I HATE party politics

TallyRand

Seriously, it’s actually like competing football teams and self survival for the next election, doesn’t work.

I’d much rather something like an industry professional is selected, take health care, make it a well paid job to match the importance of the role and then elected td’s can then firstly set an incentive target for that person and separate to that singularly or grouped together with shared belief to influence the running of health and push their local position with the CEO health person.

Can’t see a downside to that.

Fr_Dougal

Yeah...like successful businessman Donald Trump running a country?

CtevenSrowder

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Yeah...like successful businessman Donald Trump running a country?

Or even better a Politburo.

johnmcdnl

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/new-chairman-of-hse-appointed-by-government-1.3633170

I'd have though that's what this lads job is for? Government sets policy, and pressumably he had a responsibility to ensure the HSE makes the changes and spends the money wisely that is allocated to them.

TallyRand

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Yeah...like successful businessman Donald Trump running a country?

Apologies, you must be a big supporter of the current government, no? Then the one before that, Or the one before that or any in the last 50 years?

Donald trump and some hse appointee thrown in by government aren’t really touching on the brief point I made of ending party politics and sociopaths gunning for re-election every term

Donald Trump

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Yeah...like successful businessman Donald Trump running a country?

Successful billionaire stable genius with the highest TV ratings you mean?

Not like that Bertie chancer fella and his magic winning horse from the post immedately above

biko

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Yeah...like successful businessman Donald Trump running a country?

What are your KPIs?

US is actually going quite well, as a business.

The US unemployment rate dropped to its lowest level for more than 49 years in April, according to official figures. The jobless rate fell from 3.8% to 3.6%, the US Labor Department said, the lowest since December 1969.

skinny90

I hate trump... but gets sh*te done...

realdanbreen

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Yeah...like successful businessman Donald Trump running a country?

Or how about David Drumm--as soon as he gets released from jail of course.!

seamus

TallyRand wrote: »

Seriously, it’s actually like competing football teams and self survival for the next election, doesn’t work.

I’d much rather something like an industry professional is selected, take health care, make it a well paid job to match the importance of the role and then elected td’s can then firstly set an incentive target for that person and separate to that singularly or grouped together with shared belief to influence the running of health and push their local position with the CEO health person.

Can’t see a downside to that.

In this case what will happen is that the person who is selected won't be the best choice for the job, but the one who is best buddies with the TD, or their buddy's buddy, or whatever.

Even an open hiring process wouldn't work; CEO circles are too small and the person picked for the job will be the one best known to the interview panel, not necessarily the best candidate.

Outside of that you have the issue that businesspeople tend to be looking ahead and planning ahead.

In the event of an appointment to (for example), the HSE, the "CEO" would be thinking ahead to his next move; in five years' time when the next government comes in. So he starts signing deals and contracts to the benefit of one or more major corporations, guts the HSE and when he's done he moves on and gets a job in one of the big companies he just handed billions of euro to.

Stephen Elop. Left senior exec position in Microsoft, became Nokia CEO. Signed exclusivity deals with Microsoft to "save" Nokia. Five years later, Nokia has collapsed, is bought by Microsoft, huge chunks of the workforce laid off. Elop takes a huge bonus during the acquisition and is re-hired by Microsoft on a seven figure salary.

You could put all sorts of conditions in place that bar him from working in healthcare for a decade after leaving, but the kind of people you're dealing with will either find loopholes to get around this, or will just not be interested in the job.

The fundamental mistake here is assuming that "if we just ran the country as a business, there'd be no problems".

In reality, if that we true it would already have happened. A country has to be run like a co-op or a non-profit. Running it like a private business means that you're using the entirety of its resources to generate personal wealth for a tiny number of people.

TallyRand

seamus wrote: »

In this case what will happen is that the person who is selected won't be the best choice for the job, but the one who is best buddies with the TD, or their buddy's buddy, or whatever.

Even an open hiring process wouldn't work; CEO circles are too small and the person picked for the job will be the one best known to the interview panel, not necessarily the best candidate.

Outside of that you have the issue that businesspeople tend to be looking ahead and planning ahead.

In the event of an appointment to (for example), the HSE, the "CEO" would be thinking ahead to his next move; in five years' time when the next government comes in. So he starts signing deals and contracts to the benefit of one or more major corporations, guts the HSE and when he's done he moves on and gets a job in one of the big companies he just handed billions of euro to.

Stephen Elop. Left senior exec position in Microsoft, became Nokia CEO. Signed exclusivity deals with Microsoft to "save" Nokia. Five years later, Nokia has collapsed, is bought by Microsoft, huge chunks of the workforce laid off. Elop takes a huge bonus during the acquisition and is re-hired by Microsoft on a seven figure salary.

You could put all sorts of conditions in place that bar him from working in healthcare for a decade after leaving, but the kind of people you're dealing with will either find loopholes to get around this, or will just not be interested in the job.

The fundamental mistake here is assuming that "if we just ran the country as a business, there'd be no problems".

In reality, if that we true it would already have happened. A country has to be run like a co-op or a non-profit. Running it like a private business means that you're using the entirety of its resources to generate personal wealth for a tiny number of people.

Fair enough points, however, I never once mentioned a business person. Isaid an industry professional, so again taking healthcare, you would have candidates who’ve worked as surgeons or doctors apply to sitting TD’s rather than a small interview panel, the democratic choice of person will be picked.

This person will know how the hse works, how hospitals work and will provide a platform on how they will change and Improve which would be part of the application process and yes you’re right that it would need exclusions to avoid someone strolling into a related field at the end of their term.

Which is why we should pay big money and provide targeted incentives that if they’re doing a good job they won’t want to leave!

Leave the tds prode that office for parish pump stuff instead of plonking inept people with one eye on local stuff and the other running a multi-billio lm dollar body with little or no relative experience, madness Ted.

Wanderer78

skinny90 wrote:

I hate trump... but gets sh*te done...

Like what?

meeeeh

TallyRand wrote: »

Seriously, it’s actually like competing football teams and self survival for the next election, doesn’t work.

I’d much rather something like an industry professional is selected, take health care, make it a well paid job to match the importance of the role and then elected td’s can then firstly set an incentive target for that person and separate to that singularly or grouped together with shared belief to influence the running of health and push their local position with the CEO health person.

Can’t see a downside to that.

You mean like successful GP James Reilley taking over health portfolio and becoming one of the worst health ministers in recent history. Yeah I can't see what could go wrong.

TallyRand

meeeeh wrote: »

You mean like successful GP James Reilley taking over health portfolio and becoming one of the worst health ministers in recent history. Yeah I can't see what could go wrong.

No, and you know I don’t mean that. James Reilly was a politician within a political party playing the usual game of promises and auction politics, same old same old.

It’s crazy that you’re quick to point out potential flaws like you are very defensive over the current system. Care to name the last “good” health minister seems as my idea is so terrible?

meeeeh

TallyRand wrote: »

No, and you know I don’t mean that. James Reilly was a politician within a political party playing the usual game of promises and auction politics, same old same old.

It’s crazy that you’re quick to point out potential flaws like you are very defensive over the current system. Care to name the last “good” health minister seems as my idea is so terrible?

I don't know tbh. I'm in Ireland since 2005 or so, Harney was best of them, Reilley worst in my opinion. None of them was very good.

Still you have head of HSE to run the service, Minister is there to get the money, set up priorities and so on. As someone said you are actually suggesting the model how socialist factories were ran. Someone was parachuted to run the factory and then worker reps rubber stamped the decision. It does not work.

I agree with you that ministers could be people who don't stand in elections but you need some sort of manifesto and vision for the country.

Banzai600

i find the irish politicians utterly repugnant and repulsive. The cronyism , corruption etc that goes on is never ending. The bank bail out, the cover ups , bending to EU pressure etc etc, its never ending.

if they all went up in smoke, literally, on kildare st, i couldnt give a fiddlers. they all swing to whatever agenda is loudest on social media.

We just keep sucking up the taxes too as they come to us.

we havent had a government in years, and there are no alternatives in sight.

pretty f***in dismal if you ask me.

dubrov

TallyRand wrote: »

Seriously, it’s actually like competing football teams and self survival for the next election, doesn’t work.

I’d much rather something like an industry professional is selected, take health care, make it a well paid job to match the importance of the role and then elected td’s can then firstly set an incentive target for that person and separate to that singularly or grouped together with shared belief to influence the running of health and push their local position with the CEO health person.

Can’t see a downside to that.

This is kind of how it works already.
The TD makes the decision and a tender is run by the civil service to select an experienced party to implement. There may be incentives in the contract. The problem is that some of these tenders are so big that they take forever and get completely out of control.

TallyRand

My op was a bit of wandering ramble but still surprised the thread didn’t develop into a robust discussion, can’t stand party politics (football teams) and unqualified TD’s, how in the name of the sweet lord would I want jack chambers, a plethora of Sinn Fein and other newly elected “kids” with little to no business, professional or indeed life experience.

Warped that these young careerist politicians actually get elected, wouldn’t be able to run a bath most of them never mind a country.

Junkyard Tom

Donald Trump wrote: »

Successful billionaire

Donald Trump who inherited vast wealth from his Da?



AS A BUSINESSMAN, TRUMP WAS THE BIGGEST LOSER OF ALL

Rodin

seamus wrote: »

In this case what will happen is that the person who is selected won't be the best choice for the job, but the one who is best buddies with the TD, or their buddy's buddy, or whatever.

Even an open hiring process wouldn't work; CEO circles are too small and the person picked for the job will be the one best known to the interview panel, not necessarily the best candidate.

Outside of that you have the issue that businesspeople tend to be looking ahead and planning ahead.

In the event of an appointment to (for example), the HSE, the "CEO" would be thinking ahead to his next move; in five years' time when the next government comes in. So he starts signing deals and contracts to the benefit of one or more major corporations, guts the HSE and when he's done he moves on and gets a job in one of the big companies he just handed billions of euro to.

Stephen Elop. Left senior exec position in Microsoft, became Nokia CEO. Signed exclusivity deals with Microsoft to "save" Nokia. Five years later, Nokia has collapsed, is bought by Microsoft, huge chunks of the workforce laid off. Elop takes a huge bonus during the acquisition and is re-hired by Microsoft on a seven figure salary.

You could put all sorts of conditions in place that bar him from working in healthcare for a decade after leaving, but the kind of people you're dealing with will either find loopholes to get around this, or will just not be interested in the job.

The fundamental mistake here is assuming that "if we just ran the country as a business, there'd be no problems".

In reality, if that we true it would already have happened. A country has to be run like a co-op or a non-profit. Running it like a private business means that you're using the entirety of its resources to generate personal wealth for a tiny number of people.

If we ran the country like a business there'd be no old age pension.

tuxy

This is why I voted independent **** parties, Michael Lowery #1!

Edgware

tuxy wrote: »

This is why I voted independent **** parties, Michael Lowery #1!

He fixed the road

Triangle

TallyRand wrote: »

Seriously, it’s actually like competing football teams and self survival for the next election, doesn’t work.

I’d much rather something like an industry professional is selected, take health care, make it a well paid job to match the importance of the role and then elected td’s can then firstly set an incentive target for that person and separate to that singularly or grouped together with shared belief to influence the running of health and push their local position with the CEO health person.

Can’t see a downside to that.

Unfortunately, successful business people are purely driven by money. Sometimes you need someone driven by the cost to society.
You won't find many of these in successful companies.