Decentralisation

Victor · 31-03-2005 07:55PM

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

Efficency, just compare Blackrock hospital with the Mater. :mad:

But look at how much you have to pay to use Blackrock. :rolleyes:

Victor · 31-03-2005 08:49PM

uncivilservant wrote:

There is massive suspicion within the Civil Service that Decentralisation will be used as a way to 'dispose' of in house IT - outsourcing is seen as something of a holy grail by senior management, and the floating of the job in question (and it's rather onerous application form) is perceived by some as an opportunity to gather information on a huge number of the IT staff and the jobs they do who wish to remain in Dublin in one fell swoop (the post in question will not be Decentralising).

You mean "write your job specification"? Maybe someone should do a Lester Burnham

I have a feeling your 10m2 guide figure is a little lower than the norms adopted for Civil Service accommodation, but regardless of that you're only considering the actual build costs and not the knock on effects.

10m2 is the norm for shared office space, it doesn't include special uses like server rooms, large meeting rooms, public offices, etc.

Furthermore there is no "IT budget". Unless you're considering each relocating department's existing IT budget

This is what I meant.

Victor · 31-03-2005 09:21PM

MorningStar wrote:

THe governemnet seem to think keeping prisoners central to family is more important than keeping loyal employees close to their family.

Actually quite a few prisoners have been / will be decentralised. Castlerea, Midlands, Killsallaghan ....

MorningStar · 31-03-2005 09:56PM

Victor wrote:

Actually quite a few prisoners have been / will be decentralised. Castlerea, Midlands, Killsallaghan ....

That's just simply lack of space. The goal is to keep them close to their families. There are a millions valid reasons for this in terms of re-offending. The short answer is the government do see it more important to keep the prisoners closer to their families than a civil servant to theirs.

NewDubliner · 31-03-2005 10:23PM

MorningStar wrote:

The short answer is the government do see it more important to keep the prisoners closer to their families than a civil servant to theirs.

It's a test of loyalty. In future, only staff who put the interests of FF/PD ahead of their families can have careers.

gerrydublin · 01-04-2005 01:18PM

pete wrote:

Ah yes. The Department of Communications, Marine & Natural Resources. Sent to Cavan.

Marine. In a landlocked county.

http://www.politics.ie/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2506

Excellent point, you have just given a perfect reason for the Government to move the Dept of Agriculture from Kildare Street Dublin 2,
Also Adelaide road in Dublin 2 has no forest around it, so lets moved Dept of Natural resources from there.

Since when do civil servants working in the administration area have to working in an office surrrounded by cows or a forest or water for them to be able to work efficently.

gerrydublin · 01-04-2005 01:29PM

RicardoSmith wrote:

Thats true. But in the current scenerio, you'll lose all the business knowledge and skills that were in place, replace them with contractors at 3 times the cost, which we'll all foot the bill for in our taxes. Outsourcing rarey means better services. So ultimately you'll be getting less services and paying more for them.

I agree, we should have just outsourced a lot of the IT "development" work to India like Bank of Ireland. Accenture cost too much! As for IT "support", I've no problems with Accenture doing that, as long as they tendered for and won the tender according to the EU guidelines on competition.

If you feel sorry for the civil servants, think of the Fruit of the Loom workers in Donegal who were told the Company was up and leaving for low cost countries, now that's constructive dismissal!
Here civil servants are only being asked to move cross country.

pete · 01-04-2005 01:30PM

Well there's a blast from the past.

gerrydublin wrote:

Excellent point, you have just given a perfect reason for the Government to move the Dept of Agriculture from Kildare Street Dublin 2,

Don't most Department of Agriculture staff already work outside Dublin?

Also Adelaide road in Dublin 2 has no forest around it, so lets moved Dept of Natural resources from there.

Did you actually read the linked article?

"In the case of the Department of Communications, Marine & Natural Resources, while I would like to see new jobs locating in Cavan, it is surely inappropriate to locate the headquarters for the Department of the Marine in a landlocked county, particularly at a time when other clear destinations may be suitable.

"There are two obvious examples of more suitable destinations: in Galway, next to the new Marine Institute headquarters; or in Cork, next to the new National Maritime College. The college is under construction alongside the Naval Headquarters at Haulbowline where there is a site owned by the Government at the former Irish ISPAT plant. Either of these two destinations would surely have made sense to ensure that efficiency and technical knowledge is pooled in existing hubs of maritime activity.

"Instead, in the Government's wisdom it has chosen Cavan. While Cavan would be suitable for most departments, as a landlocked county in the middle of Ireland it's not the best choice for the Department of the Marine."

That was the point (i.e. the apparent lack of consideration for other, more suitable locations - it would appear that making sure there was something for everyone in the audience outweighed these facts), and not the simple irony of having the Department dealing with marine affairs in a landlocked county.

ps there is no "Department of Natural Resources".

Since when do civil servants working in the administration area have to working in an office surrrounded by cows or a forest or water for them to be able to work efficently.

They don't. So why move them?

pete · 01-04-2005 01:39PM

gerrydublin wrote:

I agree, we should have just outsourced a lot of the IT "development" work to India like Bank of Ireland. Accenture cost too much! As for IT "support", I've no problems with Accenture doing that, as long as they tendered for and won the tender according to the EU guidelines on competition.

If you feel sorry for the civil servants, think of the Fruit of the Loom workers in Donegal who were told the Company was up and leaving for low cost countries, now that's constructive dismissal!
Here civil servants are only being asked to move cross country.

... and if you feel sorry for the fruit of the loom workers in Donegal, think of the poor sweatshop workers in <insert third world country of choice>.

It's a bit more complicated than simplistic "put up or shut up" whataboutery - there's always someone else worse off.

uncivilservant · 01-04-2005 01:51PM

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=39&si=1369312&issue_id=12286

THE Minister for State at the Office of Public Works, Tom Parlon, has rejected claims that the decentralisation process would cost the taxpayer almost €260,000 for every civil servant who moves out of Dublin.

In a statement, the minister criticised the opposition and members of the media for failing to "stick to the facts" surrounding decentralisation, saying that the Government's decision would be implemented in full. "It was reported that a capital envelope of €900m was earmarked to pay for some 3,492 civil servants to move resulting in a cost to the taxpayer of some €257,731 per person," the statement read.

"This is incorrect. This figure of €900m is earmarked for the whole of the decentralisation programme and relates to the movement of over 10,000 civil and public servants."

In his presentation to the Dail Select Committee on Finance on Wednesday, Mr Parlon said 3,492 civil service posts would be decentralised, and that €900m had been earmarked for completion of the programme. The programme will cost the taxpayer €90,000 per public servant.

Facts? How about differentiating between "movement" and "decentralisation"?

Facts? Of the10,500 posts involved, only 3,500 are actually 'decentralising' from Dublin - the rest are just playing musical chairs, staff already located outside Dublin taking advantage of the opportunity to move from town A to town B.

Facts? The €900 million is being spent to facilitate the relocation of these 3,500 from Dublin - the other moves are incidental.

Facts? Where are the costings for maintaining thousands of duplicated jobs in Dublin?

The_Conductor · 01-04-2005 03:16PM

pete wrote:

Don't most Department of Agriculture staff already work outside Dublin?

Yup- there are less than 10% of the staff in this Department currently in Dublin, we are the most decentralised of all the government departments to the best of my knowledge. That is about 400 staff of a total staff of about 4,300 based in Dublin.

gazzer · 01-04-2005 03:22PM

I used to work in the Dept of Agriculture and dealt with all the local offices... there is one in almost every county... i think the office for Sligo/Leitrim is the same one...

NewDubliner · 01-04-2005 07:23PM

gerrydublin wrote:

Here civil servants are only being asked to move cross country.

But, why? What's the advantage?

NewDubliner · 03-04-2005 04:08PM

From the 'Sunday Independent', some acknowledgement that the given cost is not the the full cost, but the author still has not realised that the cost of re-training most staff is being concealed by the government:

Eating the elephant, one bite at a time
THERE is a history in this country of single, disastrous decisions which crippled the economy for years to come. There was the decision to keep sterling as the national currency after 1922; the failure to embrace freer trade and capital flows after 1945; and the use of large-scale borrowing as a way to fund current government spending in the Seventies.

Could this history be about to repeat itself with the decision to de-centralise large chunks of the civil service? A lot of serious people, inside and outside politics, think so. But hardly anyone is saying so.

The opposition parties are terrified at the reaction in towns looking forward to the extra jobs and spending money if they suggest that de-centralisation should be abandoned. They confine themselves to complaints about government inefficiency in organising this great diaspora - as if that made any difference.

It is more difficult to explain the silence of economists and political scientists who, in private, are scathing about the likely costs and loss of productivity in a public service which already rates too high on the former and too low on the latter.

Perhaps they are not sure where to start on something so huge and so potentially dangerous. There is the old advice about how to eat an elephant - one bite at a time. Now we have somewhere to get our teeth into this elephant, with the publication of estimates for the capital cost of the project.

A cool €900m, according to junior minister Tom Parlon. That's enough for 150km of motorway, the re-furbishment of every school in the country, or (if you're mad enough) a Luas line to the airport. Even that may not be as mad as what is being planned.

The IDA is restricted to around €10,000 in taxpayers' money for each job it creates. This figure is almost €90,000 per job, and it is not the full cost.

Apart from the fact that these numbers nearly always turn out to be too low, there is no provision as yet for paying civil servants who decline to go to the country, or for the extra pay or expenses which will undoubtedly be claimed by the unions and, almost as undoubtedly, conceded.

Mr Parlon points out that there will be savings, as Dublin offices are sold or come off the rent-roll. It is not unreasonable that the savings might equal the inevitable extra costs, and the final figure will be around €1bn.

The Exchequer can find €1bn easily enough and, as a once-off cost, it will soon vanish in the huge government accounts. It is impossible to know what will be the continuing costs from higher pay, extra staff and travel expenses. But the real fear for many is the damage that de-centralisation may do to the operations of the public service itself.

It is of course possible to de-centralise parts of government, and it is probably a good idea. But it has to be done carefully. The operations must be ones which can be carried out just as successfully outside Dublin. It may be that some locations are more suitable than others, and the right functions must be devolved, especially if some of the staff insist on staying in the capital. And so on.

None of this is possible with the present de-centralisation plan. The actual departments to be moved, and where they were going, were announced in Budget 2000 - and apparently slightly in advance of Budget 2000 by Mr Parlon. Neither he nor Mr McCreevy could have had any idea whether the above conditions would be met, because no such studies had been done.

All this might not be so worrying if the public service were noted for the quality of its internal communications. Alas, it is not.

Government departments across the board often lack essential information about their remits, and nearly always lack the expertise to make proper use of the information they do have. Reform has been promised for many years, but the periodic reports on it show only slow and patchy improvement.

One cannot entirely blame the public service for being unable to keep up with the complexity of modern Ireland. These leviathans are slow to shift in every country, and few countries have developed at the speed of Ireland in the last 12 years.

But it is a pressing national challenge to bring the public sector up to the task. Our future prosperity depends on the kind of activities which require first-class public services. Low taxes will not compensate for third-rate health, education, transport and social facilities.

The last thing we need is for this task to be long-fingered while the nightmare logistics of de-centralisation are sorted out. The fear is that it could do permanent damage to the performance of government, just when it urgently needs to get better. And unlike previous mistakes, it is hard to see how it could ever be reversed.

Brendan Keenan

uncivilservant · 03-04-2005 04:37PM

Sindo wrote:

...the extra pay or expenses which will undoubtedly be claimed by the unions and, almost as undoubtedly, conceded.

Is there any evidence of such a claim happening?

NewDubliner · 04-04-2005 08:45AM

From the Irish Independent:

The pretence of an 'independent chairman' is being dropped, I think. Mr Quigley is very much an establishment man.

Note the reference to 'sweeteners', this is a plant by the spin doctors to get people thinking that what's holding the scheme up is a demand for compensation/incentives. Note also the suggestion that the massive Dublin staff surplus that will be caused by the scheme will be absorbed by 'churn'. No mention of how much all this churning will cost.

Former tax boss tipped for Flynn job

DERMOT Quigley, the man who produced the report into the Martin Cullen-Monica Leech controversy, heads the queue to take over from Phil Flynn in overseeing the Government's ambitious decentralisation programme.

The former head of the Revenue Commissioners is front-runner for the vacant post of chairman of the National Implementation Body (NIB) following Mr Flynn's departure in clouded circumstances in February.

The Government would, however, have to confront a likely public perception that Mr Quigley was being rewarded for exonerating Mr Cullen of the charge of improperly awarding a lucrative public relations contract to a political crony.

The name of the former head of Forfas, John Travers, who recently reported on the public nursing home charging of medical card holders, has also entered the frame.

The Government is expected to decide on the new decentralisation chief within the next month.

Meanwhile, the Government again insisted yesterday that a €900m provision for the programme over the next seven years did not include any contingency to pay civil servants "sweeteners" for relocation.

Junior Minister Tom Parlon said there were "substantial numbers" who wanted to relocate in every department.

Those who wanted to remain in Dublin would "churn" into different areas of the civil service remaining in the capital, he said.

A total of 3,492 of the 10,600 due to be moved have already signed up and are on their way.

Senan Molony
Political Correspondent

ishmael whale · 06-04-2005 02:33PM

I found this article raised a few questions in my mind.

How does the decentralisation programme contribute to balanced regional development? Is it not true that the national spatial strategy would suggest this approach is already doomed to fail? Why are we spending money so lightly on a failed policy?

How much is the Prison’s service move costing? Why are we doing this? What makes it sensible to move the headquarters of the Prisons service to Longford, where it will be more distant from all but one prison? Why is it suddenly a good idea to provide staff with a crèche?

Why move the headquarters of the Garda to Templemore? In what way is their present location inhibiting their ability to perform their functions? How does moving to Templemore enhance their ability to perform their functions? Would the difficulties experienced in getting suitably qualified staff for the training college in Templemore not suggest that it is likely that locating Garda headquarters there will actually limit its ability to perform?

Does our present experience suggest that, in the years ahead, Garda management will have greater or lesser demands placed on it? What is it that makes those demands less important than showing commitment to the decentralisation programme? Do similar considerations not apply to the Prison’s service.

http://www.examiner.ie/pport/web/ireland/Full_Story/did-sg--xxg9sFr9Isg0aewFBADppk.asp

06/04/05
McDowell hopes to lure staff to Longford with crèche
By John Breslin

A CRÈCHE is to be built on the site of the prison service’s new headquarters in an attempt to entice staff to move out of Dublin under the decentralisation programme.
Justice Minister Michael McDowell has pledged prison service staff will move out of Dublin to the new Irish Prison Service headquarters in Longford by the start of 2007.
Only a handful of the approximately 150 staff have expressed a preference to move from the current headquarters in west Dublin, which only opened four years ago.
…… The minister said the continued progress towards decentralisation of the prison service is “tangible evidence of this government’s commitment to the decentralisation programme and to balanced regional development”.

Approximately 100 staff across the Department of Justice have expressed a preference to move out of Dublin. In addition, it is planned to move 200 gardaí and civilian staff from the Phoenix Park headquarters to Templemore. Only eight people, including two gardaí, indicated they were willing to transfer.

Victor · 06-04-2005 10:58PM

ishmael whale wrote:

Why are we spending money so lightly on a failed policy?

To support the impoverished property speculators in the west of course.

Why is it suddenly a good idea to provide staff with a crèche?

It has always been a good idea, selling it as an advantage is about as genuine as "toilets and staff canteen included".

Why move the headquarters of the Garda to Templemore? .... Would the difficulties experienced in getting suitably qualified staff for the training college in Templemore not suggest that it is likely that locating Garda headquarters there will actually limit its ability to perform?

Actually having headquarters in Tipperary might actually make some intermeidate Garda management more willing to work in either location. Templemore would avoid the risk of being an Dilbertesque gulag, where awkward people would be sent.

http://www.examiner.ie/pport/web/ireland/Full_Story/did-sg--xxg9sFr9Isg0aewFBADppk.asp

Approximately 100 staff across the Department of Justice have expressed a preference to move out of Dublin. In addition, it is planned to move 200 gardaí and civilian staff from the Phoenix Park headquarters to Templemore. Only eight people, including two gardaí, indicated they were willing to transfer.

Can't gardaí be ordered to specific locations (seeing as they are paid a permanent rent allowance).

ishmael whale · 07-04-2005 11:47AM

Victor wrote:

Actually having headquarters in Tipperary might actually make some intermeidate Garda management more willing to work in either location. Templemore would avoid the risk of being an Dilbertesque gulag, where awkward people would be sent.

I don’t follow the point you’re making here.

Victor wrote:

Can't gardaí be ordered to specific locations (seeing as they are paid a permanent rent allowance).

I think your are right. Presumably in the absence of volunteers they can simply instruct Gardai to go.

Why the Government would choose to show that kind of determination in this situation rather than, for the sake of argument, in progressing its agenda in the aviation sector is not clear.

NewDubliner · 08-04-2005 07:37PM

Victor wrote:

Actually having headquarters in Tipperary might actually make some intermeidate Garda management more willing to work in either location. Templemore would avoid the risk of being an Dilbertesque gulag, where awkward people would be sent.

Hmm, the plan seems to have a lot of 'mights', 'maybes' & 'coulds' in the list of reasons for spending some €2bn+ euro.

The 'awkward people' will probably be assigned to the 'Department of Administrative Affairs' in Dublin & ordered to lick the gum on FF TDs envelopes.....

Victor · 09-04-2005 07:08AM

ishmael whale wrote:

I don’t follow the point you’re making here.

If Templemore is currently viewed as somewhere that Gardaí don't want to work because once you are sent there, you are stuck there and that further promotion is only possible in HQ, then having the HQ next to the college would be useful.

NewDubliner · 09-04-2005 08:42AM

Victor wrote:

If Templemore is currently viewed as somewhere that Gardaí don't want to work because once you are sent there, you are stuck there and that further promotion is only possible in HQ, then having the HQ next to the college would be useful.

Or maybe move the college next to the HQ?

But, is the problem of being 'stuck' a geographical one or one caused by specialisation?

NewDubliner · 09-04-2005 09:41PM

Some extracts from Tom Parlon's address to the PD conference in Cork, note he's still dodging any detailed value for money justification, not very transparent at all.

Value for Money

Real results are achieved by common sense economic policies, commitment and hard work. The public rightly demand value for money - after all its their money.......

Transparency in Government

Honest politics means open and transparent government. Since our foundation we have been to the forefront of fighting corruption in Irish public life. Honest politics also means facing up to problems, not sweeping them under the carpet, telling the people the truth, not attempting to sell them spin and most of all taking tough decisions in the nations interest not the parties......

Decentralisation and Balanced Regional Development – I can assure you ladies and gentlemen that Decentralisation is well under way and our party in Government is fully committed to balanced regional development.

Last week I was in Sligo at the signing of the building contract for the first of these decentralised offices. This week Michael McDowell was in Longford completing another contract signing for the Prison Service HQ.

I can now announce to you that sites for the construction of buildings under this programme have been secured in the following 12 locations.

Clonakilty, Portarlington, Birr, Killarney, Newcastle West, Athlone, Carlow, Knock, Dundalk, The Curragh, Thurles, Furbo.

We have also agreed deals in principle on sites in the following 4 locations:

Drogheda, Newbridge, Trim, Wexford

Active negotiations are also taking place and I expect that we will have sites secured in 5 more locations in the very near future. These are:

Portlaoise, Mullingar, Thomastown, Drogheda, and Loughrea

In addition to these deals, we propose to rent offices from 'Property owners' at the following 5 locations, which may allow for earlier staff movements. These are:

Tullamore, Kilrush, Limerick, Listowel, Carrick-on-Shannon,

Deals have been secured for Buncrana, Donegal Town, and we are at final stages in negotiations for both Cavan and Dungarvan.

Decentralisation is happening!

Some comments have been made in relation to 'costs' but it is interesting to note and compare rents in Dublin to those in other areas of the country.

Current rental figures show that Dublin prices can be in the region of €35/45 per sq.ft. as against €12/18 sq.ft. in Munster and Connacht.

I have already outlined that we have sold €100m of surplus property last year and I expect a similar figure this year. Next week, I will be in a position to dispose of a significant property in Dublin of over 8 acres, which should bring us significantly nearer to meeting our targets.

Decentralisation of civil servants from Dublin to 53 locations around the country will be a huge boost to local economies and improve the quality of lives of many of our civil servants. It is my view that decentralisation has the potential to reinvigorate the Civil Service and act as a catalyst for change within the system. I also believe that the Governments positive example will attract the private sector to these locations.

joolsveer · 12-04-2005 12:09PM

I came across this document on the AHCPS website. (I have converted to rft for ease of access by non MS Word users.)
for some reason I couldn't upload an rft file so I have converted to txt.

I am not sure what happens to staff members who wish to stay in Dublin but are not on any of the panels which will be set up. There is not a definition of Dublin in the document either. Could someone be obliged to travel from the north of Fingal to the south west of South County Dublin?

The_Conductor · 12-04-2005 12:32PM

joolsveer wrote:

I am not sure what happens to staff members who wish to stay in Dublin but are not on any of the panels which will be set up. There is not a definition of Dublin in the document either. Could someone be obliged to travel from the north of Fingal to the south west of South County Dublin?

Yes, is the answer to that.
Dublin is inclusive of Dublin city and county......
I.e. there are a couple of hundred vacancies in Swords in the CSO for the census next year........
Hmmmmm

gerrydublin · 12-04-2005 01:23PM

NewDubliner wrote:

Some extracts from Tom Parlon's address to the PD conference in Cork, note he's still dodging any detailed value for money justification, not very transparent at all.

Current rental figures show that Dublin prices can be in the region of €35/45 per sq.ft. as against €12/18 sq.ft. in Munster and Connacht.

I have already outlined that we have sold €100m of surplus property last year and I expect a similar figure this year. Next week, I will be in a position to dispose of a significant property in Dublin of over 8 acres, which should bring us significantly nearer to meeting our targets.

If I was never for Decentralisation, I am now!

That's a saving of €23/27 per sq ft, and think of how much room we are talking about. That's a massive saving.
I like it, thinking of the future, the country needs to be competitve, it needs to keep it's administration costs down!

Then as regards pulling in €100m last year, and expect the same this year, that will go a long way to paying for any properties needed down the country, properties which are more modern and not some mid-twientieth century kip like those of the Department of Health( who strangely are moving out of Poolbeg street to another more modern building in Dublin :mad: )

NewDubliner · 12-04-2005 09:00PM

gerrydublin wrote:

If I was never for Decentralisation, I am now!
That's a saving of €23/27 per sq ft, and think of how much room we are talking about. That's a massive saving.wn!

Then as regards pulling in €100m last year, and expect the same this year,

His speech is deceptive, important details are being omitted.

Buildings are the least significant cost in any organisation.

The 'saving' will only be realised if & when the Dublin buildings are sold/vacated.

The rural rent figures quoted by Parlon are just guesses and will rise before any contracts are signed.

Parlon is only speaking of buildings and furniture. He is deliberately omitting the costs of IT infrastructure, organisational disruption & replacing valuable skills. Most of the IT cadre will have to be replaced & the new staff or contractors will be much more expensive.

The €100m does not come from the decentralisation scheme, it's from other properties that would have been sold anyway, except, now instead of repairing schools or hospitals, it will be wasted on a 'vanity project'.

uncivilservant · 12-04-2005 09:05PM

From the Sligo Weekender:

SLIGO/LEITRIM Deputy John Perry has called on the Government to apply some logic when it comes to decentralisation and the Department of Agriculture.

...

"For example, in Donegal at least ten jobs will be gone from Raphoe that won’t be replaced. Castlebar stands to lose a huge number of jobs – a town that was once classed as a regional headquarters for Agriculture! Surely it stands to reason that Castlebar would get a large portion of the jobs that are being currently outlined for Portlaoise?

This makes very little sense. The Government is making decisions regarding people’s livelihoods, people’s futures. Such decisions cannot be made without appropriate consideration of the facts."

One can only assume the irony of his statement is completely lost on Deputy Perry.

uncivilservant · 12-04-2005 09:09PM

gerrydublin wrote:

If I was never for Decentralisation, I am now!
That's a saving of €23/27 per sq ft, and think of how much room we are talking about. That's a massive saving.
I like it, thinking of the future, the country needs to be competitve, it needs to keep it's administration costs down!

And obviously the cost per square foot is the single most important issue in deciding where to locate one's offices - don't you think it rather odd that the private sector don't share this view?

NewDubliner wrote:

The €100m does not come from the decentralisation scheme, it's from other properties that would have been sold anyway, except, now instead of repairing schools or hospitals, it will wasted on an a 'vanity project'.

Exactly. The rationalisation / disposal of the State's "property portfolio" predates the McCreevy announcement on Decentralisation by a number of years.

NewDubliner · 12-04-2005 09:25PM

uncivilservant wrote:

From the Sligo Weekender:

Is Portlaoise in Tom Parlon's constituency?

Decentralisation

Comments