NCBI part 2
On September 15th 2009 I received a letter from the National Council of the Blind outlining the work of their very worthwhile EYE CAN program. The letter was accompanied with a request for a monthly payment towards it. It goes without saying that this was, in normal times, a worthy cause, but I felt that such a request was slightly inappropriate. Those in receipt of the non-contributory blind pension occupy a position astride the poverty line, and there are more than enough calls upon our limited income. What was more everyone knew that the aforementioned blind pension was facing a cut in line with the evil prescriptions of the McCarthy report.
I was anxious to explain the position I was in and why I, and most other blind pension recipients, would have been unable to contribute to the EYE CAN program, no matter how much they wanted to. I also wanted to find out what the NCBI was doing about the prospect of benefit cuts. Had it made a submission to the government? Could blind pension recipients help? Could they, for example, lobby their local politicians?
The letter I received had been sent in the name of the NCBI’s director Des Kenny. There were no contact details, such as an e-mail address. However, I eventually found a way of sending a letter to Des via e-mail. I did so in late September 2009 and I have never received a reply.
I subsequently found out that the National Council for the Blind had indeed made a pre budget submission, but without any involvement from those poor wretches whom it represents. This submission was, I feel, not quite as strident or rigorous as was necessary, and I take the liberty of reproducing a paragraph of it here.
“The report by the Commission on Taxation recommended that the Blind Person’s
Tax Credit be discontinued, in favour of a direct payment. NCBI broadly
agrees with this recommendation as the Blind Person’s Tax Credit currently
only benefits people in employment. However, NCBI would like to be involved
in the consultation around what this direct payment should be before giving
our full backing to this decision.”
The NCBI’s Communications Officer, Ms. Fionnuala Murphy, added
“These recommendations are drawn up in conjunction with our community-based staff, who have regular contact with people who are blind or vision impaired and keep themselves up to date on the issues that people face in their daily lives.”
Let me repeat, nobody from the NCBI has been in contact with me for years. Nobody can say I’m a shrinking violet when it comes to expressing how I feel.
For one thing, I would have refused to even engage in a budget based on the recommendations of Colm McCarthy. This was an unoriginal and dishonest right-wing blue-print for rolling back government involvement in the economy. But such churlishness would have been pooh-poohed by some as outrageous behaviour towards people who pretend to no more about things than I do. And then people like government ministers, senior civil servants and economists might have been in a better position to make donations to things like the EYE CAN project, and their generosity should not be met with ingratitude. But would a more strident, dare I say macho stance towards the McCarthy recommendations have mattered? They were followed almost to the letter.
I haven’t heard of the response (if any) by the NCBI to the cut in the blind pension benefit. It may have occurred, but fell below the news radar. In any case, not everything that happens in this country gets reported, no matter how news worthy it is. Another name for it is censorship. I somehow doubt that there response has been as robust as mine, as when I call Minister Hanafin a liar, a name to which she is more than entitled. Maybe there are those who have been conned into believing that if they’re nice to Minister Mary she won’t cut the blind pension in the next budget, or indeed might augment it by a few euro – that is, if Mary Hanafin is still a minister at the next budget. Her involvement with blind charities in the past is well known, and she certainly publicised it in her attempts to gin election to, amongst other bodies, Fianna Fail’s so-called Committee of Fifteen.
I noticed that the attempts of some blind and partially-sighted people to protest against the cutbacks were met with frowns of disapproval by those who said such protests would achieve nothing, that the government no matter how evil or corrupt it might be, is all powerful and that the blind and partially sighted are pretty much on society’s bottom rung. But the biggest elephant can be driven mad by the smallest flea. As Dolores Ibarruri (La Passionaria) once said, it’s better to die on your feet than live on your knees.
