Comments for Just Muddling Through

Comment on About What Politics is About: Bruno Latour by Genevieve3977

Genevieve3977 — Mon, 02 Jun 2025 01:47:29 +0000

https://shorturl.fm/0oNbA

Comment on Strengthening Civil Service Accountability and Performance: A Poor Performance by Colin144

Colin144 — Mon, 02 Jun 2025 01:46:57 +0000

https://shorturl.fm/hQjgP

Comment on A Question of Culture – Report of the Independent Review Group on the Department of Justice and Equality by Jace3546

Jace3546 — Mon, 02 Jun 2025 01:46:24 +0000

https://shorturl.fm/fSv4z

Comment on The New Forum Is Not Social Partnership. It Is Worse. by Betsy2578

Betsy2578 — Mon, 02 Jun 2025 01:45:50 +0000

https://shorturl.fm/PFOiP

Comment on European Culture, Secularism, Modernity. A Note on Remi Brague by Julian1495

Julian1495 — Mon, 02 Jun 2025 01:45:17 +0000

https://shorturl.fm/0EtO1

Comment on European Culture, Secularism, Modernity. A Note on Remi Brague by FrankLitton

FrankLitton — Mon, 31 Aug 2015 09:47:00 +0000

In reply to Veronica. I am not longing for anything; certainly not a return to the past. That past had its problems and solutions. They are not our problems, still less can they be our solutions. I am interested in the resources available to specify our problems and find solutions. While we have no difficulty in condemning the past for its problems/solutions, we lack the resources to attend to present difficulties. Do you believe that we have no problems and therefore no need for solutions? I must admire your mastery of the thought of most French theorists that allows you conclude that so disparate a group have one defining characteristic.

Comment on European Culture, Secularism, Modernity. A Note on Remi Brague by Veronica

Veronica — Sat, 29 Aug 2015 18:50:00 +0000

What are you longing for here? A return to the concept of belief in some ‘supreme being’ who will make everything all right? As regards Ireland’s political economy in the ’60s and early ’70s, Marxism was irrelevant. If anything, Ireland was turning away from a failed nationalist project which, via Fianna Fail nationalist ideology, had sought since the 1930s to promulgate a fanstasy that some sort of ‘third way’ existed between a market economy and a hegemonic Catholic/nationalist ethos that would allow Ireland to flourish within the protectionist straitjacket of a paternalist state. I think it is worth bearing in mind that in the 1950s at one point some 20% of Irish citizens were confined in institutions of one sort or another – prisons, industrial schools, lunatic asylums etc.Communists, tiny minority and all as they were, were run out of the place. No dissidents of any stripe, social, political or moral, were tolerated. As for most of the French theorists – although I am not familiar with Brague – the distinguishing characteristic of their work is their endless capacity for circular reasoning. I guess that is why their theories – from Althusser to Foucault to Latour – enjoy temporary fashonability before they are quietly consigned to the intellectual dustbin.

Comment on The New Forum Is Not Social Partnership. It Is Worse. by Cathal Coleman

Cathal Coleman — Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:45:00 +0000

Great stuff Frank. I’ve tweeted on it, so expect a tsunami of reaction! Cathal

Comment on A Question of Culture – Report of the Independent Review Group on the Department of Justice and Equality by Muiris

Muiris — Thu, 28 Aug 2014 20:40:00 +0000

Hi Frank – I found the report succinct if a little taciturn, and slightly unconventional insofar as the detailed recommendations formed by far the largest portion, and the findings and evidence on which they are formulated are in contrast quite brief – a consequence of the short time-scale the authors might justifiably argue – but it nonetheless raised a lot of questions in my mind about how the conclusions were distilled from the evidence. And as you say some of the ideas that informed the recommendations are worthy of further exploration – particularly ‘silo culture’ (where have I heard that before…) and I assume the belief that top-down systems were inhibiting more cross-departmental work. The arguments for reform of ‘culture, leadership and management’ at least depart from the standard recommendations to address ‘governance’ and ‘accountability’, but as you point out, suggesting that the Department is somehow remiss in achieving what is perceived to be best management practice does not do justice (no pun intended) to wider changes to the context in which the department operates. It occurred to me that there must be some disappointment amongst the committed reformers of the 1990s who sought to have much more strategic thinking in government departments only to find that some twenty years after the launch of the much vaunted Strategic Management Initiative, it has been determined to be curiously absent in one of the key departments of state.

Of particular interest was the agencies issue. That its relationship with its agencies somehow ceased to function productively was arguably not a problem uniquely faced by the Justice Department – this research report from a decade ago suggested a government wide issue and found that the Justice Department had the largest number of ‘non duplicate function’ agencies when compared to others, as well as the greatest variety in agency types (and one must also presume internal governance arrangements). This was outwardly reflected in the shifting names of the Department from the early 1990s – having been simply the Department for Justice from 1924-1993, it became the subject of considerable bureau-shuffling as equality, law reform, human rights and even childcare issues have come and in some cases disappeared from under its aegis, one might assume leaving their own organisational legacies. All the while, what has long seemed to be the most likely candidate for a separate agency (remember the 1985 Whitaker Committee of Inquiry into the Penal System which made a strong case for ‘a separate executive agency or board’ to manage the Prison Service?) has curiously remained firmly within the Department structure. The suggestion that a more uniform and
command-like structure for the department’s agencies might sound appealing, but
the overwhelming evidence is that trying to shoehorn agencies into – dare I say – silo-like reporting and accountability structures has not been successful anywhere. In the UK, this is formally recognised and agency management or ‘sponsorship’ is now regarded as a specialist skill for civil servants to develop.

Seeking a means to best align incentives, structures and cultures of authority in order to achieve critical tasks, especially those that cross organisational boundaries, cannot rest within the administrative system or individual departments. The Irish civil service has routinely proved itself very capable of achieving cross-organisational objectives once a political priority has been set. This report should prompt some more detailed consideration about how best the achievement of such objectives can be motivated without the need for crisis-inspired reviews.

Comment on Strengthening Civil Service Accountability and Performance: A Poor Performance by franklitton

franklitton — Mon, 31 Mar 2014 09:12:41 +0000

In reply to Veronica.

Yes, ‘situations’ do keep piling up. The calls for a Police Authority are yet another example of the lack of trust in the electoral/representative system. A new ‘functionally representative’ body is likely. Politicians and the media are too busy throwing stones to reflect on the pros and cons of this.
I am afraid I do not know the answer to your question on the Taoiseach’s authority over Secretary’generals. I suppose it follows from his authority over his Ministers.
The ‘corporation sole’ is a legal device to give a legal personality to a department; just as company law does for a firm. It’s origin lies in the middle ages when Parish priests were deemed the ‘corporation sole’ of the Parish. Of course, this legal doctrine has to put alongside the political and management ‘doctrines’ that provide the scaffold for the relationship between ministers and their civil servants.