Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 12 Nov 2002

Vol. 557 No. 1

Other Questions. - Decentralisation Programme.

Phil Hogan

Question:

73 Mr. Hogan asked the Minister for Finance when he will announce decisions in respect of decentralisation of Departments; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16516/02]

Paddy McHugh

Question:

77 Mr. McHugh asked the Minister for Finance when he will announce decisions in relation to decentralisation of Departments to the regions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21092/02]

Jim O'Keeffe

Question:

92 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Finance the position regarding the programme of decentralisation of Government offices outside Dublin; his views on whether Bandon is a suitable location for such a Government office; and if the town will be considered accordingly. [20255/02]

Joe Sherlock

Question:

98 Mr. Sherlock asked the Minister for Finance the number of staff who have been transferred to date in regard to the Government's announcement more than two years ago of a major programme of decentralisation of up to 10,000 civil and public servants; the policy of the Government in regard to decentralisation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21300/02]

Paul Connaughton

Question:

122 Mr. Connaughton asked the Minister for Finance the plans for accelerated decentralisation of Departments; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16904/02]

Seymour Crawford

Question:

129 Mr. Crawford asked the Minister for Finance the preparations he is making in concert with the national spatial strategy to identify the locations to which Government services will be decentralised. [21331/02]

Paul McGrath

Question:

132 Mr. P. McGrath asked the Minister for Finance his proposals to decentralise some Departments. [21387/02]

Jimmy Deenihan

Question:

138 Mr. Deenihan asked the Minister for Finance his plans to make a decision on the decentralisation of Government offices in the near future; if the ISDN proposal which includes a joint application from Listowel, Kilrush and Newcastle West will be successful; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21089/02]

I propose to take Questions Nos. 73, 77, 92, 98, 122, 129, 132 and 138 together.

The Government is committed to moving forward the progressive decentralisation of Government offices and agencies taking the national spatial strategy into account. This commitment was reiterated in An Agreed Programme for Government. As I have said on many occasions of late, there is a wide range of important issues that must be taken into consideration before a final decision is taken on the matter. It is vital that all involved are consulted, be they staff concerned about their futures or departmental managements concerned about the delivery of the public services for which they have responsibility.

Given these wide ranging considerations it is not possible for me to state, at this time, when the Government will be in a position to take a decision on the issue of decentralisation. The Deputies may be assured that the submissions and representations which have been made will all be taken into account as part of the deliberative process.

In view of the fact that the Minister for Finance is aware of how quickly the capital city and east coast locations have been developed in the past few years compared to some parts of the country, would he agree that it is necessary to make decisions as soon as possible and not prevaricate any further? Decisions on decentralisation were expected to be announced by the Minister about 18 months ago. I realise that the Minister had to take political considerations into account before the general election, to ensure that nobody was upset. Does he agree that decentralisation is urgently needed if we are to remove regional disparities and to improve the quality of life of the people? Early decisions regarding the spatial strategy and decentralisation are essential if we are to have proper planning and development of the regions.

I agree with the Deputy's remarks and I hope to be in a position to make decisions about decentralisation in the near future. The Deputy outlined the history of the decentralisation project. I said in my answer to the priority question that a number of criteria must be taken into account. I decided, late in the lifetime of the last Government, that nothing was to be gained by making a decision at that stage. I accept the Deputy's remarks about the capital city, which is one of the many criteria that must be taken into account. The Government hopes to be able to resolve this question early in its lifetime and thereby attract praise from many parts of the country.

I call Deputy McHugh.

A Leas-Cheann Comhairle—

Many Deputies are waiting to ask questions.

I wish to ask a brief further question.

Time will run out and Members who wish to ask questions will be unable to do so.

Could I ask the Minister a quick question?

I am trying to be fair to all Deputies.

I will be fair with you.

I will allow a quick question.

Will the Minister take Kilkenny into account when decisions are being taken? I know the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will want me to ask this question.

I never go to sleep at night without thinking about Kilkenny.

Neither do I.

Does the Minister agree that an unacceptable amount of time has been taken to make a decision about decentralisation? Does he agree that the public deserves better treatment from the Government than that it has received regarding this matter? Will areas that have been officially designated as disadvantaged, under research carried out under the RAPID programme, receive special consideration when decisions are being made about decentralisation? I am thinking in particular about two towns in my constituency, Tuam and Ballinasloe, which have been designated as disadvantaged but which have received no Government attention as a consequence of the designation.

As I outlined in my earlier reply to a priority question, a number of issues must be taken into account when making a decision about decentralisation, and the matters to which Deputy McHugh alluded can be included among them. I will endeavour to marry all the criteria, even those that may seem to conflict, to put together a genuine programme of decentralisation. I have received submissions from the towns mentioned by the Deputy and I acknowledge that areas that lost out previously wish to be considered on this occasion. As I said earlier, many other matters must be taken into account. I have been intensively lobbied about decentralisation every time I have gone around the country in the past three years.

The Minister was in Tuam.

I have been lobbied in Tuam and Ballinasloe.

Does the Minister agree that it is an insult to the snail to suggest that he has proceeded at a snail's pace? Does he recollect that he told the House in May 2000 that he would make decisions about decentralisation within a couple of months? Did the criteria to which he now refers occur to him when he promised us a decision within a couple of months of May 2000? Does he accept that he has not adequately explained the delay? Does he agree that 32,000 or 33,000 public servants in Dublin are seeking to get out of the capital? Does he have any consideration for those who are being kept in cold storage in the capital? Can he indicate whether there will be an independent assessment of this matter, or whether decisions will be made on the basis of purely political considerations when he ultimately catches up with the snail and announces a decision? As I do not wish to be outdone by my colleagues from other parts of Ireland, can I finally ask the Minister if he is fully aware of the benefits to the country of relocating an office to Bandon, apart from the benefits to the town itself?

What about Goleen?

I do not know the exact number of public servants who would like to relocate from Dublin. Perhaps the figures mentioned by the Deputy are accurate, but there is no doubt that the number involved is considerable. If there is any advantage in the delay since I first announced, in December 1999, the plan to put in place a decentralisation programme, it has been the realisation among public service managers that many of their workers wish to relocate outside Dublin. As I said earlier, this desire has probably been noted by trade union leaders too. Immediately after I announced the decision, I encountered many obstacles in the form of managers in many Departments, including my own, who said that I should not think about going through with the plan. Those who manage and represent public sector workers were taken aback, as time passed, by the large numbers of people who expressed a desire to relocate outside Dublin, for the reasons alluded to by Deputies Hogan, Ó Caoláin and others. This revelation is the only positive aspect of the snail's pace of progress regarding this matter.

I do not intend to go down the road of independent assessment. I can give two good reasons why politicians should be prepared to make tough decisions as best they can. Whenever thorny issues are encountered in Ireland, it seems that public representatives delegate responsibility to somebody else as it is too difficult for them to decide. It has almost reached the stage where we do not make our own decisions, but I do not subscribe to that theory of politics, as Deputy Jim O'Keeffe and others are aware. The other problem of giving the decision to an independent group of eminent people is that they would take into account the official things said to them, but they would not listen to the points made by people like Deputies O'Keeffe, Deenihan, Hogan or McHugh. I believe such arguments should be taken into account. Anyone who has been in Government, as Deputy Jim O'Keeffe has been, would realise that to be the case.

In response to Deputy O'Keeffe's questions about the snail's progress of this project, I can inform him that I recall the remarks I made in the House in May 2000. I have made many decisions in recent years, including during my time as Minister for Finance, and I have been regularly criticised for not consulting adequately. Some of my better decisions, however, have been those which did not involve consultation, but I do not get credit for them. One result of the many decisions I have made is that I am still on this side of the House and the rest of the Deputies are still on the other side—

Unfortunately.

—although my delay in making a decision regarding decentralisation may have assisted in that. Perhaps we did something right in that regard. The national spatial strategy, which will be published shortly, will also have a bearing on the Government's decision regarding decentralisation.

In view of the chaotic state of the national development plan and the fact that there are shortfalls in terms of money to invest in it, even at a time when we are investing in worldwide equity stock markets, as the Minister has said, does the Minister agree that decentralisation has been delayed to the extent that its costs will be tremendously high? Civil servants will be sent to places where significant elements of infrastructure have been cut. For example, the Minister for Transport has decided, in effect, to destroy railway transport in the south-west and south-east. If we are to have effective decentralisation, the maintenance of public transport infrastructure is essential.

I do not agree with the Deputy's remarks regarding the national development plan, as the moneys provided by the Exchequer to the NDP are ahead of the level profiled when the plan was initially announced.

We have nothing to show for it.

Order. Time is running out.

People can argue about such matters among themselves. What happened when large amounts of money were put into infrastructure in recent years? We created a large inflationary spiral when we spent a great deal of money. People might say that we did not get a great return for it, but those kinds of aspects must be borne in mind for the future. I do not agree that higher costs would arise from a Government decision about decentralisation now than would have been the case if a decision had been made in 1999 or 2000. The same infrastructure will have to be provided and the same office accommodation will have to be made available. The best thing I can say is that the Government will make a decision about decentralisation early in the lifetime of this Administration. We will allow plenty of time for work to take place and for the necessary planning to be put in train. I hope that the decision will be made in the near future.

Does the Minister agree that his statement in May 2000 created an expectation within the Civil Service and in provincial towns like Mullingar? Midland towns like Longford, Athlone, Tullamore, Portlaoise and Kells have decentralisation, but Mullingar does not. When the Minister made his statement he got a tremendous response from a variety of organisations. He created an expectation in these towns which wanted decentralisation but he then put a damper on everything for purely political reasons. The reason he did not make a decision was that he was afraid it would affect the election outcome.

No, we went too near the election.

It would have affected the outcome of the election so the Minister ran away from it. Will he give a commitment that the programme for decentralisation will be published within six months from today?

In view of the commitment the Minister's party gave to the people of north Kerry, Clare and west Limerick prior to the election that the ISDN proposal would be successful, will he honour that commitment? I am sure he will agree this was instrumental in his party having two candidates elected in Clare and two in west Limerick and retaining its seat in north Kerry. I hope the Minister will honour that commitment. In the preliminary census report the Listowel area is the only one showing a decrease in population. This is a good reason for decentralising a public office to Listowel. The Minister has agreed in the past – I am sure he will still agree – it is a very creative and innovative proposal from the three towns in question.

I cannot help raising the issue of the Border counties in the context of decentralisation. The area, particularly County Monaghan, has the lowest increase in population anywhere in the country. I put it to the Minister – the Minister of State is sitting beside him – that a small amount of extra office space is required for much-needed staff in the Ballybay DVO office. In spite of all the financial problems, at least some extra money should be made available for the restructuring of a house, which is available, to ensure the necessary staff are in place to service the most intensive farming county in the country, which engages in poultry and mushroom farming and so on.

A brief question from Deputy McHugh and Deputy Boyle.

Will the Minister's decisions on decentralisation be made to ensure he remains on that side of the House or so that the regional imbalance is addressed and the poorer regions benefit from those decisions?

Given the time the Minister has had to consider decentralisation, will the programme be deepened as well as widened? What we have had to date has been office relocation. Given that the apparatus of Government is still centralised, it matters little to ordinary citizens whether an office is located in Letterkenny or Dublin in terms of accessing information or having complaints redressed. The real issue is that decisions for local communities should be made in local communities themselves.

Let us get on with the decentralisation programme and the greater issues raised by Deputy Boyle can then be addressed. Experience shows that while many people want to be involved in administration, when it comes to making tough decisions at local level they are not prepared to do so.

As a new Independent Member of the House, Deputy McHugh probably knows more about self-preservation than anyone else in Galway East. I am sure he will bear that in mind during his political career.

Deputy Deenihan and Deputy Collins have been more vociferous than most other Deputies in the House in pushing the case for Listowel, Kilrush and Newcastlewest over a long period. They made a very good joint submission for these three areas, which will be borne in mind when decisions are being made.

I will take that as a positive answer.

Written answers follow Adjournment Debate.

Top
Share