Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Department of Public Administration?

  • 10-12-2009 6:31pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 9,366 ✭✭✭


    Basically, having looked at the joke that was the Prime Time special on Monday, or was it Tuesday, can't remember, anyhow...I'm looking to put some sort of concept together for a "Dept of Public Administration" or "Dept. of Administrative Affairs" or "Dept. of the Civil Service".

    The whole point being that any activity on a PPS number with the Revenue Division would be immediately be fed to the Welfare Division, meaning your payments could be monitored. If the computers in Revnue spoke to DSFA this would never have occurred.

    It's a model that fits the rationalisation of the Civil Service as there are people in the Civil Service whose job it is to tick a box on an Excel spreadsheet and send it to another agency for further administration. If there were 1 centralised system, the efficiencies that could be achieved have the potential to be massive.

    Obviously enough though it would require a multi-billion euro initial investment in a software programme that was capable of all of this and training staff.

    Imagine one bank account, one payroll and one answer to one question. If civil servants don't like Brian Lenihan, they definitely wouldn't like me.

    Discuss.


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 960 ✭✭✭Shea O'Meara


    I always found it either amusing or irritating, (depending on the circumstances) that all these Government departments aren't linked via that new fangled gadget the intranet (or internet, never catch on by the way). I've often found myself getting a form from one crowd then having to shuttle it off to another for a stamp or some such and then bring it back to the start.

    The powers that be, in my opinion, are not competent enough to carry out such a task; see the Garda effort PULSE (30 million a year by the way* ) or even that e-voting fiasco.
    FF would pay one of their buddy's company's to half arsedly (it's a word) over see it and millions later.....we'd scrap it.

    * http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2009/06/28/story42766.asp


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,993 ✭✭✭ParkRunner


    A lot of Government Departments are in the process of upgrading the role of technology in providing public services. If the money was there they could all be brought in but these things take time and moreso money, the latter of which there is none of.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 960 ✭✭✭Shea O'Meara


    Why would the idea only dawning on them now? Lack of money would be a relatively recent issue taking into account the decades the technology has been at our disposal.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 146 ✭✭potlatch


    There *was* a Department of Administration (or something like that). It was abolished around the same time as the *real* Department of Administrative Affairs (as it was called in 'Yes, Minister').


  • Hosted Moderators Posts: 1,713 ✭✭✭Soldie


    Efficiencies? Centralised? Please.

    After an economic catastrophe created by politicians, the last thing we need is the expansion of the political sphere.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 48 onedoubleo


    Though a great concept the level of computer literacy is so low amongst the public sector that I imagine only 10% could actually make the transition to a new system.
    A multi billion euro investment would be necessary in making a brand new department but thats just wasteful and so should be expected in the coming year.

    The software is easy to make by todays standards, just look at the system in place in An Post or look at the RTE Player (I know they are not fully state owned) to see that we already have sophisticated pieces of software involved.

    To be honest I don't know why the government hasn't gone to universities and asked the heads of computer science departments to come up with this since we pay for their salaries.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,993 ✭✭✭ParkRunner


    Why would the idea only dawning on them now? Lack of money would be a relatively recent issue taking into account the decades the technology has been at our disposal.

    These things take time to design, develop and put into practice. They also have to be flexible enough to be able to take account of changes in legislation and other developments. I would love a better computer system myself and a more integrated one too with other Departments but unfortunately your money is being spent on other projects


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 960 ✭✭✭Shea O'Meara


    The Agresso system was brought in some years back to deal with parts of finance etc. Instructors went from Council to Council instructing staff on it's usage. So bringing in a change of system wouldn't have been to much of an alien concept. I must admit to not being Mr. I.T. (fell down on the bikini section), but even some form of connection/intranet so some pertinent information is visable to all parties; address, unemployed/employed, nationality etc. must have been do-able at some stage over the past ten years or so? I just think it's an obvious idea. Every agency works off some database or other and as I've seen myself, there are ways of making one set compatible to the other without any major hardware overhaul.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    onedoubleo wrote: »
    The software is easy to make by todays standards, just look at the system in place in An Post or look at the RTE Player (I know they are not fully state owned) to see that we already have sophisticated pieces of software involved.

    Things like the RTE player use a lot of off the shelf components available elsewhere I imagine but then so would most of the other systems so I agree with most of your statement but the best thing about them being off the shelf is the sophistication from the maintenance and upkeep point of view is much reduced when you use other peoples components and they are writing the patches for you that have to be made.
    To be honest I don't know why the government hasn't gone to universities and asked the heads of computer science departments to come up with this since we pay for their salaries.

    Me neither, there are so many postgrad students and undergrad students doing boring final year projects that will never be used and don't offer much practical experience. Why not offer them the opportunity to make projects that will actually be in use? It costs little to maintain these systems. Most of the work is building them in the first place.

    The only problem I can see is the lack of understanding from many students in college with poor code writing skills. Projects that are actually going to be used would require good programmers and good programmers will in many cases want more challenging projects and more Computer Science and cutting edge related.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,435 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    Clearly, the benefits of a centralised data base with common sense information sharing could be quite beneficial - flagging useful info across departments, reduced training allowing transfers between groups more easily and so on.

    I do have two problems though:

    Wouldnt this department just be another quango? Its got a very "Yes, Minister" feel to it. I feel too much of ministerial responsibility has already been shifted out: if this Dept is going to be responsible for administration, what does that imply for the existing Depts? Are they no longer for the quality of the data they are maintaining?
    Obviously enough though it would require a multi-billion euro initial investment in a software programme that was capable of all of this and training staff.

    And this. Obviously? I dont see why its "obvious" that it would be a multi-billion euro investment. Assign a group of experts from the various departments to brainstorm with a 3 month or 6 month deadline to draft a specs doc, and then put it out for tender to the private sector, globally and give it to the lowest fixed contract that meets the specs. Who knows, we might get a surprising offer that isnt demanding billions of euro for the job?

    The point I'm making is that, if we walk out there assuming right from the start were going to spend billions instead of looking for value then we are not going to get value. This is taxpayer money, there is a responsibility to ensure we get the most bang for buck.

    Out of curiousity, seeing as you mention excel - are the public sector using Microsoft Office? Id assume with licensing costs a simple save would be to use Open Office which is an entirely free rival and almost interchangeable: even has the ability to open, modify and save MS docs.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,757 ✭✭✭fly_agaric


    ninty9er wrote: »
    Basically, having looked at the joke that was the Prime Time special on Monday, or was it Tuesday, can't remember, anyhow...I'm looking to put some sort of concept together for a "Dept of Public Administration" or "Dept. of Administrative Affairs" or "Dept. of the Civil Service".

    Is it healthy to have the depts share too much of the information they collect on us? They should share more than they do (enough to combat fraud better...) but I would not be okay with a situation where there are no chinese walls between the departments, or one central agency holds all data on my interactions with the state.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 48 onedoubleo


    Sand wrote: »

    Out of curiousity, seeing as you mention excel - are the public sector using Microsoft Office? Id assume with licensing costs a simple save would be to use Open Office which is an entirely free rival and almost interchangeable: even has the ability to open, modify and save MS docs.

    I believe they use office, a family member works as a social worker and I have seen her use outlook as the mail client and word to type up documents.

    So maybe signing up to office live mightn't be a bad idea, that way it is very simple to share files and documents that doesn't require them to be at a desk. So there is the processes available already to the masses why cant one be in place for governmental departments.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,344 ✭✭✭Thoie


    Sand wrote: »
    Out of curiousity, seeing as you mention excel - are the public sector using Microsoft Office? Id assume with licensing costs a simple save would be to use Open Office which is an entirely free rival and almost interchangeable: even has the ability to open, modify and save MS docs.

    (Fact)
    I know of one department where it was suggested, but it was shot down as being too expensive due to downtime for retraining, and the costs of the trainers themselves. It would also have to go through the tender process, which is difficult for "free" things as there isn't really a supplier to stamp the necessary bits of paper.

    (Fiction)
    Knowing some of our government departments, there'd probably have to be special Post Traumatic Stress payments added on to that as well to, as employees might be traumatised by having to write a letter without the help of a talking paperclip. Then we'd get the "Not using Office" extra payment, to compensate those who were missing out.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    Thoie wrote: »
    (Fact)
    I know of one department where it was suggested, but it was shot down as being too expensive due to downtime for retraining, and the costs of the trainers themselves.

    lol I imagine it will cost the same to move to Office 2007 since they completely changed the interface so best to jump when its time for the next upgrade.
    It would also have to go through the tender process, which is difficult for "free" things as there isn't really a supplier to stamp the necessary bits of paper.

    That sound moronic TBH. Its harder to use free things in the public sector than to pay someone for the same thing because of the way the paperwork works?


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,366 ✭✭✭ninty9er


    Sand wrote: »
    Wouldnt this department just be another quango? Its got a very "Yes, Minister" feel to it. I feel too much of ministerial responsibility has already been shifted out: if this Dept is going to be responsible for administration, what does that imply for the existing Depts? Are they no longer for the quality of the data they are maintaining?
    Apologies, it would be THE department. Within there would be an Agriculture Division, Finance Division etc... All other Departments would become divisions within PA
    fly_agaric wrote: »
    Is it healthy to have the depts share too much of the information they collect on us? They should share more than they do (enough to combat fraud better...) but I would not be okay with a situation where there are no chinese walls between the departments, or one central agency holds all data on my interactions with the state.
    I think it would be perfectly okay for everything to be maintained on one system, but to address your concern have user level defined access (e.g Secretaries General have access to all information about anyone, a Clerical Officer has access to all information relative to their division only, with Revenue Audit having access to all financials and responsible for all payments from the state to individuals.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 960 ✭✭✭Shea O'Meara


    Thoie wrote: »
    (Fact)
    I know of one department where it was suggested, but it was shot down as being too expensive due to downtime for retraining, and the costs of the trainers themselves. It would also have to go through the tender process, which is difficult for "free" things as there isn't really a supplier to stamp the necessary bits of paper.
    All County Councils use office. Not sure, but I believe Microsoft cut deals with schools/government departments/big business requiring the use on a broad scale.
    Thoie wrote: »
    (Fiction)Knowing some of our government departments, there'd probably have to be special Post Traumatic Stress payments added on to that as well to, as employees might be traumatised by having to write a letter without the help of a talking paperclip. Then we'd get the "Not using Office" extra payment, to compensate those who were missing out.
    Yeah, solid employment, decent pension plan...the big ejits:rolleyes:


  • Site Banned Posts: 5,904 ✭✭✭parsi


    ninty9er wrote: »

    The whole point being that any activity on a PPS number with the Revenue Division would be immediately be fed to the Welfare Division, meaning your payments could be monitored. If the computers in Revnue spoke to DSFA this would never have occurred.

    There has been a lot of disquiet over the years from Politicos (incl your party Ninty ;) ) about using the PPSN as a form of global identifier with a transaction in one Gov department updating records in other departments etc.

    I seem to recall that the efficiency of it was overshadowed by the imagined potential of a Big Brother use (something that run_to_da_hills might have a view on).

    (dredging this up from the mists of time so I may have misremembered it)


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,435 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    I know of one department where it was suggested, but it was shot down as being too expensive due to downtime for retraining, and the costs of the trainers themselves. It would also have to go through the tender process, which is difficult for "free" things as there isn't really a supplier to stamp the necessary bits of paper.

    Training shouldnt cost all that much tbh - all I could think of is that the guys who can write macros and stuff in their sleep might lose that utility until they get familiar with Open Office but 99.99999% of staff would only use it for basic word processing/spreadsheets/slideshows which Open Office can do for free.
    I believe Microsoft cut deals with schools/government departments/big business requiring the use on a broad scale.

    I dont know what price the government pays, but can it really compete with free?
    Apologies, it would be THE department. Within there would be an Agriculture Division, Finance Division etc... All other Departments would become divisions within PA

    The centralisation and sharing of information under a common system, with common training requirements and maybe a modular front end specific to particular roles/rights I think is fine. But Id lose the Super Dept idea - it sounds like an interchangeable definition of the Civil Service as it currently stands.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,757 ✭✭✭fly_agaric


    ninty9er wrote: »
    I think it would be perfectly okay for everything to be maintained on one system, but to address your concern have user level defined access...

    I don't know if it does address all my concerns. Just having such an all-encompassing system is dangerous.

    Even if the setup/security is good it is ripe for abuse by by a government who later shifts the goalposts on use of the information.
    edit- scenario parsi mentions above.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 55 ✭✭ms.sunnyb


    What is public administration? i don't understand what they do, i understand the government discuss and come up with policies, does public administration just do research for the policies before they are proposed or implemented?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    EF wrote: »
    A lot of Government Departments are in the process of upgrading the role of technology in providing public services. If the money was there they could all be brought in but these things take time and moreso money, the latter of which there is none of.

    There was plenty of it in the mid-2000s when the computer revolution was happening, why the hell didn't they jump on it back then?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    ninty9er wrote: »
    Basically, having looked at the joke that was the Prime Time special on Monday, or was it Tuesday, can't remember, anyhow...I'm looking to put some sort of concept together for a "Dept of Public Administration" or "Dept. of Administrative Affairs" or "Dept. of the Civil Service".

    The whole point being that any activity on a PPS number with the Revenue Division would be immediately be fed to the Welfare Division, meaning your payments could be monitored. If the computers in Revnue spoke to DSFA this would never have occurred.

    It's a model that fits the rationalisation of the Civil Service as there are people in the Civil Service whose job it is to tick a box on an Excel spreadsheet and send it to another agency for further administration. If there were 1 centralised system, the efficiencies that could be achieved have the potential to be massive.

    Obviously enough though it would require a multi-billion euro initial investment in a software programme that was capable of all of this and training staff.

    Imagine one bank account, one payroll and one answer to one question. If civil servants don't like Brian Lenihan, they definitely wouldn't like me.

    Discuss.

    There is a little bit of a problem called the Data Protection Act which is based on EU directives.

    Do a little research on the topic and you will see how difficult your suggestion is.
    onedoubleo wrote: »
    Though a great concept the level of computer literacy is so low amongst the public sector that I imagine only 10% could actually make the transition to a new system.
    A multi billion euro investment would be necessary in making a brand new department but thats just wasteful and so should be expected in the coming year.

    The software is easy to make by todays standards, just look at the system in place in An Post or look at the RTE Player (I know they are not fully state owned) to see that we already have sophisticated pieces of software involved.

    To be honest I don't know why the government hasn't gone to universities and asked the heads of computer science departments to come up with this since we pay for their salaries.

    This is so ignorant on so many levels, it is difficult to see how to respond. For a start your information on computer literacy in the civil service is way off as the real figure is close to 100%.

    Secondly, using an example like the RTE Player is laughable. For a start, the Oireachtas website does the same thing much cheaper and has about four channels rather than RTE's two.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,993 ✭✭✭ParkRunner


    There was plenty of it in the mid-2000s when the computer revolution was happening, why the hell didn't they jump on it back then?

    Well they did to a point. Complex new systems were designed in many Departments. Some made it on stream, other projects had to be shelved or curtailed as the economy fell off a cliff.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,948 ✭✭✭gizmo555


    Sand wrote: »
    Out of curiousity, seeing as you mention excel - are the public sector using Microsoft Office? Id assume with licensing costs a simple save would be to use Open Office which is an entirely free rival and almost interchangeable: even has the ability to open, modify and save MS docs.

    Limerick City Council (soon to merge with the County Council) has done great work in this area and provides a great example for the rest of the public sector.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,900 ✭✭✭trashcan


    Godge wrote: »
    There is a little bit of a problem called the Data Protection Act which is based on EU directives.

    Do a little research on the topic and you will see how difficult your suggestion is.

    This is so ignorant on so many levels, it is difficult to see how to respond. For a start your information on computer literacy in the civil service is way off as the real figure is close to 100%.
    .

    Thank you. At least someone gets it. This is the problem with a lot of pontificating about the public service. It's done by people without the knowledge to actually know what they are talking about. Like it or not, the Civil Service is bound by all sorts of legislation. You might not like it, and dismiss it as red tape, but it's there and cannot legally be ignored.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,885 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    Lads

    you realise this is a 5 year old zombie thread?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,948 ✭✭✭gizmo555


    Riskymove wrote: »
    Lads

    you realise this is a 5 year old zombie thread?

    Not any more, apparently!


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,366 ✭✭✭ninty9er


    The Data Protection Act is for the purposes of ensuring data is only used for the purpose for which it is held. The consolidation of government would mean that one body is the holder of all the data, and a purpose for which all data is held could be stipulated to be "the efficient provision of public services". Another could be the "prevention of attempts to undermine or defraud"

    I'm very familiar with the restrictiveness of the Act, it's a pain in the ass, but if you MAKE the Act, you can certainly use it for the purposes of more streamlined, effective and efficient public services.


Advertisement