Politics over Saving Lives.. Coast Guard cuts on the South Coast

Trotter

First of all, we've been discussing this in the Waterford forum, but I think it might be worth having a look at from a political point of view also. Mods feel free to lock if I'm off the mark.

Here's an article from today's Indo.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/cuts-to-rescue-helicopter-service-put-lives-at-risk-2116725.html

Basically to cut a long story short, the government had put out the plan that of the 4 coast guard helicopters in Ireland, they were going to cut the south coast one to a 12 hour daytime service. If you got a pain in your chest on a trawler off the south coast, then tough.. the helicopter from Dublin would have to come and get you. That meant a 45 minute muster time for the crew, 30 to 40 mins to the south coast + whatever time it took to reach you in the Trawler.

What the above article shows is that the government are now scraping the barrell so hard that to them, people's lives have a figure on them.

Again, apologies if mods think this shouldn't be in politics.

Thirdfox

People's lives always has a cost attached (in terms of governments, politics and law).

I believe in the US - the cost of a human life is 2.4 million dollars (at least for highway transport safety costs). If a safety feature costs more to implement than the people they save the government will look at spending the money elsewhere.

It's unfortunate but the reality that in a world with limited resources we have to find ways of best using them. One helicopter could mean 6 less firemen, 5 less nurses or 10 less teachers etc. Can you justify taking away money from them?

Similarly with drugs - I watched a programme on the BBC a few months ago where the top doctors at the NHS were deciding what drugs they can afford to provide their patients. 1 expensive heart transplant or 10,000 flu vaccinations? There's always benefit - but it's the prioritising that can be such a difficult judgement call to make - and there's always someone who loses out

Morpheus

If a heli is scrambled to sea off the coast of waterford and comes from dublin, isnt it an SOP that they would have to refuel at waterford before continuing on?

Trotter

Morphéus wrote: »

If a heli is scrambled to sea off the coast of waterford and comes from dublin, isnt it an SOP that they would have to refuel at waterford before continuing on?

It would depend how far off the coast the call is. If the weather was bad though and the rescue was difficult, even if the heli made it there without refueling, it could mean having to return to Waterford or Cork in mid rescue to refuel and then go back out. These are all decisions that would be made either before take off or during the rescue as conditions changed. If the call came from far off the coast and the captain made the decision to refuel in Waterford before getting to the scene, you're looking at the 30-40 mins from Dublin flying against the prevailing wind, and 15 - 20 mins to refuel in Waterford before even leaving the coast to attend the scene. Once on scene, (now approx 45mins to an hour or so later than the Waterford Heli could have managed it), they've got to hold the heli in the hover at all hours of the night, in the wind and rain, and send someone down on the winch wire to assess or rescue a casualty. If its a search operation, the heli can stay on scene for an amount of time related to the amount of fuel on board. In that situation you've the Waterford heli taking off within 30-40 mins of the call coming in and arriving on scene with maximum fuel for the search in the minimum amount of time.

Some of the minister's comments stink of being ill informed. For example, he said the new helicopters would be 50% faster. Thats not the case. Its closer to 15% but the prevailing wind would almost negate the extra speed if the heli came from Dublin. He said the current older heli can't fly at night or in clouds. Thats a joke because many lives have been saved by the heli crews all over Ireland and in Irish waters at night, and in clouds.

I think they've chosen the South because they figured the people wouldn't give out as much as others in Ireland might. That comes across in that article. How wrong he was.

cavedave

If 7pc of these people were not reached within an hour, that would equate to four people whose lives might have been put at risk by a daylight-only service.

And he said the cost of the new 10-year contract with CHC Helicopter Corporation would be €50m per year compared to €27m per year for the existing contract with the same company, which expires in 2013.
"That is €500m over 10 years for what is essentially a diminished service," he said.

So that seems to be for 5 helicopters. How much would you save by stopping this service? How much per life saved is that?

If I was the one stuck on a boat I would not want to hear about cost per life year saved and such.

simonj

It seems the dept of finance needed to flex its muscle, and decided to cut back on the South East.

For minimal real savings, an area that is our main shipping lane, has a viable fisheries industry and a lot of recreational water users it is simply unbelieveable - and it is very much a political issue.

Look at it this way, how many lives could be saved by a helicopter remaining on 24hr standby as opposed to Mary Harneys junket out to NZ?
There are at least a few weeks coverage in that cutback - and this is not an anti-Harney rant.

The Senate, particularly those appointed to the Senate - used as a parking space for failed TDs - is another area of expenditure in which savings could be made.

Its time to get priorities straight

johngalway

I'm on the West Coast, it's a shameful decision. Cowan and the rest of those gangsters should be put out off the SE coast on a bad night and see how they like it.

The sea isn't a thing to be trifled with. They are sending people to their deaths penny pinching on emergency services yet bailing out their friends in the banks.

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Sully

Its been saved folks. The government have re-considered and will keep the service going as-is. Big thank you to all those who campaigned against this cutback - it looks like FF councilors in the area will try suck up all the coverage on this one, but remember there were politicians from other party's (such as Paudie Coffey from Fine Gael, one of the most vocal from the opposition and in todays papers again on the issue) and a huge number of the general public furious at this cutback and fought hard to retain it. Its them we should be thanking and not the local FF councilors.

Congrats to everyone who put in an effort.

Overheal

I can only imagine who's salary they were trying to cushion by cutting those helicopters.

murphaph

Overheal wrote: »

I can only imagine who's salary they were trying to cushion by cutting those helicopters.

No need to imagine, apart from the overpaid politicians in Leinster House there are 300k overpaid public servants taking all the money home, hence cuts in services.

bmaxi

Overheal wrote: »

I can only imagine who's salary they were trying to cushion by cutting those helicopters.

My thoughts exactly, if get rid of a few of those Junior Ministers Bertie created and that worthless Senate, we could probably run 24/7 search and rescue out of every port in the country.

johngalway

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0330/wexford.html

FlutterinBantam

bmaxi wrote: »

My thoughts exactly, if get rid of a few of those Junior Ministers Bertie created and that worthless Senate, we could probably run 24/7 search and rescue out of every port in the country.

yes that would be a terrific idea.

highly trained and expensive equipment stationed at ,well let's take Dublin Co.

All standing by and paid by the taxpayer.24/7

Balbriggan/Skerries/Loughshinney/Rush/Dunlaoire/Dalkey.

Would you ever think before you post pal.

bmaxi

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

yes that would be a terrific idea.

highly trained and expensive equipment stationed at ,well let's take Dublin Co.

All standing by and paid by the taxpayer.24/7

Balbriggan/Skerries/Loughshinney/Rush/Dunlaoire/Dalkey.

Would you ever think before you post pal.

I said "probably", the implication being that if money was wasted on other unnecessary institutions, why not SAR in every port. Do you take everything literally?
Perhaps you should analyse before you shoot your mouth off.

Trotter

Great news to hear that the service has been retained.

Whats scary is the fact that it was considered at all. Equally annoying was the willingness of the powers that be to use 'facts and figures' that seemed to be very far off the mark to justify the horrendous decision.

In a further extension to this good news story, the coast guard helicopter, assisted by many others, brought a man to safety this evening. From all accounts, he was very, very, lucky.

Kayaker rescued off Wexford coast

Well done to everyone who worked so hard to overturn this crazy decision.

FlutterinBantam

bmaxi wrote: »

I said "probably", the implication being that if money was wasted on other unnecessary institutions, why not SAR in every port. Do you take everything literally?
Perhaps you should analyse before you shoot your mouth off.

By 'unnecessary' institutions I take it to mean the ones you have no interest in.

When will the single issue people in this country realise that all these things have to be paid for, and whilst we all believe the 'Motherhood and Apple Pie' of hospitals in every town all on 24/7, some of us realise that this is impractical and unsustainable and that scarce resources need to be spread to cover the maximum area possible.

One of the reasons this country is in the hole it's in is that some people take a totally selfish view and once their particular single interest is accomodated, the remainder can fight over what's left.

This is a tad off topic, but i feel needs to be said.

Nothing personal to anybody.

bmaxi

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

By 'unnecessary' institutions I take it to mean the ones you have no interest in.

When will the single issue people in this country realise that all these things have to be paid for, and whilst we all believe the 'Motherhood and Apple Pie' of hospitals in every town all on 24/7, some of us realise that this is impractical and unsustainable and that scarce resources need to be spread to cover the maximum area possible.

One of the reasons this country is in the hole it's in is that some people take a totally selfish view and once their particular single interest is accomodated, the remainder can fight over what's left.

This is a tad off topic, but i feel needs to be said.

Nothing personal to anybody.

By definition then, a "necessary" institution is one you have an interest in.
Nobody is suggesting we have a hospital in every town. What I am suggesting is that the 24/7 SAR in Waterford is a necessary institution and worth every penny of it's cost. The Junior Ministries created by Ahern either to salve his conscience or to appease his critics, along with the holding pen for failed and aspiring TDs in Leinster House, are not.
I don't see how it can be selfish to wish to protect the lives of people who have to brave the elements, on a day in day out basis to earn a living, and not selfish to protect the interests of fatcat, pampered politicians who serve no useful purpose and who are another and major reason, the country is in the hole it's in.

FlutterinBantam

bmaxi wrote: »

By definition then, a "necessary" institution is one you have an interest in.
Nobody is suggesting we have a hospital in every town. What I am suggesting is that the 24/7 SAR in Waterford is a necessary institution and worth every penny of it's cost. The Junior Ministries created by Ahern either to salve his conscience or to appease his critics, along with the holding pen for failed and aspiring TDs in Leinster House, are not.
I don't see how it can be selfish to wish to protect the lives of people who have to brave the elements, on a day in day out basis to earn a living, and not selfish to protect the interests of fatcat, pampered politicians who serve no useful purpose and who are another and major reason, the country is in the hole it's in.

Now you are beginning to make some sense. I fully accept that.

However you spoiled your argument by this SAR in every port crack.

Let's get this straight, we have to tailor what we can provide from taxpayers fundsbased on what we can afford.

The job of Govt. is to spread these scarce resources where they are most useful and cost effective and give best value to the taxpayer.


Single issue activists pay no heed to those principles and concentrate their efforts on one area only without giving a toss about anyone else.
Not suggesting that you have any vested interests in that area,but we as a population must learn to be more mature in our thinking and more altruistic and less self centred.

Think outside the box for a change.

bmaxi

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Now you are beginning to make some sense. I fully accept that.

However you spoiled your argument by this SAR in every port crack.

Let's get this straight, we have to tailor what we can provide from taxpayers fundsbased on what we can afford.

The job of Govt. is to spread these scarce resources where they are most useful and cost effective and give best value to the taxpayer.


Single issue activists pay no heed to those principles and concentrate their efforts on one area only without giving a toss about anyone else.
Not suggesting that you have any vested interests in that area,but we as a population must learn to be more mature in our thinking and more altruistic and less self centred.

Think outside the box for a change.

Did you actually read my original reply or do you only see what suits you?