Decentralisation

NewDubliner

smccarrick wrote:

Ok, so absolutely nothing new- in fact there is more information in the public domain than is listed here. Nice to see no mention of the 2027 break-even date..... Curious to see whether the "facts" are in actual fact correct- e.g.

There's a combination of 'spin' and 'putting out the trash', here, and where did this come from?

The rule-of-thumb estimated cost of relocating 100 civil servants is put at €10m, once the cost of the site, building the offices and fitting it out are included.

This puts the total cost of the scheme at 1bn. After the buildings, that leaves 100m for other costs. Suggesting that the IT, productivity loss and retraining costs will be just €9,800 per staff. That's very low.

It's nice to see that the Indo has such respect for the government that it was not so rude as to ask awkward questions.

Victor

NewDubliner wrote:

It wouldn't be the first time, but there's also the possibility that this is a good way for the government to get a large section of IT staff to voluntarily submit their CVs for scrutiny. Just think how useful this information would be for other purposes.....

Please do explain.

The rule-of-thumb estimated cost of relocating 100 civil servants is put at €10m, once the cost of the site, building the offices and fitting it out are included.

Thats really expensive.

Rule of thumb is 10m2 per person at even €3,000/m2 to build leaves a huge gap. OK, you have to add IT, but I suspect IT is coming out of the IT budget not the Decentralisation budget.

uncivilservant

Victor wrote:

Please do explain.

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).

Thats really expensive.

Rule of thumb is 10m2 per person at even €3,000/m2 to build leaves a huge gap. OK, you have to add IT, but I suspect IT is coming out of the IT budget not the Decentralisation budget.

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.

Furthermore there is no "IT budget". Unless you're considering each relocating department's existing IT budget, in which case you might as well say the money is coming from thin air, as to the best of my knowledge no IT budgets have been increased in any meaningful way to deal with the implications of the decentralisation program.

RicardoSmith

Personally while I can see short term financial gains and cost cutting, to be made by outsourcing IT. I don't see that it works. The systems generally take longer to develop, have less features and cost a lot more. Support is a constant headache as you don't have a bank of experience of custom applications or the business knowledge. Because loose the experience from the internal staff, contractors change too often, and its too expensive to employ the same number of support people. Ulitmate these contracts go to the lowest bidder which will mean that eventually the agency or main contractor will outsource from outside of Ireland for staff. Which means theres less work for Irish IT people, and you'll run the risk of situations like you had on Irish Ferries.

uncivilservant

smccarrick wrote:

Also- are the 100 DSFA staff actually DSFA staff moving from Dublin, as stated, and not DSFA staff from elsewhere- or staff from other Departments?

From the RTE News website:

Mr Brennan was speaking in Sligo where contracts were signed for a building which is to be part of the first phase of the Government's current decentralisation programme.

It is an extension to the offices of the Department of Social and Family Affairs in Sligo.

Speaking at the ceremony, the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Tom Parlon, said the project would take 18 months to complete.

The extension will house 83 staff decentralising from Dublin and will also facilitate another 68 staff currently based in the Waterfront building in Sligo. When complete it will accommodate a total of 605.

So is it 100 from Dublin & 70 from "other offices", or is it 83 from Dublin & 68 from other offices?

Of course, we're still none the wiser if those are 83 staff or 83 posts that are moving....

NewDubliner

More government propaganda, courtesy of the 'Irish Independent':

THE Government's programme for decentralisation is very much on track with an announcement on a number of new locations expected shortly, the Minister of State in charge of public works, Tom Parlon has revealed.

From then on, announcements will be made on an almost weekly basis, as new property solutions and arrangements for advancing the development and design of the buildings emerge and the programme is rolled out, the minister said.

"We are just about ready to move off. It is just a matter of putting up the signs on land announcing what department is going there and we are on the way," he said. Minister Parlon was in Sligo town with Social Affairs Minister, Seamus Brennan yesterday to turn the first sod for a €14m extension to the existing Department of Social Affair's north west headquarters.

The five-storey building, which is scheduled for completion in October 2006, will house 605 staff working in the pension services section of the Department of Social Affairs.

Speaking at the event, Mr Brennan said: "I believe that those who do make the move see the very real advantages in terms of property prices and general quality of life very quickly."

My favourite quote is: "It is just a matter of putting up the signs on land announcing what department is going there and we are on the way."

On the way indeed, but where.............?

D'Peoples Voice

thegills wrote:

Decentralisation is dead and buried along with Mary Harney and the rest of the PD party.

If Mary Harney and every other right minded person had their way, the public sector would be reduced greatly not just moved.
For how many years have we heard the public sector and their unions plead for more money for staff working in Dublin as opposed to those outside, why, because the cost of living is higher here we are told.
Now when the government are going to help them move and guarantee their job in the process, they're still not happy.
Remember we are only moving 10,000 from a number of circa 309,000. No wonder it was oversubscribed!

IMHO the public sector is a parasite, eating off the wealth created by the private sector. you only have to look at what happens when public sector companies are privatised, the first thing they do is reduce staff, why because they are overstaffed. Look at Irish Life, B+I ferries & Grreencore to see why the PD's were spot on to privatise them. They lost staff and are all now very much going concerns, contributing to the country, not taking from it.
Think what could happen if we could privatise the running of our hospitals and schools. Efficency, just compare Blackrock hospital with the Mater. :mad:

ishmael whale

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

....Remember we are only moving 10,000 from a number of circa 309,000. No wonder it was oversubscribed!....

I take it this is a troll. Everyone knows that the scheme is undersubscribed, apart from the locations closest to Dublin.

uncivilservant

The five-storey building, which is scheduled for completion in October 2006, will house 605 staff working in the pension services section of the Department of Social Affairs.

What this rehashed press release - sorry, I mean "article" - on the (ahem) runaway success of the Decentralisation programme fails to mention is that of those 605 staff, only 83 are classified as being "decentralising" staff (as per RTE News report yesterday.)

Over 500 of them already work in Sligo.

The latest available figures from the Department of Finance lists 84 posts for decentralisation to Sligo from Dept. Social & Family Affairs. As of November 2004, there was a shortfall of 37 people / "expressions of interest" to fill these posts, with the 16 available CO posts being oversubscribed by 13. (Ref: Appendix 1 of this document - http://www.pseu.ie/docs/Decent24.doc). Not to worry.... I'm sure Seamus will find some way of getting the other 37 bums on seats.

Which reminds me... As with the rest of the programme, no indication has been given of where the 47 "expressions of interest" are coming from. Existing Dublin based DSFA staff? Existing non-Dublin based DSFA staff? Non-DSFA Dublin staff? Non-DSFA, non-Dublin staff? Who knows!

NewDubliner

uncivilservant wrote:

What this rehashed press release - sorry, I mean "article" - on the (ahem) runaway success of the Decentralisation programme fails to mention

I think the Indo was on auto-pilot when this came out, it was the Easter hols after all.

So far, the Irish Times & The Examiner (I think) have completely ignored Mr Parlon's latest revelations. Their BS filters must come from a different manufacturer.

DublinWriter

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

Think what could happen if we could privatise the running of our hospitals and schools. Efficency, just compare Blackrock hospital with the Mater. :mad:

Careful now. Down with that sort of thing.

True enough, and just like what happened in the states they've got Pepsi-Cola Corp. and Coca-Cola Corp. banging on the doors of schools to offer-them shed-loads of money in return for the school exclusively selling their products. Ironically, many high-schools in the mid-west have had either company build them new gyms on such agreements.

I've been to Blackrock a few years ago for a few routine oral X-Rays. The X-Ray department was chaotic, queues of people lining the walls waiting their turn. It was my first time in there and I was quite shocked as I expected at least a complimentary glass of Champagne and a sit-down in a leather recliner as I waited the 2 hours or so for my turn for a quick X-Ray.

For heathcare, I'd look at the French/Belgium/German model rather than the US one. Same with education.

Everything else? Sell it off, and I'd include RTE in that (only 20% of their revenue comes from the licence fee after all!).

cdebru

DublinWriter wrote:

Careful now. Down with that sort of thing.

True enough, and just like what happened in the states they've got Pepsi-Cola Corp. and Coca-Cola Corp. banging on the doors of schools to offer-them shed-loads of money in return for the school exclusively selling their products. Ironically, many high-schools in the mid-west have had either company build them new gyms on such agreements.

I've been to Blackrock a few years ago for a few routine oral X-Rays. The X-Ray department was chaotic, queues of people lining the walls waiting their turn. It was my first time in there and I was quite shocked as I expected at least a complimentary glass of Champagne and a sit-down in a leather recliner as I waited the 2 hours or so for my turn for a quick X-Ray.

For heathcare, I'd look at the French/Belgium/German model rather than the US one. Same with education.

Everything else? Sell it off, and I'd include RTE in that (only 20% of their revenue comes from the licence fee after all!).

yes selling off our telecommunications infrastructre has been such a rip roaring success no reason to believe the electricity wont be as oustanding a success story

we need too hand over to foreign multinational companies what little control we have in our economy over our infrastructure

NewDubliner

From today's Indo

THE decentralisation programme will cost the taxpayer almost €260,000 for every civil servant who relocates out of Dublin.

Junior minister Tom Parlon revealed yesterday that €900m had been earmarked for decentralisation to pay for 3,492 jobs being moved from Dublin at a cost of €257,731 each.

And some government departments are insisting that mid-ranking civil servants be given their own private offices when they move, he told a Dail Select Committee on Finance and the Public Service.

Despite the Office of Public Works, and most private companies, believing open-plan offices are conducive to a "more productive work environment" some departments were insisting officials at assistant principal level or above be allocated individual offices.

Mr Parlon, Minister for State at the Office of Public Works, told the committee the OPW would spend €70m on the decentralisation programme this year.

A total of €30m had been ringfenced for the purchase of sites, with the balance to be spent on fitting out offices, he said.

Fifteen government departments and agencies are due to move in the first phase of decentralisation, which involves 21 projects in 20 locations and the transfer of eight headquarters outside of Dublin.

Eight buildings should be fully fitted out and ready for occupation in 2006, nine more in 2007 and the remaining four in 2008. The cost of procuring the office space was €900m, and 3,492 jobs would be moved.

Mr Parlon also said properties had been secured in Carlow, Longford, Newcastle West, Athlone, the Curragh, Sligo, Dundalk, Donegal and at Furbo in Co Galway. Although more expensive, the OPW believed design and build contracts would be secured from developers to allow projects to be advanced at a faster pace.

Up to 40pc of the required office space would be leased, he said.

The OPW will also spend €19.5m upgrading and enhancing office accommodation for government departments this year.

The OPW's budget for 2005 is €469.3m - an 8pc increase on last year. Some €18m will be spent on providing additional accommodation for Garda trainees at Templemore Garda College.

Looks like Mr Parlon is preparing to shift the blame for the massive cost of the scheme onto the staff.

That figure of €257,731 is only for bricks & mortar. It is not the full cost as it does not include IT or telecomms, the huge costs of retraining, the cost of hiring outside contractors to cover for lost experts, nor general productivity losses as a result of the moves.

The Indo's editorial finally stirs to ask some questions, but is hardly bothering to look deeply at the plans. Note too, that Parlon appears to be 'hung out to dry' as the only Government proponent of the scheme:

THE increase in Government spending over last year, forecast at 8pc, is in fact running at 11pc. Not yet a storm signal, but certainly a warning signal, worth noting along with Brian Cowen's cautious words to the Oireachtas Committee on Finance and the Public Service yesterday.
....

Sound stuff. A pity it squares so poorly with information supplied to the same committee by a junior minister in the same Government - Tom Parlon, Minister of State at the Office of Public Works.

Mr Parlon told the members that €900m had been earmarked for the decentralisation programme, under which 3,492 jobs would be moved from Dublin to other locations at a cost of €257,731 each.

A quarter of a million per transferred official: is this good value? More expensive contracts to enable offices to be built faster: where's the hurry? There seems to be a bit of a disjuncture between the Department of Finance and the people who sign cheques on behalf of the taxpayers. Maybe Mr Cowen can mend it.

gerrydublin

ishmael whale wrote:

I take it this is a troll. Everyone knows that the scheme is undersubscribed, apart from the locations closest to Dublin.

"apart from the locations closest to Dublin" which don't count, is that what you are saying?

The_Conductor

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

Remember we are only moving 10,000 from a number of circa 309,000. No wonder it was oversubscribed!

Really?
Last time I checked there was a total of about 37,400 civil servants in the country- of whom in excess of 21,000 are already decentralised. In addition, of the ultimate proposed figure of 11,500 (of the 16,000 positions) in the Dublin region- for further decentralisation, only shy of 3,500 of the positions have been applied for- and of those we still don't know how many are people who have not yet been decentralised (aka a relocation as opposed to a decentralisation). The only locations oversubscribed to the best of my knowledge are: Drogheda, Naas and Newbridge and even then only at entry level clerical grades........

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

IMHO the public sector is a parasite, eating off the wealth created by the private sector. you only have to look at what happens when public sector companies are privatised, the first thing they do is reduce staff, why because they are overstaffed. Look at Irish Life, B+I ferries & Grreencore to see why the PD's were spot on to privatise them. They lost staff and are all now very much going concerns, contributing to the country, not taking from it.

A discipline of Adam Smith I see......

Essentially you are suggesting that unless someone produces a tangible good, they are parasites feeding off the toil of those who work in manufacturing industries?
Amazing how the service industry is growing, isn't it?
Governing the country- is, whether you like it or not, one of the "services" necessary in this country. Politicians may decide policy- civil servants implement it.

Your suggestions that a mad rush to privatise is "spot on" as you put it- is an extremely blinkered view at best. I note how you have mysteriously forgotten to mention some of the less successful privatisations- one which immediately comes to mind being Eircom...... Only quoting examples which suit your argument does not provide an impartial analysis of the situation......

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

Think what could happen if we could privatise the running of our hospitals and schools. Efficency, just compare Blackrock hospital with the Mater. :mad:

Yes, have a think about it.......
Much increased class sizes in our schools. Cherry picking of pupils with higher aptitudes by "elite" schools- leaving some schools branded as failures- because of their inability to compete with their monied colleagues. Look at the US and the UK.

As for the health services- you obviously have not bothered to even look at whats happening there? In the US- basic healthcare insurance for a 30yo male with no medical conditions and no prior hospitalisations starts at about 14,000 per annum. And don't even suggest relying on Medicare- lol, you wouldn't last for very long......

As for Blackrock versus the Mater.......Have had the misfortune to have to visit both for tests lately. While the Mater may have had a more "conveyor belt" approach, they were quicker at giving me an appointment- and getting back with results- the opposite of what you are suggesting......

The_Conductor

gerrydublin wrote:

"apart from the locations closest to Dublin" which don't count, is that what you are saying?

What he is suggesting is a lot of people are "volunteering" to "decentralise" to locations close at hand- as the implications of not-decentralising (lack of career prospects, lack of meaningful work, uprooting of family and other commitments etc) are incalculable, particularly as civil servants have to rely on leaks in the press for information.
I.e. people do not want to or intend to move homes- but are sticking themselves down for locations within a commutable distance....... by my book that doesn't really count- what do you think?

ishmael whale

gerrydublin wrote:

"apart from the locations closest to Dublin" which don't count, is that what you are saying?

Indeed. What I’m suggesting is that people opting for Trim, Newbridge and Drogheda (which are the only three locations really pulling in the numbers) are essentially only moving from one place of work to another within the greater Dublin area. While I cannot substantiate this with any information, I would speculate that the people opting for these locations are people seeking a shorter commute e.g. people currently commuting from Drogheda and from North County Dublin might find the idea of commuting to Drogheda attractive when compared to commuting into town. That’s fine so far as it goes, but its hardly evidence of an enormous demand among civil servants to leave the capital.

To refresh memories, when that headline figure of 9,500 is bandied around it contains two inaccuracies. Firstly, it includes people already decentralised seeking to move to another decentralised location e.g. moving from Castlebar to Claremorris. Secondly, such Dublin based staff as have applied tend to apply for the locations closest to Dublin. The further you go from Dublin, the fewer staff you get.

All this basically means is that the programme is a farce at all levels. It’s good to see the Indo picking up the question of cost. Why is this a national priority? Why are we spending so much on this farce when we’ve the second highest primary class sizes in Europe, when the health service still underperforms and has a hefty bill to pay from past mistakes etc etc ?

uncivilservant

And some government departments are insisting that mid-ranking civil servants be given their own private offices when they move, he told a Dail Select Committee on Finance and the Public Service.

Despite the Office of Public Works, and most private companies, believing open-plan offices are conducive to a "more productive work environment" some departments were insisting officials at assistant principal level or above be allocated individual offices.

Shock! Horror! For shame! The cheek! Oh wait a minute... Wouldn't these be the same 'mid-ranking' (hasn't that description been used for all civil servants from EO to PO at some stage?)Assistand Principal Officers currently residing in individual offices in their existing accommodation? They're hardly demanding anything new.

However, I wish Tom the best of luck in encouraging them (and the AHCPS / IMPACT) out into the open.

MorningStar

To_be_confirmed wrote:

S**t, that dude's a nutcase! I was thinking along the lines of choosing the best location be it a city or smaller town and developing it to such an extent that it would rival Dublin

Decentralisation needs to happen if we are to check the excessive growth of dublin. Ireland would be a better place to live in, in every way, if we can stop this unbalance in the country

Decentralisation is no the only method to deal with the problem of "excessive" growth in Dublin. It's a possible option. The method of execution is obvously flawed as it hasn't been taken up. I don't particularly like unions but they needed to be consulted on an action like this. To announce it as part of the budget is also very suspect. The decision was also sold as a way to get local votes with in the party too. Do you really want the unbalance addressed? It means Dublin problems down the country. Decentralisation will by no means address the problem that is so historical.
Civil servants aren't interchangeable like the government think. Who would want to go from an area of interest to one of no interest? Let alone skill sets. The whole extended family situation is also considerable. Are people meant to leave elderly family memeber in Dublin and move down to the country? THe governemnet seem to think keeping prisoners central to family is more important than keeping loyal employees close to their family.
I'm coming in late so I guess many points have already been made.

NewDubliner

Quote:
...Despite the Office of Public Works, and most private companies, believing open-plan offices are conducive to a "more productive work environment" some departments were insisting officials at assistant principal level or above be allocated individual offices.

You have to admire the 'cute hoor' in Parlon. He's trying to get people to believe that the huge cost of the scheme is the fault of staff wanting their own offices. That's a far cry from the 'superb accomodation' with 'car parking' he was promising when he first declared 'Parlon Country' open for business.

The natural riposte is that offices are not milking parlors.....

Victor

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

gerrydublin wrote:

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

But, why? What's the advantage?

NewDubliner

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

uncivilservant wrote:

From the Sligo Weekender:

Is Portlaoise in Tom Parlon's constituency?