I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to set out briefly the role of the Department of the Taoiseach in the development of e-government. I will address some of the key issues raised in this report in so far as they pertain to the responsibilities of the Department.
The Department of the Taoiseach, specifically the information society policy unit, was assigned a co-ordinating role for the Government action plan on the information society, New Connections. The plan set out the Government's policy on the key infrastructures of telecommunications, the legal and regulatory environment, and e-government and the supporting frameworks of e-business, research and development, lifelong learning and e-inclusion.
The policy objective in respect of e-government was to have all public services capable of electronic delivery available on-line through a single point of contact by 2005. This was to be facilitated by the public services broker, to be developed by the Reach agency. A range of services were listed to be prioritised and progressed on a basis consistent with the broker model. The delivery of specific projects and initiatives was, and remains, the responsibility of the various Departments and agencies concerned.
The e-cabinet project was the responsibility of the Department of the Taoiseach to deliver. I am happy to report it is operating very successfully, facilitating new efficiencies and cost savings. It was also delivered within budget.
The Department was also responsible for monitoring and reporting on progress under the action plan. An information society implementation group, at assistant secretary level, served as a network, whose purpose was to monitor progress against the objectives set out in the plan. This group recommended the establishment of the information society fund. The fund was administered by the Department of Finance and projects were evaluated by representatives from the Department of Finance and the Department of the Taoiseach. I was pleased to note in the Comptroller and Auditor General's report the fund was acknowledged to have made possible projects that otherwise would not have happened, that it facilitated the more expeditious delivery of some and the expansion of other projects and that it was well-managed.
The information society policy unit also co-ordinates Ireland's participation in the EU benchmarking exercise in on-line public service delivery. It does so by serving as a liaison between the consultants who conduct the benchmarking on behalf of the Commission, Capgemini, and the Departments and offices responsible for the relevant public services covered by benchmarking. The unit ensures each Department and office is aware of the methodology employed by the consultants and endeavours to ensure they provide the requisite information in a timely manner. It also monitors the emerging scores ensuring errors are identified and corrected, which has on occasion resulted in our score being revised upwards.
Other important aspects of the e-government agenda are the responsibility of the Departments of Finance, Social and Family Affairs and other Departments and agencies. For example, the Department of Finance is responsible for enterprise-level technical policy, provision of advice, guidance and assistance on certain technical aspects and evaluation of proposals from an overall value for money perspective. It was also responsible for the management of the information society fund.
More recently, the Department of Finance has taken responsibility for the management of the peer review system for large, complex or cross-cutting information and communications technology projects in the Civil Service and certain other areas. The Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources has responsibility for telecommunications infrastructure and broadband roll-out. The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment is responsible for the BASIS service, an information service for businesses, as well as the e-business strategy that seeks to optimise the usage of information and communications technology by small and medium-sized enterprises and microenterprises.
The Citizens Information Board is responsible for the provision of standardised information on services directed at citizens. The Local Government Computer Services Board is responsible for local authority e-government systems. Finally, the Reach agency under the Department of Social and Family Affairs is responsible for identity services and the public services broker.
The e-government agenda dates back to 1999. The policy objective of the first action plan was to create a new vision of service delivery including facilitating self-service and making many services available on-line on a 24-hour basis. There were also efficiency and modernisation benefits to be pursued.
The focus of that first action plan was to create an impetus towards those goals by encouraging separate streams of activities in as short a timescale as was possible. It was in this context that initiatives such as the Government virtual private network, GVPN, and the public services broker arose.
The second action plan — New Connections — published in 2002 was a more comprehensive and ambitious document, which sought to encourage progress on as wide a scale and to the maximum extent possible. It was not a detailed project plan in which one would expect to have specific targets, milestones and detailed costings. Its purpose, rather, was to encourage Departments to identify what they could achieve using technologies to produce improved outcomes. Departments identified key projects as priorities for themselves and these were included in New Connections as flagship projects to be prioritised and progressed over the period of the plan. It was for the relevant Departments, in the context of the development of the specific projects, to determine the detailed business case, project plans and costings.
The Comptroller and Auditor General's report focuses on several specific areas including some that pertain to responsibilities of the Department or processes which it was involved.
Ireland has been very successful in delivering e-government projects. There have been significant improvements in services for our citizens. We see it in the value of cost savings annually arising from several key initiatives. We see it too in the new efficiencies many of these projects have made possible. For example, e-cabinet facilitates significant efficiencies across all Departments. I am happy to note such positive effects are noted by the report.
There have been some difficulties and challenges. Some projects took longer than expected but in each case for particular reasons which can be explained by the responsible Departments.
Making a real difference in service provision was our key objective. We have, in partnership with the other key stakeholders, delivered on this. There are many examples that could be cited. Less visible and less commented upon are a range of other successful projects which deserve to be recognised. These include: the transformation in the Public Appointments Service; the on-line services for farmers and agricultural stakeholders; the provision of on-line free information for citizens at single points of contact; on-line examination results; and many others.
There is better access to services for citizens, with many available on a 24-hour basis. The time it takes citizens to transact services is, in many cases, significantly reduced. For example, 125,000 hours are saved annually by citizens by using the facility for taxing a car on-line. New mothers can have child benefit paid automatically without having to apply, owing to the investment we have made in streamlining administrative services. It is possible for citizens to inspect maps, free of charge, on-line through the Property Registration Authority — and the evidence is that they are happy with these new facilities. A survey of motor tax on-line customers shows that all respondents were satisfied, or very satisfied, with the service being provided.
There has been progress in delivering value for money. There are headline examples such as the annual savings of approximately €25 million a year from the use of the Government virtual private network, or the €18.4 million savings by Revenue last year as a result of its on-line system, as well as savings that result for individual businesses and citizens using the services. Many projects are delivering significant value for money across the public service. Some of this is easy to quantify, some of it less so.
There was some surprise that the report showed a number of projects were "not progressed or abandoned". I recognise that the survey methodology employed by the consultants, by its nature, has certain limitations. When we inquired into this further, we discovered that the outturn was significantly more positive on a number of these projects, which were not abandoned and had progressed.
A number of the projects that did not progress to completion were dependent on a satisfactory solution to the issue of identity management and verification. This was the issue being addressed primarily by the Reach agency through the development of the public services broker. My colleagues may wish to comment on the issues dealt with in the report on this project, but I should simply observe at this point that in addition to some specific problems referred to in the report, we face a major challenge in operating an on-line identity management system compared to many of our European partners who have long had a system of population registration. This is at the heart of our relative decline in the EU benchmarking measures.
A further consideration in the pace of project development was low levels of citizen engagement or interest in on-line transactions with the public service. A customer survey we commissioned in 2003 found that only 1% of respondents had used on-line communication in their dealings with the Civil Service. By 2006 a survey found that 20% had used e-mail, and 12.5% the Internet to contact the public service. The perceived convenience of these channels had doubled over the period, but at levels well below telephone and written communication.
On other issues raised in the report, I am sure my colleagues will welcome the opportunity to address the perceived cost overruns and put these into context. The issues on occasion reflected additional costs incurred because projects were expanded to deliver more than was envisaged in the original concept. Although we have had significant successes, much clearly remains to be done. While further achievement will improve Ireland's performance in the international benchmarking exercise, this is not our primary motivation. Our aim is to achieve outcomes that more adequately deal with the needs of citizens and provide better value for taxpayers.
In that context I welcome the positive recommendations in the report. Many of them are closely aligned with actions that have already been taken, such as, for example, the introduction of stronger project governance measures put in place by Government, particularly the peer review of larger projects. My colleagues may wish to comment today on other specific recommendations in the report. From the perspective of my Department I can see merit in a number of the recommendations relating to the broader e-government agenda as we move forward.
The report recommends that our focus should not be technology led, but based on customer and business outcomes. I strongly agree and this is the approach we have adopted in framing the forthcoming third action plan, which focuses on major processes based on their potential to provide value. I also agree it is appropriate to set more specific and measurable targets and to formally assign responsibility for the achievements of goals in this project management process.
My Department has prepared a new knowledge society action plan in consultation with all Departments. It was decided to defer its submission to Government so as to avail of the opportunity to have regard to the recommendations of the OECD review of the Irish public service, to which the Comptroller and Auditor General referred, and which is nearing completion. At our request it contains a specific treatment of e-government issues. We also wanted to take into account our consideration of this report from the Comptroller and Auditor General. This new plan will focus on what our priorities need to be now, and will, we hope, set the agenda for further progress.
Apart from the internal re-engineering of processes to achieve greater efficiency leveraging technology, the rapid increases over the past two years in broadband penetration and the projects for further development in the near term, create a very positive environment for engagement with citizens and businesses through on-line channels. In that context we look forward to development which will benefit from the conclusions and recommendations in this report.
