Politicians didn't achieve it. The people who work in and run the sector achieved it. The problem here is that we blame politicians for things that aren't their fault. Therefore the problems don't get fixed.Politicians in other EU democracies achieve good progress in health and housing - so the problem is not one resulting from the limitations of a democratic structure on political decision-making, is it ?
They're the ones giving glowing references to incompetents to allow them move to other hospitals within the system and make them someone else's problem.Are you saying that HSE senior management would be backed up by a minister for health if they sacked a few useless surgeons or consultants and the other consultants threatened a strike ?
Yes, and the doctors and nurses in senior positions, after all around one in three hospitals are managed by a nurse, and the Unions officials who obstruct and resist change. All of those people have blood on their hands.You are blaming who for the health crisis ? The HSE managers ?
They can't sack them or the Unions would have everyone outside on the picket line.Are you saying that HSE senior management would be backed up by a minister for health if they sacked a few useless surgeons or consultants and the other consultants threatened a strike ?
If the economies of scale mean that his overall net profit is better then yes. But what's that got to do with anything?Do you believe that a builder has an economic interest in producing loads of houses every year even if his price and margin would be sharply reduced by doing so ?
I agree but this is a democracy with an electoral structure that produces strong Parliaments and weak governments. The biggest lie politicians tell is that they can actually change things.Leadership in a democracy lies with the elected government.
The electorate has repeatedly shown that they are not interested in real reform and hard decisions being made. The fact that the Shinners, a reincarnation of the worst version of 1970's populist Fianna Fail, are the most popular party in the country is testament to that.So does blame for failures to lead.
If you want to set the rules, go set up your own boardKeep out of it, Leo.
I took trajan's comment as a joke.If you want to set the rules, go set up your own board
If the economies of scale mean that his overall net profit is better then yes. But what's that got to do with anything?
I'm not absolving them of their responsibility, I'm absolving them of other people's responsibility. It's remarkable that the people who work in and run our health service, an extremely well funded and staffed health service, bear no responsibility for the shortcomings of that health service.@Purple
If you absolve a government of its obligation to lead (and, if needs be, drive) positive correction in critical areas of citizens' lives then we are on a road to anarchy.
I don't understand your point.The term of an Irish government is long enough to effect enough change to convince a comfortable majority of citizens to renew the mandate of that government.
The constraint on supply is not money, it's labour. Every builder out there is already building. Is the Government expected to get into the minutia of the construction sector and restructure and reskill what is a grossly inefficient sector? They are already throwing money at that problem and things are improving but it's not a quick fix and, for obvious reasons, there aren't many subject matter experts in relation to construction in the Civil Service.It's not the economies of scale here. It's the impending closing of a big demand gap by increasing supply - equilibrium in the housing market - that leads to realistic prices for houses, keener sourcing of materials and labour plus less obscene margins to investors in that sector. Individual builders won't want to create even a hypo-equilibrium state in housing never mind equilibrium.
So if social housing is deemed desirable then the state or local authorities have to become players, i.e. tenderers of housing contracts to the building sector. And it matters a lot who we choose as public reps.
I don't understand your point.
The constraint on supply is not money, it's labour. Every builder out there is already building. Is the Government expected to get into the minutia of the construction sector and restructure and reskill what is a grossly inefficient sector? They are already throwing money at that problem and things are improving but it's not a quick fix and, for obvious reasons, there aren't many subject matter experts in relation to construction in the Civil Service.
Oh, so did I, so he got a smiley face in response to suggest mine was also a joke.I took trajan's comment as a joke.
The problem with pragmatic honest common sense people is that they get too frustrated when they run up against the I refuse to change my poor work practices unless you thrown money at me brigade that is unionised and institutionalised.It ain't rocket science - it's just a matter of getting honest and common sense people running things in Leinster House.
4 years in nowhere near enough time to fix an organisation which is in fact an amalgamation of hundreds of organisations, with all of their restrictive practices, with all their duplicated processes and which employs well over 100,000 people, none of whom can be made redundant or even moved to different jobs without a pay rise and the blessing of their Union.My point there was in answer to your point about our ineffectual governments to date (agreed) and the health service. Basically I am saying that democratic government can effect change without being tossed out by citizens inconvenienced by side-effects of the transformation due to the 4 year term of office being long enough for people to see the improvements.
Agreed, but that doesn't mean they have the power to solve it.Whatever the constraint may be, it's clear that government has the primary role in solving it.
Every country in the developed world is chasing skilled labour.If it's labour - bring them in. If it's land - pass laws to acquire land in suitable locations for housing.
So called vulture funds, on balance, improve the housing market.And if it's a binding agreement to vulture funds to not exceed new housing rates for a given period - then bring in a constitutional right to affordable housing that will override it.
We have them, for the most part.It ain't rocket science - it's just a matter of getting honest and common sense people running things in Leinster House.
What's that line that for every complex problem there's a simple answer... that's wrong.But I admit that I am at a loss as to where I can find these guys amongst those offering themselves to the electorate.
We're all gonna get free houses under Sinn Fein, Duke, sure we'll be deliiighted!Would we maintain our recently acquired status among the top 20 in the World Happiness stakes, as reported recently in the Irish Times?
Is this the same Sinn Fein who increase rates in NI while campaigning on the basis of eliminating or reducing similar taxes here?We're all gonna get free houses under Sinn Fein, Duke, sure we'll be deliiighted!
The Shinners are the biggest party.The Shinners are up to their necks in builder/developer antics.
And they won't get in anyhow - it'll just be some sort of amalgam of indos and big parties.
Yes, but will they be safe houses?We're all gonna get free houses under Sinn Fein, Duke, sure we'll be deliiighted!