Minister for Health Simon Harris and family trapped in home by protesters.

super_furry

GAA Beo wrote: »

Life is so hard for the millionaire Harris family in their mansion in leafy Greystones, how ever will they cope with the commoners outside their door. Spare me, I have sympathy for the hundreds of thousands struggling in this country. Many on the streets last night that the Fine Gaelers consider "bums".

Jesus wept. 'Leafy Greystones'? There's a tree in their estate so they must be baron-landlords?

Mansion? It's a semi-detached house in Wicklow.

Grayson

Marengo wrote: »

Republican leanings.. We live in the Republic of Ireland, I'd be surprised if they were monarchists.

Also this association of Republicanism as evil and labelling people 'Shinner' has to stop. It is legitimate to be a Republican and law abiding.

There's republicanism and then there's republicanism. We are all technically republicans. However there's a certain badsh1t crazy group of idiots who take it to the next level. The kind of idiots who bang on about sovereignty. They're in the same level of idiocy as the "freemen".

Anyone who decides to call their groups "Battalion" and "Flying Column" are complete morons.

AndrewJRenko

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Isn't it strange how those who are absolutely certain that it is overstaffed don't seem to have the slightest clue about how overstaffed it is.

It’s clearly over staffed given the costs.

But yet again, no specifics. How many people would you like to fire from the eHealth team?

hatrickpatrick

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Building project overruns are always interesting. The media always frames them as waste, but to be honest the only waste really is the inflation.

If the hospital has been correctly priced initially it would be coming in at a similar price to this. If we are unhappy with the now final price, would we have been happier accepting a lesser hospital?

It's more about the exposure of the people charged with managing the country's finances as frighteningly incompetent, and yet the near certainty that nobody in charge is going to be fired or face any meaningful consequences.

Turner

Just looked at the video. Talk about the dregs of society.

All on medical cards id say, one or two on disability (one fella even brought his walking stick) and no doubt one or two members of Saoradh (supported the bombing at Derry courthouse)

I know we have to have the right to protest, but to show up at a government ministers house where a mother is nursing a newborn baby.

This has to border on harassment or intimidation which are criminal offences.

Public order unit should have been called in to sweep this crowd of cretins up and deposit them back to whatever pub they normally spend all their dole/disabillity money in.

Gimme A Pound

Marengo wrote: »

this association of Republicanism as evil and labelling people 'Shinner' has to stop. It is legitimate to be a Republican and law abiding.

I agree very much but it's obvious they mean the extremist ones.

MrMusician18

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It's more about the exposure of the people charged with managing the country's finances as frighteningly incompetent, and yet the near certainty that nobody in charge is going to be fired or face any meaningful consequences.

If we had been told that this project was going to cost €2bn from the outset, what would the options have been? Really the only way would have been to down-spec. Would the public have accepted a lesser quality hospital, fewer beds and fewer services?

Don't get me wrong, budgeting is important, but the real hang up people seem to have is the price. This project was always going to cost this amount whether or not it was priced correctly beforehand.

MrMusician18

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Building project overruns are always interesting. The media always frames them as waste, but to be honest the only waste really is the inflation.

There's a well-known sharp practice in irish politics of deliberately low-balling a price for a desired capital project, in order to win Government approval, only for the costs to rise inevitably. If that is what happened here, it still doesn't excuse the behaviour of the Minister - arguably, it aggravates it, as it means he was completely oblivious to the possibility, on top of just not bothering to seek regular updates.

MrMusician18

MrMusician18 wrote: »

This project was always going to cost this amount whether or not it was priced correctly beforehand.

this is complete nonsense. Not even FG ministers are saying that. I assume you can show us where you were saying this before the news emerged? Why did you sit on such an explosive news story? Amazing.

AndrewJRenko

Snow Garden wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Isn't it strange how those who are absolutely certain that it is overstaffed don't seem to have the slightest clue about how overstaffed it is.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/the-hse-can-t-work-out-how-many-staff-it-has-1.766165

The HSE can't work out how many staff it has

Now, as you all know by now, the HSE has some difficulty with figures. It can’t figure out how much PPARS (personnel, payroll and related systems) cost, or maybe it doesn’t want us to know. The latest debacle with the insurers could cost us €50 million, according to Prof Drumm, or nothing at all according to Minister Harney. It’s the way you tell ’em.

Then there are the conflicting reports as to how many actually work in the service. There seem to be about 112,000, give or take a few thousand. I became bogged down in this particular morass when I quoted figures used by three stockbroking firms, Davy, NCB and Goodbody in a joint paper issued on April 2nd. They averred that in the HSE there were about 49,000 administrative staff and 61,000 frontline staff and that such a ratio was unsustainable.

Rebuttal was swift and the numerical waters were muddied. A Mr Paul Connors, speaking for the HSE, said the true figure was 16,000 administrators. Further modification came from the highest levels of the organisation: there were only 6,000 in admin proper and the other 10,000 were in secretarial support of the frontline.

Stay with the maths awhile. If there are indeed only 16,000 and there are 61,000 frontline troops, that leaves 40,000 souls in limbo if the overall total is correct. What do these people do? Surely it is not beyond the capacity of this expensive overstaffed monstrosity to provide a categorical breakdown of its alleged 112,000-strong workforce? Then we’d all know and these controversies could finish. That would be a small step toward transparency. Needless to say, there is not a commercial company in the land that do not know their personnel numbers and into which categories they fall. Furthermore they don’t need an army to find out.

This explains why there are eight nurses trying to cope with upwards of 100 patients in a trolleyed AE unit and worked off their feet. It explains why one tired nurse, maybe with a care assistant, tries to cope with 40 older folk in a ramshackle under-funded facility at night.

Are you a flat Earther too?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Neligan

I'm not sure that quoting a ten year old opinion piece is a great way to move on a factual debate.

All the data on HSE numbers is published in the public domain

http://databank.per.gov.ie/Public_Service_Numbers.aspx?rep=Health

But why the mad rush to find data now? Surely you're not suggesting that all those pushing the 'overstaffed "line didn't actually have any basis for this claim?

MrMusician18

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

this is complete nonsense. Not even FG ministers are saying that. I assume you can show us where you were saying this before the news emerged? Why did you sit on such an explosive news story? Amazing.

If I tender a build and I get a price of €1m but I have accidentally excluded €250k of necessary extras the final build price will be €1.25m.

However if I had the full tender, the price I would have got back from the builder would've been very close to €1.25m as well initially.

In the business we aim for the latter and not the former, as is that it's easier to ensure you can afford what your want built when you know the price up front. True, you will also get a marginally better price in the tender since it's the open market price however a good QS will be able to beat a contractor back to very close to market price.

blanch152

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm not sure that quoting a ten year old opinion piece is a great way to move on a factual debate.

All the data on HSE numbers is published in the public domain

http://databank.per.gov.ie/Public_Service_Numbers.aspx?rep=Health

But why the mad rush to find data now? Surely you're not suggesting that all those pushing the 'overstaffed "line didn't actually have any basis for this claim?

I have linked to the data several times in different threads on this issue.

Ireland is at the top of the EU rankings for nurses per head of population and nurses per hospital bed. We are also near the top of the rankings for nurses pay.

There is plenty wrong with the health service, but it is not nurses pay and it is not the number of nurses. How nurses are used and deployed, the economies of scale issue, nursing management grades created for nurses who could not handle the day-to-day work, how other grades are used and deployed etc. are all of more importance in solving the problems of the health service.

MrMusician18

MrMusician18 wrote: »

If I tender a build and I get a price of €1m but I have accidentally excluded €250k of necessary extras the final build price will be €1.25m.

However if I had the full tender, the price I would have got back from the builder would've been very close to €1.25m as well initially.

In the business we aim for the latter and not the former, as is that it's easier to ensure you can afford what your want built when you know the price up front. True, you will also get a marginally better price in the tender since it's the open market price however a good QS will be able to beat a contractor back to very close to market price.

None of this is relevant to the National Children's Hospital. Nobody, not even Government ministers, are arguing that the overrun can be simply explained by 'accidental exclusions', or even construction inflation. There are hundreds of millions of euro that nobody can account for.

But let's all go apesh1t over an 11-man peaceful protest in leafy Greystones.

Billcarson

Acosta wrote: »

Mrsmum wrote: »

I think the protesters were very wrong and also very foolish. They gave Harris the sympathy vote at a time when he is an absolute disgrace.

that the majority of people in Ireland act like their in some sort of warped permanent state of sedation.

Fluoride in the water probably lol. Sorry off topic but another issue that should be addressed at some point.

MrMusician18

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

None of this is relevant to the National Children's Hospital. Nobody, not even Government ministers, are arguing that the overrun can be simply explained by 'accidental exclusions', or even construction inflation. There are hundreds of millions of euro that nobody can account for.

But let's all go apesh1t over an 11-man peaceful protest in leafy Greystones.

Of course it can be explained by exclusions. Overruns are all extras. The money hasn't vanished into a hole, it hasn't even been handed over yet.

The extra overs are be being crystalized because the contractors are asking questions of the design team and these necessary amendment to the tender are now being priced. But this design was always going to cost this amount.

Such overruns point to major exclusions from the tender and tend to point to it being rushed to market. Had a 2bn price tag come out in the design stage the project would've been downgraded/trimmed/slashed. Would half size hospital at €1bn have been better than what was needed for €2bn?

I imagine the ultimate question will be who decided to go to tender with an incomplete/preliminary design and why.

James Brown

_Brian wrote: »

This doesn’t surprise me.

Can see from water protests onward that there are a very low class mixing with genuine protesters looking for nothing but a cover story to cause trouble and have a go, they’ve no “greater good” in mind, just trouble.

Following politicians home and intimidation of their families is real bad form and discredits all protesters.

Shame on whoever is doing this

No it doesn't. People are capable of seeing which causes and protesters they support and those they don't. I can see the odd outraged blue shirt using it on any protest they don't like like the water protests. 'ISIS' anyone?

spurious wrote: »

More of the scumbaggery that surrounded Joan Burton in her car.

Very organised and not at all a spontaneous act.

Paul Murphy wasn't invited. It was some random woman said 'will we keep her here all night?' the people there didn't invite Murphy. Some Councillors were there. All had their homes raided at dawn and three Garda gave false statements regarding Murphy. The people who caused any real trouble were never pursued apart from one trouble making kid.
Hardly organised by any side, maybe the Garda evidence

MrMusician18

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Of course it can be explained by exclusions. Overruns are all extras. The money hasn't vanished into a hole, it hasn't even been handed over yet.

The extra overs are be being crystalized because the contractors are asking questions of the design team and these necessary amendment to the tender are now being priced. But this design was always going to cost this amount.

Such overruns point to major exclusions from the tender and tend to point to it being rushed to market. Had a 2bn price tag come out in the design stage the project would've been downgraded/trimmed/slashed. Would half size hospital at €1bn have been better than what was needed for €2bn?

I imagine the ultimate question will be who decided to go to tender with an incomplete/preliminary design and why.

You have no way of actually knowing whether the cost increases have arisen on foot on lack of detail in the surveys, or because of changes to the plans, or because of complications thus far in the build including damage to adjacent property, or even construction firms taking the piss. Each possibility opens up further questions, going right back to whether the St James's site is suitable.

It's a bit of a nonsense to simply dismiss this by declaring that you always knew it would cost this much. Of course you did.

Franz Von Peppercorn

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

But yet again, no specifics. How many people would you like to fire from the eHealth team?

Of course I don’t have specifics. Running the Irish health service isn’t my job, but it costs more per capita than better services elsewhere and provides a much shoddier service. The extra cost is largely wage costs. Ergo it is over staffed.

I don’t feel I need to go through every employee and their specific remuneration to price that, nor could I.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Of course I don’t have specifics. Running the Irish health service isn’t my job, but it costs more per capita than better services elsewhere and provides a much shoddier service. The extra cost is largely wage costs. Ergo it is over staffed.

You're ignoring the facts that ireland has lower population density to most European countries, which is compounded by the fact that we rely more heavily on hospitals than primary care settings. So when you compare Ireland to a country like Holland, you're not comparing like with like. The health system that we operate is decades behind the rest of Europe, its a design that was created when Labour was comparatively cheap.

Having said that, it's worth mentioning that we spend less money on healthcare as a % of GDP than most OECD countries.

MrMusician18

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

You have no way of actually knowing whether the cost increases have arisen on foot on lack of detail in the surveys, or because of changes to the plans, or because of complications thus far in the build including damage to adjacent property, or even construction firms taking the piss. Each possibility opens up further questions, going right back to whether the St James's site is suitable.

It's a bit of a nonsense to simply dismiss this by declaring that you always knew it would cost this much. Of course you did.

You are missing the point, as usual. I am not saying I always knew it would cost €2bn, obviously I didn't. What I am saying is that this design was always going to cost €2bn no matter what was budgeted, no matter if we found out before the tender, during construction or after.

Perhaps it will open up questions on whether this site was the right location, whether it could've been built cheaper elsewhere. It wouldn't have been though. Half of the cost seems to be made up with ancillary costs that would be present no matter what site was chosen.

But all the naysayers will keep floating the Blanchardstown red herring forever more all because it would have a bigger carpark

MrMusician18

MrMusician18 wrote: »

You are missing the point, as usual. I am not saying I always knew it would cost €2bn, obviously I didn't. What I am saying is that this design was always going to cost €2bn no matter what was budgeted, no matter if we found out before the tender, during construction or after.

Perhaps it will open up questions on whether this site was the right location, whether it could've been built cheaper elsewhere. I won't though. Half of the cost seems to be made up with ancillary costs that would be present no matter what site was chosen.

But all the naysayers will keep floating the Blanchardstown red herring forever more all because it would have a bigger carpark

One of the strongest advocates for Blanchardstown is a former Master of the Coombe Hospital, but sure he's just a naysayer too, what does he know?

It's interesting to observe that of all the experts that have appeared in the Irish media, its only those attached to St James's who are consistently in favour of that site. There are plenty of outside experts, Irish doctors and even a man who builds hospitals for a living, saying its the wrong site. Naysayers! Shinners! Thugs!

MrMusician18

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

One of the strongest advocates for Blanchardstown is a former Master of the Coombe Hospital, but sure he's just a naysayer too, what does he know?

It's interesting to observe that of all the experts that have appeared in the Irish media, its only those attached to St James's who are consistently in favour of that site. There are plenty of outside experts, Irish doctors and even a man who builds hospitals for a living, saying its the wrong site. Naysayers! Shinners! Thugs!

Dolphin Report 2012 wrote:

From a clinical and academic perspective, we identified St James’s Hospital as the
existing DATH [Dublin Academic Teaching Hospital] that best meets the criteria to be
the adult partner in co-location because it has the broadest range of national
specialties and excellent research and education infrastructure”.

Really?

blanch152

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

You're ignoring the facts that ireland has lower population density to most European countries, which is compounded by the fact that we rely more heavily on hospitals than primary care settings. So when you compare Ireland to a country like Holland, you're not comparing like with like. The health system that we operate is decades behind the rest of Europe, its a design that was created when Labour was comparatively cheap.

Having said that, it's worth mentioning that we spend less money on healthcare as a % of GDP than most OECD countries.

https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm

No it is not worth mentioning a lie.

Here are the OECD figures, we spend the seventh highest amount per capita on healthcare.

As always, GDP distorts Irish figures, so using the per capita amount gives a pretty clear picture.

The health service doesn't need any more money. Any money for a payrise for nurses should be met by productivity savings or changes to medical cards etc.

MrMusician18

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Really?

I didn't say there are no experts agreeing with the St James's site, I said that the only experts that are *consistently* in favour of St James's are themselves currently attached to that hospital. There is no shortage of other specialists in paediatric medicine expressing alarm at the decision.

It's quite a rare thing for Irish consultants to come out against their colleagues in the media - most won't even do that before the courts in med neg cases. So that alone should raise some eyebrows.

Boggles

Does the new figure of 2 billion included the cost of the inevitable tribunal or will that be extra?

Arghus

Overblown coverage. A few people protesting.

tayto lover

They need to stop this “doomed to fail” project now.
Half arsed planning and clowns behind it.

Plumbthedepths

Arghus wrote:

Overblown coverage. A few people protesting.

But Harris was trapped in his home and the baby may have needed a doctor and some other made up nonsense..... overblown is right, but it serves to portray Harris as a victim and takes some of the heat off him.

MrMusician18

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I didn't say there are no experts agreeing with the St James's site, I said that the only experts that are *consistently* in favour of St James's are themselves currently attached to that hospital. There is no shortage of other specialists in paediatric medicine expressing alarm at the decision.

It's quite a rare thing for Irish consultants to come out against their colleagues in the media - most won't even do that before the courts in med neg cases. So that alone should raise some eyebrows.

The expert report backed St. James. They were tasked with looking at all the issues and determined that clinically it's the best place.

There's a distinction to be made between criticisms of someone's medical politics (it's a thing seemingly) and professional criticism of someone's ability as a clinician.

MrMusician18

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The expert report backed St. James. They were tasked with looking at all the issues and determined that clinically it's the best place.

You haven't bothered to read the report, have you?