Western town is to be the site for O Cuiv's headquarters

THE Government has chosen Charlestown, Co Mayo, as the new headquarters of a department after planning permission was refused at Knock Airport.

The headquarters of the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs will employ 140 people when it is fully staffed. Of these, 70 are currently located temporarily in Tubbercurry, and 30 more are due to take up their posts later this year.

An Bord Pleanala had turned down the department's appeal to build the new headquarters at Knock Airport on July 13, saying the building should be located in a town.

Minister Eamon O Cuiv brought the Charlestown proposal before the Government yesterday and it was approved.

But there is now likely to be a two-year wait before the building is completed and the staff move in to the new location, five miles from Knock Airport.

Mr O Cuiv said last night he was confident that planning permission would be approved when a new site is bought in Charlestown, where the design for the proposed building at the airport would be used.

He said the Government had directed the Office of Public Works, which is responsible for the decentralisation programme, to take the necessary steps for the new location "as a matter of urgency".

He said he had had discussions with the unions and staff associations yesterday and they were happy with the new arrangements.

Quickly

Mr O Cuiv said he had been keen to move quickly to end the uncertainty about the new location in the interests of staff, their families and the running of the department. "The airport location for the headquarters would have been of great strategic value in terms of the further development of the airport and the area," he said.

"But Charlestown is close to the airport and on the Western rail corridor, and the location of the headquarters there will have very positive benefits for the town, the airport itself and the surrounding area." The minister said that half of those moving to Charlestown were being relocated from Dublin.

Gene McKenna
Irish Independent

Let's leave poor Tom alone and debate the real issue

LO AND behold the Labour party are upset. "Conflict of interest," they say. Who's conflicted then? Tom Parlon former IFA leader, Minister for State at the Office of Public Works (OPW) and champion of decentralisation, that's who.

What did Tom do to incur their wrath? Well, he up and left Irish politics to take a job as director general of the Construction Industry Federation. Labour's Health spokeswoman Liz McManus believes Tom now has a "serious conflict of interest."

What has got one our country's brightest opposition politicians into such a twist? Let's try and guess in this hypothetical scenario: a former junior minister is hired by a lobby group to deal with his former government department, the Office of Public Works. The OPW buys and sells lands on behalf of the State as part of its many functions.

Our fictional former minister would be aware of lands up for grabs. Maybe our man knows things others don't. Baloney. Every local hack from Listwoel to Belmullett knows where the OPW are interested in buying or selling.

Ah yeah, says you, but with knowledge and connections our man could get preferred treatment in the sale or purchase of said lands. More baloney. The advantage of dealing in the State's physical assets is that they are sold off as a result of a rigorous tendering process. You puts in your bids and may the best man win. Besides, the minister doesn't deal with this area, he is a figurehead not a manager.

But what about influencing overall government policy? Our man is connected, knows high ranking civil servants in the OPW. Our man eats beef with ministers and all that.

Baloney. This theory ignores the culture of civil service in Ireland.

Get this straight - civil servants worry about other civil servants. They do not worry about politicians, especially ones who lost their seat. Civil servants are peer driven. They may be guilty of being conservative, of moving slowly, of giving minimal answers to Parliamentary Questions but they are not corrupt.

Remember the series Yes Minister? Most of these lads would dance around their junior minister. They are safe in the knowledge that said politician will soon be out the door, courtesy of Joe Public the voter or at the whim of the Taoiseach.

Policy is decided by the new minister and government of the day. Our lad ain't at the table anymore.

However Labour's Liz McManus has done us a service by touching on the real underbelly of this issue: the relationship between politicians and private commercial interest groups. At the heart of the matter lies the suspicion that one is indebted to the other and thus a corrupt advantage accrues.

On the opposite side is the belief that it is fair and reasonable to employ and consult with people of skill and capacity notwithstanding their political/commercial connections. In January 1993, the Labour party under Dick Spring went into government with Albert Reynolds' Fianna Fail Party.

Labour brought in a few friends with them. Programme managers they were called. Were they publicly elected? No. Did they go through a normal equal opportunities job posting process? No. Were these positions open to suitably qualified supporters of other parties? No. Were they drawn from business and other professional interest groups? Well yes they were. Were they in a position to influence government policy? Almost certainly. Were they men of integrity - absolutely.

Irish political life would be the poorer without the contribution of men like Fergus Finlay and Greg Sparks. They frequently outsmarted Fianna Fail. They were, however, allies of and appointed by Labour government ministers.

Which is more worthy of debate? A politician leaving office to go to a lobby group or someone from the commercial sector coming in to influence government policy?

Let's go back to another grand coalition. December 1994, and John Bruton leads a Labour Fine Gael and Democratic Left grouping into power. As you look at your wage slip and the tax take, think about the cost of running over 130 state bodies, most of which have political nominees on their boards.

Back then it was the three-two-one rule. On these state boards three seats went to Fine Gael, two to Labour and one to the Democratic Left, so the story goes. And yes, before you all squeal, no better boys than Fianna Fail for advisers, programme managers and make-up artists and the like.

There were some very good appointments under Labour patronage. The eminently capable Brendan Halligan, economist and Labour party veteran, was appointed to Bord na Mona. However let's reacquaint ourselves with the old health boards, "the 11 kingdoms" as they were known. I will spare Labour, and indeed all parties, the embarrassment of naming some of the gobdaws they put onto those boards.

These were boards that affected our health, quite often run by muppets with no skill other than that of brown-nosing. (There were notable exceptions like the late Toddy O'Sullivan from Cork.)

So let's leave Tom Parlon alone. Alas poor Tom has gone from fields of gold to bricks and mortar and suffered the indignity of decentralisation.

You may or may not admire Tom, but he is as straight as they come. Let's have a serious debate about lobby groups, political funding, civil appointments and the role of brokerage. But as we do, remember the less obvious spheres of influence. These lads are around a lot longer than Tom and you won't be seeing them jumping out of a haystack anytime soon.

Eamon Keane presents the Lunchtime Show on Newstalk 106-108FM.

Eamon Keane
Sunday Independent

Setback for decentralisation plan to Knock

Plans to decentralise the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs to Knock, Co Mayo, have received a setback with the refusal of planning permission for a new headquarters building.

The move of 140 staff, planned as far back as 2003, was to have been completed later this year. Some 37 staff from the department moved to temporary accommodation at Tubbercurry, Co Sligo, last July.

At the end of last year, it was projected 64 staff would be in place in Tubbercurry, covering six sections of the department.

Despite missed deadlines for the planned new headquarters, Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs Éamon Ó Cuív announced last July work would commence on the new offices in the first quarter of 2007.

"It is estimated that the headquarters will transfer there from mid-2008. Once the new offices are ready, the staff in Tubbercurry will relocate, giving a total of 140 in the new location," he said.

The building was to have comprised two three-storey wings of offices linked by a glazed atrium stepping up the hillside site.

However, planning permission was appealed by Peter Sweetman and Associates of Rathmines, Dublin and, in its ruling yesterday, An Bord Pleanála rejected the application.

The board said that, notwithstanding the proximity of the building to Ireland West International Airport, Knock, the headquarters would have been in a "rural area which is remote from the town of Charlestown or any other settlement, remote from the normal range of services and facilities associated with office accommodation and remote from public transport infrastructure".

It was considered the proposed location of a standalone office building unrelated to the operation of the airport would give rise to unsustainable forms of commuting and would be contrary to the current Mayo Development Plan.

The board also found that, by virtue of the proximity of the runway at Ireland West, the building would have represented a poor working environment for staff.

The board's decision was welcomed by An Taisce, which called for a complete review of the decentralisation programme.

"Decentralised offices should be situated in the gateways and hubs in locations which have good access to public transport, and do not worsen car-based sprawl," it said in a statement.

Tim O'Brien
© 2007 The Irish Times

Top civil servants warn of relocation disaster

THE country's top civil servants have denounced the decentralisation programme as fatally flawed.

Senior civil service workers who have opted not to relocate now have to watch others being recruited for their jobs, a ploy which they say is vindictive, unjust and deplorable and makes a mockery of voluntary relocation.

They say that the programme, costed at €900m and rising, will have to be radically changed before it undermines the entire public service.

"The carry-on-regardless attitude of the Government means that the loss of corporate memory caused by decentralisation will be overwhelming," the Association of Higher Civil and Public Servants (AHCPS) has warned.

Dublin will become the career backwater for civil servants who will not relocate and over 3,000 of them, including 80pc of senior managers, will be "surplus to requirements in the capital", the AHCPS said.

Retiring general secretary Sean O'Riordan told the association's annual conference in Dublin that while pay was the glue holding social partnership together, decentralisation dominated industrial relations in the civil service and many of the state agencies. He said the scope and time scale of decentralisation should be adjusted.

"We want to see the programme changed in a manner which stops the undermining of public services," he said."We want an immediate and radical review of decentralisation, and this must specifically consider abandoning proposals to move entire departments from Dublin to scattered provincial locations."

Mr O'Riordan said that under the programme, whose capital costs would be at least €900m, more than 90pc of the people with very high levels of policy expertise and understanding would change jobs.

Skills could haemorrhage at senior level unless career development paths were maintained, he said. The AHCPS believes that the current decentralisation programme is not well thought out, rational or carefully planned.

Applications

Mr O'Riordan said meeting the targets was critically dependant on transferring staff, but over 46pc of civil servants targeted had not applied.

These included many in senior management positions, whose work was critical to the efficiency and good performance of their departments.

A report from the executive committee of the AHCPS said that if the decentralisation system remained in place, Dublin would become the end of the career development line for hundreds of highly skilled and dedicated senior civil servants.

"When or if this programme is completed, fewer than 10pc of Dublin-based civil servants will have relocated with their current jobs to departments and offices outside the capital," the report adds.

On benchmarking, Mr O'Riordan said that he did not want to add to difficulties in the health sector, but independent benchmarking was put in place by both sides as a reasonable alternative to having public service pay determined on the streets.

"Public sector unions will not buy into any benchmarking models that might depart from the criteria for pay determination," he added.

Lorna Reid
Irish Independent

Unforeseen issues blamed for failure of decentralisation plans

The Government has failed to decentralise 8,000 civil servants, writes Stephen Rogers in Ennis.

THE Government has admitted it failed to decentralise more than 8,000 civil service staff because it did not prepare properly before announcing decentralisation in 2003.

At yesterday’s IMPACT civil service conference in Ennis, the union pointed out that 10,300 civil servants were supposed to have been relocated from Dublin to 53 centres in 25 counties before the election. To date only 2,000 have been moved.

Labour Affairs Minister, Tony Killeen addressed the union delegates, and afterwards admitted the practical implementation of decentralisation ‘has thrown up issues and problems that I don’t think anyone really foresaw’.

“It has thrown up a whole range of issues that probably were not expected. The decentralisation position of 2003 came against a background of very successful decentralisations previously, when almost in every case it was oversubscribed.

“They tended to be smaller numbers in locations that were attractive because there was not an opportunity to work there previously anyway. One of the issues in this round has been the scale of what was proposed.”

He defended decentralisation as a process that was strategically worth pursuing for the benefit of the country.

“Historically, the way it happened has not been good for Dublin or for the areas from which people migrated,” he said. “I think decision making based in a very small geographical area is not in the interest of that area or the rest of the country.

“So, I do think the principle is very good but the practical implementation has thrown up issues and problems that I don’t think anyone really foresaw.”

IMPACT National Secretary Louise O’Donnell said it was now time for a rethink, that the union was not opposed to decentralisation and had workable solutions for a programme that had ‘backed itself into a corner’.

She said stakeholders need to review each of the departments and organisations earmarked to move and look at removing those for whom decentralisation is clearly not practical or cost-effective.

An option which Tony Killeen said was being considered by government was interchangeability of roles between the semi-state or state agency sector and the public and civil service.

“He said the option had arisen in the past when technical and professional staff who would not or could not move might have been filled from the other sector.

If that is introduced to solve the decentralisation impasse, it could lead to the introduction of common terms and conditions and promotional prospects for workers in each of the sectors.

Irish Examiner

Spatial plan a load of nonsense

David McWilliams tells us planners what he thinks of the National Spatial Strategy:

Apparently, we have a National Spatial Strategy.

It was published some time last year, or maybe it was the year before. It was full of hubs, corridors and gateways. It said something about more balanced development, more decentralising of jobs and generally less congestion, commuting and snarl.

Like a national school project, a lovely map of the country was unveiled with lots of straight blue and red lines. It alluded to fancy-sounding things like radial corridors and seemed very progressive at the time. Economic activity, research and employment were to be spread more or less evenly around the country. Most crucially, this would take pressure off house prices in the Dublin area.

No expense was spared on the PR exercise to unveil it and the later plan for decentralisation of civil servants.

Unfortunately, just like the Luas, the National Spatial Strategy and plan for decentralisation did not join up.

Towns which were supposed to become hubs and gateways and, as such, were earmarked for jobs and development, didn’t get earmarked for civil servants. Other towns seemed to be getting government departments based on the precariousness of the local government politician’s electoral majority.

But who cared? Did anyone notice? For awhile, little else was talked about. The only problem was that it was all nonsense.

There has been little effort to plan the country and, even when there is planning, it is rarely implemented. Planning a growing economy is like clothing a growing teenager - you buy him expensive trainers and combats and, within six months, he has outgrown both.

Similarly, with a growing economy, roads that are adequate today are jammed within eight months. The capacity of some trains was increased last year, but they resemble the Calcutta Express already.

Towns that were villages in 2001 are now concrete jungles. So, even if there was an effective planning strategy, it needs to be modified, expanded and updated constantly.

But don’t worry about these hypothetical details, because the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing - our government says one thing and does precisely the opposite.

For example, last Thursday, the IDA- a central agent of government policy - unveiled plans to seek pre-planning permission for new high-tech businesses. The idea is that a tailor-made technology campus be put in place before investment decisions of large multinationals are made.

Having such ready-made sites available would obviously encourage investors to set up here. The IDA forecasts that 2,000 jobs will come to the campus in the next few years, which is great news. The only problem is that it is in west Dublin. Just in case you hadn’t noticed, west Dublin is the most congested, badly-planned place in the country.

Now, let’s go back to the great National Spatial Strategy. According to this plan, this type of development was to be relocated away from Dublin, allowing the city to breathe and, in turn, to re-energise parts of the west and south of the country.

But no - that’s only in dreamland. Back here in Ireland, PR takes precedence over planning.

So this little development will add to the swelling of Dublin. But just how dominant is Dublin?

To get an idea of its bloated pre-eminence, let’s take a trip to our maternity wards. There were more babies delivered in Dublin in 2004 than in the entire province of Munster - an area 20 times bigger.

There were three times more babies delivered in Dublin than in the entire province of Connacht.

But these babies are not born to city dwellers; they are largely the progeny of the commuter class - the ‘Kells Angels’.

The census reveals a crescent stretching from Drogheda to Arklow, where people are commuting more than one and a half hours a day. This large ‘baby belt’ is home to the most fertile counties in the land and is creating a dependency on Dublin that will be very hard to rebalance.

At the moment, Dublin’s truly overwhelming dominance means that commuting begins in the womb. The commuting foetus is uniquely Irish. In the same way as maternity books advise mothers to play classical music to their unborn children, the fact that expectant mothers from towns like Kells, Navan, Wicklow and Edenderry have to commute in the traffic to Dublin for scans and proper antenatal care, can be seen as perfect pre-birth training for life on the outside.

The newborn child will be able to tell his Mozart from his Bach, his hard shoulder from his roadworks, his unleaded from his diesel, his M50 from his N11, and his Abbeyleix jam from his Monasterevin bypass. A perfect traffic symphony for the traffic people - a sort of fanfare for the common commuter.

But who benefits from this haphazard development? The developers, for starters.

It has been said that Fianna Fail is the political wing of the construction industry, and a quick glance at the residents in the Fianna Fail tent at the Galway Races every year would suggest that this is not too far from the truth.

Is this closeness to the construction/land/property industry healthy? Obviously not, particularly as the housing market is overheated already. Think about the following statistic: we are building more houses per head than post-war Germany did when trying to rebuild itself from scratch.

Why are so many houses going up now?

Because they have to build as quickly as possible. Many developers who have bought sites at astronomical prices need to get the houses up immediately, just in case anything happens to the market. Nobody wants to be sitting on a huge land bank on the day it dawns on the Irish that we do not need all these extra houses.

A conspiracy theorist would suggest that the reason for the National Spatial Strategy in the first place was to copper-bottom the investments of well-placed developers who saw their land zoned into perpetuity. The reason it has not yet been implemented is because the same developers’ other land banks have not been fully developed yet.

When they are, the government will introduce the plan in earnest. But who believes conspiracy theorists? Surely not you, not here, not now?

One of the less obvious problems with developer-led rather than planner-led policy is that it is anti-economic in nature.

Much of economics is about scale: if a town or a region has scale or mass, it can become self-sufficient. It will be able to sustain itself.

Typically, on the continent, regions are aggregated together to create a sustainable community of larger and smaller towns. They market and advertise themselves as one. For example, in Belgium, the towns of Bruges, Ghent and Ostend marketed themselves as the region of west Flanders, with predictably positive economic results that broke the commuter link with Brussels.

If this were done in the midlands of Ireland, it could prevent the great sucking sound of the area being drawn into Dublin with the attendant commuting and overcrowding issues.

The problem for the midlands now is that it might already be too late. None of the five main towns has a population of more than 20,000 and, as this column has pointed out before, close to half the populations of Athlone, Tullamore and Mullingar now commute to work.

Without scale, these towns will be unable to resist the gravitational pull of Dublin and decisions such as the IDA’s one last Thursday will make that more difficult.

Moving 10,000 civil servants won’t do much either. Think about it: more than 120,000 people will move jobs this year.

This puts the hullabaloo about moving a few thousand civil servants into context.

But what about Cork, Galway and Limerick? Well, it appears that the spatial strategy does not see these as being in any way linked. It has been suggested that a motorway arc linking these three substantial cities would be smart and, given the fact that they are the only three urban centres of any significance outside Dublin, this would seem the only way to redress the eastern pull of development.

But, of course, that might make too much sense and risk being seen as too revolutionary; and it might not suit the vested interests.

So we will just plod along, commuting in the sprawl where the new suburbs and older towns are unable to break the umbilical ties to Dublin - Ireland’s 21st century placenta.

David McWilliams’s book The Pope’s Children, published by Gill & Macmillan, is in shops now.

Visit www.davidmcwilliams.ie