Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)

Unfortunately, what is laughable is the Deputy's inability to listen to the details of the reply which confirms that the suggestion that this was hastily cobbled together is untrue. Every time I answer questions in this House I must contend with the same tired old rhetoric on this matter, particularly from this Deputy who talks out of both sides of her mouth about the muted support of the Labour Party for this process.

In response specifically to her supplementary questions, the Taoiseach did not say anything new. The decentralisation implementation group has always said that implementation of the programme should be on a phased basis. The group set out timeframes which recognised the differing business requirements of individual organisations, the central applications facility take-up for certain locations and the property solutions available. The implementation group proposed this revised timeframe and the Government agreed to it last year. The original timescales envisaged for the programme when first announced were very ambitious and required the full and active co-operation of all the parties involved. It was clear from an early stage that the issues which surfaced would take a considerable period to resolve. The setting of ambitious targets, however, was the best way to drive the programme forward and has enabled us to make significant progress.

In regard to Navan, I assume the Deputy is referring to the recent media coverage surrounding the relocation of the probation and welfare service. The original decision provided for the relocation of approximately 100 staff in the headquarters of the probation and welfare service to Navan. It was realised early on that approximately 80 of these staff are case officers working in the Dublin area and, to make up this shortfall, several other organisations will move to Navan in accordance with Government policy. These include the national property services regulatory authority, the new coroners agency and the new unit responsible for the management of human resources for Garda civilian staff. The original number of posts going to Navan remains unchanged.

Birr seems to be becoming a cause célèbre for certain Deputies but I would love to see them go there some time. Discussions were held on three occasions under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission to see if progress could be made in respect of Birr. The latest of these meetings concluded in the early hours of this morning. These continuing efforts by all the parties to use the offices of the Labour Relations Commission to find a solution is heartening. This is the only way it will be possible to arrive at a resolution which will allow meaningful talks to commence on the substantive issues around the implementation of the decentralisation programme. I strongly support using all the established and dialogue mechanisms.

In respect of the loss of corporate knowledge through the relocation of staff to the country, the Deputy should consider the story of the Revenue Commissioners in a previous decentralisation programme. The Revenue Commissioners told the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service last year that they set up decentralised offices with 900 staff in the mid-west in the early 1990s. At the time 10% to 12% of staff in the Collector-General's office opted to relocate. When staff who were employed in other Revenue posts are included, that figure increases to 25%. As a result, some 75% of decentralising staff were new to the Revenue organisation. The Revenue Commissioners regarded this as an opportunity to examine its internal efficiency and, consequently, significant improvements were made to processes, systems and work practices which were implemented in the course of the decentralisation. That experience by Revenue can be replicated in the current decentralisation process.

See this speech in context