Madam, - I would like to record my total objection to the VHI, the State-owned health insurer, seeking to increase premiums by 8.5 per cent as reported by Siobhán Creaton, (July 25th).
It has already reported a rise of 130 per cent in profits to €33.8 million to the end of February 2003.
Its excuse for the increase is that this is necessary to ensure its financial viability.
Needless to say, the Government has lap-dogged is way to agreement, being totally in favour of inflationary measures.
Premiums have already increased by 13.6 per cent this year to €735.4 million.
After the transfer of €33.8 million from profits, reserves stood at €215.7 million.
Any further increase can only be assumed to emanate from a profit motive, to sell off and privatise at the expense of the insured.
I am not an economist, but I would like to remind my fellow insured that previous "sell-offs" of semi-state bodies have been to the exclusive benefit of both the Government and individuals in upper management.
What makes these people entitled to gain a huge pay-off for doing a very ordinary civil service job is not mentioned.
All that is said is that: "A sale of the insurer could raise more than €300 million for the Government. VHI senior management and staff would also stand to benefit financially from the sale".
If any people are entitled to a pay-off I believe it should be those who have contributed to the profitable bu-ild-up of the VHI, i.e. the subscribers.
If needed, the Government could quite easily raise €300 million by raising the rate of income tax. However, it knows full well that it would be quickly kicked out of office if it attempted any such measure.
It prefers the soft touch of hitting conscientious people who are hogtied to the VHI and its premiums.
My question is, why change a current situation which is eminently profitable to making alternative investments on which, as we all know, this Government has not been overly impressive. - Yours, etc.,
MICHAEL O'CARROLL, Newtown Heights, Tramore, Co Waterford.