realitykeeper wrote: » You only think such things about God`s Holy Catholic Church because of reports which were not commissioned by the Catholic Church. I suggest the inquiry into the tragic case in which a healthy child was aborted be carried out by a judge as was the case with the Ryan report into the Church. It would be a whitewater and a waste of taxpayers money if the National Maternity Hospital pays someone to inquire into them.
realitykeeper wrote: » I think very highly of the Catholic Church but I understand why a lot of people feel differently. My opinions are not swayed by the media or by public opinion which is understandably swayed by decades of anti RCC vitriole. I am every bit as subservient to God`s Church as I always have been. You see, I look at all that is and was good about the Church. That is not to say I am oblivious to its sins. My view on the EU is similar in that I think things need to change but I think we are better off in it than out of it.
Bannasidhe wrote: » Can you not bring yourself to admit that the taxpayer's will be paying for the inquiry not the NMH as you are keen in insist?
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » So who should do the review and who should pay for it?
realitykeeper wrote: » The people the NMH commission, will receive payment from the NMH and not from me. So no is the answer.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » You said a judge should do the enquiry, who do you think pays the judges?
realitykeeper wrote: » I think it is someone other than the NMH, which is all that matters.
realitykeeper wrote: » In the past, internal reviews and self assessment were the standard until the law changed. This is not the past. What concerns me is that the Minister for health is permitting this waste of taxpayers money. The review into what happened at the NMH should not be commissioned by the NMH. The state should appoint a judge to examine it.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » So your earlier posts Were lies You don't mind taxpayers money spent as long as you get to decide where it's spent?
realitykeeper wrote: » I have no problem with the taxpayers money being spent appropriately. The NMH commissioning an inquiry into itself is a corrupt misappropriation of taxpayers money.
Kidchameleon wrote: » I don't get the push back here, I think it is fair enough to state that an entity commissioning an inquiry into itself may not yield completely impartial results.
aloyisious wrote: » Well the NMH would have to have some input into who'll do the inquiry to ensure the person would know something about the business and would be impartial/not with animus. Given the Royal College of Obstetrics apparently declined a request to do the inquiry, it seems it might be hard to fill the position.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » If the NMH was investigating the NMH then he wouldnhave a point. The fact that it will ve an external company seems to matter not as he thinks that the NMH money will mean they won't be impartial. That's why he is wrong.
realitykeeper wrote: » Of course the inquiry team are going to be partial to the people who are paying their wages.
robindch wrote: » Don't know how or where you work, but in my area, there are plenty of professionals who act as professionals regardless of who's paying them. While the people most easily bought off, seem - with distressing regularity - to be the same people who manifest the greatest outrage at the idea that anybody else might be corruptible.
realitykeeper wrote: » A judge and the department of Justice respectively.
Igotadose wrote: » No crime was committed.
Calina wrote: » It is called projection. People project what they would do on to others.
realitykeeper wrote: » No, that`s why I`m right. Of course the inquiry team are going to be partial to the people who are paying their wages.
For all we know the NMH may be planning to interview multiple candidates until they find one that will do it their way and of course that could mean a total whitewash. Even if they just pick a name from a hat, the people (or person) commissioned might be mindful of the possibility of repeat business in future when they issue their report. That means some serious sugarcoating.
Bannasidhe wrote: » Details of all inquiries carried out into hospitals can be found here:https://www.lenus.ie/discover - can you find one report where despite the evidence the inquiry was favourable to the 'clients'?
realitykeeper wrote: » The NMH is the customer, I think we can therefore expect a whitewash.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » This could also go for anyone who does the investigation, you think judges (you said one should do the investigation) are above reproach? So who/what company do you think should be commisioned to do this investigation that would satisfy your criteria? Also, what experience.would a judge have in these matters? The 1st thing he would do is bring in a company to do this investigation and write a report for him, the taxpayer would still be forking out for it which you said was unacceptable to you.
realitykeeper wrote: » Like a say, I judge should do the inquiry. No judges are not above reproach. A judge would have the similar experience to other judges who carried out inquiries in the past. A judge would call on witnesses and hear testimony. No judge in history has ever looked up the yellow pages to find some company to do his job for him. What is unacceptable would be for the MNH to commission the inquiry team.
Bannasidhe wrote: » Have you found that inquiry report yet where a whitewash occurred?
realitykeeper wrote: » The inquiry and it`s whitewash are still at the tendering stage.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » A judge would have to bring in experts, possibly from the companies you are claiming would be biased, those companies would have to be paid by the taxpayer.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » Ah so you have no evidence of it you're just predicting it will happen? Well going by your previous predictions over the last several years I'm guessing that history will repeat itself and you will yet again be wrong on many levels.
realitykeeper wrote: » At a tribunal, witnesses can be subpoenaed and different parties can send their own experts to testify. Taxpayers money is wasted if it is not used properly as would be the case if the NMH commissions the inquiry team. A tribunal would be more impartial.
realitykeeper wrote: » I am predicting nothing, the NMH have already admitted they are commissioning an inquiry into themselves.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/f07ee44b0b39bbb635066da4046d9475.svg)
