Decentralisation

NewDubliner

zuma wrote:

Is that your attempt to claim the high moral ground?

Look, move or loose your job!

You've made no effort to understand the issues and you've ignored the important issues that have been raised since your posting. Why should anyone take you seriously?

The current plan will add to traffic problems in Dublin, it will mean increased taxes for everyone and lower public service efficiency. In the towns it favours, it will drive up prices and only have a marginal benefit on local employment.

Why are you in favour of the current decentralisation scheme?

Give reasons.

zuma wrote:

So what do you propose the people who refuse to leave Dublin do as the idea of decentralisation isnt going to disappear anytime soon!

Make sure that the truth about the current project is known to the electorate.

uncivilservant

TAOISEACH Bertie Ahern admits his Government's decentralisation plan is in trouble and management of it is "a difficult exercise". For the first time, he conceded that moving 10,600 civil servants to more than 50 locations outside Dublin was too big a project for the time allowed.

From today's Irish Independent.

Perhaps now he might concede that 10,600 "posts" to 50 locations is just never going to happen.

New_Departure06

One of the advantages of decentralisation for the relevant regions is that it will allow for local recruitment in the future. I think that if some civil servants refuse to cooperate then the govt should hire replacement staff in the new regional centres.

NewDubliner

New_Departure06 wrote:

One of the advantages of decentralisation for the relevant regions is that it will allow for local recruitment in the future. I think that if some civil servants refuse to cooperate then the govt should hire replacement staff in the new regional centres.

Why not just keep the jobs where they are and save money?

oscarBravo

Give it up, ND06. As a passionate believer in - and activist towards, in my own way - rural development, I can't see any point whatsoever in this whole doomed project. All the alleged benefits to the regions can be achieved, more cost-effectively and without the IR catastrophe.

New_Departure06

NewDubliner wrote:

Why not just keep the jobs where they are and save money?

That's the Dublin mindset talking again.

We need more balanced regional development, instead of everything being centred in Dublin.

NewDubliner

New_Departure06 wrote:

That's the Dublin mindset talking again.

We need more balanced regional development, instead of everything being centred in Dublin.

No, it's the cost-concious mindset.

It's time we examined the costs and the benefits of the current plan.

Just how much extra tax will people have to pay & to what extent does the current scheme contribute to 'balanced regional development'?

TempestSabre

New_Departure06 wrote:

That's the Dublin mindset talking again.

We need more balanced regional development, instead of everything being centred in Dublin.

You mean like the National Development Plan. But decentralisation isn't part of that. Is building isolated office ad hoc all over the place "balanced regional development"?

SeanW

I've always thought Decentralisation was a load of crap TBH.

If the government was serious about regional development, new jobs would be created in the regions, acessible by local people, instead of trying to drag Dublin people from their homes, friends and extended families to regional locations they don't want to go to anyway.

It must rank up there with SSIAs as the stupidest, costliest, most ridiculous and expensive vote buying plot in this farcical government's history. I'm no fan of civil servants either, but I hope you guys give Bertie, Parlon etc the roastings they deserver over this nonsense.

So I'm guessing NewDeparture06/Zuma et. al. would love it if his current employer told him to move to someplace else or risk promotions/the job itself? Would go without question? No? I didn't think so.

NewDubliner

SeanW wrote:

So I'm guessing NewDeparture06/Zuma et. al. would love it if his current employer told him to move to someplace else or risk promotions/the job itself? Would go without question? No? I didn't think so.

Given that they've not tried to justify the scheme, I think we're just seeing a bit of begrudgery.

RainyDay

New_Departure06 wrote:

We need more balanced regional development, instead of everything being centred in Dublin.

Do you really consider that locating Govt services based on the electoral needs of current Govt deputies to be 'balanced regional development'?

SeanW

"Balanced Regional Development" is a buzzword usually used by nutters looking for ridiculous projects anyway, kind of like the Western Rail Corridor.

And to top it off, these schemes don't actually DO anything to balance regional development ... They just look like they might be nice idea.

Victor

New_Departure06 wrote:

That's the Dublin mindset talking again. We need more balanced regional development, instead of everything being centred in Dublin.

Then why does the plan ignore the National Spatial Strategy?

fly_agaric

New_Departure06 wrote:

One of the advantages of decentralisation for the relevant regions is that it will allow for local recruitment in the future.

Yay! Each scattergun-decentralised little civil-service dept. can then become the personal creature of local bigwigs and parish-pump politicos like good banana republics everywhere.

New_Departure06 wrote:

That's the Dublin mindset talking again.

Oh no! Deliver us from the evils of the dreaded "Dublin Mindset".:rolleyes:
What would you call your mindset?
The "Dublin-hating begrudger" mindset?

Bet you really enjoyed RTE's fallout program! Now that's what I call decentralisation!:D

New_Departure06 wrote:

We need more balanced regional development, instead of everything being centred in Dublin.

The govt. spends way too much of our money on Dublin. Look at its world-class, world-class I tells ya, airport, public transport, hospitals, and the much envied motorway-marvel that is the M50.:rolleyes:

Anyway, why the feck would you want most of the civil-service to be in the capital city of the country near to the ministers' who run the show and close to each other so they can communicate easily and effectively with each other on overlapping issues?

DOH...what a bone-headed and illogical idea.

Ever so much better to send them out them willy-nilly to all points of the compass for "regional development" (aka strategic vote-buying) purposes.

Why would we ever copy other countries' that usually move the govt. and its apparatus to a single new city or region when they want to use it as a tool to stimulate development (e.g. Brazil, maybe S. Korea - I think they are considering a shift from Seoul)?

Decentralisation would make more sense to me if they were planning to gradually move the entire govt. (Dail and Seanad too) and most of the civil service out of Dublin to Cork/Limerick and surroundings or to Galway and surroundings but that doesn't appear to be what this scheme is about at all.

The_Conductor

fly_agaric wrote:

Anyway, why the feck would you want most of the civil-service to be in the capital city of the country near to the ministers' who run the show and close to each other so they can communicate easily and effectively with each other on overlapping issues?

The big thing that I just don't get is the way that no-one seems to be mentioning that over 2/3 of the civil service is already outside of Dublin. The current proposed decentralisation scheme is in fact the 5th largescale scheme in Ireland since the late 70s. Fewer than 1 in 3 civil servants are in Dublin......

NewDubliner

After this week's reality-check, the handlers & spin doctors seem to be sweating a bit. They've just activated the emergency 'popularity-revival' plan:

They put Bertie on the Tubridy show.:D

fly_agaric

smccarrick wrote:

The big thing that I just don't get is the way that no-one seems to be mentioning that over 2/3 of the civil service is already outside of Dublin. The current proposed decentralisation scheme is in fact the 5th largescale scheme in Ireland since the late 70s. Fewer than 1 in 3 civil servants are in Dublin......

Taking your word for it, that is a surprising figure (to me anyway).
That would make most of my rant against decentralisation (scattering dept's all over the country making the civil service less efficient) a bit pointless and stupid.

I just couldn't stop myself when I saw the usual stuff about "Dublin Mindset" and Dublin hogging development in the country being dragged out.

<runs away from thread full of civil servants.>

uncivilservant

fly_agaric wrote:

Taking your word for it, that is a surprising figure (to me anyway).
That would make most of my rant against decentralisation (scattering dept's all over the country making the civil service less efficient) a bit pointless and stupid.

Not really. What had been decentralised in the schemes before this one were individual divisions of Departments, whereas what McCreevy dictated was the sending of entire departments, including their HQ's.

Naturally enough, the first people to compain were the affected individual ministers themselves, all of whom insisted they'd have to maintain a Dublin office while their actual departmental HQ was in some other TDs constituency.

New_Departure06

Someone mentioned how much was this costing the taxpayer. Well it has been repeated umpteen times on the radio about how sites have been purchased around the country. Make it worth the taxpayers' while by moving there or else commuting there to work.

My question still hasn't been answered - if you don't want to move there then why not commute their instead? Many tens of thousands are forced as it is to commute to Dublin from outlying areas.

Dirk Gently

New_Departure06 wrote:

My question still hasn't been answered - if you don't want to move there then why not commute their instead? Many tens of thousands are forced as it is to commute to Dublin from outlying areas.

How many hours traveling in a car clogging up the roads sitting in traffic would be considered a reasonable commute. If everyone gets up at 5 in the morning and gets home at 11 at night then it just might work. Wonder if they would get milage allowance off the tax payer and cut their working week to 3 days so they get to spend some time with their families.
Commuting from Dublin is not the answer.

New_Departure06

clown bag wrote:

How many hours traveling in a car clogging up the roads sitting in traffic would be considered a reasonable commute. If everyone gets up at 5 in the morning and gets home at 11 at night then it just might work. Wonder if they would get milage allowance off the tax payer and cut their working week to 3 days so they get to spend some time with their families.
Commuting from Dublin is not the answer.

But it's okay for the culchies to have to commute to Dub of course! :rolleyes:

Dirk Gently

So your answer is to force people who want to stay in Dublin to sacrifice themselves by adding to the problem of long commutes.

Alot of the culchies you speak of make homes in Dublin and enjoy the lifestyle. If the locations where the government wants to relocate people to offered people a quality of life similar to what they have in Dublin there wouldn't be as much resistance to moving. The problem has a lot to do with regional development (or lack of).

What reasons have people to move out of Dublin away from there friends to places with less services. I actually applied about a year ago and put on the form that I was willing to move anywhere in the country but they still didn't want me:( It didn't make a difference to me where I worked as I'm young and don't much care about leaving Dublin as I have no mortgage or kids keeping me here and wouldn't mind a change of scenery with cheap rent compared to Dublin but for someone who has worked in Dublin and settled here with a house and family it is asking a bit much to move. Glad I didn't get the job now as I wouldn't want to be seen as undermining the people trying to keep their jobs in Dublin.

very miffed dub

I've thought about posting on this thread for quite a while but have resisted.......until now. This is my personal experience of decentralisation so far.

The simple fact about DECENTRALISATION is that it is a complete farce. I work in a key section of a Department where workers need to have a great deal of knowledge (amassed over years and years) and also technical skills. In the past anyone wishing to transfer to work in the section had to be interviewed to check their knowledge and suitability. Since decentralisation started any Tom, Dick or Harry could be transferred into the section as long as they would decentralise to the chosen location and we have lost staff with years of valuable experience and knowledge.

A person can be trained to do a job but knowledge that has taken years to grow cannot be transferred to another person (usually from outside this Department) without standards falling and at the end of the day it is the public that will suffer.

For the last few months my workload has doubled because I'm trying to train in my boss and my replacement - both of whom have come from different departments and haven't got a clue!! I have to work overtime (usually unpaid) so I can do my job properly..........FARCICAL!! Costly mistakes have been made by the new personnel and the experienced Dublin staff have had to mop up the resulting mess.

The worst thing about decentralisation (apart from being displaced from a job that I actually take pride in and love) is the uncertainty. We were told last November that the section will definitely move to the new location early in 2007 but are still waiting to hear what's going to become of the original staff (none of whom opted for decentralisation and don't all live in Dublin btw). The Dublin staff who won't decentralise (for whatever reason) are living on a knife edge. We don't know from day to day what's happening and if we'll have our current job next week, next month, etc., etc.

What's hapening has been likened to a cull. The number of staff in the decentralised section will be significantly reduced. It's a cunning way to actually decrease staff numbers.

With regard to married couples working for different Departments. I know of at least two couples who will be affected by this debacle (assuming they agreed to decentralise - which they haven't).

The first couple were expected to decentralise to Donegal and Waterford respectively. They have teenage children who will be attending College in Dublin soon. What are they supposed to do??? Buy a house somewhere in the middle and meet at week-ends??? It's an absolute joke.

The other couple who have two small children (one of which has health problems and needs to go to Crumlin Children's Hospital on a regular basis)would only be separated by 150 miles if they agreed to decentralise!!

The public sector unions should be ashamed of themselves. I'm a member of the PSEU and they are USELESS!!!

I have a suggestion for Mr. Ahern and co. Either scrap the farcical dentralisation programme or erect a purpose built structure capable of holding at least 5000 disgruntled civil servants who will not decentralise. It would have to have interior white walls lined with padding so we can collectively bang our heads off the dreaded white walls and avoid a huge legal case against the State.

Thanks for letting me get this off my chest

SeanW

Look, many of these people have families rooted in the city, children in schools, spouses who have careers in the city, have amenities not often present in rural areas, friends, extended family, everything in their Dublin homeland.

Why the hell would all these people just want to up and move RIGHT NOW just to get the present government some extra votes? I can very much see the point of view of the people who don't want to move.

Also, like I said the phrase "balanced regional development" is usually used by anti-Dublin loonies looking for crazy projects. One such project is the Western Rail Corridor, which, although it looks like a nice idea when you look at the details you find that for the most part it would serve low-density areas (one off housing free-for-all in Mayo for example) over a very poor quality alignment that would cost a bundle to reopen, provide a poor quality service, and despite all the hype it would attract very few actual users (y'know, fare paying passengers who actually USE the train?), therefore losing piles of money every year, and quite possibly damaging the image of railways in this country as a viable, sensible investment to move large numbers of people, which is what passenger railways are supposed to do. And I say this as a pro-rail person and a member of pro-rail lobby Platform 11 which also opposes the Northern section of the WRC in favour other more viable investments including the Southern section of the WRC, which has much more potential.

Back on topic, anyone who is thinking clearly should have seen the problems with the Decentralisation proposal coming a mile away. So as soon as some (usually from the West) "I hate Dublin" type person says

New_Departure06 wrote:

balanced regional development

you can safely ignore everything else they have to say. Especially when they're promoting something as looney and unjustifiable as the WRC/Decentralisation.

Unfortunately, despite the fact that both will probably do more harm than good, both are government priorities to buy votes from aforementioned Anti-Dublin types.

TempestSabre

If you've family in Dublin, and kids you won't want to uproot them to pull them away from from their family and firends. If you are single you are not going to want to move down to where theres no social life. The country is mainly (but not only) only attractive to people with links and family in the country. So you should promote development in these places.

If you move a office/dept wholesale, and all its staff, you aren't creating any significant development or new jobs. You are just paying to relocate, and then paying to support that office in a location that is is still unattractive to most people and business'es. The fundamentals of that location haven't changed. At least not by the current decentralisation plan.

You could survey where people want to decentralise too, then build there, and offer incentives, like day care or flexible hours, teleworking. But building in the middle of nowhere, where no one wants to move to, and were you only want to grab a few votes at the expensive of hundreds if not thousands of workers and their extended families is simply a waste of taxpayers money. You'll lose staff, have to recruit, offering higer wages to attract people out of Dublin, and also hire contractors to cover the shortfall. As they do now to cover the shortfall caused by the embargo.

Consider all of this when theres a embargo on recruitment and the aim of the embargo is to reduce the staff numbers of the civil service and semi-states. How then is decentralisation going to create jobs?

So the only rational for involuntary Decentralisation is a vote grabbing exercise, pre election, that some estimate is going to cost the taxpayer around a billion euro. No one knows for sure, because actually no ones costed this crazy scheme. But most people seem to more interested and happy that public workers are being hurled around the country than looking at how much its costing them and what little they are getting in return.

SeanW

So it's kinda like the other balanced regional developers pet project, the Northern section of the WRC.

Only this is infinitely more expensive and stupid, and involves screwing around with thousands of people's lives.

Unbelieveable.

New_Departure06

58% of the public support decentralisation they are hardly "loony" contrary to the implications of calling decentralisation "loony" by an individual on this thread.

very miffed dub

Assuming I did decentralise miles away, could the FF/PD coalition (or any future government) guarantee school and college places for my children in the decentralised location??

I DON'T THINK SO!!!!!!!

There's a lot more to consider than commuting times

SeanW

New_Departure06 wrote:

58% of the public support decentralisation they are hardly "loony" contrary to the implications of calling decentralisation "loony" by an individual on this thread.

And Hitler won the elections in Germany in 1938. Not comparing decentralisation to the Nazis, but it just goes to show how easily people can be fooled. That's all your 58% proves.

NewDubliner

New_Departure06 wrote:

58% of the public support decentralisation

That's not true.

When was a referendum held?

58% of a small number of people questioned in a poll supported the idea of decentralisation. The people polled were not asked if they were prepared to accept more traffic in Dublin and in the selected towns, higher taxes and lower services as part of the project. If they had been informed of the truth about the cost of the project and the dubious benefits it will bring, the percentage would have been much lower.

Can you tell us how much the project will cost?