Decentralisation

NewDubliner

zuma wrote:

Is that your attempt to claim the high moral ground?

Look, move or loose your job!

You've made no effort to understand the issues and you've ignored the important issues that have been raised since your posting. Why should anyone take you seriously?

The current plan will add to traffic problems in Dublin, it will mean increased taxes for everyone and lower public service efficiency. In the towns it favours, it will drive up prices and only have a marginal benefit on local employment.

Why are you in favour of the current decentralisation scheme?

Give reasons.

zuma wrote:

So what do you propose the people who refuse to leave Dublin do as the idea of decentralisation isnt going to disappear anytime soon!

Make sure that the truth about the current project is known to the electorate.

uncivilservant

TAOISEACH Bertie Ahern admits his Government's decentralisation plan is in trouble and management of it is "a difficult exercise". For the first time, he conceded that moving 10,600 civil servants to more than 50 locations outside Dublin was too big a project for the time allowed.

From today's Irish Independent.

Perhaps now he might concede that 10,600 "posts" to 50 locations is just never going to happen.

New_Departure06

One of the advantages of decentralisation for the relevant regions is that it will allow for local recruitment in the future. I think that if some civil servants refuse to cooperate then the govt should hire replacement staff in the new regional centres.

NewDubliner

New_Departure06 wrote:

One of the advantages of decentralisation for the relevant regions is that it will allow for local recruitment in the future. I think that if some civil servants refuse to cooperate then the govt should hire replacement staff in the new regional centres.

Why not just keep the jobs where they are and save money?

oscarBravo

Give it up, ND06. As a passionate believer in - and activist towards, in my own way - rural development, I can't see any point whatsoever in this whole doomed project. All the alleged benefits to the regions can be achieved, more cost-effectively and without the IR catastrophe.

New_Departure06

NewDubliner wrote:

Why not just keep the jobs where they are and save money?

That's the Dublin mindset talking again.

We need more balanced regional development, instead of everything being centred in Dublin.

NewDubliner

New_Departure06 wrote:

That's the Dublin mindset talking again.

We need more balanced regional development, instead of everything being centred in Dublin.

No, it's the cost-concious mindset.

It's time we examined the costs and the benefits of the current plan.

Just how much extra tax will people have to pay & to what extent does the current scheme contribute to 'balanced regional development'?

TempestSabre

New_Departure06 wrote:

That's the Dublin mindset talking again.

We need more balanced regional development, instead of everything being centred in Dublin.

You mean like the National Development Plan. But decentralisation isn't part of that. Is building isolated office ad hoc all over the place "balanced regional development"?

SeanW

I've always thought Decentralisation was a load of crap TBH.

If the government was serious about regional development, new jobs would be created in the regions, acessible by local people, instead of trying to drag Dublin people from their homes, friends and extended families to regional locations they don't want to go to anyway.

It must rank up there with SSIAs as the stupidest, costliest, most ridiculous and expensive vote buying plot in this farcical government's history. I'm no fan of civil servants either, but I hope you guys give Bertie, Parlon etc the roastings they deserver over this nonsense.

So I'm guessing NewDeparture06/Zuma et. al. would love it if his current employer told him to move to someplace else or risk promotions/the job itself? Would go without question? No? I didn't think so.

NewDubliner

SeanW wrote:

So I'm guessing NewDeparture06/Zuma et. al. would love it if his current employer told him to move to someplace else or risk promotions/the job itself? Would go without question? No? I didn't think so.

Given that they've not tried to justify the scheme, I think we're just seeing a bit of begrudgery.

RainyDay

New_Departure06 wrote:

We need more balanced regional development, instead of everything being centred in Dublin.

Do you really consider that locating Govt services based on the electoral needs of current Govt deputies to be 'balanced regional development'?

SeanW

"Balanced Regional Development" is a buzzword usually used by nutters looking for ridiculous projects anyway, kind of like the Western Rail Corridor.

And to top it off, these schemes don't actually DO anything to balance regional development ... They just look like they might be nice idea.

Victor

New_Departure06 wrote:

That's the Dublin mindset talking again. We need more balanced regional development, instead of everything being centred in Dublin.

Then why does the plan ignore the National Spatial Strategy?

fly_agaric

New_Departure06 wrote:

One of the advantages of decentralisation for the relevant regions is that it will allow for local recruitment in the future.

Yay! Each scattergun-decentralised little civil-service dept. can then become the personal creature of local bigwigs and parish-pump politicos like good banana republics everywhere.

New_Departure06 wrote:

That's the Dublin mindset talking again.

Oh no! Deliver us from the evils of the dreaded "Dublin Mindset".:rolleyes:
What would you call your mindset?
The "Dublin-hating begrudger" mindset?

Bet you really enjoyed RTE's fallout program! Now that's what I call decentralisation!:D

New_Departure06 wrote:

We need more balanced regional development, instead of everything being centred in Dublin.

The govt. spends way too much of our money on Dublin. Look at its world-class, world-class I tells ya, airport, public transport, hospitals, and the much envied motorway-marvel that is the M50.:rolleyes:

Anyway, why the feck would you want most of the civil-service to be in the capital city of the country near to the ministers' who run the show and close to each other so they can communicate easily and effectively with each other on overlapping issues?

DOH...what a bone-headed and illogical idea.

Ever so much better to send them out them willy-nilly to all points of the compass for "regional development" (aka strategic vote-buying) purposes.

Why would we ever copy other countries' that usually move the govt. and its apparatus to a single new city or region when they want to use it as a tool to stimulate development (e.g. Brazil, maybe S. Korea - I think they are considering a shift from Seoul)?

Decentralisation would make more sense to me if they were planning to gradually move the entire govt. (Dail and Seanad too) and most of the civil service out of Dublin to Cork/Limerick and surroundings or to Galway and surroundings but that doesn't appear to be what this scheme is about at all.

The_Conductor

fly_agaric wrote:

Anyway, why the feck would you want most of the civil-service to be in the capital city of the country near to the ministers' who run the show and close to each other so they can communicate easily and effectively with each other on overlapping issues?

The big thing that I just don't get is the way that no-one seems to be mentioning that over 2/3 of the civil service is already outside of Dublin. The current proposed decentralisation scheme is in fact the 5th largescale scheme in Ireland since the late 70s. Fewer than 1 in 3 civil servants are in Dublin......

NewDubliner

After this week's reality-check, the handlers & spin doctors seem to be sweating a bit. They've just activated the emergency 'popularity-revival' plan:

They put Bertie on the Tubridy show.:D

fly_agaric

smccarrick wrote:

The big thing that I just don't get is the way that no-one seems to be mentioning that over 2/3 of the civil service is already outside of Dublin. The current proposed decentralisation scheme is in fact the 5th largescale scheme in Ireland since the late 70s. Fewer than 1 in 3 civil servants are in Dublin......

Taking your word for it, that is a surprising figure (to me anyway).
That would make most of my rant against decentralisation (scattering dept's all over the country making the civil service less efficient) a bit pointless and stupid.

I just couldn't stop myself when I saw the usual stuff about "Dublin Mindset" and Dublin hogging development in the country being dragged out.

<runs away from thread full of civil servants.>

uncivilservant

fly_agaric wrote:

Taking your word for it, that is a surprising figure (to me anyway).
That would make most of my rant against decentralisation (scattering dept's all over the country making the civil service less efficient) a bit pointless and stupid.

Not really. What had been decentralised in the schemes before this one were individual divisions of Departments, whereas what McCreevy dictated was the sending of entire departments, including their HQ's.

Naturally enough, the first people to compain were the affected individual ministers themselves, all of whom insisted they'd have to maintain a Dublin office while their actual departmental HQ was in some other TDs constituency.

New_Departure06

Someone mentioned how much was this costing the taxpayer. Well it has been repeated umpteen times on the radio about how sites have been purchased around the country. Make it worth the taxpayers' while by moving there or else commuting there to work.

My question still hasn't been answered - if you don't want to move there then why not commute their instead? Many tens of thousands are forced as it is to commute to Dublin from outlying areas.

Dirk Gently

New_Departure06 wrote:

My question still hasn't been answered - if you don't want to move there then why not commute their instead? Many tens of thousands are forced as it is to commute to Dublin from outlying areas.

How many hours traveling in a car clogging up the roads sitting in traffic would be considered a reasonable commute. If everyone gets up at 5 in the morning and gets home at 11 at night then it just might work. Wonder if they would get milage allowance off the tax payer and cut their working week to 3 days so they get to spend some time with their families.
Commuting from Dublin is not the answer.

New_Departure06

clown bag wrote:

How many hours traveling in a car clogging up the roads sitting in traffic would be considered a reasonable commute. If everyone gets up at 5 in the morning and gets home at 11 at night then it just might work. Wonder if they would get milage allowance off the tax payer and cut their working week to 3 days so they get to spend some time with their families.
Commuting from Dublin is not the answer.

But it's okay for the culchies to have to commute to Dub of course! :rolleyes:

Dirk Gently

So your answer is to force people who want to stay in Dublin to sacrifice themselves by adding to the problem of long commutes.

Alot of the culchies you speak of make homes in Dublin and enjoy the lifestyle. If the locations where the government wants to relocate people to offered people a quality of life similar to what they have in Dublin there wouldn't be as much resistance to moving. The problem has a lot to do with regional development (or lack of).

What reasons have people to move out of Dublin away from there friends to places with less services. I actually applied about a year ago and put on the form that I was willing to move anywhere in the country but they still didn't want me:( It didn't make a difference to me where I worked as I'm young and don't much care about leaving Dublin as I have no mortgage or kids keeping me here and wouldn't mind a change of scenery with cheap rent compared to Dublin but for someone who has worked in Dublin and settled here with a house and family it is asking a bit much to move. Glad I didn't get the job now as I wouldn't want to be seen as undermining the people trying to keep their jobs in Dublin.

very miffed dub

I've thought about posting on this thread for quite a while but have resisted.......until now. This is my personal experience of decentralisation so far.

The simple fact about DECENTRALISATION is that it is a complete farce. I work in a key section of a Department where workers need to have a great deal of knowledge (amassed over years and years) and also technical skills. In the past anyone wishing to transfer to work in the section had to be interviewed to check their knowledge and suitability. Since decentralisation started any Tom, Dick or Harry could be transferred into the section as long as they would decentralise to the chosen location and we have lost staff with years of valuable experience and knowledge.

A person can be trained to do a job but knowledge that has taken years to grow cannot be transferred to another person (usually from outside this Department) without standards falling and at the end of the day it is the public that will suffer.

For the last few months my workload has doubled because I'm trying to train in my boss and my replacement - both of whom have come from different departments and haven't got a clue!! I have to work overtime (usually unpaid) so I can do my job properly..........FARCICAL!! Costly mistakes have been made by the new personnel and the experienced Dublin staff have had to mop up the resulting mess.

The worst thing about decentralisation (apart from being displaced from a job that I actually take pride in and love) is the uncertainty. We were told last November that the section will definitely move to the new location early in 2007 but are still waiting to hear what's going to become of the original staff (none of whom opted for decentralisation and don't all live in Dublin btw). The Dublin staff who won't decentralise (for whatever reason) are living on a knife edge. We don't know from day to day what's happening and if we'll have our current job next week, next month, etc., etc.

What's hapening has been likened to a cull. The number of staff in the decentralised section will be significantly reduced. It's a cunning way to actually decrease staff numbers.

With regard to married couples working for different Departments. I know of at least two couples who will be affected by this debacle (assuming they agreed to decentralise - which they haven't).

The first couple were expected to decentralise to Donegal and Waterford respectively. They have teenage children who will be attending College in Dublin soon. What are they supposed to do??? Buy a house somewhere in the middle and meet at week-ends??? It's an absolute joke.

The other couple who have two small children (one of which has health problems and needs to go to Crumlin Children's Hospital on a regular basis)would only be separated by 150 miles if they agreed to decentralise!!

The public sector unions should be ashamed of themselves. I'm a member of the PSEU and they are USELESS!!!

I have a suggestion for Mr. Ahern and co. Either scrap the farcical dentralisation programme or erect a purpose built structure capable of holding at least 5000 disgruntled civil servants who will not decentralise. It would have to have interior white walls lined with padding so we can collectively bang our heads off the dreaded white walls and avoid a huge legal case against the State.

Thanks for letting me get this off my chest

SeanW

Look, many of these people have families rooted in the city, children in schools, spouses who have careers in the city, have amenities not often present in rural areas, friends, extended family, everything in their Dublin homeland.

Why the hell would all these people just want to up and move RIGHT NOW just to get the present government some extra votes? I can very much see the point of view of the people who don't want to move.

Also, like I said the phrase "balanced regional development" is usually used by anti-Dublin loonies looking for crazy projects. One such project is the Western Rail Corridor, which, although it looks like a nice idea when you look at the details you find that for the most part it would serve low-density areas (one off housing free-for-all in Mayo for example) over a very poor quality alignment that would cost a bundle to reopen, provide a poor quality service, and despite all the hype it would attract very few actual users (y'know, fare paying passengers who actually USE the train?), therefore losing piles of money every year, and quite possibly damaging the image of railways in this country as a viable, sensible investment to move large numbers of people, which is what passenger railways are supposed to do. And I say this as a pro-rail person and a member of pro-rail lobby Platform 11 which also opposes the Northern section of the WRC in favour other more viable investments including the Southern section of the WRC, which has much more potential.

Back on topic, anyone who is thinking clearly should have seen the problems with the Decentralisation proposal coming a mile away. So as soon as some (usually from the West) "I hate Dublin" type person says

New_Departure06 wrote:

balanced regional development

you can safely ignore everything else they have to say. Especially when they're promoting something as looney and unjustifiable as the WRC/Decentralisation.

Unfortunately, despite the fact that both will probably do more harm than good, both are government priorities to buy votes from aforementioned Anti-Dublin types.

TempestSabre

If you've family in Dublin, and kids you won't want to uproot them to pull them away from from their family and firends. If you are single you are not going to want to move down to where theres no social life. The country is mainly (but not only) only attractive to people with links and family in the country. So you should promote development in these places.

If you move a office/dept wholesale, and all its staff, you aren't creating any significant development or new jobs. You are just paying to relocate, and then paying to support that office in a location that is is still unattractive to most people and business'es. The fundamentals of that location haven't changed. At least not by the current decentralisation plan.

You could survey where people want to decentralise too, then build there, and offer incentives, like day care or flexible hours, teleworking. But building in the middle of nowhere, where no one wants to move to, and were you only want to grab a few votes at the expensive of hundreds if not thousands of workers and their extended families is simply a waste of taxpayers money. You'll lose staff, have to recruit, offering higer wages to attract people out of Dublin, and also hire contractors to cover the shortfall. As they do now to cover the shortfall caused by the embargo.

Consider all of this when theres a embargo on recruitment and the aim of the embargo is to reduce the staff numbers of the civil service and semi-states. How then is decentralisation going to create jobs?

So the only rational for involuntary Decentralisation is a vote grabbing exercise, pre election, that some estimate is going to cost the taxpayer around a billion euro. No one knows for sure, because actually no ones costed this crazy scheme. But most people seem to more interested and happy that public workers are being hurled around the country than looking at how much its costing them and what little they are getting in return.

SeanW

So it's kinda like the other balanced regional developers pet project, the Northern section of the WRC.

Only this is infinitely more expensive and stupid, and involves screwing around with thousands of people's lives.

Unbelieveable.

New_Departure06

58% of the public support decentralisation they are hardly "loony" contrary to the implications of calling decentralisation "loony" by an individual on this thread.

very miffed dub

Assuming I did decentralise miles away, could the FF/PD coalition (or any future government) guarantee school and college places for my children in the decentralised location??

I DON'T THINK SO!!!!!!!

There's a lot more to consider than commuting times

SeanW

New_Departure06 wrote:

58% of the public support decentralisation they are hardly "loony" contrary to the implications of calling decentralisation "loony" by an individual on this thread.

And Hitler won the elections in Germany in 1938. Not comparing decentralisation to the Nazis, but it just goes to show how easily people can be fooled. That's all your 58% proves.

NewDubliner

New_Departure06 wrote:

58% of the public support decentralisation

That's not true.

When was a referendum held?

58% of a small number of people questioned in a poll supported the idea of decentralisation. The people polled were not asked if they were prepared to accept more traffic in Dublin and in the selected towns, higher taxes and lower services as part of the project. If they had been informed of the truth about the cost of the project and the dubious benefits it will bring, the percentage would have been much lower.

Can you tell us how much the project will cost?

Dinarius

New_Departure06 wrote:

My question still hasn't been answered - if you don't want to move there then why not commute their instead? Many tens of thousands are forced as it is to commute to Dublin from outlying areas.

Have you even bothered to look at the list of locations chosen for decentralisation and how far most of them are from Dublin?

That's why everyone has been ignoring your question.

D.

The_Conductor

New_Departure06 wrote:

58% of the public support decentralisation they are hardly "loony" contrary to the implications of calling decentralisation "loony" by an individual on this thread.

Horsemanure.
I have a degree in applied statistics- and I calculate statistically valid scientific surveys and weighted averages in different subject matter on a daily basis as part of my job.

There has not been any valid nationwide poll on support for decentralisation.
There has not been any public acknowledgement (or even attempt to measure) the actual costs other than property costs, associated with decentralisation.

If you are going to quote polls or statistics at us- you have to acknowledge their source so that people can have some faith in the truth or veracity of your comments (and so that we can check them out for ourselves). If you want to throw facts at people- the very least you can do show them the respect of acknowledging the source of your material.

TempestSabre

New_Departure06 wrote:

58% of the public support decentralisation they are hardly "loony" contrary to the implications of calling decentralisation "loony" by an individual on this thread.

As usual in Ireland most people are not really looking beyond the superficial.

Accusations against other posters of trollery are not allowed.
It's in the charter so new dubliner please read the charter.

Zuma Do not Troll in this thread or I will ban you.

This warning applies to everyone.
Anyone I think is trolling from this point out will be banned as will anyone who doesnt use the report the post feature instead of accusing a poster of trolling.

The charter is quite clear on this.
WE(the mods of politics) regard calling other posters here trolls as simply another form of abuse - ERGO it will get a ban.

pete

very miffed dub wrote:

I'm a member of the PSEU and they are USELESS!!!

I couldn't agree more. I'm a strong believer in union membership, but the PSEU's complete disregard for the concerns of their Dublin membership means I regularly consider leaving the union.... usually every second Thursday when I look at the deduction from my salary that goes to them. For what, exactly?

NewDubliner

PSEU is split nearly evenly as follows:

1: Non-dublin staff who want to move to another non-Dublin location.
2: Dublin staff who are considering moving if they get the right location.
3: Dublin staff who do not want to move.

The biggest single cadre of non-movers is in IT, but they've suffered already from general-servicisation of their speciality and are now under siege from out-sourcing and contractors.

Victor

My question still hasn't been answered - if you don't want to move there then why not commute their instead? Many tens of thousands are forced as it is to commute to Dublin from outlying areas.

Tell me how long a commute from Dublin to Youghal would take.

eigrod

Tom Parlon is a complete and utter disgrace :

From today's Irish Times :

nions blamed over decentralisation
Mark Hennessy, Political Correspondent

Rivalries between trade unions over promotions and prized postings are holding up the Government's decentralisation plan, Minister of State for the Office of Public Works Tom Parlon has charged.

Mr Parlon, who is in charge of decentralisation, said negotiations on reforms were "going very well and could be completed soon". On Saturday, Taoiseach Bertie Ahern acknowledged that the Government had "taken too much on in one go" by declaring that it would move 10,000 civil servants out of Dublin by the end of next year.


"There are a huge amount of people who want to go, but the management of that, of who can go, what grades, and how, is a difficult exercise," he told a newspaper.

Speaking on RTE's Tubridy Tonight, the Taoiseach said that decentralisation could not be completed by 2007 - the target originally set by Charlie McCreevy when he was Minister for Finance. In reality, most State institutions abandoned the 2007 target last year, while the majority of current transfer plans are expected to conclude by the end of 2009.

However, Mr Ahern appeared to go further in his RTÉ interview when he indicated that it could take until 2012 to complete, so it is not clear now if Mr Ahern is saying that not only can the first 2007 target not be met, but also that the second unofficial one of 2009 cannot be met either. Acknowledging that the original timetable had "not made sense", Mr Parlon said: "The Taoiseach was only saying what we are all saying. So what if it takes an extra two years. It was a throwaway remark from McCreevy. Nobody intended that other than him."

He was confident that "very practical solutions" could be found to ensure that decentralisation is completed, though he said some unions are fearful of conceding ground to others.
"They are very scared that they would allow people from another union to qualify for promotion to another post. There is a lot of territoriality amongst the unions," he said.

State employees cannot transfer between the Civil Service and State agencies, such as FÁS, where workers have gone on strike in protest at the plan to move them to Birr, Co Offaly.

The Government last month scrapped its plan to transfer 100 probation officers to Navan, Co Meath, though 20 secretarial and administrative staff from the Probation and Welfare Service are to move. Denying any climbdown, Mr Parlon said the Government had promised Navan 120 jobs: "Do you think the people there care that it is probation jobs, or other jobs when it comes to cashing the cheques every week."

Meanwhile, he confirmed that Office of Public Works chairman Seán Benton, who is supposed to move to Trim, Co Meath, has insisted that he must have a Dublin office to continue to function as chairman. Minister for Social Affairs Séamus Brennan, speaking on TV3's The Political Party, said: "You know the Taoiseach, he's very honest, he says it as he sees it, and he's obviously come to the conclusion that we bit off a lot to try and move 10,000 people very quickly."

However, Fine Gael TD, Richard Bruton said "gross incompetence and not over ambition" is "the real reason for the collapse of the Government's decentralisation programme" which had created "a shambles" out of what should have been a very successful programme.

"A throwaway remark from McCreevey" - so the lives & careers of several thousand people & their families can be subject to "throwaway remarks" ?

Blaming inter-union rivalry - I guess it was only a matter of time before he came up with that one !

"Do you think the people there care that it is probation jobs, or other jobs when it comes to cashing the cheques every week." - so that's what this whole programme is about ? Thanks for clarifying that for us, Minister !!!

You are a disgrace, Minister !

Marica

New_Departure06 wrote:

My question still hasn't been answered - if you don't want to move there then why not commute their instead? Many tens of thousands are forced as it is to commute to Dublin from outlying areas.

If I were to go with my organisation and commute, my daily round-trip would be over 160 miles on a notoriously-dangerous single-carriageway road - there is no train service and the bus takes two and a half hours. I am studying part-time at the moment and I spend two evenings a week at lectures and a lot of my time on other evenings doing assignments and coursework and I also have a life in my spare time. Where's the advantage to me in reverse commuting?

BTW: what gain is there for towns if people commute to them from Dublin? If people are doing long commutes to get there they won't really have much time for spending money...

Victor

Tom Parlon wrote:

A throwaway remark from McCreevey

What was the throwaway remark?

Macy

Sustainable regional development is creating new jobs in these towns, not using civil and public servants to give the impression of job creation in these areas which the Government has failed.

There has never been transferability between state agencies, and between state agencies and the civil service. This is more to do with the State Agencies being the individual employer - i.e. a FAS workers contract is with FAS, not the Government. Typical FF/PD to blame the unions for this fact I suppose.

Parlon is now scrambling around looking for an out, brought about by him jumping the gun claiming credit for jobs that ain't going to go to Birr and making himself synonymous with decentralisation. To top it off, his Departments interference has kept the FAS dispute ongoing and in the news, and has seen Birr become the place that apparently no one wants to live. I bet it doesn't seem like such a vote grabber now down in Parlon Country.

fly_agaric

New_Departure06 wrote:

But it's okay for the culchies to have to commute to Dub of course! :rolleyes:

Most of the "culchies" commuting to Dublin from the belt in Meath, Kildare + further afield are, of course, Dublin refugees driven out by the insane property prices in the areas they grew up in!
Not saying these people aren't happy where they are living (I have a few relatives among them) but I thought the preferred local term for these people was "blow-ins"? I have seen less kind terms used on these boards also. Now they become "culchies" to suit your argument.;)

NewDubliner

This report of a speech by minister O'Cuiv is interesting as in his enthusiasm for the government's scheme, he overlooks cost/value for money and puts forward the already discredited arguments about poor quality of life in Dublin (it's great) and that the scheme will relieve infrastructure pressure (it will cause more congestion, not less):

Irish Independent Fri, 12 May 2006 Rural Ireland's'backward image wrong
Brian McDonald
RURAL Ireland came out fighting yesterday in the row over decentralisation plans, slamming the "misguided perception" that country towns are somehow backward. Chief executive of lobby group Irish Rural Link, Seamus Boland, also accused the government of presiding over "a PR disaster", claiming that huge damage had been done to the decentralisation plan by the public service unions rejecting it. But last night, Rural Affairs Minister Eamon O Cuiv hit back at critics of the programme to move 10,000 civil servants out of the capital to centres around the country and said that, while it was an idealistic goal, decentralisation was definitely going to happen. Addressing the annual conference of Irish Rural Link, an umbrella group for organisations and individuals lobbying for sustainable rural development, Mr Boland said that while decentralisation was undoubtedly a good idea, it had been "soured" because it was brought in without reference to the National Spatial Strategy. He deeply regretted the bad publicity that places like Birr were now getting as a result of the public service unions saying 'no' to the plan. "Right now it is a rather sad and bad story," he told conference delegates in Tullamore. Said Mr Boland: "It is undoubtedly a PR disaster for the government. The government have simply not sold it well at all. The result is that the perception has been created that rural places are somehow backward in attitudes. "The government must address this immediately. Most rural towns have high infrastructure, cheaper house prices, accessible schools and a quality of life so much better than on the eastern corridor around Dublin. "The government must now support those making the move because, more than likely, families are worried about this. They have to go to the table and sit down with the unions and iron out this problem." In his address last night Mr O Cuiv described decentralisation as the most visionary and courageous move to benefit rural Ireland since the foundation of the State. The minister rounded on Fine Gael critics of the plan querying whether the party had lost its wits and suggesting that they were desperate to win votes in Dublin. Said Mr O Cuiv: "While rural communities will undoubtedly benefit, Dublin will also benefit, with pressure on services reduced." He directed most of his trenchant criticism at Fine Gael's front bench spokesman, Richard Bruton for proclaiming at their ard fheis the party would not move "the core planning units away from the capital where they must contribute to coherent policy making." The minister added: "Let's be very clear about this. This government's belief is that the General's place is with his troops." "Fine Gael, on the other hand, seem to have a vision of a small army of Sir Humphrey Applebys safe and secure in Dublin, far away from their staff in the regions while they postulate on government policy in a rarefied atmosphere of a particular kind of Dublin 4 mindset." Brian McDonald

Dinarius

Eamon O'Cuiv was exposed for the total ass that he is on Five Seven Live today.

Last week he was interviewed by Rachel English and, in a pathetic attempt to show how he was doing his bit for decentralisation, he cited the success of moving twenty Pobail jobs to the West. He went on to say that the job was 'half done' and another 20 would follow.

Pobail contacted RTE and said the following:

1. Pobail is expanding into the regions and the twenty jobs in the West were new jobs. No one has moved to them from Dublin and no one will be.

2. Pobail is a body made up of neither civil nor public servants.

3. They have no idea why Pobail is listed as part of the government's decentralisation process.

This correspondence was read out by Rachel English between 6.15 and 6.30, should anyone want to check it on RTE's listen again feature.

Finally, Pat Kenny interviewed Mark Hennessy this morning on radio. I missed most of it, but it seemed resignatory in tone. Hennessy's view is that if the opposition get elected next year their own backbenchers will be screaming for its completion.

McCreevy must be dining out nightly on this in Brussels.

Lastly, I'd like to compile a list of facts relating that would summarise the fallacy of this process as currently conceived. If anyone comes up with any, I'll add them to this post.

To get the ball rolling...........

1. Two thirds of civil servants already work outside Dublin.

2. Dublin's population is increasing at a rate of approximately 30,000 per annum, so for the Taoiseach to stand up in the Dail and say that we need decentralisation to ease congestion is simply a lie. The population has increased by about 100,000 since McCreey made Tom Parlon weep.

3. As former Minister for Justice, John O'Donogue's transfer of the Legal Aid Board to (guess where?) Kerry has been a fiasco.

4.??????????

D.

NewDubliner

Dinarius wrote:

2. Dublin's population is increasing at a rate of approximately 30,000 per annum, so for the Taoiseach to stand up in the Dail and say that we need decentralisation to ease congestion is simply a lie. The population has increased by about 100,000 since McCreey made Tom Parlon weep.

The only way decentralisation can relieve congestion is if the city-centre offices are left empty and staff are not allowed to sell their houses.

4.??????????

The most enthusiastic 'volunteers' don't live or work in Dublin.

5. 10,600 people have not volunteered. they've expressed an interest in moving if they can get the location & job they want.

The_Conductor

Just out of curiousity- how many of the 10,560 "volunteers" are in actual fact in Dublin at all?

Is there a figure on what percentage of this is decentralisation, and what percentage is purely relocation (irrespective of the number "posts" that are moving)?

Any more interesting articles on the public backlash in Trim/Birr/Portarlington/Longford town/ Athenry etc?

pete

NewDubliner wrote:

5. 10,600 people have not volunteered. they've expressed an interest in moving if they can get the location & job they want.

And how many of the expressions of interest from Dublin people were made purely to safeguard an existing post / location with no intention of ever moving?

Speaking from my own experience, i'd say about 50%....

New_Departure06

Should be remembered too that we have successfully decentralised in the past, e.g. Dept of Transport, Dept of Social Welfare. It has worked and will work in some form.

NewDubliner

It worked then, (eventually) but at a cost. Nobody know what the economic benefit has been or how much it cost in the end.

If it was successful, it is because nobody knows what the original goals were and if they were met.

The failed & costly decentralisation of the Legal Aid Board to Cahirciveen is already well known.

Social Welfare & Revenue was discussed at a heariing in 2004:http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/2004/07/29/story179554930.asp

....Ms Lacey and Revenue Commissioners collector general Liam Irwin highlighted previous decentralisation programmes. Both said that these had been a success but there had been transitional difficulties.

Half the posts in the Collectors General office in Limerick had to be filled by promotions because of a low take-up of transfers.

Both agencies had to recruit new staff to fill up to 20% of the positions.

These costs have not been predicted by Tom Parlon & the taxpayer does not know how much he/she will have to pay in extra taxes this time, to fund the project. The figure of 900m euro that has been revealed is for bare buildings.

The cost of IT, furnishing, re-training, productivity loss, promotions extra staff have not been estimated.

The looming loss of most IT expertese will lead to more consultants/contractors being hired.

What will the cost be this time? Will it be worth it? How will the cost be controlled and how will the benefits be measured? If it's costing too much, how will we know and how can it be stopped?

SeanW

New_Departure06 wrote:

Should be remembered too that we have successfully decentralised in the past, e.g. Dept of Transport, Dept of Social Welfare. It has worked and will work in some form.

Uh huh.

200 people have applied to be "decentralised" from Longford mainly to Carrick on Shannon. Only 150 have applied to be decentralised to Longford from Dublin.

So for this region, its really been a huge boon. Decentralisation has been one of the stupidest and worst largesses of this government since ... well ... anything.