Decentralisation – the end…?

I think it’s better it be decentralised a bit more than that, but still in concentrated chunks. The current ‘plans’ are ridiculous, fundamentally it is a proposal that hasn’t been thought through, both in terms of the will of the workforces to move, and the framework it should be executed within, i.e. the Spacial Strategy.
The principal is a good one, put planning of a nature other than that for political gain is required.
The plan is nonetheless exciting in terms of the opportunity it brings for some decent modern architecture around the country, and for the progression of the practices of sustainability in development here. Will/would the OPW be acting as architects or are they just involved in the practicalities of the project?

It’s interesting that there’s almost no flats or mansion blocks in Dublin at all from the 19th century, Iveagh Trust aside. Suppose there was never the tradition of flat or apartment living in the city that there was on the Continent, esp in Paris, or to the small degree there was in Britain. Land values or a sufficient concentration of then lower-middle class people in Dublin never prevailed to require such structures. And coming into the Edwardian period, the small Victorian streets off the larger suburban ones had firmly set the trend for the 20th century for terraces of houses in favour of blocks, the type of later blocks that dominate so many UK streets.

I dunno Diaspora about the early 19th century, I’m facinated but unsure about this time – esp that people so often make the point that it’s often said that Dublin came to a halt in residential building after 1801, and that really it did continue to develop, eg Fitzwillian Sq etc. But that’s about it! It’s really only Fitwilliam Sq and St and a scattering other developments that went up!
And considering over the course of the next 30 years the northside emptied of the affluent with virtually no new housing compensating on the southside (except the likes of some of the Synge St area) I think indicates a strong residential depression – something that largely didn’t change till 1830, when a lot started to happen – albeit mostly beyond the canals! Of course this then contributed to a big decline in the city centre, with the abscence of the prosperous concentrated residential development that so benefited the small Georgian city.
Suppose there’s two aspects to it, the commercial health of the city, and the residential aspect, both of which offer kind of conflicting signals. In the housing stakes at least, the suburbs could have done with a bit of decentralisaton to the city!

Originally posted by Diaspora

There were jobs decentralised out of Cork City recently as well was it to Bandon or Macroom?

How do Cork people feel about it?

Personally, I’d have no problem moving to any of the places you mentioned even Clon but on spatial planning grounds only places the size of Sligo or bigger would work I think.

2,000 semi-state jobs including Failte Ireland would do Cork no harm and would aid your plans for a commercially viable trans-atlantic service.

2,000 jobs for Cork, but how many of these will actually come about?? It’s grand giving the jobs to places like Clon if you are starting from scratch, but when you are asking people to move from Dublin the least you can do is give them a viable option!

The governement seems to be killing it’s own spatial plan with it’s decentralisation plans!

As for Dublin dieing a death I don’t think ye need worry about that, what will kill Dublin is over centralisation, which has been going on for decades now. But the major problems with this have only become apparent in the last 10 years.

i think that in the back of their minds, the ministers think that by building 20 3-5million office blocks around the country, they can get out of what they see as being an unpopular expenditure in their parish by okaying a metro for Dublin…..

THIS POST BY DIASPORA (TRY NOT TO POST IN MY NAME AGAIN, DIASPORA!).

DEVIN.

Originally published by Ireland.com
O Cuiv insists decentralisation on schedule
From:ireland.com
Tuesday, 27th July, 2004

The Minister for Community, Rural Affairs and the Gaeltacht, Mr Ó Cuív said today the decentralisation of his department to Co Mayo will be completed within the next three years.

The Minister made his comments today after two senior ministers yesterday said that decentralisation would not be completed in the three-year deadline set out by the outgoing Minister for Finance, Mr McCreevy, in his budget last December.

Mr Ó Cuív said it would be important that there would be no row back or fundamental change in the objective of the Government to introduce radical decentralisation around the country.

However, he said he felt that most, but not all, of the Government departments which have been targeted would be decentralised within the time frame.

Meanwhile, the IMPACT trade union has welcomed today’s statement by Minister of State, Mr Willie O’Dea, which advocated building a consensus on the future of public service decentralisation . But the union, which represents 1,600 staff earmarked for decentralisation , said it would not be enough to simply implement existing decentralisation proposals over a longer time period.

IMPACT National Secretary Peter Nolan said a new timetable was necessary, but not sufficient, to develop workable decentralisation .

Mr Nolan said: “We welcome Minister O’Dea’s call for consensus building. But this requires a reassessment of the entire programme, not just the time scale. Earlier this month the Finance Department published data that showed most specialist public servants were unwilling to relocate with their existing organisations. The inevitable result is that decentralisation is simply not practical for organisations that depend heavily on specialist staff.

You cannot run the probation service without qualified probation officers, the Health and Safety Authority without qualified safety inspectors, or Comhairle without specialist advisors. We need a new approach that focuses on practical decentralisation , which protects service delivery and which does not cost the taxpayer a fortune,” he said.

Does a potential Minister for State need to publicly declare support for Decentralisation for consideration or is our Eammon making sure he keeps his job by putting the location in such a place that there would be no other contenders for the position?

Appeasement is a skill both myself and this current government might want to learn 😀

BY DIASPORA

Originally posted by Diaspora
Sorry about that Devin I should have checked the user when I logged in on the guest computer

actually that was deirdres computer

but never mind i forgive u this time

Originally posted by Leesider

Dublin has a population of 1.2 million, gets 800million for Luas and more than likely another billion for the Metro, Cork City and environs population 350,000, gets a lousy 100million for suburban routes!!!! do the maths, it smacks of Dublinisation!!!!

It is not that Dublin didn’t need LUAS, the Country didn’t need the cost to spiral out of control to 800m. The Interconnector project or underground metro section will link all existing lines which now have three different terminuses. Dublin is one of the few 15-20m passenger airports in Europe without any rail connection, although a cheaper overground link now seems like the favoured option.

Can you imagine getting from a train from Dublin to Cork and having to travel two kilometres on a bus to take a train to Cobh?

The Rationale behind a lot of the rail investment plans are dealt with at http://www.platform11.org

Their last success was to have the Little Island to Midleton rail line reopened, their latest major campaign is to get a direct service from Clonmel to Dublin.

Most supporters of the Dublin Metro would totaly support these projects.

Unlike IRDA who simply want to go on subsidising one off houses; a strategy which ensures that there is no money to do anything with the rail network.

Decentralisation is a strategy pandering to the Bungalow lobby a sort of ‘if mohamad won’t go to the mountain then the mountain must come to mohamad’

What is the rationale behind decentralising jobs from Dublin to Trim?

Of course everone seems to be so concerned about the effect decentralisation will have on Dublin, but no quote on the positive impact it will have on other cities and towns.
The Dublin attitude is we want it all and you do have it all, and you can’t seem to stand seeing somewhere else in Ireland get anything.
As for not wanting to move, we are all Irish, this country belongs to everyone including Dubliners and you are just the same as a person from Galway, Clonmel etc etc.
Stop talking down about everybody and every place outside of Dublin, it is bloody narrowminded.
As for the advise given to the Government to make a new capital, of course this was dismissed as been stupid by Dubliners, the lime light might be taken away from them and somewhere else might get some attention.
Has Canberra effected Sydneys or Melbournes prosperity, no, Brazillia-Rio, Sao Paulo, no, Washington-New York ,no, Wellington-Auckland, no, Pretoria-Johannesburg, Cape Town, no.
Enough Said.
Down with stuck up, greedy, narrowminded and biased Dublin people.

FEDERAL REPUBLIC FOR IRELAND NOW

(in reply to Sean) No need to get personal about it – a huge proportion of Dublin’s population originate from outside Dublin (and have also had a big impact on the policies which shaped Dublin over the past few decades).

In reply to your points:
1. The national spatial strategy is supposed to take care of distributing growth sustainably throughout the country and the current (either idiotic or blatantly clientilist) decentralisation plan flies in the face of this. Nobody is objecting to the national spatial strategy.

2. The decentralisaton plan is not in fact decentralisation at all but merely relocation of elements of a centralised system (see article in Irish Times yesterday re submission on decentralisation by head of University of Limerick to Dept of Finance committee).

3. The decentralisation plan goes against current best practice in terms of both urban development and ‘joined-up thinking’ in public administration.