Before calling on the Secretary General to introduce his staff I wish to recognise the presence in the public gallery of our visitors from the Society of Solicitors, Hamilton and District, who are on a visit to Dublin. I hope their visit will be informative and of benefit in their work later. I now call on the Secretary General of the Department, Mr. Tim Dalton, to introduce his officials.
1999 Annual Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General and Appropriation Accounts.
Vote 19 - Office of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
Vote 20 - Garda Síochána.
Vote 21 - Prisons.
Vote 23 - Land Registry and Registry of Deeds.
Mr. Tim Dalton (Secretary General, Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform) called and examined.
Acting Chairman
Mr. Dalton
I am accompanied by Mr. Jimmy Martin on the Garda side; Mr. Ken Bruton, finance officer; Mr. John Cronin who deals with the PULSE project; Assistant Commissioner Joe Egan of the Garda Síochána; Ms Sylda Langford from the equality division of the Department and Mr. Seán Alyward, director general of the Prison Service.
Acting Chairman
Also present from the Department of Finance are Mr. Jim O'Farrell and Ms Emer Hogan. They are both welcome.
Witnesses should be made aware that they do not enjoy absolute privilege. Their attention is drawn to the fact that, as and from 2 August 1998, section 10 of the Committees of the Houses of the Oireachtas (Compellability, Privileges and Immunities of Witnesses) Act, 1997, grants certain rights to the persons who are identified in the course of the committee's proceedings. Notwithstanding this provision in the legislation I remind members of the long standing parliamentary practice to the effect that members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside of the House or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.
Paragraph 23 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:
Consultants were engaged in 1992 to draw up an Information Technology (IT) Strategy Plan for the Garda Síochána to replace its technologically out-dated stand alone computer systems. The consultants recommended strategies
- to maximise the resources devoted to operational duties and their more effective use in preventing and detecting crime
- to devise a plan to integrate operational systems and to upgrade the existing computer platform
- to identify how IT can facilitate the achievement of the goals in the Garda Síochána's corporate plan
- to identify interdependencies, relationships and inconsistencies between the various plans and proposals, to assess their likely impact on each other and to consider how they may be resolved
- to develop a framework to simplify and automate operations and integrate information to achieve the overall objectives of efficiency, effectiveness and cost management.
The Government approved implementation of the IT plan, as part of its anti-crime drive in 1993, at an estimated cost1 of £36.5 million, with an expected annual increase in Exchequer receipts of £3 million.
Following a competitive tendering process, the consultants were subsequently contracted, at a cost of £1 million, to bring the plan to conceptual design stage. The conceptual design was to
- determine the extent to which work practices and flows had to be re-engineered
- determine the broad scope of the applications to be designed
- determine the high level functional, technical and change management requirements
- update the Strategy Implementation Plan and business case based on the most up to date information.
The completed conceptual design formed the blueprint for the PULSE2 project and provided for 27 distinct but integrated system modules. The overarching objective of the project was to improve the contribution of the Garda Síochána in policing and the fight against crime as part of an overall law and order strategy.
The main benefits to the Garda Síochána envisaged from the project are
- freeing up Garda resources for operational duties
- fast access to vital data on persons, addresses, vehicles, etc. to ensure better response to incidents
- major improvements in criminal intelligence analysis, crime detection and service to the public
- increased detection of property crimes and return of stolen property
1 All Costs shown are inclusive of VAT.
2 PULSE: Police Using Leading Systems Effectively
- improved analysis of road traffic accidents, identification of accident black spots and implementation of road safety initiatives
- targeting of potential high-crime regions
- supporting greater integration across the criminal justice system
- improved monitoring of persons on bail and the conditions of such bail, summons service rate, warrant service and monitoring of young offenders
- on-the-spot transmission of alerts and information on the status of incidents.
The audit set out to review planning, implementation and management of the project and to compare progress against plans.
The audit included a review of departmental papers including minutes of the meetings of the various committees set up to manage the project, the strategic information technology plans produced by the consultants, the consultancy and development contracts and the project management methodology.
Meetings were held with the staff of the Department and with Garda Síochána management including members of the project management committees.
The PRINCE3 project methodology used in conjunction with the Structured Systems Analysis and Design Methodology and recommended by the Department of Finance, is applied to the project. The methodology defines roles rather than individuals and allows concentration on the products of the project and sub-divides the project into stages. Under the methodology the following management and implementation structures are in place.
- The Information Technology and Telecommunications Executive Committee charged with strategic direction of the project, reports to the Garda Commissioner and the Minister.
- The PULSE Project Board provides overall direction and management of the development contract. It approves all major plans, authorises any deviations from agreed stage plans and approves the completion of each stage and the start of the next stage. It reports quarterly to the Executive Committee; the central systems project board, responsible for the management and implementation of the Garda only aspects of the project, reports to the executive committee quarterly.
The Boards are drawn from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, the Department of Finance (CMOD), senior members of the Garda Síochána, outside academic and business experts and prime contractor staff.
3 PRINCE: Projects IN Controlled Environments - a structured project management methodology
The project management and systems development methodologies have been used in an appropriate manner.
Before the project commenced, the estimate for implementing the 27 elements identified in the conceptual design and a separate automatic fingerprint identification system costing £2.18 million had increased from £36.5m to £55.6m. The reasons for the increase were
- identification of new systems to be developed
- increased scope across the identified systems
- the inclusion of office automation in the project.
The main cost element of the project was software development and a request for tenders covering this element and change management aspects of the project was issued in April 1995. The request was prepared on the basis of implementing the 27 modules originally envisaged but included a proviso that the areas to be developed could be negotiated with the preferred supplier. After evaluation of tenders, the consultants who prepared the initial strategy plan and conceptual design, being the lower of two qualified tenderers, were selected in January 1996 as the prime contractor at a price of £23.6 million (prime contractor staff costs of £18.52 million) and software costs of £5.08 million). As this would have brought the overall cost significantly above the amount approved by Government, the Executive Committee opted to negotiate a reduction in scope of the overall project to remain within that approval.
The reduced scope gave priority to operational systems as opposed to administrative systems.
Following negotiations with the contractor it was agreed in March 1996
- to reduce the number of modules to be implemented from 27 to 17. This was achieved by separating the project into two phases, with 17 modules being implemented in Phase 1 for which funding was available and the remainder being deferred to a subsequent Phase 2 for which funding had not been sought
- to reduce the quantity of computer and ancillary equipment to be acquired
- to reduce the number of locations from 242 to 161 (subsequently increased to 181). The original plan was to install the system in all Dublin Metropolitan Region (DMR) stations and all Divisional, District and Area headquarters outside the DMR. These account for 90% of incidents reported to the Garda Síochána and ensure that 80% of Gardaí would have access to the systems. The reduction meant that the system would be implemented in all DMR stations and all Divisional and District stations outside the DMR. Procedures are to be put in place to ensure that Gardaí in non-networked locations have access to PULSE data
- to remove office automation from the project.
A contract in the sum of £12.9 million for prime contractor's staff costs plus software costs4 of £5.67 million was entered into on 20 September 1996.
The contract provided, inter alia, that
- the 17 modules be delivered in three phased releases (see table 16)
- the contract would automatically terminate on the acceptance, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Garda Síochána, of completion and pilot implementation of Release 3
4 Development, architecture and executive software licences and maintenance costs.
- the parties may review the continued relevance of deliverables and where appropriate agree revisions in writing
- copyright and any and all intellectual property rights in the systems developed be vested in and owned by the Garda Síochána
- the prime contractor would have exclusive marketing rights to the systems developed and pay a royalty of 3% (advised by the Department of Finance) of the net sale price to the Garda Síochána
- the prime contractor would supply additional personnel to fill particular project roles should the Garda Síochána fail to meet its contractual staffing obligations; and the total sum payable to the contractor is a fixed maximum sum.
The contract did not provide for penalties for the late delivery of releases but did make provision for penalties for the non-delivery of the elements within each release.
Table 16 - Module delivery schedule
|
Release 1 |
Release 2 |
Release 3 |
|
|
Planned Delivery Dates |
September 1996 to September 1998 |
May 1997 to September 1999 |
June 1998 to September 2000 |
|
Incident Response (Interim) |
Incident Response (Full) |
Driving Licence and Insurance Production |
|
|
General Inquiry |
Court Outcomes |
Juvenile Liaison |
|
|
Property |
Computer Aided Dispatch |
Bail |
|
|
Firearms |
Alarms |
Prisoner Log |
|
|
Intelligence (Interim) |
Summons |
Intelligence (Full) |
|
|
Incident Analysis (Interim) |
Warrants |
Incident Analysis (Full) |
|
|
Charges |
Traffic Accident Analysis |
Under the contract 60% approximately of the man hours required to develop the project were to be provided by the Garda Síochána in order to ensure that in the long-term they would be self sufficient in terms of operations, maintenance and enhancement of the systems.
As the project progressed additional scope and functionality were identified and, in accordance with the appropriate use of the project management methodology, were approved by the executive committee. From the very beginning it proved difficult to obtain Department of Finance sanction for the recruitment of the requisite number of IT staff to meet the Garda commitment under the contract. Moreover, recruitment and retention of suitable staff proved difficult due to considerable buoyancy in the IT market.
The changes in scope resulted in an estimated shortfall of 2,100 Garda days being provided to the development effort to the end of December 1996. The contractor exercised his right to meet 300 days of this shortfall at a cost of £300,000.
A major review of the remainder of the project carried out in December 1996-March 1997 indicated that 9,980 additional days would be required (including the 2,100 shortfall referred to).
The Department of Finance proposed that the additional staff be sourced from within the Garda Síochána or by competitive tender. The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform felt that these were not feasible options as internal resources were not available and the engagement of a third party contractor would complicate an already complex project and could expose the project to further delay and year 2000 risks. Furthermore, more competitive rates had been negotiated with the prime contractor for the extra days required. Following consideration of all the factors, the Government, in February 1998, approved the proposal of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to engage the additional staff resources from the prime contractor at an extra cost of £6 million. This brought the contract for the supply of staff to £18.9 million.
The review of the project also pointed to the need to reschedule delivery of Phase 1. As the project progressed, the project management process identified changing requirements (as well as evolving technological changes) which necessitated deferring some of the originally planned modules, bringing forward another which had previously been deferred and adding further functionality.
At the date of this report, of the original seventeen modules planned for phase 1, seven have been fully implemented and four others partly implemented in a first release; the second release scheduled for delivery in March 2001 envisages full implementation of the four partly implemented modules together with three others; the remaining three are deferred. Therefore, by the third quarter of 2001, on full implementation of phase 1, 14 of the contracted seventeen modules, together with the module originally deferred to a subsequent phase 2 and four previously unplanned modules will be in operation.
The prime contractor is responsible for each release up to the satisfactory completion of the pilot stage. Full implementation of each release is scheduled to take place six months after delivery by the prime contractor and is the responsibility of the Garda Síochána.
The cost of the project up to 30 June 2000 is £43.64 million made up as follows
|
Cost element |
£m |
|
Prime contract costs (inclusive of the initial IT strategy plan and conceptual design consultancy contracts) |
20.42 |
|
Estimated costs of directly employed civilian staff engaged in the project |
2.00 |
|
Hardware costs |
10.97 |
|
Software costs |
2.78 |
|
Telecommunication |
3.15 |
|
Training and research |
0.20 |
|
Maintenance costs |
1.86 |
|
Automatic fingerprinting service |
2.26 |
|
Total |
43.64 |
Because of delays in bringing the project into operation expenditure of a further £480,000 was incurred when the old system, which was not year 2000 compliant, had to be replaced.
The estimated final cost of phase 1, which is expected to be fully implemented by the third quarter of 2001, is now put at approximately £46 million. This does not include the cost of gardaí involved in the project as records of this involvement were not maintained.
Industrial relations difficulties pertaining to the involvement of gardaí in the day-to-day operation of the project were not resolved until October 1999.
- Phase 1 is to be delivered by the prime contractor by March 2001 rather than September 2000 at a cost of £46 million. Elements deferred to Phase 2 are currently being reviewed in the context of establishing priorities and approaches in relation to the next stage of IT development in the Garda Síochána. Fifteen of the 27 modules, identified in the conceptual design which followed Government approval of the IT strategy plan in 1993, will be in operation on completion of Phase 1 of the project together with 4 unplanned modules identified during its development.
- The scaling down of the project by reducing the number of functions being provided, the volume of hardware being installed and the number of locations in which the system would be installed from 242 to 181, to remain within the Government approved budget, raises questions as to whether what is being delivered is what Government had effectively approved and whether the original objectives were realistic. In this regard the accounting officer stated it may have been that the consultants engaged to assist the gardaí in formulating their IT plan were over-optimistic in their costing. Nevertheless, he pointed out that the PULSE project was put out to competitive tender and there was no choice but to accept the lowest tender received which involved cutting back on scope to remain within the Government approved budget.
- The initial submission to Government did not take account of the full costs to be incurred by the Garda Síochána in the development of the project although it was clearly intended that this would occur. The expected availability of Garda resources for the project was overestimated. The failure to ensure that this internal resource materialised has resulted in the approval of additional contractor costs of approximately £6m with the final extra cost not being determined until completion of the project. The Accounting Officer stated that it was recognised before the contract was placed that the number of civilian IT posts sanctioned for the project would be inadequate. This was partly compensated for by using Garda resources. However, in the absence of sanction for the creation of further IT posts in the Garda area there was no other choice but to contract the additional resources needed.
- Records of Garda staff costs in developing, training and piloting the project through its various phases should have been maintained so as to enable complete costs of the project to be computed and recognised.
- While acknowledging the complex nature of the overall project and that projects of this sort cannot be fully designed at the planning stage, nevertheless, given the extent of the same consultants' involvement from the outset it is a matter of concern that the main contract required such significant change in scope over its lifetime. The consequence of such change would have been much greater but for the use of an advanced project management and implementation methodology by the Department. The Accounting Officer emphasised that the PULSE project involved leading edge technology, in national terms was very big in scale and had no direct counterpart elsewhere in police services.
- The amendment to the contract changed the balance of man days to be spent on the project. The contractor is now to supply 53% approximately of the man days for the project as against the 40% originally envisaged. The consequences of this in the long-term is a possible detrimental impact on the requirement for self sufficiency, fewer Garda resources to undertake Phase 2, a reduction in the Garda capability to undertake the execution of pilot schemes and the long-term loss of expertise on the project within the Garda Síochána. The accounting officer accepted that this was an inevitable consequence of the inadequate number of Garda IT staff for which it proved possible to obtain sanction.
Mr. Purcell
Thank you, Chairman. Paragraph 23 sets out the results of a review by my staff of the development of the so-called PULSE computer system in the Garda Síochána. Preparatory work on replacing the old stand alone computer systems started in 1992 with the drawing up of an IT strategy plan. A year later that plan was approved by the Government at an estimated cost of £36 million. Between then and 1995 when the project was put out to tender much work had to be done in developing the design and high level functional specification of the system. By this time it had become clear that the overall project costs would be far higher than the original estimate mainly because of the identification of new modules to be developed and increased functionality in the ones already envisaged. When the tenders were received it was confirmed that the project would have to be scaled back if the Government approved limit was to be met. This was done and the main contract for developing the revised system was entered into in September 1996.
Essentially the contract provided for the supply of specialist staff to write the system together with the necessary software. The contract also provided that an agreed number of inhouse computer staff be made available for the project. The cost of the project was £18.5 million. A few months into the contract the number of inhouse staff was proving to be insufficient to meet the demands of a project that was increasing in scope as it went along. A major review was carried out in the period December 1996 to March 1997 which identified that nearly 10,000 extra staff days would be required from a source external to the Garda Síochána for the successful completion of the contract. Some 6,000 of these were to have been provided by the gardaí while the other 4,000 were needed for newly identified work. In February 1998 the Government agreed that the entire shortfall should be met by the system developers at an extra cost of £6 million. Present indications are that the scaled back project will be delivered by the consultants by the end of March 2001 - six months later than scheduled. The overall cost of the scaled back project, including hardware and telecommunications costs, is expected to be of the order of £46 million but this figure excludes inhouse Garda costs as records of these were not maintained. I do not know the status of the other elements of the system originally envisaged which were deferred because of the need to stay within approved expenditure limits.
That is a quick summary of what happened. My main concerns centre around the planning and scoping of the project. While I appreciate the difficulties involved in developing large complex IT systems I would have thought that a more realistic sizing of the project would have been achievable. In particular the availability of inhouse resources to the project was seriously over-estimated and had to be reviewed a few months into the project when it was virtually impossible to correct. The reduced internal input may have adverse implications for self-sufficiency in further development of IT in the Garda Síochána. With some background in this area I know that system development on this scale has to be dynamic to take account of technological advances and that there has to be a certain amount of firming up on requirements as you go along. The fact that the same consultants acted as the IT strategists and system developers from the beginning to the end of the project should have reduced the chopping and changing to a minimum in my opinion.
The committee might also wish to note that additional expenditure - £0.5 million or so - was incurred on replacing the old system which was not year 2000 compliant because the new modules were not ready on time. That is all I want to say at the moment.
Acting Chairman
Thank you. Does Mr. Dalton wish to make an opening statement?
Mr. Dalton
This was one of the largest and most complex computerisation projects ever undertaken by the State. Because of its size we implemented from the beginning all the control mechanisms recommended by the Department of Finance. In other words, we applied the PRINCE methodology. This meant we had an executive committee consisting of representatives of the Department, the Garda Síochána, the Department of Finance as well as three executives from the private sector who had considerable experience in IT. That committee was responsible for the overall strategic development of the plan. We had a second tier of control also in line with the PRINCE methodology which were two project boards responsible for the management and implementation of the PULSE project on a more detailed basis. These boards were chaired by a Deputy Commissioner of the Garda Síochána and included representatives of the Department of Finance and various sections of the Garda - human resources management, IT and so on. From the point of view of control, we applied all the control mechanisms recommended by the Department of Finance, which the Comptroller and Auditor General does not dispute. I understand the issue of prime concern to the Committee is the fact that we originally obtained an estimate of £36.5 million for 27 projects, significantly below the estimate of £55 million when the details were fleshed out. Another matter that will be of concern is the fact that we will have 14, rather than 27, systems in operation next year at a cost now estimated at £46 million.
The first thing that should be said about the original estimate is that it was a general estimate for what was a very general plan. I understand that is the way complex IT projects normally proceed. In other words, there is, first, a high level blueprint for which those employed to do the job make an estimate based on their best assumptions at the time. Incidentally, Andersen was selected originally on the basis of a competitive tender. All the procedures followed - the Comptroller and Auditor General made a point about the same consultants being involved - were in accordance with competitive tendering procedures, a matter to which I will come back. It was not a question of favouring any particular group of consultants; it, simply, received the contracts on the basis that it was the most competitive tenderer.
The contributory reasons for the increase from £36.5 million to £55 million included the identification of new systems to be developed as we went along - the identification of increased scope in these systems and the inclusion of office automation. Also, when we looked at the market for off-the-shelf solutions, it emerged that there was none of any value. The system, therefore, had to be built from the ground up. At that stage we were looking at a much bigger project than appeared to be the case at the beginning. However, rather than go back to the Government looking for £55 million when it had approved £36.5 million, we asked the committees to examine the system and tailor it in order that it would come within the type of figures envisaged by the Government. What happened then was that, by and large, all the administrative systems were pushed back and the operational systems received priority.
As the Comptroller and Auditor General identified, one major difficulty was the fact that from the beginning the Garda side was meant to provide about 60% of the staff input and Andersen 40%. We were unable to secure the IT staff we needed partly due to the fact that we were unable to obtain sanction from the Department of Finance which appeared to favour - I understand the reasons for this - the engagement of private consultancy staff rather than public servants. This slowed us down a little but it is fair to recognise that securing the type of staff and the numbers we wanted for a project of this kind would have been difficult because of general buoyancy in the economy. As you are aware, Chairman, when one engages a company such as this to fill in where the public service cannot provide the necessary resources, it tends to be considerably more expensive because the staff are paid considerably in excess of what public servants are paid for doing the same job.
The Comptroller and Auditor General made the point that Garda costs were not factored in as part of the overall cost of the project. He is right but I emphasise that this was not the result of an oversight on anybody's part. A costing model for the project was developed during the strategy study phase which provided for hardware capital and maintenance costs for a four year period, software capital and maintenance costs for the same period, telecommunications and line rental, and consultancy costs, and which was used to seek the funding originally approved for the project. It was used as a baseline against which actual expenditure was monitored. My advice is that if we had changed it half way through, it would have rendered it ineffective as an expenditure monitoring tool. The costs of Garda personnel assigned to the project, either on a temporary or permanent basis, were not factored in. I understand more recent thinking on costing is to the effect that the cost of personnel in the client organisation who might be temporarily diverted from time to time should be included but this was not the thinking or the model approved at the time. It was not an oversight. It was consciously accepted as the model with which we should proceed. The situation has changed since. Because of current thinking on the subject, I can confirm that the cost of Garda personnel will be included in future stages of the project.
It might be useful to comment on the success of the project which has been the subject of unfair criticism in the media. There were some teething and IR difficulties at the beginning, but the overall position is that the project is a considerable success and gaining credibility among gardaí. A major training programme has been in operation throughout the project, which means that 11,000 gardaí and civilian personnel can now access data directly. There are about 1,400 PCs at 181 locations throughout the country. There is, therefore, significant access. In the case of stations that do not have immediate access, there is access via the telephone and so on. It would not have made sense to locate outlets at every Garda station because technology is changing all the time and it may be the case that within a few years access to core data will be obtainable through telephones, mobile phones and so on. It would not have made sense, therefore, to focus on one method of entering and receiving data from the system.
Let me give a few examples to show that there has been a real benefit. Between 60% and 80% of vehicle checks are now achieved in less than three seconds and between 80% and 90% of person checks in less than 15 seconds. One of the systems to which we gave priority, the automatic fingerprint identification system, has proved hugely valuable. It used to take about 30 man days to search through the fingerprint database. It can now be achieved in minutes. This means that fingerprint databases are accessed much more regularly. In the past a total search was the exception because of the huge amount of work involved. The fact that databases are now accessed much more regularly is obviously a benefit in crime detection.
There are a number of areas where the system has proved of particular benefit. I do not want to go into detail because I do not want to describe cases pending as "successes" in case they turn out otherwise or somebody says that I am prejudicing them. In missing person cases, however, the system has had significant successes in that those classed as missing for years are now being found.
Another advantage is the detection of crimes while hot. The computer can in seconds list the old associates of a suspect. It might have taken weeks of searching through files to do this in the past. Finding old associates sometimes means crime proceeds are found very quickly. It also means that criminals do not have the same amount of time to cover up as they used to. To quote another example, if the occupants of a car are acting suspiciously in County Donegal today and a garda sees them acting suspiciously in County Cork tomorrow, he can find out this information quickly. This obviously is of huge benefit in crime detection.
The Comptroller and Auditor General raised the question of the remaining systems, which have not been abandoned and of all of which we are now conducting a further thorough analysis, looking at modern solutions and so on. The idea is that, in turn, all of them will come on stream in a separate project for which we will have to seek separate Government financing.
The system is attracting significant interest internationally. A large number of police representatives and administrators from other jurisdictions have come here - for once, New Zealanders are coming to us - to examine the system and have been highly impressed by what has been achieved.
Acting Chairman
On the question of balance, we might ask the representatives of the Department of Finance to come in but there was mention of the different view and a few points were contradicted in the reporting. Does Mr. O'Farrell wish to comment on the general issue?
Mr. O’Farrell
As the Accounting Officer said, all the recommended control mechanisms were applied, with which the Department was associated. We can safely say that we endorse the Accounting Officer's assessment and are glad to note and confirm that, from our experience, this major project is now operating with considerable success and credibility both as regards the force and the public.
Acting Chairman
I call Deputy Bell and then I will call Deputy Batt O'Keeffe.
Will Mr. Dalton comment on the public perception regarding the introduction of the new system? Apart from the substantial overrun in terms of its financial aspects, it was generally felt publicly that there was a lack of proper consultation on the industrial relations end and many of the delays and overruns occurred due to a lack of proper consultation with the Garda Síochána and its representative bodies. That led to considerable confusion and delays in the operation of the system. It is important we hear Mr. Dalton's comment on that. What level of training was initiated in advance of the introduction of the system? Why did the cost of the introduction of the system increase from the initial estimated figure to the final figure? I am glad to hear the system has been a success.
Given the substantial amounts of moneys seized from drug barons and criminals, whose property is in the process of being sold, what percentage of those moneys will be ploughed back into the newer systems which will help to make the prosecuting of these criminals more successful?
Mr. Dalton
I have difficulty sometimes in distinguishing between public perception and what is portrayed in media articles. I am not aware of widespread public perception about the success or otherwise of PULSE. Not one person whom I know outside of here has asked me a question about PULSE. Media articles, some of which were negative, were written about it. Apart from that, public perception, which can be influenced by the media, is sometimes wide of the mark. Public perception would also have been influenced initially by its introduction coinciding with a Garda dispute. It acquired an unfavourable reputation that it did not deserve.
Whatever about the public perception of the system initially among the gardaí, it has since gained considerably in credibility operationally. When new systems are introduced people doubt they have the capacity claimed and they find it a nuisance besides to change from what they are used to doing. The public perception of most new systems tends not to be ideal, but the public perception of this system has turned around.
I have not received correspondence from the public criticising PULSE, but I have read media articles, some of which were unfavourable. Its introduction coincided with Garda industrial relations. The issue at that time was not a lack of consultation with the gardaí on its introduction, but that delaying its introduction could be used as a powerful tool to advance a pay claim. There was a lack of co-operation regarding training for a certain period. If that had not involved PULSE, it would have involved something else, to gain leverage. I am not blaming the Garda Representative Association for that, as most trade unions or associations pick something that will be effective to achieve results. In this case a £40 million project was held up due to industrial action. The new system seemed to be an appropriate target at the time, but the problem was not one of lack of consultation. All gardaí have now been trained in the system. They have received various forms of training on the system, including five days focused training on its use. Most personnel are now able to use it.
The proceeds collected by CAB will not go directly into the system. They, like many other funds, will go to the Exchequer from which payouts will be made for whatever is required for this and other systems. The sums recovered by CAB are large, about £7 million in frozen assets, approximately £32 million from tax charges and £1 million from social welfare, which adds up to £40 million, but not all that has been realised. Frozen assets, such as houses and yachts, taken from criminals cannot be sold until disposal orders are made. The amount recovered in tax as distinct from raised by way of charges is more than £3 million and that figure will increase. The return to the Exchequer to date is approximately £4 million, even though the sum that is recoverable in the longer term, as I have said, will be approximately £40 million.
Given the time constraints that apply, I will be selective in my questions. Will Mr. Dalton comment on the adverse publicity the Garda Complaints Board is receiving in that it would appear, certainly to us in the Oireachtas, the system is bogged down and does not represent good value for money from taxpayers' point of view? The public would be of the opinion that the system, as operated, is not working in the interests of the public or of the Garda Síochána. Will he comment on how the moneys allocated under subhead E could be better used?
Will he or his colleagues comment on the asylum seekers task force? I appreciate that situation is complicated politically and otherwise. Will Mr. Dalton indicate if he is satisfied with the additional funding and resources allocated under this heading? Is it likely to make more progress than it did in the past year?
From my experience - I am sure my colleagues share my view - the complaints I get about delays in dealing with queries in the Land Registry and the Registry of Deeds is frustrating. I appreciate the process in which they are engaged is slow and there is not a magic formula in that they encounter many difficult problems they have to resolve, but there are substantial delays in those offices regarding the processing of deeds for registration. I am aware some improvements have been made. I chaired a committee that discussed this matter some years ago. From the point of view of the practitioner and the taxpayer, that system does not represent good value for money. I would like Mr. Dalton to comment on that.
Mr. Dalton
I will deal with the Deputy's questions in the order in which he put them. A fundamental review of the legislation applying to the Garda Complaints Board is currently under way. The board has made recommendations over the years and recommendations have also been made by the International Torture Committee and others. At present the Minister is preparing a discussion paper on various issues that arise. Some of the issues are whether there should be Garda representation on the complaints boards and other issues of that kind. They are all policy issues which will be brought into the public domain in the near future with positive recommendations for change. I cannot say what change at present, but there is a recognition that this area needs change.
The system is also bogged down for staffing reasons and there is a large case backlog. We have done something about that. There are 18.5 people in the Garda Complaints Board and we hope soon to increase that by 6.5 people, which will make a fairly big impact on the backlog.
As regards the asylum task force and asylum generally, considerable resources have been agreed for this whole area. Until the middle of this year there were approximately 240 people in that area. That was a huge increase on the number a couple of years ago. There are now approximately 341 staff in the system but the aim is to increase that to 610. We have received sanction from the Department of Finance for this. The idea is to try to speed up the processing time for asylum. At present, cases can take anything from six months to two years, depending on whether there are appeals and so on. If there is no appeal, it can take up to 15 months. The aim now is to bring all cases down to six months from start to finish. However, we recognise there is some way to go in this area. It is only when all the staff come in and are trained that we will be able to get the processing times to the level we think is necessary.
Although the numbers looked as if they were dropping in the middle of last summer, they have moved upwards again. There were 7,724 applications last year. We could be in the 10,000 to 11,000 bracket by the end of the year. There is no way of knowing whether the staff of 610, even if they are in place, will be adequate by the middle of next year. This situation is changing all over Europe and it has come our way now. While there are improvements in processing times and so on, I cannot guarantee we will not have problems in 12 months' time - it will all depend on the numbers which come our way at that time.
There has been a big problem in the Land Registry in recent years which is related to the pace of commercial activity with the buoyant economy. The Land Registry does not have sufficient resources to keep up with the demands on it. We are addressing that. There are approximately 520 staff in the Land Registry and sanction has been obtained for 77 more to cope with the demands. They will take time to come on stream and be trained. We are hoping to reduce the backlog as there should not be a backlog given the importance of the Land Registry to the functioning of the economy.
Another factor which is highly relevant to the Land Registry is that the Government has decided to convert it into a commercial semi-State body. The legislation for that is drafted and it is a matter of finding time in the queue to have it taken. That will probably have an impact as well in that it will no longer be under the same regime as a Civil Service type organisation. There is already an interim board but the idea is to move to a full semi-State commercial organisation.
I thank Mr. Dalton for his reply with which I am happy.
This was commissioned in 1993 and only 14 of the 27 will be implemented in 2001. One would be correct to say this gestation and pregnancy was extremely difficult, long and drawn out. We are not sure what value we got for the money spent.
The biggest query relates to the competitive tendering process. Mr. Dalton said someone submitted a tender for £36.5 million in 1993. The outturn will be £55 million by the end of 2001, plus the ancillary costs which are not factored in. What does competitive tendering mean in this area? Andersens obtained the contract. We decided to give the Garda 60% and the consultancy 40%. Bureaucracy was set up in that we had two boards to monitor the way things were going. However, in terms of preparation for this project, surely it was known that there was not a sufficient number of personnel in the Garda who were adept to carry out the project? The preparations which took place should have clearly signalled that from the beginning.
How can safeguards be included in cases where a group wins a contract worth £36.5 million and has to pay out £55 million? If a group submits a competitive tender in 1993 for a sizeable project in an area where there is not much expertise, is it not sensible for it to make the tender as low as possible knowing that difficulties will arise, that it has entered the fray and it cannot back out or it will cost more money and that it will be paid because it is tied into a contract?
Mr. Dalton said that 11,000 gardaí can access this system. How many gardaí have been trained to fully utilise the system in operation at present? How many vacancies exist within the Department in the computer area? How many unfilled posts exist in Mr. Dalton's sector?
Mr. Dalton
I thank the Deputy for his questions. There are major issues to be considered by anyone dealing with major computer projects. It took eight years and it was large and complex. The Deputy mentioned its conception and delivery. Most of us do not admit we were there for the conception but I was there for the delivery. We should not compare the figure of £36.5 million with the £55 million. We didnot operate on a figure of £55 million. Thefigure of £36.5 million was the only operative figure.
We sought competitive tenders for the systems. There were five tenderers who are all major players with special expertise. It came down in the end to two tenderers, IBM and Andersens. It was a question of getting the people who were experts, which was the executive committee, to look at the tender and they went for the cheapest tender. I accept the Deputy's point that a company could deliberately underestimate the costs at the beginning, but there are all sorts of provisions in the contract, apart from the staffing one, which would make it very difficult to do something like that. These contracts are cleared by expert lawyers on both sides. Protections are built into the contracts that are designed to prevent people from submitting estimates they clearly do not wish to stand over. They can be compelled to stand over their estimates.
We did not know how reasonable the original estimate was because we did not have the expertise and we had no indication at the beginning that the Garda would not be able to meet its IT personnel requirements. Nobody knew that. We envisaged we would be recruiting IT personnel rather than assigning gardaí to the job. As I said, however, we ran into some difficulty with the Department of Finance which did not convey the sanctions for these people as quickly as we would have wished. In saying that, I am also acknowledging that even if it had, there would have been problems in recruiting them.
The figure of £55 million is not operative for the purposes of what we are doing now. It is a figure that would have applied had we gone for the total system but we have not gone for that at this stage. The Deputy mentioned training and 11,000 gardaí have been trained in retrieving data from the system. Not as many have been trained in inputting data to the system as yet, but that process is under way.
How many have been trained in inputting?
Mr. Dalton
Some 2,500 at this stage and that is probably adequate at the moment because not all gardaí will be directly entering data. In some Garda stations which do not have PCs, they phone data through and forms are filled in by somebody else prior to inputting. The idea is to train everybody to input, eventually. New technology will make it feasible for the Garda on the beat to feed data into the computer system and retrieve information. Student gardaí are automatically trained in IT methods as part of their ongoing training.
I have figures for vacancies in the Department. There are 2,165 civilians in the justice area, between head office, associated offices, including forensic science, and Garda civilian personnel, of whom there are 819. The number of vacancies at the moment is 482, so the total sanctioned staff is 2,647. A number of those vacancies have arisen in the asylum area and even though we have sanction to take in people, we have not been able to recruit them. Indeed, the current vacancies apply to all sorts of areas, and I have already mentioned the Garda Complaints Board. When one adds them all up they come to large numbers. I expect some of those vacancies will continue to exist for some time because of the difficulty in recruiting people to the public service generally at present. We have priority in the asylum area. In other words, the Civil Service Commission, by virtue of Government decisions, is giving priority to that area.
As regards the conceptualisation of this scheme, how many international schemes were examined outside this one? When this scheme was promoted, was it based on any particular international model?
Mr. Dalton
A number of schemes were examined. This scheme is more ambitious than most and that is why other people are coming here to see it. Computerisation schemes of this magnitude have been tried in other jurisdictions but they have not been too successful. We are grateful we are not in that position, at least not yet. We did not find precedents when the experts went around to look at off-the-shelf solutions because they simply were not there. Therefore, everything was built from scratch and that added significantly to the cost. It also meant that the kind of computer personnel required had to be of a higher quality in order to build systems from the bottom up.
I congratulate the Department and welcome the Assistant Garda Commissioner, Mr. Joe Egan. It is a historic first for the committee that a senior member of the Garda Síochána is accompanying a delegation from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I think it is the first time that has happened for a formal reporting of the Vote. It appears to be a first anyway, and Mr. Egan is very welcome.
Acting Chairman
It is still no harm to welcome the Assistant Commissioner.
He is very welcome, indeed.
Acting Chairman
It will not do you any harm.
He may want to speak about the PULSE project in terms of the benefits it brings to policing. Having worked in the private sector, I know that an IT cost overrun is a common enough feature. We have had the same issue on this committee as regards social welfare where a large system was installed. Unfortunately, there are overruns but I would argue that the private sector is worse in this regard. It is not appropriate to heap blame on the people who invested in this project, ambitious as it was. The issue I am primarily concerned with relates to the inputting of data for this system. Perhaps the Secretary General or the Assistant Commissioner will comment on the protections that are there for ordinary citizens. Valuable as the gathering and collation of criminal intelligence is, it is important to avoid wrong inputting and to ensure adequate safeguards in a system of this nature to protect ordinary citizens against incorrect information that may be entered on their files and which could have adverse effects on their employment prospects or whatever. I would like to see that concern addressed by the Assistant Commissioner.
The other issue is the time schedule for the full roll-out of the training programme so that all members of the force are fully equipped with adequate keyboard and other skills to operate this system. Having worked as a senior executive with Digifone in a previous life, I am aware that technological developments will allow inputting via mobile phones. Nonetheless, it may be an idea for the State to invest in developing the computer skills of the Garda force. It has huge implications, not least in terms of the international fight against crime.
Will the Assistant Commissioner provide some practical examples, while obviously not quoting names, where he has seen the benefits of the system? Sometimes people look at a computer but do not see the practical consequences of its use. I would like to hear about those, although we have heard about some of them already from the Secretary General.
Someone informed me recently that there will be 600 people working in the refugee area, not just with asylum seekers but on the whole area, and that we will be employing more in that area than the entire headquarters staff of the Department of Education and Science. I wanted to clarify that because it is an astounding statistic if we are within an ace of employing that many people - more than the headquarters policy-making staff of the Department of Education and Science - in dealing with refugees, be they here legally or illegally. I am interested in having that point clarified.
Acting Chairman
On a point of order - I am sure Mr. Dalton will not need to be told this - all questions are directed through the Accounting Officer. If, however, he wishes to direct questions to any member of his team, that will be done.
Mr. Dalton
I am happy that the Assistant Commissioner is here too to answer some of those questions. I will just deal with one of them which referred to staff numbers working on the refugee issue. Not only is it bigger than the Department of Education and Science, but it is bigger than the entire policy-making function of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. The head office, including the finance division of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, comprises 472 people, of whom about 120 are in Killarney. They do the finance work for the courts, prisons etc.
The refugee processing machinery is considerable. There are separate bodies - there is the refugee applications commissioner and the appeal commissioner. A reception integration agency is about to be set up. It has all become a very large business. The experience of the Home Office in the UK has been the same as that of home office-justice type departments around Europe. The refugee processing side has dwarfed the main policy-making Departments.
On the other questions on inputting data, the roll-out of training and the examples of success, I would be glad if the committee agreed to allow Assistant Commissioner Egan to deal with those.
Acting Chairman
Certainly. Assistant Commissioner Egan, you have the floor.
Assistant Commissioner Egan
Thank you, Chairman. The training programme for the entire PULSE system is a very focused one and is designed to maximise usage of people as the programmes are rolled out. They are geared towards the specific programme. When Mr. Dalton said earlier that 2,500 are trained in data entry, that was the number sufficient for the roll-out to date. We are now heading into the major impact of the PULSE in the beginning of the first quarter of next year, 2001. The training programme has started now and between now and then we will have trained 11,000 people in data entry at seven days each. That programme is designed, in place and ready to roll. Everybody will be trained in data entry. The reason we do not have any more than the 2,500 at the moment is that it is done centrally to retain the integrity of the system so that it is brought in on a phased basis.
On the question of examples, if Mr. Dalton was reluctant to comment, I suppose I would probably be equally reluctant, if not more so. Nonetheless, there are many examples of the benefits so far. We must remember this is a national database that is now available across the board. The benefits are seen by the people on the ground. Without going into specifics, if, for example, someone is stopped in Meath and they had come to notice in Cork two days ago, it is immediately available to the people there whereas before we did not have a networked national database.
On the question of safeguards, precautions, wrong entry and people having information on record within a system of this kind - I do not want to intrude into the essential confidentiality of such a system - what safeguards does the ordinary citizen have that wrong information is not entered into the system which might adversely affect their employment subsequently?
Assistant Commissioner Egan
That is an important point and it goes back to some of the earlier questions. There were 27 systems originally but it came down to 17. There are now 14 systems. They were not devised in isolation by experts but by user groups, the people on the ground, that is, gardaí coming together with the advice of the best experts. Built into that among the user groups is a management information system. There is a huge number of safeguards in that area. It is not just a matter of an open system into which somebody can enter data or from which data can be taken. There is a series of management functions involved as well and specific people are tasked with managing the systems to ensure authenticity of the information being entered, compliance with the Data Protection Act and respect for the rights of the people whose details will be entered into the system. There is a comprehensive programme in place.
I would like to ask a few quick questions on the PULSE system. Of the 27 disciplines originally envisaged to be covered, 14 are covered at present on a reduced budget. What would the total budget be to fund the entire programme as originally envisaged? I accept you can only give me an estimate at this stage but I presume some costing has been done, otherwise it would not have been possible to identify the items in the 14 involved.
Mr. Dalton
I do not have a figure beyond the £55 million. The remaining systems are being thoroughly researched. All the systems and all the features of the systems are being visited again. It will be a different figure, I honestly could not say what it will be. It may be that with modern technology, it will be cheaper than the original estimated price. I certainly could not guarantee that. I do not know if anybody else has an estimate of the figure.
Mr. Cronin
The only indication that can be given is that at the end of the conceptual design stage, the 27 systems were costed at roughly £55 million. By taking out ten systems, the cost was reduced to £36.5 million. That would indicate that the ten systems taken out at the time would have been then valued at about £20 million. Of course, inflation and movements in the market will have changed that figure. It would have been around one third of the £55 million price.
Deputy Batt O'Keeffe referred to this earlier and it is something which has come up at meetings of the Committee of Public Accounts over the years, that is, the question of tenders and the failure to keep to the tender price. Normally, one expects a slight overrun but not an overrun of maybe up to 50% and in some cases up to 100% - we have dealt with cases where it went up to 300% and 400%. Given that this country is a leader in information technology, surely it should be possible to give a better evaluation, a better guesstimate for the want of a better description, of the potential cost at the initial stages. Why was that not possible in this case?
I heard the reply to Deputy O'Keeffe and that the contract was handed over to consultants to do the assessment. I presume the consultants were qualified to do the assessment. I presume they are familiar with that kind of territory and that on that basis, they were able to come up with a costing. I cannot understand, given the professionalism, they could be so far out.
Mr. Dalton
The consultants in question are world leaders in this field and are recognised as such. There was not an overrun in the sense that it was only when they got down to detail that the figure of £55 million emerged. I do not know why, when they produced the figure of £36.5 million at the beginning, it was £20 million short of the detailed figure. I do not have the technical knowledge to understand that. There was a number of additions to the system subsequently, however. People saw the sense in adding various bits and pieces as they got down to detail. For example, the inclusion of a personal photograph was not there at the beginning. All those additions, which are desirable, add to the cost.
I wish to come in on that point. Why were personal photographs not included at the beginning? That is the menu, the detail specification for want of a better word. Who decided it would not be there at the beginning? Surely the specification, as outlined to the consultants, should determine their ability to assess the project accurately and come up with a reasonable price.
Mr. Dalton
It was there at the point at which we entered contractual commitments. It was not there in 1992 when the original overview of the system was taken. The consultants did not get into that kind of detail as to whether to include photographs. That sort of detail came at the conceptual design stage. I understand that is standard practice. At the beginning somebody will say we will have criminal records. It can be as broad as that. They make an estimate based on such broad assumptions. It is only when they get down to detail and ask what will be in this system that you get the detailed costing.
For example, in the United States and other countries I believe they have a very sophisticated system similar to this one. To what extent were comparisons made with those systems before deciding to proceed, given that we are world leaders in information technology?
Mr. Dalton
Apparently other countries do not have these systems. They are reputed to have them. When we went out to look for them they were not there. There was no exemplar that we could rely on. I have no difficulty if the Comptroller wants to go through the tendering process in detail. My advice is that it was done properly and there were control mechanisms to achieve that. The information I have is that when we went to look for off-the-shelf solutions, which is what one would expect if other countries had these systems, they were not there. It is to Ireland that the Americans, the British and so on will come rather than the other way around.
To what extent are Garda operations covered by the system?
Mr. Dalton
I will ask the Assistant Commissioner to deal with that issue.
I do not want you to give away State secrets that may be of benefit to criminals afterwards.
Assistant Commissioner Egan
There is a central database. As I said earlier from the first quarter of 2001 charges and summonses will be generated automatically across the system. It will track the criminals right through until court appearance, fines, warrants, jailing or whatever is involved. It will be comprehensive right across the criminal system.
At present if a car is stolen in Cork the information is fed into the system as soon as the report is received.
Mr. Dalton
That is correct.
How long does that take?
Mr. Dalton
It can be done instantaneously. In Cork it could be done immediately——
Right. It is probably better in Cork than elsewhere.
Mr. Dalton
——because the terminals are available there, whereas if it happened in Castlegregory, it would be a question of somebody phoning in to the nearest point, which would be Tralee.
Would all gardaí in all stations know where to send the information?
Mr. Dalton
Yes, they would.
Mr. Dalton mentioned that vehicle checks can be achieved in less than three minutes.
Mr. Dalton
No, in three seconds.
In the case of individuals.
Mr. Dalton
In the case of persons, if they are on the system, they can be identified in 15 seconds. If a criminal or a person with a previous record is on the system and gives a name he can be traced.
The critical factor is the speed with which the information is fed into the system.
Mr. Dalton
That is critical in all computer systems.
How long does that take? That a person can be identified in the three seconds or the 15 seconds and so on——
Mr. Dalton
It is dependent on that. Obviously if somebody does not feed in the information as quickly as he should, he is not doing his job.
How are instructions given to ensure the information is fed in quickly? This comes back to value for money and the efficacy of the system.
Mr. Dalton
Mr. Egan, do you want to deal with that question?
I think this is a station matter.
Mr. Egan
There are comprehensive arrangements in place for that right across the board. We must not forget that the original databases held on all Garda computer systems have been cleaned up and transferred to the new system. There are hundreds of thousands of records and we are not depending solely on new systems coming on board to be useful for those on the ground.
I appreciate the difficulty of the job. Let us assume your car is stolen and is driven towards Galway in ten minutes' time. How quickly can the information be fed into the system and how quickly can action be taken between here and Galway?
Mr. Egan
Deputy Durkan asked for examples. There are numerous examples of pretty much instantaneous results from information being fed into the system. That is an indication of the speed involved. At present it is done on a centralised data entry base. At the beginning of the first quarter of 2001 people will be trained right across the board for individual entry. The mechanism is available for instantaneous inputting right across the board.
Regardless of whether Garda stations en route are operating, closed or whatever, does it operate?
Mr. Egan
It does.
Notwithstanding anything like that, does that cause any blip in the system?
Mr. Egan
No, the system in place should take care of that. It is designed to do so.
How does it take care of it? For example, if I stole a car from the car park and headed off to Galway and it is reported, what would happen? If I get out of the city I have a good chance of getting to Galway. Is that true?
Mr. Egan
That depends on those on the ground. If a car was stolen between here and Pearse Street it would be entered on the system as one makes the report and would be available countrywide.
Mr. Dalton
Any criminal worth his salt has a running chance.
That is a headline.
Mr. Dalton
With the PULSE system one's chances are reduced considerably. Up to now if one happened to pass through Kinnegad on the way, nobody would necessarily know it was a stolen car. Whereas now if there is a computer terminal in Kinnegad, the garda on the street has some chance of knowing that a car of some particular description is coming through and he can identify it. It will not solve every crime immediately but it enhances the capacity to solve them.
I notice on page 11 there is reference to ex gratia payments totalling a small amount of money, which was paid in 48 cases in respect of awards for exceptional performance. The amount of money involved is not extensive. What is meant by an exceptional performance? If there is exceptional performance I would have thought more money would be involved. Some 48 cases were paid out of £25,000.
Mr. Dalton
This is a new scheme under which, as the title suggests, if a group of staff or an individual performs exceptionally money or vouchers for a night out can be given to them. It is fairly limited but heretofore there was nothing of that kind. I shall give an example of what is meant by exceptional performance. Two people in our Department produced the Omagh bombing legislation, which was a complex task, in record time. That is an example of a case where an award would be made to those concerned. It meant working day and night until the task was complete.
I appreciate that.
It is a kind of merit scheme.
The merit scheme should be related in some way to the extent of the exceptional performance. In comparison to another notation in that page compensation of £42,500 was paid to a member of the public in respect of a claim arising from an injury received on the Department's premises. What type of injury was it? What type of premises was it?
Mr. Dalton
I think it was an injury in the car park if I remember correctly. I do not know the nature of the injury. I read that last night and I wondered what it was.
I bet you did. My last question is in relation to refugees and asylum seekers. I note that on page 109 the sum of £6.9 million is identified under heading G - asylum seekers task force, for which there was an outturn of £3.9 million. Likewise there was a sum of £1 million for legal aid while the outturn was £0.697.
Mr. Dalton
The essential explanation for the shortfall is that we did not have the staff in place because it took longer than we expected to get them. Essentially the same is the case in relation to the legal aid service. The legal aid service started in February 1999. It built up slowly because of the difficulty in trying to get solicitors into the system, so both have to do with the fact that the staffing did not build up as quickly as we would have hoped.
Is that available through PULSE? Is it used in collating information on refugees and asylum seekers as well?
Mr. Dalton
Not to my knowledge.
Mr. Dalton referred earlier to the time it takes to process a single application——
Mr. Dalton
Yes.
——or a number of applications, and he also rightly pointed out that there are a greater number of applicants now than there were some years ago. That arises from the fact that the Iron Curtain no longer exists and people are coming from eastern countries to all European countries. That is a fact of life with which we must deal but I cannot understand the reason it takes so long to process an application. What are the difficulties in processing the cases more quickly than at present?
Mr. Dalton
One difficulty is sheer volume but even with the best will in the world, and regardless of where it is done in the world, it is difficult to get average processing times below six months because sometimes the facts that are presented by the applicant do not accord with what might be on UNHCR records. If somebody comes in with no papers, which is a common occurrence, they cannot automatically be sent back again. Reasons may be advanced for having no papers. When the information is eventually extracted, some aspects might not tie up. For example, somebody might say they came from a part of another jurisdiction which, on investigation, does not exist or it may be that there is no conflict as alleged in the area. Sometimes the information that the applicant gives is not in accord with the facts when checked out, but there are other considerations. For example, if somebody is turned down there are rights of appeal and the appeal process takes time. Court proceedings might take place, so with the best will in the world six months is the best we can do. That does not mean that every case will take six months because there is a policy of looking at cases coming from particular jurisdictions and they may be turned around more quickly.
Acting Chairman
Before calling Deputy Cooper-Flynn, I want to ask two questions on PULSE. A number of Deputies referred to it but they were not questioning the tendering process - everybody accepts that went a long way - they are upset about the outcome. In a general way, were we not all a bit overawed by the involvement of new technology? I appreciate that consultants were brought in but companies around the world were able to make hay out of the lack of knowledge in this area. We all seemed to be a bit afraid of new technology and whatever figures were presented seemed to be acceptable. Do you think there was an element of that in this project because I have seen it in various other areas where people did not know what kind of technology would be required and they ended up paying a lot more for it? I believe we were a bit overawed by it and that international companies harvested it in turn.
Mr. Dalton
I would not say that is particularly true in the case of the Garda. The Garda was already using information technology to a fair extent. It might happen in the case of an organisation that never had experience of IT but that would not be true in the case of the Garda. It was just the sheer size of the project. Even on their initial analysis the consultants, who I believe were genuine and are world leaders in this area, got the figure substantially off what it turned out to be on more detailed examination so it was not just that the clients were overawed. The consultants, as experts, considerably underestimated what this project would cost originally. I accept that theirs was a genuine attempt to put a price on it at that time.
Acting Chairman
On the question of receipts, somebody estimated that there would be £3 million in receipts to the Exchequer annually, and there was some question of royalties also. There was an Exchequer income due from the whole process.
Mr. Dalton
There is a 3% provision in the contract in the event that Andersens decides to sell elsewhere the software it has developed here. The gardaí would be entitled to 3% of the sale price.
Acting Chairman
What is the likelihood of that? Have we had any offers yet?
Mr. Dalton
It could turn out to be significant depending on the way we progress.
Acting Chairman
You made the point that other international police forces have looked at this system and that the American system did not seem to stand up against it. You described it as being one of the leading world——
Mr. Dalton
It would be at the moment but technology changes so fast that somebody will probably do all this cheaper and better somewhere else in the future. I have a list of the people who have come here from around the world to look at the system and they appeared to have been impressed by what they saw.
Acting Chairman
Obviously we will iron out the bugs, and it is costing money to do that, but was that 3% based on the cost to us of the whole project? Would it be 3% of that cost?
Mr. Dalton
I do not have that information, Chairman. All I know is that the figure that was included in the contract was based on our legal advice at the time.
Acting Chairman
I would appreciate it if we could have a note on that at some stage because we cannot dine out forever on the receipts from the DIRT inquiry but people are becoming more interested in revenue coming in from whatever source so perhaps you might have a look at that and we will see how it goes.
Mr. Dalton
I will do that, Chairman.
Will that money go to the Garda or to the Exchequer?
Acting Chairman
I imagine it will go to the central fund. It came out of the central fund so I presume it will go back to it.
Mr. Dalton
I would imagine that, like most money, it will fall into the central fund. I do not know. Perhaps the Department of Finance would have a view on that. It is probably a matter of looking at the contract and seeing——
Mr. O’Farrell
I am sure it is the central fund. That would be the normal procedure because if we were to ring-fence everything we would need another 400 staff, which would undermine the receipts.
Acting Chairman
Well put.
I apologise for my late arrival this morning. I have two brief questions and I hope they have not been asked already. They are on the reduction in the number of locations from 242 to 181, particularly in rural counties like Mayo and Donegal. Are we in danger of running a two-tier policing service where counties like Dublin are totally catered for whereas counties like Mayo would not have the same level of service due to the reduction in locations? The second question relates to the capacity of the system with changing policing and technology needs. Can this system adapt to those changing needs in the future or are we in danger of the system being obsolete in five years' time?
Mr. Dalton
Both questions are connected. There is no discrimination against any particular part of the country. For example, in Mayo or other western counties the system is the same as everywhere else. The system would be available primarily in the divisional headquarters and would be the same there as everywhere else. There are no PCs in the smaller stations and the reasons for that are two-fold - this ties in with the Deputy's second question. First, it would not have made economic sense because gardaí contact the centre which has the facility either to feed it in or obtain information. Second, with developing technology it would not have made sense to put computer terminals in the small stations because in a few years from now, the gardaí stationed there may be able to do all they need by mobile phone or some far cheaper device than a PC. Perhaps it will be done from a patrol car which means that the garda will not be tied to the station to input or extract data. It is not a two-tier system. It is meant to roll out evenly for the whole country because it would not be of benefit if that were the case. Criminals would be the first to find out that we were running a two-tier system and they would congregate in Mayo if they thought it was left out.
The existing system is capable of adapting to new technology through mobile phones or other mechanisms.
Mr. Dalton
It is.
Acting Chairman
We will conclude on paragraph 23. We will not note the Vote today for reasons discussed earlier, but I will ask Mr. Purcell to speak on it.
It would be worthwhile if we focused on the Forensic Science Laboratory at the next meeting. We need to ascertain the extent of state of the art standard of its technology.
Acting Chairman
I call the Comptroller and Auditor General to comment on paragraph 23.
Mr. Purcell
The paragraph should not be taken as being overly critical. I referred to certain concerns I have but they must be viewed in the context of a system that is up and running and apparently operating well. Deputy Lenihan referred to cost overruns, which are a feature of large IT systems. I am not comparing apples with oranges in this case. That is evident from the report. The fact that the system is up and running, even if it is scaled back, is a major achievement. I would not like that to be understated.
I have no problem with the tendering. The tender competitions were carried out in accordance with Government procedures and EU requirements. The Chairman mentioned £3 million of an annual increase in Exchequer receipts, which has been confused with a 3% royalty that might be forthcoming under the terms of the contract. I am sure the Accounting Officer will correct me if I am wrong on this, but the £3 million arises due to a more efficient and effective system on the fines side, which should lead to a greater number of receipts, more timely return of receipts and a better service.
I intend to examine major IT projects from the point of view of what ultimately become partnerships with consultancies. In that regard, there were problems in the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. I would be concerned to ensure there is an appropriate share of the risk in this area between consultant, system developers and the client, in this case the Department, although I am not saying that did not happen in this case. I note, with satisfaction, that legal expertise was employed by the Department in drawing up the contract. We did not have a men versus boys situation, as has been the case sometimes in the past, although not necessarily in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. That might help the committee to tie up this paragraph.
Acting Chairman
It does. We have dealt fully with paragraph 23 and it is concluded. We will not note the Vote because we wish to refer to some other items that are separate form it. I thank Mr. Dalton and his staff for their usual efficient approach to the work and for their assistance in answering the questions that were put.
Vote 22 - The Courts Service.
Acting Chairman
We will move to deal with Vote 22, the Courts Service.
Will we return to deal with the Votes? Will we return to discuss Vote 19 or has it been dealt with?
Acting Chairman
No, it has been dealt with. The Votes are dealt with for today, but we are not noting them because we must consider a financial aspect and other items that we decided previously to discuss. Therefore we cannot close on the Votes.
There will be further discussion on them.
Acting Chairman
When we return to them we will not deal with general items. We want to discuss the referral of some moneys and other issues.
In the context of Vote 19, perhaps a breakdown could be supplied to the committee regarding spending on child care, which is Ms Langford's area of responsibility.
Ms Langford
Does the Deputy want that now?
Acting Chairman
We have another Vote to consider. There is a danger members will focus on one specific item in a paragraph. We have completed the examination of the Vote but we will not note it at present for various reasons.
Mr. Dalton
Does the Chairman want me to stay while the Courts Service is being dealt with?
Acting Chairman
Mr. Fitzpatrick, the chief executive officer of that service, will appear before the committee. I am not sure about the protocol in this context.
The committee might detain the Secretary General.
Mr. Dalton
I am probably guilty of some of the things for which people are blamed.
That could be serious, although if he was proven guilty that would be much more serious.
Acting Chairman
As there is an overlap in the period from Mr. Fitzpatrick's appointment as chief executive officer, it would be helpful if Mr. Dalton could stay.
I may have misunderstood the Chairman, but did he say we will discuss Vote 22, the Courts Service, without the presence of officials from the Department?
Acting Chairman
If Mr. Fitzpatrick had served for the full term covering the period in question, he would be the Accounting Officer for it, but as the period in question was split between office holders, we have asked Mr. Dalton to remain for this discussion. We will adjourn for two minutes to allow for the witnesses to be brought in.
Sitting suspended at 1.07 p.m. and resumed at 1.09 p.m.
Acting Chairman
We will resume in public session. We will continue our examination of the 1999 Annual Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General and Appropriation Accounts - Vote 22, the Courts Service. I must instruct witnesses that they do not enjoy absolute privilege. We have been joined by Mr. P. J. Fitzpatrick, Chief Executive Officer of the Courts Service. Mr. Fitzpatrick, are you accompanied by some members of your staff?
Yes.
Acting Chairman
It may be Mr. Fitzpatrick's first attendance in his current role at this committee or he may have been here under another guise on a previous occasion. I welcome him in his capacity as Accounting Officer and chief executive officer. He is accompanied by some members of his staff.
Thank you, Chairman and members. I am accompanied by Mr. Seán Quigley, the director of finance with the Courts Service, Ms Nuala McLoughlin, chief registrar and director of the Supreme and High Court offices; Mr. Diarmuid Mac Diarmada, director of the District and Circuit Court offices, and Mr. Peter Mooney, who works with Mr. Quigley in the finance directorate. I thank you, Chairman, for your welcome.
Acting Chairman
The Department of Finance is still represented by Ms Hogan. I know she has expertise in the courts area. I ask Mr. Purcell, the Comptroller and Auditor General, to introduce the accounts.
Mr. Purcell
There are no paragraphs in my report on Vote 22. The Vote is now subject to separate accountability arrangements through the appointment of an Accounting Officer specifically for this Vote. I am not sure but I think there was an interim period during the year when it was still under the general remit of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I am not going easy on it but it is only fair to see the Courts Service established before getting into it in real detail. I hope to do that with relish in future years.
Acting Chairman
I ask Mr. Fitzpatrick to make his opening statement.
The Courts Service was established as a separate independent corporate body with effect from 9 November last. The Comptroller and Auditor General is correct that we had responsibility for the Courts Service from that date. The Courts Service has its own board and it is concerned with the funding, management and administration of the courts for the State. It has been operational for almost a year now. I will provide any other information required by the Chairman or members.
Acting Chairman
I thank Mr. Fitzpatrick. Mr. Dalton is still with us because questions about the previous part of the year may be directed to him as there was a split. I join the Comptroller and Auditor General in wishing you every possible success.
I welcome Mr. Fitzpatrick and his team to the committee. We were not clear about the procedure, having dealt directly with the Department in the past. Any improvement is welcome because the courts badly need it. I served in local authorities for almost 27 years and, to my horror, I had to deal with the issue of courthouses on many occasions. However, it was impossible to make progress with the local authorities, the Office of Public Works and the Department. The next time the delegation comes before us I will ask more detailed questions than I will today, as the Courts Service is only just up and running.
I am disappointed the Assistant Commissioner has left the meeting. We got a new Garda barracks in the Louth-Meath division after campaigning for 50 years. However, we do not have a District Court courthouse in Drogheda, which is the largest borough in the country, with the biggest hinterland. It is swelling out of all proportion because of the influx of people from Dublin. That is a basic requirement under the Constitution. The courthouse in Drogheda is an old schoolhouse where I danced when I was a 16 year old teenager, which is almost 50 years ago. Several Ministers have examined it over the years.
The Office of Public Works said there are delays with the design etc. This is a 15 year delay. The site was given to the Department by Louth County Council but, five years later, it is still talking about its design. I am sure a good architect could design a courthouse in a week. There is nothing superb about such a design. I have been in many courthouses in other jurisdictions which would put our courthouses to shame. Judges and practitioners have no place to consult their clients. People must consult their solicitors and barristers while standing outside in the rain. People must travel to the other end of the county at their own expense to do jury service. There are no proper toilet facilities or facilities to make tea.
I know I am being parochial but I have lived with this problem for almost 30 years. However, I know from being on various committees over the years that the position is the same throughout the country. I am horrified that surpluses will be surrendered when we do not have a courthouse in the largest borough in the Republic of Ireland. I find that difficult to understand. I will come back to this issue because it is Mr. Fitzpatrick's first innings and I bat fairly hard.
He knows the target of ensuring that Drogheda has a courthouse by this time next year.
I am sure the Chairman remembers that I raised this issue on many occasions. I note there is a 100% increase in fines from the estimated figure to the figure realised over the past year. Is there any particular reason for that? Are more cases being dealt with or are the courts handing out larger fines? Perhaps there is a simple explanation for that.
Like many other Departments, the team is suffering from a shortage of staff and a lack of recruitment of staff. We have raised this problem on a number of occasions with various Departments. My daughter left college on a Friday and she had a job on the following Monday. She applied for the public service but three months later she still had not been called for an interview. We need to deal with the system of recruitment to the public service. There is a shortage of staff in every Department because there are delays in recruiting them. If we adopted the private sector model of recruitment, staff shortages would be substantially reduced. I ask Mr. Fitzpatrick to comment on that.
I will comment on the issues raised by Deputy Bell. As regards staffing, with the establishment of the new service which involved approximately 50 to 60 additional posts and the creation of some additional posts for some pressure areas within the courts system, we had approximately 100 vacancies earlier this year. As of this week, all the vacancies in Dublin have been filled, which was our major difficulty, and we have approximately 15 vacancies in the provinces. We have approximately 1,500 applications for transfers from other Departments, particularly at clerical officer and executive officer levels, for those vacancies in the provinces. We will have all those filled during the next month or so.
As regards recruitment, all the employees in the Courts Service are civil servants, they had Civil Service status and were guaranteed a continuation of that status when the new Act establishing the Courts Service was enacted. I am the only non-Civil Service member in the Courts Service, apart from one or two fixed term employees for particular projects. All our staff are recruited through the Civil Service Commission. Over recent months our director of human resources has been in active discussion with it about ways and means of trying to speed up the recruitment process. As of today, all our entry grade posts are filled, but that changes from time to time.
Most of the fines are collected by the courts and transferred to the Department of Finance. The money collected was higher than anticipated. It is difficult to estimate that revenue accurately because it depends entirely on the level of criminal business being dealt with by the courts and the levels of fines imposed. They can vary from year to year. For example, we know that the on-the-spot fines system has impacted in that area in a number of such cases. It is difficult to predict the amount but the vast bulk of the income from fines is not retained in the appropriation-in-aid account, it is simply transferred across to the Department of Finance and collected by the courts on its behalf.
We have been fortunate in that, with our establishment, funding for the building programme over the past two or three years has been significantly increased by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, with the sanction of the Department of Finance. We are very grateful for that. It has enabled us to commence a number of building projects which are already quite advanced. Others will be coming on stream very quickly. As regards the areas the Deputy mentioned, tenders are coming in for the new court building in Dundalk which will cost about £6.5 million. The new courthouse in Trim will be finished early next year, involving a complete refurbishment, at a cost of about £4.5 million. The site in Drogheda is available and plans are being finalised. I can assure the committee that will be progressing because the existing accommodation comprises a hall on top of a hill, which is not satisfactory for anyone. There are other projects in the vicinity, for example the Carrickmacross venue, the refurbishment of which is almost complete.
While I have only mentioned the ones in the area the Deputy referred to, there are similar projects all over the country. Work is currently going on at venues in Sligo, Cork Circuit Court, and an extension to the District Court in Anglesea Street, Cork, which is about to start. There is an urgent need for a courthouse in Maynooth and Kilcock in north Kildare which has a large population. We are exploring options in that area. In cases where we have staff and a heavy volume of business, by and large, we have stand-alone courthouses.
In other areas where the volume of business is low we could not justify spending £1 million for a court that sits once or twice a month, so we are looking at joint developments. A good example is Belmullet where Údarás na Gaeltachta and Mayo County Council both need small regional offices. We are going into a joint development there with them, which is a much more economic and cost-effective method of providing a venue where a court might sit only a few times per month.
Overall, there is a big programme. If you wish, Chairman, I can go through all the projects. They range right across the country, including Limerick, Ennis and Sligo.
Acting Chairman
I will be parochial as well. You mentioned Anglesea Street in Cork.
You got a mention.
Acting Chairman
When are we likely to get back the courthouse in Washington Street, a real courthouse, as the Cork people look at it?
That courthouse is a very busy venue. There are four Circuit Courts sitting there most of the time, and the High Court sits regularly in Cork. It is the biggest court venue outside the Four Courts in Dublin. There has been a very extensive consultation programme. The plans are complete and according to the architect the work should be ready to commence by April next year. It will probably take at least 18 months to complete. The exterior has been done, as the Deputy knows.
Acting Chairman
That is right.
We are talking about a complete refurbishment of the interior. The plans for Anglesea Street include an extension of the family law area. There is a major increase in the work being carried out in Anglesea Street. Plans for the District Court building in the former Model School have been done and work should commence on that in the first half of next year.
Acting Chairman
I would like to stay with the justice area for a moment, if I could. I said we are being parochial.
I did admit I was being parochial.
Acting Chairman
Cork is pitching for the title of "city of culture", and there is a general clean-up operation going on. Will the massive hoarding around the courthouse be necessary when the internal structure is there or will we, at least, be able to see the building? It is obscene that one of the very few beautiful buildings available is totally boarded up. Will that go?
I do not know, Chairman, but I will certainly check it out and provide a note on it for you.
Acting Chairman
I would appreciate that, if you could, and whatever pressure you can bring to bear while the internal work is being done so that, at least, the facade of the place could be seen.
Yes.
Acting Chairman
It is one of the few black spots left in the city.
We will certainly look at that and get back to you.
Acting Chairman
Thank you. I am sorry, Deputy Bell, I moved away from the original subject. Are you happy enough?
That is fine. I am happy. We are running late and there is a lot to discuss, so I will wait until Mr. Fitzpatrick and his team are longer in office and then I will go after them.
That is a very fair warning and timescale to give.
I wish Mr. Fitzpatrick the best. I had dealings with him when he worked in the health board and he was very good. I hope he will bring that expertise to this particular service. I would make a short plea from my former profession of journalism and Mr. Fitzpatrick can respond by way of letter if he wishes, because of the time constraints. It appears that working journalists covering the District Courts have a problem because they do not get access to the charge sheets. If one does not get access to the charge sheets there is a danger that a libel could be committed. In other words, one might get the name or address wrong. Will Mr. Fitzpatrick recommend or suggest to the District Court that the media could avail of the charge sheets in some formal way? Article 16 of the Constitution covers the right to have court hearings in public. Will Mr. Fitzpatrick formalise the system whereby District Court clerks and other clerks in the courts system would make charge sheets available when somebody is appearing before the court? It causes nightmares for journalists covering the courts if they cannot get the exact charge, address, name and age of the accused.
It is a very important issue and was identified in the reports of the working group on the Courts Commission, one of which recommended the establishment of the Courts Service. One of the issues it identified was access to court documents and the provision of information on the courts system to the public generally. In that regard we have established an information office. We have a website and the legal diary for the following day is available on that each evening. The rural circuit court lists will be going on to that website very shortly. The information office has produced a number of information booklets on the courts system and a regular newsletter. One of the issues we are examining is the development of a protocol for consistency in access to court documents. How requests for access to court documents, as distinct from information or lists, are handled, varies from office to office. It is something that was identified as an issue that needed to be resolved in the working groups on the Courts Commission. They suggested that it should be examined by the new Courts Service, and that is being done.
I also wish Mr. Fitzpatrick the very best. We also met in a previous incarnation. I suppose it is not unusual for legal action to be taken in the vicinity or environs of the courts. I notice, however, that under the heading of miscellaneous items, "compensation to a ward of court in settlement of a legal action" is mentioned. I do not want the details of the case, just a general idea of what it was about and what the circumstances were.
This was the Courts Service's contribution to the settlement. Basically, it was a case where it was alleged that the guardian had fraudulently attained the plaintiff's assets which had been held in wardship for them. The total compensation was much higher. It was a settlement and that was the portion which was contributed to the settlement by the Courts Service. The rest was contributed by other parties to the case.
The theory being that the courts should have been able to identify what was happening?
It was settled and no liability was established, as such, so whether they should have, is open to debate. It was settled out of court. That was the Courts Service's contribution.
Compensation and legal costs totalling £37,700 were paid in respect of three instances of legal action taken following incidents of unlawful detention. How did the courts become involved in this? Surely, the courts did not detain the people concerned.
Not exactly. What happened was that these were cases where a committal warrant was either issued in error prior to an appeal being heard of a District Court case or, for example, another involved somebody who was charged with larceny and criminal damage and where a bench warrant was issued and when the applicant failed to appear in court, they were later remanded in custody with consent to bail. Basically, they were about errors on warrants where people were detained unlawfully overnight.
I think I recognise one of the cases and that is why I raise it.
The court offices would have had an involvement.
I see legal costs totally £25,000 in relation to two instances of judicial abuse following court decisions. That, I presume, was a judicial review of the process and procedure in the court which was deemed to have been faulty at the time.
This one related to the revoking of a licence of a premise in the city. An objection was lodged and the objector did not appear in the court on the day. The objection was struck out and the licence was granted. It subsequently came back before the court and the original decision was disallowed. The judge who heard it the second time did not acknowledge the first decision and again it got a lot of publicity at the time. Basically, that is what led to the settlement.
We read all the time about juveniles referred by the courts to places of detention. To what extent can the Courts Service get involved or has it got involved? There is not much sense in the courts deciding that a juvenile should be detained for a specific period if there is no place to send him or her. To what extent can the Courts Service get involved in doing something about that or is it doing so at present?
The Courts Service has no function whatever in relation to the provision of places for anybody held in custody, whether a child or an adult. Furthermore, the only involvement of the courts is the case coming before the court and the judge's decision. As I said, the Courts Service is concerned with the management and administration of the courts. The judges are obviously independent in the exercise of their functions in relation to judicial matters. We are precluded from commenting on that. The simple answer is that the Courts Service has no function in detention places for children or adults.
Perhaps Mr. Fitzpatrick will give us a copy of the services his department covers. It is now divorced from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. We are not too clear on the actual services.
We have just published a booklet on the courts system and we will circulate it to the members of the committee. It will be circulated widely anyway. Under the Act, we are obliged to compile and produce an annual report within six months of the end of the previous year. When the first annual report is produced, there will be a lot of statistical data within that about the activity. This describes the new Courts Service structures and the various courts, what they do and the jurisdictions and so on. The statistical information and the activity data will come via the annual report in the middle of next year.
Acting Chairman
We will not note Vote 22. In fairness to Mr. Dalton, I should point out that the reason we are not doing so is that we can deal with the issue before the court, the court poor box. We have had a lot of correspondence on that. It is not because of any other issue. We got documentation on a number of issues and we have agreed to defer them to a later date.
One point raised by Deputy Bell which I meant to respond to earlier but did not was the unexpended money for last year. There was a provision in the budget last year on the assumption that the Courts Service would be up and running at an earlier date. A lot of underspend is related to the date of the establishment of the Courts Service, 9 November, and has nothing to do with the stewardship of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
Acting Chairman
We are not noting Vote 22. I thank Mr. Fitzpatrick and his staff and wish them well. The agenda for Thursday, 9 November 2000 is Votes 38 and 39, Department of Foreign Affairs, International Co-operation, 1999 Appropriation Accounts.
The Committee adjourned at 1.35 p.m. until 11 a.m. on Thursday, 11 November 2000.