Niall Crowley's resignation from Equality Authority

P

putsch

Registered User
Messages
377
Does anyone know what the true story is on this? I know the budget was cut and the organisation was fingered for decentralisation to Roscrea.

Crowley always seemed to me to be in a bit of a bubble - made himself an easy target for the cuts but nonetheless the cuts seemed savage at best.
 
To me, it sounds a bit like someone had a word with Biffo, "Who will rid us of this troublesome priest?", resulting in a savage 43% cut in Crowley's budget. As a man of principle, he did the decent thing in resigning, rather than continue to hold down a pensionable job at the head of a toothless organisation.

Crowley in his time cut lumps out of some sacred cows and made them eat humble pie, fighting the good fight and winning against banks, car-hire firms, unions, public service and so on.

Its sad to see him going and sadder to be left with the impression that his departure was engineered.
 
I was glad to see him resign. Over the years, he seemed to use his position as head of the Equality Authority as an instrument for a personal crusade rather than something useful. The EA was initially a good idea but Crowley dragged it into disrepute by some of the ridiculous decisions he made.

The fact that he resigned in a huff rather than accept sharp cuts in the EA budget does not bode well for the willingness of quango bosses to accept such cuts. God help us if every budget cut is now to be turned into a political football.
 
Apparantly over 50% of the Equality Authority cases were against the government run organisations. Is it really a surprise that the govt cut the funding on something that highlights one of the many inadequacies of their inept concept of public services.

Incidentally heard the tail end of the Joe Duffy show (complain about him I know, I know) where a lady mentioned that the govt wasted 8million getting all sorts of experts from around the world to proove some case regarding their childrens exam (didnt get the full details). Sounds like there are people in government using their positions to use the countries funds for their own political will.
 
I agree with this bit and while I accept that he is a man of principle I also agree with Ubiquitous that he seemed to have an agenda. I don't know the man at all but from hearing him speak he did sound very sanctimonious.

That said it is strange that the Equality Authority, the only body of its kind, gets hit with a massive cut and other bodies which overlap all over the place get tiny cuts.
 
Purple said:
... I don't know the man at all but from hearing him speak he did sound very sanctimonious...
Click to expand...

Ditto, but against a background of talking heads who at times sounded and behaved a lot worse than sanctimonious e.g. incompetent, untruthful, untrustworthy, I felt he had a passion for and a belief in what he was doing.

As ubiquitous said, a crusader granted, personal, I can't say and he certainly made himself and his organisation targets, but it was refreshing to see someone who seemed to believe there was value in his work.

He made mistakes but given the newness of the role and the remit, there was no roadmap and pioneers do sometimes get lost or become casualties.
 
The huge issue is indeed the way that the EA has been completely muzzled, rather than what happened/happens to Niall Crowley. While I wouldn't agree with everything the EA has done, they were hugely effective in their own field. Liveline yesterday had a series of callers nothing how the authority had supported them in taking Equality cases. In particular, the parent of a dyslexic child who had taken a case against Dept Education noted that the Dept had spent €8m in defending the case, which I guess would cover the entire EA budget for a year. It was also interesting to note the unusual and pointed reference to 'senior civil servants' in Crowley's resignation letter, which would suggest that politicians are being led by the senior execs on this issue. It is also worth nothing that the Chairperson Angela Kerins seems to make something of a habit of [broken link removed]. To misquote Oscar Wilde, to lose one Director may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose two looks like carelessness. The arguement about budget cuts holds zero water, given the single-digit cuts that applied to all other similar agencies in the Justice family. Crowley was got, plain and simple.

Crowley is undoubtedly a man of principle. His depature leaves the rest of the board exposed. If they believed the organisation can do its job with a 43% reduction, they should have come up with this proposal themselves. If they don't, they should resign.
 

Which ridiculous decisions did he make? I find your second quote quite strange, the guy resigned because he felt not run the organisation because of the cuts and decentralisation. So here we have a guy who feels he can't give the level of service the people deserve and he gets slagged off! What does this decision to cut the budget say about the commitment of FF/Greens to equality issues? Its another example of FF not looking down the line at decisions they make, cue decentralisation, Tribiunals...and this...If FF didnt want Crowley why did they reappoint him in the last two years?
 


I agree with your comments that the EA were effective but Angela Kerins (Ex FF National Executive) will stand over the cuts. Interesting to see who will take over?
 
YOBR said:
Which ridiculous decisions did he make?
Click to expand...
Here's one

[broken link removed]

I find your second quote quite strange, the guy resigned because he felt not run the organisation because of the cuts and decentralisation. So here we have a guy who feels he can't give the level of service the people deserve and he gets slagged off!
Click to expand...
So if Roddy Molloy's successor at Fás says that they can't afford cuts either, you'll take him at his word?

What does this decision to cut the budget say about the commitment of FF/Greens to equality issues?
Click to expand...

Hopefully that they want the State's equality policies dictated by common sense and not by outdated 1980's-style leftwing principles.
 

Funnily enough, I was thinking about that Late Late issue when I was writing my 'don't agree with everything they've done' post. In all fairness, that wasn't a case they actively supported, it was a press release. And indeed, it mirrors the views of some AAM posters, so I don't think it is quite fair to position it an extreme way-out-there-ultra-PC issue.

Please don't fall for the spin that this was really a budget issue. Crowley & colleagues presented a plan to continue to operate the EA with a 35% budget cut last week, and this plan was rejected by the Minister/mandarins at the Dept Justice. The EA budget is a drop in the ocean in the overall Dept Justice budget. They could save that money without breaking sweat if they wanted to. This wasn't about money. This was about getting rid of Crowley.

Wait to see him being replaced by some nice tame civil servant from oooh just possibly the Dept Justice in a few months time.
 
ubiquitous said:
Just because someone on AAM supported it, didn't mean it wasn't a ridiculous issue for the EA to campaign on.
Click to expand...
I note and respect your own opinion that this was ridiculous. I would suggest that you note that not everyone else in the country shares your opinion.
 
ubiquitous said:
Here's one

[broken link removed]



So if Roddy Molloy's successor at Fás says that they can't afford cuts either, you'll take him at his word?
Click to expand...

That was not a decision, that was a comment he made...looking at their website of the EA I would support many of the decisions made by the Equality Tribunal particular in terms of protecting employees from discrimination. The fact is that the EA was a sucessful organisation, working to investigate and deliberate on breaches of the Equality legislation. Obviously it was too sucessful for FF........It is not possible to compare cuts in EA with Fas...The problem is that people just don't know what they want from semi state bodies...if they are unsucessful at certain aspects they gets slagged off...if they are sucessful like the EA they get slagged off..........
 
diarmuidc said:
I know there's more to the story than just budget cuts, but isn't this what the public and the media are howling for? Cut the "quangos"? (I hate that word)
Click to expand...

Yes, there are calls for cuts in public expenditure but should we not carefully examine where we want the cuts or do we want to return to the days when women had to give up their jobs becuse they were pregnant? I would argue that we need to cut back but should carefully consider where we should make those cuts...
 
YOBR said:
That was not a decision, that was a comment he made........
Click to expand...


Not exactly. The fact is that someone in the EA decided to engage their researchers in an investigation of the alleged "gender stereotyping" on the part of the Late Late Show. To portray this as anything other than a policy decision is disingenuous, in my opinion.

YOBR said:
The fact is that the EA was a sucessful organisation, working to investigate and deliberate on breaches of the Equality legislation.
Click to expand...

Indeed it was. The point is, though: can the State afford this sort of service?

YOBR said:
should we not carefully examine where we want the cuts or do we want to return to the days when women had to give up their jobs becuse they were pregnant?
Click to expand...

With respect, this is scaremongering of the lowest order, and you know it.
 

Are the EA not entitled to comment on issues which they feel are within there remit? In relation to the point as to whether the State can afford this type of service we have to look beyond the Late Late Show and look at the actual decisions made by the Equality Tribunal see http://www.equality.ie. Also, my last point is correct as we need to decide what issues are important to us in this country. With a cut of 43% in its budget, the EA is never going to be able to handle its caseload so there will be no effective deterrent against employers who choose to ignore equality legislation.
 
YOBR said:
Are the EA not entitled to comment on issues which they feel are within there remit?
Click to expand...

Of course they are. But that brings us back to my opening comment: "Over the years, (Crowley) seemed to use his position as head of the Equality Authority as an instrument for a personal crusade rather than something useful. The EA was initially a good idea but Crowley dragged it into disrepute by some of the ridiculous decisions he made."

YOBR said:
there will be no effective deterrent against employers who choose to ignore equality legislation.
Click to expand...

That's not correct. Equality legislation still stands even if the EA implodes or is abolished. Anyone who wants to take a case against their employer or anyone else still has a range of avenues open to them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register