Waterford Politics MEGATHREAD

7upfree

Sully wrote: »

Sinn Fein voted today, along with Fine Gael and Independents, for the new Mayor and Deputy Mayor. Two Fine Gael candidates. Cllr Lola O'Sullivan (Tramore) is the new Mayor and John Carey (Passage) is the Deputy Mayor.

Cllr Mary Roche was proposed as Mayor by some Independents, including two Tramore Cllrs. Which is odd seeing as Conway's election campaign was about electing local and Tramore needing strong local representation.

Ah, FG and the Shinners. Who'd have thought it!:D After all the years they spent isolating Davey Walsh. What a shower.

hardybuck

7upfree wrote: »

Oh yeah. Of course it does.:rolleyes:

Have you any experience with shared services?

GaelMise

7upfree wrote: »

Do we even need the number of Councillors? Or any at all?

Of course not, all we need is to install you as county generalismo. Even that would probably not be good enough for you. :rolleyes:

I have asked already - what purpose do both centres serve?

They allow for the people of Waterford to access local government services without expecting a substantial proporation of them to travel accross the county.
The current set up is actually quite a bit better than what went before as people in Tramore and that area no longer need to travel to Dungarvan.

As has been pointed out, there are fewer councillors, and there will be further savings due to job losses. Do you know why there will be job losses?

Motor Tax - online.

Property Tax - online.

Water rates - online.

Ah, so only those with internet access are entitled to services from the council is it?

7upfree

GaelMise wrote: »

Of course not, all we need is to install you as county generalismo. Even that would probably not be good enough for you. :rolleyes:

Couldn't do much worse really. Don't give up the day job BTW!:D

GaelMise wrote: »

They allow for the people of Waterford to access local government services without expecting a substantial proporation of them to travel accross the county.
The current set up is actually quite a bit better than what went before as people in Tramore and that area no longer need to travel to Dungarvan.

A great example of the inefficiencies and duplication that prevailed. And will continue to do so. Completely detached from reality. And what, precisely, are these "local services"?

GaelMise wrote: »

As has been pointed out, there are fewer councillors, and there will be further savings due to job losses. Do you know why there will be job losses?

Do I really need to? All I see is continuing duplication. Two centres. Such "cost savings"!

GaelMise wrote: »

Ah, so only those with internet access are entitled to services from the council is it?

This is the 21st Century. Something you apparently do not recognise.

robtri

GaelMise wrote: »

They allow for the people of Waterford to access local government services without expecting a substantial proporation of them to travel accross the county.
The current set up is actually quite a bit better than what went before as people in Tramore and that area no longer need to travel to Dungarvan.



Ah, so only those with internet access are entitled to services from the council is it?

So what services are needed to be duplicated in two centres that are required to be accessible ???

I am curious to know what you believe is the required in both districts that people need access too

Sully

Probably one of the more amusing debates in the chamber yesterday was when the council meetings would be held, going forward. Joe Kelly wanted it after working hours to facilitate people who have a day job (a valid point), Mary Roche main concern was not getting into the papers in time and having to wait an extra week for people to read all about it (in all fairness!), council staff made the observation that staff would have to be kept back working later in the evenings (but they would accommodate the councillors if that's how they decided), Blaise Hanngian made an observation some were still in college in Dublin (possibly a little dig at FF Cllr Quinlan?!) whereas some others talked about Friday's impacting people's weekend plans (long weekends, presumably).

John Cummins interrupted the debate to get a bit of cop on in the chamber and Sinn Fein (can't recall which member) agreed with John, proposed the new time and day and put the subject to bed at last. Every second Monday, can't recall the exact time that was agreed. Think the idea was to keep it the way it always was and the observation being made by John that he didn't understand why this was being discussed to such length.

With the Independents being split and fighting with each other, I think it's going to be a rocky road for a while until some normality returns! The council couldn't even sort out committee positions due to all the fighting!

7upfree

robtri wrote: »

So what services are needed to be duplicated in two centres that are required to be accessible ???

I am curious to know what you believe is the required in both districts that people need access too

No answer forthcoming. Loads of "people don't know what they're talking about/ranting/etc" but not one of the proponents of duplicating both centres can come up with a valid argument for doing so. No surprises there.:rolleyes:

7upfree

Sully wrote: »

Probably one of the more amusing debates in the chamber yesterday was when the council meetings would be held, going forward. Joe Kelly wanted it after working hours to facilitate people who have a day job (a valid point), Mary Roche main concern was not getting into the papers in time and having to wait an extra week for people to read all about it (in all fairness!), council staff made the observation that staff would have to be kept back working later in the evenings (but they would accommodate the councillors if that's how they decided), Blaise Hanngian made an observation some were still in college in Dublin (possibly a little dig at FF Cllr Quinlan?!) whereas some others talked about Friday's impacting people's weekend plans (long weekends, presumably).

John Cummins interrupted the debate to get a bit of cop on in the chamber and Sinn Fein (can't recall which member) agreed with John, proposed the new time and day and put the subject to bed at last. Every second Monday, can't recall the exact time that was agreed. Think the idea was to keep it the way it always was and the observation being made by John that he didn't understand why this was being discussed to such length.

With the Independents being split and fighting with each other, I think it's going to be a rocky road for a while until some normality returns! The council couldn't even sort out committee positions due to all the fighting!

Ballymagash Urban District Council (Hall's Pictorial Weekly in the 1970s) comes to mind straight away. It highlights the fact that maybe these councils should be disbanded completely. A cost on the country that, quite literally, produces nothing, apart from hot air.

Have a look at the cabinet meeting here at 40m 50s. Some things never change really.....some great other stuff in these clips also.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cIAhCGhZ5E

hardybuck

7upfree wrote: »

No answer forthcoming. Loads of "people don't know what they're talking about/ranting/etc" but not one of the proponents of duplicating both centres can come up with a valid argument for doing so. No surprises there.:rolleyes:

When structuring these type of back office admin/shared service type offices, you've got options. Questions might include:

1) The length of service of staff. If Waterford staff were more recent hires, it might have been a cheaper redundancy process, and vice versa.

2) Quality of staff. We have no insight into their skills register, and the level of quality in either office. They may have cut most of the people they wanted out of both organisations, and kept the best. You see it regularly in manufacturing where Irish sites are kept open despite having higher costs, their quality etc. is much better than rival sites.

Another example might be that the Dungarvan staff have a lot of financial expertise, Waterford the procurement process etc. You want to keep staff out of both offices as a result.

3) Facilities. Length of leases for buildings, machinery, service contracts etc, potential resale value of site, investment in the site. Huge amount of consideration given to that.

At the end of all of that, you'll have a series of options factoring in costs, logistical challenges, political challenges etc. Just for example, if you found out that shutting Waterford was €500k cheaper due to the fact that their staff had less service, you might be tempted to pursue that approach. However, you might not in the knowledge that it might present a huge amount of organisational challenges.

Very difficult to speculate in the absence of any real information. In the absence of that info I wouldn't be rushing to any conclusions.

Black Suir

Psychedelic wrote: »

FF/FG/Lab have joined together in a pact to elect James Tobin (FF) as Chairman of Waterford City and County Council, with Jason Murphy (also FF) as Vice Chairman. How depressing that is to have two FF people leading the new council, to be followed by FF/Lab in the following years.

Chairman is still the same thing as the mayor, I think, or has that changed with the amalgamation?

The pact has the absolute bare majority (17 out of 32) to give them a majority on the council - assume this means they'll all vote to support each other's motions etc so looks like nothing will change now even though we elected so much new blood in the Independent and SF councillors.

A new council but with the same old FF/FG/Lab leading - how will this change Government treatment of Waterford?

After the election's last month, we were always going to have packs whether it was the old city and county councils or the new city and County COuncil unless one party could gain a majority and that was never going to happen. The party that fielded most candidates was FG with 14 and they needed 17 to have a majority. It could have happened that non party members could have formed a majority if they had 17 or more elected but the likelyhood of that happening was slim. There would be too many of them each fighting for their own little corner of the county and not caring about the rest of it. Such things as budgets would never be passed. We would have have Big Phil ruling us more that he is attempting to for the next 5 years if the non party members formed a majority.

Black Suir

Sully wrote: »

They have.

Made worse by Fine Gael and Labbour. God help us however is Sinn Fein get in.

Black Suir

7upfree wrote: »

But you now have a situation where BOTH sets will travel alternately, doubling travel costs. It is beyond belief. Dungarvan should have been closed.

Why?

Black Suir

7upfree wrote: »

Six FEWER councillors. Wow! What a saving! And I'm the one in need of help.......:roll eyes:

As I said, completely surreal. A "meter" - and duplication remains. Do we even need the number of Councillors? Or any at all?

I have asked already - what purpose do both centres serve?

Motor Tax - online.

Property Tax - online.

Water rates - online.

There is absolutely NO requirement for two administrative centres - under ANY circumstances.

Believe it or not, not everyone knows how to work a PC/Laptop or any other such device. Also do to realise that even if everyone can use a PC etc, not everyone has a credit/debit card to pay over the net or have sufficent money in a bank account.

robtri

Black Suir wrote: »

Believe it or not, not everyone knows how to work a PC/Laptop or any other such device. Also do to realise that even if everyone can use a PC etc, not everyone has a credit/debit card to pay over the net or have sufficent money in a bank account.

that is true.... but everyone can use the postal system (you can post this stuff to them)..... for those couple of items that are mentioned there is no need for an office...

so what services are are critical and needed in both City and Dungarvan...

7upfree

Black Suir wrote: »

Why?

Duplication.

7upfree

http://www.thejournal.ie/bausch-and-lomb-jobs-1509464-Jun2014/

nkay1985

7upfree wrote: »

http://www.thejournal.ie/bausch-and-lomb-jobs-1509464-Jun2014/

I'm no fan of John Deasy but fair play to him for calling Bruton out.

Deise67

pity he's outside the fold ! least he's calls it as it easy , had some dealings with him a few years back , he helped as much as he could, and I'm not a party man either !

Black Suir

robtri wrote: »

that is true.... but everyone can use the postal system (you can post this stuff to them)..... for those couple of items that are mentioned there is no need for an office...

so what services are are critical and needed in both City and Dungarvan...

The way things are going and could well go in the next few years, it would be easier to go to Dungarvan or Wateford City to pay things like tax etc than it will be to find a rural post office to do it that way.

hardybuck

7upfree wrote: »

Duplication.

Did you read my previous post? You're assuming duplication when we don't know that is the case. You're stating that Dungarvan should be closed when you haven't any information about their staff profile, property leases etc., and what that might cost.

Ironically, this is actually symptomatic of some of how the likes of SF and others do business. Bawl from the sidelines without knowing much, if anything, about what exactly is going on.

You're also possible forgetting that Dungarvan is more of a central location than Waterford is. Waterford could be more suitable for closure as a result if there was a decision between the two.

Max Powers

nkay1985 wrote: »

I'm no fan of John Deasy but fair play to him for calling Bruton out.

agree, dont know how effective it is but it at least feels better to have someone shouting for us. is it helpful, open to debate but you gotta have a bit of respect for him for calling it as it is. Hopefully Bruton/govt will be embarrassed into action, its a long shot as he/they are deluded to think that their 'plan' is sufficient/working effectively.

7upfree

hardybuck wrote: »

Did you read my previous post? You're assuming duplication when we don't know that is the case. You're stating that Dungarvan should be closed when you haven't any information about their staff profile, property leases etc., and what that might cost.

Ironically, this is actually symptomatic of some of how the likes of SF and others do business. Bawl from the sidelines without knowing much, if anything, about what exactly is going on.

You're also possible forgetting that Dungarvan is more of a central location than Waterford is. Waterford could be more suitable for closure as a result if there was a decision between the two.

I've asked you already - what are these "serves" being provided? There IS duplication. No two ways about it. An absolute farce.

7upfree

Max Powers wrote: »

agree, dont know how effective it is but it at least feels better to have someone shouting for us. is it helpful, open to debate but you gotta have a bit of respect for him for calling it as it is. Hopefully Bruton/govt will be embarrassed into action, its a long shot as he/they are deluded to think that their 'plan' is sufficient/working effectively.

Only shouting now because they were given a whipping in the elections. Too little, too late. As always in Waterford.

7upfree

robtri wrote: »

that is true.... but everyone can use the postal system (you can post this stuff to them)..... for those couple of items that are mentioned there is no need for an office...

so what services are are critical and needed in both City and Dungarvan...

No answers forthcoming. Enough said.

7upfree

hardybuck wrote: »

You're also possible forgetting that Dungarvan is more of a central location than Waterford is. Waterford could be more suitable for closure as a result if there was a decision between the two.

Yes, and Portlaoise is a more central location than Dublin. Should all the relevant Government Departments be moved there?

AdMMM

Sully wrote: »

Probably one of the more amusing debates in the chamber yesterday was when the council meetings would be held, going forward. Joe Kelly wanted it after working hours to facilitate people who have a day job (a valid point), Mary Roche main concern was not getting into the papers in time and having to wait an extra week for people to read all about it (in all fairness!), council staff made the observation that staff would have to be kept back working later in the evenings (but they would accommodate the councillors if that's how they decided), Blaise Hanngian made an observation some were still in college in Dublin (possibly a little dig at FF Cllr Quinlan?!) whereas some others talked about Friday's impacting people's weekend plans (long weekends, presumably).

John Cummins interrupted the debate to get a bit of cop on in the chamber and Sinn Fein (can't recall which member) agreed with John, proposed the new time and day and put the subject to bed at last. Every second Monday, can't recall the exact time that was agreed. Think the idea was to keep it the way it always was and the observation being made by John that he didn't understand why this was being discussed to such length.

With the Independents being split and fighting with each other, I think it's going to be a rocky road for a while until some normality returns! The council couldn't even sort out committee positions due to all the fighting!

To be fair, it was their first meeting, with a lot of them in the chamber for the first time and unaware of existing procedures. You say that John Cummins was the voice of reason on the night (and he could very well have been), but he was far from the voice of reason when he first opened his mouth in the chamber after the last election, barely being able to string a sentence together with the nerves. He has learned a lot in that time, and I'd imagine everyone else in the chamber will learn a lot too over the next few years, so I wouldn't be rushing to conclusions based on the contributions on one nervy night that has traditionally been more like a pantomime than an actual Council meeting.

As for the Committee positions, these are usually sorted out through hushed late night meetings between party representatives before the first meeting, but because more Independents are involved, it means more late night meetings and with a more diverse grouping of people so it will always take longer to reach agreement.

Sully

AdMMM wrote: »

To be fair, it was their first meeting, with a lot of them in the chamber for the first time and unaware of existing procedures. You say that John Cummins was the voice of reason on the night (and he could very well have been), but he was far from the voice of reason when he first opened his mouth in the chamber after the last election, barely being able to string a sentence together with the nerves. He has learned a lot in that time, and I'd imagine everyone else in the chamber will learn a lot too over the next few years, so I wouldn't be rushing to conclusions based on the contributions on one nervy night that has traditionally been more like a pantomime than an actual Council meeting.

As for the Committee positions, these are usually sorted out through hushed late night meetings between party representatives before the first meeting, but because more Independents are involved, it means more late night meetings and with a more diverse grouping of people so it will always take longer to reach agreement.

To be fair, there are a good few experienced councilors in that meeting and it wasn't the new kids on the block raising eyebrows. You could understand if it was. It took John & possibly John Hearne to bring a bit of order.

The committee positions are done differently better the older bodies.

7upfree

Question: is there still a separate City and county Manager? If so - why?

hardybuck

7upfree wrote: »

I've asked you already - what are these "serves" being provided? There IS duplication. No two ways about it. An absolute farce.

Why don't you go and ask? You haven't a clue at the moment do you?

hardybuck

7upfree wrote: »

Yes, and Portlaoise is a more central location than Dublin. Should all the relevant Government Departments be moved there?

Different question, and borderline ridiculous example. In that example you'd be asking every Government Department to close their doors to move there, along with the Dail and Seanad, to a place without the necessary infastructure to handle such a move. Almost literally impossible.

In the Waterford v Dungarvan example you're comparing two similarly organised organisations facing similar sized populations.