Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 23 June 2004
8 Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Finance the way in which the proposed system will work for Dublin-based civil servants who do not wish to move as part of the Government’s decentralisation programme in regard to the recent announcement by the Taoiseach; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18592/04]
View answer23 Mr. Deenihan asked the Minister for Finance if he will give serious consideration to the proposal to decentralise information technology posts to Tralee, County Kerry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18554/04]
View answer26 Ms O. Mitchell asked the Minister for Finance if he has finalised discussions with the public service unions on the proposed centralised applications facility; if he has identified each of the locations at which an existing building is to be acquired; and the locations at which site purchase is proposed. [18662/04]
View answer30 Mr. O’Shea asked the Minister for Finance if he will report on the work to date of the group chaired by Mr. Phil Flynn to oversee the decentralisation programme. [18598/04]
View answer31 Mr. Kehoe asked the Minister for Finance if any element of the present decentralisation programme is open to revision; and the way in which he intends to evaluate proposals for modification. [18704/04]
View answer34 Mr. Deasy asked the Minister for Finance the arrangements for transferring staff in State agencies which are moving under the decentralisation programme to new duties in the wider public service. [18701/04]
View answer38 Ms McManus asked the Minister for Finance if his attention has been drawn to the warning from the trade union, IMPACT, that it would, if necessary, take industrial action to protect the careers of civil and public servants who chose not to participate in the Government’s decentralisation programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18593/04]
View answer39 Mr. M. Higgins asked the Minister for Finance if a survey has been carried out generally to establish the number of public servants willing to transfer to new locations in regard to his decentralisation proposals, or if any such survey is planned; his views on whether the move will be voluntary and that no public servant will suffer in regard to career options or promotional opportunities if he or she does not wish to move to a new location; if his attention has been drawn to the serious concern that has been expressed by various trade unions representing virtually all grades in the public service at the implication of the proposals; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18590/04]
View answer41 Mr. Boyle asked the Minister for Finance the way in which it is proposed to allow civil servants to remain in Dublin if their Department is being moved elsewhere under the Government’s office relocation programme. [18706/04]
View answer43 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Finance if it is proposed to establish a second application stream for Dublin-based posts in the Civil Service in the context of decentralisation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18721/04]
View answer49 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Minister for Finance if he will subject the Government’s decentralisation programme as completed to date and as planned to a formal review under the expenditure review initiative; and, if not, the reason therefor. [18558/04]
View answer55 Mr. M. Higgins asked the Minister for Finance the total moneys expended to date as part of the Government’s decentralisation programme announced in the Budget Statement in December 2003; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18591/04]
View answer60 Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Finance if his attention has been drawn to the serious concern expressed by specialist public servants working in a variety of State agencies at the implications of the decentralisation proposals announced in the budget and the fear that if decentralisation goes ahead, it could lead to a significant loss of expertise by those agencies and a consequential deterioration in services to the public; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18594/04]
View answer80 Mr. Hogan asked the Minister for Finance the agencies in the ambit of his Department which will not be part of the decentralisation programme announced in December 2003; the reason for decisions in that regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14057/04]
View answer95 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Finance if his attention has been drawn to the fact that public servants in the information technology area who do not yet know the location of their decentralisation will be at a considerable disadvantage under the CAF system, since their options to avail of the alternative locations will be much reduced by the time that they are in a position to make an informed choice; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18848/04]
View answer97 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Finance the branch or branches of the Civil Service likely to be decentralised to County Kildare and the timeframe for same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18875/04]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 8, 23, 26, 30, 31, 34, 38, 39, 41, 43, 49, 55, 60, 80, 95 and 97 together.
Immediately after the announcement of the new decentralisation programme, a special sub-committee of the Civil Service general council was set up to facilitate discussions with the Civil Service unions. Regular discussions have been taking place not only with those unions but also with the ICTU group of unions representing staff in the State agencies. I am committed to continuing consultations with the unions throughout the implementation of the programme. I am aware of the different concerns expressed by union representatives concerning the decentralisation programme, and I feel that those can be addressed through the process of consultation and dialogue that has been put in place.
The decentralisation implementation group, known as the Flynn group, submitted a report to the Government at the end of March 2004. The Government accepted the report and it has now been published. It is available on my Department's website at www.finance.gov.ie. The group is continuing its work, and I expect to receive a further report at the end of July.
As recommended by the Flynn group, a central applications facility, or CAF, was launched on 12 May 2004 to receive applications from those wishing to relocate. The CAF allows staff in all participating organisations to apply for transfer to or express an interest in various provincial locations. The exact terms and conditions which will govern movements from one part of the public service to another and across professional streams are the subject of ongoing discussions with the public service unions.
I have stated from the outset that participation in the scheme is voluntary. Staff whose jobs are being decentralised and who opt to remain in Dublin will have to be reassigned in due course. As information becomes available from the CAF, it will be possible to identify vacancies which will arise in organisations remaining in Dublin as a result of individuals from those organisations applying for decentralised posts. The exact procedures which will apply to allow staff to be reassigned in Dublin will have to be discussed between public service management and staff interests.
No central survey of civil and public servants has been carried out to ascertain the numbers seeking transfers to decentralised locations. However, the results of the CAF should provide a reasonable assessment of interest in the programme. The same number of promotional opportunities will continue to exist across the public service, but in the future that will reflect the new geographical spread of staff.
I have no plans to carry out a formal review of this programme under the expenditure review process. I am satisfied that the arrangements which are in place for the implementation of the programme will ensure that it is implemented in a cost-effective way. The Flynn group requested that each organisation produce an implementation plan incorporating all risks which could arise as a result of the transfer of all or part of its operations. Such risks could include, for example, a loss of expertise or a deterioration in services to the public. Each organisation was also required to include risk mitigation strategies for each risk identified in its plan.
I provided €20 million in my Department's Vote to meet any decentralisation capital costs which arise during this year. No funds have yet been released from this subhead. My Department has already sanctioned the acquisition of sites in Longford and Carlow, and I expect finalisation of site acquisitions to accelerate in the coming months with a consequent increase in the rate of expenditure under this heading. To date, the cost of the Flynn group has amounted to €69,000, and the Office of Public Works has spent around €90,000 on costs associated with the identification and evaluation of sites.
The OPW is assessing the proposals received for each of the locations. Most are for the provision of sites, but the potential to purchase existing buildings is still an option in a small number of locations. It is expected that significant progress will be made in the transfer of organisations over the next three years.
The identification of the locations for the information technology staff, as outlined in the Flynn report, will be announced as soon as possible. Following that, the posts involved will be included in the CAF. The Civil Service unions have recently written to my Department seeking an extension to the time allowed for making priority applications to the CAF. I accept that people need a reasonable amount of time to consider their options.
My Budget Statement of 3 December 2003 set out the offices which are scheduled to transfer to County Kildare. Following is a table detailing the agencies in the ambit of my Department and showing those relocating. The criteria used to select organisations for decentralisation are set out in my budget documentation. I have already dealt with the question of a revision to the programme in a priority question.
Agencies in the ambit of Department of Finance
Central Bank: Not relocating
Civil Service Commission: Part relocating
Economic and Social Research Institute: Not relocating
Institute of Public Administration: Not relocating
National Treasury Management Agency: Not relocating
Office of Public Works: Relocating
Office of the Ombudsman: Not relocating
Office of the Revenue Commissioners: Part relocating
Ordnance Survey Ireland: Relocating
State Laboratory: Not relocating
Valuation Office: Relocating
Is the Minister's statement that he has no plans to review the structure that he has set up regarding the work being carried out by Mr. Flynn's implementation committee not a direct contradiction of the statement made by the Taoiseach on 7 June in Cabra that the Government would develop a similar facility to the CAF for those who wish to remain in Dublin city? He also said that he appreciated that there is a great deal of uncertainty among the many thousands of public servants who, although they wish to stay in Dublin, are having their jobs decentralised. Who is right? Is it the Minister for Finance who says that he has no plans to carry out any further review, or is it the Taoiseach who, on 7 June when opening a football facility in Phibsborough in Cabra in the heart of his own constituency, promised civil servants who wished to stay in Dublin a special applications facility?
Where does the Taoiseach's promise stand when it has now been disowned by the Minister for Finance, who has said that he has no such plans? As I understand it, the Taoiseach has no direct control over the decentralisation process; it is in the Department of Finance. The Taoiseach, on the eve of the local and European elections, made promises to civil servants who, for family reasons, cannot be decentralised, but the Minister for Finance has just said that he has no plans for a review. Where does the Taoiseach's promise stand?
There is no divergence between what the Taoiseach said on that date and what I have said in the past.
Where is the facility?
I assure the Deputy that it was always the intention, as I stated at the time, that when people indicated a preference to locate outside Dublin, the staff remaining in Dublin should have a similar facility available to them as to where they relocate within the city. That is exactly what the Taoiseach said in his speech. That was known many months ago.
No, that was not what he said. He said that the Government would develop a similar facility. This is more election promises and lies.
Allow the Minister speak without interruption.
It is quite simple. When the decentralisation programme is in operation and people go to the various parts of the country, there will still be thousands of civil servants left in Dublin and jobs to be filled. There will therefore be a similar central applications facility available for those people remaining in Dublin to indicate their preferences regarding where they go in the Dublin scene.
Is the Minister saying that it will be at the end of the process? Does he have no plans to do it now? That is contrary to what the Taoiseach said.
Order, please. The Minister should be allowed continue without interruption.
It will be ongoing. The Deputy should think about what she is saying and use a little common sense, something given to some of us. In reality, we will not know where the vacancies will be in the various Dublin offices until people relocating express a preference of going to the country. At that point, it will be possible for people in the Dublin area to signal their intentions regarding which offices they would like to relocate to. The facility that is available now for the decentralisation programme throughout the country will be available to those who wish to remain in Dublin. This programme is voluntary, as I have stressed repeatedly. Nobody is being forced to do anything. That makes sense. It was always the intention and remains so.
I have always said that members of the Government were the sultans of spin, but the Minister has confirmed it now. They are trying to create one version for Dublin and give a different version of answers when they are asked questions down the country. The truth of the matter is that the electorate saw through it in both locations.
I have specific questions for the Minister. How are employees of State agencies to be accommodated? Will they be offered transfers where they have been employed for specialist purposes? If they are not moving down the country, what will be on offer for those specialist grades? Does the Minister believe it fair not to announce the IT location, with the result that people who might wish to consider moving to the country to some other location cannot participate in the CAF lottery because they do not know where their jobs will go? Is it the case that on previous occasions about 40% of the transferred positions were filled on promotion and that this was how it was secured? If that is the case, will we see a significant hidden Bill on this in terms of promotions?
As regards disruption, is it the case that previous transfers have required five moves for every one post moved out of the capital and that there is an extraordinary degree of churning and disruption attached? Can we expect that to occur again here? This will go on and on, with an impact on services for a long time to come. Has the Minister factored in the impact on delivery of services in the areas affected?
On the first question relating to professional grades, there are ongoing discussions with the Civil Service unions representing those workers on how to accommodate them, as far as this is possible. This scheme is voluntary, I stress again, so we will have discussions with the unions on that matter. We should be in a position shortly to announce the IT locations. In the budget statement, which I mentioned earlier, I referred the question of the IT locations to the Flynn group which was to come up with options. It has reported and the Government will shortly be in a position to announce the IT locations. Furthermore, there was also a commitment as regards staff within the health sector and we hope to deal with that in the near future.
As regards promotion, when this is all working itself out, I am sure that the template of the past to which the Deputy refers will be relevant. I do not want, at this stage, to identify any particular areas for promotional opportunity. Promotions may arise. That is something to be worked out in talks with the Civil Service unions. On the last question, when for instance the TDs were moved from here in Leinster House across to Kildare Street and back again, there were complaints about disruption. One can never move an organisation without some disruption. I do not know whether the Deputy has ever been involved in moving, but in my professional background I have experienced at least two moves. There is always a certain amount of disruption. One must remember this is what Civil Service managers are paid to do and they do it quite well. Some Departments have considerable experience of decentralisation and have done it successfully.
We have decentralised thousands of people over the past 20 years, to Longford, Sligo and various parts of the country. Decentralisation is not something the Civil Service has no experience of. Some Departments have considerable experience and we hope to lessen potential disruption.
Given that decentralisation implies significant personal disruption for individuals and their families, was the requirement of availability for transfer to any location, as indicated, part of the condition of employment for the position advertised earlier this year in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform? Is that to be the norm in terms of recruitment to the public service in the future? Is this the formula the Minister intends to use to secure transferability and mobility of staff within the public sector? This is something I would like clarified.
As regards the pre-December 2003 announcement in the budget by the Minister of 10,300 positions to be decentralised, there was an agreement between the Department of Finance and Teagasc — the Minister's Department and the Department of Agriculture and Food — as regards decentralisation of its personnel, for which there was a €6,000 once-off payment for those opting to relocate outside Dublin. What is the current status of that arrangement? Has it been put on hold because the Minister was fearful that the arrangement in place with Teagasc staff might be expected to be replicated by other public service workers who were to be relocated around the jurisdiction?
Will the Minister give special consideration to Tralee in County Kerry for the IT jobs which, I understand, will be decentralised?
I am sorry, he has already promised them to Monaghan.
A joint submission has been made by Shannon Free Airport Development Company and Tralee Urban District Council to the Minister's Department outlining the case for Tralee, which is strong. Tralee is a town that has lost out considerably in technology jobs in recent years. This would be a major boost and I appeal to him to consider Tralee favourably when making his decision.
The least I can say about Deputy Deenihan is that he has been full square behind the programme of decentralisation. He has not spoken out of the two corners of his mouth about it in the past six months. I will give him credit for that. More than other Deputies in this House, he was for it, he spoke in favour of it and he has not delivered one message in Kerry and a different one here in Dublin. I compliment him on his honest approach to this. I cannot say the same for all members of his party or indeed of any party in the House.
I certainly will consider Tralee. It must be remembered we asked the Flynn group to consider where the IT jobs should be located. I am sure the Deputy is aware of the general recommendations made in the Flynn report in this regard. If I had the pick of the boom towns in Ireland, Tralee would be one of them. It has a strong local economy and does very well.
As regards the question raised by Deputy Ó Caoláin, certainly people should know when they are applying for jobs within the Civil Service that the new headquarters of a Department etc. is located in a particular part of the country. People who apply for the Civil Service from County Kerry know they will be located in Dublin, but they should know in the future that the Department being applied to may be in some other part of the country. Finally, on this topic, one of the reasons for the negative publicity is that a highly influential group of civil servants at a particular level is based in Dublin. Some of them do not want to go anywhere for obvious reasons. They are highly influential within the circles that most of us mingle and operate in and they have the ear of, say, the Dublin media.
There has been much unbalanced comment about this. Let us put it in perspective. Some 10,000 civil and public servants are being asked to relocate from Dublin. Take any percentage of this figure representing people who do not want to go at any cost, multiply this by five, to take account of a partner and four children, and there is still only a small number as a percentage of the total population of Ireland. The population of Ireland is currently 4 million, give or take a few thousand. No matter what way the figure is multiplied it is a minute number compared to the total population of Ireland, and even the population that lives outside the greater Dublin area. That should be borne in mind by everybody. I do not believe it is too much to ask since it is voluntary.
What about Teagasc?
The people in those jobs arein permanent and pensionable employment.When a private company collapses in Deputy Deenihan's or Deputy Ó Caoláin's constituency the employees do not have the option of having their jobs guaranteed forever. They must go on the dole or look for another job. Public servants are in the unique and privileged position that no matter what happens their jobs are protected. Their pensions are protected, and that is not given to everybody. I want to put those remarks on record to give some semblance of balance to this debate.
What about the issue of Teagasc?
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
