Chuaigh an Ceann Comhairle i gceannas ar 2.30 p.m.
Decentralisation Programme.
1. Deputy Enda Kenny 
asked the Taoiseach the number of staff in his Department who have applied for relocation under the Government’s decentralisation programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [46598/08]
2. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach the number of staff in his Department, broken down by grade, who have applied for relocation under the Government’s decentralisation programme; the number of such staff who have relocated to date; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3149/09]
3. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the number of staff from his Department who have been relocated under the decentralisation programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7055/09]
The Taoiseach: I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, together.
Of the 179 civil servants currently serving in my Department, 28 have applied through the central applications facility to relocate under the decentralisation programme. The breakdown by grade is two principal officers; seven assistant principals; five higher executive officers; four administrative officers; five executive officers; one staff officer; and four clerical officers. Some 25 former members of staff have already been assigned to decentralised posts.
There are no proposals to decentralise my Department or any of the bodies under its aegis. It is a matter for those Departments to which staff from my Department have decentralised to assign such staff to locations outside of Dublin.
Deputy Enda Kenny: Arising from the Taoiseach’s reply, I assume some of the 28 have applied for locations that are now stalled under the decentralisation programme. What is happening to the sites that were acquired and are now in limbo until the next review in 2011? In respect of those, has any computation of the loss in value of the sites as a result of depreciation taken place? I am sure some of the 28 staff of 179 in the Department who have applied will go to locations where nothing is happening, will happen or can happen until whatever review is carried out in 2011.
The Taoiseach: Any such sites will continue to be managed by the OPW as part of its portfolio. It is important to point out that to date a total of €276 million has been spent on the programme but there have been offsettings, savings or reallocation of property to other schemes valued in the region of €556 million.
Deputy Enda Kenny: I thank the Taoiseach. Given the deterioration in the public finances — as the Taoiseach said at the weekend, we do not have a thriving economy just now — the situation is such that we should be up-front about this. In cases where numbers, grades and categories stack up, this process should have been completed long ago. However, in the case of some semi-State agencies, it will never happen and putting it off into a sort of limbo for review in 2011 is not facing reality or being truthful with those communities and people throughout the country.
I support decentralisation. A well planned, properly managed decentralisation programme has always been of enormous benefit throughout the country, no more so than in the Taoiseach’s constituency. Is it the case that the 2011 review is only a political smokescreen which suggests that in reality this will never happen in the way it was envisaged for the 53 locations when it was announced originally by the former Minister, Mr. McCreevy?
Are we holding out false hopes for people, including some of the 28 staff from the Taoiseach’s Department, that at some future time a decentralisation programme might be put in place when the Taoiseach knows that a review in 2011 means another five or 10 years beyond that before anything is to happen? Would it not be better to be up-front with these people? The transfers that are under way should be finished by now. However, with regard to those situations where there are clearly difficulties or where the numbers, grades and categories do not stack up, perhaps the Taoiseach should tell those communities it will not happen in the way that was envisaged and that we will try to do something else for them in the context of the national development plan.
The Taoiseach: The right thing to do in the new economic circumstances in which the Government found itself in preparation for the 2009 Estimates was to confirm that there will be a deferral in terms of the provision of accommodation pending review in 2011 in respect of those sites where it was felt, first, there was not a contract in place and, second, it would not have been possible to proceed between now and then. That was the right decision to make.
As I said, more than €350 million of the €556 million was provided by the offsetting of the sale of very high value sites at the height of the property market and the potential for future receipts will be much more limited. There was also property valued at €75 million which was transferred to the Affordable Homes Partnership and the OPW has agreed joint venture development schemes with a value of approximately €125 million, subject to the volatility in the current property market.
It is important to point out with regard to the purchase of sites at the prices available in 2006, 2007 and 2008 that, similarly, those high prices were available in respect of the disposal of many sites. The figure of €556 million in respect of those disposals provides a positive offsetting against the €276 million that has been spent on the programme to date.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: The Taoiseach makes all of that sound as if the State is making a profit on decentralisation. If it is such a financial success, why is he cancelling it? In the statement the Government made on 14 October that it would not go ahead with the remainder of decentralisation, it was stated it was doing it for budgetary reasons. However, when he is asked questions about property costs, acquisition costs, fitting-out costs and so on, he is able to quote all of these figures to us to the effect that the Government is getting more in than is going out. Has there been a net cost to decentralisation and if so, will the Taoiseach tell us that cost? If there has not been a net cost, what is the budgetary consideration on which he based the decision to cancel the remaining phases and to review these in 2011?
The last time this round of questions took place, we discussed the numbers decentralised from Dublin. When the then Minister for Finance, former Deputy McCreevy, announced the decentralisation programme the plan was that 10,000 civil servants would be decentralised from Dublin to other locations. We now know that 2,500 have been decentralised to other locations, but that less than half of these are from Dublin. Of the remaining 3,500, only half of these will be from Dublin also. Can the Taoiseach tell us the total number decentralised from Dublin, as opposed to the 10,000 anticipated under the McCreevy plan?
The Taoiseach: What was actually being decentralised was 10,000 posts. We were not decentralising 10,000 Dublin people out of Dublin; we were decentralising 10,000 posts.
Deputy Olivia Mitchell: That was the justification.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: They were posts out of Dublin.
The Taoiseach: That is what we were doing. It is posts that one is transferring.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Yes, Dublin posts.
The Taoiseach: When those people——
Deputy Olivia Mitchell: That was the justification given at the time.
The Taoiseach: When people decentralise and go on to retire, the post remains and is filled where the vacancy arises. It is the posts that one is transferring. It is important to point that out. It is not the case that when people’s time is up they will not all relocate back to Dublin. That is not the idea, the idea is to transfer posts. That is a very important point, which I thought would have been understood at this point.
Anyone working in the Civil Service had the right to apply for decentralisation to his or her preferred position. As a former trade unionist, I am sure the Deputy would agree there should be no discrimination in respect of people’s ability to relocate based on their original location. I do not believe that is a principle to which the Deputy would subscribe. All civil servants had the right to relocate to whereever they wished, subject to that being a suitable location, to having the skill sets necessary, or to having the ability to take up the retraining for moving from Department to Department.
I do not have the figure. The Deputy should speak to the Minister for Finance about whether there are any more specific figures available.
The decision of the Government in October 2008 will facilitate the location of up to 6,000 posts in 40 locations outside of Dublin. This is made up of 2,600 posts already moved with an additional 3,400 in train at present. I cannot give the geographical addresses of those people in terms of where they are from. That is not available to me. The Deputy should check with the sponsoring Department if that information is available.
The success or failure of the programme is not dependent on what percentage of people are Dublin people. They are all public servants who had a right to relocate if they so wished. Some were from Dublin and others were not. Some may have been living in Dublin for some time but still regard themselves as Galway people, such as Deputy Gilmore. The same applies to County Offaly also.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Yes indeed, and very proud of it.
The Taoiseach: The point is well made at this stage and I do not have to labour it any further, if the Deputy will excuse the pun. The question of costs relates to property costs, which I have given. The needs of the programme are assessed in the context of the Estimates process each year. Funding is approved on the basis of the particular projects being progressed in the relevant period. Originally in 2004, a notional gross figure of €900 million was put on the decentralisation process. As a gross figure it did not include any possible offsets in terms of what other funds would become available to the State as a result of the decentralisation process. The figures I have given are the property costs and the offsets as opposed to the costs on the property side show a positive figure in the region of €280 million.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I would like to return to the net cost. The Taoiseach indicated the estimated cost of the decentralisation process when it was announced was originally put at €900 million plus. The Government made a decision that it was going to put the decentralisation process on hold — in effect end it — and review it again in 2011. The statement issued by the Government at the time said that this was being done for budgetary considerations. The problem I have with this — I ask the Taoiseach to help us out with it — is that when both Deputy Kenny and I ask him questions about the costs, specific questions about the costs of the acquisition of property, fitting out, rental costs and so on, he replies in terms which suggest that the State has been doing very well financially out of the decentralisation process, that because all this property is being acquired in the areas to which civil servants are to be decentralised and properties elsewhere are being released, this has created a net gain for the State. Is there or is there not a net cost or has there been a net cost to the decentralisation process to date? Can the Taoiseach tell the House what that net cost is because this does not add up? If money is being made on decentralisation, why would the Government cancel it for budgetary reasons? What is the net cost?
An Ceann Comhairle: The Taoiseach can only answer for his own Department, Deputy Gilmore.
The Taoiseach: I can only answer for my own Department. I can give other information as is available to it. With regard to the property aspects of the decentralisation programme, the notional cost was included in the budget of 2004 because it could not be predicted with great accuracy——
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: It is all a bit of a notion.
The Taoiseach: Sorry, it is not a notion. A total of 6,000 people will be relocated by 2011. A total of 3,400 are already in the process of being decentralised. They will be going voluntarily and in line with trade union agreements and in line with the strategic plans of Departments. I often hear people complaining about decentralisation but I have yet to hear anyone in the House saying the level of service in a decentralised office is less than what it was before.People in these areas will tell one that the relocations have been beneficial in a whole range of ways and not just to the benefit of employees and I am glad to hear this. It provides an improved working environment for public servants and also improves productivity, because decentralisation brings with it up to date fit-out and computerisation and information systems which makes for a better position than the incremental acquisition of IT, as was the case in the past.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Why, then, is the Government cancelling it?
The Taoiseach: One can never find a specific case to justify the level of criticism implied behind some of the questioning. However, decentralisation is a political football which people in the House want to continue to kick around.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: That is not the case at all; it was a legitimate question.
The Taoiseach: I agree it is a legitimate question. I remind the Deputy that all his rural Deputies are unequivocally in favour of it, as stated in the local newspapers.
Deputy Olivia Mitchell: The Minster for Arts, Sport and Tourism, Deputy Cullen, is not in favour of it.
The Taoiseach: It is different to the soundings I got in this House about decentralisation when I was Minister for Finance or even now that I am Taoiseach. That is fair enough because we do not all have to rule with an iron consistency.
To answer the Deputy’s question, I can only answer based on what is available to my Department. There will be fit-out costs which must be included in the equation. I make these points in the interests of an accurate and balanced debate.
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: Has the Taoiseach’s Department or any other Department carried out a cost-benefit analysis of any of the decentralisation moves that have already taken place? Has there been any evaluation of the net benefit, of the monetary impact and how it impinges on the performance and the smooth running of the said relocated Departments or sections of Departments? Will the Taoiseach give the House an indication if such an exercise has been carried out?
With regard to the various land banks and properties that have been purchased in preparation for planned relocations, I understand there are currently at least five sites that have not yet been developed in preparation for the relocation of the targeted Departments. Among those are two sites in County Waterford that cost in excess of €10.1 million of the €16.3 million involved in the five sites to which I refer — at Waterford and Dungarvan. There was another site in the Taoiseach’s constituency in Offaly, one in Kilkenny and one in my constituency, in Cavan, where the Department for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources and the HIQA offices were to be located. Will the Taoiseach indicate whether all of these are greenfield sites, or if there are properties involved that would entail ongoing maintenance and security? Is there a continual outlay in terms of the maintenance, upkeep etc. of any or all of these sites, and can he indicate whether the Government intends to proceed with the roll-out of each of the signalled relocations to the five sites in question?
The Taoiseach: The Government decided in October 2008 to defer any further decision on those matters until 2011. As the Deputy says, the context in which sites are being held under the management of the OPW relates to that decision and therefore there will be no change in their status until 2011 at the earliest. At that stage the Government will revisit the issue, having completed the present stage by which time some 6,000 will have been relocated to about 40 sites throughout the country. I cannot anticipate what the Government’s decision will be at that time.
As regards whether these sites are working well, I have had no complaints from Deputies in these areas or members of the public that vary from what one might find in any other area of public administration. Issues as regards irregularity have not been raised on the floor of this House. If people are suggesting there are problems, perhaps they might identify them so they may be dealt with, if they exist.
I am sorry but I do not recall what other issues were contained in the supplementary. Perhaps the Deputy might repeat them.
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: The Taoiseach talks about problems, and I am somewhat lost by his reply. I asked whether an exercise had been carried out as regards a cost benefit analysis on any——
An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy might hang on a second. The problem is that we are talking about the Department of the Taoiseach and the Minister for Finance is responsible to the Dáil for decentralisation.
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: The Taoiseach has asked me to clarify the question. I am doing that at his request.
An Ceann Comhairle: Hold on a second, now. I can only operate within the rules. The rules say the Taoiseach is responsible for his Department and he must answer questions about it in the House. The Minister for Finance is in charge of the whole question of decentralisation. That is the only point I am making.
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: As regards questions up to this point in time, Ceann Comhairle——
An Ceann Comhairle: I have said it all along, but perhaps the Deputy was not listening.
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: No, the Ceann Comhairle has not, with respect, as the record will show——
An Ceann Comhairle: Yes, I have.
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: ——because I have listened carefully and asked questions in line with the previous speakers. I ask for the same courtesy from the Chair as that shown to Deputy Kenny and Deputy Gilmore. That is no more than my due.
An Ceann Comhairle: I said the same to Deputy Gilmore.
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: I have asked the Taoiseach specific questions and I am equally entitled to a reply.
The Taoiseach: It is not a question of whether the Deputy is entitled to a reply, if the matter is outside the ambit of my Department. However, I am trying to be as helpful as I can be. Since I do not have direct responsibility for the programme I cannot be asked. It is not a question of not meeting the Deputy’s entitlements. Of course I shall meet his entitlements, if the questions relate to my Department, but the Deputy is asking me a more general question. The Minister for Finance who has overall responsibility for the decentralisation programme can provide the information.
I do not have the answer to the Deputy’s question on the basis of the information available to me because it is outside the ambit of my Department. I try to be helpful when I can as regards general comments
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: I know that is second nature to the Taoiseach.
The Taoiseach: Absolutely — I am always as helpful as I can be to the Deputy.
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: No one is disputing that at all.
The Taoiseach: I thank the Deputy.
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: It would look, from the Taoiseach’s very poor and thinly veiled responses that the prospect for any of the five sites is doubtful. Specifically, as regards the Waterford case it is a matter of more than just one door flying off over the weekend. We have seen the door flying off other interests there in terms of both Waterford and Dungarvan. Is there not within the Taoiseach’s gift the wherewithal to be frank with the House rather than this kicking to touch in terms of 2011? Why will he not be honest and frank with the House and tell the Members here that in respect of the so-called targeted 10,000 relocations or decentralisations, the rollout of that project is finished, over and done with?
An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy can ask the Minister for Finance about that. I call Deputy Howlin.
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: Why does the Taoiseach not tell the people outside this House who are wondering about their future in the service——
An Ceann Comhairle: In the future the Deputy should ask the Taoiseach questions that are relevant. I call Deputy Howlin.