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."
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.
The EA gave legal and other advice in formal and informal settings, there capacity to do this will be greatly reduced due to the budgetary cutbacks.
Yes, but in most cases where people have to take on the State (eg HSE, Revenue etc) in the higher Courts, they have to do it off their own bat. There is no State agency to hold their hand. Why otherwise in this case?Its is a huge difference for someone to go to the High Court using their own resources than to have a case pursued on their behalf by the EA.
There is already a multiplicity of agencies providing similar advice and assistance - Citizens Information is only one. There is no reason why one of these bodies can take responsibility for advising people as to their equality entitlements etc.
Yes, but in most cases where people have to take on the State (eg HSE, Revenue etc) in the higher Courts, they have to do it off their own bat. There is no State agency to hold their hand. Why otherwise in this case?
Citizens Information cannot provide the advice that was given by the EA, they could advise what the legislation said but that is it. They do not monitor case law or provide any avenue I am not aware of any other agencies providing similar advice/services to EA. The Ombudsman and Revenue Appeals Office offer avenues to those who have/or wish to pursue a case against the Revenue/HSE.
You still have not provided any further examples of the "ridiculous decisons" you mentioned.
Study Highlights Significant Gender Inequalities in Domestic Sphere
* Men spend more time on paid work than unpaid work (housework and caring). On average men spend 4 hours 40 minutes on paid work per day and just under 2 hours on unpaid work per day.
* Women spend more time on unpaid work than paid work. On average women spend just over 5 hours per day on housework and caring and just over 2 hours per day on paid work.
* Given that caring and housework are unpaid and undervalued, this has implications for gender equality.
But, unfortunately for the equality cause, Crowley left the authority vulnerable to attack by an unforgiving minister through his hubris, apparent empire-building and often cavalier attitude to taxpayers’ money. Like most quangos, the Equality Authority became engorged during the boom years, its voracious appetite for public cash appearing to grow with feeding.
On its establishment in 1997, the authority’s annual budget was €378,000. Before restraints were introduced, this figure had bloated to €5.9m. Its staff numbers have grown from single digits in 1997 to more than 50 today.
The authority became a byword for grandiose expressions of platitudinous piety, in a dizzying array of formats.
Crowley and his champions may be aghast at the thought, but most members of the public will have cheered last month when Ahern ordered the authority to end its relentless production of glossy reports and brochures, extravagant information campaigns and lavish PR fanfare. This kind of ostentatious malarkey has more to do with the promotion of the equality industry than equality itself.
The proliferation of campaigns is a particular bugbear with Ahern, and it’s easy to see why. Much of the spending on dubious consciousness-raising drives — such as the €230,000 splurged on the botched Say No To Ageism poster-series — has simply been wasteful.
Worse still, in what looks suspiciously like an attempt to maintain its media profile between legal actions, the authority has repeatedly associated itself with campaigns that are clearly outside its remit. Among the typically frivolous wheezes with which it's been involved is Work Life Balance Day. At a time when the work-life balance of many people is dictated by growing unemployment, this prissy festival of banality is more likely to raise tempers than consciousness.
Crowley should ponder the fact that, while the authority performed much undeniably useful public service during his tenure, his resignation will not be mourned by many beyond the bleeding-heart intelligentsia. For most citizens, Crowley had become a walking billboard for the unqualified promotion of a rights-based equality culture that places no emphasis on civic responsibility, especially among groups such as travellers who play an active role in creating the prejudice that exists against them.
The Ombudsman and Revenue Appeals Office offer avenues to those who have/or wish to pursue a case against the Revenue/HSE.
Well, here's another one. When do you want me to stop?
http://www.equality.ie/index.asp?locID=135&docID=726
Anyway, don't take my word for it. Here's what Liam Fay had to say in the Sunday Times.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article5337516.ece
What's to stop the Ombudsman handling equality cases?
Liam Fay's article is rubbish, there are very few facts and again, like your own points contain no spotlight on the actual results/decisons given by the EA.
The main facts to emerge from Fay's article are that the EA's budget had ballooned in recent years and it was spending large sums of money on dubious campaigns.
The EA is a semi state body under the control of the Dept. of Justice. Every year that body enters into the annual Estimates process with its parent Department. Any increase its received was with the approval of the Dept/Minister of Justice based on its strategic plan which also would have been approved by the Minister. (see link to legislation below).
If the Minister and/or his officals didn't like the direction of the EA, all, they had to do is not approve its Strategic Plan.
Not exactly a cast-iron guarantee of value for money for the Exchequer
Or, horror of horrors, cut its Budget? (which is what it did).
I've no idea, but you seem to expect public bodies to plan their policies and activities around your personal likes and dislikes, rather than (dare I suggest) the views of professionals who spend their entire working lives and in many cases their entire career in that particular sector. Just because you reckon that something is 'ridiculous' does not automatically mean you are right, and they are wrong.Why would I expect otherwise?
Equality law and practice is an extremely complex area. Suggesting that the functions of the EA are taken over by a body that provides general advice such as the Citizens Information Centres is a bit like saying we don't need accountants because that girl there on the checkout can do the adding up. It doesn't work.There is already a multiplicity of agencies providing similar advice and assistance - Citizens Information is only one. There is no reason why one of these bodies can take responsibility for advising people as to their equality entitlements etc.
Yes, but in most cases where people have to take on the State (eg HSE, Revenue etc) in the higher Courts, they have to do it off their own bat. There is no State agency to hold their hand. Why otherwise in this case?
The Ombudsman deals only with public bodies, and Equality law applies equality to public and private service providers.What's to stop the Ombudsman handling equality cases?
It is fascinating to see how quickly and easily Liam has lost the revolutionary zeal of his youth to suit his new paymasters at News International. Please let's not kid ourselves that this anything close to independent comment or (god forbid) analysis.Anyway, don't take my word for it. Here's what Liam Fay had to say in the Sunday Times.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article5337516.ece
I guess Liam is somewhat embarrassed today now that the real rationale for nobbling the EA/Crowley has become clear.The main facts to emerge from Fay's article are that the EA's budget had ballooned in recent years and it was spending large sums of money on dubious campaigns.
I've no idea, but you seem to expect public bodies to plan their policies and activities around your personal likes and dislikes,
How many times do you feel the need to repeat this red herring?Just because you reckon that something is 'ridiculous' does not automatically mean you are right, and they are wrong.
Do you think that when ordinary citizens found themselves having to take on the likes of the HSE and the Revenue in the High & Supreme Courts thar they are doing so from a position of anything but inequality? Where is the State agency to help them and to take their cases for them?The hint is in the name - Equality. Where people are taking these cases, they are taking them from a position of inequality. Provision of a basic level of support and legal advice (for a small number of carefully selected cases) attempts to address this inequality.
Indeed but a large proportion of EA cases were against public bodies.The Ombudsman deals only with public bodies, and Equality law applies equality to public and private service providers.
Just because you don't like what he says.It is fascinating to see how quickly and easily Liam has lost the revolutionary zeal of his youth to suit his new paymasters at News International. Please let's not kid ourselves that this anything close to independent comment or (god forbid) analysis.
I sincerely doubt it. I also think your conspiracy theory lacks credibility.I guess Liam is somewhat embarrassed today now that the real rationale for nobbling the EA/Crowley has become clear.
It seems ridiculous to me for the Min. Justice to approve a Strategic Plan for 3 years and then cut the budget by 43%.
On this thread, where you stated that "Just because someone on AAM supported it, didn't mean it wasn't a ridiculous issue for the EA to campaign on". You may think it ridiculous, but clearly others don't.Where did I say that? I did say that about Crowley (as subsequently has Liam Fay) but I most certainly did not generalise beyond this.
Here you go.Do you think that when ordinary citizens found themselves having to take on the likes of the HSE and the Revenue in the High & Supreme Courts thar they are doing so from a position of anything but inequality? Where is the State agency to help them and to take their cases for them?
Less than half of the new cases in 2007 were for Govt depts/state agencies;Indeed but a large proportion of EA cases were against public bodies.
Let's revisit this in a month or so. This one is going to run for a little while yet.I sincerely doubt it. I also think your conspiracy theory lacks credibility.
you said this already today. Have you forgotten already?On this thread, where you stated that "Just because someone on AAM supported it, didn't mean it wasn't a ridiculous issue for the EA to campaign on". You may think it ridiculous, but clearly others don't.
Less than half of the new cases in 2007 were for Govt depts/state agencies;
Clubs 5
Education 13
Financial & Business Services 13
Government Departments & State Agencies 33
Health 7
Other Services 4
Transport, Storage & Communication 3
Wholesale & Retail 2
Total 80
We'll see. Do you know something the rest of us don't?This one is going to run for a little while yet.
Why would they need to, if they can issue a binding ruling against a complaint through the normal process?Does the Ombudsman's office finance High Court cases against Revenue, HSE etc? If they do, its news to me.
Perhaps you didn't realise that most Irish schools are privately owned, whether by a religious body or (like the former CBS schools) by an independent trust. They aren't private in the sense of charging fees, but they are privately operated. Similarly, many of our hospitals are operated by private, independent bodies too.Were all the education & health cases against the small minority of private operators in either field? I doubt it. If you re-examine your figures, I think you will end up at well over half.
Well, I think I understand Equality issues for a start.We'll see. Do you know something the rest of us don't?
Why would they need to, if they can issue a binding ruling against a complaint through the normal process?
Well, like it or not, people do find themselves taking High Court cases against bodies like the Dept of Education, the Revenue & the HSE.
Indeed they do, and the Dept Ed in particular seem to have taken a particularly vindictive approach to pursuit of costs against the losers of such cases, even though that were clearly taken in good faith. All the more reason to have a well-resourced and well-led EA in place to keep manners on such organisations on Equality issues, I'd have thought.
Now that you mention it, yes there is.Or is there some other point that you're making about the EA here that I'm missing?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?