Compo madness - Our tacit acceptance of dishonesty

IT IS entirely possible that every single cent of the €145 million paid out by local authorities since 2000 in compensation was absolutely justified. It might be possible that everyone involved told the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

In 2007, Dublin City Council paid 774 claimants more than €6.8 million. That’s close enough to €25,000 every single working day. Since 2000 Cork City Council paid out €17,830,086. That’s real money and represents services denied elsewhere.

These figures represent only what was paid to claimants and do not cover legal costs or the cost of preparing a defence — if one was mounted — so the real cost of our compo culture is far greater.

Remember too though, these figures deal only with claims made against local authorities. Businesses, schools, sports organisations, the health services, the gardaí and everyone else dealing with the public face other claims as well. To put our compo culture in context: the 16,791 deafness claims taken against the army cost just under e300 million, or more than twice the amount paid out by all local authorities since 2000.

It is entirely possible that each and every local authority settlement was reached without any of the parties involved exaggerating their difficulties. It is entirely possible too that only the highest standards were applied while the public purse was in jeopardy.

It must be hoped as well that each and every professional involved, a legal representative or an expert witness, regarded the truth as more important than securing lucrative settlements for clients.

It is also entirely possible that Declan Kidney might summon Ruby Walsh, after his amazing Cheltenham week, to fill Denis Leamy’s place — if he is ruled out by injury — in the Irish squad for Saturday’s Grand Slam decider in Cardiff. Possible indeed, but unimaginable, even in Ruby’s wildest fantasy.

We all know that a very good proportion of the claims are less than honest. Of course there are genuine cases of hardship brought about by the neglect and these must be resolved fairly. Sadly, the genuine claimant sometimes falls under a cloud of suspicion because of the very many rogue claimants.

However, there are those who regard the slightest accident or slight as the opportunity of turning a molehill into a mountain of cash.

This opportunism is encouraged by a culture of acceptance; we turn a blind eye and pretend that this is a victimless pursuit of opportunity and that there is no theft involved. This is the kind of dishonesty Transparency International warned of earlier this month when they reported that Ireland had a particularly high level of “legal corruption”.

If our straitened times force local authorities, and all other entities so threatened, to defend these actions more vigorously, it would be a positive consequence.

Of course the more basic problem is much more deeply rooted — in our tacit acceptance of dishonesty in its many manifestations.