Union calls for review of decentralisation process
Under the plan, the Government is determined to decentralise more than 10,000 civil servants to more then 50 locations within the next three years.
However, following a meeting of its executive committee yesterday, the Association of Higher Civil and Public Servants (AHCPS) decided to request a complete review of the controversial plan.
Although the union, which represents senior civil and public service managers, is in favour of "a voluntary and rational model of decentralisation", it remains strongly opposed to current plans. It has warned in the past that the services delivered to the public will greatly deteriorate.
According to an AHCPS statement, decentralisation, as currently envisaged, is tantamount to a forced fragmentation of central Government and will impact on policy at departmental, ministerial, national and international levels.
"Of great concern to many trade unions is the complete unwillingness on the part of Government to have regard to the serious issues raised about the workability of these decentralisation proposals.
"The AHCPS experience is that no one in Government wishes to listen to or hear any criticisms of decentralisation or any suggestions that the scope or timescale proposed just do not make sense," the statement said.
It went on to say that many AHCPS members who either see their jobs disappearing, or feel themselves coerced into moving are becoming increasingly angry.
"This situation, unless decentralisation is now addressed in a rational and reasonable way, is likely to get very substantially worse over the next three years as the programme is rolled out and the churning process begins in the public service.
"It is utterly compounded by the widespread belief, fuelled by political statements, that public servants are pawns in a political game and that the scope and timetable for decentralisation is dictated by party rather than by public interest," the statement said.
The union also accused the Decentralisation Implementation Committee of underplaying legitimate criticisms and refusing to meet with unions.