Irish Election are pleased to announce our collection of Irish 
IE.Pod - Launch Interview With Pat Rabbitte
Read more about: Irish Election, Irish Politics, Labour Party, Podcasts
Well the eagle eyed among you will already have spoted the button above for our podcast page. Thanks to Simon for the page design, image and also the sound editing on the podcast. Our first podcast is now available from here-get listening and when your done use this thread to have a natter about some of the issues raised. Hopefully we will discuss them on the next podcast too.
Edit by simon: Sorry for busting in on your post. But the Labour party link to the podcast as do Electricnews.net
Second edit by simon: Looks like the The Irish Examiner tuned in as well.
anyone notice he didnt seem to have an issue with privatising dublin bus?
If I remember correctly, he said that he’d do “whatever works,” but refuted any suggestion that privatisation would work. It’s my guess that he probably does have some problems with privatising Dublin Bus, and the pragmatic approach is the only way he can express his concern while still sounding reasonable.
While briefed on the internet and broadband roll-out, he seemed almost clueless about the actual workings of the internet. Did he say at one point that he hadn’t heard Zack Exley was on-board?
I laughed at his opening expression. When asked, “what would you do…?” he replied, “Well, what we wouldn’t do is …” Such a politician’s answer! Also, when asked to give his thoughts on the GAA - the ‘lighter note’ - his tone remained as grave as ever, which I thought was odd.
Anyway, I enjoyed that, hopefully the rest of the podcasts will be as listenable. And yes, ‘listenable’ is a real word, apparently.
yeah the exely stuff really caught him on hte hop-he didnt seem to know what they were hiring him for either…
Im not sure he dismissed private-he said it was the wrong question for now. That sounded like a bit of a fudge.
Also, when asked to give his thoughts on the GAA - the ‘lighter note’ - his tone remained as grave as ever, which I thought was odd. Not a hope the dubs will win, maybe he takes his football really seriously ; )
Listenable is a bit clunky though as a word, i feel like writing listenable to, which is completely wrong I know.
Question i have is whether this interview had any effect on what you already thought of him before? OR reenforced those ideas?
p.s. Anyway, I enjoyed that, Thanks, no doubt you will occasionally be listening to yourself on it…
C
Question i have is whether this interview had any effect on what you already thought of him before? his attitude around mcdowell was interesting.
On the privitisation ya what i got from it was that if someone made the better arguement he would agree to it. Now we just have to make the good arguement. But i think it is just to pacify Fine Gael give them that and he can get something in return.
Ya the exely stuff really got him . i think he must have thought it was a secrt. but it was in the paper. Very wierd.
See he is a mayo man in a Dublin constituency. He has to be careful. If mayo beat dublin in the all-ireland and he looks too happy about it. His seat might be treatened.
Question i have is whether this interview had any effect on what you already thought of him before? OR reenforced those ideas?
I’m not sure. I think it should be noted that I enter this project with little other than my preconceived notions of the parties. I’ve never made an effort with Irish politics before, so this is part of a real effort to familarise myself with it. On that level, the interview certainly helped: more than mere short soundbites, but more engaging than long written pieces.
I noted what he said on immigration and I plan to compose something on the subject - though I’m still not certain how, and someone will doubtlessly get there before me. He said something about businesses salivating (my word) over the cheap labour. That’s something I intend to call him on - this thought is only developing, so it could be wrong, but it seems like he places his aversion to business above the main issue. I was encouraged by his proposals of integration, but I’m not sure how much of that is mere talk.
I was surprised that he said outright that Israel had a right to exist; I’d previously thought that, on that subject, the aim for leftish politicians was to fudge the question. I suppose in doing so, he concedes a point to gain another.
Interesting point kevin about adversion business. Think about it you keep hearing sound bites about Harney privitising the health service and thats bad. But rarly do you hear any reasons why it is bad. Just that it is bad. That is based on ideology not fact which makes it a joke to me. But Pat did mention one bad thing about it that it would leave consultants way from the public hospidels.
Considering that the hospidels are going to be on campus. I don’t really think that will happen. They already have private patients in public hospidels they will simply have to walk a bit further is all. The fact is that if this is brought in we will have less doctors pre bed in public hospidels simply because we will have more beds. The sooner UL and Waterford IT get medical schools the better.
ill come back to the point re business etc later as im at work but i just wanna note this;
I was surprised that he said outright that Israel had a right to exist; I’d previously thought that, on that subject, the aim for leftish politicians was to fudge the question. I suppose in doing so, he concedes a point to gain another.
That is a very HP point-Im a lefty no doubt bout it(not far left but on that side) I dont have issues with existence of israel, nor do many of my friends. Often HP has taken a smal portion of the left and presented it as representative. They are simply louder. Here even more than england the far left is vocal but tiny. Most on the left have no issue with israel existing rather with militarism in general (i apply that to both sides btw).
perhaps im wrong as its not scientific just me experience of ‘moderate’ lefty types
I think Pat did extremely well. The points on Zak Exely are a bit exagerrated folks. Pat simply said he didn’t know the news of our engagement with him had been leaked. He had no problem discussing our approach to technology-he didn’t mention that such a high number of Labour T.D.’s and Councillors are blogging like myself recently.
Pat’s talk on football is well based-I regularly meet him at inter-county matches going back to Kery’s ignominious defeat to Clare in the Munster final in 1992. I also think he’s right on the Dubs although I’ll be rooting for the Kingdom tomorrow.
On the health service, could I recommend Maeve-Ann Wren and Dale Tussing’d book on the state of the Health service to Simon-if he really thinks that the mix between public and private is having no impact on the system, this book will put him right. Building private hospitals on our ground is a ludicrous waste of money, as is the bonkers Treatment Purchase Fund, where the state pays private hospitals so that consultants can take patients off their waiting list in one hospital and treat them in another at hugely wasteful rates. Typical P.D./FF economics, paying on the double but putting our resources in the pockets of their wealthy backers.
Well done to Irish election on this cast. How about more, maybe with Councillors like myself, particularly in light of the silly season coverage of our expenses.
Thanks Sean,
i have that book on my to read pile actually-the recommndation may bump it up a bit!
I think the zack stuf just caught him off guard, which always makes for good listening. Eitehr that or it was a ploy to cover the secret plans they have ; )
The podcast is intended to be one a week for the next while, perhaps a break and then onward with a second series. We will try to keep the mix between our comment and interviews going as long as we can thats for sure!
Treatment Purchase Fund, where the state pays private hospitals so that consultants can take patients off their waiting list in one hospital and treat them in another at hugely wasteful rates.
i have to say it does boggle when you think about it. The idea of a national insurance however is designed to combat that by allowing the money for treatment to follow the patient-it would need serious regulation of private and public health to work though.
I think the cast was very good, though the sound quality bounced around a bit. I still think Pat hasn’t really found his voice as a party leader, he was excellent in the last election and is a very good marker of an opponent, but sometimes he comes across as seeing everyone and every question as an opponent instead of an oppoutunity. That could just be what I’m hearing though.
I was a bit put out that he didn’t as such address whether we will be looking at using health insurance as a means to ensure equality of care in delivery. For me that would be the best thing to do in the treatment and acute sector while the medical card system needs to be overhauled in the GP area (so that it isn’t all for nothing or charged for everything, we should have coloured coded(so American) cards that cover 100%, 75%, 50% and 25%, perhaps you can buy the rest of the cover if you are so inclined) and my inclination is we need a national non-means tested level of care for prevention efforts, though in all likekihood some preventation methods would probably need to be medical carded.
I think the idea of an ongoing series of commentary cast is excellent. People skyping over the Sundays.
ludicrous waste of money
For me the dignaty of patients comes first way before the whole private/public debate. Indeed the money should not be a issue at all. If this privitisation provides more beds quicker and frees up to private beds we already have then I have no problem with it at all if the national treatment fund gets people treated faster then i have no problem with it. They need treatment today not in 5 years time. The treatment fund does that. Capital spending on more hospidels will take years to provide the same. I am surprised that labour is putting money before people.
AS for the sound that is something that we need to work on. But hopefully we will improve.
Simon “For me the dignaty of patients comes first way before the whole private/public debate. Indeed the money should not be a issue at all.”
Actually, I would tend to disagree with you here. If I had some disease or condition which would cost €150 million to treat then I would suggest the money could be better spent elsewhere. Fact is that the health service involves a number of efforts which are aimed at doing very different things. It would be a real help to get an idea of where the money gets spent in terms of prevention, treatment, recovery, and short termn postponement. We need to have a mature debate about health spending that recognises that we are all going to die at some point and that spending all of our lives just to keep on living is not how life is meant to be.
One little note on sound quality: if you have a mike that doesn’t have a foam cover, you can avoid hissing and popping by moving it down just out of the air flow. The volume’s slightly lower, but it does help.
cheers for the tip keith. i think we have a lot to learn but hopefully by the end it will be sweet as a decent priate station.
‘For me the dignaty of patients comes first way before the whole private/public debate. Indeed the money should not be a issue at all. If this privitisation provides more beds quicker and frees up to private beds we already have then I have no problem with it at all if the national treatment fund gets people treated faster then i have no problem with it. They need treatment today not in 5 years time. The treatment fund does that. Capital spending on more hospidels will take years to provide the same. I am surprised that labour is putting money before people.’
Not surprisingly, I’m not going to agree with you Simon. The three major reports, Brennan, Prospectus and Hanley don’t seem to support the privatisation approach either. It’s not the Labour Party who is putting ideology before the health of the system or the patients, but the Harney/Ahern thatcherites who can see no merit in spending on public health. I do believe that there are other ways to achieve better out-turns in the system, including building and staffing more public beds urgently. We’re still behind the average EU spend, despite the fact that we have thirty years of catch-up to do. The time for real commitment to investment in the future of all public services is now, in fact it was probably seven years ago. Instead our taxes have been fritteered lining the pockets of the Mater Privates and Blackrock clinics at the expense of equal patient care for all.
Harney/Ahern thatcherites Why does everyone have to bring insults into a debate the debate does not need the use of throw away phrases like thatcherites in it.
Ireland has the fastest growing health spend in the OECD so to say [they]“see no merit in spending on public health” is bit disengenous indeed Irelands spend pre capita is above the OECD average. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/31/2/36958547.pdf
Also considering that the hospideals already have private beds in them and thus are already privititised how can it be said what Harney is doing is privitisation. It is mearly moving , the priviate hospidels wouldn’t have the state paying for the cleaning, nursing, operating costs(not operating in the medical sense of the word) and catering staff.
Can the state provided the operations needed faster by “building and staffing more public beds urgently” then the National treatment purpose fund can. Starting from right this minute. Which would provide the operation first.
By the way thanks for commenting nice to see a politican actually debating something with a joe soap from tipp
Catchy name by the way!