Decentralisation

ronbyrne2005

a friend of mine worked for a company in dublin, he was told that the company had to move to the west of ireland ,he had a choice ,move to where his job was or quit his job,luckily he was already thinking about leaving and left for a new job near his home but this is the reality for everyone in private sector,why should the public sector be shielding from the new economic reality? they already have many advantages over similarly qualified private sector people such as better pay,flexible working hours,extra maternity leave, great pensions, job for life etc the fact that dublin is bursting at the seams and the rest of the country is struggling economical and that things will only gets worse indicates that it is vital for the future of our country that decentralisation occurs. tell the civil servants that their jobs are moving to cork galway waterford or whereever and of they dont like it they can transfer to a job in dublin if it is available. also the private sector should be encouraged to relocate outside of dublin say with ten years zero tax rate to locate in donegal and other west of ireland locations other wise dublin is gonna come to a standstill with house prices going even higher,traffic getting even worse and the rest of the country will suffer too.

NewDubliner

ronbyrne2005 wrote:

a friend of mine worked for a company in dublin, he was told that the company had to move to the west of ireland

Was the company moving to save money and become more efficient or was it moving so as to bilk the taxpayer out of 3bn Euro and put it into the pockets of FF/PD supporters in the hope they'd re-elect the government?

Civil Servants in Castlebar cost the same to employ as those in Dublin. No cost saving there.

ronbyrne2005

i agree the pds /ff are using decrentralisation to garner votes thats why i think an indeppendent body shud decide where the decentralised locations are.
as to civil servants costing less outside dublin, they would cost less as property for offices is cheaper outsde dublin and the reduced congestion in dublin would mean less cost to economy.

The_Conductor

ronbyrne2005 wrote:

i agree the pds /ff are using decrentralisation to garner votes thats why i think an indeppendent body shud decide where the decentralised locations are.
as to civil servants costing less outside dublin, they would cost less as property for offices is cheaper outsde dublin and the reduced congestion in dublin would mean less cost to economy.

I don't think anyone will argue with the fact that FF/PDs are using decentralisation to garner votes (especially as there is a national spatial strategy in existence- for developing areas of critical mass around the country that this entire scheme seems to be ignoring).

An independent body should decide the decentralised locations...... yes, thats what the National Spatial Strategy was for...... unfortunately it was expedient for the government to conveniently ignore it in their vote buying campaign......

I still don't get where you are coming from about civil servants outside Dublin costing less..... First of all, unlike almost every European country- those working in the capital city are not paid an allowance to take the higher cost of living into account. So salaries wise- there is no difference between an EO in Kildare Street and one in Castlebar. Secondly- a large portion of the properties occupied by the civil service in Dublin belong to the state and do not cost much in the way of annual upkeep by the OPW. (I'll vouch for that- the carpet in my building was laid in 1977 and there are actually potholes in the floor. The OPW put a steel plate under my desk as I kept breaking the legs of chairs in a large conduit hole that was drilled through the floor for electricity cables down to the second floor and never used). Quite simply- Dublin based civil servants are largely in old poorly maintained buildings with few if any facilities.

An example of the first phase of decentralisation is the occupation of Maynooth Business Campus by 2 different government departments. The accomodation has to be to a certain standard (you can be certain Legionaires Disease and asbestos problems are out of the question- unlike Dublin buildings.....) and as public transport is not the best there are almost 7 parking spaces per employee.

That comfortably brings me onto cars, and your assertian that decentralisation will bring " reduced congestion in Dublin". It may mean marginally fewer cars- and believe me its marginal as fewer than 1-in-7 civil servants drive to work as we either have no parking spaces, or, unlike the private sector, pay for parking as a taxable benefit-in-kind. Allowing that 2800 civil servants move, that is fewer than 400 less cars on the road. And allowing that 924 of those who have elected to move are couples- its actually closer to 275 fewer cars (on Dublin roads). However- by past experiences- it would generate in excess of 2000 cars on roads elsewhere...... In my own case myself and fiance are currently bussing it to and from work (and we walk a fair bit too). She is being sent to Dundalk and myself to Portlaoise. While neither of us are currently driving, both of us will be before long.

Regarding the reduced cost to the economy..... quite how do you quantify an almost 5 fold increase in car driving as a reduced cost (given its elsewhere than Dublin). Its estimated that it would reduce Dublin's economy by greater than 1.5 billion per year. Its also estimated that as in a lot of cases these are households with two wage earners and the second is largely not a civil servant- that the reduction of 1.5 billion in Dublin's economy does not translate to a 1.5 billion increase elsewhere (as those jobs that spouses get would be less well paid on average (providing they were able to find jobs in areas of expertise)). The Chambers of Commerce calculate it would be closer to a reduction of 15-20% and that is before all the extra costs associated with additional car ownership and travelling are factored in.

You are also totally ignoring the stupid suggestions of what people are being told they are doing...... Administrative staff in the Department of Agriculture are being armtwisted into agreeing to becoming Driving Testers- the only requirement is a clean driving licence (a good knowledge of the rules of the road being optional- as "training will be provided")...... I'm a trained forester, and also have a degree in computer science- its not convenient to give me a job in the forest service- as that would break procurement rules. Its supposedly cheaper to have a contrator do computer jobs that I would do in my sleep (I'm confused on that one- contractors earn more in a day than I do in over a week)- instead those who want to do their driving tests in Naas will shortly be tested by a qualified forester- who despises roundabouts........

As for my colleagues- well, a shipload of them are being drafted in to do the paperwork for next years census- another batch are trying to do the administrative end of things for the Gardai by using that Pulse system for them and God only knows what they have planned for the rest of the people......

I give up......

NewDubliner

ronbyrne2005 wrote:

as to civil servants costing less outside dublin, they would cost less as property for offices is cheaper outsde dublin

Not by much & by Tom Parlon's estimates, are certainly not by anything near the cost of the scheme. It would take 20 years for the costs to be covered & that's assuming he's right. The full cost of the PPPs to build the new offices is unknown, don't be surprised if costs eventually exceed those of staying in Dublin.

ronbyrne2005 wrote:

and the reduced congestion in dublin would mean less cost to economy.

You've fallen victim to 'spin'. There's never been any evidence put forward to support this bogus claim. Traffic congestion will increase not decrease:

If & when the Dublin offices are vacated, the new tenants will fill them at higher densities than the Civil Service. The result will be more commuters to these offices, not less. Not only that, but some Dubliners will try to commute from, say, Rathfarnham to Drogheda, in order to preserve their promotion prospects. So, where before they used public transport to reach the city centre, now, they'll be driving across the city.

ronbyrne2005

right so there may not be massive savings from moving the civil service to the country but i think we badly need to move private companies outside dublin as this dublin centric growth is doing no one any good , maybe we could create a new administrative capital somewhere where development is need and theres lots of sspace anput in proper infrastructure and attract private companies there and then we may have some more balanced growth

The_Conductor

Yes, that was the reason the National Spatial Strategy was drawn up- identifying "Gateway" towns which had what was considered a sufficient relative critical mass to make what you are suggesting a success.

Of course- when the government saw that by sticking to the Spatial Strategy it would limit their vote buying potential- there it went, out the window......

ronbyrne2005

i hate irish politics ,full of nepotism gombeenism cronyism , im emigrating with the cash from my average dublin home and buying a large gaff in some decent country.

delboy159

I have heard a few Civil Servants refer to themsleves as professionals in the past - having worked in the private sector and now in the Civil Service I can confirm the majority are not professionals. A professional is someone who must not only gain strictly controled (and challenging) qualifications in their area of expertise, but they must work in specialised areas of their field before they can become qualified....

A lot of jobs in the Civil Service are transferable, most people are replaceable - its a fact.

Everyone will agree the FF/PD bandwagon is trying to get what they can politically, from the decentralisation.

However, the fact remains that I have listened to people complain for years about the centralised nature of the Irish economy and society.
Jobs in Dublin
Universities in Dublin
Opportunities in Dublin

It is very hard for the Irish government to "sell" rural areas to the private sector when they haven't committed significant jobs to these areas themselves. It is necessary to make this move for the long term social and cultural benefits it would give not only Dublin, but the rural areas.

The financial arguement of €2bn/€3bn is all well and good - over how many years? You can use a single figured sound bite such as that, but over 10 years (which will probably make it €4bn) - is not as large a cost per annum.

That would work out at €400 million per annum - if the full 10,000 decentralse - they won't. Probably only half that amount will move (at best). €400 m down to €200 m, then you consoder the more costly plans will be scraped in the 10,000 to 5,000 cut. So €150m per annum is looking realistic.

The knock on benefits to the rural regions around the country will be for decades and generations. There will be a knock on input to local economies, with spin off jobs and money into local industries (in the short and long term).
How much tax payer money in tax incentives, free buildings etc. is used to get multinationals to locate in rural areas? These companies can and will pull out at any minute and leave local economies in a mini crisis. With civil service departments this investment of governement money will be a safe use of tax payers money in the medium and long term compared with the multinational option.

To answer the point about this being a waste of money, with only a few people benefitting.
If you take into account -
Current Civil Servants
Spouses of Civil Servants
People hoping to join the Civil Service (possible their spouses)
The family of Civil Servants who may need them to be local in years to come
The rural economies with 40 families that may gain 5 or 6 more families because of this.
The rural sporting and cultural communities that will see more members and participants.
Just to name a few of the obvious benefits

Now you are looking at tens of thousands of people in this country that will directly and indirectly benefit from the decentralisation programme - immediatley. The decentralisation programme is seen as being more of a long term benefit to areas (which it is) - yet there are obvious short term gains also.....

eigrod

delboy159 wrote:

If you take into account -
Current Civil Servants
Spouses of Civil Servants
People hoping to join the Civil Service (possible their spouses)
The family of Civil Servants who may need them to be local in years to come
The rural economies with 40 families that may gain 5 or 6 more families because of this.
The rural sporting and cultural communities that will see more members and participants.Just to name a few of the obvious benefits

Given that approx 50% of the CAF applicants are already living & working in the country and that the vast, vast majority of the other 50% are not moving house [ simply moving job to be closer to their current homes ], the points you make are not at all relevant.

ishmael whale

So there are still a few diehards.

I think the question of staff being messed around if they have applied for jobs in the expectation of decentralisation needs to be seen in the real world context. Chucking someone in Dublin out of their job simply to give the same job to a new entrant in a regional location cannot be defended on the superficial reason that the potential new entrant is being messed around. In fairness, the Ordanance Survey Cartographer looking forward to his new life as a Probation Officer in Navan probably has a greater claim to that complaint.

The question of regional development has already been well dealt with, so it’s a little surprising to see some people still hankering for it. eirgrod makes a valid point when he points out that, in practice, the programme doesn't acutally involve many people moving residence. The decentralisation plan is simply a farce at many levels.

For what its worth, the bulk of well paid public service jobs are in the Garda, teaching and the health services and are actually decentralised of their nature. Only about a tenth of public sector jobs are in central government and, according to the CSO, they are not the best paid. So there are already plenty of opportunities in the regions for people seeking state employment. There is no knock on boom from consumer expenditure in a small open economy like Ireland (which equally means the question of the capital losing ten thousand salaries is equally irrelevant.)

If there’s one point the diehards need to take away, it’s the potential use to which these resources could be put. A figure of €3 billion is being floated for the first phase of decentralisation. Half that amount could built the Dublin Rail Interconnector, which would vastly increase rail capacity on Northside DART, Drogheda, Navan, Mullingar and Maynooth services. This would do far more to alleviate congestion that moving a few thousand civil servants hither and dither.

The simple fact is that relieving congestion and promoting regional development by the proposed decentralisation is like trying to heat a house by lighting a cigar with a wad of banknotes.

Alun

Heard from a friend in the Dept. Agriculture the other day that the powers that be are touting around for candidates who might like to transform themselves in just 6 weeks of training (!!!) into fully qualified, experienced driving test examiners for an 18 month contract (presumably to get the backlog down).

Is there no end to these peoples' talents?

EDIT: Oops, just noticed that someone else had posted this .... still, 6 weeks????? In the UK, AFAIK, you wouldn't stand a chance of becoming an examiner without several years of experience as a qualified, certified driving instructor and an advanced driving qualification from the IAM.

cyclopath2001

delboy159 wrote:

A lot of jobs in the Civil Service are transferable, most people are replaceable - its a fact.

Yes indeed: the big consultancies are waiting in the wings to take over all the IT jobs and once they've achieved software lock-in, the rates will go up.

NewDubliner

This from RTE, the radio reports that's he's insisting that the cost will be €900m. (Although he does not acknowledge that this is just for buildings.):

Parlon denies text poll interference

07 December 2005 07:22

Junior Minister Tom Parlon has denied all knowledge of claims that his staff tried to influence the result of a local radio poll in his constituency.

The poll, which discussed the issue of decentralisation, found that 94% were satisfied with the Government's policy on transferring civil servants to the regions.

The Head of News for Midlands 103, Will Faulkner, said on air that the station had managed to trace some of the texts received, to 'persons working for, or associated with, the PD's.'
Advertisement

Mr Faulkner said it went against the spirit of the poll for persons associated with the policy to participate in this way.

Mr Parlon has said 'when you have a text competition, then you should say if someone is not entitled to vote'.

Dinarius

Hopefully Mr. Faulkner will learn from this that there are good reasons why polls are best carried out in a scientific manner, wherein those polled are chosen in a balanced and fair way, thus avoiding precisely what happened above.

Of course we see this type of polling every day of the week (Sky News is addicted to it) so I shouldn't be surprised.

D.

ishmael whale

Phone in polls are mostly for the entertainment value. This one is turning out to be very entertaining.

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1520952&issue_id=13374
Parlon workers 'didn't try to sway job switch poll'

Wednesday December 7th 2005
Senan Molony
Political Correspondent
A JUNIOR Minister has denied all knowledge of claims that his staff tried to influence the outcome of a local radio poll in his constituency. Tom Parlon's special adviser Matt Moore and constituency secretary Ethel Horan, were among those whose phones sent text votes to a poll run by Midlands 103 radio station on decentralisation.

The proposal put to listeners - asking whether the Government should re-think its policy on transferring civil servants to the regions - was defeated by a resounding 94pc to 6pc. But Midlands 103 Head of News Will Faulkner said on air that the station had managed to trace some of the texts received to "persons working for, or associated with, the PDs".

It went against the spirit of the poll for persons associated with the policy to participate in this way, he said. While strongly denying any orchestration, Mr Parlon was unabashed about the PD intervention last night. That mention had been made on air of the PDs involvement in the vote was "I thought a bit silly", the minister said. He added that "in a competition such as You're A Star, if someone had €1,000 to spend on texts, then it is about winning the competition".

Other calls were yesterday traced to phones operated by PD Senator Kate Walsh of Kildare and PD councillor Eddie Fitzpatrick. Another person made five calls to the poll number in immediate succession, each time voting against a Government rethink.

The phone number was traced yesterday to Cathal Fitzgerald, the PD's parliamentary party policy officer. Mr Fitzgerald denied making any calls to the station on the poll. Mr Parlon and Labour's Finance spokeswoman Joan Burton rowed on air over how many or how few civil servants were prepared to move with the Fas agency from Dublin to Birr, Co Offaly. She said that only six had volunteered, but Mr Parlon claimed 51 would go, and that promotions could be involved. The trade union Siptu later disputed Mr Parlon's figures.

As to whether the taxpayer should have to pick up the cost of texts from Matt Moore and Ethel Horan and the use of their time, Mr Parlon suggested that public and private sector workers commonly made texts in work time. "If you decide you have a text competition, then you should say if someone is not entitled to vote," he said.

Dinarius

ishmael whale wrote:

"If you decide you have a text competition, then you should say if someone is not entitled to vote," he said.

As my grandmother would have said, "A brazen cur!"

The sad part is that this boorish thug will be re-elected without a hitch.

[Sometimes (but only sometimes!) I wish we had the Brits electoral system. It really is about the survival of the fittest (positively Darwinian, in fact) and it produces a level of public representative far superior to here, on average. The level of debate during the Conservative leadership campaign was of a standard we can only dream about. Pond life doesn't begin to describe most of them. But, I digress............]

D

Hotblack Desiato

delboy159 wrote:

A lot of jobs in the Civil Service are transferable, most people are replaceable - its a fact.

But a lot aren't. One of the major reasons Civil Service IT is in decline is because there is no career structure to keep talented IT staff working in IT, instead when they win promotion they are moved into non-IT posts and their years of expertise go to waste. As a result the consulting firms are laughing all the way to the bank.
There are many other examples in general service grades, it's not just a problem for 'professional' grades. (IT staff are general service grades.)

Many decentralising sections are looking at a staff turnover of 95% or more, this can never be a good thing even ignoring the specialist skills issue. Apart from training costs, the loss of corporate memory will cause more mistakes to be made, lower efficiency and reduce service quality for years to come. I used to work in DSW and it took a good six months to get a new staff member up to speed on the myriad rules involving claims. Every so often you'd have a case which only a ten-year veteran of the area could hope to answer. Who's doing to do that post-decentralisation?

It is very hard for the Irish government to "sell" rural areas to the private sector when they haven't committed significant jobs to these areas themselves.

Wrong, the private sector couldn't give a fig about where civil servants work. But they frequently complain about our glaring infrastructure deficits.

The financial arguement of €2bn/€3bn is all well and good - over how many years? You can use a single figured sound bite such as that, but over 10 years (which will probably make it €4bn) - is not as large a cost per annum.

It's still a waste of money no matter how you try to make it look smaller.
This money would be far better spent addressing infrastructure deficits, our creaking health service, or our massively underfunded education system. Any of those three would be of far greater real benefit to rural Ireland than this decentralisation programme.

There will be a knock on input to local economies, with spin off jobs and money into local industries (in the short and long term).

Few civil servants are going to move home to avail of DC. They might buy their newspaper and sambo in their new location, there again they might pick it up at home and bring it with them. In that case they're spending a big fat ZERO in their new location.

With civil service departments this investment of governement money will be a safe use of tax payers money in the medium and long term compared with the multinational option.

This harks back to the 'Eighties talk of 'job creation' where padding the public and semi-state sectors with un-needed warm bodies was seen as a viable answer to unemployment. It didn't work then and it certainly won't work now, unless you plan to create a command economy where the majority of workers will be employed by the State in one form or another. Except command economies don't work either.

The family of Civil Servants who may need them to be local in years to come

Yes, my family in Dublin may need me to be local in years to come, so I'm staying put thank you very much. Most of my colleagues are from Dublin too and none of them want to go anywhere.

The rural economies with 40 families that may gain 5 or 6 more families because of this.

This is one of the major problems with this plan. A city dweller is not going to be inclined to move to a small town. If all the jobs moving had gone to Cork, Limerick, Galway etc. then it might actually have been popular with staff - as well as achieving far greater economies of scale in relation to building costs.

ishmael whale

Here’s another example of the kind of rigidity decentralisation brings to the system. We should be getting the benefit of needing fewer staff processing farming grants because of simplified EU rules. Instead, we end up with a block of staff on the payroll but doing nothing as their redeployment to another area is problematic on both practical and political grounds. The situation is dragging on, as I can remember this particular case being raised in the local press months ago. It is not an unique case – staff were similarly left on the payroll in Ballina, but with no work, when housing grants were abolished.

The clear conclusion is that splitting up central government departments makes little sense, and makes for poor value for money. This kind of case needs to be highlighted, particularly when people express the superficial view that past decentralisations are ‘successful’. Past decentralisations are causing additional costs, meaning money that could be better spent is wasted.

http://www.mayonews.ie/current/news.tmpl$showpage?value1=3342858442192203
TWENTY-nine years after the Department of Agriculture established a base in Davitt House, Castlebar, activity at the centre will be drastically reduced from Thursday next when the main body of work carried out in Castlebar will be moved to Portlaoise. The switch from Castlebar to the midlands is a follow-on from the policy of decentralisation introduced by the former Minister for Finance, Charlie McCreevey, a policy now being implemented by Minister for State at the Department of Finance, Tom Parlon.

The move has not met with universal acclaim among the staff and one employee, who has worked there for 25 years, told The Mayo News that the staff there feel ‘sold-out and demoralised’. “We don’t want to move to Portlaoise, we’re all very happy here and we’re settled in Mayo with our families. All we want to do is work, but after Thursday there’ll be very little for us to do here. We want to work and we want to work for the Department of Agriculture because that’s what we’re trained to do, but we can’t. There are people here who were specially recruited in 1976 and now they’re expected to up and go to Portlaoise,” he said.

Staff members who turned down the switch to Portlaoise were offered alternative places on the Garda PULSE system, while last week an offer of a switch to Driving Test Centres in Connacht was also proposed. However, out of the 100 or so staff employed by the Department of Agriculture in Davitt House, just 20 opted to take up the PULSE option. “PULSE doesn’t suit everyone and not too many took up the option. It’s shift-based work while the situation with the Driving Test Centres is that work is guaranteed for only 18 months,” he said.

Mayo Fine Gael Deputy, Michael Ring described the loss of the jobs to Portlaoise as a victory for the Tom Parlon, Minister for State at the Department of Finance with responsibility for the process of decentralisation. “Tom Parlon is responsible for those jobs going out of Castlebar. He has won in this case and Castlebar has lost. Nearly 100 jobs are being lost directly but an awful lot more are affected because so many families are involved. …..

http://www.westernpeople.ie/news/story.asp?j=28390
100 staff at Davitt House in Castlebar will face temporary unemployment with a closure of the Department of Agriculture offices due at the end of this week. …. the Department admitted that none of the staff based in Castlebar wished to transfer full time to the SFP unit in Portlaoise and jobs will not be provided immediately. “People are being redeployed on an ongoing basis in that 22 staff will be going to the Garda Information Services Centre, Being civil servants the staff will be paid.”
….
“This is a political decision, it’s not decentralisation. We now have a situation where our qualified Agriculture staff are being redeployed to totally unrelated areas such as PULSE or as the Minister proposed last week to driver testing,” said Deputy Ring before noting his disgust at the Fianna Fáil representatives in Mayo for allowing the closure. “I am disgusted that Fianna Fáil has allowed this to happen. I am calling on Fianna Fáil to explain to the people of Mayo why they are allowing this to happen. Shame on the Fianna Fáil elected representatives in the County. This is a win for Tom Parlon and the P.D.’s.”

NewDubliner

Umm, is Portlaoise in Tom Parlon's consituency?

ronbyrne2005

sunday times

FAS, Ireland’s training agency, is paying €275,000 an acre for the site of its new headquarters in Birr, Co Offaly, even though only a fraction of its Dublin staff have agreed to move there.
The purchase of the land will be finalised by the end of this month, although opposition parties say the asking price is “excessive and questionable”.



The deal is more expensive than the controversial €200,000 per acre purchase of a site in Thornton, in north Dublin, that will house a new prison complex. and nearly double the €140,000 per acre estimate supplied by estate agents to Fas when the agency first considered buying the land over a year ago.

Fas said yesterday that it was ready to close on the deal to buy the 5.6 acre site, near the Tullamore Road in Birr, for more than €1.5m. A spokesman said it was “happy” with the move.

The purchase is bound to add to growing criticism of the government’s decentralisation project, which is suffering from a lack of civil service enthusiasm. The Labour Party says the government is paying too much for sites and buildings for decentralised departments.

Joan Burton, its finance spokesman, said: “Prices are soaring in the areas where the state is decentralising and the taxpayer is paying to facilitate a plan that civil servants are rejecting. In the chosen areas, businesses and home buyers are seeing prices soar.” She says the government should come up with a more economically viable plan. Richard Bruton, Fine Gael’s finance spokesman, said his main concern was that once the government had finished paying for sites and buildings, nobody would want to move in to them.

“Going on the response the government’s decentralisation plan has received so far, these new buildings are going to be close to empty,” he said.

Just 10% of targeted civil servants have agreed to leave their Dublin offices and retain their existing posts. Out of 7,200 civil servants due to move, just 3,740 have agreed to be relocated, mostly to different departments which will involve extensive retraining.

Fas insists that the purchase represents “value for the taxpayer”. The organisation said: “All negotiations were carried out by a highly professional firm and we were guided by them at all times. The process of buying the site was protracted in order to ensure that it met all our requirements. The deal has received the backing of both the Office of Public Works and the Department of Finance.”

Fas handled the purchase itself, but in all other decentralisation cases the OPW is overseeing the purchase of land and buildings. The OPW said the Fas deal “really wasn’t an OPW decision. They are paddling their own canoe on this one”, it said.

The purchase of the Birr site, currently owned by Respond!, an affordable housing charity with company status, had been delayed over concerns relating to price. It was valued at €140,000 per acre, but Hamilton Osborne King, the agents involved, described this as “a desktop estimate”.

David O’Neill, an associate with HOK, said: “When the original estimate was made, it was based on incomplete information.” There were concerns in Fas when the price was increased. The agency’s management questioned the purchase once criticisms over the Thornton site purchase surfaced. “There were further discussions around this time, but a decision was taken that the deal was good,” O’Neill said.

About 400 Fas staff are due to go to Birr under the government’s €900m decentralisation plan but only 101 employees have indicated that they will move to the new location.

Of these, only about 50 are existing staff, with the rest of the applications coming from people who want to switch from other civil service and semi-state departments.

Earlier this year the OPW had to defend the purchase of other land and buildings. Labour claimed the state was paying out an average of €430,000 per acre on the basis that €35.7m had been paid for 20 sites around the country. These included sites in expensive areas such as Limerick city and Killarney, where the state paid €4.3m. In Newcastle West, it paid €400,000 to Limerick county council for a half-acre site for the Revenue Commissioners. Other purchases were much cheaper than the Birr acquisition. In Portlaoise a nine-acre site was bought from the IDA for the new headquarters for the department of agriculture at a cost of €1.1m. In Longford a six-acre site for the Irish Prison Service cost in the region of €70,000 per acre.

The OPW said comparisons with the cost of the Thornton site were not valid as this was agricultural land. Where possible it is buying sites and buildings from the state at prices cheaper than those being sought by private sellers.

The OPW says it is also selling land and buildings in Dublin to raise money for the state and insists that the cost of decentralisation will be earned back in savings in years to come.

pete

Extract from a document circulated by the PSEU which I'd imagine will be of interest to those wishing to stay in Dublin:

- Departments will identify staff wishing to remain in Dublin

- In Departments with likely surpluses, (and only in those Departments), such staff will be asked to use this process to indicate preferences

- Staff who have applied to re-locate under CAF will not be invited to apply for moves within Dublin. If they wish to apply under this process, they will be required to withdraw their application on the CAF. In relation to people who have not applied for ‘early mover’ locations and who are concerned that the moves for which they have applied could be delayed indefinitely, the aim will be to locate them in the organisation for which they have applied, as soon as possible

- Staff who use the Dublin transfer process will be invited, in order of length of service in their grade, to take up opportunities as they arise and they will be in a position to decline offers. For the sake of speeding up the process a number of people might be given conditional offers for the same post at the same time

- This process will not interfere with promotion arrangements, save in accordance with the arrangements discussed already in respect of promotions

Apart from the fact that people were led to believe that they were registering an "expression of interest" in moving to a decentralised office, not making an actual application, I can't help but feel this will blow up in Finance's face.

I know of quite a few people who "expressed an interest" in their own department's decentralisation destination purely to avoid being churned around departments / roles to accommodate other decentralising souls.

Wholesale withdrawal from the CAF process would play absolute havoc with Finance's figures. A blessing in disguise, then?

NewDubliner

pete wrote:

Extract from a document circulated by the PSEU which I'd imagine will be of interest to those wishing to stay in Dublin:

Strangely, the proposal is just to list a load of departments and locations but with no indication of what types of jobs might be on offer. I can see the Dublin IT staff being a bit perplexed in trying to figure out where they might be able to continue their speciality.

This from yesterday's 'Sunday Tribune':

Finance admits need to replace IT staff who refuse to budge
by Martin Frawley

THE Department of Finance has admitted that it will have to hire hundreds of IT consultants costing millions of euro to cover the work of its own civil servants who do not want to move out of Dublin under the Government's decentralisation plan.

Under the latest blow to hit the Government's plan to move civil servants out of Dublin to over 50 locations around the country, Finance Minister Brian Cowen is also faced with the prospect of paying IT staff `on the double'.

Those who opt to remain in Dublin will still have to be paid even though they may not be engaged in IT work while their replacements outside Dublin will also have to paid for doing the actual work, possibly at a higher contract rate.

As part of the Government plan to move 10,000 civil servants out of Dublin, it has earmarked almost 900 key IT staff from Revenue, Social and Family Affairs and Agriculture to move to Portlaoise, Kildare and Drogheda.

But so far, just 400 staff have volunteered to make the move and Finance fear that many of those do not have the requisite IT skills. Revenue in particular has already warned that it simply cannot afford any disruption to its IT operations during the move.

Finance told the public service unions last week they they were prepared to offer promotions in bid to lure IT specialists to take up the jobs outside Dublin.

But if there were still shortfalls, said Finance, each affected departments could "go to the market to identify and employ external experts and contractors/consultants as stop-gap measures until sufficient number of internal staff with requisite knowledge and experience are in place".

But the PSEU public service union executives have told Finance that they will strongly resist any open recruitment of IT consultants as it would displace existing IT civil servants who will be surplus to requirements in Dublin. 7

pete

Minister for Defence Willie O’Dea, in a reply to a Dáil question by Mr Timmins, said the Office of Public Works has assessed a total of 12 sites in Newbridge as potential sites for the Department of Defence headquarters.

“A local authority-owned site, comprising around 4.3 acres, had been identified as a likely solution and it is currently being assessed. When all aspects, including access and security, have been fully evaluated, a final decision will be made regarding the acquisition of the site,” he said.

The site is located beside the railway station in Newbridge, which will be convenient for employees travelling by train from Dublin.

comedy gold

what's probably not so funny though is

The Department of Defence is set to relocate to a site owned by Kildare County Council in Newbridge, while the Defence Forces headquarters is moving to the Curragh.

Fine Gael defence spokesman Billy Timmins TD said the cost of acquiring the 4.3- acre site in Newbridge could run into millions, even though there were 766 acres available for use in the nearby Curragh camp.

http://breakingnews.iol.ie/news/story.asp?j=166606822&p=y666x75z8

uncivilservant

A taste of things to come?

Thousands of civil servants who refused to transfer would end up getting paid to do little or nothing in Dublin offices until they retired, Mr Kenny warned.

Under the latest figures released by the Department of Agriculture's central applications facility, 4,000 Dublin-based civil servants will not transfer with their jobs if the plan, originally due to end in December 2007, is completed.

Staff in the Department of Agriculture's offices in Davitt House, Castlebar, had been moved into overcrowded offices and left with little work to do because their functions had been transferred to Portlaoise, he claimed.

"The Castlebar staff would not move, contract workers were brought into Portlaoise in rented buildings and they brought in other livestock personnel from other regions and paid them overtime. "They have moved them down to the veterinary office, which is now overcrowded, which doesn't have the work for people. The thing is an utter shambles. Some people will be left sitting until they reach pension age, their experience and capability unused. If they continue the way that they are going, they will break the long memory of the public service."

more here: FG leader predicts 'chaos' after decentralisation

NewDubliner

He also said this:

However, the Fine Gael leader, in an interview with The Irish Times, said the Government should get on first with the most popular decentralisation transfers, such as to Knock, Co Mayo.

Is it true that Mayo is popular with staff living in Dublin?

Does Enda Kenny represent Mayo?

Note that he's avoided the cost & accountability issues. The project has an unlimited budget.

pete

NewDubliner wrote:

He also said this:

Is it true that Mayo is popular with staff living in Dublin?

Does Enda Kenny represent Mayo?

Note that he's avoided the cost & accountability issues. The project has an unlimited budget.

Kenny may hate decentralisation, but when opportunity knocks...



Decentralisation is a shambles, Enda Kenny declared last week. It was appallingly planned and threatens chaos in the civil service. So, obviously, the Fine Gael leader will be putting a stop to this nonsense once he gets into power? Well, no. We just have to get on with it now, says Kenny. And especially the decentralisation of one government department to Knock. “Knock will happen,” said Kenny. “There are quite a number of people from the west who want to go down to that region.”

Remind Sue where Knock is again? Oh yes, Mayo. And forgive your diarist’s forgetfulness, but which constituency does Kenny represent?

Let’s get this straight then: the Fine Gael leader thinks decentralisation is a mess — except the part where loads of civil servants come to his constituency — but he’s not promising to change the scheme if he becomes taoiseach because that might cost his party votes in the election.

Kenny must know that it was precisely this specious attitude by Fianna Fail and the PDs that caused the “shambles” of decentralisation in the first place. And they wonder why the rest of us are so cynical about politics.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2091-1975112,00.html

Dinarius

I don't subscribe to the Irish Times online, but they devoted Saturday's main editorial to a similar attack on that prat Kenny.

If anyone does subscribe, they might like to cut and paste?

D.

pete

Dinarius wrote:

I don't subscribe to the Irish Times online, but they devoted Saturday's main editorial to a similar attack on that prat Kenny.

If anyone does subscribe, they might like to cut and paste?

D.

courtesy of a friend:

Kenny comments off the mark




Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny has probably done himself political damage because of indecisive comments about the Government's controversial decentralisation programme. The lack of clarity and political courage displayed on an issue of such fundamental importance to the good governance of the State is likely to have dismayed his closest supporters and caused vacillating voters to reconsider their options.

In an interview with Mark Hennessy in this newspaper last Wednesday, Mr Kenny was extremely critical of the "appallingly planned" decentralisation programme that, he said, threatened "chaos in the Civil Service". But, rather than call for the suspension or abandonment of the scheme, which envisages moving 10,000 civil and public servants out of Dublin along with eight Government Departments, the Fine Gael leader supported its implementation where possible, particularly in relation to the transfer of a department to Knock, Co Mayo, in his own constituency.

This is the kind of "gombeen politics" the Progressive Democrats were so critical of before Minister of State Tom Parlon taught them the error of their vote-getting ways. It represented the thinking behind an uncosted and unplanned decentralisation programme that Charlie McCreevy unveiled on behalf of Fianna Fáil during an otherwise boring budget speech in 2004. Buying rural votes was - and still is - the name of this particular game. And if the decentralisation scheme disrupted proper planning and administration procedures and ran counter to the Government's own spatial strategy, so what?

Fine Gael and the other opposition parties regularly criticised this dangerously dysfunctional approach in the Dáil. A lack of preparation and public service resistance caused the Government to review its plans. Last year, it scaled back the initial programme to involve 15 locations and the transfer of 2,000 public servants by the year 2009. But even that looks like a madcap idea as the great bulk of middle and senior management refuse to move from Dublin, while half of those applying for transfers are already based in the provinces.

Two months ago, Fine Gael extracted figures from the Government that showed only one-in-nine civil servants is prepared to move with their departments. It warned of the fragmentation of policymaking and the cost of employing replacement staff. But, earlier this week, when it came to challenging the expectations of voters in the 53 towns and villages earmarked to gain civil and public servants from the process, Mr Kenny kicked for touch. Constituency considerations are never far from the mind of a politician. That is as it should be. But there are times when a broader approach is required. And this is one of them. An economy-threatening gamble was undertaken by the Government as part of its vote-getting scheme on decentralisation. As a potential taoiseach-in-waiting, Mr Kenny should have considered the national interest and moved beyond the constraints of parish pump politics.



© The Irish Times

ishmael whale

They could have put in on the front page, with the headline

"Kenny says voters too stupid to see decentralisation is a load of toss"

pete

ishmael whale wrote:

They could have put in on the front page, with the headline

"Kenny says voters too stupid to see decentralisation is a load of toss"

NNIMBY - Not Not In My Back Yard

The_Conductor

Filling out the supplementary application for HEO this evening.
Still damned if I know what to put in the section "Willingness to embrace change"...... I did enter the damned competition after all, but I can't very well say that.......

NewDubliner

This from the 'Examiner':

Naturally, the minister ignores the fact that experienced staff, an expensive and hard-to-replace asset, will be lost.

A better headline would have been: 'Minister compares Limerick to Liberia'

12/01/06

Ahern rebuffs aid agencies over decentralisation plea
By Michael O’Farrell, Political Reporter
FOREIGN Affairs Minister Dermot Ahern last night delivered a stinging rebuke to aid agencies and opposition parties who want him to reverse plans to decentralise the Government’s foreign aid section.

Under the Government’s decentralisation programme, Development Co-operation Ireland (DCI) is scheduled to be relocated to Limerick at the beginning of 2007.

However, with just 13 of the agency’s 123 staff in favour of the move, 35 aid agencies yesterday wrote to Mr Ahern asking him to reverse the decision.

Their concerns, though, were given short shrift by the minister, who promised to follow through on the plan regardless.

“It seems to be quite illogical, the notion that aid agencies can work in Liberia or Lesotho but not Limerick,” he said.

Mr Ahern pointed to the 1991 decentralisation of the development committee of the OECD from London to Dhaka in Bangladesh.

“There was uproar at moving people half way across the world but that move has worked in an era which had none of the air transport or communications links we currently enjoy.

“However, apparently it is not possible for a development agency to function in the computer age of 2007 by moving 100 miles down the road to Limerick.”

But in its letter to Mr Ahern, Dochas - the Irish Association of Non-Governmental Organisations - warned that the move posed “a significant threat to the hitherto high quality of the Irish aid programme”.

“This proposal will lead to a loss of expertise and will slow down much-needed aid,” said Dochas director Hans Zomer.

That view has been expressed by all opposition parties, unions and academics. And the DCI advisory board has warned of the implications.

MadMoss

As a contract employee with a state agency earmarked for decentralisation it might be of interest to others that all new contract employees in my agency now have a clause in their contract that states, "Your continued employment is on condition that you live wherever the head quarters of this agency is based, further, we are due to decentralise to another location (specified)". (I decided not to use the exact wording of the clause and paraphrase.)
My reading of this is basically the answer to decentralisation is if you don't go, you will be fired.
Is there anyone left who still believes that the government’s decentralisation proposals are voluntary?
What a bummer eh?
Later.

The_Conductor

MadMoss wrote:

As a contract employee with a state agency earmarked for decentralisation it might be of interest to others that all new contract employees in my agency now have a clause in their contract that states, "Your continued employment is on condition that you live wherever the head quarters of this agency is based, further, we are due to decentralise to another location (specified)". (I decided not to use the exact wording of the clause and paraphrase.)
My reading of this is basically the answer to decentralisation is if you don't go, you will be fired.
Is there anyone left who still believes that the government’s decentralisation proposals are voluntary?
What a bummer eh?
Later.

Its been that way for the last 14 months in the civil service too. In addition to this- all promotions (be they internal or external) are contingent on the person agreeing to decentralise. I.e. your career is stone dead in the water unless you agree to decentralise...... You are right though- calling it voluntary is stretching the truth to breaking point. Strictly speaking- you did not have to take the job- it was a condition attached to taking the job that you signed up to- i.e. you volunteered. Similiarly- I sat exams recently (along with several thousand more people). Despite the fact that I did very well in the exams and promotion is based on merit, a condition attached to promotion is that I decentralise- i.e. I volunteered. Thus- volunteering has no correlation whatsoever with people wanting to go anywhere. If you hold a gun to someone's head and tell them that you will shoot them unless they volunteer to jump into a river- I guess most people will volunteer to jump into the river...... The difference between the act of volunteering and the act of coercian appear to have gotten blurred somewhere......

By the way there is what is known as the 52 week rule. Basically- if you have been in a location for over 52 weeks, you cannot be moved against your will. I have heard that two of the unions are eager to test contracts that people were obliged to sign, to see whether they still come under the 52 week rule or not (thats the CPSU and the PSEU). As yet its untested though.

Why does the rather unpolitically correct joke about the dyslexic devil worshipers who sold their souls to Santa come to mind?

NewDubliner

smccarrick wrote:

Its been that way for the last 14 months in the civil service too. In addition to this- all promotions (be they internal or external) are contingent on the person agreeing to decentralise.

What happens if you accept a promotion, agree to decentralise & it's in a department which is remaining in Dublin for a few years. If & when the move is to take place and you refused to move (maybe because you could no longer afford to), would you be demoted or fired?

What happens if the move is cancelled, would people who declined promotion because of the requirement to agree to move be entitled to be reconsidered for promotion?

The_Conductor

You would be entitled to a position at the original grade you had been in prior to decentralisation. You would enter your previous grade at the salary point you were on prior to decentralisation, however seniority in that grade would be reset to "0". In addition, placement in your original grade would be by the Public Appointments Service- not by the home department, and you would most likely be placed into a new department.

jd

Dermot Ahern was on the radio a few days ago. Basically he said that there should be no problem retraining people to cover positions where people wouldn't decentralise. I'm wondering how he proposes to condense 4 year degree courses in Science, Engineering and Computer Science/IT etcas well as the specific training for the job, when he trains up civil servant staff to cover specialist positions.??

eigrod

This will really get interesting when these "new" people sit down to be trained by the people whose posts they are effectively taking.

MadMoss

eigrod wrote:

This will really get interesting when these "new" people sit down to be trained by the people whose posts they are effectively taking.

It's going to we awkward at best. At worst there will be insults flying left and right. I am annoyed over the whole issue but some staff in my state agecny are furious.

NewDubliner

smccarrick wrote:

You would be entitled to a position at the original grade you had been in prior to decentralisation. You would enter your previous grade at the salary point you were on prior to decentralisation, however seniority in that grade would be reset to "0". In addition, placement in your original grade would be by the Public Appointments Service- not by the home department, and you would most likely be placed into a new department.

So, it could be quite an interesting bet (not to mention experience) to go for promotion in a non-'early-mover' department in the hope that they eventually do not move.

Worst case, you end up with a few year's extra salary before being dumped into a non-job, where you would have been sent in the first place?

Victor

MadMoss wrote:

"Your continued employment is on condition that you live wherever the head quarters of this agency is based, further, we are due to decentralise to another location (specified)".

Are they saying you have to reside where the agency is based?

Or that you should pitch a tent behind your desk?

MadMoss

Victor wrote:

Are they saying you have to reside where the agency is based?

Or that you should pitch a tent behind your desk?

Yep that's what's in the contract. You have to live where the headquarters is based. Does anyone know if my employer is entitled to do that? It sounds a bit OTT to me.

eigrod

Fine Gael's position as per Enda Kenny on Radio1 lunchtime Sunday & today's Examiner.

To be honest, I think that he has outlined it fairly well, assuming they would follow up on it in the event they got into Government. Go ahead where the demand is there, drop it where its not - logical enough i.m.o.

I've never voted FG or FF, and probably will never give a no. 1, but this would tempt me to give a preference.

Fine Gael vows to reverse decentralisation if necessary

By Harry McGee, Political Editor
FINE Gael yesterday committed itself to significantly slashing the Government's ambitious decentralisation programme if necessary.

Party leader, Enda Kenny, pledged that a FG-led government would carry out an audit of the plan to transfer more than 10,000 public servants from Dublin to 53 locations around the country.

He described the current situation as a "shambles" yesterday.

He also made it clear that if the numbers did not stack up for new locations, he would take the hard decision of reversing the policy for some locations.

"Where the numbers and skills measure up, you go ahead. When it is not going to happen, there needs to be some honesty and straightforwardness," he said, in a clear indication that his party would seek alternative locations or withdraw that part of the programme altogether.

He also said that Fine Gael was opposed to any ministerial offices or senior civil services being moved out of Dublin.

Citing reasons of good governance, he said if it was allowed go ahead it "would destroy the corporate memory of the department and you destroy efficiency."

This new direction may prove high risk for Fine Gael as Government-side TDs will inevitably challenge the party to name the locations it will drop and to outline how many civil servants would move under its revised plans.

holly_johnson

eigrod wrote:

Fine Gael's position as per Enda Kenny on Radio1 lunchtime Sunday & today's Examiner.

To be honest, I think that he has outlined it fairly well, assuming they would follow up on it in the event they got into Government. Go ahead where the demand is there, drop it where its not - logical enough i.m.o.

I've never voted FG or FF, and probably will never give a no. 1, but this would tempt me to give a preference.

Seems very vague to me... just the usual "say what people want to hear" tripe. I wonder what his detailed plan is. If there is one!

NewDubliner

eigrod wrote:

To be honest, I think that he has outlined it fairly well, assuming they would follow up on it in the event they got into Government. Go ahead where the demand is there, drop it where its not - logical enough i.m.o.

Enda seems to have taken his eye off the ball: COST EFFECTIVENESS.

The biggest demand is for people moving from one non-Dublin location to another. (e.g. Limerick to Kilrush, Cahirciveen-Killarney) Enda is ignoring the cost and any benefit to the economy. It's turning into a rather expensive family-friendly initiative.

Dinarius

It seems to me that he is (sensibly) advocating the kind of decentralisation that already exists. i.e. allowing back office (or non-executive or decision making) to move down the country - loads of examples of this have existed for years - while keeping the strategic, policy making bit in Dublin.

I'd vote for that, though I agree it's very risky for FG.

D.

NewDubliner

Dinarius wrote:

It seems to me that he is (sensibly) advocating the kind of decentralisation that already exists. i.e. allowing back office (or non-executive or decision making) to move down the country - loads of examples of this have existed for years - while keeping the strategic, policy making bit in Dublin.
I'd vote for that, though I agree it's very risky for FG.
D.

You mean like moving all IT jobs out Dublin when hardly any expensively-trained IT staff want to move and there's a national shortage of IT workers?

You'd vote for that?

Dinarius

That's not what I meant.

If he combines a willingness to move with an emphasis on non-executive grades and departments then, yes, I would vote for it.

My wife's salary is calculated and dispatched from an office somewhere in Mayo. The work being done there could be done anywhere.

Also, while I believe that the executive should stay put, there could be exceptions. e.g. Marine is fully subscribed and ready to move to Clonakilty. Politically, it is a non-event. Administratively, it is chicken feed. It could be done anywhere, so good luck to them.

Government can learn a lot from any large, private sector organisations. IBM or Intel will do what they can, where they can. But, for the most part, they will make key policy decisions in one location only. That is as it should be.

This brainless exercise was McCreevy's farewell present to a government he almost certainly knew he was leaving when he made the announcement. Go figure! ;-)

D.

NewDubliner

Dinarius wrote:

If he combines a willingness to move with an emphasis on non-executive grades and departments then, yes, I would vote for it.

What about costs and benefits? Shouldn't there be a justification for spending the money?

Government estimates are that it will take 20 years for the policy to pay for itself. Even if that's correct (and when did the Government ever gets its project costs right?), I think I could get a better return on a billion euro just by putting in the Credit Union.