Console. Charity, Irish-style

jmayo

2RockMountain wrote: »

Jack and Jill have done great work, but I think the line between the charity and the CEO got a little blurred at times.

http://www.thesun.ie/irishsol/homepage/news/7028547/Jack-Jill-founder-Jonathan-Irwin-admits-donor-cash-spent-on-Seanad-lobbying-bid.html

If that is the worst he has done then he still comes out at the top of the heap.
I do know he was very vocal about siting of childrens hospital.
Of course he was ignored.
Who would think the head of a major childrens charity that has dealt with over 1500 families with terminally ill babies would have any valid input into the siting of a new childrens hospital. :rolleyes:

selastich2

jmayo wrote: »

If that is the worst he has done then he still comes out at the top of the heap.
I do know he was very vocal about siting of childrens hospital.
Of course he was ignored.
Who would think the head of a major childrens charity that has dealt with over 1500 families with terminally ill babies would have any valid input into the siting of a new childrens hospital. :rolleyes:

But Marys been in the civil service 40 years and knows all about breaks and stuff, she's bound to be the best person to lead the quangos

2RockMountain

jmayo wrote: »

If that is the worst he has done then he still comes out at the top of the heap.
I do know he was very vocal about siting of childrens hospital.
Of course he was ignored.
Who would think the head of a major childrens charity that has dealt with over 1500 families with terminally ill babies would have any valid input into the siting of a new childrens hospital. :rolleyes:

selastich2 wrote: »

But Marys been in the civil service 40 years and knows all about breaks and stuff, she's bound to be the best person to lead the quangos

Not so much about Mary and her 40 years services as the expert members of the review group - people who have actually run hospitals, not just talked about them, people who know how much priority to give to travel/parking details when siting a new hospital:

Dr Frank Dolphin (chair)
Mr Simon Clear
Mr Michael Collins
Professor Jonathan Hourihane
Professor B.G. Loftus
Mr John Martin
Professor Clodagh O’Gorman
Ms Louise Shepherd
Professor Owen Smith

jmayo

2RockMountain wrote: »

Not so much about Mary and her 40 years services as the expert members of the review group - people who have actually run hospitals, not just talked about them, people who know how much priority to give to travel/parking details when siting a new hospital:

Sorry not wanting to take this thread in another direction but I do want to answer this post.

So called experts were also touting the Mater as being a great site.
Then after planning hold ups and some further thought it turned out it wasn't such a great site after all. :rolleyes:

Something you appear to forget is that a lot of those professors got to be professors not just because of their knowledge and ability, but because they played politics.
Ever see or watch the selection of a university president.
It aint the best man/woman, it aint the best professor or researcher, it is the best politician and really the one who has stepped on the least amount of toes.

Anyone that thinks that politics, both government/council and especially medical, hasn't played a major part in the siting of new hospital is deluded.

Also you can actually quiet easily steer an expert panel or committee to giving a desired output if you set the right terms and conditions in the first place.
It wouldn't be the first time this has been done.

Anyway this is going off topic.

2RockMountain

jmayo wrote: »

Sorry not wanting to take this thread in another direction but I do want to answer this post.

So called experts were also touting the Mater as being a great site.
Then after planning hold ups and some further thought it turned out it wasn't such a great site after all. :rolleyes:

Something you appear to forget is that a lot of those professors got to be professors not just because of their knowledge and ability, but because they played politics.
Ever see or watch the selection of a university president.
It aint the best man/woman, it aint the best professor or researcher, it is the best politician and really the one who has stepped on the least amount of toes.

Anyone that thinks that politics, both government/council and especially medical, hasn't played a major part in the siting of new hospital is deluded.
.

I presume you'll take that same approach when you need someone to put a stent into your aorta or treat your family member's cancer. You'll ignore all the Professors and their political qualifications and choose a bloke who set up a charity, tried to run for a failed political party and mouths off about anything and everything to save your life, right?

jmayo wrote: »

Also you can actually quiet easily steer an expert panel or committee to giving a desired output if you set the right terms and conditions in the first place.
It wouldn't be the first time this has been done.

And what specifically was wrong with the Terms of Reference (not terms & conditions) of the Dolphin Group?

oppenheimer1

jmayo wrote: »

Sorry not wanting to take this thread in another direction but I do want to answer this post.

So called experts were also touting the Mater as being a great site.
Then after planning hold ups and some further thought it turned out it wasn't such a great site after all. :rolleyes:

Something you appear to forget is that a lot of those professors got to be professors not just because of their knowledge and ability, but because they played politics.
Ever see or watch the selection of a university president.
It aint the best man/woman, it aint the best professor or researcher, it is the best politician and really the one who has stepped on the least amount of toes.

Anyone that thinks that politics, both government/council and especially medical, hasn't played a major part in the siting of new hospital is deluded.

Also you can actually quiet easily steer an expert panel or committee to giving a desired output if you set the right terms and conditions in the first place.
It wouldn't be the first time this has been done.

Anyway this is going off topic.

This sort of anti intellectualism really grinds my gears. The Mater was the best site in terms of patient outcomes, but was rejected because ABP thought it was too high and too dense for the site. Co location with st James is the next best in terms of patient outcomes. These things were all thought through by experts with years of medical experience, what qualifies you to reject their expert advice?

jmayo

2RockMountain wrote: »

I presume you'll take that same approach when you need someone to put a stent into your aorta or treat your family member's cancer. You'll ignore all the Professors and their political qualifications and choose a bloke who set up a charity, tried to run for a failed political party and mouths off about anything and everything to save your life, right?

Ohh of course because I question some doctors recommendation for hospital location, where they often have vested interests, I will also now self treat my illnesses.

FFS talk about leaps in arguments.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

This sort of anti intellectualism really grinds my gears. The Mater was the best site in terms of patient outcomes, but was rejected because ABP thought it was too high and too dense for the site. Co location with st James is the next best in terms of patient outcomes. These things were all thought through by experts with years of medical experience, what qualifies you to reject their expert advice?

I just love how often it is trotted out that some of us should just listen to our betters.


BTW would this be the same profession that have had some major medical diagnosis cockups that are in the end of course always just systemic failures within the system ?
Would this be the same profession that have refused medical treatment to some patients due to religious considerations ?

Dispensing unquestioned respect for the opinions of our so called elites has gotten this country into a whole pile of shyte in the past.

I just wonder were you lecturing people to listen to the likes of Patrick Neary, the Dept of Finance and the vast majority of the economists tell us how well capitalised the banks were pre bust ?
I actually reckon you were.

Maybe as someone who has spent time in that area and know quiet a lot of people involved in the medical industry and have had to listen to them speak about getting in and out of James makes me doubt the shyteology trotted out about how great a site it is.
It is cramped, it is in middle of city and instead of planning for the future we plan for yesterday.
Yes it is beside a major adult hospital, but isn't it about time we built an ultra modern major national hospital together with new maternity hospital outside our city centre.

And you even have to admit above that the experts still thought the Mater was the best site and it was only because of ABP that it was ruled out. :rolleyes:
To me that means they never really considered space and access as major components.

barney4001

now i see the kellys are saying the high end clothing was bought for homeless people lol whatever next

2RockMountain

jmayo wrote: »

Ohh of course because I question some doctors recommendation for hospital location, where they often have vested interests, I will also now self treat my illnesses.

FFS talk about leaps in arguments.

Interesting, so you accept medical expertise when it comes to your own life, but not when it comes to other matters.

The 'Mater' issue is no reflection on the expertise of these folks. It is a planning issue. No-one can predict the planning rulings of An Bord Pleanala. The medical experts picked the Mater as the best site, and the planning authorities rejected a building of that size and scale. No-one can predict the rulings of ABP.

The medical experts haven't said anything about how easy it will be to get to James, because they know exactly how difficult it will be. They also know where to rank transport issues when siting a new hospital.

Some of the best hospitals in the world have no parking for patients and families. They're still great hospitals.

http://www.gosh.nhs.uk/parents-and-visitors/travelling-gosh

Brendan Bendar

wokingvoter wrote: »

The Kelly's have probably stashed away plenty of money to keep them going while they go to ground, heads down for a while before they relocate to some far flung spot where they'll dupe another community into handing over their spare cash.
I garantee no charges will ever be levied against them here.

Calling you out on that one.

They will do time, bro, serious time.

stateofflux

i would not be surprised if a new charity regulatory / governance Quango was set up soon. To 'monitor' the chaos. 80-100 new jobs will be created though..move along now

2RockMountain

stateofflux wrote: »

i would not be surprised if a new charity regulatory / governance Quango was set up soon. To 'monitor' the chaos. 80-100 new jobs will be created though..move along now

Something like this one, set up in recent years? https://www.charitiesregulatoryauthority.ie/

How about giving proper legislation and proper resources to the current regulator instead of setting up a new one.

selastich2

Gardai investigating after horse bought for Console Paul Kelly's daughter disappears in 'theft'

The horse was removed on Thursday from stables owned by Olympic show jumping trainer Gerry Flynn by two men posing as gardai working on the Console investigation.

Their visit was arranged in a phone call last Wednesday night, and Mr Flynn said he was not home when the men arrived between 10am and noon.


The mare was taken along with a white Fiat 500 car and a horse trailer.


http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/gardai-investigating-after-horse-bought-for-console-paul-kellys-daughter-disappears-in-theft-34872310.html

ohnonotgmail

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Calling you out on that one.

They will do time, bro, serious time.

while i would this to be true i just dont see it happening given our history of dealing with conmen and fraudsters.

Annasopra

maudgonner wrote: »

That's a line that has been repeated a lot when discussion of charity salaries comes up. And I see the logic to it - if you want to run a major company the CEO would expect a salary much higher than that.

BUT we have thousands of charities in Ireland, they're not all major corporations. And in the case of Console and many others, they are not recruiting people worth that kind of money, they're clearly giving CEO positions to people who have no qualifications or experience to justify anything remotely like that money. But it was handed to them, or more accurately they handed it to themselves.

So clearly paying huge salaries does not get us the calibre of people that it should. And paying huge salaries may well attract the wrong kind of people. I'd far rather see someone at the head of a charity who is genuinely passionate to be there and makes sacrifices to do so, than someone who is in it for the paycheck.

The thousands of charities are not all paying ceos 100k. In fact most of them are not.

Annasopra

Simon2015 wrote: »

Charity CEO's Adi Roche (cheronobyl children) and Maureen Forrest (hope foundation) both work for free.

Thats what I call real charity workers.

Also we have Brid Leahy of ASH Ireland who only takes a 36k salary.

The idea that you have to pay charity CEO's 6 figure salaries to get the "best people" is nonsense. By paying out that kind of money you will only attract charlatans.

http://www.thejournal.ie/irish-charity-ceo-salaries-spending-best-practice-2659408-Mar2016/

The idea that all people who work for charities should work for free is mind boggling and exploitative

suicide_circus

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

The idea that all people who work for charities should work for free is mind boggling and exploitative

So is having CEOs on 150/200k paid for through donations while volunteers do the grunt work.

Annasopra

jmayo wrote: »

Jonathan Irwin was on 90k a year as CEO, but when you look at the bigger picture he took no salary for over 6 years.
He comes across as one of the real altruists in a quagmire of entitled wantabee CEOs and charity bosses.

Jonathan Irwin? A real altruist?

You're having a laugh. This is the guy who used Jack and Jill finds to pay for his personal Seanad campaign.

HeidiHeidi

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Jonathan Irwin? A real altruist?

You're having a laugh. This is the guy who used Jack and Jill finds to pay for his personal Seanad campaign.

That's a fairly serious allegation you're making there.... have you anything to back that up?

ohnonotgmail

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

That's a fairly serious allegation you're making there.... have you anything to back that up?

will this do? Its a link to the Sun but the allegations hold water. http://www.thesun.ie/irishsol/homepage/news/7028547/Jack-Jill-founder-Jonathan-Irwin-admits-donor-cash-spent-on-Seanad-lobbying-bid.html

maudgonner

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

That's a fairly serious allegation you're making there.... have you anything to back that up?

He used the Jack & Jill franking machine to post campaign letters, and was unapologetic about it.

http://www.thesun.ie/irishsol/homepage/news/7028547/Jack-Jill-founder-Jonathan-Irwin-admits-donor-cash-spent-on-Seanad-lobbying-bid.html


ETA: beaten to it by ohno

Annasopra

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

That's a fairly serious allegation you're making there.... have you anything to back that up?

Jonathan Irwin admitted it to The Sun so yes.

HeidiHeidi

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

will this do? Its a link to the Sun but the allegations hold water. http://www.thesun.ie/irishsol/homepage/news/7028547/Jack-Jill-founder-Jonathan-Irwin-admits-donor-cash-spent-on-Seanad-lobbying-bid.html

maudgonner wrote: »

He used the Jack & Jill franking machine to post campaign letters, and was unapologetic about it.

http://www.thesun.ie/irishsol/homepage/news/7028547/Jack-Jill-founder-Jonathan-Irwin-admits-donor-cash-spent-on-Seanad-lobbying-bid.html


ETA: beaten to it by ohno

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Jonathan Irwin admitted it to The Sun so yes.

Fair enough. I didn't know that.

2RockMountain

suicide_circus wrote: »

So is having CEOs on 150/200k paid for through donations while volunteers do the grunt work.

In most cases, the 'grunt work' is done by paid staff. Very few charities of any significant size depend on volunteers for front line services.

And there are very, very few charities paying anyone in the 150/200k. The ones that do are very large organisations, so in fairness, if you want someone who can run an organisation with an 8-figure budget and hundreds of staff, they're going to need paying accordingly.

Ellie2008

2RockMountain wrote: »

In most cases, the 'grunt work' is done by paid staff. Very few charities of any significant size depend on volunteers for front line services.

And there are very, very few charities paying anyone in the 150/200k. The ones that do are very large organisations, so in fairness, if you want someone who can run an organisation with an 8-figure budget and hundreds of staff, they're going to need paying accordingly.

Why do they "need to be paid accordingly" why can't the fact that the have chosen to work for a charity be reflected in their salary? If you want to make big bucks stay in the private sector, if you want to do something charitable work for a charity at reduced rates (not nothing but less). If you've no interest in the latter grand don't work for a charity. It's not right that so many volunteer for charities for the money they raise to go towards management salaries.

VincePP

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Jonathan Irwin? A real altruist?

You're having a laugh. This is the guy who used Jack and Jill finds to pay for his personal Seanad campaign.

If you read something other than the sun which is a total rag, you'd have read that his campaign for the senate was in order to further his role within the disbility sector and to represent people with disabilities and particulary those his charity worked with.

It was not a personal campaign,but very publically campaigned as head of Jack & Jill and it was to progress his work with Jack & Jill, hence in my eyes there would be no issue using jack and jill facilities or services as a successful end result would have had major benifits for Jack & Jill.

Remember this is a guy who could very easily earn 300k+ in the private sector, but takes 88k before tax to operate this fairly large not for profit organisation.

Console guy took hundred's of thousands in untaxed money and expenditure for his own greed.

gctest50

VincePP wrote: »

If you read something other than the sun which is a total rag, you'd have read that his campaign for the senate was in order to further his role within the disbility sector and to represent people with disabilities and particulary those his charity worked with.

It was not a personal campaign,but very publically campaigned as head of Jack & Jill and it was to progress his work with Jack & Jill, hence in my eyes there would be no issue using jack and jill facilities or services as a successful end result would have had major benifits for Jack & Jill.

Remember this is a guy who ...........

steady on before you do yourself a nasty neck injury there

Mod:
<link snipped>
Not really appropriate. Or SFW.


not like your on about Abdul Sattar Edhi


.

Ellie2008

gctest50 wrote: »

steady on before you do yourself a nasty neck injury there

<snip>


not like your on about Abdul Sattar Edhi

In fairness it's hardly appropriate to post that link!

ohnonotgmail

VincePP wrote: »

If you read something other than the sun which is a total rag, you'd have read that his campaign for the senate was in order to further his role within the disbility sector and to represent people with disabilities and particulary those his charity worked with.

It was not a personal campaign,but very publically campaigned as head of Jack & Jill and it was to progress his work with Jack & Jill, hence in my eyes there would be no issue using jack and jill facilities or services as a successful end result would have had major benifits for Jack & Jill.

Remember this is a guy who could very easily earn 300k+ in the private sector, but takes 88k before tax to operate this fairly large not for profit organisation.

Console guy took hundred's of thousands in untaxed money and expenditure for his own greed.

who made the decision that he could use charity funds to run for the Seanad?

maudgonner

VincePP wrote: »

If you read something other than the sun which is a total rag, you'd have read that his campaign for the senate was in order to further his role within the disbility sector and to represent people with disabilities and particulary those his charity worked with.

It was not a personal campaign,but very publically campaigned as head of Jack & Jill and it was to progress his work with Jack & Jill, hence in my eyes there would be no issue using jack and jill facilities or services as a successful end result would have had major benifits for Jack & Jill.

Remember this is a guy who could very easily earn 300k+ in the private sector, but takes 88k before tax to operate this fairly large not for profit organisation.

Console guy took hundred's of thousands in untaxed money and expenditure for his own greed.

Nobody is suggesting that what he did is on par with what the Kellys did.

However, I have donated to Jack & Jill and I never would have expected my money to be used to fund a Seanad campaign. The charity does not promote itself as a political organisation, so its funds should absolutely not be used to fund political campaigns, IMO.

He exercised very poor judgement, and displayed quite a degree of arrogance in his response to it, from what I can see.