Tag: Politics & Culture

  • Science Week Ireland Competition

    Curses. I missed the deadline for yesterday’s competition over on Mulley.net to win a Wii in National Science week.

    I will not make the same mistake twice. Today’s question is “What invention would you like to see most in the future?“.

    Given I missed yesterday’s deadline I was tempted to go for a TARDIS or similar time travel machine (not a De Lorean as Simon would probably try to open the gull wing doors to make it fly, thus not breaking the “rules of the game”). However I dismissed this as that would open up the whole time travellers paradox… If I’d posted and been in with a chance to win the Wii would I have wished for a time machine to bring me back in time to post and win the Wii and if I hadn’t would I have won or would the original timeline have continued on.. (ohhh my brain hurts after that).

    I then thought about Giant Killer Robots (ideally made of gold). However Roosta beat me to it. Curses. Perhaps I should ask for my time machine?

    However a more mature pondering of the question made me consider my commuting and the implications for future family life (I live in Wexford, work in Dublin) and my carbon foot print (I tend to travel to the UK and US a few times a year to speak at conferences) and the fact that it took a colleague 2.5 hours to get from Swords to the city centre yesterday due to the buses – or specifically the lack thereof.

    So the invention I’d most like to see in the future is a transporter like wot they have on Star Trek. My commute to the office would be a lot shorter (speed of light vs speed of bus eireann), I could zip back to wexford for lunch with the family, work late for my wage-masters and be back home for tea and tucking in etc. And my colleague would be able to get from Swords to Dublin before he has to turn around again and retire.

    And I’d never have to deal with Ryanair’s baggage allowance or Baggage manglers handlers ever again.

    Yup. Transporters it is. And interestingly we are getting closer to this technology… extend the range and move from simple matter to slightly overweight bloggers.

  • Let them eat cake…

    Economy on the slide. House prices falling. Talk of having to raise taxes to cover essential day to day costs of running the government. Rumblings of voluntary redundancies in the Health Services, grumblings of the need to ensure more productivity in public services before further benchmarking payments are made… and all this after an election season where we were assured it was only a matter of time before we were all walking on water and had free flying cars (well not quite, but you get the picture).

    But our noble Taoiseach (already one of the highest paid elected officials in Europe) is today awaiting the announcement of a pay rise to bring his €260,000 a year salary up to something that a fella can live on in today’s Ireland.

    Update: RTE now have the figures… The Taoiseach’s new salary is €310,000, a 14% pay rise.

    To put it another way, the CEO of a large corporation seemingly lied to shareholders at an AGM (the election) about the performance of the business, failing to disclose adequately (if at all) the level of material risk associated with future performance of the enterprise, or recognise the levels of chronic mismanagement within his executive team and now he is to be rewarded with a payrise (which also means a raise in his already generous pension as Taoiseach).

    George W. Bush has a total ‘package’ including expenses and allowances of around $470,000. At today’s exchange rate that comes to just over €330,000. Will Bertie get more than him in ‘raw’ cash? The salary component of GW’s package comes to just over €280,000 at today’s exchange rates – only €20,000 more than Bertie.

    Pretty soon POTUS will want a raise as well, just to keep up with el Berto.

    Irish Government ministers and other TDs (as well as judges) will also get a bump in the bank account as a result of this review.

    If the Taoiseach is serious about leading the country through a period of solemn fiscal tightening before his party claim saviour status in the next election then he should start with himself. Reject the payrise… Send a signal to his ministerial colleagues that it is entirely their own choice if they want to take the pay rise, if they do they’ll be on their own in the PR stakes.

    With one simple gesture he could rout the opposition and reclaim his ‘man-o-the-people’ image before buggering off to a content retirement.

    Yeah… right… like that will happen.

    Update: Quelle surprise. A pay rise of 14% for the Taoiseach, 15.5% for the Tanaiste (who is also our minister for Finance) and a raft of further increases for other roles and we find ourselves in a position where the management of the country cannot now really argue for ‘belt-tightening’ or wage restraint within social partnership, at least not without falling over giggling.

    Let them eat cake indeed.

  • Amazon.co.uk and Trademark2.0

    A while back I reviewed Trademark2.0 by R.Todd Stephens. The book is now available from Amazon.co.uk…

    My review of the book can be found here…

  • Irish Government considering abandoning mandatory retirement age

    RTE news this evening (2007/08/08) reported that the Irish Government was considering removing the mandatory retirement age of 65.

    picture of bismarckHistorically, the concept of a mandatory age for retirement has its origins in the 19th Century. Germany was the first country to introduce a state-funded retirement pension in 1889. Otto von Bismarck set the retirement age at 70 (although this was later dropped to 65 and in Germany now stands at 60 for women and 65 for men, with women being raised to 65 in 2012).

    So from the retirement age of 70 all Germans were entitled to their old age pension paid by the state until their death. The average life expectancy of a German male in 1889 was (apparently) 72 with the majority making it not much further than their late 60s. Some sources I’ve looked at give a range of averages between 66 and 72 so I’d welcome some definitive statistics here rather than peddle myth and misinformation.

    In any case the social brotherhood of workers only had to fund each other’s pensions for a ball park period of 2 – 3years.

    This of course means that many people never got to claim their pension because, as every primary school child will tell you, the average is made up of the sum of all ages in the population divided by the number of people in that population. So the economics of Bismarck’s Social Security pension were fairly harsh.

    Now, our life expectancies are much longer. The choices are to either remove the mandatory requirement to retire at 65 and make it an optional age (ie the state will provide your pension at any time after you are 65) or raise the retirement age to a level that Bismarck would approve of. The legend is that when setting the retirement age Bismarck simply asked his civil servants at what age did most people die and then added a year or two.

    There is a good discussion of this at this link, and again discussed here.

    The Irish Central Statistics Office publishes statistics on Life expectancy in Ireland (funnily enough). From the most recent factoid available the following points are worth noting:

    • In 1926 an Irish male infant was expected to live only 57.4 years (or 7.6 years short of the 65 year retirement age).
    • Over the last 75 years, life expectancies have increased by 20% for men and 40% for women.
    • The life expectancy of an Irish male after retirement at 65 in 2002 was 15.4 years, with women living a further 18.7 years. It is likely that this has increased yet again.

    Compare this last figure to the approach of Bismarck to the German Social Security system.

    If he was Minister for Finance in Ireland today (Biffo von Bismarck if you will) and he was to ask his civil servants at what age do most people die, the answer would be between 80 and 84 years on average. He’d push for the median age (the age in the middle of the dataset from which the average is calculated), which I’d guesstimate to be about 85.5 based on the detailed table of life expectancies that can be found here (I’ve worked off life expectancies for people over 65).

    brian cowen

    He’d smoke his pipe (I can’t find any pictures of Bismarck with a pipe, but he has that look about him – pipe smoker.) He may or may not inhale. He’d scratch his head and probably set a mandatory retirement age of….

    ….(sound of large calculator whirring and crunching numbers)
    ….(sound of figure being pulled out of thin air)

    ….82(ish)

    This figure would be picked because it would give, on average, a pension payment for 2 years to retirees but the majority of people who aspired to retire would most likely expire before that age was reached. Which is exactly the logic that was applied in the foundation of the world’s first social security retirement pension.

    Ultimately, the objective of Bismarck’s pension scheme was to provide an insurance against the physical disability of old-age that affected the largely manual heavy labour of the time. In this information age much of our work involves mental capability and is less reliant on physical ability.

    In that regard I would argue that the best approach would be to raise the retirement age slightly (perhaps back to Bismarck’s original 70 years) and then make it optional for people to retire at that age or to keep working and contributing until they feel that they no longer need to, want to, or could be bothered to. Many jobs today do not require the same level of physical capability that would have been needed even fifty years ago – we are now knowledge workers in an Information economy… the capability of the brain and the ability to continually learn and improve skills are key. A co-worker may benchpress more than me, but we don’t move data in wheelbarrows.

    One of the visions of retirement is it provides more time in your twilight years to spend time with grand-kids or pursuing hobbies. Web2.0 technologies increasingly provide the means for people to turn hobbies into niche businesses or to be flexible in how they provide their skills to potential employers. I suspect in my retirement years we will see an army of ‘silver surfers’ engaging in shorter engagements on their own terms allowing them to mix the benefits of retirement (more time with grand-kids or pursuing hobbies) with the benefits of working in industry niches that excite them and provoke passion. In these roles the minds that would otherwise have been put out to pasture will provide valuable coaching and mentoring for the younger workers without necessarily requiring full time employment – unless they wanted it.

    A flexible model is required that might allow a person to choose a time after a certain age when they will stop working or cut back, and a framework will be required that will allow people to take their full pension allocation or a reduced amount while they continue to work, with the freedom to claim their full pension if they choose not to work for a period of time.

    I’d love in 40 years to be able to work for 3 months on a project for an economic rate, paying taxes and paying pension contributions, while drawing 50% of my normal pension (or similar) and then to take 6 months off to do as I wish while drawing down my full State pension to cover basic costs and then go teaching (for a salary) for a few months. All of this would require legislative changes in terms of tax treatments and such like but the day of the flexible retirement will come soon.

    One alternate model might be a ‘graduated retirement’ that the retirement age could be either kept at 65 or set slightly higher and that those who wished not to work after retirement could do so and would be paid the basic pension, but those that wanted to continue working could take a reduced pension payment (say 75% of the basic amount) with the balance being paid into a reserve account. As the worker would continue to pay state pension contributions while working (which would increase the ‘pot’ for paying the basic pension to all), the reward would be that once they decided to cease working they could draw down from their ‘reserve’ account to increase the level of their State pension once they had stopped working.

  • Mobile phone registration

    The Irish Government have again trundled out a proposal to force mandatory registration of pre-paid mobile phones. It is stated that this will be a wonderful weapon in the war on drugs, organised crime and pixies.

    There are two small problems with the proposal as it currently stands.

    1. It is unlikely to work as the politicians claim it will
    2. It is unlikely to work as the politicians hope it will

    Now, technically, this is just one problem but it is such a doozy I thought it would be worth mentioning at least twice.

    The reason it is unlikely to work as the politicians claim it will is that in order to ensure that the Register of Mobiles does not become filled with Michael M. Ouses or I.P Freelys the process will require some form of validation of name and address. In order to mitigate the risk of forged or fraudlent documentation being used (which would result in Mr Freely freely getting his fone phraudulently phone fraudulently) this documentation will need to be of some ‘official’ form.

    For Bill Pay phones the usual documentation required is a passport or drivers licence (a work ID on its own is not usually sufficient in my experience) and a utility bill – these prove you are who you say you are and you live where you say you live. In order for the Register of Mobiles to meet the stringent evidentiary requirements that the stated purpose require (to deter criminals using mobiles and to assist in tracking and apprehending them via their mobile records) then a very high level of validity and verifiability will be required of the information used for identification purposes when the phone is being purchased.

    The majority of Ready-to-go customers would seem to be children and teenagers (I’ve lost track of the number of phones my teenage sister-in-law has had over the past few years). They may not have a passport, are unlikely to have a driver’s licence (until they are in their late teens) and are extremely unlikely to be in possession of a valid utility bill in their name.

    So how will they register their phones? Are the Government proposing that the phones would be registered to the parents of these children and teenagers? What then if the child is involved in some criminal activity? Does the parent become a suspect because of the mobile phone records?

    “I didn’t beat up little Johnnie… I’d left my phone at home. My ma hates Johnnie – she must’ve done it!”.

    One solution proposed to this (which according to the Irish Daily Mail came from Civil Servants in a review of this idea update– thanks to Antoin at eire.com who has a blog post which quotes the Dept of Communications on this topic) would be to implement the Register of Mobiles only after a National Identity Card was introduced in Ireland. In theory, this would give a standardised, State-backed identity (and possibly a unique identifier for the person). However there are no current proposals to implement such a card and previous proposals have met with opposition from various quarters.

    A further issue is that name and address data ages over time. People move house, get married, get divorced or die. What mechanism will the Government require to ensure that the information registered on the Register of Mobiles is maintained accurately and in a form that meets or exceeds the evidentiary requirements of the legal system? This is not an issue for bill Pay phones as if the bill ceases to be paid the phone is cut off… and if the bill is still being paid but the address is no longer valid the Authorities have other investigative avenues open to them (such the payment records). For ‘ready-to-throw’ mobiles this is and will be a critical problem. Not only can the person move address, but the phone may ‘move person’ by being swapped, loaned or shared between family members (this may happen with bill pay phones but it is reasonable to assume that in the case of a bill pay phone the ‘sharing’ or ‘lending’ of the phone would be temporary).

    Currently we have a very important national register of people which is collated and maintained for a very serious and important function in the operation of the State. It’s called the Electoral Register and, not to put too fine a point on it, it has some ‘issues’ with the quality of the information there-in and the levels of duplication and inaccuracy in the data. What confidence should we have that the Government will have learned the lessons of the Electoral Register in the design and implementation of any new Register of Mobiles?

    I am not saying we should not require registration of pre-pay mobile phones (all operators currently encourage registration through ‘free credit’ bribes). However if we are to require citizens to give up elements of personal privacy and provide information about their mobile phone usage to State Agencies then it is essential that the system work as it is intended it will and that the information captured meets or exceeds the expectations of the politicians, the police and, most importantly, the citizen. Crucially this must happen with out the information captured being excessive or irrelevant to the stated purposes for registration.

    If we require people to provide information into a system and set of processes that will eventually degrade into an unmanaged cacophony of inaccurate, incomplete, inconsistent and otherwise just plain awful data rather than a symphony of polished, reliable and policed information then we will have achieved nothing other than a layer of paperwork and a burden on mobile phone operators and their customers. Those with criminal intent will pervert the system – foreign SIMS, imported phones, stolen phones etc.

    By definition they don’t play by the rules.

  • Seanad elections

    The counting of votes for the Irish Senate begins today. As a graduate of the National University of Ireland, UCD I had expected to have a vote. As a member of the Alumni Association (and a regular recipient of the lovely colour magazine produced by the University Alumni office) I should have received my ballot paper by registered post.

    My wife is also a graduate of the same university and likewise has given the Alumni Association her current address (which happily is the same as mine).

    Neither of us have received ballot papers. Unfortunately I ran out of time to chase this up with the University authorities but…

    …if they can send me the Alumni newsletter to my home why didn’t I get my ballot paper? These were supposed to have been sent by registered post, so I would have expected a ‘non-delivery’ notice from An Post if we weren’t there.

    Perhaps the State Electoral register isn’t the only electoral register which has ‘issues’? I wonder if any other UCD graduates failed to receive their Senate ballot papers?

  • You are now entering the Parlon zone…

    Breaking News.ie reports this morning on a Sunday Tribune story that Tom Parlon, former junior minister in charge of the OPW, is to lead the Construction Industry Federation in a legal challenge against the policies of the OPW on awarding fixed-price contracts.

    This is a policy that he championed while in Government. He is quite likely to have a very in-depth familiarity with any internal debates and briefings that might have been conducted with regard to the communication and operation of this policy.

    It is this access to and familiarity with internal policy formulation that requires civil servants in ‘designated positions’ to wait 12 months before taking on roles in the private sector.

    Arguments to the effect that Tom Parlon was sacked as Junior Minister by the electorate when he was not returned as a TD and as such no ethical issues arise are tenuous at best. The logic of this conflation would appear to be that the electorate voted Tom Parlon out of his ministerial office directly (and by extension elected the Taoiseach’s brother in to replace him).

    The election was not a vote on Mr Parlon’s conduct as a junior minister but on his ability to out-campaign his political opponents in his electoral consituency. In that he failed to achieve his goal. Even if he had been re-elected there is no guarantee that he would have retained that junior ministry (perhaps he would have been given another role in Government). Would it have been ethically acceptable for him to take on the CIF role as a back-bench TD with no ministerial role in the OPW?

    Mr Parlon failed to be elected, he was not sacked by the electorate. His constituency opponents out performed him (in particular Brian Cowen who got 27% of first preferences) and he did not regain his seat. A consequence of his failure to be re-elected as a TD is that he is no longer a junior minister and is at a loose end. This loose end he has tied up by taking a well paid position with the CIF.

    There are doubtless other roles he could have taken on that would not raise the question of ethics. However he opted to take on a role that requires him to round on policies he championed in his previous role, perhaps drawing on knowledge he might have gained in that role which raises the question of ethics and the standards we expect of the political masters of the Civil Service.

  • Progressive Democrats – bastion of ethics?

    Tom Parlon, one of the former PD TDs and bookie’s favourite to take the leadership once the paperwork about the PD consitiution requiring the leader to be a sitting TD was sorted out, has resigned. He has been head-hunted by the Construction Industry Federation. As ever, there is much comment on this over at IrishElection.com
    The fact that in the 29th Dail (the one was dissolved before the election that he failed to get re-elected in) Mr Parlon was the Junior Minister with special responsibility for the Office of Public Works does not, it seems, raise any potential for conflict of interest in Mr Parlon’s view. The OPW is responsible for state construction contracts and has an annual budget of €630million. Mr Parlon has stated that

    “The whole tendering process in the OPW was completely separate from the minister. Individual companies tender and the OPW is obliged to accept the lowest tender. I never had any involvement in this.”

    However it is standard practice in the Civil Service for a ‘cooling off period’ of 12 months to be applied before a civil servant who may have had a ‘designated’ position (as defined in the Ethics Acts) goes to work for a private sector firm that might have dealings with their former department. In any case the Civil Servant must notify the Standards in Public Office Authority. In the private sector ‘gardening leave’ is often applied to staff who take jobs with competitors. This is simply good ethical practice and avoids the implication that there may be untoward influence applied in the conduct of business. This is precisely the point raised by Transparency International.

    The question is – does the Junior Minister fall within a category of people who might have a ‘designated position’ under the terms of section 20.2 of the Civil Service Code of Standards and Behaviour? Given that any other such person would draw their authority from the responsible Minister by way of delegation I would argue that this might be the case. (The legal eagles over at McGarr Solicitors or Tuppenceworth can feel free to correct any errors in my interpretation of the legalities/ethics here.)

    Mr Parlon’s defence that he was seperate to the tendering process holds less weight when one considers that any Civil Servant in the OPW who had a ‘designated’ position (defined in the Ethics Acts) would need to cool their heels for 12 months and that any Civil Servant in the OPW who was taking up employment in the private sector in a firm that they might have had official dealings or which might gain an unfair advantage over competitors as a result of that employment would need to notify the Outside Appointments Board. The direct involvement of the Civil Servant in a particular process is not a requirement for the notification to the Outside Appointments Board.

    This scenario is not addressed in the advisory booklet on the Ethics Acts for ‘Office Holders’ (which Mr Parlon, as a Minister for State/Junior Minister, was) so he might be excused for overlooking the ethical gap here. Perhaps the €250,000 per annum salary on top of his TD and Junior Minister pension has distracted him from the fundamental issues.

    However the question is a simple one – do we hold the Servants of the State (Civil Servants) to a higher ethical code than their leaders? If a senior Civil Servant from the OPW resigned (or was dismissed as Mr Parlon was in effect) and promptly took up a senior position with a lobby group for the Irish Construction Industry Federation would that go unchallenged or be so easily dismissed as a non-issue?

    Mr Parlon says that the PDs will survive as they have some ‘young blood’ coming through local authority councils. However with no likely candidate emerging to lead a party that has had the stuffing knocked out of it in the Election one must wonder who will lead the ‘young bloods’ and remould the party into a vibrant and relevant voice. The speed with which Mr Parlon has grabbed this particular lifevest should surely give these ‘young bloods’ pause for thought.

    Perhaps Tom Parlon is simply working on fulfilling his destiny to lead people who will ‘build a better Ireland’ but he has realised it is the brickies, plumbers and plasters rather than the PDs who have a better chance of achieving this?

    Ethics be damned. He’s on a mission from god.

  • Public Transport

    Iarnrod Eireann/CIE have announced a massive overhaul of the DART network in Dublin to integrate public transport around the capital. Details of their proposal can be found in the Irish Times today.

    What struck me was the similarity between the diagram of what they are proposing and the plan put forward previously by transport lobby group ‘Platform 11’. Platform 11’s proposal can be found here.

    The only difference I can see is that the Platform 11 plan makes use of the well documented tunnel that runs under the Phoenix park between Heuston Station and Docklands to complete the ‘orbital’ transport route.

    Of course I could be wrong – the diagrams presented are both artistic representations of (what I hope) are more detailed technical plans. But surely the consultation process that is now commencing should consider the options of converting the tunnel – which given that CIE are proposing to put some of the DART network underground as part of their plan surely makes sense? – it’s the one part where they wouldn’t need to dig the tunnel first.

  • Name checked on the Irish Times…

    …specifically I found myself namechecked on the Irish Times blog page of Shane Hegarty in his blogroll. Not sure what I’ve done to warrant such a mention other than rant interminably about things that most people have far to little time to care about, but it is an honourable mention.

    From the look of his blogroll I’m in good company, surrounded by some familiar sites as tuppenceworth, but due to the miracles of the alphabet I appear just below Damien Mulley.

    The very least I can do is to add a link to the PresentTense blog on the Irish Times website (and to Mulley.net as well).