The proprietorial control of state-funded education and social services by Catholic organisations runs counter to principles of good government, since the funding confers a degree of liability on the state for services it has little or no authority over – as proven in the wholesale abuse of children in institutional care.

I don’t believe there is such a thing as “unbiased relationships counselling”. Any such counselling is going to have a built in bias – and I’d far rather that that bias or assumption is clearly stated up front.

I’d agree with you if other organisations were being excluded because they didn’t fit the departments bias – but I don’t believe that is the case.

To answer your second question, The Brewer’s Droop Support Group.

Are you saying that catholics are not entitled to counselling sympathetic to their beliefs? Because you don’t share them?

What deserving organisations are not getting funds?

The vast majority in this country are still Catholic

http://beyond2020.cso.ie/Census/TableViewer/tableView.aspx?ReportId=74644

One of my suspicions was that Accord was not the sole religious group to benefit. Another was the Family Life Centre in Mayo.

While it claims to disregard “religious belief” it has a distinct Catholic bias. The director is a Catholic priest; it receives funding from the diocese; it hosts courses by Accord; it advocates the Galilee Community run by a religious order, Bock’s friends, the Sisters of Mercy; it promotes special masses for couples celebrating wedding anniversaries; even the graphics it uses on its web site and brochures are distinctly Catholic/Christian.

I’m suspect other recipients have links with the Catholic church too. That would make the payout greater than I originally calculated.

That is Accord’s only stated aim.

But I don’t see the relevance to Accord.

The arrrangement was more than bizarre though. It was driven by Woods’s membership of Opus Dei and Bertie Ahern’s relationship with the Sisters of Mercy in Eccles Street.

Did you know that the church’s negotiator, Sr Helena O Donoghue, vetoed the Attorney General’s attendance at the final two meetings, and that this demand was agreed to by Woods and Ahern?

Did you also know that Ahern used to work for Helena O Donoghue?

those who actively protect, screen and shelter abusers are equally complicit.

Agreed. And the church is moving – slowly I concede – to address that.

And I hold no brief for that curious financial arrangement. The state had some liability – it failed in putting people in institutions it knew were (at least) overstretched and therefore open to abusers. But the financial arrangement was bizarre and wrong.