Redress boards and the Taxpayer

silverharp

As a taxpayer I am pi**ed off with all these redress boards, the latest one being advertised is about Nortern Ireland and the troubles. How can we possibly solve todays problems if we financially keep having to look in the rear mirror?
I would love to see everyone that was abused by the church for instance get justice ie see the abusers in front of a jury, but as a taxpayer I don't see the reason for compensating these people. Since when was money a cure for stress/mental health problems etc. ? to my thinking financial compensation should only be for financial loss. It seems like are politicians are very free with spending other peoples money while at the same time denying people justice

BuffyBot

It's not meant to be a cure. The key phrase is contained in the root of the word compensation. Compensate.

fly_agaric

silverharp wrote:

would love to see everyone that was abused by the church for instance get justice ie see the abusers in front of a jury, but as a taxpayer I don't see the reason for compensating these people.

Well, the money is also a punishment of, and judgement against those partly responsible through negligence (the state and moreso the church in this case) as well as an attempt at redress.

silverharp wrote:

to my thinking financial compensation should only be for financial loss.

Do you mean a direct financial loss - or would you stretch to include things like losses of potential earnings?

I hope you'd at least accept that.

Otherwise your idea seems quite disturbing to me.

A person can suffer injury in an industrial accident or be damaged and wronged by their government and expect nada by way of financial compensation.
If somebody damages your bank balance or assets through their negligence you'll get restitution of your loss.
Human pain and suffering only deserves financial recognition if it can be measured in financial terms to the last cent. Nice.:)

Victor

So, by your reckoning, if someone is abused and traumatised, clinicly depressed, socially mal-adjusted, underemployed, lives in an unstable household, they shouldn't be able to get counselling, training, medical care and improved housing?

Congratulations.

silverharp

Victor wrote:

So, by your reckoning, if someone is abused and traumatised, clinicly depressed, socially mal-adjusted, underemployed, lives in an unstable household, they shouldn't be able to get counselling, training, medical care and improved housing?

Congratulations.

I don’t have a problem with money being spent on counselling or other health/social aspects of these victims, I just don’t see that giving people cheques for €50K-100K solves anything. Monetary payments are a poor substitute for justice or vindication which is what I assume most people want. Also remember that the state doesn’t have any money of it’s own, it belongs to taxpayers so in effect I am being held accountable financially for the actions of the church which had undue influence over a poor and weak state in its infancy.

Macy

Isn't the theory of redress boards to save the state money as well as making it easier for victims (lest we forget they are victims here)? Instead of many costly court cases, the cases are settled in a less confrontational and more efficient manner.

Victor

silverharp wrote:

I don’t have a problem with money being spent on counselling or other health/social aspects of these victims, I just don’t see that giving people cheques for €50K-100K solves anything.

It can make the difference between being able to get proper counselling now compared to drip-fed counselling from the HSE sometime in the future.

Monetary payments are a poor substitute for justice or vindication which is what I assume most people want.

However monetary payments can make real differences to peoples lives. Is "free" justice really justice at all? Should people be able to eat justice or should they only get a justice aroma?

Also remember that the state doesn’t have any money of it’s own, it belongs to taxpayers

Highly aspirational, not very practical. But remember, you are merely one of several million tax payers. You live in a democracy, the government giveth, the government taketh away. If you don't like the rules, leave.

so in effect I am being held accountable financially for the actions of the church which had undue influence over a poor and weak state in its infancy.

We are all being held accountable for the joint actions of the state and others. The state put people in these institutions. When they ran away, the state returned them to these institutions. When they complained, the state largely ignored them.

Its sad to see people with as little compassion as you.

Flying

BuffyBot wrote:

It's not meant to be a cure. The key phrase is contained in the root of the word compensation. Compensate.

Well then why does the taxpayer have to foot the bill for the RC Church I am not RC so why should I, the Catholic church has millions if not billions in funds why should'nt they be made pay and not the innocent taxpayer..

BuffyBot

Well then why does the taxpayer have to foot the bill for the RC Church

Because the society of the time, and it's elective government, used these institutions as caregivers and detention facilities. The church, of course, has a lot of responsibility for what went on, but society and the Irish State as a whole at that time is ultimately responsible.

The downside is that sometimes todays society, and the Irish State of today has to pay for the mistakes it has made in the past.