O’Conall Street

I don’t want to rehearse again my concerns about what Northern Ireland’s Education Minister Caitriona Ruane has done by way of a U turn on the eleven plus, but do want to say something about communicating change.

The Minister gave a terrible interview of BBC Hearts and Minds programme last night. When asked again and again how she was going to translate ‘her’ vision for the future of education here into a reality, despite the opposition of all the other parties on the Executive, she said simply kept stating that she was the minister.

Sometimes it is very useful to state the obvious when communicating change. People resistant to change need to be reminded that is is happening and that you have the power to make it happen, etc. That is of course when you have the power. Ms Ruane does not. She is part of a power sharing executive which requires cross community consensus on major issues like this one. She has the power to bring forward ideas but not the unilateral power to implement them without the executive’s agreement. Could someone please communicate this to her.

It’s not often I end up shouting at the TV but after Noel Thompson’s tenth attempt to get her to answer the question of how she could bring forward her plans without agreement she simply repeated that she was the minister for education and she was engaging stakeholders. She seems unable to accept that the law says she needs consensus to make changes and that if she doesn’t get agreement selection stays.  Arrrrrrrrghhhhhhhh…….Or in the immortal words of the shark in Finding Nemo - DENIAL!.

Now it was never going to be an easy partnership with SF and the DUP at the helm. Selection is a complex and emotional issue and I do acknowledge she has one of toughest challenges in government. But this is a democracy not a Stalinist one state system and the people have a voice though their MLAs. Here it’s about winning an argument, not simply ramming through something on a majority vote. Ms Ruane would be out on her ear in any other system. She may well live on in this one. Meantime children will suffer, parents and teachers will worry and unless things change dramatically, Sinn Fein will loose votes.

On another very very sad note. Ireland lost a fine man last night. Robert Dunlop, the young brother of the late Joey Dunlop died at the North West 200. He follows Celtic legend Tommy Burns to what we all hope is a better place. A great man like his late brother, Robert will leave a huge legacy and will be missed by this island. 

The blogs are humming to the tune of “Edwards backs Obama” this  morning. The Huffington Post, NYT, CNN, ABC and uncle Tom Dooley and all are debating whether his endorsement will bring the much needed blue collar white support base to Obama.

There is a common thread that there is not much Edwards’ endorsement does for Obama right now that it would not do on, say, June 4.  Andrew Romano from Newsweek (thanks to RealClearPolitics for the link) thinks:

The “white, working-class” voters of West Virginia can’t recast their ballots. And Clinton will still clobber Obama—think 25 points—in Kentucky on Tuesday, even if Edwards joins him on the stump. With the primaries essentially over, Edwards is basically stepping into his inevitable general election role—a passionate, respected, credible general-election liaison to blue-collar America who sways skeptics by saying “I’m one of you and here’s why I support this guy”—a few weeks early. When I mused this morning about why seven percent of West Virginians supported Edwards in yesterday’s primary, a Stumper reader from West Virginia named “mountaingal” wrote in to explain.  “I can tell the difference between pandering (Hillary downing shots), charismatic fluff (Obama’s rhetoric), and honest-to-goodness conviction. [Edwards] understands where we come from… His ’son of a mill worker’ message… resonates with those with similar upbringings.” For that reason, Edwards will undoubtedly help bring Democratic voters like “mountaingal” into the Obama fold by November. But again, he was always going to do that. Whether he starts today or in two weeks doesn’t make much of a difference.

That said, it’s worth wondering how many mountaingals and mountainguys Edwards can “deliver” for Obama—and whether those gains would be actually help Obama overcome John McCain in November. The signs from his brief 2008 bid are somewhat encouraging. In South Carolina—the only remotely “Appalachian” state where Edwards competed—he in fact won white men, whites over 30 and whites overall, despite earning only 18 percent of the vote to Clinton’s 27 and Obama’s 55. The only problem? Edwards has actually attempted a similar feat on the national stage once before—and it didn’t work out so well. In 2004, John Kerry only won over 41 percent of white voters—not enough to defeat George Bush—and lost in Edwards’ home state of North Carolina by a dozen points. Back then, Edwards wasn’t just another surrogate; he was Kerry’s running mate. So the record is inconclusive at best.

Tonight, Edwards opened his remarks with reams of praise for Clinton—and an explicit call for unity. “When this nomination battle is over—and it will be over soon—brothers and sisters, we must come together as Democrats and in the fall stand up for what matters for the future of America,” he said. “We are a stronger party because Hillary Clinton is a Democrat.” A gracious and necessary message, but even here it’s unlikely that Edwards’ timing will prove particularly consequential. Clinton is determined to battle at least until Montana and South Dakota vote on June 3, and any effort to declare a victor before then will only encourage her supporters to dig their heels in deeper. Far from changing any minds—other than those of a few fence-sitting superdelegates, perhaps—tonight’s Edwards endorsement will merely reinforce the existing contours of the contest. The Democrats will come together eventually, and Edwards will do his duty. But until then, he—like the rest of us—is just going to have to wait.

I don’t think anyone seriously thinks Clinton can now pull it off. I haven’t heard too many who think she is a credible vice presidential candidate either. Many pundits suggest her continuing is good for the party, allowing her support base to gradually climb down and come to terms with their loss, then switch to Obama. The next couple of weeks will be as intriguing as the [past five months.
 

After twelve months of uncertainty Caitriona Ruane appears on the verge of turning the clocks back six years.

Can I declare an interest. I have an eight year old son (P4) and was looking forward to him being spared what I consider to be an outdated and infective judgment of a child’s potential - the eleven plus.

During the five years of suspension the New Labour government etched a consensus on the governing principles on selection from the major stakeholders and the political parties. Until St Andrews everyone accepted that selection at eleven was going, there was also an increasing acceptance that the demographic shifts all around us required a fundamental rethink and that a collegiate model was a possibility.  That was twelve months ago. Today the minister is reported to be on the verge of reintroducing selection at eleven.  

In many ways Ms Ruane inherited a good roadmap and needed to set about strengthening support around the already accepted principles as well as putting meat on the bones of the new system. Instead she retreated to 2002 rhetoric,  appeared to avoid the stakeholders and set herself on a war-footing with the Education Committee in the Assembly.

The long and short of it is that the common ground which had been gained has been lost and the principles which had been accepted are now being rejected. It was never going to be easy but that is no excuse for any minister who was handed a solid set of principles on which to build. There is very much this Sinn Fein minister could learn from the way in which her direct rule British colleague, Angela Smyth handled the issue during her time in charge. So far it’s been a walkover for New Labour over SF.

My son and his schoolmates deserve better. They are starting a new new curriculum which will not prepare them for selective testing at the end of primary school.   In fact it has been designed to do quite the opposite as it is based on a process on continuous evaluation of the child’s progress. I guess teachers everywhere will be arriving a work confused and concerned about how they can support their students in the coming years. Many will believe they are being used as pawns in this increasingly poor case study in policy reform. I will study her full proposals in great detail when they emerge at the end of this week and would encourage every parent to do so also.

10,000 or more dead in China, maybe 100,000 in Burma. A corrupt and despotic government in Zimbabwe and little hope for anyone in Tibet makes you wonder about the world.

Back on the old turf we are tearing ourselves apart over a European treaty which is being opposed by a coalition with one thing in common, their world view goes no father then the shores of this island.

I know all politics is local and all charity starts at home but this is 2008. We are in the midst of an amazing technological and communications revolution and in may ways we are in a more fair and equitable world than ever before. Globalisation has its detractors, and many of their arguments are indeed strong. Of course the European Union has its opponents but most of their arguments a little more than narrow minded nationalism.

It’s a big world we live in and even though we may be a small place that does not abdicate us of responsibility to care and consider those beyond our shores. I can’t see how supporting a Yes vote for the Lisbon treaty threatens that.

We are in the middle of the week ten years ago when it all turned sour. On the 10th of May the Balcombe St Gang paraded themselves at the Sinn Fein Ard Feis in Dublin and on the 14th Michael Stone returned the favour at the Ulster Hall in Belfast. In just one week the referendum went from being about the future to a ’celebration’ of some of the worst killing sprees in the troubles. This had a major impact on the middle ground and the Yes campaign began to hemorrhage support, particulalry amongst middle of the road protestants.

So much is different now. The achievements of the past decade are many and the progress had been substantial yet the sense that we remain in transition is still with us.

I had a long conversation this weekend with a friend and senior public servant about when, or even if, politics and government will move from this reactive transitional state to a progressive reform agenda. We agreed that what was first required was an effective alternative government, something to give people choice and capable of developing a public policy reform programme which could win popular support. Of course the people also need to decide the time is right to consider policy as well as personality or ‘position’ at election time. That could take the guts of a decade.

On the 20th anniversary of this week a decade ago, I wonder will politics have become more real or will we still in the words of Bono be starring at the sun waiting to go blind…..?

I posted yesterday about how under whelmed I felt about the Prime Minister’s speech at yesterday’s investment conference.

His big offer was to allow the Executive to pocket the proceeds from another £1billion worth of public asset disposals, bringing the total asset fund to £2.2billion. Looking at it from a London perspective it makes perfect sense. This will force the DUP and SF into agreeing to a fire sale of a considerable proportion of the public estate, something the shiners will find very difficult to swallow and I suspect backbench DUP men will have issues with too.

I have to say as an Irish person I am less the chuffed to be told by London that we can sell what is surely already ours. The British government appropriated through compulsory purchase a large amount of land in Northern Ireland. All they are doing is handing it back at the worst possible time without making a positive exchequer contribution or policy change to kick start this economy.

As Nigel Dodds said the corportaion tax issue is not going to go away.

No bland speeches from Tony O’Reilly, Chief Executive of the Independent Group, at today’s investment conference. He raised the issue of corporation tax condemning the British Government’s failure to address the issue. No words were minced in criticising Sir David Varney, author of two reports on the Northern economy, who he described as a jockey riding to his owner’s (the PM) instructions.

Brown has delivered an underwhelming speech.

Over 100 international business leaders are tucking into the Ulster Fry this morning preparing for the big investment conference. The day got off to a good start in Weber Shandwick with two of our global clients’ CEOs leading the Good Morning Ulster interviews. Nortel and All State are examples of companies which invested in the North some time ago and are happy to stay on.

Of course as economy Minister, Nigel Dodds, said the elephant in the room remains the uncompetitive rate of corporation tax in NI versus the Republic. It would help greatly if the British government acknowledged this by granting a preferential rate to NI. In the meantime there is plenty the North can offer in terms of economic advantage.

There is an interesting report in today’s Belfast Telegraph on the relative cost of living in Belfast and Dublin. Mercer Consulting in their annual survey of major cities found that Belfast is 40% cheaper than Dublin which is rapidly becoming  very, very expensive place to live. This is something potential investors will note and could well mitigate the tax differentials between the two jurisdictions.

Watched the Apprentice last night. I hope our VIP visitors gave it a miss. All those qualifications and not an ounce of intelligence between them. Maybe I’m getting old and cranky but you would expect a bunch of super dooper graduates to know what kosher chicken was. Me thinks a little less time in front of the mirror and little more with their face in a book would be a good start.

Great to see Brian Lenihan promoted to Finance Minister. He is a class act and deserving of promotion. It will be interesting to watch this legal eagle with serious government pedigree navigate his way through a very challenge brief.

Off to do some work now.  

This is an expanded version of an article I have written for this month’s edition of Fortnight Magazine.

————————————

The SDLP is at a cross roads, there is no doubt about that. Many perceived Good Friday 1998 as the fulfilment of its historic mission, yet there is as great a need for strategic leadership on this island today as at any point in the last century.

The Agreement was a decade ago and in the years since the SDLP can rightly claim to feel more than a little shafted by the British and Irish Governments and damaged by the retirement of the entire leadership in the space of two years. The governments played a dangerous game with the SDLP. The party ‘with no guns’ to quote Tony Blair was served up to Sinn Fein as the prize if they cooperated. That never bothered New Labour – they were never going to face them in an election and whilst Fianna Fail were happy to flirt with SF north of the border they played an opposite game in the South, crucifying Gerry Adams and his fellow travellers at the last election.

This is all for the record. The fact is the SDLP is still at the cross roads and little does it matter now how it got there. What does matter is that politicking and side deals aside, the institutions that are being shared in Northern Ireland are SDLP creations - the product of true vision and persistent argument.

Yes, the SDLP is poorly organised in many parts of the North, many MLAs are due an MoT they may or may not pass, and whilst there are enough young faces competing in the succession stakes, the party gives the appearance of treading water. It’s a pity because there is plenty to oppose: from Catriona Ruane’s gambling with our children’s future to a right wing, pay more get less, budget with SF endorsement and the politicking around victims and parades. Never mind the failure to secure a lower corporation tax for our businesses.

The SDLP review group is meeting against this backdrop. Made up of senior members it has been asked to report back on future options for the party. The group isn’t working in a vacuum; it has an important document which informs its members as they consider the party’s future. ‘A United Ireland and the Agreement’, states clearly that “The SDLP also believes that in the context of unity there would be a realignment of politics, with parties of the left – and right – joining together across the island.”

For as long as I can remember, there has always been a group within the party, who publicly present themselves as FF-SDLP. Based on support for their motions at conference I reckon they make up about 20% of members. You might expect the rest of the party to be a loose coalition of FG-SDLP, Lab-SDLP, Green-SDLP or even PD-SDLP. Not so. Outside the FF group, the vast majority of members consider themselves to be SDLP, full stop. They are progressive people who believe in unity through agreement and reject sectarianism and its political mouthpieces. They are more than just nationalists. They campaign for and believe in equality and social justice. They are social democrats and new Irelanders in the true sense of the word and if recent internal party meetings are anything to go by they are willing to continue fighting for their beliefs and the party they love. Not surprising that they would overwhelmingly adopt a document clearly stating that realignment should take place along ideological lines.

These people are smart and highly political. They are keen to enter discussions with other parties in the South and in the North about the future of this small island. They see much to be done in the North and much that would need to change in the South if their ambition of an agreed Ireland is to be achieved.

So where to now? The SDLP has three options; do nothing, continue alone or lead the way in shaping 21st century Ireland. Options one and two are already off the table, the tide waits for no man and the sea is rising all around the SDLP. Nationalism is moving on from the conflict and progressive unionism in increasingly interested in exploring new relationships. This is something the party itself recognises. Hence the interest in exploring new alliances, both sides of the border, in order to build a new agreed Ireland.

Speaking to Fianna Fail, Labour, Fine Gael, the UUP and others is an important step on this journey. I know very few SDLP people who would be against the idea of discussions in principle. In fact the vast majority of SDLP people I know would be very keen to talk to other parties about how progressive politics can play the lead role on this island. Social Democrats are always interested in power. They are not parties of protest but parties of change. No surprise that the Review Group has been given such clear policy guidance then.

The SDLP is a member of the Party of European Socialists and the Socialist International alongside many of the world’s most successful parties. If the SDLP were ever to give up this membership they would be surrendering the right to call themselves progressives. They would also be handing Sinn Fein the keys to one of the most influential and powerful political groups in the world. For be under no illusion, SF would apply to join the PES and SI the day after the SDLP left. Gerry Adam’s may sully social democracy on the campaign trail but such statements are about as credible as his denials of ever being in the IRA.

All very well I hear you say. With a decreasing vote and poor organisation it is all fairly academic and now is the time for action not long term strategy. In my mind these are compatible courses of action, not mutually exclusive ones. Many who advocate immediate merger with FF come from some of the most poorly organised parts of the SDLP, many more are not even members of the SDLP. Fianna Fail is all about organisation. It could well turn out that those who want change most could well become its first casualties.

It may be that many of the MLAs, have lost the ability to organise and are searching for a quick fix. On the other hand it may be that they realise just how much they still have, the huge job of work that still needs to be done and the need to get on with it. There will be change. However, nobody surrenders an inch with making another one somewhere else. And some things, like social democracy and the ‘New Ireland’ agenda simply cannot be for sale.

There is a big opportunity for progressive politics on this island. In the commercial world brands change but they never give up their core proposition.  My own view is that the SDLP’s social democracy and membership of the PES is more attractive to other parties on this island than many in the party recognise. The big future for the party is to realise its ambition for a new Ireland without surrendering the core values that delivered peace to this island.

It’s Irish News day again. This month I am focusing on internal communications and its influence over staff morale.

_______________________________________

Employee retention – particularly related to high-performing individuals – is an increasing challenge for organisations on these islands. Turnover takes a toll on the morale of existing staff, on business continuity and productivity. Ultimately, the loss of talent hits a company’s bottom line. There is a strategy for countering attrition: the practice of effective employee communication. And we know it works, by the company it keeps among those best-in-class organisations in Europe, Asia and North America.

The traditional Achilles’ heel for employee communications practitioners has been their struggle to link effective internal communication with performance and retention. Insidedge, surveyed 600 employees North and South to try and understand better the impact of communications on their attitudes.

The results were startling. In Northern Ireland 38 percent and in Republic of Ireland 32 percent of those surveyed expected to leave their current employment in the foreseeable future, while an overwhelming 74 percent of all Northern Ireland and 80 percent of RoI interviewees indicated that an improvement in communications would positively influence them to remain with their employers.

The findings also reinforce a commonly held belief: Employees trust face-to-face communication the most. The most trusted sources of information for Irish employees are their immediate day-to-day supervisors, immediate colleagues and senior employees who can mentor and advise them, regardless of title. Each of these has greater influence on behaviour and commitment than more common sources such as newsletters, email and intranets.

Unfortunately, all too many companies rely on non-personal forms of communication, instead of equipping and expecting their managers to communicate. Sensing a void of information, employees turn to each other to interpret company decisions and actions, and misinformation based on opinion becomes ‘fact’ to employees thanks to the legendary bush telegraph.

The survey indicated that the top-three most useful and effective ways to communicate with employees in Ireland are small workgroup or departmental meetings, led by division heads and/or immediate supervisors; open-door policies, suggestion boxes and other ways employees can take initiative to communicate with management; and informal get-togethers where employees can talk and exchange ideas.

Improving how you communicate is one part of the battle. Equally important is what and when you communicate. Ensuring that the information you share is accurate, timely, truthful and complete – and that employees have the opportunity to participate in an open dialogue – is the other half.

So, as you think about your plans for employee communications, keep a few things in mind. Listen to your employees. Regular research – whether through staff surveys, periodic and targeted focus groups or even event-specific feedback forms – provides an insight into what people care most about. By knowing what your employees believe you are better equipped to address their concerns, and in turn, build their trust. Just as external research guides the decisions you make in marketing to customers and consumers, employee research should guide your plans for internal communication.

Build a manager-as-supervisor culture. Study after study shows that managers and supervisors are vital communicators. Yet, so many companies fail to take advantage. It’s not enough to give your supervisors information.

Put your people first. How often has your company launched a new product, broadcast or published a new marketing campaign, or announced a new strategic direction without telling your employees who are the people who have to sell your products, represent your brand and execute your strategies? Have a plan to share important information with your employees first, so that they are ready to respond when customers call. Don’t let your people hear about new initiatives on the radio, TV or in the newspaper before they hear it from you!

Give it to them straight. Most companies are more than eager to share good news with their people, and to celebrate in success. People also want to hear the bad news, no matter how difficult it might be to take. Sooner or later, the word is going to get out. Wouldn’t you prefer that your employees hear it straight from you, than through the grapevine? Have a plan to share all of your news with your people. They will trust you more if you are willing to share not only the good, but also the bad and the ugly with them.