Condensed version:
1) Ducking out of some kind evidence provision by accusing me of being ideologically blind doesn't wash, at the very least you could provide some evidence about salary levels of public vs private sector, for those of us not from Ireland.
In particular you should pay attention to the difference between the pay for "public sector elites" and the rest. It's a common thing for some people to rail against guaranteed pensions using the salaries of the best paid public workers as an example but with little calculation attention to the bulk of the workforce.
2) The mechanics of project plans etc. is already present in the public sector in many major European countries, are you saying it isn't in Ireland - or just that the results are not published to the public?
(I don't know anywhere that they are published in detail to the public yet.)
What I hope comes through is that my real targets are the bureaucrats behind the scenes who have often done a shocking job in many instances but always avoid accountability. There has been an huge amount of empire building going on. The health service was re-centralised a few years ago - from many regional boards to one - but far from cutting out duplication in services and management, this actually resulted in an increase in admin staff and a huge number of promotions. Even insiders admit it was a total sham - as they admit that the "Benchmarking" increases for productivity were in most instances a joke.
Much of what I say would not be particularly controversial to public servants (speaking in private). They are aware there are big problems, and that something has to give. They're just not sure where the leadership is going to come form. notes from no w here
And I don't think I was unreasonable about it?
If so, I apologise.
by accusing me of being ideologically blind
I have already accepted your point that the diary could be improved by the inclusion of more hard statistics - which will require more work but which I will do as time permits. But please note that very little by way of information measuring productivity in the public service is ever gathered - let alone published - because there is an ideological objection, within the Civil service, to doing so.
I suppose my most general point would be that the public has a right to know how their money is being spent, allegedly for their benefit, and to objective information about the value for money of that spending, Hence my "modest proposal" that such information should be generated and published in the future. You can hardly accuse me of failing to furnish information when the basic problem is that it is never produced, and when the point of my diary is that it should be produced in the future. notes from no w here
Still, I don't follow you on "received wisdom". What is the "received wisdom" here on public servants? Do you think this:
European Tribune - A Modest Proposal
Ultimately this diary isn't about public versus private at all, because both can be spectacularly well and badly run. It is about a complete failure of management per se, of ensuring that given objectives are achieved in the most efficient manner possible, and that the means by which they are achieved are subject to ongoing review, continuous improvement, and cost reduction as new organizational structures, technologies and evidence based improvements in working outcomes are introduced.
would not be subscribed to by almost everyone here (subject to some discussion about the exact purpose and outcome of "cost reduction")? As long as we are clearly looking at private sector failures in the same way, and Ford knows there can be massive inefficiency, poor management, snoozing on rent, failure to deliver service, in big private sector organisms. And provided also that we can recognize that, if the public sector should be accountable for its use of the public's money (the public has a right to know how their money is being spent), we should also wonder where the private sector's money comes from if not from our pockets (and in a much less freely chosen way than market ideology would have it).
Equally your comment about people "taking it personally" seems exaggerated: the comment by Colman that you point to is no more testy than the tone of half of your diary, after all. And what is that you want of us, anyway? To have no point of view? Or to show Olympian detachment, sit back and blandly roll out calm and measured arguments backed by the impressive data we just happen to have to hand on the question (in fact, to do what you haven't done in your diary ;))? You are practically asking members here to behave as if they were getting paid to do a job. And ET becomes what, in that case? A kind of professionally-run debating hall open to the four winds?
Failing this, apparently you see us as doomed.
That's the main reason why so many people leave or don't join up in the first place.
Perhaps you have evidence that "so many people" leave, and you know why they do so? As for those who don't join up in the first place, it's rather hard to quantify them or understand their motives. So I find your statement quite stunning. When locusts move on, they leave nothing behind
Perhaps you have evidence that "so many people" leave, and you know why they do so? As for those who don't join up in the first place, it's rather hard to quantify them or understand their motives. So I find your statement quite stunning.
Well of that half dozen or so who told me they came over from Timesonline, only Valentin remains. The Third Column left after feeling set upon, if I recall. The others told me by email that they felt intimidated by the content and tone. (I don't know if they ever registered or just lurked). Some current ETers have also told me privately they also feel hurt by their treatment on ET - particularly by prominent members who they feel specialise in snarky comments and rarely have anything positive to contribute.
I'm not saying that some of this isn't inevitable or unavoidable, I'm just disappointed by what appears to me to be a lack of growth in the active membership on ET since I joined - but I don't have figures on that. Perhaps you have figures on the growth in the number of diaries, and comments, and in the number of people actually commenting over the past year. notes from no w here
I'm not going to answer your following point. It's the private emails thing again. I suggest people who feel hurt by snarky comments should say so - by writing to the perpetrator, if they don't want to speak openly. By the time we'd worked all that out, we'd probably find that all of us have been hurt at different times by words and perceived attitudes (I have). I'll say again: though there's always room for improvement, ET is a warm and civil place in the blogosphere.
There are no stats of the kind you outline available to me via Scoop. Sitemeter, however, shows an improvement in monthly visits and page views on the same autumn months in 2007. Not spectacular, but a rise. When locusts move on, they leave nothing behind
If you have read the comments on many of my diaries, I think you will see that I occasionally engage in reasonably robust debate especially when attacked personally. However I am increasingly of the view that it isn't worth my while bothering to respond to snarky comments especially where there seems to be no attempt to contribute in a positive way or add valuable information on a topic.
I'm prepared to accept I may have over-reacted on this occasion and become over sensitized about it because it has happened a few times recently and a few other ETers have also expressed their disillusion to me. I'm torn between confronting such behaviour and just ignoring it - but I have now decided that it isn't worth it and will just move on.
(PS The reference to The Third Column wasn't directed at you - I came in late on that controversy and wasn't aware anyone held you to be particularly culpable. I have a very short memory for such spats but my vague memory is that some other contributors were more unhelpful) notes from no w here
people will take it personally if you challenge the received wisdom on ET. See also Colman's comment below. That's the main reason why so many people leave or don't join up in the first place.
What's the received wisdom of ET on the EU Constitution? What's the received wisdom on ET on nuclear energy? what's the received wisdom of ET on astrology? What's the received wisdom on ET on the ECB interest rate policy?
Bleh. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
I stayed around though, and I must admit that such incidents are MUCH rarer than on other blogs, so let's not blame that on ET particularly. "The womb that spawned that thing is fertile yet"
