Decentralisation

Dinarius

New_Departure06 wrote:

I'll tell you....you're lucky you don't have Josef Stalin planning your decentralisation...then where would you be!

Funny you should say that, since decentralisation as conceived by Bertie et al. is the nearest thing to enforced Collective Farming we've had in our eighty odd years of history. Except that this is 2006 not 1938. Appalling.

To see Parlon squirm last night was a joy to behold. He really had no answer to anything. This is utterly brainless in conception and execution and he looked the part.

I totally agree that the AHCPS rep was superb and it would attract me to that organisation. He crushed Parlon like the bug that he is. But, it is grade dependent, isn't it?

The comment by one of the local business contributors from Birr was very revealing. He expressed disappointment in the progress thusfar particularly so considering that local investors had bought land and applied for planning permission with a view to building 'starter homes' for the new arrivals. That's really what it's all about (along with vote buying)........"FIANNA FAIL, THE BUILDERS' FRIEND" - should make T-shirts with that written on it - lining the pockets of its pals.

Still on the issue of Birr. It's is obvious that Parlon intended to greedily take one of the largest slices of the decentralisation cake for himself (400 to Birr), so it is all the sweeter that it has one of the worst takeups! ;-)

Much of the focus has been on decentralisation and its patent lack of takeup. Little attention has been paid to the consequences of Parlon's '...demented auctioneer...' (Pat Rabbitte) behaviour. As has been indicated in a post above, the implications of Parlon's selling off of the family silver in Dublin are potentially appalling. The accommodation problem that will arise could be catastrophic.

D.

NewDubliner

Dinarius wrote:

To see Parlon squirm last night was a joy to behold. He really had no answer to anything.

Yes, it was fun, in a Japenese endurance game show type of way.

Just remember, Parlon does not need the votes of Dubliners. What matters to him are the votes of people in his constituency. To some of them, he's probably a hero, taking on the twin evils of the Dublin mandarins and trade unions.

fly_agaric

Dinarius wrote:

The comment by one of the local business contributors from Birr was very revealing. He expressed disappointment in the progress thusfar particularly so considering that local investors had bought land and applied for planning permission with a view to building 'starter homes' for the new arrivals.

LOL. Great stuff.

utopian

Dinarius wrote:

Funny you should say that, since decentralisation as conceived by Bertie et al. is the nearest thing to enforced Collective Farming we've had in our eighty odd years of history. Except that this is 2006 not 1938. Appalling.

Get a grip. Asking a few thousand civil servants to work elsewhere has nothing in common with a policy that led to the deaths of millions of people.

Dinarius

utopian wrote:

Get a grip. Asking a few thousand civil servants to work elsewhere has nothing in common with a policy that led to the deaths of millions of people.

A little irony never hurts! ;-)

D.

The_Conductor

utopian wrote:

Get a grip. Asking a few thousand civil servants to work elsewhere has nothing in common with a policy that led to the deaths of millions of people.

This is off-topic, but I'll continue nonetheless.
Collective farming was massively successful- everywhere, apart from in the Ukraine. The biggest incentive for serfs to join these collective farms was access to mechanised machinery. The deaths that you mention were a result of 1) 3 years of drought in the early 1920s (late 1922-1924) and 2) a deliberate policy a little less than 10 years later to destroy the very Ukrainian nationhood in 1933 (where food was allowed to rot rather than distributed to peasantry) and 3) The war-time famine of 1946-47.

Famine was a conscious instrument of war against the Ukrainian peasantry (as admitted by numerous then members of government including Maxim Litvinov). It is regarded as a genocide against the Ukrainian peoples. It was undertaken because the Ukrainian people, unlike the Russians, were extremely individualistic in nature- and also had no Russian type obshchina (or history of common ownership of land). The Ukrainian Kurkuli (successful small farmers) were rounded up en-mass and deported to Siberia- and the peasantry of the countryside allowed to go hungry in order to feed those workers in industries that were to be redeveloped (east of the Volga).

Collective farming was however a resounding success in Russia.

In brief- collective farming was 1) a punishment designed to break the Ukrainian people and 2) a manner of supporting industry relocation/development in the underdeveloped hinterland (and in a single leap catapult the regions into a newfound developed status).

Certainly many untold millions died- but this was largely as a result of an acknowledged state of warfare between the Communists and the Ukrainian people, rather than as a result of poor economic ideologies (even if they were seriously circumspect).

As such- the analogy, comparing today's proposed decentralisation strategy to collective farming- with the desired policy of promoting regional development at the acknowledged cost to the Kurkuli- is valid. The genocide of the Ukrainian peoples (and subsequent genocide of other soviet peoples including several infamous episodes (Katyn Wood etc)) while horrific- were seperate distinct efforts to break peoples.

utopian

smccarrick wrote:

The biggest incentive for serfs to join these collective farms was access to mechanised machinery.

No serfs around then. I would have thought the "incentive" was the promise of not ending up in Siberia...

smccarrick wrote:

The Ukrainian Kurkuli (successful small farmers) were rounded up en-mass and deported to Siberia

While the Russian kulaki were provided with all-expenses-paid trips to the Black Sea coast...

smccarrick wrote:

Collective farming was however a resounding success in Russia.

I suppose that depends on whether the "elimination of the kulaks as a class" is one of your criteria for success.

Anyway, back to the whinging...

The_Conductor

Lol.....
I need coffee.....

pete

I haven't seen an interview performance like that since Guy Kewney on BBC News....

Diaspora

NewDubliner wrote:

Just remember, Parlon does not need the votes of Dubliners. What matters to him are the votes of people in his constituency. To some of them, he's probably a hero, taking on the twin evils of the Dublin mandarins and trade unions.

His chances don't look good in Offaly either given his support for the Standish family featured on Prime Time in April 2004 who were found to have polluted the local drinking water with carcinogens in the area where he has is farm and once derived a lot of his support.

I may sound niave but weren't the PDs supposed to be keeping an eye on FF and not pulling strokes / protecting those that do themselves?

NewDubliner

Diaspora wrote:

His chances don't look good in Offaly...
I may sound niave but weren't the PDs supposed to be keeping an eye on FF and not pulling strokes / protecting those that do themselves?

Does anyone seriously think that Parlon is the driving force behind this project? I think he's on an 'all or nothing' mission, gambling what remains of his electoral credibility in the hope that the coalition will get away with the stroke.

Yes, I think you would be naive to think that the PDs 'keep an eye' on FF. That's just one of their electoral pretensions. The facts suggest that they're the 'Thathcherite' branch of FF.

Macy

NewDubliner wrote:

Does anyone seriously think that Parlon is the driving force behind this project? I think he's on an 'all or nothing' mission, gambling what remains of his electoral credibility in the hope that the coalition will get away with the stroke.

Well he clearly mislead on Prime Time last week about the FAS dispute, as no sign of anyone being invited to the LRC for talks at this stage. But then wouldn't be the first time in that dispute that he hasn't been truthful.

Dinarius

Decentralisation was discussed on 'Questions and Answers' last night. Didn't watch it, but did tape it.

Will report later if no one else does.

D.

holly_johnson

I only saw a few minutes of it, but there was a woman in the audience who works in FÁS, and she gave Micheal Martin a bit of a hard time, as did Bowman. All Martin could do was stutter and blush. What a twat.

Dinarius

Just watched the tape. Martin was shown up for the feather light material that he is. Kept uttering the mantra that 10,500 had already signed up. Fell back on his well honed 'young curate on the point of hysterical' routine.

Sadly, in true Irish fashion, not one of the panel or audience knew enough to correct the prat that only 4500 of those are Dublin based.

Once again, a government minister was squashed like a bug by a trade union official. In this case, Patricia King. She was superb. Alas, she was only batting for the public service side. It is now patently clear that the civil service unions have sold their clients down the river and are keeping their heads down.

Spoke with someone in the OPW this morning who said that there is a school of thought in their which feels that the unions should be arguing this from the point of it being bullying and intimidation. Let's face it. That's what it is.

No one knows what will happen to them when their job is decentralised, least of all Micheal Martin. That's grounds enough for action.

D.

Macy

Dinarius wrote:

No one knows what will happen to them when their job is decentralised, least of all Micheal Martin. That's grounds enough for action.

I believe there are constructive dismissal cases being prepared in the semi state's as we speak.

The attitude of the CPSU and PSEU beggar's belief to me, it really does. If all the unions had been behind the campaign, then it would be really dead in the water. Instead they've chose the devide and conquer route of old (see the strength of the Revenue Branch before decentralisation and after) to keep the power with the few in HO.

eigrod

Dinarius wrote:

Spoke with someone in the OPW this morning who said that there is a school of thought in their which feels that the unions should be arguing this from the point of it being bullying and intimidation. Let's face it. That's what it is.

Possibly, but I think that could be a very bad move from a PR perspective. The tabloids & the Sundays would have a field day with that one and any public sympathy that may be out there would evaporate rapidly.

holly_johnson

Macy wrote:

I believe there are constructive dismissal cases being prepared in the semi state's as we speak.

I don't understand this... on what grounds? Refusal to relocate?

Macy

holly_johnson wrote:

I don't understand this... on what grounds? Refusal to relocate?

There is no plan on what people will be doing if they don't go. If the Enterprise Ireland jobs go to Shannon, what happens to the staff that don't go, if their job and work is gone? Taking someone's job away leaving them white walled is a strong case for constructive dismissal.

Dinarius

Just told at lunchtime that there is/was/will be a march/protest against decentralisation outside the OPW (51, St. Stephen's Green, Dublin 2) today.

Anyone else hear about this? If not, I guess it's par for the course in terms of the total lack of organisation on the part of those opposing it - FAS workers/unions excepted.

D.

Macy

It was organised by SIPTU's State and Related Agencies Branch with the FAS Branch afaik. There were representatives from Amicus there, and Impact members from OPW walked out to join the protest too. I think all the state agencies that SIPTU represent were there and a good turnout (better than the singing at least ).

Dinarius

Glad to hear it, but if it had received a mention here, some of the 24,401 page impressions might have turned out too. ;-)

D.

Macy

Yeah, should of, but it's been a hectic few days! :eek:

Dinarius

Was well covered on News Talk 106 and RTE 1 Radio at 4.00 p.m.

Both bulletins mentioned the fact that it was outside Tom Parlon's office.

Also, NT 106 had a brief soundbite from a union official saying, (and I'm paraphrasing) how can something be described as volountary when you're required to say yes to it in order to get promotion?

Indeed.

If civil and public servants sit tight, this will be dead in the water, with a couple of notable exceptions; one being Marine to Clonakilty. This one is a no-brainer. They've had all 91 required AND all the required breakdown in grades from day one. In addition, anything to do with marine or fisheries, in general, is politically of no consequence whatsoever. There are no fish left and there is no policy. So, it could be run from Siberia.

They should, of course, had these 91 in situ since last summer as originally planned. They could then have held it up as a success and said, "Come on in, the water's lovely." But no, they had to buy land, apply for planning and build a building. Needless to say, with the entire project coming down around their ears and an election in the offing, this has been scrapped. They are now going the temporary accommodation route, which they should have done 18 months ago. Fools.

On foot of this, there is a meeting in Clonakilty next Monday for all those moving there. The first tranche will be in place by the end of the summer and the rest of them will be there by the time of the general election.

There are then two possibilities:

1. They do the sensible thing and say that they have done what could be done given the level of acceptance they had to work with.

2. They brazen it out and say, we've done Clonakilty, now re-elect us and we'll complete the programme.

Needless to say, I have no idea what the 91 or so left behind in Adelaide Road will be doing come the Autumn/early 2007.

D.

gbh

Here is my suggestion to break the decentralisation impasse:


The applications process should be opened up to private sector employees as well.

Therefore an employee in a private sector executive job who wants to move down the country should be allowed to apply for a decentralised public sector executive job.

And a person in a public sector executive job who wants to remain in Dublin should swap with the private sector executive.

TempestSabre

How likely or practical is that since the public sector staff in the semi-states aren't (currently) being allowed transfer between semi-states, or into the civil service. Transfers have happened in the past though.

You can always move from the private sector into the public sector. Or public to private. How do you think people get in or out of it?

Of course its been difficult to get into. Because of the recruitment embargo in recent years, aimed at reducing the numbers in the public sector. Yet another irony is decentralisation will undo all that by (Most likely) increasing the numbers. most likely with more expensive contractors, or they'll need to offer bigger salaries to attract specialists to the middle of nowwhere.

Not that cost is an issue, its only taxpayers money they are throwing away.

Victor

TempestSabre wrote:

How likely or practical is that since the public sector staff in the semi-states aren't (currently) being allowed transfer between semi-states, or into the civil service.

Are you confusing semi-states with state agencies?

TempestSabre

Victor wrote:

Are you confusing semi-states with state agencies?

Oops yes. Been a long day.

Hotblack Desiato

gbh wrote:

Therefore an employee in a private sector executive job who wants to move down the country should be allowed to apply for a decentralised public sector executive job.

Regionalised open recruitment is already happening.

And a person in a public sector executive job who wants to remain in Dublin should swap with the private sector executive.

:rolleyes:
Most people who enter the civil service from a private sector job take a significant pay cut to do so. It's the trade-off for security. Don't believe a word of the guff in the Indo about how 'average' public sector pay exceeds 'average' private sector pay. The public sector average is skewed upwards by the relatively numerous top bods (PO equivalent and up.) The private sector average is skewed down by low paying industries.

The private sector executive is likely to go: "Basic pay, hmm, can't I negotiate an increase? No? Oh well, there's always the bonus? What!?! No bonus? Well what about a car allowance then? No? Do I even get parking? Probably not you say? Listen lads, forget it..."

Hotblack Desiato

Dinarius wrote:

Just told at lunchtime that there is/was/will be a march/protest against decentralisation outside the OPW (51, St. Stephen's Green, Dublin 2) today. Anyone else hear about this?

It was in several newspapers last week - though until this morning, none of them made it clear that it was Parlon's office in Dublin not his constituency office... :eek:

If not, I guess it's par for the course in terms of the total lack of organisation on the part of those opposing it - FAS workers/unions excepted.

The unions which are officially "neither for nor against, blah blah..." are studiously ignoring what's going on in FAS and elsewhere.
This will bite them in the behind big time when state agencies pull out and the pressure is on to get civil servants to make up the numbers.

Macy wrote:

There were representatives from Amicus there, and Impact members from OPW walked out to join the protest too.

One or two PSEU members happened to be passing that way on their lunch break... *cough* in fact the side of my head was very briefly on TV tonight

and a good turnout (better than the singing at least ).

God yeah