Author: Anthony

Corruption kills

The following is a transcription of an interview by Miriam O’Callaghan with Susie Long, a terminally ill patient, on last Thursday’s Prime Time. There is no need for any comment.

Miriam O’Callaghan:

Earlier this year a really courageous woman went public about her experiences in the health system when she became terminally ill with cancer because, as a public patient, she had to wait seven months before getting the necessary tests.

She’s now in our Lady’s Hospice in Dublin

Miriam:

Susie, how are you at this moment?

Susie:

I’m feeling ok, I’ve been told I don’t have that much time left but I plan on proving them wrong a bit. I don’t want to be given a time and stick to it, I want to keep going because I have too many things and people that I want to engage with.

Miriam:

Do you still believe that the delay originally between the time you went to your own GP and the time when you finally got the colonoscopy did probably damage your chances of survival?

Susie:

Well, the waiting period was seven months and seven months is a long time with cancer. I can’t prove it but I believe it, yes. I do believe it, because it had only just spread to my lungs, you know there are only a couple of spots on my lungs so it wasn’t that the cancer had completely invaded my body by that time, so yes, I believe the seven months was a disaster.

Miriam:

Do you feel in a sense the Irish health system let you down?

Susie,

Yes, I do, I do. The fact that if I had VHI or any of the other private medical insurances, if I had them I would have been seen immediately and my chances of survival would have been better. The fact that there’s inequality built into the system means that I’m terminally ill. I believe that people should be seen on the basis of how ill they are, of their symptoms, not on how much money they have.

Miriam:

I know you think it’s important about the Kilkenny day centre that’s going to be set up, tell me about that and also there are other people who would argue there’s no point in having these smaller centres, you actually need these big centres of excellence if we’re ever going to treat cancer properly in Ireland.

Susie:

People need hospitals in their communities, they don’t need to trek across the country when they’re ill to get the help that they need. This new centre will have 24 beds, it’ll be state of the art and it will cut down on the waiting lists because seven months is too long to wait for a colonoscopy when you’re bleeding from your rectum, when you’re bowl movements change rapidly. They tell you the symptoms and they tell you to hurry up and get seen but then they put you on a waiting list to get the diagnosis which doesn’t make sense but with this new unit hopefully that will put an end to it.

Miriam:

I sit before you and you’re incredibly brave and everybody worries about getting cancer and most Irish families have been touched by it. What is it like to have cancer, how do you cope with it?

Susie:

You just take one day at a time. I wake up and I’m glad that I’m here, there’s a lot of good things to live for so every day that I have to spend with my husband and my children makes it worth it. It makes whatever you have to put up with cancer, you know there’s pain and it’s rotten, it’s horrible but I’m glad every morning I wake up it’s one more day I can spend with my family.

Miriam:

Are you frightened of what lies ahead or do you have great faith?

Susie:

I’m not religious, no. I’m confident that I’ll have a comfortable death in the hospice here; they look after people very well. I want it to be as far away as possible but I’m confident I’ll be well looked after while I’m here.

Miriam:

If you had one message for the Irish health service and those who run it what might it be?

Susie:

The health service should be for everyone equally, and that’s it. Everyone is entitled to a good health service; it shouldn’t depend on where you live or how much money you have in your back pocket. The health service is paid for by our tax money and so therefore we’re entitled to every service available that we need.

Bertie has nothing to worry about

Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny thinks that Bertie Ahern will be in trouble if he fails to provide clear answers to the Tribunal. Kenny is wrong.

For Ahern, this episode is nothing more than an irritant.

He knows that standards in Irish public life operate from the sewer, that most Irish citizens are docile and easily fooled, that the media quickly loses interest as soon as the next scandal breaks and most of all he knows that there is no authority in the state with the courage or power to actually make him accountable.

He may be mildly concerned that if the Greens decide to abandon ship, he will have the bother of rearranging his power base.

He has nothing else to worry about.

Dunphy, seeing the light

“Ireland is a very, very corrupt country in all its institutions and professions.”

This was the view expressed by Eamonn Dunphy on last Sunday’s Marian Fincuane Show. When asked to elaborate, Dunphy went on; (Edited version)

“If you reflect on our professions, accountants, Bankers, Gardai, some of our major business figures and no less a person than the Taoiseach himself who is going to be in Dublin Castle this week.

I think that any forensic view of all of that tells us that we live in a deeply corrupt society.

We need honest people in public life and we need serious regulators running regulatory authorities. If you’re an accountant or banker and you are caught you need to be punished. I’m sick of seeing the consequences of corruption in this country, in every aspect of our national life.

If there is no probity, if there is no sense of justice abroad in our community then why should anyone behave? How can we point the finger at a delinquent, a gangster when people in suits are very often not much better?”

Welcome to the long held views of Public Inquiry, Eamonn.

Guilty

There were some interesting views expressed on the tragic Madeleine McCann case on Sunday’s Marian Finucane Show.

Mary Banotti, former MEP and, significantly, chair of the Irish Centre for Parentally Abducted Children seemed in no doubt that the parents are guilty.

There’s something strange here, either these people, very attractive parents, middle class, beautiful child, lots of pictures of the child to keep the public engaged, everything that makes a rich and wonderful tabloid story.

But somewhere along the line something very odd began to appear in this case and unfortunately, whether we like it or not, and I’m certainly not saying this is the case with them, parents have murdered their children and have been quite plausible in public, we’ve all seen the pictures of people having press conferences and then being arrested a few days later.

A man was seen carrying something wrapped in a blanket towards the port and straight away I thought; they’ve gone out to sea

Niamh O’Connor of the Sunday World was even more devastating in her forensic conclusions.

I think in this case there’s a history of bad parenting, they did decide to leave the children on their own in the apartment so obviously that would point to them as suspects.

Marian Fincuane; What about other parents who do the same?

I don’t know anyone who’s done it, none of my friends have done it, actually leave the building, no.

Marian Fincuane; or even leave the room?

Well, leaving the room is a different matter; you’re still within earshot of the children or whatever, but the fact that they did leave the room and that there’s a history there.

The Mc Canns are fortunate that Mary and Niamh are not actually judge and jury.

Standing up for the anthem

In an ideal world humans would have no need for the primitive instincts associated with religion and nationalism.

Unfortunately, it is unlikely that our species will ever evolve to such an enlightened level. In the meantime we have national anthems, which were the hot subject on today’s Liveline. (Thursday)

National anthems have just one purpose; to make sure citizens of warring states will mindlessly slaughter each when the occasion demands and to keep those same citizens primed for war in peacetime.

In the 1970s Cobh could be a dangerous place to socialise. The navy was in the midst of its first big modernisation programme which resulted in a large number of recruits, descending on the town to relax and check out the local talent. This did not go down well with the local gentry and so fist fights and even mini riots were common.

I remember on one occasion a free for all was underway at the local hotel. Chairs, bottles and fists were flying all over the place until the band decided to play the national anthem. Immediately, the fighting ceased and everybody stood to attention, when the music stopped, it was back to business.

Over the years I have witnessed people being threatened and even assaulted because some drunken imbecile got it into his head that the anthem wasn’t getting the respect it deserved.

I also found it fascinating to experiment with the psychology of anthems by, for example, whistling God Save the Queen among friends. It always got an immediate response; in most cases there would be pretended outrage and some finger wagging but on some occasions I would be gently but firmly ‘advised’ that my actions were ‘unwise’.

Needless to say, I was never stupid enough to carry out such experiments among strangers, especially where alcohol was being consumed.

One of my most interesting experiences regarding the playing of anthems was when Ireland played England at Croke Park last February.

I watched the game with some friends in the Old Oak bar in Cork city. The place was packed and the atmosphere was electric. Hearing God Save the Queen being played on such hallowed ground was an amazing experience.

I was even more amazed, as was everyone else, when a man in front of us stood rigidly to attention when the band struck up Amhrán na bhFiann. Seconds later another man stood up and before long most people in our area were at attention.

I think the key to the emotions generated by nationalism is awareness. It’s possible to be a proud citizen without carrying around a large load of negative historical baggage

IFSRA – Swimming without a swimsuit

The performance of the Irish Financial Regulator is allegedly monitored by two panels; industry and consumer.

Judging from the two articles below it is difficult to believe they are talking about the same organisation. The third piece is a letter I wrote to the Irish Times (unpublished) in response to the inconsistency of the panels.

Criticism of regulator is misconceived

While both industry and the Financial Regulator want strong players in the IFSC, it can never be a zero-failure environment, writes James Deeny

Sept 4th 2007

The recent coverage of the problems associated with the Irish subsidiary of Sachsen LB and the associated implied criticism of the Irish regulatory regime have failed to cover some crucial aspects of international regulation in Ireland.
Fundamental lessons were learned from the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) fiasco nearly 20 years ago when that bank structured itself in such a way that there was no obvious primary regulator.
International financial regulation now clearly defines where the buck stops through a universal principle of home country consolidated regulation of the worldwide operations of a banking group. In the case of Sachsen this consolidated supervision occurs within the German regulatory system.
To say that the Irish Financial Regulator was seeking to distance itself from the problem is totally unfounded. It was for the Financial Regulator here to supervise the compliance with national and European banking regulation of the Irish subsidiary Sachsen LB Europe solely and that is what it did.
There are obvious lessons to be learned from the Sachsen situation, both in Ireland and, more particularly, in Germany. The German regulatory system is fragmented and does not benefit from a single regulatory regime similar to that established in Ireland in 2003. One can legitimately ask whether it was prudent to allow a regional savings bank to engage in capital market operations on the scale involved and whether such a bank had the necessary experience and controls in place to engage in such activity. That was for the German regulator to decide.
Now, we can expect the bar will be raised both in Germany and in Ireland regarding the scrutiny of bank licence applications and their associated business cases, especially with smaller banks involved in capital market transactions.
However, the system of home country regulation that was put in place has worked and the problems that arose have been addressed and resolved in Germany.
We also need to bury another dangerous media misconception that Ireland operates a “light touch” regulatory regime. This is a million miles from the reality. The fact is that the Irish Financial Regulator operates to world-class regulatory standards where increasingly its day-to-day regulatory work is driven by EU and international regulation.
I would seriously doubt whether any of the over 10,000 firms and funds regulated by the Irish Financial Regulator would categorise their regulation as “light touch”.
The Financial Services Consultative Industry Panel continually talks to the Financial Regulator, seeking to achieve a top quartile standard in financial regulation, balanced with international competitiveness. Light regulation is on neither of our agendas.
The use by some media commentators of easy catchphrases to help describe the complex matters that have arisen equally have no place in a serious debate on these issues. They only add to the potential misunderstanding that can arise and, indeed, can also lead to unnecessary reputational damage internationally.
Since its formation in 2003 the Financial Regulator has undertaken an immense workload in completely updating its authorisation, fitness and probity, sanctions and inspection protocols. It has significantly raised the bar for all domestic and international financial service providers. The reality is that it is doing a good job.
In the international wholesale financial services market, Ireland ranks in the top four in the EU. Ireland punches well above its weight in the sector, with a highly developed skill set across a range of financial services.
In the main, the players involved are strong international financial names operating under a robust Irish regulatory regime. The sector is a huge job creator and wealth generator for Ireland.
The IFSC is a financial crossroads and given the scale of the operations involved, we can expect at the margin that similar situations to Sachsen will arise where weaker players run into difficulty.
We need a mature understanding of this. As the saying goes when the tide goes out you find out who is in the water without a swimsuit and this unfortunately has been the case with Sachsen.
Fundamentally there is no difference between industry and the Financial Regulator in wanting strong players in the IFSC; however, it can never be a zero-failure environment.
James Deeny is chairman of the Financial Services Consultative Industry Panel which, under the Central Bank and Financial Services Act, provides independent input to the Financial Regulator on new regulation.
© 2007 The Irish Times

Regulator refuses to detail overcharging by banks

Paul Cullen, Consumer Affairs Correspondent

une 18th 2007

The State’s financial watchdog has refused to provide details of overcharging by individual banks even though its own consumer panel requested the information.
The Irish Financial Services Regulatory Authority has also refused a request to oblige banks to show gross interest with Dirt tax separately deducted on statements.
While the regulator’s consumer panel says it is “virtually incredible” that this issue is not addressed immediately, the regulator says the matter is closed until its Consumer Protection Code is reviewed next year.
The Financial Regulator also declined requests to report more frequently on the sanctions it imposes on financial services companies and to draw up a code of practice to deal with shortfalls on endowment mortgages.
In a review of the regulator’s performance, the panel accuses it of slowness and excessive caution. “It communicates with such caution that it gives the impression that if it can find a reason not to act, this will be the preferred outcome. It appears to seek complexity and obstacles rather than to see consumer-oriented solutions to current and emerging problems.”
As well as criticising the regulator’s “unsatisfactory” performance in a number of areas, the panel says consumers need to be more clearly informed about where complaints should be made. It says consumers, and the panel itself, receive no information about the enforcement of regulations.
However, the chairman of the panel, accountant Brendan Burgess, said the performance of the regulator in dealing with some issues had improved since the review was completed earlier this year. “We hope they will continue to speed up.”
The regulator had also started responding faster and more appropriately to questions from the panel. “And even if our suggestions are generally rejected, at least they are rejected more promptly,” he added.
Overall, the regulator had got the balance right between protecting consumers and keeping the level of regulation appropriate, he said. The consumer was “far better off” than before the authority was set up.
The panel also expresses concern about the sums spent by the regulator on outside legal advice.
© 2007 The Irish Times

4th Sep 2007

Madam,

The chairman of the Financial Services Consultative Industry Panel, James Deeny, blames the German Financial Regulator for the recent problems associated with the Irish subsidiary of Sachsen LB (Opinion, 4th Sep.).

In addition, he blames the media for misunderstanding the complex matters dealt with by the Irish Financial Regulator, a situation, he claims, that could lead to unnecessary reputational damage internationally.

According to Mr. Deeny the Financial Regulator is ‘doing a good job’.

Mr. Deeny’s sister panel, the Financial Services Consultative Consumer Panel, has an entirely different view of the regulator’s performance. In an Irish Times report (June, 18th) the panel made the following criticisms of the regulator.

Refused to provide details of overcharging by individual banks.

Refused a request to oblige banks to show gross interest with Dirt tax separately deducted on statements, the panel described this refusal as ‘virtually incredible’.

Declined requests to report more frequently on the sanctions it imposes on financial services companies.

Slowness and excessive caution giving the impression that if it can find a reason not to act, this will be the preferred outcome.

The panel chairman, Mr. Brendan Burgess, in a desperate attempt to be positive made the pathetic comment. “Even if our suggestions are generally rejected, at least they are rejected more promptly.”

Even allowing for the separate functions of these panels, it is still difficult to believe they are talking about the same organisation.

Perhaps, to paraphrase Mr. Deeny, when the tide goes out we will discover who’s been swimming without a swimsuit.

Yours etc.

Anthony Sheridan

Human cancer

Here’s why humans have no hope whatsoever of surviving as a species.

When we branched off from other members of the ape family millions of years ago, we ‘progressed’ rapidly on a technological and sociological level.

We did not, however, evolve mindless violence out of our genes and so we continue to kill all around us in addition to gobbling up limited resources and destroying the very environment we depend on for survival.

There is no doubt that the planet will be better of without the cancer of humanity, the only question is – will it survive until we are exterminated?

Playing volleyball with life

There was some interesting conversation on the Marian Finucane Show last Sunday about the latest shocking scandal concerning the gross incompetence in the treatment of breast cancer.

The panel consisted of Justine McCarthy (journalist), Liam Griffin, Joe Higgins (politician), John Crown (consultant) and Michael Colgan. At times it is difficult to identify who is speaking but here are some quotes to send a chill up the spine.

John Colgan:

“It’s interesting to listen to John Crown saying that it’s easy to make mistakes, and they’ll get suspended and they’ll get sacked and they’ll get changed. Yet, when Dr. Gupta wrote to the HSE, he was told, ‘go to the Dept. of Health’ and they sent him to the Medical Council, he was given the run around.

I come back to what Justine (McCarthy) said, 650 people are dying, 15% more than the EU average. People playing volleyball with this, not taking the blame, going home, saying they did nothing and actually killing people.”

John Crown: (I think)

“There are five or six really big places… that really try to do this right (for cancer patients).
But until O’Higgins identified all of this there were lots of little public hospitals where ego driven, cult personality run individual doctors were allowing breast cancer care to be done, I believe, inappropriately, incorrectly and to a lower than acceptable standard.”

Panel member: “How does that sound to somebody out there with breast cancer?”

Marian Finucane: Terrifying, I would have thought.

Panel member: “I’ll tell you something Marian, if anything goes wrong with me in this country, I’m glad I can afford it, I’m getting a second opinion and now when I read all of this, a third.”

Hypocrites and fanatics

On Monday’s Liveline there was a very angry reaction to the publication of a harmless religious joke book by Des McHale.

He was torn to shreds by most of the callers who obviously consider themselves to be of a high moral standing and were very angry at this great ‘insult’ to their beliefs.

So strongly did they feel that one caller even claimed that McHale should suffer the same fate that extreme Islamists demand when people draw harmless cartoons.

Curiously, none of these fanatics phoned in today when the hypocrite Fr. Cleary was the subject matter.

Apparently, a harmless joke book deserves eternal hellfire while Cleary’s denial of his children was mostly justified, by admittedly more reasonable callers, with the usual cop out argument of – ‘Sure don’t we all make mistakes’.

Strokeonomics

In a well written article in last Sunday’s Sunday Business Post, Journalist and author, David McWilliams analyses the ‘Strokeonomics’ rampant in Ireland.

“Strokeonomics. It is economics Irish style, when the local government and the local politicians join forces to build infrastructure based on electoral boundaries rather than engineering logic. What other country has roads determined by county boundaries?”

”Strokeonomics enfeebles all of us because the tax money of the central government is used to prop up the ambitions of the little emperors who masquerade as politicians in Ireland.”

While McWilliams is writing about the incompetence, jobs for the boys, Gombeenism, greed and political favouritism rampant in road building.

The same points could be made about health, education, police, politics, legal system, civil service, in fact, about any area of Irish public life.

The article is well worth reading.