Public Consultation on the "Comprehensive Review of Expenditure"

Scofflaw

From the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform:

Comprehensive Review of Expenditure

As part of the budgetary correction process over the coming years, the Government will have to bring forward major savings across the full range of public expenditure, and to prioritise resources very carefully. The Government is also committed to far-reaching reforms to ensure the delivery of quality public services that meet the needs of citizens.

To achieve this, the Government is transforming the approach to budgets and providing services and has embarked on a detailed Comprehensive Review of Expenditure (CRE). This approach is a departure from previous reviews which focused narrowly on figures; under the new approach, the Government will look at reforming how services are delivered, making major efficiency gains while protecting essential services as far as possible.

Each Department will prepare a Comprehensive Expenditure Report in respect of the Department and its associated agencies, to identify expenditure programme savings, scope for savings arising from efficiency and other reforms, proposals for reducing and/or merging of agencies and associated reductions in staff numbers.

The objectives of the expenditure Review process will be to provide the Government with a comprehensive set of decision options:-

to meet the overall fiscal consolidation objectives, both as regards spending and numbers reduction targets
to re-align spending with the Programme for Government priorities
in this context, to consider new ways of achieving Government objectives in the context of public sector reform.

Under the CRE, Ministers and Departments have the responsibility to evaluate every budgetary programme for which they are responsible, within both Departments and Agencies.

The Review has been initiated and will be completed by end-September. The results of this process will then be brought before Government for consideration and decision in the annual Budget and Estimates process.

Public Consultation

As part of this process, the Government would invite the public to put forward suggestions and proposals for making further savings, and for introducing reforms and efficiencies in spending programmes and in the design of delivery of public services. To submit your proposals, click on the link contained in the table below which best describes the public service area in question. When sending your email, please also include your name and County of residence.

Privacy Notice: Please note that submissions received, including your name and region, may be published as part of the Review process in the interests of transparency and openness. However, your e-mail address will be kept private and will not be made publicly available.

Link: http://per.gov.ie/comprehensive-review-of-expenditure/

So, now's your chance to get those many excellent money-saving ideas out of the cupboard.

cordially,
Scofflaw

the groutch

will this be like the "Your Country, Your Call" thing, where they told the winner(s) to F-Off?

Dannyboy83

Scofflaw wrote: »

From the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform:

Link: http://per.gov.ie/comprehensive-review-of-expenditure/

As part of this process, the Government would invite the public to put forward suggestions and proposals for making further savings, and for introducing reforms and efficiencies in spending programmes and in the design of delivery of public services. To submit your proposals, click on the link contained in the table below which best describes the public service area in question. When sending your email, please also include your name and County of residence.

Is this only within the terms of the Croke Park Agreement?

I have plenty of suggestions, but many of them are made redundant by the CPA.

In fact, it's fairly difficult to suggest anything productive which isn't eliminated by the CPA.

Edit: I've written to them, asking them to clarify.

Sleepy

Do they have to be legal? I can think of a few places to put bullets that would save us millions in undeserved state pensions

later12

I think it is welcome to have a public consultation process generally, but I am a little sceptical about this one.

There is, firstly, the question of to what extent are the public are empowered with all of the information they need to make such recommendations - cut all salaries in the public service by half, tax the wealthiest twice as much as what they pay and abolish VAT all sound attractive to some people, but they probably haven't accounted for the consequences of these (admittedly extreme) actions. Therefore the decision will eventually boil down to the public service, therefore rendering this little more than an exercise in team spirit.

Also, I do have to wonder whether such a public consultation will not run counter to the interests of public sector/ civil service bureaucracy, again rendering this a little meaningless. It would perhaps be more credible if the submissions were being made to an independent body specifically established to push for targeted cutbacks in public expenditure.

Head The Wall

Get rid of increments and retract any issued since 2007

Delancey

An important consideration for anyone using ' inside ' information in their submissions to this review - Freedom of Information Act means that submissions cannot be considered private and your name and county of residence can be disclosed.

Be afraid , be very afraid......

byhookorbycrook

pr excercise.

thebman

Delancey wrote: »

An important consideration for anyone using ' inside ' information in their submissions to this review - Freedom of Information Act means that submissions cannot be considered private and your name and county of residence can be disclosed.

Be afraid , be very afraid......

You don't have to warn them, it does right at the bottom:

Privacy Notice: Please note that submissions received, including your name and region, may be published as part of the Review process in the interests of transparency and openness. However, your e-mail address will be kept private and will not be made publicly available.

In the interests of transparency and openness. :rolleyes:

In the interests of its all Tim's fault. Poor Tim

Nijmegen

How can we make serious cuts when such a large amount of government spending is untouchable public sector wages or social welfare provision?

You can go to school, but there'll be no chalk, no blackboard, and you'll have to share the use of chairs.

You can go to hospital, but all our staff can offer is sympathy.

You can go to hell, in other words, if you want anything from the state. Plenty of staff, though.

matthew8

Might suggest people should only get job-seekers allowance for 6 months at which point they should have to start working for it, preferably something money-producing like farming. At least get them to clear roads when it snows rather than lie around.

Nijmegen

matthew8 wrote: »

Might suggest people should only get job-seekers allowance for 6 months at which point they should have to start working for it, preferably something money-producing like farming. At least get them to clear roads when it snows rather than lie around.

What if I've paid several times annual JSA each and every year for ten, fifteen, twenty years now in tax? All that buys me is 6 months?

While we can argue around the headline rate, this is not a tenable idea.

thebman

Nijmegen wrote: »

What if I've paid several times annual JSA each and every year for ten, fifteen, twenty years now in tax? All that buys me is 6 months?

While we can argue around the headline rate, this is not a tenable idea.

Yes the reality is the fairest way to do would be the people that pay in, get paid out when they need to and everyone else is screwed.

Most people would agree that we should provide something for those that have just exited college etc... but are not in favor of plunging billions into paying for people to sit on their chairs watching soaps for their lives.

I think there is also an element of, if we pay for scum to live on the dole, they won't go robbing houses. Something the police can't/don't do anything about as there is rarely enough evidence or police time to catch such people.

Although one could wonder what would happen if we put the money we give to people to not work for live to the police to catch criminals, what the effect might be.

matthew8

The whole notion of free money really annoys me. Must reform the lot. Apart from child benefit, because without that I suspect population would decline.

Godge

Nijmegen wrote: »

What if I've paid several times annual JSA each and every year for ten, fifteen, twenty years now in tax? All that buys me is 6 months?

While we can argue around the headline rate, this is not a tenable idea.

thebman wrote: »

Yes the reality is the fairest way to do would be the people that pay in, get paid out when they need to and everyone else is screwed.

Most people would agree that we should provide something for those that have just exited college etc... but are not in favor of plunging billions into paying for people to sit on their chairs watching soaps for their lives.

I think there is also an element of, if we pay for scum to live on the dole, they won't go robbing houses. Something the police can't/don't do anything about as there is rarely enough evidence or police time to catch such people.

Although one could wonder what would happen if we put the money we give to people to not work for live to the police to catch criminals, what the effect might be.

It isn't about getting back what you paid in. Why do so many here think their taxes have to go on services for themselves?

Taxation is about the state raising money to look after those in need (social welfare) and to provide universal services (health, education) to all which would not be provided by the private sector. It is for the collective good and not for the individual's benefit.

Cookie_Monster

To achieve this, the Government is transforming the approach to budgets and providing services and has embarked on a detailed Comprehensive Review of Expenditure (CRE).

My simple idea:

Ensure every budget has 0 or a positive number at the end of it.

Nijmegen

Godge wrote: »

It isn't about getting back what you paid in. Why do so many here think their taxes have to go on services for themselves?

Taxation is about the state raising money to look after those in need (social welfare) and to provide universal services (health, education) to all which would not be provided by the private sector. It is for the collective good and not for the individual's benefit.

I do agree that social protection net and wealth transfer is right.

However, I don't believe it's fair to remove JSA from people who have paid tax for years and years after six months.

In Germany, a model welfare state, when you lose your job your dole is based on what you've been earning and - thus - contributing in tax. It then comes down over time.

pajunior

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

My simple idea:

Ensure every budget has 0 or a positive number at the end of it.

That is the idea, now we need to get to that point which is what this thread is bout.

matthew8

Nijmegen wrote: »

I do agree that social protection net and wealth transfer is right.

However, I don't believe it's fair to remove JSA from people who have paid tax for years and years after six months.

In Germany, a model welfare state, when you lose your job your dole is based on what you've been earning and - thus - contributing in tax. It then comes down over time.

My idea is that there has to be some natural resources-fields, mines, trees (of course constant replanting required)- that we can make a profit off of exploiting aand that we can make this a good deal for the workers - if we pay them 11 euro an hour and get 40 weekly hours out of them they can get 20k a year with 7 weeks (7 weeks!) of holidays for them - and for the government - the natural resources extracted could be sold which would result in us making far less of a loss, or even a profit, off of job-seekers allowance. Of course 400k people earning 10k more a year would also inject 4 billion euro into the economy.

Nijmegen

matthew8 wrote: »

My idea is that there has to be some natural resources-fields, mines, trees (of course constant replanting required)- that we can make a profit off of exploiting aand that we can make this a good deal for the workers - if we pay them 11 euro an hour and get 40 weekly hours out of them they can get 20k a year with 7 weeks (7 weeks!) of holidays for them - and for the government - the natural resources extracted could be sold which would result in us making far less of a loss, or even a profit, off of job-seekers allowance. Of course 400k people earning 10k more a year would also inject 4 billion euro into the economy.

When you discover your money tree, or invent a perpetual motion device, do remember us little people on your way up...

rumour

Scofflaw wrote: »

So, now's your chance to get those many excellent money-saving ideas out of the cupboard.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Round and round the garden.......do we not have the MC Carthy Report and numerous others. This is another political stalling tactic to buy time and avoid blame.

We know since 2008 we are borrowing €20bn (approx) a year more than we earn(€30bn) with a contracting economy. For three years we've racked up €60bn in debt that we haven't even thought about how to pay back never mind cut.
Look at the wage figures in the DoF statements....despite continual supposed austerity such as pay freezes, recruitment freezes they continue to rise.

Why does this Minister need to get involved in public consultation. If cut backs are not actioned soon the banking crisis will look paltry. At least from that there is residual value in the banking assets. Our current account spending is still out of control.

Frankly I think this is a political topic rather than economic.

matthew8

Nijmegen wrote: »

When you discover your money tree, or invent a perpetual motion device, do remember us little people on your way up...

What are you trying to say?

Scofflaw

rumour wrote: »

Round and round the garden.......do we not have the MC Carthy Report and numerous others. This is another political stalling tactic to buy time and avoid blame.

I'd agree, except that it can't actually do either. Nobody would regard it as credible to let action wait on a consultation of this kind, and nobody would consider it credible to blame the general public for a lack of ideas. So it's probably genuine enough, at least as window-dressing.

rumour wrote: »

We know since 2008 we are borrowing €20bn (approx) a year more than we earn(€30bn) with a contracting economy. For three years we've racked up €60bn in debt that we haven't even thought about how to pay back never mind cut.
Look at the wage figures in the DoF statements....despite continual supposed austerity such as pay freezes, recruitment freezes they continue to rise.

Why does this Minister need to get involved in public consultation. If cut backs are not actioned soon the banking crisis will look paltry. At least from that there is residual value in the banking assets. Our current account spending is still out of control.

I seem to recall saying that about a year ago now, when it was still all shock and awe about the banks - the deficit will be much larger, and, as you say, there's no residual value. On the other hand, you could take some comfort in the view that at least the spending is going into the economy.

rumour wrote: »

Frankly I think this is a political topic rather than economic.

Is there a difference these days?

cordially,
Scofflaw

gonedrinking

My ideas, not necessarily relevant to the review of expenditure, but for what its worth the government should:

Reduce PS pay by 10%, there I just saved 1.6 billion a year plus 5.8% interest on top of that.

About 80% of the people in Ireland haven't been affected by the recession and have built up high levels of savings, look at ways to tap into that. Should there be a big reduction on tax on high valued items, ie where someone is buying something valued at 2k or more?

Encourage more people to have children in order to get them spending again. E.g. reduce tax rates for people who have children. Do not raise the child allowance as that would only encourage doley skangers to spawn.

Start renting the ghost estates and introduce a rent to buy scheme where the value of the rent paid can be taken off the value of the house should the renter decide to buy it at some stage in the future. If they do want to buy it but can't get a mortgage for the amount remaining on the house then allow them to continue renting as before until the full value of the house is paid off in rent, then ownership of the house changes to the renter. Set up a private sector company to manage this process. This scheme will only generate about 10 million per year once expenses/costs are accounted for, but better than doing nothing I think.

The bike to work scheme is a good idea because it fools people into thinking they're getting a really good deal, whereas in fact all they are doing is buying a bike which they will use about twice at most. So think of other scams like that which we can introduce which on the face of it looks like a great deal but in actual fact is just getting people to buy things they don't really want or need.

Give every foreign citizen who visits Ireland for 2 weeks or more vouchers worth 100 for spending during their stay. The vouchers can be used in any shop/restaurant/attraction in Ireland.

Roll out fibre optic cable broadband in Ireland forcing everyone to pay to upgrade.

The Irish government to set up construction companies in Australia and China and offer jobs to construction workers on the dole, also pay for their flights and 1st months accommodation in these countries.

On a more general basis, give incentives for people currently on the dole to seek work in other countries, eg refund the cost of that persons airfare to the foreign country once they have been in that country for over 1 year.

We should set up a ski resort on one of Irelands mountains during the winter, with fake snow obviously. Also have an indoor facility for practice in Dublin and one in Cork too perhaps.

And another thing, we should be told now exactly how much income tax will rise during the next 3 years, and exactly what new taxes will be brought in. This uncertainty is the main thing stopping people from spending. Kenny thinks we are all a load of thick paddies and that by telling us there is not going to be any income tax rises we will all be rushing out spending again. But we all know, since there is not going to be any significant public sector savings in the next few years that income tax will have to rise, that's a given. So just be honest with us and let us know what the damage will be, then we can make decisions as to what we are able to spend.

matthew8

gonedrinking wrote: »

The Irish government to set up construction companies in Australia and China and offer jobs to construction workers on the dole, also pay for their flights and 1st months accommodation in these countries.

China needs no construction workers, they are set up for a massive house price collapse (they inflated 800%). We have ghost estates, they have ghost cities meant to house millions.

gonedrinking

matthew8 wrote: »

China needs no construction workers, they are set up for a massive house price collapse (they inflated 800%). We have ghost estates, they have ghost cities meant to house millions.

Doesn't matter if they have a house price collapse, their upgrading of infrastructure will continue regardless.

Nijmegen

matthew8 wrote: »

What are you trying to say?

The idea that we put people on the dole to work and it creates wealth in the country... Sure, if it worked like that every state would be 100% of GDP, that would grow by 200% each year.

rumour

Scofflaw wrote: »

Is there a difference these days?

cordially,
Scofflaw

With some resignation I agree and we must live with the profound obsurdities it delivers.

Dannyboy83

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Is this only within the terms of the Croke Park Agreement?

I have plenty of suggestions, but many of them are made redundant by the CPA.

In fact, it's fairly difficult to suggest anything productive which isn't eliminated by the CPA.

Edit: I've written to them, asking them to clarify.

I got a reply back anyway

From: webmaster PER
Sent: 05 July 2011 10:24
To: 'Dan'
Subject: RE: Comprehensive Review of Expenditure


Dan

Any suggestions can be submitted. They are not limited to croke park.

---

Press office
Departments of Finance / Public Expenditure and Reform
Ph: --- Mob: ---
email ---

________________________________________
From: Dan
Sent: 23 June 2011 15:00
To: webmaster PER,
Subject: Comprehensive Review of Expenditure

Dear Sir/Madam,

Regarding this link:
http://per.gov.ie/comprehensive-review-of-expenditure/

Please advise as to wheter proposals submitted must be within the terms of the Croke Park Agreement.

I have numerous proposals I would like to submit.
Obviously that is pointless if they must be within the terms of the CPA

Please also clarify your departments stance on this, in the specified link..

Regards
Dan

Liam Byrne

Godge wrote: »

Taxation is about the state raising money to look after those in need (social welfare) and to provide universal services (health, education) to all which would not be provided by the private sector. It is for the collective good and not for the individual's benefit.

That's what it should be about, but given the way that a massive amount of the taxes go to stuff that is of absolutely no benefit to ordinary decent people it is understandable that people start asking "hang on - what do I get from this ?"

kippy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

That's what it should be about, but given the way that a massive amount of the taxes go to stuff that is of absolutely no benefit to ordinary decent people it is understandable that people start asking "hang on - what do I get from this ?"

Totally agree with Liam here.
Not totally agreeing with the people who wonder what is in if for them when he pay tax but I can see why they think like that.

When you see the Healy Raes, John O Donohoes, Ivor Callelys, and any politician who claims excessive expenses as well as see the amount of public money that politicians use to pay off their supporters and mates, one really does have to ask "Whats in it for me?" All the wasted taxpayers money, with no accountability or transparency is a disgrace.
We all have to sit up and look at every sector. I've been asked to cut back where I can in my area (and I have) however I see far more money get blown on useless ideas all the time.

I've already sent my list of opinions to the department on where the money could be saved, some options are outside of the CPA and others have absolutely nothing to do with it.

thebman

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I got a reply back anyway

If it takes that long to get that sort of reply, I'd suggest they get a new email system :P

Dannyboy83

thebman wrote: »

If it takes that long to get that sort of reply, I'd suggest they get a new email system :P

LOL, I was waiting for somebody to notice.

Email to "Department of Public Expenditure and Reform".

2 week delay
2 sentence answer; A week per sentence.


Suggestion #1: Log off Warcraft and check your fcuking email occasionally.

Dannyboy83

Meanwhile.....

Two State organisations have been reported to the Houses of the Oireachtas for their failure to implement Irish language plans.

An Coimisinéir Teanga, Seán O'Cuirreáin today revealed that both the HSE West and the National Museum of Ireland have been found in breach of statutory language provisions.

Reports have now been sent to the Houses of Oireachtas, where they will take additional measures to correct the breaches.

Read more: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/two-state-bodies-reported-over-irish-language-breaches-511599.html#ixzz1REk9kGJo

...........we are still being governed by d1psh1ts.

Scofflaw

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

LOL, I was waiting for somebody to notice.

Email to "Department of Public Expenditure and Reform".

2 week delay
2 sentence answer; A week per sentence.


Suggestion #1: Log off Warcraft and check your fcuking email occasionally.

To be fair, what actually happens is more like this - someone looks at the email. If the question asked isn't on their list of approved answers, they have to find someone who'll give them an official answer to your question - they can't simply decide on an answer themselves, because by answering in their official capacity their answer can be claimed as policy. The internal question and answer involves them asking their line manager, maybe not that day but the next depending on what else they're doing. The line manager, in turn, may not get around to doing something right that instant, and may then have to ask around to find the person with the appropriate knowledge and authority to give an answer, which then wends its way back down the chain until it's passed to you.

Seven working days is about what that would take, without anyone being particularly slow. That's bureaucracies for you, whether they're large companies or civil services - it's what they mean when they describe small companies as 'nimble'.

cordially,
Scofflaw

thebman

Scofflaw wrote: »

To be fair, what actually happens is more like this - someone looks at the email. If the question asked isn't on their list of approved answers, they have to find someone who'll give them an official answer to your question - they can't simply decide on an answer themselves, because by answering in their official capacity their answer can be claimed as policy. The internal question and answer involves them asking their line manager, maybe not that day but the next depending on what else they're doing. The line manager, in turn, may not get around to doing something right that instant, and may then have to ask around to find the person with the appropriate knowledge and authority to give an answer, which then wends its way back down the chain until it's passed to you.

Seven working days is about what that would take, without anyone being particularly slow. That's bureaucracies for you, whether they're large companies or civil services - it's what they mean when they describe small companies as 'nimble'.

cordially,
Scofflaw

It sounds like they don't know the structure of their own organisation and lack the internal systems to communicate efficiently with each other.

Scofflaw

thebman wrote: »

It sounds like they don't know the structure of their own organisation and lack the internal systems to communicate efficiently with each other.

That's the thing, though. Companies do one thing - sell their products/services. Channels of communication for anything within that should be, and generally are, efficient (I exempt all tradesmen). On the other hand, if you ask a company something outside the ordinary, you'll find that communication slows down to civil service standards. Where there is multiple and overlapping responsibility - as, for example, with construction projects - you'll also find the same kind of slow response.

A good example would be getting an answer in respect of, say terms and conditions of entry to a competition. If your question isn't covered in the FAQs, you'll find that response times will be pretty similar to that experienced here, because, just as here, the competition is something outside the ordinary scope of business, is temporary, and is not something with a permanent line of communications or rote answers.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Dannyboy83

Scofflaw wrote: »

To be fair, what actually happens is more like this - someone looks at the email. If the question asked isn't on their list of approved answers, they have to find someone who'll give them an official answer to your question - they can't simply decide on an answer themselves, because by answering in their official capacity their answer can be claimed as policy. The internal question and answer involves them asking their line manager, maybe not that day but the next depending on what else they're doing. The line manager, in turn, may not get around to doing something right that instant, and may then have to ask around to find the person with the appropriate knowledge and authority to give an answer, which then wends its way back down the chain until it's passed to you.

Seven working days is about what that would take, without anyone being particularly slow. That's bureaucracies for you, whether they're large companies or civil services - it's what they mean when they describe small companies as 'nimble'.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I understand and agree with all you've said above and my experience has been the same, but I do generally expect and receive some level of detail back.
Maybe I'm just too cynical, but it looks to me like it was answered between bites of a slice of morning toast, lol

Scofflaw

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I understand and agree with all you've said above and my experience has been the same, but I do generally expect and receive some level of detail back.
Maybe I'm just too cynical, but it looks to me like it was answered between bites of a slice of morning toast, lol

Actually, it looks to me as if the webmaster answered you, having tried and failed to get more than a verbal response from anyone else. The person in charge of a website is often left to answer questions which are none of their business, because nobody else has been given the job of answering them officially - and that's something that happens in the private and public sector in my experience as that person.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Dannyboy83

Scofflaw wrote: »

Actually, it looks to me as if the webmaster answered you, having tried and failed to get more than a verbal response from anyone else. The person in charge of a website is often left to answer questions which are none of their business, because nobody else has been given the job of answering them officially - and that's something that happens in the private and public sector in my experience as that person.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Agreed.

Not the greatest start for the department of Public Expenditure and Reform in my book anyway.

Atilathehun

Nationalise and sell off the Insomnia Coffee shop chain.
Cheeky bastrads have announced they are not passing on the VAT decrease.
Dragons den mentality. Grabbing cnuts. Seize them and sell them, and make a high profile example of some fat cat somehere.:)

Dannyboy83

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Email to "Department of Public Expenditure and Reform".
2 week delay
2 sentence answer; A week per sentence

I emailed two long messages, which weren't thrown together, but were well thought out, regarding two different departments to this initiative on day ONE of it's being announced by Minister Howlin. It's been several weeks since then, and i haven't had a reply, not even an automatic one, nor any kind of a recognition of any communication received in EITHER case, and i would have expected my ideas to be at least worthy of consideration, in contrast to a lot of the timewasters they would have heard from on an open public email address.

I appreciate that they probably have quite a few messages to get through, but even the most basic enterprise level email application can be set up to auto reply to incoming mail with a customized message, by anyone with half an ounce of IT cop on.

I had hoped this wasn't just for the sake of optics and paying lip service to public sector reform by Howlin. I'm admittedly cynical in my dealings with Irish government departments through years of disappointment and frustration, but I haven't seen or heard anything to suggest that it was anything more than that so far.

I really hope my gut feeling is wrong.

sollar

Head The Wall wrote: »

Get rid of increments and retract any issued since 2007

Crazy suggestion... inspired by raw hatred.

later12

On the issue of another public consultation, that pertaining to improving access to credit for SMEs, the Department of Finance has produced the following press release on its website

http://www.finance.gov.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=6924

Nothing earth shattering in there, though, apart from the fact that "A total of well over 100 suggestions" were received. What's that, less than 150 probably? Seems like a lot of people have ideas but not a lot of people are communicating them to the public consultation process.

Hopefully this public expenditure consultation will have a better engagement.

Scofflaw

later10 wrote: »

On the issue of another public consultation, that pertaining to improving access to credit for SMEs, the Department of Finance has produced the following press release on its website

http://www.finance.gov.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=6924

Nothing earth shattering in there, though, apart from the fact that "A total of well over 100 suggestions" were received. What's that, less than 150 probably? Seems like a lot of people have ideas but not a lot of people are communicating them to the public consultation process.

Hopefully this public expenditure consultation will have a better engagement.

Unfortunately, that's pretty much par for the course for public consultations. Everyone complains they weren't consulted, but very few people ever say anything in consultations. As far as I recall, the CFP consultation produced about 3 citizen responses from Ireland, although one might have got the impression that it was a subject of deep interest.

cordially,
Scofflaw

thebman

Most companies manage to get people to answer questions they don't even want to answer yet our government can't get suggestions out of people.

My guess is the forms are confusing and not enough people know the address or if their suggestion should be submitted through this process or if another one exists.

Head The Wall

sollar wrote: »

Crazy suggestion... inspired by raw hatred.

What's crazy is a so called pay freeze when pay rises are being awarded annually to the tune of 250 million.

My idea is inspired by the fact that the country is broke.

Godge

later10 wrote: »

On the issue of another public consultation, that pertaining to improving access to credit for SMEs, the Department of Finance has produced the following press release on its website

http://www.finance.gov.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=6924

Nothing earth shattering in there, though, apart from the fact that "A total of well over 100 suggestions" were received. What's that, less than 150 probably? Seems like a lot of people have ideas but not a lot of people are communicating them to the public consultation process.

Hopefully this public expenditure consultation will have a better engagement.

Yes, you would hope that more of those with ideas would contribute to the consultation process.

Head The Wall wrote: »

Get rid of increments and retract any issued since 2007

matthew8 wrote: »

Might suggest people should only get job-seekers allowance for 6 months at which point they should have to start working for it, preferably something money-producing like farming. At least get them to clear roads when it snows rather than lie around.

Then again, look at some of the ideas that might go in.

Scofflaw

thebman wrote: »

Most companies manage to get people to answer questions they don't even want to answer yet our government can't get suggestions out of people.

My guess is the forms are confusing and not enough people know the address or if their suggestion should be submitted through this process or if another one exists.

The forms are usually simple enough - often just basically a big box for you to type your suggestion into! So it's probably not that.

Knowing about the consultation in the first place would strike me as more of a likely issue, although even where people have viewed the form, I'd still expect a response rate of maybe 2-3% at most.

cordially,
Scofflaw

thebman

A big box to type your suggestion into could exactly be the problem though. Users need to be guided through the process.

Scofflaw

Scofflaw wrote: »

The forms are usually simple enough - often just basically a big box for you to type your suggestion into!

thebman wrote: »

Most companies manage to get people to answer questions they don't even want to answer yet our government can't get suggestions out of people

This is one of the issues i had with the current public consultation process in the first place. Perhaps it's just reflective of the outmoded thinking and lack of agility in the public service, but the mere idea of opening up a set of public email addresses taking suggestions from a nation of 4.5 million+ disgruntled people is ludicous. Howlin's department is less than six months old and has only just got it's feet under the table, and on top of getting up to speed, as well as their normal workload, they are expected to sift through hundreds of thousands of email responses, 80 or 90% of which are likely to be of no use, ill conceived, from somebody who has an axe to grind, or just plain spammers and time wasters? It would take an age for a government department to extract the useful, workable ideas based on that model, never mind the length of time it would take to enact any new legislation arising from them.

There are cutting edge, and very affordable cloud computing systems on the IT market at the moment that are designed to allow ordinary people to submit useful ideas on a very easy to navigate form. They have a powerful but unseen analytics engine in the background to figure out which the best and most useful or applicable ideas are, based on context, language, other users voting them up, a pre-defined set of input criteria, and a whole lot of other clever stuff that the punter submitting the idea is never even aware exists. They are designed to let the best ideas "bubble up" to the surface quickly, with a minimum of administration hassle or manual input, and are in use in many private sector companies worldwide, where innovation and new ideas are hugely important, but have to be gotten cheaply, and quickly enough to be useful.

The upshot of all of this is, with a system like that, instead of the outdated and admin-heavy email consultation process Howlin and co. are currently using, a single IT boffin or public service official in that department could log in every few days over his morning coffee, and get a quick dashboard or report of the eight or ten most popular, well thought out, articulate and relevant money saving ideas, and send them straight to the minister for review. He could also get a list of a handful of "key thinkers" out in the public who seem to be coming up with the most popular or well thought out suggestions, so he can drop them a mail and say "thanks, got any more good ideas?", or "would you be interested in a job as a cop-on consultant?" for example, thus engaging his best thinkers, and giving his ideas project the best chance of having some useful outcomes.

No army of public servants sifting through emails, no months and months before anything can be done or any intelligence gleaned, just quick access to the right relevant info, without any of the crap, so something can be done with it in a reasonable timeframe.

Instead of thinking things through though, we just go "ah sure we'll throw up a few email addresses on the website, that'll do grand" with no thought for the next few steps in the process, and by the time anybody hears anything out of it, months later if ever, it's too late to care and it's just another government initiative that's come to nothing. :mad: