Under fire Martin denies he was aware of charges
Former Health Minister Michael Martin today angrily hit back at claims by his department’s secretary general that he was aware of illegal nursing homes charges as early as 2003.
Michael Kelly, who was removed from his post after the Travers Report was published, claimed yesterday that Mr Martin was briefed at least twice on the 29-year issue, including before a management meeting in December 2003.
Appearing before the Oireachtas Health Committee today, Mr Martin firstly attacked false claims, unfounded rumours and deliberate misrepresentations on the issue made by Opposition TDs in the last two months.
Referring to the December 2003 meeting, he said to the committee: “Ask yourself an objective question. Is it credible that for a few minutes on the way from the foyer of a hotel through a labyrinth of corridors and steps and stairs, that somebody is being adequately briefed on a issue of this political significance. I don’t think that has any credence, quite frankly.”
Mr Kelly said of the encounter yesterday: “I am quite clear that I did alert him to this and I don’t have any doubt about that.”
Mr Martin said he may have received substantial briefing material on the meeting in the car as he travelled the short journey from Hawkins House to the meeting in the Gresham Hotel.
He said it was unsatisfactory to get such important information at such short notice and added: “There was no opportunity for me to read the briefing material.”
Labour Committee member Liz McManus accused Mr Martin of blaming everybody except himself and said that at least Mr Kelly had shouldered some responsibility.
But Mr Martin replied: “I’m a bit fed up quite frankly, of you and others for the last two months rattling off ’he must have known because we believe he must have known’. I’ve just had enough of it now. That is untrue.”
He said the Travers Report was fair and offered the chance for a new beginning in the department after the handling of the nursing homes charges issue.
He reiterated that “clarity of information” on the issue was never available to him. “At no time did I shy away from sensitive political issues because they had financial implications or would reflect badly on the Government.
“I’m clear in my own mind I didn’t.”
| Related Stories: |
|
