Vol. 536 No. 4
8 Mr. B. Smith asked the Minister for Finance if, in view of the importance of decentralisation to the promotion of regional development for the Border region, he will consider County Cavan as a centre for decentralisation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14299/01]
9 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Finance the number of civil servants who have indicated interest in participating in the decentralisation process and who formally, or informally have sought transfers out of Dublin. [14181/01]
14 Mr. Penrose asked the Minister for Finance the position regarding the Government proposals for decentralisation of up to 10,000 civil and public servants; when it is expected that the programme of decentralisation will commence; when it is expected to be completed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14248/01]
25 Cecilia Keaveney asked the Minister for Finance the position in relation to the decentralis ation programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14184/01]
26 Mr. Deasy asked the Minister for Finance if the programme for decentralisation of Departments is being abandoned; if not, when will there be an announcement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14506/01]
35 Mr. D. Carey asked the Minister for Finance the current position of the proposed decentralisation programme; and if he will include the mid-west application in his approval list. [14196/01]
36 Mr. Finucane asked the Minister for Finance when he received a decentralisation proposal for the towns of Newcastle West, Kilrush and Listowel combined; and when Government approval will be given. [14179/01]
37 Mr. Deenihan asked the Minister for Finance when he will make a decision on the decentralisation of a Department to Listowel, Newcastle West, and Kilrush following the recent joint application by these towns; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14507/01]
39 Cecilia Keaveney asked the Minister for Finance his views on when decentralisation will occur; if Inishowen, County Donegal, will benefit from this programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14185/01]
44 Mr. Finucane asked the Minister for Finance if he will ensure that the towns of Newcastle West, Kilrush and Ennis, which have submitted a proposal for decentralisation, are favourably considered for a decentralised Department; and when he will make the announcement. [14180/01]
45 Mr. Foley asked the Minister for Finance the position regarding decentralisation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14182/01]
64 Mr. Flanagan asked the Minister for Finance the number of meetings of the Cabinet sub-committee on decentralisation which have taken place over the past 12 months; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12409/01]
65 Mr. B. Smith asked the Minister for Finance if he will have County Cavan considered as a location for decentralisation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14298/01]
72 Mr. Deenihan asked the Minister for Finance if he will outline Government policy on decentralisation; the Government offices he intends to decentralise in 2001; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14529/01]
As three of these are oral questions, not more than 18 minutes will be allocated for questions.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 8, 9, 14, 25, 26, 35, 36, 37, 39, 44, 45, 64, 65 and 72 together.
A considerable amount of preliminary and background work has been done in my Department in relation to a new programme of decentralisation. More recently, the cabinet sub-committee met formally for the first time to begin its consideration of the many and various issues involved. This meeting does not reflect the extent to which the issue has been considered by the Government over the past year or so. I have regularly briefed the Government on various developments and have maintained ongoing informal contacts with my Government colleagues.
The cabinet sub-committee has also established a small interdepartmental working group to assist its work and to focus on a couple of options which the sub-committee wish to explore further with a view to progressing the subject. I expect that, following the completion of the cabinet sub-committee's work, the Government will be in a position to take decisions regarding a new programme within the next couple of months. In the meantime I emphasise that decisions have not been taken on any aspect of decentralisation, including that as to which Departments or offices will be part of a new programme.
In developing a new programme the Government will have regard to a wide range of issues and considerations, among them the large number of submissions and representations received in my Department. I am very conscious of the many well made cases for the inclusion of various regions and towns in any new programme, including those made on behalf of the Border region in general, and County Cavan and the Inishowen area in particular, as well the joint application made on behalf of Kilrush, County Clare, Listowel, County Kerry and Newcastle West, County Limerick.
I am confident that any new programme will attract considerable interest among Dublin based civil servants. While it will be impossible to assess the precise level of interest until details of the programme emerge, the level of inquiries from individuals as well as the numbers of staff on the central transfer lists, illustrate the interest among staff in transferring from Dublin to various provincial centres. This is supported by the numbers of staff who participated in the earlier programme of decentralisation.
There are five Deputies in the House who have questions submitted in their names and I will take them in rotation, in the order in which their questions were submitted.
I thank the Minister for his detailed and positive reply. Would he agree that areas such as County Cavan, which have suffered from peripherality due to the division of our country, needs decentralisation in order to benefit from regional development? In view of the great political and economic progress achieved here in recent years, particularly with the cessation of violence in the North of Ireland, would the Minister agree that areas like County Cavan, which suffered huge economic hardship due to the troubles north of the Border, should be given preferential treatment in deciding on locations for decentralisation?
I certainly recognise the impact of the troubles over the past 30 years on counties along the border, including particularly County Cavan which suffered enormously. It is a tribute to the people of those counties that any kind of economic activity has been maintained during those years. I recognise the peripheral argument, which will form the basis of our deliberations. I realise also that many parts of the country have not benefited to the same extent as other parts in the celtic tiger development. That will also form part of our deliberations.
I should point out that decentralisation is not the only answer to the problems of a region, but I appreciate that it would give a clear signal that the Government is serious about better and more balanced regional development. As Deputies will be aware, my views on this matter could be summed up as follows. Much of the decision making of Departments and Government agencies would be far different if the Department or agency concerned was based in a town in, say, the west, north-west or Border region. Instead of planning the road from Dublin to, for example, Blacklion, County Cavan, the focus would be on how to get the road from Blacklion to Dublin – and there is a significant difference.
As I said already during Priority Questions, many criteria must be evaluated and many considerations must be taken on board, including the views of trade union representatives and staff associations and other issues such as the availability of infrastructure in the areas concerned. All of those aspects will be included in our deliberations.
Each Deputy usually beats the drum for his own area. I will not let down my own side in that regard. The Minister will be aware of the excellent case made by Bandon, quite apart from which any Department would be lucky to be based there. Does the Minister accept that the facilities available in a place like Bandon should be a consideration in any decision? The second part of my question relates to staffing. I agree that staff cannot be moved around like animals and their views must be taken into account. Am I correct in thinking that there is a huge interest on the part of Dublin based staff in moving out of Dublin? At the time the Department of Agriculture moved to Wexford the numbers of those interested in moving were larger than the actual vacancies available. Is that the general attitude to decentralisation of staff based in Dublin?
I would certainly recognise the benefits of the town of Bandon. It is one of the parts of west Cork I have visited more often than other areas and I notice that it has become a popular location for people who now commute from Bandon to Cork city. The same thing is happening in my own county. I do not wish to insult trade union representatives but I can see why trade union leaders might want to have a package type approach with all the members in one area. I am not sure that the people they represent feel the same way.
Senior civil servants in my Department and others have been amazed at the level of interest there is among middle ranking civil servants in decentralisation. A lot of people want to get away from the problems of living in the Dublin area. Another advantage to decentralisation would be recruitment. The Civil Service and bodies have had difficulty recruiting people due to the strength of the labour market but agencies outside the city do not seem to have the same difficulty. Many civil servants want the opportunity to move to better parts of the country.
I am glad to hear the Minister talk about the Blacklion to Dublin concept and I hope he remembers the N2/A5 Donegal to Dublin concept as well. I was going to ask the Minister to confirm that 10,000 people were to be decentralised according to the original announcement but the question seems to have been answered. Does the Minister agree that decentralisation has worked very well in Letterkenny and that the expansion of a cluster to Buncrana is a natural extension of the first decentralisation scheme initiated? Does he agree that Inishowen, an historically isolated location even worse than that of County Cavan and which has lost textile factory after textile factory, deserves the confidence boost that a decentralised office would give? I ask this not to elicit sympathy but because it makes sense and offers a win-win situation to the peninsula and Civil Service alike. Will the Minister confirm the timescale for the making of a decision? He mentioned two months. Is that when a decision will be taken? Will a decision on decentralisation be taken this year?
I had hoped this decision would have been made a long time ago but it has not been possible. I announced earlier in reply to a priority question that I hope to have a decision made on this in the next couple of months. It is still the goal to decentralise up to 10,000 persons from Dublin. That has been my goal from day one. If I do not set the bar high enough I will not get anywhere near it.
Deputy Keaveney makes a very good case for Donegal and particularly Inishowen and refers to the success of decentralisation to Letterkenny. I have learned in debate on the issue recently that Government offices, such as social welfare and revenue, which have already decentralised are the most progressive of the Departments in looking at going somewhere else. They are used to the idea, have got over the problems, have seen it is not the end of the world and that the Department has not fallen asunder. We have learned from them that those used to the idea do not see it as a big deal and they are willing to think in a more lateral way than other Government Departments. I recognise the uniqueness of Inishowen. It is isolated even in County Donegal and certainly isolated from the rest of the country. The difficulties of that region will be in my mind.
The Minister will recognise the composite proposal from Kilrush, Newcastle West and Listowel. I remind him that all of those locations are outside the BMW region and as such have reduced incentives for industrial development. The Minister should be cognisant of that when it comes to decentralisation. I would like the Minister to consider this proposal put forward on a very professional basis and launched recently by Deputy Kenneally. When did the Minister first announce his policy of decentralisation and does he expect it to be achieved during the lifetime of this Government?
It was announced on budget day in December 2000. I would like to have completed the process by now. In my formal reply I recognised the—
Excuse me, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, the Minister appears to have made a slip of the tongue. It was 1999.
Sorry, it was December 1999. It was budget 2000, delivered in 1999 and in my earlier reply in Priority Questions I would have made the same mistake. I thank Deputy Mc Dowell. I recognised in my reply the joint application made on behalf of Kilrush, Listowel and Newcastle West. I compliment the well presented application. I acknowledged it to Deputy Finucane previously. His colleague, Deputy Collins, has mentioned it as well and Deputy Daly in Clare has been consistently pushing me about Kilrush. At every sporting event we attend Deputy Deenihan tells me the great advantages of Listowel in County Kerry. It is my intention to try to deal with this matter as soon as possible.
I am glad the Minister has recognised this proposal from the three towns involved as creative and innovative. I remind him that in recent years there has been a loss of employment in all of these towns and the IDA is finding it increasingly difficult to get industry to locate in them. Does the Minister agree that the only way of providing jobs and restoring and supporting the economy of these towns is through decentralisation? Does he also agree that the possibility of staff movement and promotion is better facilitated if the three centres are near each other as in this case? Proximity will allow easy movement of personnel from one town to the other. The attraction is that a family would not have to move but could commute easily between the three towns. I urge the Minister to take these factors into consideration. The economy of west Limerick, north Kerry and west Clare is very dependent on this decentralisation process.
The points put forward by Deputy Deenihan have been well made by him. Some of the Government Departments that have already decentralised will now say they should sub-decentralise. They maintain it would be safer because the offices they occupy are overburdened and they should move out further. That shows some of the advantages of making the decision many years ago. I hope that will apply in some smaller locations around the country.
I recognise the well made case made by Listowel, Kilrush and Newcastle West. There is an advantage to having a cluster approach. It is difficult to ask civil servants looking at a career structure to pull out in a little group and move to a particular location in the country because then they would not have the same career opportunities as their confrères in Dublin with their progressive promotional structure. In rural Ireland a distance of 20 or 30 miles between towns is not a lot. It takes me well over an hour to travel the 22 miles to Dublin but travel between rural towns would not have the same constraints. The cluster approach has the advantage of offering a promotional channel for civil servants. All these matters are taken into account. I cannot please every Deputy and Senator.
The Minister will please those who persistently ask him questions on this subject.
I feel deprived as I represent a constituency with no Government office and unlikely to have one.
They all work for the Government thanks to Mr. Haughey.
A lot of them work within this House, for whatever reason. Does the Minister not agree that the process is farcical? It is 18 months since the announcement and no one expects a decision until after the next general election. If we take the Minister and the Taoiseach seriously, that will not be for at least another six or eight months. The Minister told us—
It will not be for 12 months.
I pass on that. The Minister told us a couple of months ago, as he did today, that he expected to be able to have a Government decision in "a couple of months' time." Why should we take today's assertion any more seriously than the earlier one?
I did say that on a previous occasion. I am determined to complete this process.
The Minister said that before.
I am determined. I stated in Priority Questions that there is only one way to achieve it.
It is interesting that the only Deputies who asked supplementary questions are from the north-west and south-west, the areas that deserve priority. I am appalled at the lack of roads proposed for the north-west in the national development plan in Donegal, Cavan, Monaghan and links to Derry. Those regions' economic development must be a priority. The lack of road proposals should be made up by decentralisation. West Clare, north Kerry and west Limerick also have good cases. Does the Minister accept that?
I am glad the Minister stated, echoing what is said by civil servants who participated in decentralisation, that a process which cuts people off from promotion will not succeed. There must be a critical mass in a cluster. A site is available beside the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development office in Cavan that could be used to extend that office and provide accommodation for a further 150 civil servants. That would facilitate the Minister in accelerating the decentralisation programme.
Deputy Smith makes a good case. I agree with Deputy Jim Mitchell. In an earlier reply, I said that if Government agencies were in the parts of the country being considered there would be a different focus. It is hard to break it down. I do my best but extraordinary actions must be taken to make people think differently. People think that things must continue to happen in Dublin. If my Department was in Tullamore, and, as Minister for Finance, I had to go there on a Monday morning, I would think differently. I am not suggesting that the Department is moving there, in case anyone picks me up on that. In these PC times, one cannot crack jokes.
Why is it a joke to suggest that the Department of Finance moves to Tullamore?
It is not a joke. I am making a point.
It would give a new meaning to BIFFO.
They are committing hara-kiri in the Department as he speaks.
A number of people did so in the last four years.
