[ad_1]
There were more details. There was more context. But there was no smoking gun.
Instead, there were diametrically opposed views on the same series of events.
One of the central goals of the Tánaiste was to explain their motivation to share / leak a confidential document.
In a chamber with limited attendance numbers due to Covid-19, but with many additional MPs in the shadows, Leo Varadkar projected himself as someone who acts in the public interest.
He said he was a trained GP, from a medical family, who values community care and wanted to get a new GP contract over the line.
This, he maintained, was the reason he used the influence of the Taoiseach’s office to help him cross the line.
Mr. Varadkar said that he had taken an active and personal interest in the negotiations and kept in touch about the progress.
So when the agreement was signed with the Irish Medical Organization, and later approved by the Cabinet, he handed over a copy of the agreement to the National Association of General Practitioners to secure their support as well.
He argues that all the information highlighted was in the public domain and he wanted a good part to be universally accepted, as not all GPs were represented by IMO.
He argued that the only reason Dr. Maitiú Ó Tuathail received the document was because he was the head of the NAGP, not because he was a friend.
He said that no benefits had been passed on to the NAGP, but that the government was fulfilling a political commitment to keep the NAGP up to date.
Regarding the messages published in Village magazine by Dr. O Tuathail stating that Mr. Varadkar “always complies”, the Tánaiste said that some people claim to be closer to you than they really are. He said: I never convey a special advantage.
Then the opposition parties had the opportunity to enter the fray: the format of the question and answer session was presented for once.
Mr. Varadkar’s apology, expression of regret, and clarification that it was a unique event are probably enough to retain the support of his Coalition partners.
Sinn Féin’s Pearse Doherty asked the Tánaiste who had requested the document from the Health Department, photocopied it and sent it to Dr. O Tuathail without reference to the department, the minister or the IMO.
Mr. Varadkar told Deputy Doherty that Dr. O Tuathail had requested the document and he agreed.
Sinn Féin’s finance spokesperson said there had been no regular contact between the Health Department and the NAGP, even though Fine Gael ministers recently claimed that was the case.
Congressman Doherty also asked about a number of new messages, which were played just before the debate began, and involved Dr. O Tuathail.
Varadkar said he could not answer for the actions or comments of others and that the avenue of investigation was effectively closed.
Congressman Doherty said his conclusion was that this was evidence of an old man’s club, golden circles and favors for friends.
The debate continued.
Labor Aodhán Ó Ríordáin argued that there were a million and one holes in the history of the Tánaiste.
He asked if that was the case that the NAGP was collapsing and if Mr. Varadkar was unaware that there were all kinds of corporate governance issues around him.
In response, Leo Varadkar said that he gave the document to the NAGP because there was a commitment from the government to collaborate with them.
He said that it was not widely shared among NAGP members and that it was not published in the public domain.
Social Democrat Catherine Murphy claimed that the document was clearly confidential, not for circulation, and the negotiations had not concluded when the Tánaiste sent it to the president of the NAGP.
Leo Varadkar replied that in hindsight, he would have done it through official channels if he was doing it again.
RISE TD Paul Murphy asked Mr. Varadkar if he would sue the magazine over the article.
Leo Varadkar said the magazine seemed to want him to do so, however, he had been told that the publication is largely self-financed, it does not have a legal team and suing them would be like suing someone on Twitter.
At the end of the debate, the overall result is that the Opposition parties were not convinced of what the Tánaiste had to say in any way.
However, Mr. Varadkar’s apology, expression of regret, and clarification that it was a one-time event is probably enough to retain the support of his Coalition partners.
[ad_2]