FG outlines plans for major public sector reform

[wexfordman]

They haven’t outlined very much judging by that link apart from aspiration and bubble and squeak.

Objectives are one thing, achieving them and the methods employed to do so are another.

So far FG are heavy on the former and thin on the latter.

The same could be said for the recent labour party conf, all we heard was poor workers this, people losing jobs here, spread the wealth blah blah blah, no substance, no mention of real ps reform, no mention of the need for drastic ps reform cost cutting, salary cuts and job cuts in any definitve sense!1

[adamirer]

A bit more detail... I'm sure this will be fleshed out at the ard fheis...

Speaking to senior public service officials at the UCD Business School, Richard Bruton TD said that Fine Gael in government would issue clear riding instructions to the public service to drive radical reform.

"We will back ambitious managers who are crying out for change. We shall end the tolerance of failure by Ministers or senior public service managers. We shall introduce accountability with consequences, naming and shaming under-performance, and requiring managers to shape up or ship out.

"The tragedy in our public service is that talented and committed people are trapped in a system that is failing them. The government has allowed the system to be corrupted by a budgetary system not fit for a corner shop, by their habit of soft-option politics and by their refusal to apply professional standards either to themselves or those around them.

"Under our radical plan for public sector reform, we shall implement a series of changes which will promote excellence in the provision of government services. The first change we must now make is turn ministers into buyers on behalf of the people. How would this make a difference?

- The onus will clearly be on Ministers only to spend what the country can afford and get best value.
- The commitment to deliver results will determine who gets the money.
- Ministers will expect the resignation of managers who dont deliver what they promised.
- Managers will be given the power to run their operations - to cut the fat and not the muscle.
- Programmes will be closed down that deliver poor results.
- Staff no longer needed by an organisation will be moved to areas where they are needed.
- Managers will be charged for the cost of capital so that they will be encouraged to save on space and improve the utilisation of equipment.

"This would be a revolution in the way we spend taxpayers' money. Like in a business, delivery to customers, high performance, and efficiency will be at a premium, and managers will be expected to deliver.

"We need the political will to make this happen. It means ending a political culture -

- where problems are bought out, not confronted;
- where failure is tolerated;
- where powerful interests can shelter from scrutiny and change.

"Beyond the political will, such a change will present our public service leaders with very significant new challenges. We shall need to design -

- systems for moving staff to areas of greater need;
- systems to support managers with their new responsibilities;
- metrics to measure the quantity and quality of services delivered;
- a system for dealing with people who underperform;
- an obligation on every unit to publish its performance;
- systems of reward for exceptional performance .

"We have a choice in next week's Budget. We can travel the familiar route adopted in bad times of 'slash and burn' leaving the bureaucracy intact, the systems undisturbed while the vulnerable clients of public services are turned away, and those losing their jobs to shoulder most of the pain of our economic failures. Alternatively we can use this crisis to embrace the need for radical reform, to signal that spending in 2010 will be decided not by the demands of agencies for inputs but instead by obliging them to make a bid for money on the basis of what they intend to deliver to clients.

"It is by embracing a bold agenda of reform that the public service can help make Ireland more competitive, help keep down burdens, help protect jobs. This is a challenge we cannot pass up. The debate about the public service has always been one about inputs, never about outputs. That should have changed years ago. It must change now."

[adamirer]

still very aspirational (FF saying the same thing for 12 years), but in the right direction. In Fairness, delivering Better Government etc sprouted in the rainbow goveernment, so this is history here.

[wexfordman]

"cut the fat and not the muscle"
Thats the kind of talk we need, folowed by action!!
Lets hear more of the same from labour!!

[Question R24U]

Perhaps they might consider drafting the amendments which would be required to the Civil Service Acts, in order to bring these changes about.

One matter which may also need to be addressed, is having managers in the same trade union as those they manage (or else the unions acting in consort).

It sounds good, but normally their press releases on their website have a link to a 20 odd page document.

[Mysterious Stranger]

The Government needs to lead by example.Reform in the Dail first then the rest of the public sector.Eliminate the rake of junior ministers and the TD's ridiculous expenses.Scrap committess that dont produce results within 6 months of their creation.Cap ministers pay.And replace Kenny with Bruton.And prioritise the cancer vaccine for young girls ,16 million euro is a price worth paying!!

Then Fine Gael will get my vote.

[smitchy2]

But what does he mean here? Within the context of already existing arrangements.

Adamirer gives a good description of some of the aims of this initiative.
If agreements need to be broken they will have to be.
We have to see a new way of running areas of the PS.

Some of the benefits will be to transfer people from unproductive areas to others where staff are needed more urgently.
He has admitted there will be redundancies where people are unable/unwilling to move from their current posts.

I know there will be massive union objection to these moves but this will begin to address the issue about how taxpayers money is spent efficiently and deservingly throughout all sectors.

[Kevin Doyle]

If agreements need to be broken they will have to be.

The arrangements I'm talking about are the existing subvention requirements already in place for the Commercial and non-commercial semi states etc etc (they where set up to enable them to behave precisely as Bruton has described they should be behaving), or is he confining his reform to the Civil Service and the interdepartmental relationships currently in place. (A very welcome initiative by the way)
As it stands, and according to Bruton the likes of the ESB, for example, are model companies.

On the point of specifics he’s somewhat wishy washy and has he really said anything that hasn't been aspired to before. Talk of value for money has littered the political discourse for the past 20 odd years. I want to see specifically what Bruton has in mind that represents a significant departure from FF/PD rhetoric.

[bormotello]

"We will back ambitious managers who are crying out for change. We shall end the tolerance of failure by Ministers or senior public service managers. We shall introduce accountability with consequences, naming and shaming under-performance, and requiring managers to shape up or ship out.

"The tragedy in our public service is that talented and committed people are trapped in a system that is failing them. The government has allowed the system to be corrupted by a budgetary system not fit for a corner shop, by their habit of soft-option politics and by their refusal to apply professional standards either to themselves or those around them.

"Under our radical plan for public sector reform, we shall implement a series of changes which will promote excellence in the provision of government services. The first change we must now make is turn ministers into buyers on behalf of the people. How would this make a difference?

- The onus will clearly be on Ministers only to spend what the country can afford and get best value.
- The commitment to deliver results will determine who gets the money.
- Ministers will expect the resignation of managers who dont deliver what they promised.
- Managers will be given the power to run their operations - to cut the fat and not the muscle.
- Programmes will be closed down that deliver poor results.
- Staff no longer needed by an organisation will be moved to areas where they are needed.
- Managers will be charged for the cost of capital so that they will be encouraged to save on space and improve the utilisation of equipment.

"This would be a revolution in the way we spend taxpayers' money. Like in a business, delivery to customers, high performance, and efficiency will be at a premium, and managers will be expected to deliver.

"We need the political will to make this happen. It means ending a political culture -

- where problems are bought out, not confronted;
- where failure is tolerated;
- where powerful interests can shelter from scrutiny and change.

"Beyond the political will, such a change will present our public service leaders with very significant new challenges. We shall need to design -

- systems for moving staff to areas of greater need;
- systems to support managers with their new responsibilities;
- metrics to measure the quantity and quality of services delivered;
- a system for dealing with people who underperform;
- an obligation on every unit to publish its performance;
- systems of reward for exceptional performance .

Good, good, good
At least they are reading p.ie.
I don’t like FG, but so far it sounds not too bad.
let’s see

[Kevin Doyle]

Good, good, good
At least they are reading p.ie.
I don’t like FG, but so far it sounds not too bad.
let’s see

As self satisfied posts go that ones priceless.

Did FG contact you with any offers to held them steer policy?