Twitter Facebook Vimeo Youtube Google Plus Pinterest Tumblr

 

We have moved the forums to different software, so various elements of the user interface have changed. Over the next couple of weeks, the template will be changed for a more fluid design to better suit the variety of devices that we use today. Extra features will alao be added.

 

NSS & Decentralisation

This topic contains 15 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by  Anonymous 6 years, 6 months ago.

Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #709956

    plannerman
    Participant

    One of the key aspects of the National Spatial Strategy was the decentralisation of Government Departments Can anyone tell me how many of these departments moved and which ones have not yet commenced the move.

    #800101

    Anonymous

    Whatever plans were contained in the NSS for the relocation of Government functions were overtaken by the ridiculous proposals included in the ‘Decentralisation’ fiasco, so whilst some functions have moved, they are largely guided by the latter rather than the former strategy. (‘Strategy’? What am I saying? I mean of course ‘vote grabbing exercise with no planning rationale’.)

    #800102

    Anonymous

    The issue I have is not with the movement of Gopv Depts. For the record I think it makes good planning sense or rationale to disperse these large organisations to areas such as Ballinasloe which need economic growth. But the lack of movment or the rate at which these depts are moving is so slow, its painful

    #800103

    Anonymous

    I wasn’t debating the wisdom of moving govt functions, I was pointing out a factual inaccuracy in your original post, viz.

    One of the key aspects of the National Spatial Strategy was the decentralisation of Government Departments

    Re your question, a very quick Google search yields this site: http://www.decentralisation.gov.ie/

    *** *** ***

    If you want to debate the wisdom of moving the functions, we can do that too.

    The price of ‘Decentralisation’ should not be the efficiency of the civil and public service. And I reiterate- it was the so-called ‘Decentralisation’ here’s-one-for-everyone-in-the-audience project that proposed this, not the NSS.

    If it’s such a good idea, why then are so many civil and public servants so vehemently opposed to it? I would suggest it is because these are people, not just numbers on a chart.

    The topic has been discussed previously in these threads:

    De-Centralisation
    Blanket ban on one-off housing in Northern Ireland announced

    #800104

    Anonymous

    So you beleive that leaving all gov depts in an over congested city is the way forward, That spreading these depts in an attempt to revitalise other regions is a bad idea. That selling off valuable land in Dublin City Centre which can be used in other areas is not worth attempting. You seem to be going against any form of “planning rationale” and taking the social or morale high ground.

    If it’s such a good idea, why then are so many civil and public servants so vehemently opposed to it? I would suggest it is because these are people, not just numbers on a chart.]

    .
    I should also state that I am one of those numbers due for relocation to Ballinalsoe. But you have to look at the bigger picture, not think about the “numbers” who have to relocate now.

    #800105

    Anonymous

    Plannerman I assume your username is ironic?

    Decentralisation, and the mentality behind it, is the single most backward and potentially fatal policy measure for public administration and coherent regional planning on this island. It was a simple bribe lumped onto a budget speech to shore up support for Fianna Fail in advance of the 2004 Local and European elections. It signifies all that is wrong with the structures of government in Ireland.

    Firstly it is not decentralisation, as all power and decision making will remain centralised in Dublin 2. Real decentralisation as opposed to Oirish decentralisation involves giving regions autonomy over planning, taxes, health provision, education etc. like in Spain – a daft concept for a small island with less people than a decent sized city.

    Secondly it is even more dispersed than the NSS, which was a political sop in any case. It also ignores the NSS as the locations were chosen on political grounds not planning grounds. Within 1 year, one government policy had been thoroughky shafted by another. Why should private interests be forced into certain areas when the State won’t even touch them?

    Thirdly, the solution to Dublin’s congestion is not to disperse development across the island,. In fact the opposite is true. In order to establish a proper functioning mass transit network and sustainable communities, Dublin City requires more development and more consolidation, as opposed to the sprawl across Leinster you seem to advocate.

    Fourthly, my last point does in no way whatsoever advocate the concentration of National Development or Investment into Dublin. What I advocate is the concentration of development into a number of large towns and cities to act as a counterbalance to the Capital. They would be places like Cork, Limerick, Galway, Athlone, Dundalk and Sligo. Outside of this not much more than natural growth and associated job creation should be encourage – No more massive multinationals along crap roads in small towns leaving Dublin as the only attractive option for most – no more dispersal of health services and 3rd level education to the four corners – no more subsidised airports that compromise the rest leading to hell in Dublin.

    The regions can only be revitalised by the consolidation into a small number of large settlements. Without critical mass you have nothing

    #800106

    Anonymous

    @alonso wrote:

    What I advocate is the concentration of development into a number of large towns and cities to act as a counterbalance to the Capital. They would be places like Cork, Limerick, Galway, Athlone, Dundalk and Sligo. Outside of this not much more than natural growth and associated job creation should be encourage -

    A bit mean, alonso, to leave out Waterford!

    #800107

    Anonymous

    yeh you’re right Gunter. Although there’d be ructions from Wexford and Kilkenny as well! Waterford should be included as the SE centre – an oversight on my part.

    #800108

    Anonymous

    Well said alonso

    #800109

    Anonymous

    @gunter wrote:

    A bit mean, alonso, to leave out Waterford!

    I think there should be only 5 main ‘gateway’ cities in Ireland i.e. one in each region. Dublin,(Midlands) Galway (North West) Limerick (West) Cork (South West) & Waterford (South East) Each should have an Airport motorway connection and good quality rail links to each other and Dublin providing a polycentric hub covering the main population centres in the Country. Waterford is the only one of these cities without a university. These five cities need to be devloped and any decentralised governement departments that could be sensibly decentralised should be sent to them. I would suggest that each city should have a Mayor and some devolved government and be geared towards being the economic engines in their regions. Where the city regions cross county boundaries such as Waterford a city authoirty should be devised where both counties are represented. Waterford at the moment is hemmed in to its north by County Kilkenny which has no interest in develping Ferrybank which is the adjoining the biggest population cetnre in the South East. Instead its resources are directed towards Kilkenny which is really only a town. Waterford port is located in Co. Kilkenny and the Regional Airport is in County Waterford – WIT is seeking University status so there is already in place some of the main planks in establishing a vibrant city There is a perception that Kilkenny is curtailing the expansion of this city region because of its pre-occupation with its own identity particulary as a huriling county. It would be in its best interests to see Watrford / Ferrybank city expand to 100,000 to 150,000 population and leave Kilkenny to serve as County town like Dungarvan does in County Waterford.

    I 100% agree that the governemt decentralisation plans were an election gimick and they make no sense from a planning point of view.

    #800110

    Anonymous

    @plannerman wrote:

    That spreading these depts in an attempt to revitalise other regions is a bad idea.

    I think its more that its a meaningless gesture. Moving departments in this manner makes no meaningful contribution to revitalising other regions. Its simply puts up the cost of government and makes it less coherent.@plannerman wrote:

    That selling off valuable land in Dublin City Centre which can be used in other areas is not worth attempting.

    but we already know that there is no immediate saving to be made in property costs, plus this seems to elevate property values over all other considerations. If property in Dublin is more expensive than elsewhere, its simply reflecting the fact that its a good location to locate it.

    Can I suggest that, if you expect support for the programme on rational grounds, there would need to be a substantial study done which showed (inter alia) what the cost of moving is, what the ongoing costs will be, and compares that to some detailed evaluation of expected benefits. Through what mechanism do we expect the location of jobs in Ballinasloe to have any impact on the immediate area, given that whether 100 people do their shopping in Tesco in Ballinasloe or Tesco in Ballymun has a negligible impact on either location. And, bear in mind, what I’m saying is we need more than a superficial assertion that the movement of 100 jobs must have some impact.

    I think you can take it from the fact that such a study has not been done means people can guess the outcome. There is no significant benefit arising from the programme, other than that some people will be able to move their publically funded job to the location of their choice. I simply cannot see why that is a priority at this time.

    I suppose it is appropriate to notice that the OECD, in passing, were clearly left stunned at the lack of thought put in to what they insisted on calling ‘administrative relocation’ and the lack of any clear picture of what this was supposed to achieve.

    #800111

    Anonymous

    @plannerman wrote:

    One of the key aspects of the National Spatial Strategy was the decentralisation of Government Departments

    This is not possible because decentralisation was devised after the National Spatial Strategy.
    2000: National Development Plan: Concentrate investment in 5 Gateway towns for Ireland
    2002: National Spatial Stretgy: Make that 9 Gateways and 9 ‘hubs’
    2003: Decentralisation: Feck it. We’ll have 59 locations chosen for development including the growth dynamo of Kiltimagh.

    When everywhere is a priority, nowhere is a priority.

    Did it work? Well, the populations of Cork and Limerick city both shrank between the census of 2002 and 2006. Meanwhile, Meath and North Dublin increased by a fifth.
    http://beyond2020.cso.ie/Census/TableViewer/tableView.aspx?ReportId=1757
    Kiltimagh grew by 10% (96 people)

    Can anyone tell me how many of these departments moved and which ones have not yet commenced the move.

    10,300 jobs were to be decentralised : as announced in Dec 2003
    by June 2007, 1000 positions had been moved. The government announced that 90% of positions to be moved will be call centre monkey type positions.

    http://www.publicjobs.ie/downloads/DIG_report_July_final_draft.doc

    #800112

    Anonymous

    @Barry Hall wrote:

    I think there should be only 5 main ‘gateway’ cities in Ireland i.e. one in each region. Dublin,(Midlands) Galway (North West) Limerick (West) Cork (South West) & Waterford (South East) Each should have an Airport motorway connection and good quality rail links to each other and Dublin providing a polycentric hub covering the main population centres in the Country. Waterford is the only one of these cities without a university. These five cities need to be devloped and any decentralised governement departments that could be sensibly decentralised should be sent to them. I would suggest that each city should have a Mayor and some devolved government and be geared towards being the economic engines in their regions. Where the city regions cross county boundaries such as Waterford a city authoirty should be devised where both counties are represented. Waterford at the moment is hemmed in to its north by County Kilkenny which has no interest in develping Ferrybank which is the adjoining the biggest population cetnre in the South East. Instead its resources are directed towards Kilkenny which is really only a town. Waterford port is located in Co. Kilkenny and the Regional Airport is in County Waterford – WIT is seeking University status so there is already in place some of the main planks in establishing a vibrant city There is a perception that Kilkenny is curtailing the expansion of this city region because of its pre-occupation with its own identity particulary as a huriling county. It would be in its best interests to see Watrford / Ferrybank city expand to 100,000 to 150,000 population and leave Kilkenny to serve as County town like Dungarvan does in County Waterford.

    I 100% agree that the governemt decentralisation plans were an election gimick and they make no sense from a planning point of view.

    Someone in power must have read this post – big plans announced by South Kilkenny Council to upgrade Ferrybank to a City.

    #800113

    Anonymous

    have you a link to this story?

    #800114

    Anonymous
    #800115

    Anonymous

    interesting stuff. thanks

Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.