J&J Chief exectutive says no to Children's Hospital site because the area is a kip

Kermit.de.frog

Just listened to the CE of the Jack and Jill foundation on the radio just now who was talking about the National Children's Hospital proposed on the site of St Jame's Hospital in Dublin.

An interesting conversation. He seemed more concerned with the fact the area is a drug ridden unredeemable cesspit (according to him) than anything else.

His comments are likely to upset the locals and others. He was saying no one should park their cars there and why would parents send their children "to an area like that" which is full of drugs and depressing. He said people saying it would regenerate the area should look at Temple Street hospital and that area and take their heads out of their backsides (to paraphrase).


A part from that argument he made little effort to deal with any practical issue. There was a virulence there to his opinion of the area and it was made with that pompous well heeled tone that is almost designed to irritate the target audience (in this case the locals in the area).

It's hard to disagree with a lot of what he says about these areas he is talking about. They are rough places. But is it fair to put down these places on national radio even if there is an element of truth there? There was no pretense about the core of his argument. It had less to do with children and more to do with the fact he hates the area. Especially given the organisation he works for too people might be even more surprised with the attitude.

Curiously the presenters did not challenge him on his views like they should have in my opinion.

I guess this is just representative of a certain section the professional classes and their disregard for working class areas. God forbid they would have to drive through one to get to work! Maybe it has more to do with that and less to do with the children.

In fairness, he's not really too far from the truth.

Having worked in that area for a while I've seen first hand what its like. Its not a nice part of Dublin/Ireland.

He makes some valid arguments

Titzon Toast

He's right though, it is a kip.

shruikan2553

Well was it a drug ridden unredeemable cesspit? There may be plenty of nice people living there and they aren't the problem but if their neighbours are on drugs and committing crime then it probably is one.

Fr_Dougal

Seems as if he has his own agenda.

Mitch Connor

My other half knows a few nurses who work there and have been held up at needle point going to and from work. My other half has no intention of going to work at that site when the childrens hospital is eventually built, as she doesn't reckon it will be safe.

Regardless of the rep of the area, it is a terrible spot for a national childrens hospital, it should have been built on a green field site on/near the M50. Getting very sick children from around the country to that place will be a joke - remember reading one of the people behind the plan saying that parents could bring their kids via the Luas, from the Red Cow - cause that is exactly the type of environment you want your incredibly sick immune system comprimised children in.

Tipsy McSwagger

TheZohan wrote: »

Seems as if he has his own agenda.

Yup to build a hospital in a decent area.

Valetta

Neither he nor his organisation has any imput into where the hospital will be built, so his opinion will be ignored, as it should be.

K-9

Rough enough area all right. The Mater was the last proposal so not much better.

mickydoomsux

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

Yup to build a hospital in a decent area.

So, not anywhere near Dublin City then?

Kermit.de.frog

K-9 wrote: »

The Mater was the last proposal so not much better.

I remember the proposal for the mater site.

http://www.imbecile.me/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/japan-tsunami-boat-roof-house.jpg

tritium

There are worse areas and at least it has a decent amount of space as opposed to the mater site. There are some rough sites nearby but to be fair I can't think of many places in the entire country that don't have some rough places nearby. Amazing how many people with only a passing knowledge of Dublin who would rush to condemn the area, and I say that as someone who worked nearby in the 90's when it was somewhat rougher.

Of course if the head of J&J would like to pony up the cost for a site in an area he approves of then I'm sure we'll be all ears.

Matt_Trakker

Titzon Toast wrote: »

He's right though, it is a kip.

Yea, he's spot on.

suicide_circus

I live 10mins walk from james st.Very large amount of addicts in the area. The only place in the country you will see more addicts roaming the streets is the abbey st/talbot st/bachelor's walk kind of area which is within a short walk of temple st and the rotunda.

mickydoomsux

tritium wrote: »

There are worse areas and at least it has a decent amount of space as opposed to the mater site. There are some rough sites nearby but to be fair I can't think of many places in the entire country that don't have some rough places nearby. Amazing how many people with only a passing knowledge of Dublin who would rush to condemn the area, and I say that as someone who worked nearby in the 90's when it was somewhat rougher.

Of course if the head of J&J would like to pony up the cost for a site in an area he approves of then I'm sure we'll be all ears.

This entire post is typical of a Dublin apologist.

"Shure, it isn't as bad as other ****holes and it certainly isn't as bad a ****hole as it used to be. Shure why don't the charity buy another site somewhere else if they have a problem with this kip?"

Dublin. It's an utter dump, but it's our utter dump.

Seaneh

As said already it should be built in the MOST accessible place, not the least. Getting people in and out of there in a hurry will be a nightmare. Putting it outside the city near the M50 or even outside Dublin altogether but in the commuter belt would be a much better idea.

Knine

suicide_circus wrote: »

I live 10mins walk from james st.Very large amount of addicts in the area. The only place in the country you will see more addicts roaming the streets is the abbey st/talbot st/bachelor's walk kind of area which is within a short walk of temple st and the rotunda.

I just spent a week recently in Temple Street Children's hospital with my daughter. I did not actually see any addicts when I got out for short breaks.

Public transport like Luas etc is all well and good until you have a child not capable of using it. I dread the drives to the new proposed site & I live in Dublin.

suicide_circus

mickydoomsux wrote: »

This entire post is typical of a Dublin apologist.

"Shure, it isn't as bad as other ****holes and it certainly isn't as bad a ****hole as it used to be. Shure why don't the charity buy another site somewhere else if they have a problem with this kip?"

Dublin. It's an utter dump, but it's our utter dump.

There are pockets of Dublin which are shiitholes but the majority of it is grand and some of it is absolutely lovely.

Kermit.de.frog

You would want to consider carefully whether the Luas red line is suitable for carrying sick children to hospital given a lot of it's clientele are junkies and scumbags going to and from the childrens court.

Definitely a turn off for this site.

P_1

The only way a children's hospital would work on that site was if its construction was paralleled with a pretty massive regeneration of the James' Street area.

Rough Sleeper

mickydoomsux wrote: »

This entire post is typical of a Dublin apologist.

"Shure, it isn't as bad as other ****holes and it certainly isn't as bad a ****hole as it used to be. Shure why don't the charity buy another site somewhere else if they have a problem with this kip?"

Dublin. It's an utter dump, but it's our utter dump.

Get yourself down to Tipperary Town, Tuam or Newcastle West if you want to see what an "utter dump" actually looks like. Or better yet, Bogota or Caracas.

mickydoomsux

Rough Sleeper wrote: »

Get yourself down to Tipperary Town, Tuam or Newcastle West if you want to see what an "utter dump" actually looks like. Or better yet, Bogota or Caracas.

Thanks for once again proving my point.

HomelessMidge

tritium wrote: »

and I say that as someone who worked nearby in the 90's when it was somewhat rougher.

Have lived in Dublin 8 all my life. Not half as bad as it was in the 90s!

Yeah you get scum around here but I have felt safer walking around my area than some parts of Kildare, Meath, Louth and a few other counties.

It's getting better around here. There knocking all the flats down and moving everyone around. Its when you have a group of scumbags with pack mentality that **** starts.

I have lived a 10 minute walk from James street all my life and have never been bothered. Once in my familys lives has anyone been held with a needle and that was my aunt who was working in a chemist (the chemist was robbed) on Thomas street around 98-2000. It was probably the countries most drug ridden street at that time.

suicide_circus

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Thanks for once again proving my point.

Seriously if you think Dublin is an utter dump, you've lead a sheltered life.

Rough Sleeper

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Thanks for once again proving my point.

You don't have a point. Calling somewhere an utter dump suggests that's it's a drab, dangerous ****hole with few redeeming qualities, rather than a decent city where you'll get asked for change a hanful of times on an average day.

mickydoomsux

suicide_circus wrote: »

Seriously if you think Dublin is an utter dump, you've lead a sheltered life.

Nope, I've been in numerous cities all over the globe and Dublin is easily the least pleasant.

A dirty, scumbag infested kip of a place. I dread having to go there for any reason.

Rough Sleeper

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Nope, I've been in numerous cities all over the globe and Dublin is easily the least pleasant.

Guess what: so have I, and I disagree with you. Which kinda nullifies your anecdote.

Peregrine

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Nope, I've been in numerous cities all over the globe and Dublin is easily the least pleasant.

A dirty, scumbag infested kip of a place. I dread having to go there for any reason.

I reckon Dublin won't be half as bad if people weren't pissing all over it in every thread that even remotely mentions its name.

If we could go back to talking about the Children's Hospital rather than your opinions on a city, that'd be great.


Personally, I don't like the St. James' site or the Mater site purely because it could be built on a much more accessible site.

listermint

Nimr wrote: »

I reckon Dublin won't be half as bad if people weren't pissing all over it in every thread that even remotely mentions its name.

If we could go back to talking about the Children's Hospital rather than your opinions on a city, that'd be great.

Should have been built in Tallaght, Off M50, Off M4, On Luas Lines, On Direct Bus Routes. Next to New newlands cross upgrade.

This whole thing was a joke and a political football from the get go.

Every arsehole in office trying to stick their oar in.

spurious

Is it the area, or does the presence of a hospital and all its diseased patrons and hangers on make it a kip?

Robbo

I get a fierce bang of Alan Patridge's irrational fear of London in this thread.

Off to London, no doubt. Go to London! I guarantee you'll either be mugged or not appreciated. Catch the train to London, stopping at Rejection, Disappointment, Backstabbing Central and Shattered Dreams Parkway.

miss no stars

Seaneh wrote: »

As said already it should be built in the MOST accessible place, not the least. Getting people in and out of there in a hurry will be a nightmare. Putting it outside the city near the M50 or even outside Dublin altogether but in the commuter belt would be a much better idea.

I was originally opposed to the idea of having it either at the Mater site or the James' site. Then I heard a fairly compelling argument about it. 80% of those who will use it are from Dublin. Not the greater Dublin area. From Dublin. Putting it on a random spot off the M50 makes it very expensive/awkward to get to for people who don't have their own car. If your child is from outside Dublin and is attending the hospital, they're sick enough that they can't be treated regionally and they'll have to travel there by car anyway so accessibility isn't the issue - you're in a car, you can get there. If your child has been sent for an xray on their arm, or for tonsils out, or for routine blood tests, or for stitches, or for a checkup with a specialist etc. - you know, the day to day stuff that 80% of the people who will use it will be there for - accessibility by non-car based transport is important. It's also important for family. 80% of the future patients live in Dublin. Parents doing shift changes with who's there and who's at home/in work also need to be considered. That's made easier for 80% of families attending if it's a bus into town and hop onto the Luas rather than "for how long am I paying for parking, will I get stuck in traffic?". And realistically, it's a simple route in from the M50.

Amirani

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Nope, I've been in numerous cities all over the globe and Dublin is easily the least pleasant..

Clearly not to a particularly diverse range. Or maybe you've just been visiting the sunshine and rainbows touristy areas?

If Dublin is the least pleasant city you've travelled to, then you really haven't travelled to that many. That's almost an object fact if you look at many quality of life/student city rankings.

joe swanson

Why do people insist on calling these area 'working class' when its patently obvious work is the last thing a lot of them do.

P_1

spurious wrote: »

Is it the area, or does the presence of a hospital and all its diseased patrons and hangers on make it a kip?

To be honest its the area. It's pretty badly run down, plenty of abandoned, falling down buildings which naturally attract addicts to use as squats.

It's a shame because quite a lot of the buildings are beautiful (architecturally speaking) and its a great spot in relation to the city center.