“The alternative is a disengagement from Public interest groups”

Are you referring to the PS unions as being one of these “public interest groups”? The recent negotiations have shown us that the PS unions are no such thing. They are a private interest group of public sector workers. Their interests are quite clearly centred around their own pay and conditions, and not around the public interest. I don’t mean this as an insult or a slight or as a disparaging remark, but simply a statement of fact.

The problem with much of the ‘national partnership’ process in recent years was that it was portrayed as being in the interests of society as a whole, when in fact it was only in favour of the various interest groups (private & public), and sometimes as a side benefit met with society’s interests as well. The problem was that it was a process that was fuelled by cheap credit and boom-cycle taxes, which allowed the government to seemingly meet everyone’s needs (lower taxes, higher wages, more services/govt expenditure, lower unemployment) at virtually no cost (surplus/low deficit). We now can see quite clearly that much of the benefits of this process were either an illusion or a bubble. Taxes have risen and will continue to do so, wages will fall and must continue to do so, we have suffered a massive jump in unemployment and are unlikely to see significant levels of job creation anytime soon, and most people believe, rightly or wrongly, that the services we receive are either poor in quality or expensive in price (ie taxes).

That leaves the question mark over what to do with government expenditure/services, what their ‘real’ level should be, and how we fund that. The first real answer to that conundrum will be seen on Wednesday, especially in how the various stakeholders react to the governments latest attempt to bring the fiscal position of the State back to a more balanced situation.

I am involved in researching the policy making impact of social partnership including democratic deficits at the moment and am deeply aware of the failings and successs of the process.I would however advice caution and suggest that you read Kenneth Galbraith’s “The Predator State” to get an idea of the alternative to engagement with a wide range of both public and private interest groups.
The alternative is a disengagement from Public interest groups but the well financed private interest groups will always be there through paid lobbyists and will not share societal goals.

Moreover, Dr James Reilly alleges that the Dutch expenditure on health care is about 3500 per capita whereas ours is about 5000 per capita. You would have to interrogate him on his figures.

@Vincent
I actually agree with you on this one. However, last Friday provides me with hope. We are going nowhere while deals are done in backrooms without trnspaency. We are where we are because of such institutions as the Galway Tent and the Siptu & IBEC hotline to government. The spoils of the Celtic tiger were divided up in places such as these out of the public eye. We need root and branch reform which involves all those in positions of influence over the last decade being given red cards. They failed, simple as that.

Got any actual evidence that the public service doesn’t deliver value for money?

Remarkable. You advocate that since the Unions failed to get their way, they should ensure the continuance of a broken model which fails to deliver a value for money service to the citizens of the country. That is quite some claim to fame.

We’ve already been in continuous process of “reform” for the last two decades of partnership.

However, actual delivery on the promises is always just one more pay-rise (or averted pay-cut) away.

I thought Bert was a socialist. If truth be told there was no ideology or intellectual analysis but complete systems failure. The Banking System turned itself into a large property hedge fund for which management deserve primary responsibility so shoud go. This was achieved with the connivance of the CB and the Regulator. So far only Neary has taken the fall but Begg and the current permanent govt and political class should go.

Then the windfall gains from this stupidity were doled out in the toilets to the SPs. Heads have to roll here as well. Why are Begg, McCloone still in the game with Cowen et al. Time to clean out the whole rotted rancid stable.

what’s truly ironic is that the biggest alleged neo-liberal of them all, Michael McDowell, wanted to end the stamp-duty addiction, and was castigated at the time (and ever since) for this.

They are arguing because it will allow them to game the system and leave it so next year the cut is automatically undone. I dont blame them for trying it on thats their job; to spin for their members.

Just something to think about if we had 6 months unpaid leave for teachers, the OECD report would still show them well paid by ‘contact hour’.. (Ask Ernie) But obviously they wouldnt be well paid; Im using it as an example of how stats can be used…

So please apply some intellectual rigour to your own claims.

What exactly is a neo-liberal? You seem to have this as a term of abuse? I dont know what exactly you are getting at, you might have a valid point, would you care to explain?

Am I one? Is the writer of the article one? Would Jack O’Connor qualify? In his role in the trade union movement? In his role as Central Bank Director? Name a few…

As regards who destroyed our economy; the credit cant go to one group alone…. those who sat at the social partnership table and divided the stamp duty loot between themselves are not blameless… Or maybe they are all neo liberals also?

comparing quarterly figures isn’t a good idea - there are too many seasonal factors. Earnings went down between Q1 and Q2 last year too, but then bounced back up again in later quarters.

I suggest you start reading peoples opinions and not making them up.

I have not objected to public sector pay cuts-I have pointed out that they have already taken one and that the new proposal on unpaid leave is also a pay cut.
My principle point, that has been judiciously ignored is that the neo-liberals who destroyed our economy are now intent on destroying our society.

Having said that this thread is becoming boringly repetitive as you guys repeat your mantra again and again and with every repetition the truth and intellectual rigour diminishes.

Is it too much to ask that the cosseted rent seekers in the public sector share some of the burden too.

Whiel we are attributing blame for why we are here. I would sweep the top echelons of the banks from office-boards and executives. What about every body at the rank of AS and above in the civil service too and the CB plus those on state boards. Then we should have a general election to elect a govt with a new mandate to restore the economy.

You see, I am a democrat too. I would like to see authority residing where it should in the elected assembly of the people and not in the Galway Tent or the equally well connected Liberty Hall or IBEC on Baggot St.

The only way I think you can square all this is to suggest that the percentage fall in private sector employment should now be matched by the same percentage fall in public sector employment.

A neat, fair solution that ensures social solidarity, if not partnership?

have heard the politicians say it here; but also read something in the Financial Times about states within the United States who are attempting to raise money. The word permanent was being used in much the same context as here…

Cant find a link… but there you go…

“We all know the purpose of the current negotiations. It is about saving the ass of a dicredited Taoiseach and protecting the economic interest of a rent seeking public service. Those asked to pay are generally lower paid, often times not paid, have less security of tenure and the propect of lower retirement income. As they are generally younger, they are now probably more indebted and locked into overpriced housing contracts. Moreover as the data show their incomes are falling faster from Q1 than the public
service workforce.”

So you would prefer to have public policy made by the highly resourced rent seekers of the Galway tent and banker variety? The reality of pluralist democracy is that interest groups will always be with us. An engagement with all the strands is far superior to the “predator state” as described in the US by Kenneth Galbraith. (I have come to realise, however, that many of the people on here ranting about the public sector care little for democracy and wish to impose the type of state described in GAlbraiths excellent book).

Your solution for lower paid public servants is to impose a second blanket pay cut in a year ,in the same year that all promotional opportunities have been removed from them for an indefinite period?

Lets get real and honest here. It is clear that the cost saving is not that important to many of you or else the reaction to the unpaid leave proposal would not have been so severe. The reality is that many of you see that in the absence of the tools of monetary policy the alternative is to drive down wages in the private sector and for this to be done it must first be done in the public sector.

@ Vincent

We all know the purpose of the current negotiations. It is about saving the ass of a dicredited Taoiseach and protecting the economic interest of a rent seeking public service. Those asked to pay are generally lower paid, often times not paid, have less security of tenure and the propect of lower retirement income. As they are generally younger, they are now probably more indebted and locked into overpriced housing contracts. Moreover as the data show their incomes are falling faster from Q1 than the public
service workforce.

@Ernie

You nearly got there. You nearly addmitted the facts the public service is higher paid. For that progress, I salute you.
As an example of nobility in the public service look at the behaviour of the upper echelons in that section of the revenue dealing with the richest. They are deserting the field just when their skills needed most. It is a logical economic decision to depart for the retired workforce or the potentially more lucrative pastures of tax avoidance. Nobility it aint though.

also re “highly noble concept of public service”

This does indeed happen in other countries. However there has to be some sort of tangible sacrifice for this act to be considered “noble”, or else its just another ‘job’. Paulson going to the Treasury springs to mind.

However, consultants earning €250k, gardai earning the same as accountants, and mid-to-higher management in the civil service taking home €125k doesn’t spring to mind when i think of noble sacrifices.

I am Jewish, so watch who you give lessons to.

Anyway, you’re the one who brought up Godwin’s Law (which is itself a bit of a joke about nazism), not me.

I dispute much of what you write about Public Sector workers in the above, particularly with regard to the so-called “pay premium” which, even if it exists, is probably justified.

We’re also getting a taste of how “bulletproof” the pensions are every time Lenihan or some other gov’t minister threatens to tax them or otherwise tamper with them.

So, thanks, but I don’t need to join any dots or spot any differences. You might like to read the recent SIPTU paper on wage differentials, though.

“Unfortunately, no one can tell on paper whether one is being serious or humerous but you chose not to clarify.”

These are useful.

I remind you
@Ernie,

presume you tongue is in cheek there or is it?

I specifically asked you was your tongue in cheek and you did not answer. Unfortunately, no one can tell on paper whether one is being serious or humerous but you chose not to clarify. I have to agree, even though it pains me, with Simpleton’s take on things.

@Eoin

I could add that the PS lost the high moral ground, if they ever had it, when they decided to propose a flat % percentage reduction on all public sector workers through unpaid leave. But then it was a deal propsed by union fat cats to the highest paid public servants in Europe…”smoke filled rooms” anyone. I though only libertarians supported a flat tax.

Are you so blind to humour? You said Godwin’s law was about to be instantiated and I responded that only a nazi would think that. You do know what Godwin’s Law is, don’t you? Given that my post immediately followed yours, was it not obvious that I was making a joke? You may find it feeble but it’s hardly charitable to characterise the post as me calling you a nazi.

But all charity goes out the window when there’s a propaganda war to be won, I guess.

eh..no he didnt-his comment was completely tongue in cheek!

“The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place”
G.B.Shaw

“highly noble concept of public service”

no offence, but the PS lost the moral high ground when they decided they’d rather cut services than wages via the unpaid leave option.

It is clear that the neo-liberals who destroyed our economy are intent on destroying our society.I would hope that this often excellent forum of information and discourse does not become an Irish version of Fox news!

At the end of the day our problems will be solved by engagement and negotiation.
Shame on the person who commenced this thread in an attempt to pervert and destroy a negotiation process attempting to achieve common ground on economic recovery and public service reform.