€1bn cost overrun for new Children's Hospital

Mr. Incognito

Amirani wrote: »

Dolphin Report was the basis for the decision. They recommended the location at St James's. Full report is here: http://www.newchildrenshospital.ie/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Dolphin_Group_Report-1.pdf

It's worth a read if you want to have an insight into the pros and cons of each possible site and why they settled on James's.

I have never read that report.

It's amateurish in the extreme. No data. Statements made with no supporting evidence.

The guy that wrote the report was clearly a political appointee had no medical qualifications, legal qualifications, planning qualifications, traffic knowledge etc and should not have been commissioned to write this report. No offence to the guy but I cannot see how he was qualified to do this.

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

James is actually the smallest site of all the tenders. Connolly was clearly the most suitable. Unbelievable.

Some of reasons for James

Irish Blood Transfusion Service on site

Cryobiology Storage Facility(EUTCD) on site

I mean seriously

facehugger99

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

They should put pressure on bam anyway

Hard ball them, as in. They will never get another state contract again

They probably won't.

You can't exclude Contractors from future public procurement processes because you don't like the claims they are making under an existing Contract.

If claims are found to be valid they will get paid, if they are invalid they don't get paid.

You can't blackmail BAM into not pursuing a Claim by threatening to exclude them from future Contracts - it's illegal under Public Procurement legislation.

beauf

awec wrote: »

If this was the private sector there'd be p45s all over the show.

The Private sector IS building it no?

ToBeFrank123

beauf wrote: »

The Private sector IS building it no?

Yes. But project management of the overall project would or should be by the HSE.

Its just another typical case of lack of accountability.

At most someone will be moved sideways or moved to a plum job in Europe with a bigger salary and nice pension.

Until a Yellow Vest type movement gets its ass in gear in this country, this kind of incompetence and unaccountability will continue. Its one of the reasons I no longer vote in General Elections as we keep voting in the same fools who appoint their incompetent friends to important positions.

The Dail committee meeting yesterday was funny. Finger pointing between politicians and HSE officials, both knowing full well neither will be held to account.

Its always someone else's fault.

beauf

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Yes. But project management of the overall project would or should be by the HSE....

Isn't this the project team? Mix of private and public, with the construction side mostly private and the medical side mostly public.

http://www.newchildrenshospital.ie/the-project/national-paediatric-hospital-development-board/

ToBeFrank123

beauf wrote: »

Isn't this the project team? Mix of private and public, with the construction side mostly private and the medical side mostly public.

http://www.newchildrenshospital.ie/the-project/national-paediatric-hospital-development-board/

Yes a mix of this, a mix of that. Accountability spread out and widely distributed so when something goes wrong there isn't one or two people who can be held to account. Pass the buck as widely as possible.

Its fairly clear at this stage, the hospital cannot go ahead. It should be scrapped, and the money saved redistributed to existing hospitals to allow them improve their children's services.

If it does go ahead the cost will likely continue to climb, as surely as night follows day. My prediction based on "emerging trends" is they will be lucky to get loose change out of 3 billion.

Time for someone to put a stop to this madness and stop throwing good money after bad. Whatever has been spent already will have to be written off but better that than wasting billions.

ToBeFrank123

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Its fairly clear at this stage, the hospital cannot go ahead.

but This is Ireland.



This is the method to my Madness:


A long time ago, a Labour Government minister for health said to the presenter on RTE lunchtime news that construction of Tallaght Hospital had indeed the Green Light. My point here is this health minister did not say that the project over ran it's timescale by 4,320 years and extra cost in budget.


The childrens hospital HAS THE GREEN LIGHT.

AbdulAbhaile

beauf wrote: »

Isn't this the project team? Mix of private and public, with the construction side mostly private and the medical side mostly public.

http://www.newchildrenshospital.ie/the-project/national-paediatric-hospital-development-board/

Look, the most important thing is that no one is held accountable no matter what went wrong.

Auguste Comte

facehugger99 wrote: »

You can't exclude Contractors from future public procurement processes because you don't like the claims they are making under an existing Contract.

The only thing that the ordinary Joe who "gets up early in the morning" can do is to ensure that fg get the same treatment that the labour party got in the next election.

P1ss poor decisions were obviously made but the
people who made them are to be protected.

FG are making the shinners look honest and people before progress compitent.

ToBeFrank123

AbdulAbhaile wrote: »

Look, the most important thing is that no one is held accountable no matter what went wrong.

+1

No accountability and no transparency. And no-one willing to step in and pull the plug on this madness. Instead its allowed continue to an inevitable and extremely costly disaster.

ToBeFrank123

Auguste Comte wrote: »

The only thing that the ordinary Joe who "gets up early in the morning" can do is to ensure that fg get the same treatment that the labour party got in the next election.

P1ss poor decisions were obviously made but the
people who made them are to be protected.

FG are making the shinners look honest and people before progress compitent.

Agreed. Right wing corruption and incompetence is what opened the door to the hard left Socialists in Venezuela. We all know how that ended up!

awec

beauf wrote: »

Isn't this the project team? Mix of private and public, with the construction side mostly private and the medical side mostly public.

http://www.newchildrenshospital.ie/the-project/national-paediatric-hospital-development-board/

And who does the board report to?

hmmm

If no one is to be held responsible, why are they wasting taxpayer's money on reports?

Auguste Comte

awec wrote: »

And who does the board report to?

The minister for dodgy reports it would seem.

beauf

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Yes a mix of this, a mix of that. Accountability spread out and widely distributed so when something goes wrong there isn't one or two people who can be held to account. Pass the buck as widely as possible. ...

Well its spread out across public and private to start with. Then the HSE and the Ministers and Govt who have been involved, which has been FF and FG. The public voted them all in and the private sector is heavily involved it it also.

On boards the majority wanted it built at the Mater and James, despite all the logic against it, and dismissed the concerns of people with first hand experience saying why its a bad idea.

So regardless of the complaining now after the fact when its too late. The general public & majority of boards have pretty much got what they asked for.

We all just have to pay for it now.

beauf

hmmm wrote: »

If no one is to be held responsible, why are they wasting taxpayer's money on reports?

Because they want to it look they they are doing something while not actually doing something. Same with the housing crisis.

nice_guy80

You can be guaranteed there are some very well connected consultants making a lot of money from this project

The paperless IT system alone will be astronomical

Gravelly

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

They should put pressure on bam anyway

Hard ball them, as in. They will never get another state contract again

They probably won't.

Oh yes they will. You think this is the first state project BAM had massive overruns on?

Think again - this is just the one that everyone's heard about.

Bonzo Delaney

It's frightening how in incompetent those in office seem to be and those in opposition aren't in anyway better equipped either.

I'd imagine as with any project the initial estimate came in and I'd hope some expert or someone qualified piped up and said, hey look someone just built a hospital across the water be it the UK or main land Europe for x amount so this estimate isn't going to cover half it allowing for Irish rates and regulations and so on so forth or at that price we'll have change to spare.
It's just another wasted drain on the tax payer after another for the last 20 years

political analyst

It would have been better to spend the money on improving services in Crumlin and Temple Street instead of embarking on this expensive project.

TheRiverman

Appalling to think that nurses are threatened with sanctions for going on strike for better pay and working conditions and no one is being held accountable for this criminal fiasco.First of all the site that was chosen was awful and now the cost spiralling out of control.Wheres the sanctions for the people who got this so wrong ?.

beauf

political analyst wrote: »

It would have been better to spend the money on improving services in Crumlin and Temple Street instead of embarking on this expensive project.

Have you ever been in temple Street? It's completely dysfunctional building and site. It's decades past it's sell by date.

beauf

TheRiverman wrote: »

Appalling to think that nurses are threatened with sanctions for going on strike for better pay and working conditions and no one is being held accountable for this criminal fiasco.First of all the site that was chosen was awful and now the cost spiralling out of control.Where's the sanctions for the people who got this so wrong ?.

By wrong do you mean expensive and over budget. The cost of building wasn't a huge focus in the various reports.

Auguste Comte

beauf wrote: »

TheRiverman wrote: »

Appalling to think that nurses are threatened with sanctions for going on strike for better pay and working conditions and no one is being held accountable for this criminal fiasco.First of all the site that was chosen was awful and now the cost spiralling out of control.Where's the sanctions for the people who got this so wrong ?.

By wrong do you mean expensive and over budget. The cost of building wasn't a huge focus in the various reports.

Neither it would seem we're the facilities that a national children's hospital should have.

Who would approve a national hospital that can't facilitate a rescue helicopter.

For the money its costing it should come with a fleet of helicopters, because parents arriving from the country with a sick kid will struggle to access it, not to mention park if when they do eventually get there.

political analyst

beauf wrote: »

Have you ever been in temple Street? It's completely dysfunctional building and site. It's decades past it's sell by date.

Then why didn't they just buy a greenfield site in a rural area somewhere just outside Dublin city for the new hospital? It would mean that patients' parents wouldn't have the headache of finding where to park their cars and there'd be enough room for a helipad to facilitate air ambulances.

political analyst

Auguste Comte wrote: »

Neither it would seem we're the facilities that a national children's hospital should have.

Who would approve a national hospital that can't facilitate a rescue helicopter.

For the money its costing it should come with a fleet of helicopters, because parents arriving from the country with a sick kid will struggle to access it, not to mention park if when they do eventually get there.

Were these questions not considered when the application for planning permission for the hospital was being considered? Did the paediatricians not take these issues into account?

TheRiverman

political analyst wrote: »

Then why didn't they just buy a greenfield site in a rural area somewhere just outside Dublin city for the new hospital? It would mean that patients' parents wouldn't have the headache of finding where to park their cars and there'd be enough room for a helipad to facilitate air ambulances.

Agree with you 100%,but common sense is not common at all.

ToBeFrank123

political analyst wrote: »

Then why didn't they just buy a greenfield site in a rural area somewhere just outside Dublin city for the new hospital? It would mean that patients' parents wouldn't have the headache of finding where to park their cars and there'd be enough room for a helipad to facilitate air ambulances.

I'm guessing an influential politician or two wanted it in their constituency.
And some influential consultants wanted it close to their homes for a quick commute and also close to their practice and private hospital practice.

A greenfield site wouldn't suit the consultants.

Just a guess.

ToBeFrank123

They solved the Mountjoy/Thorntan Hall problem by upgrading Mountjoy. It cost far less than they thought and about 1/20th the cost of building a new prison.

They should apply the same principle to our existing hospitals in this instance.
2 or even 1 billion would go a long way to improve them for children's needs. These hospitals have the existing staff and consultants.

iamwhoiam

political analyst wrote: »

Then why didn't they just buy a greenfield site in a rural area somewhere just outside Dublin city for the new hospital? It would mean that patients' parents wouldn't have the headache of finding where to park their cars and there'd be enough room for a helipad to facilitate air ambulances.

Weren't they offered a greenfield site on the Naas rd between Red Cow and Newlands Cross . A perfect spot for it and if I remember rightly it was offered for free ?

Auguste Comte

political analyst wrote: »

Auguste Comte wrote: »

Neither it would seem we're the facilities that a national children's hospital should have.

Who would approve a national hospital that can't facilitate a rescue helicopter.

For the money its costing it should come with a fleet of helicopters, because parents arriving from the country with a sick kid will struggle to access it, not to mention park if when they do eventually get there.

Were these questions not considered when the application for planning permission for the hospital was being considered? Did the paediatricians not take these issues into account?

I don't know, but a proper enquiry would find out who done what but that's not what the minister has signed off on.

Another half a million wasted on a report that's undermined before it starts.

emo72

I recall thinking at the time that a green field site was the best option, even Connolly would be brilliant. I knew we'd end up with a thread wondering why it's gone tits up. Everyone with half a brain knew it.

SEPT 23 1989

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Weren't they offered a greenfield site on the Naas rd between Red Cow and Newlands Cross . A perfect spot for it and if I remember rightly it was offered for free ?

Noel Smyth offered the site for free and to build the hospital at cost price

that was 2006 he offered again in 2010

iamwhoiam

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Noel Smyth offered the site for free and to build the hospital at cost price

that was 2006 he offered again in 2010

Absolutely baffling why this wasn't even explored . Its a perfect site

beauf

political analyst wrote: »

Then why didn't they just buy a greenfield site in a rural area somewhere just outside Dublin city for the new hospital? It would mean that patients' parents wouldn't have the headache of finding where to park their cars and there'd be enough room for a helipad to facilitate air ambulances.

Its like none of you have read the reports or followed this process until recently.

Space for parking or a helicopter were not primary considerations.
This was discussed to death previously on these forums.

Basically co-location if practical within reason became co-location at any cost.
It was obviously a political football for a long time also.

beauf

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Absolutely baffling why this wasn't even explored . Its a perfect site

Greenfield sites are in the report. Why do think it wasn't explored?

Once the co-location at any cost became the primary consideration, greenfield sites were at a huge disadvantage.

Nationally there has been a move everything to Dublin policy for almost everything.

political analyst

beauf wrote: »

Its like none of you have read the reports or followed this process until recently.

Space for parking or a helicopter were not primary considerations.
This was discussed to death previously on these forums.

Basically co-location if practical within reason became co-location at any cost.
It was obviously a political football for a long time also.

If something goes wrong with a patient in either a maternity hospital or a children's hospital then why can't the emergency care be given right there instead of transferring patient to a general hospital?

In page 70 of the Dolphin report that was linked earlier in this thread, "Construction cost likely to be more expensive than on a greenfield site" was listed as a weakness/risk in the Value For Money criteria in assessing St James Hospital as the site to be chosen for the National Children's Hospital.

That's an understatement now.

Harry Palmr

beauf wrote: »

Nationally there has been a move everything to Dublin policy for almost everything.

This came up as an angle in a discussion on WLR in Waterford when talking about the services available for heart attack victims in the S.E. (you have to travel to Cork or Dublin after hours ie 9/5 Mon/Fri) and someone noted that no one in Dublin is required to travel to another location for any healthcare that's available in Ireland. It wouldn't even occur to them such a situation could happen.

facehugger99

emo72 wrote: »

I recall thinking at the time that a green field site was the best option

Yeah, but I doubt you’ve any relevant experience or training on which to base such a decision.

political analyst

Harry Palmr wrote: »

This came up as an angle in a discussion on WLR in Waterford when talking about the services available for heart attack victims in the S.E. (you have to travel to Cork or Dublin after hours ie 9/5 Mon/Fri) and someone noted that no one in Dublin is required to travel to another location for any healthcare that's available in Ireland. It wouldn't even occur to them such a situation could happen.

The south-east campaigners are ignorant. Does it not occur to them that, even if you're in a town with a fully-functioning general hospital when you have chest pains caused by heart trouble and you get to the hospital in time, it doesn't necessarily mean you'll survive (In my locality, the Cavan town area, just over 3 years ago, a man with heart trouble drove to hospital despite the pain he was having and got to the emergency department in time but then he died anyway).

Cost of building the Burj Khalifa in Dubai - $1.5bn

Petronas Towers in Kuala Lumpur- $1.6bn

Burj Al Arab in Dubai - $1bn

The Shard in London - £435m

Obviously these aren't hospitals but are impressive well known buildings that have all come in cheaper than this hospital is going to.

political analyst

As for traffic congestion on routes to the new hospital, presumably, gardaí would clear the way in advance so that an ambulance can get through without delay.

beauf

downtheroad wrote: »

In page 70 of the Dolphin report that was linked earlier in this thread, "Construction cost likely to be more expensive than on a greenfield site" was listed as a weakness/risk in the Value For Money criteria in assessing St James Hospital as the site to be chosen for the National Children's Hospital.

That's an understatement now.

All the reasons why the existing hospitals shouldn't be revamped, poor location, limited parking, expensive to develop on a constricted site, no room for expansion, applied even more to the Mater, and more again to St James. Rather than solving those problems it actually made them worse.

Even now you often can't get parking at the Mater. They will will be reducing parking at St James as there's no space.

These are not the primary concerns. But they should never have been dismissed out of hand to tailor the requirements to politically expedient locations.

jmayo

beauf wrote: »

The Private sector IS building it no?

Anyone with half a brain or that has run any kind of project, even if you are just building an extension on your house, knows that contractors can ramp up costs, particularly if they run into any kind of obstacle that wasn't planned for.

Thus the private sector companies building it will of course up the costs if they can, it is called business, possibly sharp business practices at a push.
But it is up to those managing the project, those sponsoring the project, those actually paying for the project to ensure there is value for money and there are not massive overruns in budget or time.

The grade A fookup made by HSE and Dept of Health with the near hundred million cost overrun on PPARS, which initially was meant to be somewhere under 10 million, should have been enough of a warning.

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

I'm guessing an influential politician or two wanted it in their constituency.
And some influential consultants wanted it close to their homes for a quick commute and also close to their practice and private hospital practice.

A greenfield site wouldn't suit the consultants.

Just a guess.

First it was the Mater, no coincidence Bertie was in power, it was in his constituency and his old employer.
But there were enough highly placed medical consultants and academics who saw that site as benefit to them.
And there were reports a plenty and experts a plenty wheeled out to back up the proposal.

When the planners pulled the rug from under that looney plan, the proposers of James immediately saw their chance.

And because it is such a poor location, they have had to plan for easier access emergency sites to be built in Tallaght and Connolly.
If that is not admission that access is a fooking problem then I don't know what is.

Of course the usual gimps will be on here telling us how it needs to be beside a big adult hospital, asking why can't you travel with sick kids on the great public transport (i.e. the junkie Luas) and shure there will be parking.

Yeah parking isn't the reason nurses have to arrive an hour earlier even for early morning shifts.

And to placate poor old Vincents and UCD they have shoehorned the new Maternity hospital in there, even though the trust that own it have some rather backward ideas regarding women's rights.

This country is run by a shower of eejits and arrogant connected fookers.

beauf

political analyst wrote: »

The south-east campaigners are ignorant. Does it not occur to them that, even if you're in a town with a fully-functioning general hospital when you have chest pains caused by heart trouble and you get to the hospital in time, it doesn't necessarily mean you'll survive (In my locality, the Cavan town area, just over 3 years ago, a man with heart trouble drove to hospital despite the pain he was having and got to the emergency department in time but then he died anyway).

I no idea what your point is, or the relevancy of that story to anything.

Harry Palmr

political analyst wrote: »

The south-east campaigners are ignorant. Does it not occur to them that, even if you're in a town with a fully-functioning general hospital when you have chest pains caused by heart trouble and you get to the hospital in time, it doesn't necessarily mean you'll survive (In my locality, the Cavan town area, just over 3 years ago, a man with heart trouble drove to hospital despite the pain he was having and got to the emergency department in time but then he died anyway).

Well duh! You may like to think of yourself as a political analyst but you clearly have little clue about concepts such as probability. If the SE has full time coverage more people will survive and recover if they are successfully transferred to a cardiac unit within about an hour of the event.

That's all I'm saying as this is drifting off topic.

jmayo

political analyst wrote: »

The south-east campaigners are ignorant. Does it not occur to them that, even if you're in a town with a fully-functioning general hospital when you have chest pains caused by heart trouble and you get to the hospital in time, it doesn't necessarily mean you'll survive (In my locality, the Cavan town area, just over 3 years ago, a man with heart trouble drove to hospital despite the pain he was having and got to the emergency department in time but then he died anyway).

The other morning there was a consultant, from Cork I think, on the radio talking about report into centres of excellence and from recollection improved treatment of cancer, etc.

When asked by interviewer what they found in their research as regards ease of access for people long way from the centre, he replied they hadn't looked into that.

So one of the major concerns of patients who are losing their local hospital is ease of access to services and this fooking entitled ar**hole has the cheek to reply they didn't bother looking into that.
Of course he probably lives a few miles from the hospital so couldn't give two rats ass about some poor bast*** having to make a 120 or 130 mile round trip to the hospital.

tigerboon

downtheroad wrote: »

Cost of building the Burj Khalifa in Dubai - $1.5bn

Petronas Towers in Kuala Lumpur- $1.6bn

Burj Al Arab in Dubai - $1bn

The Shard in London - £435m

Obviously these aren't hospitals but are impressive well known buildings that have all come in cheaper than this hospital is going to.

If you were to add proper labour costs to the Dubai ones .....We can't use slavery in Ireland.

What if the original costs put forward were construction costs only. The co location thing makes sense if the gap in costs are reasonable. If the cost put forward were €2 billion it wouldn't have been approved (you would like to think). Put forward the "building costs " get approval and have the fight later. They had to have had an idea how much it was going to cost to equip the bloody thing

emo72

facehugger99 wrote: »

Yeah, but I doubt you’ve any relevant experience or training on which to base such a decision.

Nice one mate. Yet. Here. We. Are.

Looks like the people with the expertise and relevant experience know as much as I do.