Decentralisation

ishmael whale

Originally posted by luckat
What on earth is the use of the whole population sliding over to the east until the whole country tips into the sea?

There's several errors here. Firstly, the country won't tip into the sea if population tends to move East. Secondly, the proposed decentralisation will do nothing to affect that general trend. Thirdly, it can be anticipated that splintering central government offices will significantly reduce its effectiveness, which has implcations for everyone.

Originally posted by luckat
A few years ago we were hearing about the wonders of teleworking. Decentralisation will have all the same advantates: less commuting, cheaper house prices, etc.

Decentralisation actually supports the continued development of a car-dependent culture in rural areas, whereas concentration raises the possibility of public transport solutions. As for cheaper housing, the expense starts to mount where people moving to one-off housing in the countryside expect the same access to services as persons in urban areas.

Originally posted by luckat
And even the schools are an advantage. In Dublin you're lucky to get a kid into a school with under 30 in a class; in many parts of the country a kid can get real personal attention in small classes with dedicated teachers.

I think you'll find the education argument is more complex than this. Basically, it costs about twice as much to educate a child in a small primary school as a large one. The 'individual attention' you are talking about is paid for by the high pupil teacher ratios elsewhere. There's more that can be said about this, but that's probably the key point.

Originally posted by luckat
Not to mention the fact that the civil service might lose its Dublin-centred mindset and realise that there's a whole country, not just one city, in it.

As I've said above, the Dublin mindset seem to be a poor approach to training hurling teams. What is a Dublin mindset? Is it just an expression of a vague feeling of hostility held by people with a Shannon Stopover mindset?

uncivilservant

Originally posted by Cork
If you were working for a supermarket, bank or private company - you are liable to be transferred at any given time.

Cork, cork, cork.

PLEASE do try to pay attention.

Civil Servants are liable to be transferred at any time, but as far as I understand it (and I have not verified this yet), you can only be forced to move to any of the geographical locations you indicate you are willing to work in when you join the civil service. If I remember correctly (it's been a while) you simply select these from a list of counties.

Now, I'm no expert, but I think any meddling with this would be getting into the whole contract / terms of employment end of things. They have those in the private sector too, right?

Civil Servants are there to serve the people of this country.

And we do.

We are not, however, there to serve the electoral interests of any political party.

They are civil servants. Why do they expect that the location of their jobs won't change?

See above.

Will further benchmarking payments be required to overcome this inflexability?

What inflexibility? And what exactly does it have to do with benchmarking?

It is a pity that people in the private sector don't get similar treatment.

Why? Are you jealous? Because it might explain some of your begrudging, anti-dublin(er) mindset.

cdebru

This isn't the Chinese Cultural Revolution

no its probably year zero and the khmer rouge
clear the cities


cork

Civil Servants are there to serve the people of this country.

how is it serving the people to scatter people to the four corners of the country
against their will and against any common sense

uncivilservant

What inflexibility? And what exactly does it have to do with benchmarking?

you wont get an answer out of cork on this benchmarking is one of his hobby horses although he doesn't actually know anything about it last week he tought that employees of semi state companies got benchmarking

Not to mention the fact that the civil service might lose its Dublin-centred mindset and realise that there's a whole country, not just one city, in it.

can you give an example of this mindset you go on about particularly in relation to the civil service

ishmael whale

While any smokescreen to cover killing the programme is welcome, it’s a little bizarre to see the floated reason being ‘the difficulty in having 50 new civil service offices around the State ready on time’ rather that ‘the whole idea is just dumb.’

This half reflects the way in which the focus on public debate tends to be on the lack of volunteers. But the main reason to kill the programme is because it simply does not make sense as a way of organising our affairs, and will destroy the effectiveness of government. This would be true even if there were queues of volunteers rushing down to fill newly completed offices.

http://www.rte.ie/business/2004/0726/presswatch.html
Today in the press

July 26, 2004 09:57
Press watch
***GOVERNMENT TO INCREASE SPENDING IN KEY AREAS - The Irish Times reports that the Taoiseach and Brian Cowen are to work together to forge a new image for the Government in the coming months, targeting spending on voter sensitive areas and extend the three-year deadline for the moving of 10,000 public servants out of Dublin. The paper says Government sources say the completion date for decentralisation is now almost certain to be deferred, under cover of an imminent report pointing to the difficulty in having 50 new civil service offices around the State ready on time. It is not known whether a specific new deadline will be set. According to the Times the Government is expected to target specific high-profile problems in the health services for improvement in the short term. These include accident and emergency services. There is also expected to be a concerted push to open some hospital facilities, which have been built but not opened due to staff shortages.

uncivilservant

And so it begins.... or rather, ends:

A number of ministers have now cast doubt on the three-year timetable for decentralisation set by outgoing Minister for Finance, Charlie McCreevy.

The Minister for Defence, Michael Smith, described the deadline as ambitious, while the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Noel Ahern, agreed.

Mr Ahern said he believed the policy would remain but added that the scale of decentralisation proposed would take longer than people thought to complete.

Earlier, the Minister for Transport, Seamus Brennan, said the Government would study a report from the Decentralisation Implementation Body before making any decision on extending the deadline for the civil service shake-up.

The report is due out in about two weeks.

Mr Brennan said the Government remained committed to the principle of decentralisation, but would have to examine whatever difficulties the committee under Phil Flynn threw up.

Source: http://www.rte.ie/news/2004/0726/decentralisation.html

Good to see the boys all staying on-message, although i expected a bit more of a drip-drip-drip of cold water comments before the next Flynn report rather than the flood we've seen today.

sceptre

We're going to hear the word "principle" a lot over the next few reversing days.

ishmael whale

An outbreak of Dublin mindset from the Irish Examiner. I can’t argue with a word of it.

http://www.examiner.ie/pport/web/opinion/Full_Story/did-sgodeLNPim5aAsg7OWirIStPSk.asp

27/07/04
Decentralisation plan - McCreevy's legacy on back burner
NO sooner had the knife been slipped into Finance Minister Charlie McCreevy's back than the Government's decentralisation plan began to unravel at the seams.
Bereft of his stubborn certitude, fellow ministers are suddenly finding decentralisation too hot a potato to handle.
Plans to move civil servants down the country will soon be long-fingered. Ill-conceived and badly packaged, it is a ticking time bomb that could blow the Government's re-election hopes out of the water. Nor, as evidenced by Fianna Fáil's devastating election performance, was the electorate duped.

There is more to decentralisation than a knee-jerk reaction to ministerial whims based on political geography. If it is to prove effective, local authorities must be given genuine powers to raise and spend finance across a range of public services.

The political reality is that essential services were starved of funding by Mr McCreevy. Long before he departs for Brussels, his ambitious decentralisation plans are in danger of crumbling.

ishmael whale

There's coverage in today's Irish Times of submissions to the Oireachtas Finance Committee on decentralisation. It includes evidence that the former President of the University of Limerick has a Dublin mindset as he points out that the programme has nothing to do with decentralisation as generally understood, and will significantly harm the effectiveness of government.

My only quibble with the ex-Pres is he falls into the trap of saying processing jobs can be sent anywhere, not taking into account that these jobs are prone to redundancy both from schemes being abolished and from new technology or outsourcing. For example, the staff of the abolished housing grants scheme have been sitting on their hands in Ballina without sight of any new work. Redundancy or redeployment elsewhere are not politically feasible. So people get paid to do nothing while new hospital units cannot open because there's no money for staff.

'Decentralisation done right' is not about moving the Child Benefit section of the Department of SFA as far away from the main maternity hospitals as possible for no obvious reason. 'Decentralisation done right' is, as the good Prof points out, giving responsibility and power to local authorities and leaving them to get on with it.

There's a quote from Laois Chamber of Commerce, who still support the scheme. Clearly their Gombeen mindset is untroubled at the prospect of resources being wasted and the nation suffering so long as their Centras can unload a few more overpriced copies of Car and Driver.

pete

The second flynn report has been launched & is available here.

A sample:

Corporate memory
2.21 There is concern that decentralisation will result in significant loss of corporate knowledge and memory - although it can also be argued that in some cases a loss of corporate memory can act as a catalyst for positive change by freeing an organisation from an over-reliance on precedent. The matter has received considerable attention in the individual implementation plans prepared by departments/agencies and specific remedial actions are proposed where appropriate

Fantastic. From today, civil servants will no longer be accused of not having a clue about what they're doing - they are, in fact, merely "freeing an organisation from an over-reliance on precedent".

Fantastic.

cdebru

i see from the flynn report that the ministers are to have offices in dublin with a staff so already they are doubling up ths is going to end up costing us a fortune

still no proposal in the flynn report as to what is going to happen to the excess staff left in dublin just that they will be given positions in the departments that remain in dublin but how long will this take and how long will the irish taxpayer be paying for the excess staff

Cork

The Collector Generals office transferred very successfully to Limerick.

I think public sector unions will probably be looking for incentives to move.

Decentralisation is very popular outside Dublin. It is about time that the regions got their fair share of government jobs.

Just as Charlie McCreevy over hauled our tax system. Our cuvil service too could do with an over haul.

It has been based in Dublin since the days of British rule. Today we have a flexable workforce together with modern communications & we also need more development in the regions.

Opposition partys have yet to put forward credable development policies with regards this country. They are like a bunch of moaning minnies.

Spacial Strategy, Decentralisation etc. They even fought elections on the idea of building an airport in Knock.

Yet this lack of vision has not stopped them ignoring the fact that many areas of this counry need an injection of economic activity.

therecklessone

Cork wrote:

Decentralisation is very popular outside Dublin. It is about time that the regions got their fair share of government jobs.

And thats what it all boils down to Cork, isn't it? "Dem langers in Dublin can't be having all the jobs, can they?"

uncivilservant

Cork wrote:

The Collector Generals office transferred very successfully to Limerick.

And your point would be what, specifically?

The fact that there have been many offices successfuly decentralised is completely irrelevant to the current fiasco, unless of course they are being held up as examples of how it should be done.

I think public sector unions will probably be looking for incentives to move.

Specifically? Based on what evidence, exactly? So far, the only person involed to mention 'inducements' of any kind has been Tom Parlon (http://www.uncivilservant.com/article.php?id=152)

Decentralisation is very popular outside Dublin.

And nobody is preventing anyone outside dublin decentralising. What's your point?

It is about time that the regions got their fair share of government jobs.

And how are they currently apportioned? How does it break down on a per capita basis? How do you think it should be broken down?

And where, specifically, are "the regions"?

Just as Charlie McCreevy over hauled our tax system. Our cuvil service too could do with an over haul.

Really? In which areas, specifically?

It has been based in Dublin since the days of British rule. Today we have a flexable workforce together with modern communications & we also need more development in the regions.

And? I don't see that the four points you raise are in any way dependent on each other.

Opposition partys have yet to put forward credable development policies with regards this country. They are like a bunch of moaning minnies.

"Credible"? Like this wonderfully well thought out relocation programme policy, where all planning and feasibility studying has taken place after the decision has been made, eh? Great.

Spacial Strategy, Decentralisation etc. They even fought elections on the idea of building an airport in Knock.

Yet this lack of vision has not stopped them ignoring the fact that many areas of this counry need an injection of economic activity.

If you were making a point here it's completely lost on me. Please elaborate.

cdebru

Cork wrote:

The Collector Generals office transferred very successfully to Limerick.

i think you have missed the point this is moving complete government departments away from where your seat of government is based
yes you can easily move an office or a part of an office and it may work without too many problems

but moving a complete government department is ridiculous unless you were moving them all to one new location that may make some sense and moving the seat of government there as well

but under this proposal for example the ministry of agriculture is being moved to laois so the minister will be in port laois except of course he will have to be in dublin where the Dail is as well thats when he is not at home in his constituency so now we will no doubt have to support perhaps another house for the minister one in dublin one where his department is and of course his main residence or maybe we will just have to foot the hefty hotel bills when he is in dublin or vice versa not to mention the increased travel expenses

video conferencing will not work because anybody who has used it will tell you that yes you can see the person you are talking to but you cant not see who else is in the room so discussing sensitive information over this medium will not be a runner

if the government really wants to do something like this they should designate a new administrative capital and move everything there the dail the president everything maybe somewhere near knock airport might not be a bad idea at least it might get some use

Cork

cdebru wrote:

but moving a complete government department is ridiculous unless you were moving them all to one new location that may make some sense and moving the seat of government there as well

So, is it not stange - how Dell don't centralise all their activity in the US?

The same would go for the Intel in Kildare.

Maybe, the minister would not have to be on site 24/7.

Maybe,Michael Dell saw the benefits of locating outside their own region.

But, maybe our civil & public services have yet to adapt to modern business practices despite the genoursity of benchmarking.

uncivilservant

But, maybe our civil & public services have yet to adapt to modern business practices despite the genoursity of benchmarking.

Maybe you don't have a clue what you're talking about?

Sand

Maybe,Michael Dell saw the benefits of locating outside their own region.

Yeah, he saw cost and tax benefits as well as getting inside the EU free trade zone. I.e real gains and reasons for going to the expense and hassle of setting up in Ireland.

There are *NO* such benefits for this half assed decentralisation scheme. It isnt even decentralisation - the whole decision making procedure remains completely centralised (or firmly locked in the Dublin mindset if you will ) , its just going to great expense and inconvenience to move departments around the country as part of some pathetic ploy to get FF votes in the next general election.

But, maybe our civil & public services have yet to adapt to modern business practices despite the genoursity of benchmarking.

Well its very very clear that FF havent adapted to modern business practices - this isnt even corrupt, its completely stupid. Theres not a good businessman in the world whod waste his money like this. However, its not FFs money theyre wasting on this, its the taxpayers.

Cork

Sand wrote:

There are *NO* such benefits for this half assed decentralisation scheme.


QUOTE]

When you ignore the benefits to those communitys in the regions and those civil servants who want to get far away from Dublin

Sand wrote:

Well its very very clear that FF havent adapted to modern business practices - this isnt even corrupt, its completely stupid. Theres not a good businessman in the world whod waste his money like this. However, its not FFs money theyre wasting on this, its the taxpayers.
QUOTE]

But Tesco, AIB and BOI can send managers anywhere. But why do civial and public sevants expect to be in the same location for good and glory?

When the take the job they should expect to move where ever they are sent.

I know one company that told a guy his job was been tranferred to Dublin.

Either go or leave.

But with job security - do public servants think they are above this?

Public Servants are there to serve the public of this country. They are paid by us thru our taxes. I think that their location will benefit many rural towns to a great extent.

Many towns have not seen sight nor sound of the Celtic Tiger. They government should start moving people into the regions as soon as possible.

therecklessone

Sand wrote:

There are *NO* such benefits for this half assed decentralisation scheme. It isnt even decentralisation - the whole decision making procedure remains completely centralised (or firmly locked in the Dublin mindset if you will ) , its just going to great expense and inconvenience to move departments around the country as part of some pathetic ploy to get FF votes in the next general election.

Couldn't have out that better myself.

therecklessone

Originally posted by Cork

When you ignore the benefits to those communitys in the regions and those civil servants who want to get far away from Dublin

And jaysus if they're not careful they'll be killed in the stampede...

Am I the only one who finds it ironic that such an enthusiastic free-marketeer as Cork is demanding that the government provides jobs for the regions. Shouldn't the market be able to provide the employment you seek Cork?

I take it you'll support Aer Lingus staff in Shannon when they are laid off under Willie Walsh's latest cost-cutting plan? Aftre all, there are benefits to the communities from those jobs staying in the region.

Originally posted by Cork

But Tesco, AIB and BOI can send managers anywhere. But why do civial and public sevants expect to be in the same location for good and glory?

When the take the job they should expect to move where ever they are sent.

I have yet to hear anyone say that the conditions of employment of a civil servant include the possibility of relocation. It their contracts say they are to be stationed in a particular place, then they have a legitimate grievance. Can anyone clarify whether this is the case or not?

My contract of employment states specifically that I may be stationed in one of three places in Ireland, or in any place abroad that my employers see fit.

Quite apart from that aspect, the plan as put forward by McCreevy was deeply flawed. It is no wonder civil servants are opposed.

Sand

When you ignore the benefits to those communitys in the regions and those civil servants who want to get far away from Dublin

But Tesco, AIB and BOI can send managers anywhere. But why do civial and public sevants expect to be in the same location for good and glory?

Youre criticising your own point there Cork. You argue that we should be moving departments around for the benefit of the 4 or 5 Civil Servants who want to move down the country, and then argue that where civil servants want to live or work shouldnt be a consideration!

I dont even have to add anything to that. Youve done it all for me.

Public Servants are there to serve the public of this country. They are paid by us thru our taxes. I think that their location will benefit many rural towns to a great extent.

Exactly!!!! They are there to serve the public of this country. They are paid for by the public tax money. The public, not FF.

They are NOT there to make a doomed attempt to benefit a few rural towns. Every single expert report has argued that a policy to create an alternative to dublin for investment requires consolidation of one or two towns to achieve economies of scale. This scheme flies in the face of that expert advice, scattering them across the country. Its not even close to an attempt to rejuventate regional economies.

Its purely and simply a FF vote buying exercise.

Cork

Sand wrote:

Its purely and simply a FF vote buying exercise.

Bringing the CSO to Cork brought many benefits to Cork. Safe Food is also in Cork.

These are 2 successes.

Cork has benefitted from both the CSO and Safefood.

But, other regions deserve to benefit as well. For far too long there has been an exodus to Dublin for jobs.

Opposition partys did precious little to buck this trend.

The spacial stratergy together with government decentralisation is long over due. I am sure public servants will probably receive incentives to move - they will bring up the numbers.

uncivilservant

therecklessone wrote:

I have yet to hear anyone say that the conditions of employment of a civil servant include the possibility of relocation. It their contracts say they are to be stationed in a particular place, then they have a legitimate grievance. Can anyone clarify whether this is the case or not?

It is.

Why else do you think the programme is 'voluntary'?

therecklessone

uncivilservant wrote:

It is.

Why else do you think the programme is 'voluntary'?

So a civil servants contract does not allow for relocation, other than with the individuals consent? Grand so, that'll do me.

Cork wrote:

But why do civial and public sevants expect to be in the same location for good and glory?

When the take the job they should expect to move where ever they are sent

There's your answer Cork.

Cork

Point of information:

But I think contracts for both civil and public sector workers are being revised.

Are new entrants into these jobs getting contracts without:

a Job security
b no gaurentee that work will be at a given location.

I am not sure on this, Would anybody know the current situation?

therecklessone

Cork wrote:

Are new entrants into these jobs getting contracts without:

a Job security
b no gaurentee that work will be at a given location.

I am not sure on this, Would anybody know the current situation?

A welcome admission. Until you have that clarified, can you resist the temptation to say things like this:

Cork wrote:

But why do civial and public sevants expect to be in the same location for good and glory?

When the take the job they should expect to move where ever they are sent

Cork

therecklessone wrote:

A welcome admission. Until you have that clarified, can you resist the temptation to say things like this:

I can actually resist every thing but temptation.

But seriously, I don't really know the current situation with regards contracts with regards public/civil servants. But, therecklessone, I will do my level best to comment on contracts.

cdebru

Cork wrote:

So, is it not stange - how Dell don't centralise all their activity in the US?

The same would go for the Intel in Kildare.

Maybe, the minister would not have to be on site 24/7.

Maybe,Michael Dell saw the benefits of locating outside their own region.

But, maybe our civil & public services have yet to adapt to modern business practices despite the genoursity of benchmarking.

i think you are confusing a multinational business which is obviuosly trying to expand into new markets and lower production costs such a s labour
with a government there is no comparison the two things are completely different
i never said that the minister would have to be on site 24/7 but he can not be in two places at the same time

what dell saw was the chance to open up new markets for his products and to benefit from the lower labour costs in other countries
i dont see the comparison you are trying to make the civil service is not looking for new markets for it service nor is there any suggestion that labour costs in the decentralised civil service will be any lower
(unless we really decentralise and move our civil service to asia where wage costs are much lower makes about as much sense as the current proposal)

i see your back on your hobby horse about benchmarking again did you actually find out anything about bench marking yet last time you tought that
employees in hte semi state sector had recieved benchmarking do you now realise this was wrong
other than that what are the specific modern business practises you want them to adopt or is this just another cliche

cdebru

Cork wrote:

I am sure public servants will probably receive incentives to move - they will bring up the numbers.

so its definite then since you are sure they will probably

Flukey

I am a bit late getting in on this topic and I haven't read the thread, but suffice to say that the decentralisation as planned is crazy. Move a few of the independent offices out of Dublin, by all means, but not whole departments. The very idea is ridiculous! What'll happen after the cabinet re-shuffle? Will all the departments be moved around again? They should be looking at decentralising industry and jobs and encouraging people to move by putting in the proper infrastructure in the rest of the country to encourage business and people to move there. The government should stay where it is.