I agree in this case. Possibly as a result of some of the lessons learned.
The State is getting bigger
- Thread starter Purple
- Start date
The Data Protection Commission is a unique example where it ended up as you say the de facto European wide regulator.
It is not a similar situation to the Central Bank's position at the time at all.
I was using it to illustrate the point that effective regulation isn’t a priority for the State, regardless of how obvious the need might be to those who take an interest.
Well we can see that e.g. in the Mica scandal.
But a State could be well on top of its current regulatory responsibilities, and been caught on the hop with what happened with the explosion in scope of the DPC.
It could be. And should be. But it generally isn’t.
I've already stated twice on this thread that it's not doing too badly. Of course it could be better, but you can say that about virtually any organisation. (For example, quite incredibly there are some people around who don't believe that Ryanair are an outstanding company!)
And the regurgitation of the claim that it's one of the best funded healthcare systems in the world is neither here nor there. It's a mess and has been since it was muddled together at the start. Even before it was established, the HSE was handed a poisoned chalice by the unmentionable Bertie Ahern who promised the Health Unions that not a single employee would lose their job due to the HSE being set up - the man should immediately have been kicked out of office for that insanity!
Are you seriously suggesting that there is an equivalence in either the importance or dysfunctionality of either organisation?
It's central to the discussion. The State set up a totally dysfunctional organisation with massive duplication of processes which is staffed with people who, incredibly, refer to themselves as heroes but who resist meaningful attempts to reduce that duplication of process and waste and wilfully ignore their own culpability for the chaos and waste around them. Without addressing any of those structural and cultural issues the State (the government and the Civil Service) continue to pour more and more money into it. The net result is suffering and waste and a diminution of the country they claim to serve. The HSE is the most glaring example but it's certainly not an outlier.
I agree completely, so how can you say it's not doing too badly? It's like the old line "Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the Opera?".
So is it a good thing that the State keeps betting bigger without addressing these fundamental issues first?
Exactly.
And, given those massive constraints - allied to the unending stream of populist political interference (seen most recently in the proposed closure of the 'unfit for purpose' Navan A&E Unit) - I don't think that the HSE is doing a bad job. Of course I write this having just received my 4th Covid vaccination and flu jab free of charge and receiving my 5th Covid certificate by email 24 hours later. Well done, HSE!
Last edited:
Okay, so taking into account that it is an utterly dysfunctional organisation they can deliver some services well. That certainly doesn't mean they are doing a good job. That means that they deliver some good services. That's two completely different things.
Your GP got paid €33 per shot for the Covid jab and €11 per shot for the Flu jab (€30 plus a €10% pension contribution and €10 plus a €10% pension contribution). So it wasn't free, it cost the State €143, plus the cost of the vaccines, plus their internal procurement and administration cost to give you those injections. The total is probably well north of €200.
I'm out - feel free to argue with yourself until you get bored and fall asleep.
Wouldn't worry too much about Purple to tell you the truth. If it's anything to do with the public service or old people, he'd rather see that section more or less eliminated. Amazes me how much time he has for posting. If he worked, or had qualified to work in the PS he wouldn't have that time to constantly moan
Grand so, but if you say silly things people will question you.
Of course not. But my point is that the extent to which the State is empowered to address these issues without the support of successive governments is limited.
Happy to learn from your hard-won experience!
But it is really. It’s an absolute outlier in terms of its return on expenditure. It’s not the only example of PS inefficiency by any means but please don’t use it as an example of the PS experience generally or as evidence of the blanket ‘gross inefficiency’ to which you refer. That’s quite disingenuous.
Yes, I have the unfortunate habit of questioning the silly things people say.
Fair point, it is an outlier but it's high profile only because it's such a big drain on resources.
Remember when Irish Water was formed and the Chief Executive said that it was over staffed by 3000 people from a total workforce of 7000. That doesn't mean that the other 3000 didn't work hard etc, it meant that there was gross duplication of process when the service was delivered at a county level rather than a national one.
My commiserations to your family and both of your friends. (I think you have two?)
That’s a fair point. And look at how efficient his organisation became as result of his leadership.
There’s no incentive for senior public servants to highlight, much less address, inefficiencies when they’re ultimately castigated for doing so by the political classes.