The Government's decision to think again before announcing its plans for the biggest decentralisation programme in the history of the State, is one of its wiser judgments in recent times. Next week's Cabinet meeting had been heralded by the Minister for Finance, Mr McCreevy, as the date for the unveiling of the most radical relocation programme of Government departments and agencies and - for the first time - non-commercial State-sponsored bodies, to towns and cities outside Dublin. That decision has now been postponed until the autumn.
It would be gratifying to think that the Government had some sound social or economic reason for deferring its long-awaited decision. But, apparently, it had not. Senior Government sources were quoted in this newspaper yesterday as stating that the decentralisation plan had turned into an "ad hoc frenzy" with Ministers, Ministers of State and backbenchers attempting to claim Government agencies for their own constituencies. It has become the political lottery for those holding the reins of power.
The Minister for Defence, Mr Smith, admitted, quite unashamedly, on RTE recently that, as the local TD, he would make no apologies for lobbying for decentralisation to his constituency. He has transferred part of the Army and Civil Defence operations to North Tipperary. The Minister for Finance, Mr McCreevy, has moved part of the State Laboratories to Kildare. The Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs, Mr Dermot Ahern, has announced plans to relocate the entire accounts branch of his Department to Dundalk. The Minister for Justice, Mr O'Donoghue, has despatched the Legal Aid Board to Cahirciveen.
The Tanaiste, Ms Harney, gave some inkling of the Ministerial perspective on the matter in Waterford on Tuesday when she said that proper decentralisation should take place on social and economic grounds, not for political reasons. There is not a shred of evidence to suggest that this is happening. It appears that, following their frenzied departure from the Dail for the recess last month, Ministers were fearful that the announcement of the decentralisation locations would unleash a new round of damaging accusations about political jobbery and stroke politics. More than 100 towns and cities, including some County Councils, have made applications for decentralisation projects. More locations will lose than win at the end of the day.
The Government has only itself to blame for this situation. There has been a blatant lack of transparency and proper planning about the whole decentralisation process since Mr McCreevy first announced the plan to relocate 10,000 public servants in the last Budget. The Minister has refused to set out any qualifying criteria for towns and cities being considered, preferring instead "to address the many public representatives who have been in touch with him".
In a recent circular to branch secretaries in all Government departments, the Association of Higher Civil and Public Servants has advocated that the economic and social basis on which individual locations are chosen should be spelt out and debated publicly before final decisions are made. There should be an administrative assessment of the policy and consumer implications of the decisions. The traditional practice of transferring sections of Departments to the local constituency of the Minister, it said, had given rise to the perception of "civil servants being handed out like smarties in pursuit of local electoral advantage".
The Government would do well to heed this warning. There is still time to develop a rational policy on decentralisation but it must be based on sustainable objective criteria.