Decentralisation

irish_bob

thousands of irish people will have to move to australia or the uk or wherever now since they lost there jobs yet the public servants throw a strop when there being asked to relocate to tullamore all the while keeping there short working day , zero accountability and bullet proof pension possitions

its time the people spoke up about the biggest issue by far facing this country

public service reform

The_Conductor

irish_bob wrote: »

thousands of irish people will have to move to australia or the uk or wherever now since they lost there jobs yet the public servants throw a strop when there being asked to relocate to tullamore all the while keeping there short working day , zero accountability and bullet proof pension possitions

its time the people spoke up about the biggest issue by far facing this country

public service reform

With all due respect- you are merely repeating hysteria that the media love to portray- it sells newspapers after all.

First of all- the people emigrating to the UK or Australia (or where-ever) are for the most part young people, who are not married with children and other commitments that older people often have. The average civil servant is in their 50s, almost 65% of them are women, and almost 18% of those due to be decentralised are also married to another civil servant who is due to be sent to a totally seperate location (in my case I am due to go to Portlaoise, but my wife is due to go to Letterkenny). The only solution is for one to resign and to move jobless with their partner to their location, in the hope that they will be able to get a job there (increasingly unlikely in the current climate). Meanwhile anyone young enough to have bought an apartment in the recent years, is stuck with it and unable to sell it even at a major loss (akin to everyone else)- so those hordes of civil servants who were supposed to support the rural building boom haven't materialised either.

Our short working day- as you put it, depends entirely on the department and section you happen to be working in. Most of our public offices are now open from 8AM in the morning till 7PM at night. Measured in a 4 week block, its not unusual to do 40 or 50 hours unpaid overtime, for which you may, if work permits, take a day and a half in-lieu. If it doesn't allow (if you're in a busy section) you loose them.

Zero accountability? Really? The average civil servant is under more intense scrutiny the whole time than anyone in the private sector. Between regular performance appraisals, role profiles, procedure manuals etc- I'd like to see a job as well scrutinised in the private sector (and I have worked in both). If you do not perform, you can and will be demoted or fired- and it happens regularly.

Bulletproof pensions- anyone employed since 1995 in the civil service pays 14% of their gross income into a defined benefit pension scheme which pays out 50% of the average of their 5 last years of salary, less whatever the prevailing contributory OAP pension rate is. Contrast this with anyone working in the financial sector for example- they get 75% of their final salary + the contributory OAP (though those schemes are now largely closed).

In addition- the salaries in the civil service are acknowledged to be 15% below comparable salaries in the private sector- in recognition of the defined benefit aspect of the pension scheme. While it may be a reasonable pension- its by no means handed to you on a plate- you have to pay for it, and its no-where near as generous as many private sector schemes.

The other massive thing that you are alluding to is public sector reform. You have to realise that the civil service is only a tiny part of the public sector. There are more people working in the HSE than in the rest of the public sector combined. There are fewer than 1/3 as many civil servants as there were 20 years ago- while the HSE now is 6 times bigger than the combined staffing of the various health boards of 20 years ago.

Today's civil service is a dynamic, well educated, professional organisation- where people are recruited and promoted on a merit basis- its really difficult to get in- fewer than 6% of applicants succeed (have a look at some of the threads in the jobs forum on this site for some annecdotal evidence). Years ago it was used as a dumping ground by politicians to manipulate unemployment figures- which is why it used to be stuffed with people who had no real idea of what they were doing. With the advent of the Public Appointments Service- recruitment of staff became transparent- politicians no longer had the means to interfere in the process.

If you really want to debate decentralisation on this thread, please come here with facts and reasoned arguments, instead of simply bleating whatever headline the tabloids see fit to print to shift a few extra copies on a slow news day.......

NewDubliner

smccarrick wrote: »

one new girl has a doctorate in electronic engineering,

Very useful if the Civil Service decides to design its own chips.

smccarrick wrote: »

no idea what its costing-

No one does, not even the Taoiseach in whose backyard this money is being spent..

smccarrick wrote: »

but if the current incumbents are being used to fill positions elsewhere as they arise, instead of new people being brought in, then at least a large chunk of the salary aspect is offset.

There are no Dublin-based IT vacancies for them, so the likelihood is that they'll be retained to support their replacements (as happened with the Legal Aid Board in Cahirciveen). So, this means that Civil Service numbers will have to increase.

irish_bob wrote: »

its time the people spoke up about the biggest issue by far facing this country...public service reform

Good idea, let's start by not spending money on unnecessary projects?

eigrod

irish_bob wrote: »

thousands of irish people will have to move to australia or the uk or wherever now since they lost there jobs........

Surely they should have joined the Civil Service instead of the jobs that they chose that are no longer there then ?

Was very easy to join the Civil Service over the last 8 years or so....an open & transparent recruitment process.....the fairest of any employer to be honest. I just can't think why the "bullet proof pension positions" didn't attract them all in.

Perhaps all those who chose to join the Civil Service should now just give up their jobs for the misfortunate people who lost their private sector jobs ?

Carawaystick

"Our short working day- as you put it, depends entirely on the department and section you happen to be working in. Most of our public offices are now open from 8AM in the morning till 7PM at night. "


links please??
I do not believe most pubic offices of the civil service are open any where close to 8am til 7pm


Social Welfare 9.30 to 12.00 and 14.00 to 16.00.
http://www.welfare.ie/contact/index.html#Dublin_north

Revenue ros helpdesk 9.00am to 5.00pm
https://www.ros.ie/PublisherServlet/news&helpdesk#helpdesk%23helpdesk

Govt Publications office 9.30am to 5.15pm (Non - Thurs) and 9.30am to 5.00pm (Fri
https://www.ros.ie/PublisherServlet/news&helpdesk#helpdesk%23helpdesk

passport office 9.30am to 4.30
http://www.dfa.ie/home/index.aspx?id=254

Riskymove

Carawaystick wrote: »

links please??
I do not believe most pubic offices of the civil service are open any where close to 8am til 7pm

Most Departments are open for that time, public offices may specify certain hours for people to call in,but that does not mean civil servants only work those hours

my own building is open from 7 am to 9pm

The_Conductor

My building is open from 7AM to 8PM, however we only deal with the public from 8AM to 7PM. Depending on the nature of the section a lot of the early and late hours might be associated with the issue of various types of licences (which have specified issue dates under EU regulations), tenders for various contracts or proposals, reporting deadlines from institutes etc etc- it really varies. In my section if you come in for 7-8AM you go home early (5-5.30PM)- if you come in for 9-10AM you stay later (7-7.30PM).

irish_bob

smccarrick wrote: »

With all due respect- you are merely repeating hysteria that the media love to portray- it sells newspapers after all.

First of all- the people emigrating to the UK or Australia (or where-ever) are for the most part young people, who are not married with children and other commitments that older people often have. The average civil servant is in their 50s, almost 65% of them are women, and almost 18% of those due to be decentralised are also married to another civil servant who is due to be sent to a totally seperate location (in my case I am due to go to Portlaoise, but my wife is due to go to Letterkenny). The only solution is for one to resign and to move jobless with their partner to their location, in the hope that they will be able to get a job there (increasingly unlikely in the current climate). Meanwhile anyone young enough to have bought an apartment in the recent years, is stuck with it and unable to sell it even at a major loss (akin to everyone else)- so those hordes of civil servants who were supposed to support the rural building boom haven't materialised either.

Our short working day- as you put it, depends entirely on the department and section you happen to be working in. Most of our public offices are now open from 8AM in the morning till 7PM at night. Measured in a 4 week block, its not unusual to do 40 or 50 hours unpaid overtime, for which you may, if work permits, take a day and a half in-lieu. If it doesn't allow (if you're in a busy section) you loose them.

Zero accountability? Really? The average civil servant is under more intense scrutiny the whole time than anyone in the private sector. Between regular performance appraisals, role profiles, procedure manuals etc- I'd like to see a job as well scrutinised in the private sector (and I have worked in both). If you do not perform, you can and will be demoted or fired- and it happens regularly.

Bulletproof pensions- anyone employed since 1995 in the civil service pays 14% of their gross income into a defined benefit pension scheme which pays out 50% of the average of their 5 last years of salary, less whatever the prevailing contributory OAP pension rate is. Contrast this with anyone working in the financial sector for example- they get 75% of their final salary + the contributory OAP (though those schemes are now largely closed).

In addition- the salaries in the civil service are acknowledged to be 15% below comparable salaries in the private sector- in recognition of the defined benefit aspect of the pension scheme. While it may be a reasonable pension- its by no means handed to you on a plate- you have to pay for it, and its no-where near as generous as many private sector schemes.

The other massive thing that you are alluding to is public sector reform. You have to realise that the civil service is only a tiny part of the public sector. There are more people working in the HSE than in the rest of the public sector combined. There are fewer than 1/3 as many civil servants as there were 20 years ago- while the HSE now is 6 times bigger than the combined staffing of the various health boards of 20 years ago.

Today's civil service is a dynamic, well educated, professional organisation- where people are recruited and promoted on a merit basis- its really difficult to get in- fewer than 6% of applicants succeed (have a look at some of the threads in the jobs forum on this site for some annecdotal evidence). Years ago it was used as a dumping ground by politicians to manipulate unemployment figures- which is why it used to be stuffed with people who had no real idea of what they were doing. With the advent of the Public Appointments Service- recruitment of staff became transparent- politicians no longer had the means to interfere in the process.

If you really want to debate decentralisation on this thread, please come here with facts and reasoned arguments, instead of simply bleating whatever headline the tabloids see fit to print to shift a few extra copies on a slow news day.......

you started your post by patronisingly accusing me of being misled by the ( as you put it ) hysterial anti public service media
this is not the 1st time i have heard this line parroted by those in the public service , in fact an uncle of mine said the very same thing to me last yr

let me be very clear , i deal with the public service in more areas than the health service and i deal with one specific area all the time
i do not need the sunday independant to tell me that the public service is an inneficent , unaccountable , lumbering dinasaur with a massive sense of entitlement

Riskymove

irish_bob wrote: »

let me be very clear , i deal with the public service in more areas than the health service and i deal with one specific area all the time
i do not need the sunday independant to tell me that the public service is an inneficent , unaccountable , lumbering dinasaur with a massive sense of entitlement

and do you think the current decentralisation plan is going to change that??

IMO its going to result in worse customer service

Carawaystick

smccarrick wrote: »

My building is open from 7AM to 8PM, however we only deal with the public from 8AM to 7PM.

You claimed that most public offices were open, and when challenged provided no evidence.

again, links to at least 4 offices open to the public from 0800 til 1900

50 hours overtime in 4 weeks would be over the 48 hour working time directive limit. assuming a normal 40 hour working week.
which would be illegal. I realise just cos something is illegal won't necessarily prevent the govt doing it, but again evidence please.

The_Conductor

If you really want examples- start at the bottom of Kildare Street- Department of Transport opens to the public at 8AM (and staff previous to this), the Houses of the Oireachtas open at 8AM, the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment opens at 8AM, the Department of Arts, Sports and Tourism opens at 8.45AM, The Department of Finance opens at 7.45AM (around the corner on Merrion Row), The Department of Agriculture opens at 7.30AM (ditto Merrion Row- Kildare St. is 8AM), etc.

The provision of services to the public depends entirely on the nature of the particular service- however each and every of the Departments above provide some level of service (depending on particular area). Internal resources (i.e. IT helpdesks and phone services tends to be on out-of-hours service till about 8.30AM and from 7PM onwards (but if you actually call to the relevant section they will deal with whatever the query is).

I actually don't understand why you doubt this- its been this way for several years- its nothing out of the ordinary.

Re: overtime- when its getting very high, people clock out, so its not totally off the scale. Persistent high levels of overtime would be unusual- and would notably reflect very poor staffing levels- as levels have fallen considerably over the last few years through a non-replacement policy as people quit/retire/die. Persistent high levels of overtime tends to be in higher grades- and also tends to occur in a seasonal manner (aka lots of very long hours in the summer time when quite a few staff take unpaid leave- but also if a particular scheme is closing shortly or deadlines imminent.......)

I'm not exagerating when I suggest that my own AP may very possibly do well over a hundred hours OT per month- 12 hours days are practically the norm for him, often longer.

I really do not understand the levels of cynicism expressed here on this thread. The civil service is an awful lot smaller than it was years ago- and people are recruited at competitive interview for their skills and dedication. Most people join because they are in actual fact public spirited- if you compare graduate recruitment salaries from the civil service with other industries- we certainly don't do it for the money. Myself- I joined because I actually really enjoy my job, and I work with some really decent people. The work is incredibly varied and while certain aspects of it can be infuriating as hell, its that way elsewhere.

NewDubliner

Carawaystick wrote: »

again, links to at least 4 offices open to the public from 0800 til 1900

www.ros.ie, www.revenue.ie - open 24x7.

But, the government has put that system in jeopardy by proposing to move its computer centre and all associated expert staff outside Dublin. The move is estimated to cost in excess of €100m and involves significant risk of severe disruption to service.

The proposers have made no financial estimate of any benefits in return for the expenditure.

Firetrap

If you apply that logic, people working in banks must have very short working weeks indeed!

It is a scandalous waste of taxpayers' money and will cause a shocking loss of expertise. How, for example, can you get someone who's worked as a probation officer for all of their career to magically retrain as an expert in taxation or mapping or environmental issues?

dresden8

Firetrap wrote: »

If you apply that logic, people working in banks must have very short working weeks indeed!

It is a scandalous waste of taxpayers' money and will cause a shocking loss of expertise. How, for example, can you get someone who's worked as a probation officer for all of their career to magically retrain as an expert in taxation or mapping or environmental issues?

That's hardly the point. FF ministers need to get money and jobs into their constituencies. The country can go f**k itself after that.

Carawaystick

NewDubliner wrote: »

www.ros.ie, www.revenue.ie - open 24x7.

But, the government has put that system in jeopardy by proposing to move its computer centre and all associated expert staff outside Dublin. The move is estimated to cost in excess of €100m and involves significant risk of severe disruption to service.

The proposers have made no financial estimate of any benefits in return for the expenditure.

The second link I posted had the opening hours of the ros helpdesk. not open 24x7

just rang the dept of Ag, phone was answered at 21:12
Rang Dept of Enterprise, machine told me Our offices are open from 09:15 til 17:30, Monday to Friday. 01 6312121

dept of transport office hours 9:15 to 5:30, 01 670 7444

National Library 09:30 - 21:00 and half day saturday
National museum 10:00 - 17:00 6 days and half day Sunday.

The reason I doubted this was the complete lack of advertising of this availability of service by the civil service. If the dept of Ag hadn't answered, I would have been hesitant.

Riskymove

Carawaystick wrote: »

The second link I posted had the opening hours of the ros helpdesk. not open 24x7

just rang the dept of Ag, phone was answered at 21:12
Rang Dept of Enterprise, machine told me Our offices are open from 09:15 til 17:30, Monday to Friday. 01 6312121

dept of transport office hours 9:15 to 5:30, 01 670 7444

National Library 09:30 - 21:00 and half day saturday
National museum 10:00 - 17:00 6 days and half day Sunday.

The reason I doubted this was the complete lack of advertising of this availability of service by the civil service. If the dept of Ag hadn't answered, I would have been hesitant.

There are always going to official opening hours generally based around a 9-530 situation. The people manning the switch may go home at 5.30 for example. That does not mean everyone goes at 5.30 or that the Department is closed.

You can direct dial people at anytime (in my Department anyway).

To be honest i dont think it would be efficient to keep a reception or switch manned form 8am to 9pm every day

NewDubliner

Carawaystick wrote: »

The second link I posted had the opening hours of the ros helpdesk. not open 24x7

But, thanks to technology, the service itself is available 24x7. IT specialists are on call 24x7 to keep the system online.

There's nothing in the present 'decentralisation' plans that's going to change the opening hours of the help desk that you want in addtion to the online service. In fact the whole idea of having an online service is to reduce the need for expensive staff.

This plan will result in lowered productivity as the expensively trained IT specialists are relocated to unrelated work and new staff are brought in to replace them.

Firetrap

I wonder overall how many new people will have to be recruited into the public service to make decentralisation work? I mean, if you have a proposed office that's supposed to have say, 200 staff in it but only about 20 have applied to go, will the government have to recruit 180 extra staff to fill the new office? And all the time, they're still paying the wages of the existing staff in Dublin, who may or may not be gainfully employed. They still haven't sorted out the discrepancies between technical and general service grades...

The_Conductor

Firetrap wrote: »

They still haven't sorted out the discrepancies between technical and general service grades...

Which discrepancies?
Do you mean the fact that a lot of the general service grades are only nominally "general service"- and the fact that despite months of writing detailed procedure manuals, checklists, job specifications etc- that in many cases its simply impossible to recruit people to become, for example, a finance officer overnight (especially when these people tend to hold accountancy qualifications, but not have any recognition of the fact)? A lot of the people applying for public sector jobs are dropping their applications once they look into the pay/superannuation/working locations and other conditions- as they do not feel they can make it work for them. Over 1/3 of the people who applied for the recent EO and AO competitions never even bothered turning up for the exams (note: the AO exams are ongoing).

Then there is the parallel problem that some people who are highly skilled in particular areas are being moved to other areas where they are unable to make use of these skills- and they are being replaced by staff who have no expertise whatsoever- purely on the basis of where they are willing to commute to (and its commute now- as its virtually impossible to either buy or sell property).

Further- is it fair that some people are having their salaries chopped because they are being forcibly moved into other areas which do not attract overtime/allowances/travel or other expenses? A lot of IT work (particularly infrastructure but also some other areas) is by necessity carried out at weekends and outside office hours- and between different buildings and locations can be an ongoing process. Will the new people be as willing to work anti-social hours? For less pay?

Its all well and good to blindly plough on in the name of public sector reform- but why should skills and expertise be dumped purely on political whims? And the worst thing of all- despite the fact that its been ongoing for a couple of years now, there is still no idea what it will cost the exchequer at the end of the day. None. Some costs were held up (notably building costs) and proclaimed to be the true costs- when in actual fact they are the tip of the iceberg.

Will the public ever hold politicians accountable for their actions? Arguably some did- when they voted no to Lisbon? I really don't know.......

Firetrap

My bad. I didn't explain myself very well there What I was trying to articulate was the problems of transferring staff between stage agencies and the civil service. The grading structures in the civil service don't exactly match up with those in the stage agencies and is just another headache to contend with.

With the economy going down the tubes, it would be a feckin' disgrace if the government pushes ahead with this costly travesty. I've yet to be convinced that it came from anything other than a drunken pub chat on the eve of the 2003 budget. Charlie McCreevy deserves to be horse-whipped.

Carawaystick

back on topic, are there still plans to decentralise semi state companies?
Wasn't there a plan to move 120 of the 80 Bus Éireann staff to Mitchelstown from Phibsboro?

Firetrap

Yep, they are still moving, despite the especially low take-up. There is a problem that's holding things up regarding grades. Most of them have their own unique grading system which doesn't really coincide with grades in the civil service. From what I've heard, sorting this is a major headache. To the best of my knowledge, nobody has transferred from one to the other.

The_Conductor

Firetrap wrote: »

Yep, they are still moving, despite the especially low take-up. There is a problem that's holding things up regarding grades. Most of them have their own unique grading system which doesn't really coincide with grades in the civil service. From what I've heard, sorting this is a major headache. To the best of my knowledge, nobody has transferred from one to the other.

Another problem is that post the superannuation reforms- that pension rights in the state bodies are in a lot of cases, actually far superior to those in the civil service......

pvt.joker

slightly off topic but...I have heard talk in the independant this week that there will be recruitment freezes placed on the civil service in the coming weeks, and that vacancys will not be filled etc. Do you think this will apply to an Garda Siochana also? I am at the late stages (medical) of getting into the next intake (August or November at worst case), and am very worried since reading that.
Although the government has committed to raising the strength of the force over the next year or 2.
Anyone any insight?
thanks

The_Conductor

Its a public sector recruitment freeze, as opposed to a civil service recruitment freeze. The implications are that certain areas will be allowed to cover natural wastage (people quitting, retirements, deaths) while other sectors will not be even allowed to recruit for those. The cabinet is to be briefed on Tuesday and there is a statement on the matter due from the Department of Finance on Wednesday (the 2nd).

S.

pvt.joker

smccarrick wrote: »

Its a public sector recruitment freeze, as opposed to a civil service recruitment freeze. The implications are that certain areas will be allowed to cover natural wastage (people quitting, retirements, deaths) while other sectors will not be even allowed to recruit for those. The cabinet is to be briefed on Tuesday and there is a statement on the matter due from the Department of Finance on Wednesday (the 2nd).

S.

Thanks.
Hopefully the government view an GS as one of those areas that should be allowed to recruit, what with violent crime on the increase etc.

irish_bob

i dont believe the gardai are under resourced , the problem is how they deploy there resources , they perfer to send out teams of gardai to busy public highways out of town to stop people for tax offenses , all the while the saturday night thugs are kicking the crap out of each other back in town

there are 2 things guards love, having there egos masaged and an easy target , its the handiest job in the world as long as your not in a really bad area , they look the other way a lot of the time anyway
they would perfer slaughter a few chickens than take on a hungry fox any day of the week

pvt.joker

irish_bob wrote: »

i dont believe the gardai are under resourced , the problem is how they deploy there resources , they perfer to send out teams of gardai to busy public highways out of town to stop people for tax offenses , all the while the saturday night thugs are kicking the crap out of each other back in town

there are 2 things guards love, having there egos masaged and an easy target , its the handiest job in the world as long as your not in a really bad area , they look the other way a lot of the time anyway
they would perfer slaughter a few chickens than take on a hungry fox any day of the week

Not under resourced? Really? There are 12,000 or so psni officers in Northern Ireland, for a population of 1 million people. There are just under 14,000 members of an GS in the south , with a population of 5 million people.

:rolleyes:

Take your garda bashing elsewhere, as this has now gone off topic so I won't say anymore.

irish_bob

pvt.joker wrote: »

Not under resourced? Really? There are 12,000 or so psni officers in Northern Ireland, for a population of 1 million people. There are just under 14,000 members of an GS in the south , with a population of 5 million people.

:rolleyes:

Take your garda bashing elsewhere, as this has now gone off topic so I won't say anymore.

slow down , you havent been handed your badge just yet , you will have plenty of time to throw your weight around
the comparrison with northern ireland is not a valid one , nothern ireland is a place not long out of war , its in transition

pvt.joker

irish_bob wrote: »

slow down , you havent been handed your badge just yet , you will have plenty of time to throw your weight around
the comparrison with northern ireland is not a valid one , nothern ireland is a place not long out of war , its in transition

Thanks for the personal insult there :rolleyes:


Ok then, how about New York city, population of 8 million, with 38,000 police officers?
I suppose that's not a valid comparison either?

You don't have a clue.

Firetrap

Back on topic, I was driving today and listening to Radio 1. Tom Parlon was on, wearing his CIF hat. There was a Fine Gael TD (I think....I only heard parts of it) who said that Decentralisation has cost €1 billion. WTF!

The_Conductor

Firetrap wrote: »

Back on topic, I was driving today and listening to Radio 1. Tom Parlon was on, wearing his CIF hat. There was a Fine Gael TD (I think....I only heard parts of it) who said that Decentralisation has cost €1 billion. WTF!

Probably Simon Coveney (unless they decided to let Richard Bruton on air )?
I think the figure being bandied around is EUR980 million (purely for property acquisitions and fitouts- no other costs having been quantified).

pvt.joker

What an utter disgrace. And have we ANYTHING to show for this 980 million in terms of increased productivity/economic benefit to the regions?

Firetrap

Well, some civil servants who were already living and often working in the regions got jobs closer to their homes, saving themselves a commute in the morning. Oh, and some of them got nice promotions to boot :rolleyes:

NewDubliner

pvt.joker wrote: »

What an utter disgrace. And have we ANYTHING to show for this 980 million in terms of increased productivity/economic benefit to the regions?

Sure we do, Brian Cowen is very popular in Tullamore, for moving a chunk of the Department of Finance and providing extra staff to fill the empty cubicles. I think I recall reading that a delighted senior manager (100k/year) there now has more time to devote to his golf.

That said, they have not spent the 980 million yet, that's what they want to spend . Cutbacks might reel that in a bit, now Brian's got his piece of the cake.

irish_bob

NewDubliner wrote: »

Sure we do, Brian Cowen is very popular in Tullamore, for moving a chunk of the Department of Finance and providing extra staff to fill the empty cubicles. I think I recall reading that a delighted senior manager (100k/year) there now has more time to devote to his golf.

That said, they have not spent the 980 million yet, that's what they want to spend . Cutbacks might reel that in a bit, now Brian's got his piece of the cake.

who said fianna fail never look any further than the next election

the unions will get what they want at the expense of badly needed infrastructure

The_Conductor

irish_bob wrote: »

the unions will get what they want at the expense of badly needed infrastructure

Just out of curiousity- what is it that you think the unions want?

Riskymove

irish_bob wrote: »

who said fianna fail never look any further than the next election

the unions will get what they want at the expense of badly needed infrastructure

and what has badly needed infrastructure got to do with Decentralisation?

santry_goonshow

I am frustratred looking at this thread, as I do from time to time because nobody really debates the important things about decentralisation, which are:

Its not decentralisation, its dispersal. Decentralisation is allowing Govt Departments make fewer decisions and encouraging locally based local authorities and State agencies to make more that are appropriate to their regions. Ireland is the most centralised of all the countries in the OECD and urgently requires decisions to take account of local arrangements. There are not enough staff in Councils for example and too many in office blocks belonging to Govt Departments and they directly spend 91% of the public budget which the OECD recently said was very bad practise. Anyway to different things and we should even use the word.

Taking 50,000 to 60,000 Civil servants out of Dublin is a good idea - dispersing them is not. Other states have made smaller cities near their former capitals become the e.g. Canberra is now the administrative capital of Aus., Ottowa the administrative capital of Canada, Brasilia is the capital of Brazil. The effects were measured, in fact the transport, space and rent cost savings of doing that in all three countries is the subject of many studies etc. on the matter. However, I believe that the Government should have identified one location or possibly two and concentrated the development there. Canberra was a tiny crossroads town with no bypass when it was chosen. It was chosen as a compromise b/t Sydney and Melbourne. Brasilia is a former forest, but purpose built by the Brazilians in the 1950s and the location identified because its as near to the very centre of that country as you can get. Ottowa was just a village, and had only lumberjacks in it when Queen Victoria chose it, especially because it lies on the border between Ontario and Quebec and so allowed all Canadians to claim it. The Governments of all 3 went in and built the cities ad hoc, with the view that they needed to allow working space and residential space and the cities were perfectly planned. After about 20 years of existence each of the cities experienced an economic boom independently of the rest of the economy. And the good news is that the cities that "lose" the Government agencies also see a boom.

Unfortunately the Government couldn't make a distinct decisions and I for one would hope that this nonsense is stopped now and that we go on to name one city, hopefully a small one that we build up gradually as the new administrative captial. Athlone has a compelling case geographically, whereas Limerick and Galway could be twinned to help provide a huge Atlantean city corridor which already has an airport a railway and a lot of feeder towns.

BOHSBOHS

take 60,000 civil servants out of dublin ??????

theres only ~30,000 in the entire civil service in the whole country so taking
60,000 out of dublin might be difficult

santry_goonshow

BOHSBOHS wrote: »

take 60,000 civil servants out of dublin ??????

theres only ~30,000 in the entire civil service in the whole country so taking
60,000 out of dublin might be difficult

Fair enough, but you can count them a number of ways. If you add in ALL the staff from state agencies and specialist Government funded initiatives that are present in Dublin you get far more than 30,000 and I wasn't saying partial dispersal, I was going for the whole kit and kaboodle.

The_Conductor

santry_goonshow wrote: »

Fair enough, but you can count them a number of ways. If you add in ALL the staff from state agencies and specialist Government funded initiatives that are present in Dublin you get far more than 30,000 and I wasn't saying partial dispersal, I was going for the whole kit and kaboodle.

I'd also point out that the current scheme is actually the 6th scheme in the past 30 years. Less than 40% of the civil service is actually present in Dublin at all. Prison officers are considered civil servants, as are the employees of government Departments and certain state bodies. The rest of the public sector is also very small, with the exception of the HSE, who employ over 200,000. The Irish Civil Service, contrary to what you expect, is actually the smallest civil service per head of population in the whole OECD.

I do agree with your previous post re: dispersal of posts willy nilly all over the place. We have a National Spatial Strategy- with a number of gateway cities and towns. If the national interest was actually being served in the decentralisation scheme- the decentralisation proposals would have focused on the gateway cities and towns, delivering broadband and other infrastructure which is crucial in any modern society. Instead we have a communications network worse than that of many third world countries. I think this is what "Irish_Bob" was referring to. I don't disagree with him- I'm just curious as to why he thinks the unions are to blame for the lack of vital investment in infrastructure? The firesale of Eircom and the shenanigans since the sale, are more to blame for the poor infrastructure than anything else.........

The government did however make a distinct decision regarding decentralisation- it was not based on economic principles, or the greater good of the country- it was based purely on parochial or feudal politics. How much can we disperse these posts around the country to try to maximise our votes come election time. Thats it pure and simple, nothing more, nothing less.

mountainyman

santry_goonshow wrote: »

whereas Limerick and Galway could be twinned to help provide a huge Atlantean city corridor which already has an airport a railway and a lot of feeder towns.

Limerick LOOKS like a capital. It is a georgian city with a magnificent river which the new ministries could be built along.
It would be a great capital.
Limerick Galway Derry.

NewDubliner

We can make significant cost savings by keeping the capital we already have.

santry_goonshow

NewDubliner wrote: »

We can make significant cost savings by keeping the capital we already have.

Cost savings. Short term-thinking right there.

Go check out the millions of articles about the building of Canberra, Ottowa, Islamabad, Brasilia, Abuja. Each of these were so well planned and because they were not appended to existing poor infrastructure they save aministration costs, have brilliant public transport and highly desireable places to live with most civil servants very happy to leave their former abode.

What in fact happened in all cases (except Ottoawa) is that the presence of a new city, once it takes off and reaches a population over 100,000 adds about 8% GDP per annum to the national economy, but doesn't overheat the exisiting infrasture. The better news is that the city that gives up the public service office and residential space also wins because it absorbs the space and infrastructure for more intensly "productive" activities and so grows up to 5%. Now I know that these are modest compared to Celtic Tiger Ireland, but that could be the only growth we see for the next 10 years.

If you ask me not moving the civil service to one location is a massive opportunity lost.

The only problem with grafting this into a city like Limerick is that it would have to be rebilt to such an extent that you'd have every money-grabbing nimby muppet sweating the Government for all they can get.

eigrod

santry_goonshow wrote: »

Cost savings. Short term-thinking right there.

Go check out the millions of articles about the building of Canberra, Ottowa, Islamabad, Brasilia, Abuja. Each of these were so well planned and because they were not appended to existing poor infrastructure they save aministration costs, have brilliant public transport and highly desireable places to live with most civil servants very happy to leave their former abode.

What in fact happened in all cases (except Ottoawa) is that the presence of a new city, once it takes off and reaches a population over 100,000 adds about 8% GDP per annum to the national economy, but doesn't overheat the exisiting infrasture. The better news is that the city that gives up the public service office and residential space also wins because it absorbs the space and infrastructure for more intensly "productive" activities and so grows up to 5%. Now I know that these are modest compared to Celtic Tiger Ireland, but that could be the only growth we see for the next 10 years.

If you ask me not moving the civil service to one location is a massive opportunity lost.

The only problem with grafting this into a city like Limerick is that it would have to be rebilt to such an extent that you'd have every money-grabbing nimby muppet sweating the Government for all they can get.

Canada, Australia, Brazil, Ireland. Spot the odd one out from a size perspective ?

Ireland's a small country from a size perspective and Dublin isn't that far off from being the centre point of that small country. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The_Conductor

The population of Canberra is 342,000
The population of Ottawa is 1.22 million
The population of Islamabad is 956,000
The population of Brasilia is 2.12 million
The population of Abuja is 784,000

The population of Dublin (to include the Eastern corridor) is 2.95 million
The population of Cork (to include ring towns) is 376,000
The population of Waterford is 45,780
The population of Galway is 72,730
The population of Limerick is 90,780

Abuja is the only purpose built new capital of the cities you listed- of this in excess of 95% of the building costs (total including housing) was borne by the federal government (from oil revenues). Very few civil servants or workers can afford to live there- and are incentivised to commute with petrol vouchers to cover their commute from the previous capital Lagos.

All of the other cities were pre-existing cities- and of them population wise, Canberra and Ottawa have actually fallen in size since the administrative functions moved there (why- I have no idea?)


Re: the Irish cities- as per above, there simply is not the economy of scale in Ireland that there is in the other countries (with the possible exception of Cork- but you'd be in the same situation as Dublin then). We are a small country with a total population of just over 4 million- and most recent statistics from the CSO show that the growth in our population which was recorded over the past few years has slowed right down and with current trends will be reversed within 4 years. None of the cities other than Dublin and Cork have densities similar to any of those in the countries you listed.

I do agree with you that the scattergun approach in the decentralisation scheme is a big mistake- but I disagree with you on what a logical and worthwhile approach to take would have been. In my opinion if they were going to go ahead with it- the National Spatial Strategy should have been consulted- and encouragement given in reasonable measures for the cities and towns identified as gateway towns in the different regions, instead of flittering away the possible gains in the manner that has happened.

There is a difference between short-term cost savings, and long term additional expenses which is what is going to happen with the current decentralisation scheme. They haven't dared sit down and try to reasonably quantify the costs- the 980 million is purely buildings and kit-outs ffs. If you accept that well over 60% of the civil service are already located outside of Dublin- mostly from the previous decentralisation schemes- moving to a new administrative capital becomes a moot point- as what are you moving?

There really does seem to be a perception that everything is up in Dublin, which is far from the true situation. Its a perception perpetuated in the media- where they also insist on going on about how government spending is concentrated in the capital- when the actual figures show massive net outflows from Dublin to the regions. Its catering to feudal instincts- playing people off against each other- and making Dublin the big bogey man.

Yes, the government ****ed up- but further catering to pure opportunism and parochial politics isn't going to make matters any better.

irish_bob

eigrod wrote: »

Canada, Australia, Brazil, Ireland. Spot the odd one out from a size perspective ?

Ireland's a small country from a size perspective and Dublin isn't that far off from being the centre point of that small country. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

but it is broke

NewDubliner

irish_bob wrote: »

but it is broke

Very witty, but what do you mean by broke? What is broken?

We already have decentralisation, we don't need any more of it.

Costly make-work schemes such as the Department of Finance offices in Tullamore and the Legal Aid Board in Cahirciveen should be closed down.

Firetrap

Moving large trances of the public service out of Dublin isn't a magic bullet that's going to solve unemployment problems or improve services overnight. If the people who like to knock the public service think things are bad at the moment......