HSSD board members refuse to go

GUERNSEY'S Health and Social Services board members will not resign.

GUERNSEY'S Health and Social Services board members will not resign.

Their decision followed a two-and-a-half hour meeting at the department’s headquarters this afternoon.

The five members will use a vote of no confidence debate to explain their actions, which included operation and ward closures, in the wake of a shock £2.5m. overspend.

Comments for: "HSSD board members refuse to go"

topcat

Well that's okay then. Remember this when your boss asks you to leave his employ. Just say"NO"

pyer

I don't think Deputy Hadley could be described as the boss of the HSSD board, even in his wildest dreams

Barry Tucker

Interesting will be good to see what they come up with . Why there are wards closed at the PEH I have hurd thay have found aspestos but that was all removed 20 years ago in ozanne and giffard they have found it now in the old hospital de sum ward Carey ward Arnold etc why now 50 years they were in use . The castel hospital wards closed and other ward used for office staff . KE7 wards closed . Brock ward sherwell ward receiving room knocked down for new wards to be built ? Why did they need new wards built when they had all these others closed , Also the new theatre at the PEH they did not need . HSSD said in the states 15 years ago that they needed 5 new wards built and offices to relocate the pataints from the castle to the PEH so they could close the castle still open 1 ward rest offices .

Barry .

guern abroad

The reality is far more projects have had far more money spent on them rather then on ongoing maintenance programmes to sustain esisting infrastructure yet that approach is OK?

Expat

No shock here. Only in Guernsey can you overspend by £2.5m or send £2.6m to a false account and still keep your job! Amazing.

Ray

At difficult times like these I always ask myself'what would Matt Fallaize or Mike Hadley do?'

kevin

No the HSSD Board are right not to resign. There will now be a full debate on this.

Yes there is a £2.5 million pound overspend on health which one way or another affects everyone yet we give £4.6 million pounds a year to fund private education which is not NEEDED. We have built new marinas we have spent £17 million on new courts e.t.c.

The point is our states need to wake up and PRIORITISE. Health, Education and Housing are the essentials, everything else is just the icing on the cake.Finally no Dave Jones we do not need to hand out huge sums of money to people who make poor life choices and continue to make poor life choices because they know misguided deputies like you will look after them. We could easily knock £1m off the social security budget.

John

Ray, I think in the case of Matt Fallaize he is popular because he isn't a minister. Unfortunately when it comes to the States unpopularity comes with responsibility. Mike Hadley on the other hand just seems to be enjoying the upset. I am in two minds about the whole thing. People's health matters more than anything and because the amount of people seeking help is variable then it is going to be difficult to cap the spending in a particular year. On the other hand one hears of there being too many managers and not enough people doing the actual work. Should the members of HSSD resign, I am not sure. I just hope that the cancellation of operations is not just a political stunt.

GM

Kevin

I agree with you re the need to prioritise to ensure that we can pay for this, but I would challenge you re your claim that the States subsidises private education. It's crystal clear that the parents of fee payers in fact subsidise the States to the tune of around £5,000 to £6,000 per child per annum, which the States would have to pay if no private schools existed.

islander

There will always be an overspend in the HSSD.

No one can calculate life expectation needing personal care of treatment.

What is needed is more doctor to patient involvement and less administration cost[States of Guernsey]

Doctor and nurses care for the sick so let them get on with their jobs and get value for patients.

The HSSD are too involved with the running of our hospitals dictating its requirements and staffing levels.Listen to the doctor and nurses requirements please

kevin

gm

we have had this debate before and i'm talking about need. the falling pupil numbers at state schools mean that in all probability anyone who can't afford fees if subsidies were removed at private schools could easily be accomodated at state schools. However you and I both agree that savings could be made and HSSD and Housing would be able to have their budgets left alone.

HSSD have a desperately difficult job literaly dealing with life and death issues. Mike Hadley, the same Mike Hadley who got it totally wrong on Sunday opening , now wishes to push through a vote of no confidence in the HSSD board yet won't stand for minister of HSSD or indeed a place on the board if the vote succeeds. Now there's someone you can really trust!

GM

Kevin

It costs the States of Guernsey something like £6000 a year to educate a child in the States secondary school system, yet it only costs the States around £2500 per annum when the child is being educated at one of the Colleges. The difference is paid by the parents. There is not a chance that the States could make up that difference per child of some children were pulled out of the Colleges,so there are no potential savings there.

There is wastage all over the States. HSSD and Education seem to be far bigger culprits than Housing.

I agree with you re Mike Hadley. A complete joke. Unfortunately not a funny one though.

Spartacus

GM

Here we go again, you just don't get it do you.

The total cost of delivering education through the states system is not much different if the schools are at full capacity or low capacity. Therefore each extra child does not increase the overall cost by £6,000. The per capita cost decreases if their are more pupils. Therefore the grants to the private colleges represent an additional cost to the service, not a subsidy to it.

As for Mike Hadley, he is doing a grand job.

GM

Spartacus

On the basis that you clearly haven't yet replaced that faulty dictionary of yours which contains the incorrect definition of "subsidy", or, alternatively, that you are too thick or too stubborn (or indeed both) to understand the correct definition, then I'm not interested in engaging with you on that debate. As I said last time to you, I'd rather eat my own hair than carry on debating with you.

Re. Hadley, as usual you seem to take the contrarian view of absolutely everything. I don't see much support for your view of him.

Spartacus

GM

You can define subsidy however you like and use whatever dictionary you choose, the grants to the colleges from the education department which are funding for special places and reduced school fees are an expense of the taxpayer.

Maybe it is you who is thick and stubborn because GM thinks she is ALWAYS "right" and everyone else is ALWAYS "Wrong".

I have no idea why you think my view of Mike Hadley is contrary at all, plenty supported his views on Sunday trading and plenty agree that HSSD were wrong to cut services.

I don't see much support for your views on lots of things. If you are hoping everyone is always going to agree with each other I suggest you head back to cuckoo land.

Benedict

GM

I regularly disagree with Spartacus but I do not see the point in abusing her. Make your own points clearly and politely. Your ad hominem [ad feminam] attacks diminish you.

Silly post of mine. Spartacus is robust enough to look after herself. Still, noblesse oblige.

GM

Benedict

There is not a single element of "abuse" in that post. Those same points have been made clearly and politely in the past but to no effect. In one ear and out the other.

I am already highly suspicious that you are Spartacus writing under a pseudonym. You've suddenly appeared out of the blue, with clearly the same views as Spartacus, trying to defend Spartacus, just as Spartacus was disappearing with her tail between her legs. Hmm.....

Spartacus

GM

1) You have failed to take on board Benedict's valid comments, you are in fact continually abusive and do not seem able to control it. Suggesting someone is thick is always abusive, it is also incorrect as I have a high IQ.

2) If you make a point which I disagree with, being abusive will not get me to change my mind. That is bullying. The only way you will convince me to change my mind about something is to provide evidence to support your ideas.

3) Benedict has been around for a while and as he says we do not always agree but I respect his good manners, I suspect he is older and wiser than both of us.

GM

Spartacus

1) I don't consider anything was abusive at all. You hang on like a dog with a bone even when proved wrong. My "abuse" is no different from what you dish out. Strangely enough I don't seem to have this issue with anybody else (other than Arnald, but that's taken as read). If you can't stand the heat....

2) You don't accept evidence even when presented on a plate to you if it doesn't fit your agenda. As we have regularly debated, your definition of "facts" is an extremely subjective one. Even when proved wrong, Spartacus is never wrong.

3) That's interesting - I've used this site for about 7 years under various pseudonyms, and that's the first I've ever seen from Benedict, or certainly at least in the last 2 or 3 years. All of a sudden "he" comes out of the woodwork and you and "he" are best pals defending each other. Its especially noticeable because your views never receive any support on this blog. Hmm...

Spartacus

GM

"Proved" is another word you need to look up. Just because you do not agree or dispute a fact does not mean you have proved your case.

So you justify your abuse (ie insults) on the basis that

1) I try to stand up for myself

2) You reserve this treatment for me (and Arnald whoever he is)

3) If I can't stand the heat (your abuse) I should "stay out of the kitchen" (refrain from posting)

I have a better idea - how about you just refrain from resorting to abuse, instead back up your arguments with intelligent debate and evidence or alternatively just ignore my comments? You cannot justify abuse. It is angry behaviour.

Aha! I suspected you have posted under other pseudonyms and other gravatars. I have transparently posted under other pseudonyms but always with the same gravatar.

I'm not best pals with Benedict! I have said before I do not comment on this forum to try to make friends I seek to debate. I do not seek anyone's approval or see the need to have my views backed up by anybody. I exercise by right to freedom of speech. Anyone is welcome to disagree with my views but you cannot tell me, or anyone else that their opinion is wrong. An opinion is never wrong.

Your weakness is the comfort you get from getting fluffy approval from the likes of Neil Forman and Ray. You are clearly insecure and need the approval of others. Sorry to disappoint but you won't get that kind of fawning from me.

Benedict

Dear GM at 2.15

I do assure you that I am not Spartacus. However, you are quite right in saying that I crawled out of the woodwork. I have been convalescing and I must now crawl back into the woodwork.

I fear that I have rather flooded the posts in the last 48 hours. I apologise for my prolixity. I thanks all posters for their patience and good humour. I wish everyone a very happy Christmas and New Year.

GM

Spartacus

I know very well what "proved" means. At least that means that one of us does.

I am sorry that you feel that I've been "abusive". I haven't been, but I'm sorry that you don't seem able to spot the difference.

Why should I ignore obvious garbage when I read it from you? As you rightly say, free speech is important.

Once again you have misread what I said (no wonder you don't identify "abuse"). I said that I have used various pseudonyms over the years. I did not say that I currently use various pseudonyms. I have solely used the GM moniker for about 2 years. Other pseudonyms long predated debates with you, if they can be called that.

I see that Benedict has now withdrawn. Clearly the association that I made between you and "he" struck a nerve. Funny that...

Neil Forman

Spartacus

Why do you have to throw my name into this argument? ;-)

GM is right, it does cost less to pay these grants. For your information GM & I do not always agree but unlike you I will admit it if I am proved wrong.

Spartacus

Neil

You didn't admit to being wrong about the pension fund as proved by the actuaries report.

You are wrong about the college grants as proved by the tribal helm report.

I have never seen you disagree publicly with GM. You are always there to pat his back when he is bullying others.

GM

Spartacus

Grow up. Nobody is "bullying" anyone.

Neil Forman is hardly likely to admit that he was wrong on those points when he very clearly wasn't wrong at all!

Ironically, that infers that you think that your opinions on those points are "facts". QED.

Spartacus

GM

I find you very aggressive and personal. I would love to hear your definition of bullying.

I quoted the source of reference for the facts on those two points. You have offered no evidence to support why you dispute of these facts.

GM

Spartacus

As I said before - grow up. Don't come on here claiming to be the oracle on everything and claiming that yours is the only view which can be correct, and then complain when people don't accept your view.

Nobody is bullying anyone. That's another definition that you seem to have a different dictionary for. You simply cannot accept people who counter your views and who make comments that you don't agree with.

Life and debate is about differing views. Get over it. But don't behave like the spoilt brat in the primary school playground who can't take it and wants to cry to teacher when somebody stands up to your nonsense. You just don't seem to "get it" that your own style of dictatorial debate is highly inflammatory and condescending, not to mention that you hold on to your disproved theories like a dog with a bone.

If you just want to find a blog to express your views on where nobody will question your views, then this one clearly isn't it. There are clearly several other posters who have exactly the same problem as I do with you, yet none of us have the same problem with other posters. That's called a trend.

PLP

Judging by some of his posts I'd say Benedict is a Christian (possibly a Roman Catholic) whilst Sparty has made it pretty clear she isn't. Besides, Sparty doesn't seem to have a problem standing alone so why she'd suddenly engage in some pointless ruse to get an imaginary TIG friend doesn't really make much sense to me.

Spartacus

GM

You can't tell me what to do, what to think or what to write let alone where to write it and I'm not going to stop expressing my views just because you don't like my style.

Nice try.

I'd still love to know your definition of bullying.

So what are you going to do about YOUR problem with me? Hurl personal insults? Criticise my style? Try to belittle me? Is that the way you deal with your problems with people? You may as well give it up as that aggressive approach might work in your day to day affairs but it is clearly not having the desired effect with me.

Neil Forman

Spartacus

I did not admit to being wrong about the pension fund as I don't believe I am wrong. I have listed the figures and have shown that the deficit is GROWING.

I am dubious about the Tribal Helm report, they receive a percentage of any savings made, they identified a few which basically were staring them in the face. The grants paid to Private Colleges were an easy target, scrap these and there is a 'saving'. In the long run this will cost us more! My opinion, you may and can disagree.

I have publicly disagreed with GM on this very site, maybe you have missed it. In this instance I agree totally.

This is an interesting read and may put this into a bit of perspective for you. This is research by financial experts, believe me it is scary.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article33201.htm

Spartacus

Neil

Thanks for the link, that is quite an extremist viewpoint. Who are these people? You say they are financial experts but I couldn't find any credentials.

I'm not dismissing their theories I have no doubt that there are hard times ahead for Britain and Europe but nevertheless I don't agree with everything they say.

I think it is disgraceful that UK have cut the top tax rate from 50p to 45p. It is shameful that they are cutting benefits for families who are working hard but on the breadline. The attitude is "The rich don't have enough money and need more, the poor have too much money and need it taken away".

We need to look to Scandinavian countries for guidance on stability, harmony and equality. Too many people in power are obsessed with attracting wealth and greed. What is needed is a focus on VALUE for money and quality of life, simplicity not complexity. Big difference.

So far Guernsey has been sheltered from the global problems but that is now looking likely to change. The Horacle has tweeted that we are facing a precipice not a gentle decline and I tend to agree with him. It could well be that PB Falla's predictions are correct, I always thought as much.

We need to look at our taxes, even GM has changed tune and is now proclaiming the virtues of tax increases. Owen Jones tweeted "If a rich man wants to help the poor he should pay his taxes gladly not dole out money at a whim". I couldn't agree more, charity cannot solve our problems.

So regarding the public sector pension fund. The deficit will not grow unless a decision is made to allow it to grow, that is not a problem it is a calculated strategic decision. It is your prerogative to state your views about the situation but it is my prerogative to challenge that and provide evidence which I have done.

My stance is based on cost effective measures looking at the big picture. I simply don't agree that changes to the pension will create overall savings for public sector remuneration, the problem is much larger.

Same thing with the tribal helm report. They have used detailed information and identified net savings over 5 years, they claim that the longer term savings would continue and be greater. It is your prerogative to disagree with this evidence but you have no evidence to support your alternative theory.

Guernsey's larger education problems are based on inequalities. We need to use our scarce resources to better effect to create a skilled and healthy workforce not give special funding towards an elite minority who tend to leave Guernsey en masse on completion of their education.

I am eagerly anticipating the "future vision of education" report which is due by the end of the year and also the outcome of the public sector pension review. I will relish any new factual information and may adjust my opinions accordingly, or reaffirm them, I hope you will be equally open minded.

Neil Forman

Spartacus

Did you actually read the whole document? It names the writers and their experience.

We are heading for very hard times, Alan Greenspan who was the Director of the Federal Reserve made a prediction about ten years ago and said that the world was heading for a depression ( not recession ) and I tend to agree with him.

I would not like to see tax increase until it is a last resort, the average earner cannot afford much more. We can save more in Government spending.

The pension scheme deficit has grown.

As I said, I view the Tribal Helm report with a pinch of salt, I will dig out the paperwork and read it again to back up my opinion.

I will read the Future Vision Of Education & Public Sector Pension review papers with an open mind.

Then argue about them with you;-))

Spartacus

Neil

Infoclearing house is a chappy called Tom from Southern California! No credentials but you can email him to check.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/who.htm

Alan Greenspan predicted the mess? Some say he created it!

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1877351_1877350_1877331,00.html

I take your point about taxes on average earners but the increase in the wealth gap is my prime concern.

I don't dispute that government spending can be curtailed, but the changes you want to the pension fund and shrinking of staff numbers will not necessarily create the results you want.

The problems are complex clearly and so I am pleased about the forthcoming pension review, the HSSD review and the tax and benefits review. We are in pivotal times and these reviews are imperative asap. Government needs to get its act together pronto.

I hope you read all the tribal helm reports thoroughly there is a lot of expert logic within them.

I don't dispute that the pension scheme deficit has grown, my point was that it is and always has been under government control, I have explained before how they slashed contributions in order to create a deficit and this deficit has now grown to an acceptable level.

Neil Forman

Spartacus

The chappy called Tom from infoclearinghouse is a site host who puts documents that the public should know about online. He is not the author. Did you read the insert by Fredrico Tessore who was a Financial Analyst for Citibank in Buenos Aires.

I just remembered the quote from him, I will take your point. Watch a film called inside job about the banking crisis. I should have twigged then.

You are right, the wealth gap is increasing.

We will have to agree to disagree on the pension & staffing issues, I have my opinion, you have yours.

L'eree Lad

Neil,

That article is basically a sales pitch for Moneyweek magazine.

They are scaremongering people into thinking the only way they can protect themselves from this threatended 'financial meltdown' is to subscribe to Moneyweek.

The problem I have with that article, other than the sensationalist tone, is that none of the figures are adjusted for inflation. For instance, the UK national debt growth graph from 1970 to the present shows a 12 times rise in debt. However, in the same period inflation has increased 14 times. So adjusted for inflation the national debt now is lower.

How does this indicate impending disaster for the UK? More to the point, how does this relate to Guernsey? We do not have any 'national' debt?

This is the internet. Don't take everything at face value. Especially on this forum!

Ray

GM

Interesting little interview on the radio this morning with Matt Fallaize re his unchallenged amendment on the mortgage relief proposition

He had mixed feelings that his amendment might not be debated as he would have liked his views to be aired more fully but on the other hand he realised that he would have been a lone voice against a five man Board and 'AN ARMY OF CIVIL SERVANTS'

Does he know something that most of us also know?

GM

Ray

I never know what Matt Fallaize knows or doesn't know, as he always seems to resign before we get to find out!

Neil Forman

Ray

I think the Facebook site had a lot to do with this as well, have you seen the flyer put out by S.T.E.W?

Benedict

GM:

Your argument contains a fallacy. If a school is understrength there is hardly any extra cost in allowing extra pupils to attend. The provision of buildings and teaching staff remains the same. The additional cost is marginal - text books mainly.

The fallacy in your argument is hypothecating a fixed sum per pupil. In fact that sum varies, depending on how many pupils are being taught. More pupils = lower individual cost.

However, the above needs to be qualified. IF extra pupils at a state school required extra classes, then extra staff would have to be employed. It might also be necessary to create more accommodation.

So, it all depends upon numbers. In practice Kevin might be right; or GM might be correct.

Ray

GM

Here is a little cut out and keep gem from Spartacus posted at 11.33pm 1/12/12 ...

'This is a debating forum,who cares who is right or wrong? It's just opinions being aired and stimulation of thoughts'

You will see therefore that it is pointless trying to win a battle of minds with facts,despite her usual demand for evidence to back up anyone else's opinions

Best to let the thread fade away gently for your own sanity.I notice that Dani has not posted for a while .. probably still recovering from the marathon October / November airing of opinions about paedophiles

Spartacus

Ray

You cut out and keep my comments? Wow, you must be a superfan :-)

It is not pointless to try to win a battle of minds with facts, certainly not with me. However what happens all too often is that opinions are presented as facts and that gets my goat.

As I said in a comment above, "being abusive will not get me to change my mind. The only way you will convince me to change my mind about something is to provide evidence to support your ideas".

Anyone is welcome to accept or reject my opinion in which case we can agree to disagree. There is no need for insults.

I guarantee my opinion will always be influenced by available evidence, in this case, the tribal helm report. GM does not agree with the savings calculations and Dani held her own views on paedophilia. In both cases their personal opinion is their prerogative but in both cases they failed to convince me to change my mind against the available evidence. Spectators of the debates will make up their own minds.

Ray

Morning Sparts

That little gem just HAD to be a keeper.It was the nearest you have ever been to admitting defeat against overwhelming odds/facts/evidence

It's so good I have hand written it for future reference in my little 'All things Spartacus'booklet

Spartacus

Ray :-)

Please save me a signed first edition, that sounds like a best seller. I'll let you know payment details for my royalties :-)

GM

Benedict

I said "there is not a chance that the States could make up that difference per child of some children were pulled out of the Colleges". The difference is currently about £4,000 per child. Yes, that difference might be reduced to a degree, but it would still be a net subsidy by the parents paying a big chunk of the cost of educating their children, which would otherwise be borne by the taxpayer.

Spartacus

GM

You clearly do not know the meaning of the word subsidy. Check your dictionary. There is no net subsidy by the parents that is an entirely false statement.

You are suggesting the grant provided to the colleges by the education department is a lower cost than the cost would be of educating those children in state schools to the tune of £4,000 and this is entirely false and shows your failure to understand per capita costs.

In any case if the grants to the colleges were stopped people would not stop educating their children privately of course. You do know what a grant is don't you?

GM

Spartacus

We've been here before and I am not going there again. You are clearly incapable of understanding something so obvious that an average 5-year old could understand it. I have far better and more useful things to do than waste time debating that same point again with you.

sarnia expat

GM/Spartacus. Talk about handbags at dawn.

jack

GM / Spartacus / Ray

YAWN

give it a break it is somewhat tedious and I dont bother reading the childish arguments

it is not funny and it is not clever

less is more?

Ray

Hijack

Since I know you won't bother to read this I can risk repeating what someone famous once said ...

‘This is a debating forum,who cares who is right or wrong? It’s just opinions being aired and stimulation of thoughts’