Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
General Irish Government discussion thread [See Post 1805]
Comments
-
AndrewJRenko wrote: »That's because they made a business decision to designation locations as bi-lingual rather than designating individual posts - a fairly sensible approach;
https://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/OLA-Scheme-2015-2018.aspx
This comes from the departments new language scheme which was adopted this year, so safe to say they have not actually done this yet. This decision, which on the face of it may work, was adopted after they failed compleatly to implement what they said they would do in their previous language scheme.
Their previous scheme was to run from 2015 to 2018 and under it they commited to identifying positions requireing Irish in the first year of the scheme and to ensure those positions were filled by the end of the scheme. By the end of the scheme they had filled zero such positions, this out of a total staff of 6,853. That department has several offices located in Gaeltacht areas and yet they still failed to designate even a single role as needing Irish.
Perhaps their new idea will work, but their track record is not so good.0 -
It's not safe to say anything about whether it has been done or not if you don't know whether it has been done or not. Otherwise, it is pure speculation.This comes from the departments new language scheme which was adopted this year, so safe to say they have not actually done this yet.0 -
AndrewJRenko wrote: »It's not safe to say anything about whether it has been done or not if you don't know whether it has been done or not. Otherwise, it is pure speculation.
We will see. Given their track record, I would not hold out much hope.0 -
First off you have a far far smaller pool of Irish speakers than English speakers. We know that from census figures.
The census figures are a joke. People who have literally two words of Irish can, and do, tick the box and claim to be Irish speakers.Another indication of demand is that the tiny amount of people who filled the census out in Irish.
Yes there's nothing stopping anyone doing this if they want, the census worker calls to you with the forms you just have to request one in Irish instead of English. If you can't understand and complete a census form in Irish then your ability to interact meaningfully with the public service in Irish does not exist. The number of Irish language forms returned is absolutely tiny.As I said, over 80% of the civil servants that should be providing services in Irish are missing. That does not mean that there are significantly less Irish speakers in the civil service than you would expect as a proportion of the population, it is just that they are in roles not designatied as requireing Irish and as such are not providing services through Irish. There are actually more than the 450 Irish speakers you would expect to find in the civil services by population, but they spend their days providing services in English while services provision in Irish is neglected. The problem is poorly allocated resources and a lack of strategic planning to address the issue, the issue is not money.
The idea that everyone in the civil/public service is directly working with the public is laughable. Outside of obvious areas like health, the "front line" is quite small. Huge numbers of people work in specialist roles and have minimal or no direct interaction with the public.
Many people who do have a high level of Irish keep quiet about it. They'd rather be getting on with their proper job / using their specialist skills rather than become the unofficial go-to "Irish language person" and become basically a dogsbody / clerk / call centre operative just because they can speak Irish, and having to do that on top of their proper job and get not a single cent for the hassle.© 1982 Sinclair Research Ltd
0 -
I see Harris says he only found out about the Cervical IT glitch that caused further delays Wednesday, with the story coming out Thursday. I'm finding it very hard to believe anything Simon says.He said that what had happened was "not acceptable" and that women needed to be reassured.
The minister said patient representatives were also made aware of the glitch "on the day the story broke" and added that that was was "highly regrettable".
https://www.rte.ie/news/health/2019/0715/1062188-simon-harris/0 -
Advertisement
-
Matt Barrett wrote: »I see Harris says he only found out about the Cervical IT glitch that caused further delays Wednesday, with the story coming out Thursday. I'm finding it very hard to believe anything Simon says.
Do you think the civil service works differently to every other organisation, their employees are exception people who will immediately highlight every FU they make and see that everyone knows about it.....
The fact is that people have a tendency to cover up their mistakes, try to fix them without anyone else knowing about it and only when there is no other alternative do they start escalation. He is luck he did not read it first in the papers!
"Hello, this is Mick in IT operations, can you please tell the Minister that I accidentally deleted the backups for last week.... sorry about that..."
No going to happen...0 -
Do you think the civil service works differently to every other organisation, their employees are exception people who will immediately highlight every FU they make and see that everyone knows about it.....
The fact is that people have a tendency to cover up their mistakes, try to fix them without anyone else knowing about it and only when there is no other alternative do they start escalation. He is luck he did not read it first in the papers!
"Hello, this is Mick in IT operations, can you please tell the Minister that I accidentally deleted the backups for last week.... sorry about that..."
No going to happen...
You are explaining why you think this sub-par type of behaviour happens. It doesn't add nor detract anything from the point that it's poor, we deserve better, especially from elected ministers even if we are sometimes sold they are mere cogs or figureheads.0 -
Matt Barrett wrote: »You are explaining why you think this sub-par type of behaviour happens. It doesn't add nor detract anything from the point that it's poor, we deserve better, especially from elected ministers even if we are sometimes sold they are mere cogs or figureheads.
What exactly should the minister have done here? Have email notifications that systems are being backed up each and every night?0 -
Hotblack Desiato wrote: »The census figures are a joke. People who have literally two words of Irish can, and do, tick the box and claim to be Irish speakers.
I'm not aware of any evidence of widespread fraud on the census, do you know of any?The idea that everyone in the civil/public service is directly working with the public is laughable. Outside of obvious areas like health, the "front line" is quite small. Huge numbers of people work in specialist roles and have minimal or no direct interaction with the public.
Who suggested that everyone in the civil service directly works with the public? You seem to be laughing at your own joke.Many people who do have a high level of Irish keep quiet about it. They'd rather be getting on with their proper job / using their specialist skills rather than become the unofficial go-to "Irish language person" and become basically a dogsbody / clerk / call centre operative just because they can speak Irish, and having to do that on top of their proper job and get not a single cent for the hassle.
This is why an unplanned ad-hoc, optional system based on volunteer work by staff is a failure.0 -
What exactly should the minister have done here? Have email notifications that systems are being backed up each and every night?
I find it hard to believe him. That's the issue I have. Did he only find out Wednesday? We've seen before he is privy to information and then sits on it until it comes out in the media. He's not very proactive but like Varadkar and Murphy great at telling us how disappointing and unfortunate things are after the press inform us all.0 -
Advertisement
-
Matt Barrett wrote: »I find it hard to believe him. That's the issue I have. Did he only find out Wednesday? We've seen before he is privy to information and then sits on it until it comes out in the media. He's not very proactive but like Varadkar and Murphy great at telling us how disappointing and unfortunate things are after the press inform us all.
If you it hard to believe him, the corollary of that is that you credibly expect him to be routinely told that every back-up has gone well as suggested by markodaly.
If that is your position, at least have the honesty to admit that.0 -
Matt Barrett wrote: »I find it hard to believe him. That's the issue I have. Did he only find out Wednesday? We've seen before he is privy to information and then sits on it until it comes out in the media. He's not very proactive but like Varadkar and Murphy great at telling us how disappointing and unfortunate things are after the press inform us all.
So instead of answering my question and ignoring my call on stating what he should have done instead, you change the question from an action item to one of trust.
So, I guess he should have done nothing different so.0 -
I'm not aware of any evidence of widespread fraud on the census, do you know of any?
Census 2016 states that 39.8% of the population "can speak Irish" (Whatever that actually means) and 4.2% claim to speak Irish daily outside of the education system (a "Dia duit" would suffice)
If you take these figures at face value they paint a very different picture of Irish society than the reality I see around me.
Religion is the same, you can be a lifelong atheist but still perfectly accurately tick the catholic box because you were baptised and the RCC regards that as lasting for life! There is no way that 78.3% of the population is catholic in any meaningful sense.
This questions are so vague (and worded in a way which encourages people to tick the "right" answer - how you word the question is all-important in surveys) as to be practically worthless.
All the indications are that many if not most of those 4.2% box-tickers would not actually have a high enough standard of Irish to be able to interact meaningfully with the public service in Irish.
If they are really daily Irish speakers with some level of fluency, why are they not able to complete the census form in Irish (in their own time, ability to look up hard words etc.) ?
The idea that there are masses of people out there who insist on completing the census form in English, yet need to interact with the public sector in Irish over the phone doesn't stand up.Who suggested that everyone in the civil service directly works with the public? You seem to be laughing at your own joke.
You seem to be suggesting that some proportion of the overall number of posts be reserved for Irish.This is why an unplanned ad-hoc, optional system based on volunteer work by staff is a failure.
There's no point doing anything more outside of services provided to Gaeltacht areas.© 1982 Sinclair Research Ltd
0 -
If you it hard to believe him, the corollary of that is that you credibly expect him to be routinely told that every back-up has gone well as suggested by markodaly.
If that is your position, at least have the honesty to admit that.
No, don't be absurd. See below.So instead of answering my question and ignoring my call on stating what he should have done instead, you change the question from an action item to one of trust.
So, I guess he should have done nothing different so.
Because my initial comment regarded trust, I chose not to go off on your flight of fancy. I'd expect basic common or garden office management.
We have the Minister of health stating he found out about the IT glitch the day before the media broke the story.
We had this as a follow on:It will also look at how the IT problem was escalated by the HSE to the Department of Health.
The review will determine the complete chronology of events, from the time the IT problem first emerged, up to the public reporting of the issues last Thursday, 11 July.
https://www.rte.ie/news/health/2019/0715/1062188-simon-harris/
As I said the other day I find it hard to believe anything Simon says.
This morning we have this:The letter to 'Sharon' says that: "The Minister for Health, Simon Harris, T. D. has asked me to thank you for your correspondence concerning CervicalCheck and would like to again apologise for any distress this delay has caused you and reassure you that this is a priority for his Department and the Health Service Executive (HSE)."
The letter does not show that either the department or Minister Harris was aware of any IT issue at that point.
Last weekend, the department said that it became aware of the existence of an IT issue on 25 June through information supplied by the Health Service Executive.
Minister Harris has said the matter was first escalated to him last Wednesday evening, 10 July.
https://www.rte.ie/news/health/2019/0716/1062344-cervicalcheck/
So we know the minister and his office were aware of a delay as far back as June 6th. A mystery delay it seems, just a delay. We are to believe nobody asked 'what delay?' 'Why?' 'How long?' etc.
A couple of things; He either knew and kept quiet until his hand was forced. He didn't know but his department did or the department and Harris knew there was a delay, but didn't know what or think to ask, on this issue of national health concern.
So as I say, I find it hard to believe anything Simon says.
It's poor. It's either dishonesty or incompetence.0 -
Hotblack Desiato wrote: »Census 2016 states that 39.8% of the population "can speak Irish" (Whatever that actually means) and 4.2% claim to speak Irish daily outside of the education system (a "Dia duit" would suffice)
If you take these figures at face value they paint a very different picture of Irish society than the reality I see around me.
This questions are so vague (and worded in a way which encourages people to tick the "right" answer - how you word the question is all-important in surveys) as to be practically worthless.
The question is "Can you speak Irish?", and "If Yes, how often?". That does not seem vague to me, nor does it seem to indicate that one box is the "right" answer. I think it's a bit of a reach to suggest otherwise.
The issue you are having seems to be that they ask about frequency of use rather than geting an indication on the respondants fluency. I would agree that this is a weakness in the census data and fortunatly the next census in 2021 will address it by adding a question on fluency.All the indications are that many if not most of those 4.2% box-tickers would not actually have a high enough standard of Irish to be able to interact meaningfully with the public service in Irish.
What indications would those be?If they are really daily Irish speakers with some level of fluency, why are they not able to complete the census form in Irish (in their own time, ability to look up hard words etc.) ?
The idea that there are masses of people out there who insist on completing the census form in English, yet need to interact with the public sector in Irish over the phone doesn't stand up.
You don't have to insist on filling the census form in English. You are given the English form by default. Even in the Gaeltacht you have to specifically ask for the Irish form if you want it. Irish speakers by and large are bilingual, and capable of filling the form in Irish or English.
Is there a reason that every Irish speaker should insist on filling in the Irish form only? If you fill in the English form does that mean thay you are not a real Irish speaker? Sounds absurd to me. It is for the citizen to choose which language they use, not for the state to force them.You seem to be suggesting that some proportion of the overall number of posts be reserved for Irish.
The civil service does not just provide a service to the general public. Having Irish speaking staff is about more than providing call centre services in Irish. There are organisations, business, civil society groups in all parts of the country that operate through Irish and deal with the state in ways that go beyond joe blogs calling the main reception.There's no point doing anything more outside of services provided to Gaeltacht areas.
There is no point in the state not forcing Irish citizens to use English? Should the state be allowed to ignore a citizens rights for the sake of convinience? Which of your rights should the state be allowed to ignore?0 -
Matt Barrett wrote: »A couple of things; He either knew and kept quiet until his hand was forced. He didn't know but his department did or the department and Harris knew there was a delay, but didn't know what or think to ask, on this issue of national health concern.
This is by far the most likely scenario and a perfectly reasonable one. There is a process behind these things and problems will go through multiple levels of management before getting anywhere near a Minister.0 -
This is by far the most likely scenario and a perfectly reasonable one. There is a process behind these things and problems will go through multiple levels of management before getting anywhere near a Minister.
Of course. I'm not sure what your point is.
If true, the office is aware and corresponding on behalf of the minister on a high profile issue of national concern without his knowledge, isn't believable or acceptable to me. It's as believable as Noonan not being aware of the Siteserv deal his department did with O'Brien for water metering, (still under investigation).0 -
The issue you are having seems to be that they ask about frequency of use rather than geting an indication on the respondants fluency. I would agree that this is a weakness in the census data and fortunatly the next census in 2021 will address it by adding a question on fluency.
Should be a step in the right direction.Is there a reason that every Irish speaker should insist on filling in the Irish form only?
Yes, if they want more and better public services provided through Irish, why are so many of them refusing to use a public service which is already provided through Irish?If you fill in the English form does that mean thay you are not a real Irish speaker?
Seems odd to me, yes - is their fluency is too poor to be able to interact with the public services in Irish? yet the state needs to bend over backwards to provide more services that won't be used, either?© 1982 Sinclair Research Ltd
0 -
I applied for my last passport with an Irish language form as it was the only one left in the post office. Suspect I'm being used in stats to justify funding now!0
-
I wonder is the new thing having two ministers of questionable ability giving the aul' "full confidence" in a fellow minister, with questionable abilities, over when Leo use to roll it out before they had a go at musical chairs? Maybe it's giving it less note if Leo doesn't do it himself?
I reckon the failed youthful dream team of Harris, Murphy and Varadkar are in it together, one for all as it were. Sadly Pascal 'I wasn't aware' Donohoe doesn't add any credibility.Ministers defend Harris following CervicalCheck issue
https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/0716/1063419-cervical-confidence/
Maybe Eoghan having his eyes closed is a nod to his being the 'see no evil' of the three.0 -
Advertisement
-
Hotblack Desiato wrote: »Yes, if they want more and better public services provided through Irish, why are so many of them refusing to use a public service which is already provided through Irish?
Seems odd to me, yes - is their fluency is too poor to be able to interact with the public services in Irish? yet the state needs to bend over backwards to provide more services that won't be used, either?
I don't see why there should be a moral obligation on Irish speakers to use Irish over English at all times when dealing with the state, or else they are somehow less valid Irish speakers. Nor do I think that the provision of services should be based on the number of Irish forms handed in at the last census. People should be able to use either language at their own choice.
As for why it might happen, often (invairably?) the census enumarator does not have the Irish form when they call to the door, your have to ask for it specifically. It's not dificult, but even minor social awkwardness will stop people from doing all sorts of things. People don't like to be seen as difficult. Then you will just have people who took the form handed to them when they were on the spot and didn't even think to ask for the Irish form in the moment. As I said, English is the default.
On top of that, the form is only filled in by the head of the household. There are many families where one parent if fluent and the other is not. You will get plenty of households where the non-Irish speaker filled in the form on behalf of a family which includes Irish speakers. My own household for example returned an English form at the last census despite two of the three people in the house being fluent Irish speakers, as the head of the household does not speak Irish.
Perhaps we are not 'real' Irish speakers as a result? :rolleyes:0 -
Matt Barrett wrote: »I wonder is the new thing having two ministers of questionable ability giving the aul' "full confidence" in a fellow minister, with questionable abilities, over when Leo use to roll it out before they had a go at musical chairs? Maybe it's giving it less note if Leo doesn't do it himself?
I reckon the failed youthful dream team of Harris, Murphy and Varadkar are in it together, one for all as it were. Sadly Pascal 'I wasn't aware' Donohoe doesn't add any credibility.
Maybe Eoghan having his eyes closed is a nod to his being the 'see no evil' of the three.
Indefatigably negative about everything, and anything, the Govt does?0 -
From what I've seen, he was aware of one particular case on 6th June. His office asked relevant questions of the HSE, and was informed of the larger problem in July.Matt Barrett wrote: »So we know the minister and his office were aware of a delay as far back as June 6th. A mystery delay it seems, just a delay. We are to believe nobody asked 'what delay?' 'Why?' 'How long?' etc.
Seems like a fairly reasonable approach to me.0 -
AndrewJRenko wrote: »From what I've seen, he was aware of one particular case on 6th June. His office asked relevant questions of the HSE, and was informed of the larger problem in July.
Seems like a fairly reasonable approach to me.
Even when an issue is brought to a Minister's office's attention, they go and check it out, find out there is a problem, bring it to the Minister's attention, he deals with it, and there are still people who think he should have waved a magic wand, dipped his hand into the magic money tree fund and solved it in an hour.0 -
AndrewJRenko wrote: »From what I've seen, he was aware of one particular case on 6th June. His office asked relevant questions of the HSE, and was informed of the larger problem in July.
Seems like a fairly reasonable approach to me.
To me it reads like his office and possibly Harris himself, were aware there was an issue causing delays. They either did the normal thing a child would do and asked 'what delay, why?' and lied about only finding out the day before the media published on it, or they were told there was a delay and incompetently said, fair enough, with out looking into it or asking why?Even when an issue is brought to a Minister's office's attention, they go and check it out, find out there is a problem, bring it to the Minister's attention, he deals with it, and there are still people who think he should have waved a magic wand, dipped his hand into the magic money tree fund and solved it in an hour.
When people defer to lies about expecting magic wands and money trees you know you've hit a nerve.0 -
You seem to be confusing 'delay' and 'delays'. In June, his office knew there was an issue causing a delay - one case, one person, one test result. In July, after asking some questions of the HSE, his office knew there was an issue causing delays - multiple people, about 800.Matt Barrett wrote: »To me it reads like his office and possibly Harris himself, were aware there was an issue causing delays. They either did the normal thing a child would do and asked 'what delay, why?' and lied about only finding out the day before the media published on it, or they were told there was a delay and incompetently said, fair enough, with out looking into it or asking why?
Get the difference?0 -
AndrewJRenko wrote: »You seem to be confusing 'delay' and 'delays'. In June, his office knew there was an issue causing a delay - one case, one person, one test result. In July, after asking some questions of the HSE, his office knew there was an issue causing delays - multiple people, about 800.
Get the difference?
You are making assumptions.
Let's say they'd no clue beyond that one person dealing with a delay. If they asked what delay, why? That would be normal practice, especially if the ministers office is corresponding on his behalf regarding that delay.
Here's some facts:The delay in issuing the results were first reported in the media on July 11th though the HSE had known about it since last February following a complaint by a woman about a delayed test.
The HSE informed the Department of Health on June 25th that there was an IT issue. The HSE was asked to investigate the extent of the problem and reported back to the department again on July 10th.
...Mr Harris said he was only informed about the delay on July 10th, the same day that his department was also informed about the extent of it.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/harris-not-informed-of-cervical-screening-issues-until-july-10th-1.3957002
So his department knew about the issue for a few weeks and started looking into it, all before Harris had a notion, only finding out the day before the press published on it. Convenient? Yes. So either lies or incompetence with a level of office management beneath that of a 16 year old who makes the coffee.0 -
Matt Barrett wrote: »You are making assumptions.
Let's say they'd no clue beyond that one person dealing with a delay. If they asked what delay, why? That would be normal practice, especially if the ministers office is corresponding on his behalf regarding that delay.
Here's some facts:
So his department knew about the issue for a few weeks and started looking into it, all before Harris had a notion, only finding out the day before the press published on it. Convenient? Yes. So either lies or incompetence with a level of office management beneath that of a 16 year old who makes the coffee.
You are making a conspiracy theory about absolutely nothing, as usual.
One, yes one, person gets in touch with the Minister's Office to complain about a delay. Minister's Office correctly enquires of the HSE to find out what the problem is. HSE comes back and says there is an IT issue. Minister's Office says would you look into the extent of the IT issue. HSE comes back and says eh, actually, this is a big problem. Minister is then told.
What bit of that do you not understand and accept as normal behaviour from the Minister's Office? It is to their credit that they didn't accept the first explanation that they got from the HSE. One thing is clear, Harris did well in picking his staff (probably because they are not his party colleague's son).0 -
You are making a conspiracy theory about absolutely nothing, as usual.
One, yes one, person gets in touch with the Minister's Office to complain about a delay. Minister's Office correctly enquires of the HSE to find out what the problem is. HSE comes back and says there is an IT issue. Minister's Office says would you look into the extent of the IT issue. HSE comes back and says eh, actually, this is a big problem. Minister is then told.
What bit of that do you not understand and accept as normal behaviour from the Minister's Office? It is to their credit that they didn't accept the first explanation that they got from the HSE. One thing is clear, Harris did well in picking his staff (probably because they are not his party colleague's son).
As usual? Link?
Minster claims he didn't know what his office did know two weeks prior. Not the extent, but that their was a delay affecting 800 people, IT related. Even though his office had the HSE investigating and his office wrote to a lady regarding it, on his behalf. These are facts, not conspiracy. You should look up the term. I find it hard to believe anything Simon says, never said he lied, but he's either incompetent or telling lies, iMO.
You have issue with second level nepotism but not poor quality in government offices? Why are you at great pains defending the minister of health and his office on this? Do you not think in the least it's poor administration? What good job was done here exactly that merits your energy on this?
Ministers 'not knowing' what their department is up to isn't good enough, especially on nationally important issues.0 -
Advertisement
-
That's exactly what his Department did do. They asked 'what delay, why' and they got more information on 10th July.Matt Barrett wrote: »You are making assumptions.
Let's say they'd no clue beyond that one person dealing with a delay. If they asked what delay, why? That would be normal practice, especially if the ministers office is corresponding on his behalf regarding that delay.Matt Barrett wrote: »Here's some facts:
So his department knew about the issue for a few weeks and started looking into it, all before Harris had a notion, only finding out the day before the press published on it. Convenient? Yes. So either lies or incompetence with a level of office management beneath that of a 16 year old who makes the coffee.
His Department knew about an issue for one person for a few weeks and started looking into it. Are you suggesting that every time a single test result goes missing, the Department need to report it to the minister? That's just silly
His Department asked for more information, and on the day they were informed about the scope of the problem and the number of women involved, they informed the Minister.0
Advertisement