Heartbeat:A beautiful autumn day, it is calm and sunny. Leaves, bonfire material in more sensible times, lie in expectant clumps, awaiting the slightest breeze to start their dance. Any open window or door acts like a magnet for the past glories of the Virginian Creeper, which still covers the house like a multicoloured sunset.
Our ancient yew tree is covered in berries, attended by a large visiting colony of birds, who having sated themselves, literally stagger to become airborne, with their acquired elegant sufficiency, or stuffed, as the younger family members put it, before correction by the Highest Authority.
Woe betide anybody foolish enough to park their car under this tree at this time of year.
One irritant disturbs the tranquil evening. Just outside the study window a collection of members of the order Hymenoptera, sub group Vespids have set up house.
In other words, we have a wasps nest. It is awkwardly situated for anybody contemplating its eradication. I am not of that number, believing strongly in the principle of 'live and let live'. It is, however, a problem for the Highest Authority who feels the wasps may be undermining that particular roof.
Consequently, given the way the world works, it becomes a problem for me also. My reasoned pleas that it would be dangerous to try to do anything about it at this time of year are dismissed as an amalgam of laziness and cowardice.
I utterly deny the former charge. While I know the average adult can withstand up to 1,000 stings, I can't think of any good reason why they should have to. I vainly point out that in the US, stings cause three to four times as many deaths as snake bites.
The wasps are scheduled to die off with the advent of colder weather. I just wish they'd get on with it lest the roof fall and fulfil the prophesy of the Highest Authority. I am with Dylan Thomas in his reference to children's books "that told me everything about the wasp, except why".
I was astonished to read reports of a conference on Health Impact Assessment held recently in Dublin Castle. In my petty way I wondered who paid for that.
What really piqued my interest was the claim that Health Impact Assessments (HIAs) should be a mandatory part of public policy and planning. It was postulated that transport, education and construction projects and God knows what else need to be monitored and sanctioned because of possible effects on health. The mind boggles; a new set of publicly funded Gauleiters to protect us all! But that's just me.
There are obviously real concerns for those with nothing else to do. Buses for example, they are clearly dangerous both for passengers and other road users. Statistics show that they kill people. Directly stemming from that, aspects of construction could well attract a negative HIA.
Roads for example; if we didn't construct roads we wouldn't have road accidents and deaths and we would greatly reduce our carbon footprint or whatever and thus protect the planet and ourselves from the deleterious effects of global warming. The possibilities are boundless. Utopia here we come.
The more I read, the more my interest waxed. A lady from London, coordinator of the London Health Commission told the meeting that it had undertaken HIAs on all the Mayor of London's statutory strategies since 2001. As a result, she claimed, major plans for London had been amended to effect better outcomes for health such as cycling and pedestrian facilities.
Wow! I thought a HIA for the Rock Road would have pointed out the lunacy of a cycle lane sharing the Lana Bus (bus lane for those linguistically challenged). As for walking, the problem is to actually get people to do it.
Until now, this has been a matter of choice. Perhaps we could have a group (publicly funded of course) to whip the citizens out for compulsory walks and keep them moving briskly as this is clearly in their best interests.
Worse was to come. It was stated that carrying out such HIAs will "have significant benefits for the health of London in the long-term, particularly in terms of narrowing health inequalities". What the hell does long-term mean missus? Would it be infinity, possibly? Do people actually get paid for talking nonsense like this? Don't bother to tell me. I know already.
However, lest I appear all bitter and twisted, might I suggest an HIA on the health effects of lying on a trolley in an A&E for hours or days; or possibly an HIA on the consequences of failure to access vital diagnostic and therapeutic facilities in time to deal with your cancer.
They might be of more relevance in this benighted Republic. It's not all bad. I liked the bit about local health commissions. Maybe the HSE could take this up on a community level? It's about their speed. Think about it. A spokesperson for the 'effin local health commission said: content doesn't matter, more bureaucracy and jobs for the troops do.
Meanwhile, I note that we lead the world in protecting our citizens from the harmful influence of tobacco smoke. I leave you with the sound of one hand clapping and, to preserve sanity, a quotation from Quintus Horatius Flaccus in Otium, "Laetus in praesens animus quod ultra est oderit curare et amara lento temperit risu" or "Joyful be the soul in the present, let it not trouble about what is beyond and temper bitterness with laughter."
Maurice Neligan is a cardiac surgeon