Madam, – George Lee. A man of convictions. Now he can return to what he does best . . . telling the economic story as it really is. This will be far more useful and relevant for the nation than acting as a crowd-puller for Fine Gael rallies.

His talents were being wasted. Welcome back to the real world, George.

It will be interesting to see how quickly, (or should that be how slowly?) the Government acts in calling a byelection to fill the vacancy caused by his leaving. This will indicate exactly what the Government thinks of the importance of ordinary TDs. – Yours, etc,

Madam, – Surely the lack of communication leading up to George Lee’s resignation highlights the fact that there are too many TDs in the Dáil? – Yours, etc,

Madam, – A thankyou to George, who has finally confirmed a long-held suspicion – that being a journalist in this country is a much more powerful job than being a politician.

Why be an ordinary backbencher when you can be part of the media frontbench . . .that cosy unelected forum which kindly lectures to us – the uninformed and stupid – and tells us what to think. We already have a number of Ministers who all wield far more power than a lowly TD.

There’s Joe Duffy, the Minister for Moaners; Marian Finucane, Minister for Truth and Honesty; Fintan O’Toole, Minister for I Have Extraordinary Insight; Eamon Dunphy, Minister for Sports Ethics and so on. Prior to his dalliance with politics, poor George was right up there with his Economic Ministry, but then he had to spoil it all and get confused with the fact that we live in a democracy. – Yours, etc,

Madam, – What a strange country we live in. On the day when the INLA announces the decommissioning of its weapons and ends its military campaign in the North, the mass media’s headline news was George Lee’s decision to leave Fine Gael.

Have we become so blasé about the North that another momentous event in the history of Northern Ireland is superseded by an item of nothing more than “personality politics”? – Yours, etc,

Madam, – Could it be that a Little Bird told George Lee that America with RTÉ is the place to be? – Yours, etc,

Madam, – Now that George Lee has exposed his emperor’s new clothes, perhaps some of his former colleagues in the Dáil might do the same in their respective parties. – Yours, etc,

Madam, – George Lee left a highly paid job, with full access to the public, and with little accountability for one with full accountability, long hours, and less remuneration. Perhaps he, and Fine Gael gravely misjudged the situation. If so, it does not augur well for the management of the party. – Yours, etc,

Madam, – Talk about own goals! When lambasting George Lee for his departure from politics after such a brief period, prominent Fine Gael TDs were wailing: it wasn’t even nine months, it was really only 19 [Dáil] weeks! – Yours, etc,

Madam, – In respect of George Lee’s premature act of “politicide” – a word from the wise – if you are going to swim in a shark infested waters, expect to be bitten! – Yours, etc,

Madam, – So George Lee has departed politics, and clearly he has done himself some service. I tried to develop an algorithm to work out which was the bigger waste of money, paying to have George sulk in the Dáil or funding the resumption of his preening on our television screens.

It was proving a little difficult, so I quit. – Yours, etc,

Madam, – Paul Hickey’s assertion (February 9th) that many of George Lee’s Fine Gael colleagues had equivalent, if not superior, knowledge of economics and commerce is irrelevant.

In my utter ignorance, and as a member of the public, I remain oblivious to the credentials of Senator Eugene Regan and friends. However, when the man who has informally educated the Irish people on the failures of our economic policy for the past decade or more is suddenly presented as a candidate for Fine Gael, I take notice and interest, not least because this is a man I feel I know and trust.

In turn, I feel hopeful that there exists a political candidate who has not been tainted by the rusty machinery of Irish politics and can contribute to changing our stained system. To expect Mr Lee, as Bernadette Edgeworth suggests (February 9th) to begin his life as a politician at the base level is akin to asking a revered and decorated athlete wishing to become a television commentator to start in the tea-room. – Yours, etc,

A chara, – First we have Charlie Bird crying into his martini that no one is returning his calls, now we have George Lee crying that no one is begging for his opinion. The word ego or “rtego” comes to mind. Mr Lee has displayed great naivety and instead of staying and battling it out he has abandoned those who voted him in and will now scamper back to his cossetted world in RTÉ. Obviously Mr Lee and The Real World don’t see eye to eye. – Is mise,

Madam, – George Lee, by his actions has shown that politics in Ireland have not changed. I’m brought to mind of Charles Stuart Parnell, who tried to change things for the people, but was brought down by the system – as was this man. – Yours, etc,

Madam, – What do George Lee and Roy Keane have in common? – Yours, etc,

Madam, – The country is divided again. Should he stay or should he go, principle or country. I want to be the first to name the musical: I Leo. – Yours, etc,

Madam, – Surely George Lee is now best placed to take over RTÉ’s Sunday night slot, A Week in Politics? – Yours, etc,

Madam, – George Lee’s decision confirms that Ireland’s political culture is clannish, closed-minded and in large part hereditary. It values the qualities of loyalty and acquiescence far more than expertise, real world experience and creativity. Its requirement to prioritise constituency errands, to pander to vested interests and to turn a blind eye to ineffectual processes, waste and systemic corruption serves to alienate many capable of making a serious contribution to the national agenda from entering the political arena.

Culturally, the Irish political process embraces change only at glacial pace and, as we are all too well aware, this introverted and self-preservationery behaviour is at odds with the scale and impact of the needs and challenges facing our society and economy today.

Mr Lee’s entry into politics created a sense of possibility and excitement. He should be commended for his willingness to embrace the political process and for putting his candidacy and a change oriented agenda before the people. He is, however, deserving of even more credit for delivering a clear and unequivocal personal verdict on the ineffectual nature of our party and parliamentary culture and for the manner of his resignation.

His departure from the Dáil and from Fine Gael weakens both bodies, but it serves to elevate vitally important questions about our national governance structures and their ability, or lack of it, to shape a vibrant 21st-century Ireland. – Yours, etc,

Madam, – Not only is there a good deal of optimism on the birth of this year’s baby lambs, we can now celebrate the birth of a truly honourable politician, honourable enough to stand up for his principles. Why “toe the line” when the line is frayed? George Lee for Lord Mayor, anybody? – Yours, etc,

Madam, – Following Mr Lee’s resignation from Fine Gael, I would like to offer myself as a candidate for the vacancy that now emerges. I want to make it clear that I do this without any preconditions apart from requiring a promise that I will be offered the leadership of the party within nine months, with full authority to make any decisions without question. – Yours, etc,

Madam, – Now that George Lee has been unshackled both of the weight of impartiality (RTÉ) and party politics (Fine Gael) will he be unveiling his grand economic plan any time soon? Surely someone who claims that we don’t need public sector pay cuts when the State is borrowing €23 billion a year knows something about economics that is lost on the rest of us? – Yours, etc,

Madam, – George Lee must have had a great job with RTÉ before he tried his hand at politics if he can say now that it isn’t fulfilling enough. I’m sure the 175 people who are to be let go from Boston Scientific would welcome such a role. Indeed, the former TD sounded confident that he would be returning to RTÉ, and how very nice for him.

It is possible that while Mr Lee has sufficient economic knowledge to report on economics daily, other skills are needed to form economic policy? Perhaps he looked at Dublin South, didn’t like the numbers and decided to return to the financial security of his other public sector job?

I wonder if he didn’t have the open door that public sector employees have when entering politics, would he be so cavalier in causing another byelection? What Mr Lee needs is a dose of reality – perhaps an assignment to Moyross for a year on €196 a week would fully inform the former TD? – Yours, etc,

Madam, – The last sentence in your Editorial (February 9th), “Mr Lee’s resignation should lead to an important public debate”, contradicts practically everything you wrote prior to it. What precedes this sentence are a series of vitriolic statements against Mr Lee with a few other words placed in between them to dress them up as something else.

I think it unbecoming of such a serious debate that you choose to start it by reducing it to personality rather going after the substance. To get at the substance you should be asking and answering the question: why would a person who was recognised as an expert in his field enter politics and after nine months be so disillusioned with the whole system that he packs it in?

And the place to start to answer this question is with Mr Lee. Listen to what he has said. He has made no bones about the fact that he entered into the arena to contribute to policy making, nothing else. He stated his reason for resigning is that he has not been able to, or allowed to, contribute to this policy-making within Fine Gael. Why is this? What is wrong with the political system that can allow this to happen? Despite all the spin that is going to emanate from Fine Gael, why should Mr Lee have to serve any political apprenticeship in order to be allowed to contribute meaningfully to this debate within the party?

I think Mr Lee has done the honourable thing by resigning from Fine Gael and as a TD. We constantly criticise those in positions of power that they take no responsibility for their actions, but just tough it out and carry on regardless. Now we are choosing to criticise someone who has resigned. Mr Lee’s decision will bring public opprobrium upon him from those within the political classes whose interests lie in maintaining the political status quo and who have failed to ask the hard questions over the past 10 years or so. Don’t be among them.

If you are going to start the debate, then do it properly. – Yours, etc,

Madam, – George Lee: gone but not forgotten. Enda Kenny: forgotten but not gone. – Yours,etc,

.

Madam, – In preparation for their imminent meeting with Pope Benedict XVI about the Murphy report, the Irish bishops have met with and consulted only with some of those whose stories are contained in the Ryan report.

Why, it must be urgently inquired, are they ignoring the thousands of survivors affected by the actions of diocesan priests within these bishops’ own dioceses? Their non-responsiveness towards this other half of the survivor community is shocking.

To fail to meet and listen to, a similarly representative group of survivors of abuse by diocesan clergy is an appalling oversight by a body of men whose credibility is in tatters, even among faithful and committed Catholics.

It can only be interpreted as either very careless or extremely callous. Quite possibly, it is an attempt by bishops to give the impression of having “consulted” with victims before they meet the Holy Father while, in reality, they are merely using some hand-picked victims’ groups for their own cynical purposes.

Those who stories are represented by the Ryan report certainly need to be heard continuously and there is need for ongoing dialogue facilitated between these survivors and the church, towards restitution for the unimaginable suffering inflicted upon them, in institutions.

Why do the bishops choose to ignore the huge number of those survivors whose experiences are more reflected in the Murphy report? This is truly unbelievable. The forthcoming meeting with the Pope is about the Murphy report not the Ryan report.

This disregard of survivors of abuse by diocesan clergy, whose sufferings were multiplied by the disgraceful behaviour of many bishops, is profoundly hurtful to thousands of such survivors and their loved ones. When, in God’s name, will these men ever learn? Their latest PR stunt staged on February 8th at Maynooth underlines, yet again, the snide contempt, lack of charity and humility and absence of basic Christianity, lurking behind their meaningless apologies to – and pretended sympathies for – the victims of clerics for whom they as diocesan bishops – and not the religious orders – were responsible.

The Irish Episcopal Conference gives every evidence of playing further cynical, crass and heartless games with already broken and suffering survivors. The hypocritical, crafty and self-serving omission by these men to reach out to all survivors of abuse, bodes no good for any positive outcome that may have come from their meeting with Pope Benedict and his intervention.

It highlights further their lack of any sincerity on this issue, their unwillingness and utter inability to effect healing for survivors, or show genuine repentance for, among other things, the appalling leadership of the bishops of Ireland. – Yours, etc,

Madam, – Noel Whelan’s article (Opinion, February 6th) does the public a disservice by uncritically repeating comments made by the Minister for Health, Mary Harney TD, on Today with Pat Kennyon February 3rd.

In her comments about “A&E” department (properly termed emergency department – ED – since 2000) overcrowding, she made four factually incorrect assertions. 1. The Minister suggested ED overcrowding was vastly improved. Sadly, this is not the case and a shameful “record” of 500 patients awaiting inpatient admission was reached on January 20th, 2010. 2. She asserted that the problem is confined to a few hospitals, whereas the problem is spreading and hospitals which didn’t have ED overcrowding now have the problem. Recent examples are Mullingar and Tullamore, the latter in the constituency of the Taoiseach. 3. She suggested ED overcrowding is a feature of all healthcare systems. But this overlooks the fact that it has been eradicated in the NHS since 2005! 4. She contended being on a trolley was not a problem so long as one was being treated. Quite the contrary, there is a large body of international literature which confirms that detention of patients in an ED beyond the time of decision to admit (the reality in ED overcrowding) is associated with additional patient mortality and morbidity.

Were both landmark Australian papers to be extrapolated to the Irish population, this would suggest between 350 and 400 patients are dying needlessly every year as a result of ED overcrowding. This is sufficient a public health issue to require a much greater response than has been the case to date.

Your contributor also states that now more than 90 per cent of those attending EDs are seen, treated and sent home or admitted within six hours, as if this is a Ministerial achievement.

In truth, those who can be sent home are dealt with expeditiously by EDs, but those who require hospital admission do not get admitted in a timely fashion. As access to hospital beds is not in the ED’s gift, it is not surprising that EDs are generally unable to secure a timely hospital bed for a patient.

Mr Whelan’s unashamed trumpeting of the Minister’s achievements by simply restating incorrect assertions certainly doesn’t, to my mind, meet the standards the “newspaper of record” has historically set for itself. – Yours, etc,

Madam, – Medical card holders will see a massive hike in their drug costs this year due to the new prescription tax. A medical card patient will now have to pay up to €120 a year on their medicines. This vulnerable group is certainly not benefiting from the deal between the pharmaceutical manufacturers and the Government.

The prescription tax will not benefit the patient or the State – it will simply discourage patients from taking essential medicines and therefore, lead to a deterioration of health and increased hospitalisations, costing us more the long run. Every other country is phasing out prescription taxes. Why is the Minister bringing them in? – Yours, etc,

Madam, – I read that Bertie Ahern hopes he did enough to get himself into heaven (Home News, February 8th). He can rest assured that at the very least he managed to get the whole country into limbo. – Yours, etc,