Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE 162-PAGE programme for government published yesterday is a roadmap for the next five years, but there are already criticisms that it is too vague.
The word ‘continue’ is in the document 249 times, ‘explore’ is in there 34 times, ‘review’ is mentioned 126 times, ‘examine’ is contained in the document 86 times while ‘consider’ is mentioned 56 and ‘assess’ 27 times.
The firm statement of “the government will” is only in there 23 times, while the word “commit” is mentioned 118 times.
While a word search is obviously not a fully accurate assessment of the coalition document, the vagueness of some of the promises has raised eyebrows among the opposition already.
Sinn Féin’s Pearse Doherty dubbed it a “copy and paste job from five years ago”, stating that it contained “vague aspirations”.
Meanwhile his colleague David Cullinane said it lacked depth and vision.
While it is hardly surprising that Sinn Féin would pick holes in the programme, it is fair to say that the public rolls its eyes when it sees statements like:
The government will “open the National Children’s Hospital”.
No timeline, no date, no firm commitment.
The project has been one of the biggest disasters for the last government.
It is one of the country’s largest infrastructure projects where no one knows what the end cost will be. If ever a politician should utter the phrase “lessons must be learned” its with this project.
But the mention of it speaks to the point that the public are fed up with vague promises and missed deadlines.
In the setting of new year’s resolutions, people might say: “I will be able to run 5K by June” or “I will save €5,000 by Christmas”. Both measurable goals.
They don’t write down “I will explore the idea of running 5K some time in the future” or “I will continue to save some money and assess at some point later on how to reach my goal of €5,000″.
Why? Because no one would ever achieve those goals.
So, it is no surprise that such ambiguity might make the public nervous for the next five years.
In fairness, there are concrete, measurable commitments contained in the document, such as:
While the public might scan the document in search of the new government’s can-do attitude and ambitious targets, unfortunately, those things aren’t always jumping off the pages of programmes for government.
It serves an incoming government to shy away from precise details in such a document, instead stating that minute details will be hammered out later in policy plans.
One TD on the negotiating teams told The Journal that the new programme for government was never going to be as detailed as the 2020 document.
Why so? Because the Green Party are not in government.
The political landscape was a lot different then. An election had been held in February 2020, Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil needed to make up the numbers, and in quick time, as the country was barrelling towards a pandemic.
This source said that the Greens insisted on an increased level of detail around commitments in the programme for government as they knew they would need to hold Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil to their promises.
They had been burned once before when entering into government and they knew they needed clear commitments in black and white so they could hold their coalition partners feet to the fire.
Wooly promises wouldn’t have cut it in the 2020 programme for government as the other two larger parties would have rode roughshod over the Greens once they had signed on the dotted line and entered into government.
Those on the negotiating teams this time around said that this programme for government, in terms of the level of detail and format, more resembles the 2016 document, and that was the ambition.
Similarly, in 2016, the Fine Gael-led government signed a deal with a group of Independents. But comparing and contrasting the two programmes, it is clear the 2016 programme contained a lot more detail.
Firstly, the 2016 document set out clearly what the Independents were getting in return for going into government with Fine Gael, outlining the Independent’s Alliance’s wants such as more beds for cystic fibrosis patients (which was a demand of then TD Finian McGrath) and second Cath Lab in University Hospital Waterford (a demand of then TD John Halligan), among other things.
This time around, those in the larger parties state there are no constituency concessions for the Independents (although we don’t think anyone is believing that one).
Secondly, in terms of housing, under the heading of ‘More Homes’ (an excellent ambition), in the 2025 document there is no breakdown of the type of houses the government plans to deliver or yearly targets.
In comparison, the 2016 programme for government set out promises to:
There are no such pledges to achieve anything specific in the first 100 days of this new government unfortunately.
In 2016, there were 13 mentions of actions to be completed in the first 100 days of office (there are a few “within 12 months” commitments in the new programme).
It’s taken weeks for the negotiating teams and leaders burning the midnight oil to deliver this plan for the next five years, but if the new government thinks that the vagueness on precise detail is going to get them a pass from the public, they have another thing coming.
If the promises that were made repeatedly on the campaign trail and that everyone heard so much about aren’t delivered quickly, well, they’ll know all about it.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Don’t see why it can’t be used as a step down unit. Plenty of patients in dublin hospitals who are at a stage of recovery that means they’re neither well enough to go home or sick enough for an acute bed. A short stay step down unit would free up acute beds and take the pressure off a&e departments.
Would make a decent Wetherspoons
Isn’t paying a UK estate agent to sell the building not enough (like there are no domestic estate agents); you want to turn it into a British pub too? Sure why don’t we just give up altogether and repatriate our whole economy over there?
or mad idea. the hse developes the site. they get their primary care facility and turn the rest into apartments. the rent of which will generate income for the primary care unit and free up some hse cash for other uses. why cant this be done.
The HSE is not in the business nor has any resources/experience in property development… It’s not as simple as just ‘knocking up some apartments on the site’
Some kind of public/private partnership would be required.
Once you start down that road you split the focus of the organization and its aims.
Properly managed it is quite straight forward, but I wouldn’t trust the HSE to have such foresight.
Properly managed requires them to hire good people to manage it and property developer salaries are in the millions.
The HSE doesn’t have the cash to pay enough nurses and Drs as it is, could you imagine it firing 50 nurses or cutting back on drugs and telling hospitals to do without to bring in someone to to manage its on the side property business…
Perhaps NAMA could be brought in to run that side of it in partnership with the HSE. They already have the expertise and either way the money generated ends up in the public purse.
Yes indeed let Nama sell it to their friends at a discount good thinking China man.
NAMA is a good suggestion… no need to fire anyone if NAMA provides the finance. Property developers per se don’t really need to be involved (as in a Johnny Rohan or the like )… a reputable contractor along with a small team of professionals should be well able to manage a development of its size.
property developers are just guys with money, you only need an architect and some builders to develop this building not Johnny Ronan.
Exactly what I said…
This would make an excellent respite facility if refurbished and staffed with competent caring individuals. Baggot is has loads of pubs and eateries it doesn’t need any more.
it make a great Hotel, the money from the sale could make a good purpose built unit which would have much lower running costs.
Brian you can spit and find accomodation near Baggot. I think our health service is in more need than our tourist industry!
The HSE didn’t exist in 1986. It would have been entrusted to the Eastern Health Board or some such entity.
Denis will buy it.
As some other posters have observed, it would make an excellent step down facility for those requiring convales cence; it could supply much needed accommodation for the homeless; it could supply much needed Student accommodation. (I won’t even dare mention refugees!). I am sure that many posters could posit more good uses. However, it is apparently much better to sell the building, at a knock down price no doubt, to a foreign multi-billionaire, or a hedge fund stuffed with the same people. After all, must keep up the agreed sale of assets, which had slowed down a bit, but no doubt will get right back on course.
memories
Same here Eleanor . I commenced my training there in 1969 and then after qualifying worked in the ICU , Coronary Care and Thoracic Units . It was a really good place to work and a great hospital
That used to be a district court also
No, you’re thinking of the Richmond Hospital.
No it never was !
Your right yea sorry spot on
I didn’t recognise it!!!
No matter what everyone thinks, it does need refurbishment and would probably make a great hotel .
Turn it into Student accommodation. It’s between UCD and Trinity.
Why can I not post comments on the more political articles on here today?
Behind the beautiful facade, the building is falling down. Needs knocking. It’s a safety issue. Too costly for any health care facility. Hotel best option
Will be turned into luxury apartments costing €500,000 for a one bed flat!
Become a weatherspoons or Greggs
have your say