Do you really believe they will just get rid of all the dead wood in 1 clean sweep or do you believe as I do that all the brown nosers and ass wipers will be the last to go.
1 I think John Mc Guiness is bucking for the leaders job and will say anything that will get him noticed
2 The problem with trying to bring cuts into the PS is you have to employ more staff to find out where the cuts can take place.
Madness I know
3 I would love to know which person leaked that report
4 Can't comment about this because I don't know anything about that
5 See above
Unlike the PSCS bashers I don't rattle on about things I know nothing about.
Well maybe once in a while
SLF, I would disagree with the "bashing" accusation, largely because I've been involved in the discussion. You can't use that card every time there is criticism of the PS/CS. Where Liaconn and others have pointed out discrepancies in the accusations, they have been taken on board and accepted. That's reasoned debate, not bashing. It's good to have and it's informative.
However, are you saying that I don't know what I'm on about? You asked how I came to my conclusion (and be fair to me I even accepted some element of jumping to a larger conclusion) and I told you. I did what was asked.
Liaconn, I think we're at a point where we have to agree to disagree. You feel on balance there is an agenda, I feel on balance there isn't. Without going through the every issue of the last year or 18 months of the Indo, I guess we're both arguing from a position of personal feeling.
There are and have been plenty of occasions where statistics are massaged for a positive spin on the PS/CS, I won't list them, but they're there. Examples are the percentage of GDP spent on the PS being lower per head than the OECD countries. However, the percentage of the money spent that goes to salaries is much higher here than in the OECD. However, this bit is never mentioned.
Again, SIPTU is more than willing to hang on to that one statistic from the OECD, yet accuses the OECD of having a capitalist agenda when it criticises the Irish Government for not following its model of a PS/CS.
This isn't bashing anyone, my position is and will remain that there is no agenda, just a media overly reliant on various interest groups/individuals who generate press releases for copy.
To come back to your point, why should we dismiss what IBEC say as being biassed to one agenda and not treat the other side of the social partners with the same scepticism?