Gormley arrogance

Rosahane

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0331/1224267400714.html

Reading between the lines gives an interesting take on the attitute of Gormley to the FF backbenchers:rolleyes:

Hopefully it will all end in tears:cool:

Essexboy

A bunch of obscure malcontents who resent being passed over for promotion.

You don't have to like Gormley to see what a shower these people are.

Liam Byrne

Rosahane wrote: »

Hopefully it will all end in tears:cool:

It will. Unfortunately they'll be ours, as we try to make ends meet for the next 10 years.

Rosahane

Rosahane wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0331/1224267400714.html

Reading between the lines gives an interesting take on the attitute of Gormley to the FF backbenchers:rolleyes:

Hopefully it will all end in tears:cool:

+1

Hopefully it will all end with the loony Greens getting decimated in the next election, and disbanding as a party. Though that might be too much to hope for...

mike65

It gets worse, Ivan Yates is returning to active politics with the Greens. He is on Newstalks morning show as you know, it seems his kids talked him round with tales of homeless Polar Bears.

i71jskz5xu42pb

mike65 wrote: »

It gets worse, Ivan Yates is returning to active politics with the Greens. He is on Newstalks morning show as you know, it seems his kids talked him round with tales of homeless Polar Bears.

Yes, it's amazing what people will fall for isn't it.

i71jskz5xu42pb

Rosahane wrote: »

Reading between the lines gives an interesting take on the attitute of Gormley to the FF backbenchers:rolleyes:

Which is a great attitude to have. Imagine how much better things would be if ministers didn't have to tip toe around these gombeens. The Cafe Bar License is one that still sticks in my mind as a great idea that they nixed?

Fuhrer

The good thing about having the greens in power now is that if we ever get back to a time when we have money to spend on things, no one will ever vote for them ever again.

dynamick

They would have got away with if it wasn't for you meddling greens.

If only Fianna Fáil had an overall majority then everything would be OK.

BANZAI_RUNNER

the only thing green around my house is the grass

reprazant

Mr O’Sullivan said: “I’m absolutely disappointed that he didn’t come to meet the parliamentary party grouping . . . he snubbed us in this way.”

Mr McGrath also expressed his disappointment. “We weren’t going to belittle ourselves by going down to him. . . He’s been in before and we treated him civilly.”

So, it would be belittling of them to go to him, but not the other way around?

rasper

mike65 wrote: »

It gets worse, Ivan Yates is returning to active politics with the Greens. He is on Newstalks morning show as you know, it seems his kids talked him round with tales of homeless Polar Bears.

Turned out to be an April fools day trick

mike65

What? :eek: Well I never...

PattheMetaller

Suppose with the ice caps getting smaller the poor old Polar Bears are indeed on the move

Armas22

The great thing about this government is there is so much pleasure to look forward to when the inevitable cull comes (in about 2 years, hopefully much sooner). Gormley cuts a repulsively smug figure. Even worse are the FF backwoodsmen, a useless shower whose sole functions seem to be to fill the lobbies as required and hoover up as much as they can in expenses. Worse again, a Minister for Health who, in 9 years, has achieved nothing except to put in place the wretched HSE and pay hosptal consultants a huge pay rise (for what, exactly?)

Oooh, roll on the elections!:D

i71jskz5xu42pb

rasper wrote: »

Turned out to be an April fools day trick

Like I said, it's amazing what people will fall for

Hotblack Desiato

Armas22 wrote: »

Worse again, a Minister for Health who, in 9 years, has achieved nothing except to put in place the wretched HSE and pay hosptal consultants a huge pay rise (for what, exactly?)

It's amazing how people constantly come out with guff like this. Mary Harney has achieved far more in Health than any previous minister did. Cowen couldn't wait to get out of 'Angola' and did nothing. Martin commissioned a lot of reports and did nothing with them, but did introduce the smoking ban. The health board system was a dysfunctional, hugely wasteful, politicised mess and it had to go, but no previous minister for health had the stones to do it. HSE is far from perfect but it is a big step in the right direction.
Same thing with centralised cancer care, etc. - taking on the 'save our local hospital' (even though patients have poorer outcomes in it) crowd is something that should have been done decades ago.

Armas22

ninja900 wrote: »

It's amazing how people constantly come out with guff like this. Mary Harney has achieved far more in Health than any previous minister did. Cowen couldn't wait to get out of 'Angola' and did nothing. Martin commissioned a lot of reports and did nothing with them, but did introduce the smoking ban. The health board system was a dysfunctional, hugely wasteful, politicised mess and it had to go, but no previous minister for health had the stones to do it. HSE is far from perfect but it is a big step in the right direction.
Same thing with centralised cancer care, etc. - taking on the 'save our local hospital' (even though patients have poorer outcomes in it) crowd is something that should have been done decades ago.

Sorry Ninja, I don't agree and I suspect neither will the populace come election time. Harney "took on" the consultants, and they basically showed her who was boss. Can you remember the hospital consultant on the RTE newsreport claiming that €200,000 was "Mickey Mouse money"? The end reult was that she gave in to them and gave them enormous pay rises, and as far as I can see she has got next to nothing back, other than their agreement that she can hire more consultants.
She presides over a completely demoralised workforce in the HSE, an organisation whose management systems were put in place by an interim board headed by - believe it or not - bankers. No wonder the management system is such a shambles.
I heartily disagree that the HSE is any improvement over the former Health Boards. OK, they had local politicians on their boards, but the board meetings were open to the public and it did take local public opinion into account. For many, many things, particularly in non-hospital services, this is important. I have elderly neighbours here who have seen home help and other services drop drastically since the HSE took over, long before any economic crisis took hold.

Macha

Nobody said issues don't still remain but the fact is that Ireland's healthcare system has moved up the rankings significantly since the HSE was set up:

In 2006, we were ranked 28th out of 29 in the Euro Health Consumer Index Report.

In 2009, we ranked 13th out of 33 - an improvement of 15 places.

Armas22

taconnol wrote: »

Nobody said issues don't still remain but the fact is that Ireland's healthcare system has moved up the rankings significantly since the HSE was set up:

In 2006, we were ranked 28th out of 29 in the Euro Health Consumer Index Report.

In 2009, we ranked 13th out of 33 - an improvement of 15 places.

Sorry for the digression, I realise that the original post was about John Gormley. Plenty to take issue there without even venturing into health. But just to close that off, I think the judgement on Micheal Martin earlier is a bit harsh. Even if it was the only thing he had done, the smoking ban was a tremendous achievement.

I suppose it is easy to take pot shots at Mary Harney, but I still think her record of achievement is not great. But at least she stands firm on her decisions, and backs medical judgement over things like vaccinations. I'm not sure of John Gormley's views on this, but I've heard some Greens, particularly pre-election, trying to knock vaccination and raise some very dangerous bogus fears.

I have to say I'm on Gormley's side re bloodsports though!

Macha

Armas22 wrote: »

but I've heard some Greens, particularly pre-election, trying to knock vaccination and raise some very dangerous bogus fears.

It's amazing what getting into power can do to the lunatic fringe of a political party.

i71jskz5xu42pb

Armas22 wrote: »

but I've heard some Greens, particularly pre-election, trying to knock vaccination and raise some very dangerous bogus fears.

I'm pretty sure this was just/mainly Patricia McKenna's opinion, one she said was a personal opinion, although I think there was some fuzzy language on the Green web site at some point which is now gone.

Traumadoc

Sorry to inform you that consultants who signed the new contract get 2-3% pay rise for 12% more hours ( go to publicjobs.ie to see pay scales ).
In a few years you better have private insurance because they are having real difficulty recruiting for certain specialities.
Harney ( aka sir tropham Hatt) has stood up to pharmacies and the pharmacutical industry great deal for taxpayers re cervical vaccine when the company thought she would never not take it up.

Armas22 wrote: »

Sorry Ninja, I don't agree and I suspect neither will the populace come election time. Harney "took on" the consultants, and they basically showed her who was boss. Can you remember the hospital consultant on the RTE newsreport claiming that €200,000 was "Mickey Mouse money"? The end reult was that she gave in to them and gave them enormous pay rises, and as far as I can see she has got next to nothing back, other than their agreement that she can hire more consultants.
She presides over a completely demoralised workforce in the HSE, an organisation whose management systems were put in place by an interim board headed by - believe it or not - bankers. No wonder the management system is such a shambles.
I heartily disagree that the HSE is any improvement over the former Health Boards. OK, they had local politicians on their boards, but the board meetings were open to the public and it did take local public opinion into account. For many, many things, particularly in non-hospital services, this is important. I have elderly neighbours here who have seen home help and other services drop drastically since the HSE took over, long before any economic crisis took hold.

Armas22

Traumadoc wrote: »

Sorry to inform you that consultants who signed the new contract get 2-3% pay rise for 12% more hours ( go to publicjobs.ie to see pay scales ).
In a few years you better have private insurance because they are having real difficulty recruiting for certain specialities.
Harney ( aka sir tropham Hatt) has stood up to pharmacies and the pharmacutical industry great deal for taxpayers re cervical vaccine when the company thought she would never not take it up.

Er...I just took this quote from the Department of Health website:

http://www.dohc.ie/press/releases/2007/20071005c.html

"Health service employers have offered Consultants an annual salary of up to €216,000 to sign up to the new Type A contract, and up to €190,000 for the new Type B contract. This is an interim offer. The final determination of the salaries applicable to the new contracts will be made by the Review Body on Higher Remuneration in the Public Sector.
This offer relates to basic salary only. The potential annual earnings of a Type A contract holder would be in the region of €275,000 when weekend working and on-call, call out payments are included.
(The current basic salaries of Consultants range from €164,000 to €182,000 for a Category I Consultant, and from € 147,000 to € 162,000 for a Category 2 Consultant.)"

This seems an awful lot more than 2-3% to me and, I think, it would be a common perception that consultants did very well out of Mary Harney. Are you saying this pay increase didn't happen, or that something else happened to reduce consultant pay? I'd really like to see the maths as I am open to changing my opinion about this matter!

Armas22

Salvatore Many Flamingo wrote: »

I'm pretty sure this was just/mainly Patricia McKenna's opinion, one she said was a personal opinion, although I think there was some fuzzy language on the Green web site at some point which is now gone.

I think you're right. I've had a look at some Green-ish websites. There are only a few anti-vaccination people on it, but they're very angry, and seem very embittered towards John Gormley. The majority opinions seem to be quite moderate. One of the anti-vaccinators has a theory that the increase in Green Party membership was due to mass infiltration by FF supporters, and that this caused the GP to drop its wilder policies.

walshkvn

why can't we charge the fecking lot of them with treason?

LostinBlanch

Armas22 wrote: »

One of the anti-vaccinators has a theory that the increase in Green Party membership was due to mass infiltration by FF supporters, and that this caused the GP to drop its wilder policies.

Well I'd agree with that, it makes perfect sense for FF to have sent in sleepers to just wait their six months and then try and steer policy if needed.

Of course the way for this to be disproved is for Gormless et al to show how many new members they have had in the last couple of years. I'll wager it's significant. Also don't forget they've lost over 500 members who have left in disgust at Gormless's cabals behaviour. There are threads on this over in politics.ie

Traumadoc

Armas22 wrote: »

Er...I just took this quote from the Department of Health website:

http://www.dohc.ie/press/releases/2007/20071005c.html

"Health service employers have offered Consultants an annual salary of up to €216,000 to sign up to the new Type A contract, and up to €190,000 for the new Type B contract. This is an interim offer. The final determination of the salaries applicable to the new contracts will be made by the Review Body on Higher Remuneration in the Public Sector.
This offer relates to basic salary only. The potential annual earnings of a Type A contract holder would be in the region of €275,000 when weekend working and on-call, call out payments are included.
(The current basic salaries of Consultants range from €164,000 to €182,000 for a Category I Consultant, and from € 147,000 to € 162,000 for a Category 2 Consultant.)"

This seems an awful lot more than 2-3% to me and, I think, it would be a common perception that consultants did very well out of Mary Harney. Are you saying this pay increase didn't happen, or that something else happened to reduce consultant pay? I'd really like to see the maths as I am open to changing my opinion about this matter!

DOHC website also says colocated hospitals will be finished by 2011!
If you look at the publicjobs.ie website they give you the actual salaries ( 173-176 K )
They offered much more, then refused to honour the contracts, with the 10% pay cut they are earning about the same as old cat I but have to work 12% more hours and are barred form talking to the press without the say so from HSE management.

Essentially they promised the consultants who signed significant pay rises - there were some pay rises but they did/could not honour the full rises on the contract.
the subsequent budget pay cuts were higher for those over 200k so a type B earns roughly the same as the old cat 1 but has to work 12% more hours

Macha

LostinBlanch wrote: »

Well I'd agree with that, it makes perfect sense for FF to have sent in sleepers to just wait their six months and then try and steer policy if needed.

There is no evidence of this at all.

LostinBlanch wrote: »

Aso don't forget they've lost over 500 members who have left in disgust at Gormless's cabals behaviour.

As stated earlier, it's amazing what getting into power will do to the lunatic fringe of a party that refuses to compromise. The GP members had never had to deal with it in the 16 years of their existence before they got into power.

Armas22

Traumadoc wrote: »

DOHC website also says colocated hospitals will be finished by 2011!
If you look at the publicjobs.ie website they give you the actual salaries ( 173-176 K )
They offered much more, then refused to honour the contracts, with the 10% pay cut they are earning about the same as old cat I but have to work 12% more hours and are barred form talking to the press without the say so from HSE management.

Essentially they promised the consultants who signed significant pay rises - there were some pay rises but they did/could not honour the full rises on the contract.
the subsequent budget pay cuts were higher for those over 200k so a type B earns roughly the same as the old cat 1 but has to work 12% more hours

I suppose we should really start a new thread about Mary Harney... Am I reading you right that these newer lower salaries are mainly due to public service pay cuts? When people at comparative salaries in the public service have taken about an 18% pay cut, a 2-3% rise for consultants still means they are 20% or so better off than they were against other public service pay grades. So without the consultant pay deal, I imagine that your salary in 2010 should be about 20% less than it was in 2008. So you've still done very well out of Mary Harney. And I still think consultants successfully faced her down in ways that other groups couldn't.

Do you have any views on Green Party issues on health care policy?

Armas22

taconnol wrote: »

As stated earlier, it's amazing what getting into power will do to the lunatic fringe of a party that refuses to compromise. The GP members had never had to deal with it in the 16 years of their existence before they got into power.

I wonder if it works like this - when a small, radical party with eccentric views becomes larger, newer recruits are likely to be more representative of the general population, and thus growth inevitably leads to moderation?

Or, do you feel what we are seeing is a deliberate decision of the leadership to suppress their own distinctive policies in order to gain power and pursue an agreed narrower agenda?

Personally, I suspect it might be a bit of both, maybe each view acting as a catalyst for the other. I mean - the more mainstream the leadership, the more people might join the party (or the more radical elements leave the party), and the more moderate the membership, the more the leaders have to reflect this.

Traumadoc

The consultants who signed the new contracts (my wife included) never got the full pay rise so are worse off: consultants who stayed on the old contract earn 10% more per hour


I voted for Gormley last election as I admired the way he spoke at the 2007 conference and how he made McDowell look a fool for supporting Ahern.

I was devastated when he went into government with Ahern.

rugbyman

Traumadoc wrote: »

The consultants who signed the new contracts (my wife included) never got the full pay rise so are worse off: consultants who stayed on the old contract earn 10% more per hour


I voted for Gormley last election as I admired the way he spoke at the 2007 conference and how he made McDowell look a fool for supporting Ahern.

I was devastated when he went into government with Ahern.

Ahem, he went in, in the National Interest......
Rugbyman

moonpurple

the climate issue justifies all the squalor of realpolitic it appears.

unfortunately the green party seem to like ideas more than daily life issues, there is something elitist about them, they appear to live in the future,

once upon a time a wall was built in france...many miles long..to stop the spread of the black death plague.. the wall is still there, it did not work

dog barks...train passes

in eamonn ryans constituency some residents want a barrier that stops motorcycles rat running between estates, where a new opening is being created, but it will slow down pushbikes as the negotiate it... safety from motorcyles will probably come in second to the utopian bikes in the drizzle vision

Macha

Armas22 wrote: »

I wonder if it works like this - when a small, radical party with eccentric views becomes larger, newer recruits are likely to be more representative of the general population, and thus growth inevitably leads to moderation?

Or, do you feel what we are seeing is a deliberate decision of the leadership to suppress their own distinctive policies in order to gain power and pursue an agreed narrower agenda?

Personally, I suspect it might be a bit of both, maybe each view acting as a catalyst for the other. I mean - the more mainstream the leadership, the more people might join the party (or the more radical elements leave the party), and the more moderate the membership, the more the leaders have to reflect this.

I wouldn't agree with this entirely. The more radical elements, eg Patricia McKenna and her followers have left because they don't agree with the compromises necessary to be a coalition partner (which, let's face it, the Greens will always be for the forseeable future).

In a party with the levels of internal democracy that the Green Party does, the leadership does not have the capacity to suppress the policies of the party in order to gain power. For example, in the voting on any motions, John Gormley's vote is weighted the same as anyone else's. They can put forward their point of view but ultimately 2/3rds of the members have to vote in favour for a policy to be accepted.

Hotblack Desiato

Armas22 wrote: »

OK, they had local politicians on their boards, but the board meetings were open to the public and it did take local public opinion into account.

That was precisely the problem.
It led to a grossly inefficient, balkanised, system retaining an excessive number of small 19th century hospitals, and preventing any rationalisation was essential to maintain the political careers of the local TDs and councillors.

CoalBucket

I'm sick of politicians flutin around while the country goes down the swanny. I'm gonna run for election the next time out. I just want the salary, the expenses and the pension. Think that qualifies

Armas22

ninja900 wrote: »

That was precisely the problem.
It led to a grossly inefficient, balkanised, system retaining an excessive number of small 19th century hospitals, and preventing any rationalisation was essential to maintain the political careers of the local TDs and councillors.

We will differ on this. The so-called efficiencies of the new regime are very much yet to be demonstrated, but it is crystal clear that the public accountability that was in the old system is long gone. There has to be a balance between "efficiency" and what a population actually wants. The centralised bureacracy of the HSE, based in Dublin, makes decisions that affect all parts of the country. The old Health Boards, based in their communities, made decisions for their local communities. Precisely because they had public meetings, with public representatives, the local administrators could not afford to ignore local public opinion. In my local paper, there was a monthly report on Health Board meetings. Mostly the reports were about initiatives for the elderly and other vulnerable populations, and about new service developments for the area. Since the HSE came in, there has been a noticeable dwindling of these services.

It is obvious that on the hospital side, there are potential benefits to be gained by collaboration over greater geograhical regions, particularly in cancer services (but not so obviously in Casualty or Ambulance services). The same is not true of non-hospital services. Community service needs in West Cork or Longford are not going to be the same as they are in Ballymun or Ballsbridge. Local variation has to be allowed. There is a much higher percentage of elderly, for example, in some rural areas than others, and very much more than in Dublin.