Seanad debates

Wednesday, 2 June 2004

Decentralisation Programme: Motion.

 

5:00 am

Kathleen O'Meara (Labour)

I was about to make that point. An improved train service would help. A proper worked out programme of decentralisation could be excellent for the economic life of towns round the country. When one looks at the reality of this programme, it does not appear to line up with that, unfortunately.

The decentralisation programme that was so unexpectedly announced at the last budget, has taken everybody by surprise, particularly the public servants. What is certainly emerging as one of the big issues is that people do not want to move. One cannot force people to move. To a certain extent I agree with Senator Mansergh that public servants do not have an absolute right to question the decisions of a democratically elected Government, but at the same time one would hope that in a well ordered and civilised society people should not be forced to move to somewhere they do not want to move to.

I would like to know what each Department will do if only a percentage of its staff want to move. What will happen to the remainder? Will we have an increase in public service numbers, for example if 200 are due to go to Thurles and only 100 want to move, will an additional 100 jobs be created locally? Where will the 100 staff members who stayed behind be deployed? Will there be a significant increase in Civil Service numbers in order to create the decentralisation programme successfully but also to ensure that nobody who does not want to move is accommodated? It is very important to ask how will that be resolved in practice.

That the public service unions are not happy about how the process has been managed is also a very serious matter. The Government is the largest employer in this area. It is essential that there be a process of partnership, proper communication and agreement at that level. Otherwise, the national partnership process effectively means nothing.

This programme does not line up with the national spatial strategy. In fact, it bears no relation to it. Although I welcome the proposed decentralisation to north Tipperary and to Tipperary in general, County Tipperary's omission from the national spatial strategy was notable. Perhaps the Government might drop the pretence that there is a correlation between the decentralisation programme and the national spatial strategy.

On the decentralisation policy, I would be more convinced of the Government's motives if that same policy of decentralisation were evident in other areas. In the health service, for example, the policy framework contained in the Hanly report on hospitals is all about centralisation. It is about removing local services and incorporating them into 12 regional centres. This entails the loss of local access to an essential service and forces people to travel long distances to avail of a fundamental facility, namely access to acute and emergency care. On the one hand, therefore, we have the Government extolling the virtues of decentralisation while, on the other, the direct opposite is happening in a way that will cause serious and fundamental problems in communities. That the policy of decentralisation is not mirrored in other areas of Government policy is one of the main reasons I question the Government's motives on the decentralisation programme. With regard to the Department of Education and Science, for example, one can hardly fix a window in a school down the country without this fact being imparted to Marlborough Street. I am aware that the State examination section is based in Athlone but the mindset of centralised decision-making is endemic in that Department, to name just one. The Government does not have a worked-out policy of decentralisation. If it had, we would see this policy implemented in more than one way.

In this context, the decentralisation programme is merely a cynical vote-gathering exercise. This is a pity because decentralisation, properly managed, would be a good policy, not only in terms of how the economy has developed in Dublin, but also for the purpose of improving the functionality of local government, as so much of its decision-making is centralised in the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and, indeed, with the Minister of that Department. I look forward to the report on this issue and I commend the Progressive Democrats for proposing this motion.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.