IDA forced to locate half of all jobs outside of Dublin/Cork

invinciblePRSTV

Heads up to Schuhart over on P.ie for this.

Here's the press release:

http://www.entemp.ie/press/2010/20100302.htm

Here's what they didn't tell you:

http://www.londonderrysentinel.co.uk/news/Donegal-to-be-targeted-for.6120002.jp

Under a radical new plan designed to boost employment in ROI economic blackspots, half of all new projects backed by the IDA will be now located outside Dublin and Cork, with priority given to rural areas with high unemployment.
Donegal, Sligo, Limerick and Waterford will be the focus of targeted FDI and associated job creation.

Why oh why are we hampering our FDI prospects by trying to force potential companies to locate to places they may not want to go?

As centres for Pharma & Technology Dublin and Cork are the main revenue generating areas of our economy. In other countries the idea of placing restrictions on area's economic growth by trying to push companies to area's far from th economic core of a country wouldn't be accepted.

In Ireland however gombeen politics are at play and FDI is risked as companies will be pressurised to locate in remote areas. Its common sense for major employers to locate to where centres of industry and employment already exist.

FF stop messing with Irelands prospects for jobs by trying to convince companies to go to whatever backwater minister X is from! The IDA is for national purposes not for encouraging FDI to ballygobackwards. This is classic parish pump politics.

mike65

Waterford has a decent cluster of pharma/bio-pharma so adding another couple wouldn't be such a bad idea.

murphaph

Good post. Have argued for years that we shouldn't "spread ourselves so thinly" and let centres of excellence develop and if they are in Dublin or Cork then so be it. Around here everything is centred on berlin and people from the surrounding state of Brandenburg just have to move here to find work.

gandalf

Actually once the infrastructure and backbone is in place as well this is not a bad idea especially as the Dublin area is saturated. As long as it is done methodically with proper planning and not as an election carrot to ensure whatever inbred political dynasty secures a seat to the big trough.

invinciblePRSTV

mike65 wrote: »

Waterford has a decent cluster of pharma/bio-pharma so adding another couple wouldn't be such a bad idea.

If the IDA convinces a pharma company to locate to Ireland then let the company itself decide where in the country it would like to establish itself in rather then trying to be shoehorned into area x by politicians.

deadtiger wrote: »

Actually once the infrastructure and backbone is in place as well this is not a bad idea especially as the Dublin area is saturated. As long as it is done methodically with proper planning and not as an election carrot to ensure whatever inbred political dynasty secures a seat to the big trough.

I sruggle with the notion that Dublin is 'saturated'. Like above the IDAs role is to convince companies to come to this country, not to a particular county. If a tech company wants to locate to Ireland then West Dublin/Kildare is the obvious choice, even if some politician is trying to make a case for ballyboreen in the Northwest or southeast.

BluePlanet

It creates a local economy built on very thin ice that is usually doomed.
It's another "Shannon Stop Over".

gandalf

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

I sruggle with the norion that Dublin is 'saturated'. Like above the IDAs role is to convince companies to come to this country, not to a particular county. If a tech company wants to locate to Ireland then West Dublin/Kildare is the obvious choice, even if some politician is trying to make a case for ballyboreen in the Northwest or southeast.

Drive around the capital it is strangling itself to death with traffic.

No politician will decide where a company will locate. What will decide it is the cost of doing business in Ireland. The availability of a suitable premises at the right cost, availability of infrastructure roads and communications. A suitably qualified workforce. If this can be met outside Dublin then all the better.

As I said it has to be delivered as a structured and properly planned process.

ednwireland

i dont agree with this policy
the ida should point out that there are places in the country with labour pools (these days thats everywhere)
but companies should be allowed to set up where they see fit.
(and i live and work in the area for an indigenous IT company that has never seen the tanaiste !)

Welease

ednwireland wrote: »

i dont agree with this policy
the ida should point out that there are places in the country with labour pools (these days thats everywhere)
but companies should be allowed to set up where they see fit.
(and i live and work in the area for an indigenous IT company that has never seen the tanaiste !)

I am glad to be corrected, but i dont think anyone is forcing companies to locate in specific areas. Priority (i.e. grants/help etc.) will be given to those companies willing to locate in specific areas.. If they decide not to.. no one will force them or stop them from locating elsewhere.
I really don't see what the issue is..

invinciblePRSTV

deadtiger wrote: »

Drive around the capital it is strangling itself to death with traffic.

Thats what happens when there is a underinvestment in public transport in a city like Dublin. This is being remedied and is hardly a logical consideration when talking about FDI.

deadtiger wrote: »

No politician will decide where a company will locate.

Have you not read my OP? because this is what exactly is happening. the IDA is being asked to put rural counties at the front of the line for FDI.

BluePlanet

I also disagree with this Rural-first approach.

In my opinion, it makes more sense to allow rural areas de-populate and resettle into Urban areas, where we can facilitate the necessary services at a reduced cost by taking advantage of the pop. density.

ardmacha

It is perfectly reasonable, indeed essiential that government expenditure is directed where it is most needed and these needs are not in Dublin. Is it not also the case that the EU are more tolerant of aid to the BMW area, and so projects there may be brought to country that would otherwise go to some other BMW type area?

mike65

re Welease

Agree, its even less than that though, if company X is courted with a specific non Dubland/Corkland location in mind the company can say yep we can live with that (and maybe some extra IDA backing) or no we won't, its the Pale or nothing. I suspect the Pale would win everytime. The IDA are not going to say thanks but no thanks are they?

Welease

BluePlanet wrote: »

I also disagree with this Rural-first approach.

In my opinion, it makes more sense to allow rural areas de-populate and resettle into Urban areas, where we can facilitate the necessary services at a reduced cost by taking advantage of the pop. density.

Which in turn can push up the cost of the land on which they would need to purchase for premesis through demand, making it less attractive to locate here.. There are very good reasons why companies like Intel etc. don't build factories in the middle of big cities.

gandalf

mike65 wrote: »

The IDA are not going to say thanks but no thanks are they?

Well unless its Ryanair then we all know the answer.

"Sorry Mr O'Leary you have to base your call centre on Rockall to get the grant!"

mike65

btw invinciblePRSTV you should read the stuff you link to,

New Initiatives – Ten Steps of Transformation

Support regional economic development/

3/ HIGH-LEVEL GOALS

50% of FDI projects outside of Dublin and Cork

invinciblePRSTV

Enlighten me mikey lad, what am i missing here? that the IDA haven't had a target set to locate half of all FDI outside of dublin/cork?

fricatus

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Why oh why are we hampering our FDI prospects by trying to force potential companies to locate to places they may not want to go?

Nowhere in that article is there any mention of "force". Remember that the aim is for half of the jobs to be created outside Cork and Dublin. Now, given that more than half the population lives outside Cork and Dublin, that would seem fair...

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

In Ireland however gombeen politics are at play and FDI is risked as companies will be pressurised to locate in remote areas. Its common sense for major employers to locate to where centres of industry and employment already exist.

"Remote areas"? Limerick and Waterford are the third- and fifth-largest centres of population in the state. They are already centres of industry and employment, so I don't see where your "common sense" argument is going. As they're both employment blackspots, it ought to be government policy to encourage FDI there.

As for Sligo, sure it's a good bit smaller, but in spatial terms, it's the largest population centre across a wide area of the north-west and needs to provide a lot more employment than most towns its size on account of the hinterland it serves.

Donegal is certainly somewhere that needs an employment boost, but it would seem that some sort of arrangement with the North involving Derry would make most sense.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

FF stop messing with Irelands prospects for jobs by trying to convince companies to go to whatever backwater minister X is from! The IDA is for national purposes not for encouraging FDI to ballygobackwards. This is classic parish pump politics.

I don't see how you arrive at that conclusion given that both Limerick and Waterford have lost ministers lately. Also, under FF rule, it's been Dublin, Cork and to a lesser extent Galway that have prospered. Anything they're doing for Limerick, Waterford and the north-west is long overdue.

If the IDA can be successful in attracting the likes of Boston Scientific, Cisco and HP to Galway, along with the cluster of medical devices firms there, there's no reason they can't do the same in Limerick and Waterford, which if anything are much less remote from the larger Irish cities, the UK and the continent.

mike65

(don't condecend)

You suggested the bits a quote above were somehow hidden away and that it was only thanks to the Derry Advertiser and Bogside Weekly you discovered the horrible truth.

fricatus

BluePlanet wrote: »

I also disagree with this Rural-first approach.

In my opinion, it makes more sense to allow rural areas de-populate and resettle into Urban areas, where we can facilitate the necessary services at a reduced cost by taking advantage of the pop. density.

Limerick and Waterford are urban areas though...

mike65

fricatus we are mere villages Not worthy of investment.

invinciblePRSTV

fricatus wrote: »

Nowhere in that article is there any mention of "force". Remember that the aim is for half of the jobs to be created outside Cork and Dublin. Now, given that more than half the population lives outside Cork and Dublin, that would seem fair...

Fair? whats fair is encouraging FDI to the country and let the company take it from there. Why should Dublin/Cork be put at a disadvantage for the sake of antiquated notions of spreading the wealth around?

fricatus wrote: »

"Remote areas"? Limerick and Waterford are the third- and fifth-largest centres of population in the state. They are already centres of industry and employment, so I don't see where your "common sense" argument is going. As they're both employment blackspots, it ought to be government policy to encourage FDI there..

Sligo/Donegal are as remote as you can get, equally, and we've been down this road many times before, being 3rd & 5th largest population centres mean very little they are still small areas which are no more or less deserving of FDI then Cork/Dublin. FYI the whole country is an employment blackspot and that includes Cork & Dublin.

fricatus wrote: »

As for Sligo, sure it's a good bit smaller, but in spatial terms, it's the largest population centre across a wide area of the north-west and needs to provide a lot more employment than most towns its size on account of the hinterland it serves..

See above

fricatus wrote: »

I don't see how you arrive at that conclusion given that both Limerick and Waterford have lost ministers lately. Also, under FF rule, it's been Dublin, Cork and to a lesser extent Galway that have prospered. Anything they're doing for Limerick, Waterford and the north-west is long overdue

No it hasn't, every constituency has benefited from FF largesse in the good times, the notion that Lim/Waterford/NW have somehow missed out is b******ks tbh, please lose the chip on the shoulder on these matters.

fricatus wrote: »

If the IDA can be successful in attracting the likes of Boston Scientific, Cisco and HP to Galway, along with the cluster of medical devices firms there, there's no reason they can't do the same in Limerick and Waterford, which if anything are much less remote from the larger Irish cities, the UK and the continent.

The IDA is to promote Ireland as a place for FDI, let the companies attracted here decide where in th country which iis best for their needs, if its Galway then so be it, if its Sligo so be it, but please lets not push companies into a certain location.

mike65 wrote: »

(don't condecend)

You suggested the bits a quote above were somehow hidden away and that it was only thanks to the Derry Advertiser and Bogside Weekly you discovered the horrible truth.

I think the quoted newspaper article puts context onto the point which is just one of many in yet another press release, anything else to add on the topic itself or are you just here to nitpick?.

fricatus

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Fair? whats fair is encouraging FDI to the country and let the company take it from there. Why should Dublin/Cork be put at a disadvantage for the sake of antiquated notions of spreading the wealth around?

"Antiquated notions"? Since when has the idea of trying to ensure a fair spread of employment across the main urban centres of the country been an "antiquated notion"? And if you look at it from the point of view that Dublin and Cork (less than half the population) will still get half the jobs, how exactly are they going to be "put at a disadvantage"?

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

FYI the whole country is an employment blackspot and that includes Cork & Dublin.

If you're going to use expressions like "FYI", you might provide some actual information, rather than just an incorrect opinion.

Sure, the country is experiencing increased unemployment at present, but Cork and Dublin are by far and away the best of a bad lot in that regard. And don't take my word for it... look at what the CSO has to say about it, in table 7b of the following document:

http://www.cso.ie/releasespublications/documents/labour_market/current/qnhs.pdf

The South-East has the highest unemployment rate in the country, at 15.1%. It's 13.8% in the Mid-West. Compare that to 11.6 in the South-West and 11% in Dublin. FYI, these are facts.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

The IDA is to promote Ireland as a place for FDI, let the companies attracted here decide where in th country which iis best for their needs, if its Galway then so be it, if its Sligo so be it, but please lets not push companies into a certain location.

But you see if we don't put in place policies to encourage investment in areas of high unemployment, all that will happen is that companies will simply go to Dublin, and then anyone who can move there will, and those that can't will simply stagnate in their unemployment blackspot. How is that good for the country?

We can't force companies to locate where they don't want to, but we can certainly promote areas other than Cork and Dublin, and offer incentives to locate in those areas. There are considerable infrastructural improvements going on in Limerick and Waterford, which make those areas much more attractive to FDI than heretofore. If we're creative with grant aid and tax breaks, we can attract employment to these areas. Maybe not Google's HQ, but there are plenty of activities that are suitable for locations other than Dublin.

murphaph

fricatus wrote: »

But you see if we don't put in place policies to encourage investment in areas of high unemployment, all that will happen is that companies will simply go to Dublin, and then anyone who can move there will, and those that can't will simply stagnate in their unemployment blackspot. How is that good for the country?

I would like to see focussed development of Dublin, Cork, Waterford, Galway and Limerick. No incentives should be offered to get firms to set up "single factories" tacked onto the side of provincial towns because what happens is that the town becomes 100% dependent on this one firm and when it closes the town is devastated. Better to accept the reality that urbanisation is a facet of modern life across Europe and the US and to simply move to find work. This is NORMAL everywhere else. Ireland is small, people moving to one of the urban centres (and Derry presumably) above to find employment isn't the end of the world.

Welease

actually.. nm.. pointless discussion

fricatus

murphaph wrote: »

I would like to see focussed development of Dublin, Cork, Waterford, Galway and Limerick. No incentives should be offered to get firms to set up "single factories" tacked onto the side of provincial towns because what happens is that the town becomes 100% dependent on this one firm and when it closes the town is devastated. Better to accept the reality that urbanisation is a facet of modern life across Europe and the US and to simply move to find work. This is NORMAL everywhere else. Ireland is small, people moving to one of the urban centres (and Derry presumably) above to find employment isn't the end of the world.

+1

And anyway, Ireland is such a small country that if you were to add, say Sligo to that list, a large percentage of the population would be within an hour or so of one of the main centres, so people could choose either to move or commute.

If you only have employment opportunities in Cork and Dublin, a hell of a lot less of the population is covered. The trick is in finding the balance. Two growth centres is too few; twenty is too many. In my view, Limerick, Waterford and Sligo make sense. Donegal doesn't, but Derry is the natural hub for that area, so there's no reason Donegal people should lose out, as long as we can sweet-talk our "brethren" across the border.

invinciblePRSTV

fricatus wrote: »

"Antiquated notions"? Since when has the idea of trying to ensure a fair spread of employment across the main urban centres of the country been an "antiquated notion"? And if you look at it from the point of view that Dublin and Cork (less than half the population) will still get half the jobs, how exactly are they going to be "put at a disadvantage"?

Antiquated because you're talking about spreading the wealth around in a manner similar to failed policies of previous generations. Ireland has been down this road before, trying to spur development across the country and has generally ended in failure, witness the empty IDA parks dotted around the Irish countryside.

fricatus wrote: »

If you're going to use expressions like "FYI", you might provide some actual information, rather than just an incorrect opinion.

Sure, the country is experiencing increased unemployment at present, but Cork and Dublin are by far and away the best of a bad lot in that regard. And don't take my word for it... look at what the CSO has to say about it, in table 7b of the following document:

http://www.cso.ie/releasespublications/documents/labour_market/current/qnhs.pdf

The South-East has the highest unemployment rate in the country, at 15.1%. It's 13.8% in the Mid-West. Compare that to 11.6 in the South-West and 11% in Dublin. FYI, these are facts.

No Fricatus i am not going to entertain this notion from you that just because the SW & Dublin have marginally lower unemployment rates then the SE & or MW that it somehow justifies special treatment by the IDA. If anything using your logic the opposite should apply seeing as the SW & Dublin have larger populations. We are in this together as an economy, no special cases!.

fricatus wrote: »

But you see if we don't put in place policies to encourage investment in areas of high unemployment, all that will happen is that companies will simply go to Dublin, and then anyone who can move there will, and those that can't will simply stagnate in their unemployment blackspot. How is that good for the country?

Everywhere currently has high unemployment. The IDAs role is to promote investment in the Irish economy, why should Dublin or Cork miss out an industry that may be ideally better suited to locate there rather then a Sligo or Donegal in the name of ludicrous parish pump inspired qoutas/targets for the IDA to fill.

fricatus wrote: »

We can't force companies to locate where they don't want to, but we can certainly promote areas other than Cork and Dublin, and offer incentives to locate in those areas. There are considerable infrastructural improvements going on in Limerick and Waterford, which make those areas much more attractive to FDI than heretofore. If we're creative with grant aid and tax breaks, we can attract employment to these areas. Maybe not Google's HQ, but there are plenty of activities that are suitable for locations other than Dublin.

Why should anywhere get special grants and Tax breaks from the Irish Government to locate to a particular location in this country above another? this is a tried and failed method as described earlier (eg Shannon free zone)

Why not have grants and tax incentives to locate in our most prosperous and economically developed regions in order to continue an obviously successful formula and build on the economies of scale present? surely it makes perfect sense to locate new FDI where previous FDI has been successful? We're just handicapping our economy by trying to promote multiple locations at the expense of the ROIs most successful area's of economic activity as we attempt a 21st century version of policies that sent this country down the toilet during the last century.

fricatus wrote: »

+1

And anyway, Ireland is such a small country that if you were to add, say Sligo to that list, a large percentage of the population would be within an hour or so of one of the main centres, so people could choose either to move or commute.

If you only have employment opportunities in Cork and Dublin, a hell of a lot less of the population is covered. The trick is in finding the balance. Two growth centres is too few; twenty is too many. In my view, Limerick, Waterford and Sligo make sense. Donegal doesn't, but Derry is the natural hub for that area, so there's no reason Donegal people should lose out, as long as we can sweet-talk our "brethren" across the border.

We tried this, its called the national spatial strategy. 8 hubs and over a dozen secondary hubs, it didn't make a blind bit of difference. A nation of 4 million people doesn't need half a dozen hubs, at most 2-3.

Count Dooku

Landowners outside of Dublin and Cork must also benefit from FDI. It is very unlikely that MNC’s will find right people locally, it means that key personnel will be hired outside, local unemployed probably will be hired into local shops and other service providing activities.
But new people will require houses, it mean that more local unemployed can be involved in construction activates, plus it will be good chance to sell land for those houses.

toughbuttfair

According to the 2006 Census Dublin and Cork have 40% of the state's population. Historically IDA investment was based on a population percentage basis. For example if an area had 40% of the country's population then it would be given 40% of the IDA's investment budget. This document suggests a change in policy, with the share for Dublin and Cork increasing to 50%.

If we are to believe the report in the Derry newspaper then the bulk of the remaining 50% is to be concentrated in 4 key urban areas. The former policy would have divided the remaining money equally between 24 counties, and many many towns and villages.

It certainly avoids the scattershot approach of the NSS.

Pete4779

ardmacha wrote: »

It is perfectly reasonable, indeed essiential that government expenditure is directed where it is most needed and these needs are not in Dublin. Is it not also the case that the EU are more tolerant of aid to the BMW area, and so projects there may be brought to country that would otherwise go to some other BMW type area?

Companies setting up in Ireland will do cost analyses beforehand. There is little to be gained by locating on the west when the main airports and seaports are in the South, South East and East.

Encouraging investment in economically deprived and state-dependent areas like the BMW region is fine when there is an excess of money, but there isn't, and unemployed will gravitate to cities, not Ballymuck in rural Mayo to make circuitboards for Hewlett Packard.

Population projections for Ireland are pretty consistent: the west is going to see gradual population losses, and the main development area is from Belfast --> Dublin --> Waterford --> Cork.

As it stands only Dublin and Cork contribute to state finances. All other counties are net recipients.

Pete4779

mike65 wrote: »

re Welease

The IDA are not going to say thanks but no thanks are they?

Given how Coughlan acted over the past year with Ryanair, it's highly likely that they would say exactly that.

Welease

Pete4779 wrote: »

Companies setting up in Ireland will do cost analyses beforehand. There is little to be gained by locating on the west when the main airports and seaports are in the South, South East and East.

Not all companies require seaports as not all companies deal in physical products (and even if they did, whats the difference in transferring it 100 miles via road vs 20 miles via road)... There can be plenty of reasons why companies may choose to locate in the west of Ireland, and they shouldnt be dismissed out of hand.

schween

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Antiquated because you're talking about spreading the wealth around in a manner similar to failed policies of previous generations. Ireland has been down this road before, trying to spur development across the country and has generally ended in failure, witness the empty IDA parks dotted around the Irish countryside.

No Fricatus i am not going to entertain this notion from you that just because the SW & Dublin have marginally lower unemployment rates then the SE & or MW that it somehow justifies special treatment by the IDA. If anything using your logic the opposite should apply seeing as the SW & Dublin have larger populations. We are in this together as an economy, no special cases!.

Everywhere currently has high unemployment. The IDAs role is to promote investment in the Irish economy, why should Dublin or Cork miss out an industry that may be ideally better suited to locate there rather then a Sligo or Donegal in the name of ludicrous parish pump inspired qoutas/targets for the IDA to fill.

Why should anywhere get special grants and Tax breaks from the Irish Government to locate to a particular location in this country above another? this is a tried and failed method as described earlier (eg Shannon free zone)

Why not have grants and tax incentives to locate in our most prosperous and economically developed regions in order to continue an obviously successful formula and build on the economies of scale present? surely it makes perfect sense to locate new FDI where previous FDI has been successful? We're just handicapping our economy by trying to promote multiple locations at the expense of the ROIs most successful area's of economic activity as we attempt a 21st century version of policies that sent this country down the toilet during the last century.

Thank god the EU doesn't take your stance or they would have ignored us and given billions of euro in development and aid to places like Southern England, Paris, the Rhine-Ruhr area etc

invinciblePRSTV

schween wrote: »

Thank god the EU doesn't take your stance or they would have ignored us and given billions of euro in development and aid to places like Southern England, Paris, the Rhine-Ruhr area etc

Ah would you give over with the silly hyperbole. What does the EU have to do with this? We know that the west is well used to getting money hand over fist from both The Irish Exchequer and Brussels and showing little in return, but this thread is about Irish public policy not EU affairs.

View

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Ah would you give over with the silly hyperbole. What does the EU have to do with this? We know that the west is well used to getting money hand over fist from both The Irish Exchequer and Brussels and showing little in return, but this thread is about Irish public policy not EU affairs.

Well, presumably the poster meant that investment in the EU should be concentrated in these core economic areas rather than "wasted" in remote non-core economic areas such as as Ireland.

After all, in the EU, "it would make more sense to allow rural non-core economic areas de-populate and resettle into Urban core economic areas, where we can facilitate the necessary services at a reduced cost by taking advantage of the pop. density" (to very slightly mis-quote BluePlanet).

Then again maybe there is some merit in not trying to concentrate everything into favoured areas either in the case of the EU or Ireland itself...

danman

Jeez, thanks lads.

The basic attitude from this discussion is "I'm all right Jack, to he'll with the rest of youse"

in the Inishowen peninsula, Fruit of the Loom closed down in the '90's.
We've had no major employer since then. The 2 factories in Buncrana have been layin empty for the past 15 years.

But don't worry about us, sure we can drive 4 hours each way, so we can work in Dublin.

I can't believe the selfish attitude of the posters on this thread.
I've spent the past 11 years driving down the country, leaving at 4am on a Monday, to work down the country. Most of the people in Inishowen are the same, those of us lucky enough to still have jobs.

But sure why would any of you Dubs care about us, we're as far away as we can be from Dublin, so we won't bother you.

murphaph

danman wrote: »

Jeez, thanks lads.

The basic attitude from this discussion is "I'm all right Jack, to he'll with the rest of youse"

in the Inishowen peninsula, Fruit of the Loom closed down in the '90's.
We've had no major employer since then. The 2 factories in Buncrana have been layin empty for the past 15 years.

This is exactly what happens when you encourage a provincial town and it's hinterland to be completely dependent on a single large employer.

danman wrote: »

But don't worry about us, sure we can drive 4 hours each way, so we can work in Dublin.

No, you should really move to somewhere with better employment prospects, not commute from your birthplace to work for the rest of your life!

danman wrote: »

I can't believe the selfish attitude of the posters on this thread.
I've spent the past 11 years driving down the country, leaving at 4am on a Monday, to work down the country. Most of the people in Inishowen are the same, those of us lucky enough to still have jobs.

Inishowen is extremely remote. It's EXACTLY the same for people living in the Scottish Highlands and Islands, in northern Norway, Sweden and Finland, in many parts of Germany (particularly the east) and basically loads of other places. Governments can't bring jobs everywhere and trying to do so leads to Fruit of the Loom type situations again and again. Face it...Donegal is not a logical place to set up many types of industry and never will be. This is nothing against Donegal, beautiful place that it is (was?), it is just a circumstance of geography. It seems to be a relatively new phenomenon in Ireland that we expect a job within spitting distance of where we were born. This is nonsense and people have to get used (again) to moving permanently from their rural birthplace to live in cities to find work.

danman wrote: »

But sure why would any of you Dubs care about us, we're as far away as we can be from Dublin, so we won't bother you.

We do care, in fact we subsidise you every day. Much more money is spent in Donegal than is raised there in taxes. Show some feckin gratitude at least.

I know loads of Germans from all over Brandenburg, Saxony and Mecklenburg Western Pomerania and they all live in Berlin and can't imagine ever being able to find a job in their hometowns. It would't cross their minds to blame the government for that. It's the same all over Europe and in the States too (I know folks over there who had to move 2000 miles to find work, nevermind 200! lol)

Figerty

I disagree, Its called spatial planning.

Dublin is choked with traffic, and all that is happening is the country is becoming unbalanced, the population is getting pulled towards Dublin.

Consider the amount of people that are commuting over 1 hour from Dublin every day to go to work. Now consider the health, envoirnmental and social benefits of having a balanced population and economic structure.

Take a look at how underused Shannon Airport is, but also consider the road network that exists to the west at this stage for Transport. Then take a look at how underdeveloped the centre of Ireland is, the west and South East is.

It's time to get balanced economic development'

BluePlanet wrote: »

It creates a local economy built on very thin ice that is usually doomed.
It's another "Shannon Stop Over".

danman

Tell me again why Inishowen isn't a good place to invest?
We're 1 and 1/2 hours from Belfast port for exports, we have an airport 20 minutes away in Derry.

We have a large percentage of unemployed due to the fact that we have had no inward investment during the period the rest of the country had a Celtic Tiger.

Where did I criticise the government? I applaud the IDA's attitude of redirectingjobs outside of Dublin and Cork.

Inishowen has always been forgotten by the rest of the country, it took a Buncrana mans vision to bring Fruit of the Loom here in the first place (Willy McCarter).

But like I said, it's An I'm all right jack attitude from the posters on here that I object to.

Sure the entire country should relocate to Cork and Dublin.

Please have some cop on.

gurramok

danman wrote: »

in the Inishowen peninsula, Fruit of the Loom closed down in the '90's.
We've had no major employer since then. The 2 factories in Buncrana have been layin empty for the past 15 years.

But don't worry about us, sure we can drive 4 hours each way, so we can work in Dublin.

Unemployment in NI is lower than in ROI and even much lower than that in Donegal.
So why can't the people of Buncrana look for jobs just 14miles away in Derry rather than doing 4hr commutes to the other side of the island? http://www.derry.com/townInformation.aspx

danman

We do care, in fact we subsidise you every day. Much more money is spent in Donegal than is raised there in taxes. Show some feckin gratitude at least.

I love this quote.

Let's keep all the jobs in Dublin, but then complain about having to subsidise all the people that we're not giving jobs to.

Have you thought that many people like me go to Dublin, work, pay our tax, then that money might be used in Donegal? Just because we have no employment in the area, doesn't mean that we don't pay our way from other parts of the country.

As for taking jobs in NI.
Perhaps we should forget about Donegal altogether. Donegal should join the UK. I mean it is very far away from Dublin, so it can't be that important?

We live in the Republic. We shouldn't have to rely on the UK to look after us.
The employment stats in NI are skewed because of the large percentage of people employed by their civil service.

And believe me, most of us have gone to NI to find work.

Again, I applaud this new attitude of the IDA.

murphaph

danman wrote: »

Tell me again why Inishowen isn't a good place to invest?
We're 1 and 1/2 hours from Belfast port for exports, we have an airport 20 minutes away in Derry.

We have a large percentage of unemployed due to the fact that we have had no inward investment during the period the rest of the country had a Celtic Tiger.

Where did I criticise the government? I applaud the IDA's attitude of redirectingjobs outside of Dublin and Cork.

Inishowen has always been forgotten by the rest of the country, it took a Buncrana mans vision to bring Fruit of the Loom here in the first place (Willy McCarter).

But like I said, it's An I'm all right jack attitude from the posters on here that I object to.

Sure the entire country should relocate to Cork and Dublin.

Please have some cop on.

Dan, at least read my posts before telling me to cop on. I explicitly said Dublin, Cork, Waterford, Limerick and Galway should be targetted for development. Donegal will have to rely on Derry, already the 4th largest city on the island I believe.

murphaph

Dan, If Donegal was a wonderful, fantastic place to invest (as you maintain) then firms would have already invested there en masse. They haven't because it isn't.

dogbert27

Figerty wrote: »

Take a look at how underused Shannon Airport is, QUOTE]

But doesn't that tie in to the problem of having Cork and Shannon run by the DAA?

If Cork and Shannon were independent and could compete with Dublin Airport they could set their own charges and attract more business to their respective areas.

Cork airport has an old terminal just sitting there. Ryanair wanted to take it over but the DAA wouldn't give it to them. Contrast this to Tampere, Finland who built a new terminal just like Cork and gave Ryanair their old terminal. Tampere (about 300 miles north west of Helsinki) now has connections with Italy, Germany, Scotland, Latvia, Lithuania, England and Spain. It had a connection with Dublin but guess what? Due to the DAA's uncompetitive nature they lost the route to Edinburgh much like the 500 jobs that were lost too.

Cork and Shannon need their independence to be used efficiently and help the economy in the south and west of the country but why would the DAA create competition for itself and Dublin airport when it now needs everything going to Dublin to pay off T2?!

danman

murphaph wrote: »

Dan, If Donegal was a wonderful, fantastic place to invest (as you maintain) then firms would have already invested there en masse. They haven't because it isn't.

Of the 1,740 site visits hosted by the IDA in 2009 only three were made to Donegal, all of which were in Letterkenny.
0.172% visits for 4% of the population?

Does that tell you anything?
A change in the IDA attitude is welcome.

Murph, I'm sorry if I missrepresented you, but you might understand my anger after Reading the first half of this thread, when the majority of posters were against the IDA stating that they would try to bring 50% of companies outside of Dublin and Cork.

dogbert27

danman wrote: »

when the majority of posters were against the IDA stating that they would try to bring 50% of companies outside of Dublin and Cork.

I don't think posters were against the IDA bringing 50% of companies outside of Cork and Dublin. I think they were against the IDA being "forced" to bring 50% of companies outside of Cork and Dublin.

danman

dogbert27 wrote: »

I don't think posters were against the IDA bringing 50% of companies outside of Cork and Dublin. I think they were against the IDA being "forced" to bring 50% of companies outside of Cork and Dublin.

And should they not be forced to do this?

Are we not all equal citizens of the state?

Why should Dubin and Cork citizens be more entitled to jobs than their rural cousins?

I don't understand the logic here.

As I've said in the above post, they are not even attempting to bring companies to Donegal, so perhaps they should be forced.

dogbert27

You're accusing other posters of having an "I'm all right Jack, to he'll with the rest of youse" attitude but you seem hell bent on Donegal just because that is where you are from.

What if the 50% go to Kerry, Clare, Tipperary, Monaghan, Louth, Cavan, Roscommon but not Donegal.

Would you say, "fair enough at least they didn't go to Cork and Dublin" or would you complain that Donegal was left out?

As a foreign company coming to Ireland, looking to invest my money I would want to be as close to a major city as possible and face facts, everybody would look towards Dublin first. If I'm being forced by the Irish to locate to the very north of the country, over 4 hours away from it's capital city I would look to invest elsewhere. I'm a company interested in making profits. I don't care about spatial planning in Ireland.

baalthor

Mary Harney claimed that Google were being pressurised in to locating outside Dublin but they replied that it was Dublin or nowhere. Google recently confirmed this.
The move to 'knowledge based' industries will favour urban areas.

murphaph

danman wrote: »

Are we not all equal citizens of the state?

Why should Dubin and Cork citizens be more entitled to jobs than their rural cousins?

Dan, my mother was from the country but moved to Dublin to find work and stayed there. My father's grandparents did the same. Do you think all us dubs are descended directly from the Vikings or something? Most people in Dublin (if they are not 1st generation rural) are descended from rural migrants who ca,e for work. Why should the rules be changed now because it's your generation?

People don't even have to go as far as Dublin now because there are other opportunities in Ireland's other cities, and that includes Northern Ireland for Donegal residents. I bet you have no trouble shopping in the north, so why not work there too?

danman

murphaph wrote: »

Good post. Have argued for years that we shouldn't "spread ourselves so thinly" and let centres of excellence develop and if they are in Dublin or Cork then so be it. Around here everything is centred on berlin and people from the surrounding state of Brandenburg just have to move here to find work.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

If the IDA convinces a pharma company to locate to Ireland then let the company itself decide where in the country it would like to establish itself in rather then trying to be shoehorned into area x by politicians.



I sruggle with the notion that Dublin is 'saturated'. Like above the IDAs role is to convince companies to come to this country, not to a particular county. If a tech company wants to locate to Ireland then West Dublin/Kildare is the obvious choice, even if some politician is trying to make a case for ballyboreen in the Northwest or southeast.

BluePlanet wrote: »

It creates a local economy built on very thin ice that is usually doomed.
It's another "Shannon Stop Over".

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Thats what happens when there is a underinvestment in public transport in a city like Dublin. This is being remedied and is hardly a logical consideration when talking about FDI.



Have you not read my OP? because this is what exactly is happening. the IDA is being asked to put rural counties at the front of the line for FDI.

BluePlanet wrote: »

I also disagree with this Rural-first approach.

In my opinion, it makes more sense to allow rural areas de-populate and resettle into Urban areas, where we can facilitate the necessary services at a reduced cost by taking advantage of the pop. density.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Antiquated because you're talking about spreading the wealth around in a manner similar to failed policies of previous generations. Ireland has been down this road before, trying to spur development across the country and has generally ended in failure, witness the empty IDA parks dotted around the Irish countryside.




No Fricatus i am not going to entertain this notion from you that just because the SW & Dublin have marginally lower unemployment rates then the SE & or MW that it somehow justifies special treatment by the IDA. If anything using your logic the opposite should apply seeing as the SW & Dublin have larger populations. We are in this together as an economy, no special cases!.



Everywhere currently has high unemployment. The IDAs role is to promote investment in the Irish economy, why should Dublin or Cork miss out an industry that may be ideally better suited to locate there rather then a Sligo or Donegal in the name of ludicrous parish pump inspired qoutas/targets for the IDA to fill.



Why should anywhere get special grants and Tax breaks from the Irish Government to locate to a particular location in this country above another? this is a tried and failed method as described earlier (eg Shannon free zone)

Why not have grants and tax incentives to locate in our most prosperous and economically developed regions in order to continue an obviously successful formula and build on the economies of scale present? surely it makes perfect sense to locate new FDI where previous FDI has been successful? We're just handicapping our economy by trying to promote multiple locations at the expense of the ROIs most successful area's of economic activity as we attempt a 21st century version of policies that sent this country down the toilet during the last century.



We tried this, its called the national spatial strategy. 8 hubs and over a dozen secondary hubs, it didn't make a blind bit of difference. A nation of 4 million people doesn't need half a dozen hubs, at most 2-3.

murphaph wrote: »

This is exactly what happens when you encourage a provincial town and it's hinterland to be completely dependent on a single large employer.


No, you should really move to somewhere with better employment prospects, not commute from your birthplace to work for the rest of your life!


Inishowen is extremely remote. It's EXACTLY the same for people living in the Scottish Highlands and Islands, in northern Norway, Sweden and Finland, in many parts of Germany (particularly the east) and basically loads of other places. Governments can't bring jobs everywhere and trying to do so leads to Fruit of the Loom type situations again and again. Face it...Donegal is not a logical place to set up many types of industry and never will be. This is nothing against Donegal, beautiful place that it is (was?), it is just a circumstance of geography. It seems to be a relatively new phenomenon in Ireland that we expect a job within spitting distance of where we were born. This is nonsense and people have to get used (again) to moving permanently from their rural birthplace to live in cities to find work.


We do care, in fact we subsidise you every day. Much more money is spent in Donegal than is raised there in taxes. Show some feckin gratitude at least.

I know loads of Germans from all over Brandenburg, Saxony and Mecklenburg Western Pomerania and they all live in Berlin and can't imagine ever being able to find a job in their hometowns. It would't cross their minds to blame the government for that. It's the same all over Europe and in the States too (I know folks over there who had to move 2000 miles to find work, nevermind 200! lol)

Basically, Keep Ireland for the dubs and the peoples republic of Cork. (to paraphrase Paul McCartney)

Have a look at that stat I posted earlier, 3 out of 1,740.
I am concerned about Donegal, of coarse I am.

Tell me that that statistic isn't telling you Anything about the IDA's attitude to Donegal.

People were dismissing the fact that the IDA were told to try to redirect 50% of new jobs outside the 2 main cities.
I'm arguing that this is a positive for the rest of the country and if Donegal gets a bit more notice from the IDA than previously, all the better.