Are there some things that just shouldn't be cut?

Dr Galen

well in fairness, it actualy doesn't. But the point is that we need to have a clear line between whats necessary and whats superfluous within the HSE. A lot of the extra people work in Hawkins House, Steevens Hospital and other HSE Admin centres across the country, not in the hsoitals and clinics, where in a lot of cases they don't actually have enough basci grade admin people.

It's been discussed to death but a lot of this is a hangover from the days when the Health Boards where amalgamated into what we now call the HSE

ateam

In relation to the question, I think the only untouchable thing is the old age pension and widow's pensions. Everything else is fair game in my opinion, everything from junior ministers to the dole to rent allowance to foreign aid to selling the ESB and the government's share in Aer Lingus.

The Leaving Cert Applied programme seems like a waste of money. A babysitting service for 2 years for the least intelligent, motivated and most undisciplined people in our society. But I'm open to debate on that because it could be cheaper to keep them in school for two years than on the dole or breaking into houses.

NewDubliner

ateam wrote: »

Everything else is fair game in my opinion, ........ to selling the ESB and the government's share in Aer Lingus.

Independent News and Media have been pushing for this for some time. A fire sale of the ESB would allow them to revisit the glory days of when Joe Public was screwed over in the Eircom takeover.

Disease Ridden

ateam wrote: »

The Leaving Cert Applied programme seems like a waste of money. A babysitting service for 2 years for the least intelligent, motivated and most undisciplined people in our society. But I'm open to debate on that because it could be cheaper to keep them in school for two years than on the dole or breaking into houses.

Haha, true but for some reason people will probably blast you for saying it

Dr Galen

ateam wrote: »

The Leaving Cert Applied programme seems like a waste of money. A babysitting service for 2 years for the least intelligent, motivated and most undisciplined people in our society. But I'm open to debate on that because it could be cheaper to keep them in school for two years than on the dole or breaking into houses.

have you anything to back this up? or is this another sweeping generalisation about swathes of the population :rolleyes:

Svalbard

Alcatel wrote: »

As I say, that's what everyone says about Group X or Y. "I think Education shouldn't be cut." "I think hospitals shouldn't be touched." Etc. All fair viewpoints. But no money for it...

So they say. Yet they seem to have no end of money to spend on other things. Its not the fact cuts are being made, its where and how they are being made. There are huge saving to be made in many areas of the HSE, but front line health service is not one of them.

otwb wrote: »

Agree with most of your points, but who do you think organises patients appointments and moves them around the hospital/finds medical records/organises waiting rooms/ensures that there is equipment and facilities available for clinics and theatre etc.

Admin staff are vital to the efficient operation of a hospital, lets not forget that. Should concentrate savings on those HSE (as distinct from hospital based staff) management levels who were not needed post amalgimation of the health boards. Pare services from the top down and not the bottom up.

Ok, my use of the words 'Admin staff' was inappropriate. I used it in haste when what I really wanted to refer to was the general indecipherable melee of bureaucracy. Ward clerks are hugely overworked, ditto A&E receptionists, and many other admin staff are indeed vital.
But there is endless and wasteful duplication in other areas, and entire departments (such as TeamBuilding as I described) that should be first on the chopping block. There are layers upon layers of managers, basically doing the same job.

SeanW wrote: »

Perhaps, but why does a health service with such a small amount of doctors and nurses require such an obscene ration of clerical and managerial staff? How many admin staff and middle managers does it take to buy medical equipment or organise a a waiting room?

Absloutely.

The whole idea of the HSE was to streamline and centralise the health service. In reality no departments in the former health boards were axed or amalgamated, civil service grades in the HSE were found to be unfirable - some continue to be employed on full salaries even though their roles are now obsolete - literally paid to do nothing.
The various old health boards are are still referred to as HSE South, HSE Mid-West etc and there is little or no communication between them. Effectively there is no centralisation, no increased effiicieny only more red tape and waste.

This isn't new news, people have been grumbling about it for years, but now that the s**t has hit the fan we cannot tolerate the hugely wasteful behemoth that is the HSE threatening to destroy what remains of our health service. Lives, quite literally, are at stake. Decisions taken now will have reprecussions far into the future.

ateam

Mystik Monkey wrote: »

have you anything to back this up? or is this another sweeping generalisation about swathes of the population :rolleyes:

Rather than calling it a sweeping generalisation, would you not try to constructively engage with the topic and reply with a decent, meaningful post.

I have worked with LCAs and I've seen the things they do. What they learn certainly does not provide any educational achievement. In one topic, they learn about how to use debit and credit cards and what a credit union does. This is not about education, it's all about keeping them off the streets. That's why there's a 90% attendance condition to the course.

Liam Byrne

NewDubliner wrote: »

Ireland's population is too spread out meaning that we have to have lots of hospitals and clinics all over the place. If our population were more concentrated in urban areas, we'd achieve economies of scale based on larger hospitals and resource pooling.

That's rubbish.....it's implying that the problem is that hospitals and clinics are in every tiny village.

Not everyone wants to live in a large urban sprawl, and most of the problem is that the infrastructure isn't there to get to large urban areas quickly enough......and no way to get there to visit someone in hospital either - e.g. no train to from A to B ANYWHERE on the West Coast.

Yes, the services should be concentrated in reasonably-accessible areas, but many of those hospitals proposed to take on the extra workload are ALREADY beyond capacity.

The issues with the HSE are at management and consultant and ministerial level, not on the ground.

NewDubliner

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Not everyone wants to live in a large urban sprawl, and most of the problem is that the infrastructure isn't there to get to large urban areas quickly enough......and no way to get there to visit someone in hospital either - e.g. no train to from A to B ANYWHERE on the West Coast.

If people don't want to live in irban areas, they should accept the consequences and not expect the rest of us to subsidise their lifestyle preferences.

Choosing to live in urban areas helps make the country more competitive.

Alcatel

So they say. Yet they seem to have no end of money to spend on other things. Its not the fact cuts are being made, its where and how they are being made. There are huge saving to be made in many areas of the HSE, but front line health service is not one of them.

That's a simplification. We earn 30bnEUR. We spend 20bnEUR on social welfare before anything else. That's our situation. If you earned 30k a year, spend 20k a year on your household, and have to divvy up the other 10k between your car, maybe an ongoing education, a TV, etc etc etc... Well, you'll have a crappy car, won't get a triple-A course in Trinity... Etc. Same for the government.

You can only take on so much debt. And making cuts to government spending is either a very slow, method driven process - as you describe, to target the cuts - or else it's quick and dirty. And we need quick, so it'll be dirty.

Also, even if we had the most efficient civil service the world has ever seen, we'd likely still need to make real cuts to real services. That's how deep we are in it.

Dr Galen

Rather than calling it a sweeping generalisation, would you not try to constructively engage with the topic and reply with a decent, meaningful post.

so you accuse LCA students of being the most undisciplined and unintelligent members of society and that if they weren't taking the program, they'd be burglars and you want me to reply in a meaningful way?

I have worked with LCAs and I've seen the things they do. What they learn certainly does not provide any educational achievement. In one topic, they learn about how to use debit and credit cards and what a credit union does. This is not about education, it's all about keeping them off the streets. That's why there's a 90% attendance condition to the course.

Maybe that is educational achievement for the people taking the course. Certainly learning how to use a laser card etc doesn't seem like much to you and me, but maybe thats the level of people on the course, we can't all be rocket scientists i guess.

You say that you've worked with LCA students. Well my own brother actually did the LCA. It actually benefitted him quite a lot and is now doing very well for himself, and as far as I know he hasn't robbed any houses. Neither have any of the people in his year. Though one of them did go down for something else very unsavoury but I don't think that had much to do with the LCA tbh.

I'm not having a go at you at all, if its a horrible waste of money and needs to be looked at, then I'm all for it. I'd wonder how much it actually costs to run each year, and balance that against the benefits etc. I'm just not a fan of tarring people with one brush, be they young people, the foreigners, the bankers, you get my drift.

In relation to the question, I think the only untouchable thing is the old age pension and widow's pensions. Everything else is fair game in my opinion, everything from junior ministers to the dole to rent allowance to foreign aid to selling the ESB and the government's share in Aer Lingus.

and in fairness I'd be in broad agreement with this. breaking up a few state run companies wouldn't be a bad thing

jmayo

NewDubliner wrote: »

Ireland's population is too spread out meaning that we have to have lots of hospitals and clinics all over the place. If our population were more concentrated in urban areas, we'd achieve economies of scale based on larger hospitals and resource pooling.

Have you ever visited Canada or Australia ?
Myab eyou should and then come back and tell us how their health services are and the fact that you have small towns h8undreds of miles from nearest large town.
We are 4 odd million living on a small island and yet we have sh*** services.

NewDubliner wrote: »

If people don't want to live in irban areas, they should accept the consequences and not expect the rest of us to subsidise their lifestyle preferences.

Choosing to live in urban areas helps make the country more competitive.

Were you trotting out this before about how the Dubs (ande other major city dwellers) are subsidising the ones who choose not to live in large urban areas.
Perhaps tax payers in Westport or Dingle should refuse to pay tax that goes to build and rebuild the M50 or Port Tunnel ?
If you pile everyone into an urban centre then you will end up with multiple Tallaghts and Moyrosses.
We don't have to have cr** public services, it is because money is wasted and planning is atrocious.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Liam Byrne

NewDubliner wrote: »

If people don't want to live in irban areas, they should accept the consequences and not expect the rest of us to subsidise their lifestyle preferences.

Choosing to live in urban areas helps make the country more competitive.

As stated already (which you seem to have ignored) all of the current hospitals ARE in urban areas, and given our crap infrastructure still take the rural folk in its "catchment" area ages to get to.

The plan is to move the hospitals and services from URBAN areas to semi-centralised LARGER urban areas; in many cases - as I also said - areas whose existing hospitals are already snowed under, whose car-parks are already full, whose roads are already congested.

If your logic was applied - er, "logically" - then to make the country most competitive the capital of the country would be in or near Athlone, and all of the main roads and railways to that capital would be useful in getting to other places (e.g. Cork to Galway wouldn't necessarily be miles out of the way going that way)

If there were a train from Galway to Limerick via Ennis - all urban areas - people might have a bit less of an issue with losing the hospital as Ennis people could get to Galway or Limerick handily enough.....but they can't.

And as for making things more competitive - I'm living just outside the city and I'm probably nearer to many services than someone who's stuck at the back of a badly-planned estate and needs to almost drive to the bus-stop or "local" shop.

Finally, apart from any personal preference - I'd actually hate to see what would happen if everyone upped sticks and moved to Dublin (or any of the other cities); house prices, congestion, etc multiplied immediately.......you should actually be glad that we don't want to, as on that basis it could equally be argued that people in rural areas subsidise city-dwellers' lifestyles by paying for their own petrol and not competing for houses and road resources.

Not saying my version is 100% applicable or correct, but there's two sides to every story and it's at least as valid as yours.

NewDubliner

jmayo wrote: »

Perhaps tax payers in Westport or Dingle should refuse to pay tax that goes to build and rebuild the M50 or Port Tunnel ?

They pay tax in Westport and Dingle? :eek:eek:

Seriously, I think that while some tax is paid by those remote towns you'll find that far more tax is paid by city & East coast dwellers.

Perhaps more toll roads, pay-per-use driving would be the way to encourage people to make more efficient travel plans? We could make exemptions for productive commercial trafic.

jmayo

NewDubliner wrote: »

They pay tax in Westport and Dingle? :eek:eek:

Seriously, I think that while some tax is paid by those remote towns you'll find that far more tax is paid by city & East coast dwellers.

Perhaps more toll roads, pay-per-use driving would be the way to encourage people to make more efficient travel plans? We could make exemptions for productive commercial trafic.

Doh of course more tax is paid on East Coast since there is greater population density and probably a lot more high paying employment.
Don't find many chief executive jobs down west, although I know a few guys on basic wages who could have made as decent a job at running banks and financial institutions as some of those resident in Sth County Dublin and Greystones
PS you find people would be driving more high powered cars fancy mercedes and bmeers as well and thus higher VRT and car tax. Tax on tractors is fairly low
BTW don't include Offaly in the non East coast dwellers when you are calculating based on car sizes and taxes. Lots of Mercedes and fancy hosues down there.

And speaking of more efficient travel plans, perhaps congestion charges in Dublin would be way of forcing people to not use private transport cloggin up the roads and polluting the environment ?
Lots of tax to be had there.

BTW next time you are down at a stag weekend in Westport or Dingle tell the locals you are paying too much tax because of them.
I am sure it will make you and your friends all the more endearing to the locals

NewDubliner

jmayo wrote: »

And speaking of more efficient travel plans, perhaps congestion charges in Dublin would be way of forcing people to not use private transport cloggin up the roads and polluting the environment ?
Lots of tax to be had there.

Yes & it would promote interest in developing brownfield sites to provide reasonably-priced housing near city centres. We need to cut down on free and cheap commuter parking.

The economy needs to favour those people who choose more efficient lifestyles. We shouldn't go into debt paying for roads that encourage long-distance commuters.

jmayo wrote: »

BTW next time you are down at a stag weekend in Westport or Dingle tell the locals you are paying too much tax because of them. I am sure it will make you and your friends all the more endearing to the locals

They need to pay attention to the quality of their tourism product.

thebman

NewDubliner wrote: »

The economy needs to favour those people who choose more efficient lifestyles. We shouldn't go into debt paying for roads that encourage long-distance commuters.

The roads are already there mostly. The motorways are for truck and business traffic and not for commuters but of course they can use them. You need ways of getting stuff from one side of the country to the other efficiently. That is what the motorways are for and primary routes.

The other roads are already in existence and have houses built on them so will have to be maintained regardless.

Anyway more money goes into maintaining roads in Dublin. You've obviously never drive on rural roads if you think they are well maintained.

oscarBravo

Topic, people - this isn't (or shouldn't be) yet another Dubs-versus-ignorant-mucksavages debate.

NewDubliner

thebman wrote: »

You need ways of getting stuff from one side of the country to the other efficiently. That is what the motorways are for and primary routes.

That's OK if it's goods produced on one side of the country for export from a port on the other side. But not OK, if its to carry imported goods to the other side of the country. Why should people in Dublin pay extra tax so that people in Wesport can get imported goods more cheaply paid for with their dole money? We have to stop subsidising non-economic activities.

We need to find ways to encourage & promote efficient, economically productive use of the existing roads & discouraging wasteful use (such as commuting in private cars). That way, we won't need to spend billions building bigger roads.

thebman wrote: »

The other roads are already in existence and have houses built on them so will have to be maintained regardless.

Local taxes should be raised to build/maintain/light non trunk routes used by residents.

thebman wrote: »

You've obviously never drive on rural roads if you think they are well maintained.

Of course I do. I've seen much imporovement in the last 20 years. But, I did not express any opinion about the state of maintenance.

I'm against building new roads. Let's use the existing ones more intelligently.

thebman

NewDubliner wrote: »

That's OK if it's goods produced on one side of the country for export from a port on the other side. But not OK, if its to carry imported goods to the other side of the country. Why should people in Dublin pay extra tax so that people in Wesport can get imported goods more cheaply paid for with their dole money? We have to stop subsidising non-economic activities.

We need to find ways to encourage & promote efficient, economically productive use of the existing roads & discouraging wasteful use (such as commuting in private cars). That way, we won't need to spend billions building bigger roads.

Local taxes should be raised to build/maintain/light non trunk routes used by residents.

Of course I do. I've seen much imporovement in the last 20 years. But, I did not express any opinion about the state of maintenance.

I'm against building new roads. Let's use the existing ones more intelligently.

Right so they should pay road tax for you and local tax for their roads. Your a swell guy :rolleyes:

Anyway our public transport is crap and we can't afford to invest in it. If people started using it, it would collapse. I used it for two years and was lucky enough to get on at one of the first stops where I could get a seat and not be squashed up against the window for 20 minutes each way.

Dublin Bus use is going down because it is such a pathetic service so given your efficient city living people refuse to use it and it still can't cope with the few that have to use it, how can people move to the city when we can't afford to make the service better for them.

Your logic just doesn't make any sense. This topic should be locked IMO. Its just becoming one long rant about how much you dislike rural life which consists of anything outside Dublin or Cork in your opinion so you obviously have never been to any location outside of these two places as everywhere outside these areas isn't rural (except in your mind) which makes me think your probably not qualified to comment on other areas and if they are living efficiently when you've never been there and know nothing about the areas.

Its actually scary how little you know about these areas or the type of businesses in these areas many of which could not locate in Dublin and need to be need the farmers that produce the products so they can be processed and transported to you to eat in Dublin.

oscarBravo

thebman wrote: »

This topic should be locked IMO.

Alternatively, people could just STAY ON TOPIC.

NewDubliner

thebman wrote: »

how can people move to the city when we can't afford to make the service better for them.

We need to get away from the idea that the state has to subsidise people's transport needs and lifestyle choices.

This is very much on the topic of 'are there some things that shouldn't be cut?'. There are things that can be cut. It may have been unthinkable in the past, but now, such subsidies are distorting the jobs market and discriminating against people choose to live near where they work and who choose efficent transport options.

It's a new economy folks, let's re-invent Ireland.

oscarBravo

NewDubliner wrote: »

We need to get away from the idea that the state has to subsidise people's transport needs....

Including Dublin Bus?

NewDubliner

oscarBravo wrote: »

Including Dublin Bus?

Yes, but coupled with removal/restriction of commuter parking and access to the city.

On-street parking needs to be removed to make way for cycle tracks.

Once we reduce the car commuters who waste so much space, the buses will move more freely and will be attractive, even if not subsidised. The Luas is quite pricey, yet very popular because it's frequent and reliable. That's because it has a mostly traffic-free run.

Yes, it's unthinkable to cut the Dublin bus subsidy, but direct action to help the buses run more freely could turn out to be more cost-effective.

Rather than throwing money around, we should look at ways of making more efficient use of existing infrastructure.

dresden8

NewDubliner wrote: »

We need to get away from the idea that the state has to subsidise people's transport needs and lifestyle choices.

Is that not business' needs?

Business needs it's employees moved around in an efficient manner.

It's an investment that gains an economic return.

You can rest assured my lifestyle choice is not to go into town on a wet Monday morning. My employer wants me there.

thebman

NewDubliner wrote: »

Yes, it's unthinkable to cut the Dublin bus subsidy, but direct action to help the buses run more freely could turn out to be more cost-effective.

Rather than throwing money around, we should look at ways of making more efficient use of existing infrastructure.

Now your being hypocritical again. You can't have loss making services for certain areas of the city but not in rural areas. After all they are loss making because the passenger numbers aren't there so its the same as a rural area. Dublin Bus is the model of waste. Bad service, falling passenger numbers for the years despite increased subsidies and improved bus lane access. It has shown it doesn't work.

The bus service should be privatised by your logic, to hell with people living on unprofitable routes, they should align themselves to routes that are profitable and sustainable and live on those routes. Businesses should relocate too. Cars should be banned from the city altogether and delivery vehicles, they can cycle the goods in or the state should provide public freight transport for efficient use of resources into the city centre but only where its profitable, the other businesses should be let go under.

Remove Irish Rail's subsidy too, see how long it lasts. Privatise the rail network. If the schedule isn't profitable, discontinue the services at those times.

We need to live efficiently. People may like to have these routes so they can go to a meeting in another part of the city during the day but if it isn't profitable, cut it! We have to live efficiently after all and public transport isn't efficient or profit making so we are p*ssing away money on it.

There are areas we can't cut, those are the profit making routes, we must cut everything else and people should adjust their expectations for the new Ireland NewDubliner envisages.

Note: This post may have contained sarcasm to demonstrate a point.

NewDubliner

thebman wrote: »

This post may have contained sarcasm to demonstrate a point.

Sarcasm does not always carry well in writing.

But to abstract your points, it might be accurate to say that we need to be efficient but people don't want to do what it takes to be efficient.

And to stay on point, people consider any cuts that affect their lifestyle, to be unthinkable. However, last year, it was unthinkable that public sector pay would be cut.

silverharp

thebman wrote: »

Now your being ............

The point is we live in an open economy , Microsoft , Dell or its customers dont care about the costs of rattling around this little Island , if you want to compete on a world stage then the level of "indulgences" need to be matched with greater productivity , if not the productive side of the economy will be sucked out of the country.

RiverWilde

There are far too many people in the Republic working for the state. We have too many politicians, civil servants etc etc per head of population. This is glaringly obvious when we compare ourselves to any other European state.

It seems a bit hypocritical of the state to cut services for hospitals etc., when govt. ministers are spending money on junkets, 'coz they're worth it.' If it wasn't so serious I'd laugh. One of my children told me a couple of days ago that their school is letting three of their teachers go because of lack of funding. Wonderful!

What can be cut?

1) The number of TD's - why do we need the quota we've got?
2) Their rate of pay and other perks - this shower expect people to tighten their belts - if Cowen tried to tighten his, it'd probably break.
3) The Civil service and HSE needs to be culled - there are too many people in there.

There are others but I think those three would be an excellent start.

Riv