Skip to main content
Normal View

Committee on Budgetary Oversight debate -
Wednesday, 25 May 2022

Public Service Performance Report 2021: Discussion

Apologies have been received from the Cathaoirleach, Deputy Hourigan.

Members and all in attendance are asked to exercise personal responsibility in protecting themselves and others from the risk of contracting Covid-19. They are strongly advised to practise good hand hygiene and leave at least one vacant seat between themselves and others attending. They should always maintain an appropriate social distance during and after the meeting. Masks, preferably of a medical grade, should be worn at all times during the meeting, except when speaking. I ask for full co-operation in this regard.

Before we begin, I wish to explain some limitations to parliamentary privilege and the practice of the Houses as regards references witnesses may make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence by witnesses who are physically present or by those who give evidence from within the parliamentary precincts is protected pursuant to both the Constitution and statute by absolute privilege. The witnesses are giving evidence remotely from outside the parliamentary precincts and, as such, may not benefit from the same level of immunity from legal proceedings as a witness who is physically present. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory with regard to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative they comply with any such direction.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. I remind members of the constitutional requirements that members must be physically present within the confines of the place where the Parliament has chosen to sit, namely, Leinster House, to participate in public meetings. I will not permit a member to participate if he or she is not adhering to this constitutional requirement. Therefore, any member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts will be asked to leave the meeting.

Today the committee will discuss the Public Service Performance Report 2021, which was published last week. On behalf of the committee, I welcome the officials attending on behalf of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform: Mr. John Kinnane, acting assistant secretary; Mr. Ed Hearne, principal officer; and Ms Caroline O'Loughlin, assistant principal. I ask Ms O'Loughlin to make her opening statement.

Ms Caroline O'Loughlin

I thank the Chair for the invitation to appear before the committee and the opportunity to discuss the Public Service Performance Report 2021 and answer any questions the committee may have about performance budgeting and its role within the overall expenditure framework.

The Government submission to the Select Committee on Arrangements for Budgetary Scrutiny, dated June 2016, committed to the publication of a performance report by the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform. The first report was published in 2017. The Public Service Performance Report 2021 is the sixth edition.

As recommended in the committee's final report on the framework for parliamentary engagement throughout the course of the budgetary cycle, financial performance should be assessed through the principles of performance budgeting, focusing on what is being delivered with resources and how this aligns with the programme for Government and departmental statements of strategy.

The purpose of the performance report is to increase transparency and accountability and ensure every citizen can see clearly how public funds are being utilised. The information is deliberately presented in a clear and accessible way to ensure that everyone, not just those with financial expertise, can fully understand how public money is being used. The report builds on the existing elements of the performance-based budgeting initiative and creates a space in the budget process for performance dialogue. While performance information is provided alongside financial information in the Revised Estimates Volume, REV, in December, outturn information for the current year cannot be provided due to the timing of REV publication. This means committees may not have the relevant information to allow them to assess performance for the most recent year in a timely fashion. The performance report addresses this by providing timely quantitative information on what was delivered with public funds in the previous year. This creates an opportunity for meaningful dialogue between Ministers and the relevant sectoral committees on Government performance. The information provided in the report will assist the relevant sectoral committees in tracking progress on the outputs and outcomes of key Government strategies.

The committee's final report on the framework for parliamentary engagement proposes that sectoral committees meet to consider the chapters of the performance report relevant to their areas of oversight. The performance report is designed to support such an enhanced focus on performance and delivery by committees. Relevant performance indicators are presented in a dedicated, focused document in an accessible manner. This approach seeks to enable sectoral committees to make best use of the time available for reviewing performance and achievement by Departments and agencies. The performance report is just one element of a suite of measures to increase evidence-based decision-making, such as the spending review process, the Irish Government Economic and Evaluation Service network and the public spending code.

Updates on equality budgeting and green budgeting, which are both integrated into the performance budgeting framework, are also included in the report. The equality budgeting pilot was implemented in 2018. It brings a new focus to performance budgeting, considering equality dimensions such as gender, socio-economic inequality, disability and minority groups. Following a Government decision in 2021 to accelerate the implementation of performance budgeting, all Departments now participate in equality budgeting and report equality metrics in both the REV and the performance report. An interdepartmental group has been established to drive this important work across all areas of government. This work is overseen by an equality budgeting expert advisory group, which comprises key stakeholders and relevant experts.

In 2019, Ireland joined the OECD Paris Collaborative on Green Budgeting and committed to the progressive implementation of reforms to the budgetary process to better embed climate and environmental goals within it.

With the advent of the ambitious climate targets in the programme for Government commitments and their incorporation into legislation via the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development (Amendment) Act 2021, this need grows ever more pressing. An update on this work is also included.

An ambitious work plan for performance budgeting policy is in place for the coming year. It aims to continue the momentum achieved to date and further advance this work.

In 2019, the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform successfully applied for funding to develop our performance budgeting framework and systems under the EU structural reforms support programme. The project incorporates all elements of performance budgeting, such as equality, green, sustainable development goals, SDG, and well-being budgeting, in line with the programme for Government commitment to develop a national well-being framework. The project is now entering the final phase and focuses on key priorities, such as improving the ICT framework for performance budgeting and increasing tagging of expenditure. A number of peer-to-peer study missions have also taken place to facilitate information exchange and allow Irish budget officials to learn from best international practice.

The performance budgeting framework is kept under constant review to ensure it best serves the purpose of increasing transparency and accountability. Feedback from stakeholders is an essential part of this and we particularly value feedback from the committee as a cornerstone of that.

It is clear from the committee’s final report that the performance report is a source of information that can be further utilised by the sectoral committees in their engagement with Ministers and their Departments. Such engagement would, in principle, allow the sectoral committees to consider, with the relevant line Departments, any issues regarding performance against targets, with the specific indicators selected for inclusion in the report.

The recommendations contained in the committee’s final report were quite thoughtful in this regard. I thank the committee for including this document on its agenda and I look forward to hearing its feedback. The engagement with the committee on the overall format of the report and its positioning within the budgetary cycle is very important to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform as we continue our work in enhancing the overall performance budgeting framework and the performance report in particular.

I thank Ms O'Loughlin. I will now open the floor to members who will have ten minutes each for their questions and responses. I call Teachta Moynihan.

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Leas-Chathaoirleach agus le Caroline O’Loughlin as a tuairisc agus a cur i láthair. In the short few minutes I have, I will focus on a few points, in particular, the establishment of the well-being framework. The idea is to move away from measuring only key economic indicators and instead take into account a wide range of other areas, including physical and mental health, skills, income, wealth and biodiversity. It seeks to ensure that factors that are important to people in their everyday life and quality of life are also considered as part of budgeting.

Ms O’Loughlin said that there was some engagement on this and we know that a public consultation has taken place. The various indicators that will be measured have not been defined at this stage. Will the witnesses indicate what the measurements will be and what kind of back-and-forth discussions have taken place with the different Departments? Will the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform take a lead role on the matter? I appreciate that the Department of the Taoiseach is leading on this but this is the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform's report. Rather than leaving it to the various Departments to outline what they are doing, will the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform set down for these Departments what the indicators are for measuring the well-being framework and how it will be brought about?

Mr. John Kinnane

As the Deputy noted, the Department of the Taoiseach has been leading on the work on the well-being framework. The initial report set out the well-being dimensions that we will use for Ireland. A range of 42 indicators are available on the Central Statistics Office, CSO, dashboard. With regard to our work with the line Departments - this ties into the comments made by Ms O’Loughlin - within the overall performance budgeting framework we need to see how we can utilise the well-being framework so that there will be policies within particular Departments that will impact on a particular dimension of well-being. The Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth, the Department of Education and the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage may all have policies that are impacting on a particular dimension of the well-being framework and may have the ability to move the indicators through the performance budgeting framework project.

What we are seeking to do in the project in which we are involved is to create better linkages across the performance budgeting framework, so that as policies are being developed in particular Departments, those linkages between the Departments are clear and it is also clear how they are improving well-being. We have been involved in looking at certain Departments and trying to map out their policies to see how they fit with the well-being dimensions and with the various indicators. The idea would be that over time, as we develop the performance report and also the performance metrics in the Revised Estimates Volume, we would be able to match those with the dimensions and indicators in the national framework.

It appears that some Departments would have more influence on some indicators than others. Mr. Kinnane mentioned the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth. I imagine every Department will be measured across all of the indicators because they are all dealing with the public and the community. Is it a question of measuring everybody using one set of indicators? Has the Department defined what those indicators will be? For example, as regards the greening measures, the Department has not set out all of the various measuring points for those and they have been in the report for two years now. Will the roll-out of the well-being framework be as slow? I hope it will not be as slow and it will be more prominent in the report from this year onwards? I cannot see any reason for holding back on the framework. I ask that the Department start reporting on it sooner rather than later? Can Mr. Kinnane give an indication of the timeframe for rolling it out? I would prefer to see the well-being framework moving faster than the greening measures? It is a measure of how the Government is performing in delivering for the public. It is not all about economics. We want to ensure that quality of life and other factors that are important will also be measured in the report as soon as possible. When will we see indicators on the well-being framework being presented in the report? Will the same measurements be used across all Departments?

Mr. John Kinnane

On the immediate first steps in respect of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform’s engagement with the well-being framework, the next stage in the budgetary process is the national economic dialogue. Within the national economic dialogue, which we organise with the Department of Finance, we will seek to have a session that specifically addresses the well-being framework and how it can be utilised within the budgetary process. Then, as we move forward-----

Will that be done for the current report or are we still some weeks away from that?

Mr. John Kinnane

The strength of the well-being framework is that it allows us to move beyond departmental and simply look through the lens of a Department to match the indicators that Departments may have, across a range of Departments. I just selected Departments. The Department of Rural and Community Development could have policy areas and, equally, the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage has policies and both Departments work together.

I expect that every Department would exert influence, for example, in biodiversity, knowledge and skills, income and wealth. Surely every Department would be measured against those parameters. I do not know that they act specifically in those instances but Departments influence people in those areas. It is not so much a measure of the Departments but a measure of how they get on with the public and the communities they serve.

Mr. John Kinnane

New Zealand is the country that is probably most advanced with its approach in terms of a well-being framework. The framework was developed over a number of years. That country initially utilised the framework. As budgetary proposals came in from departments, it utilised the well-being framework to scrutinise the proposals to see how they impacted on the various dimensions of well-being.

As we look towards the next budget, we are working within our Department to see whether there is a way that we can apply certain dimensions of well-being. Initially, on a pilot basis, we would assess whether we can map decisions across so decisions that impact on a number of Departments across the shared dimensions of well-being.

To get to a stage that we are in a position to produce a public service performance report that reports against the various dimensions of well-being, a lot of work needs to be done, from an IT perspective, to have a system where we can tag each expenditure line and each of the indicators within the performance report against the various dimensions of well-being. That is a huge job of work that will have to be done on an incremental basis. We will have to start on a pilot basis with certain dimensions and Departments and then roll that out so that, over time, we will get to a situation where we report against the well-being dimensions.

Has the Department gone to Departments to identify where there is roll out or is the Department waiting for them to come to it? Who is driving this initiative? Is it the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform or the various line Departments? I hope it is the former.

Mr. John Kinnane

Yes. We are driving a programme. Ms. O'Loughlin will outline the work that is being done at the moment. We have the OECD in as consultants and the work is funded through the EU Structural Reform Support Programme, SRSP

Ms Caroline O'Loughlin

We are entering the final phase of an SRSP, which examines the entire framework of performance budgeting. The OECD has been appointed to conduct the project. My Department is very fortunate as in our team consists of people who are experts in how similar reforms have been introduced in places such as New Zealand. Mr. Kinnane mentioned the New Zealand living standards framework and gender budgeting in Iceland.

The SRSP project is now in its second phase. We are engaging pilot Departments now to conduct a tagging exercise to see how expenditure can be tagged against different dimensions.

Will Ms O'Loughlin please name the Departments participating in the pilot project?

Ms Caroline O'Loughlin

The Departments that we have confirmed so far are the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, and Transport. We hope to confirm a third Department.

Why were those Departments selected? What is the rationale for selecting them? What is the name of the third Department?

Ms Caroline O'Loughlin

As this is a pilot project we wanted to identify Departments that have a broad remit over all of the dimensions of performance budgeting. We based our selection on the fact that the Departments covered all areas such as well-being, green, sustainable development goals, SDGs, and equality budgeting. We selected those who we felt were the most suitable Departments.

I advise that the Deputy has exceeded his allotted time of ten minutes and I know that time passes very fast. Perhaps there will be time at the end of the meeting and he can comment then.

I did not notice the time passing.

I thank our guests.

On page 14, the public service performance report 2021 states: "Older Persons: no. of Home Support Hours provided (including Intensive Home Care Packages)", which had a target of €22.26 million and 93% was delivered with a spend of €20.7 million. On page 16, the report states that 49% of the target has been delivered in respect of people in receipt of intensive home care packages, the number of hours from these packages is at 68% delivery and the number of short-stay beds in public long-stay units is almost 67% of delivery. How can 93% of a budget be spent on the delivery of these key performance indicators that range between 49% to 68% delivery? If 100% of these indicators were delivered then what overspend would we be faced with and why?

Ms Caroline O'Loughlin

That is a question for the Department of Health. The purpose of the performance report is to capture information to ensure we have the right information when the sectoral committees meet Departments. We must have the right information so we can have proper dialogue and scrutinise exactly what the Department has reported. I am afraid that we cannot comment on the actual work. The report wants to capture this information so that the Department has the right information to enable it to have a dialogue with Departments.

Am I correct that Ms O'Loughlin has told us that to get a proper answer we must approach the Department of Health?

Ms Caroline O'Loughlin

Yes. The report tries to give all of the right information so no matter what Department or committee is meeting that we have the right information to have proper conversations. It is a matter for the Department of Health.

Recently a programme entitled "RTÉ Investigates: Council Chamber Secrets" was broadcast. The programme was an investigation of the funds drawn down with no delivery of infrastructure. What process is in place to ensure the actual delivery of the performance report?

Ms Caroline O'Loughlin

Again, what we are trying to do is capture exactly what the Departments say they are going to do with their allocation and make sure that we report what has been actually delivered. Again, it is to inform the dialogue with the Departments and have evidence on which to base future allocations.

We are discussing the 2021 report in May 2022. Is there any way that we can see live performance data or even data that concerns this year?

Ms Caroline O'Loughlin

Metrics are contained in the Revised Estimates Volume that is published in December and they contain the targets for the year ahead.

Does the Department have an idea when the summer economic statement will be published?

Mr. John Kinnane

We do not have a definitive date but it is due over the coming weeks.

Is that the date or the actual publishing?

Mr. John Kinnane

I do not know the definitive date. Obviously the Ministers for Finance and Public Expenditure and Reform must make a decision on the actual publication date.

I note that spending is assessed in terms of a negative impact on climate change. Is there a similar piece of work to ensure that we have a just transition approach?

Mr. Ed Hearne

As Ms O'Loughlin alluded to, the steps that we have made in green budgeting are very much iterative. We started out with the kind of material that is in this year's report and last year's report. The plan is to progressively build on them over the next number of years. The principal step forward that we made in that over the past year was to look at each capital programme that went into the national development plan.

We assessed that across seven climate-related criteria, such as air quality, climate mitigation and water quality. Just transition was also one of those considerations. We have a detailed report on that, which we can share with the committee. Over time, as we mentioned, the tagging process that will be relevant to the well-being framework and to equality budgeting, will also be relevant to green budgeting. We expect there to be a specific focus on just transition. The degree to which an expenditure programme contributes to just transition will certainly be part of that process as well.

I would appreciate the detailed report on that if it is possible. I thank our guests for their time.

The next speaker on the list is an Teachta Durkan. I know he said previously that he may be a little late. I do not see him present so I will move on to Deputy Canney.

I thank the Vice Chair and the witnesses who are with us. When we talk about the whole area of public sector reform and sectoral performance reports, one of the things that is close to my heart is equality in terms of disability budgeting. The reporting on that was introduced in 2018. Are the witnesses satisfied that the allocated expenditure is being spent within the Votes? Is it making an impact and how is that measured or do they just accept the reports that come from the Departments in that area?

Ms Caroline O'Loughlin

In this instance, the performance report would try to capture the metrics that represent that work, in the body of the report in the performance metrics but also specifically under equality budgeting. We have done a lot of work in the past with the Department of Health to improve the metrics that represent disability spending and I know they have greatly improved over the past number of years. There are specific metrics under the equality budgeting heading that address disability. With equality budgeting, it is not a matter of trying to clock up metrics and thinking the job is done. We are trying to demonstrate to the Departments that if they add an extra lens to performance budgeting to target specific cohorts of society, public expenditure will be much more effective. That is what we are trying to demonstrate to the Departments. We have done a lot of work with the Department of Health to improve metrics. The metrics in the body of the report from the Department of Health on equality are quite good and, as I mentioned, equality is reflected in a number of the equality budgeting metrics specifically.

I refer to green budgeting and how the reporting of its effectiveness will be rolled out. Are there any lessons the Department of Transport or the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications should be picking up from the equality budgeting to see if we can have better and more accurate reporting? We are now putting a lot of money into retrofitting and budgeting for that type of thing. Are we seeing that money filter down to where it is needed? Do the witnesses have an insight into the areas that could be improved in the reporting so that we get a more accurate account of the effectiveness of public money being spent in these areas?

Ms Caroline O'Loughlin

There are a number of dimensions to performance budgeting. As I mentioned, they include well-being, equality, SDG, and green budgeting. In the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, we try to work together and share experiences to learn from best practice. That is reflected in the SRSP project we mentioned earlier. It reflects all elements of performance budgeting. Green budgeting is certainly learning from the experience of other elements of performance budgeting. We are trying to make sure it is as informed as it can be. The SRSP project is providing international best practice in all elements of performance budgeting, which will certainly be reflected in the work ahead.

In the context of a budgetary oversight mechanism, is the fact that we have an annual budget - we do not have rolling budgets in many cases - hampering the performance of the money that goes into budgets? A Deputy alluded to the fact that it shows how much money was spent on home help. The reality on the ground is that we cannot fulfil the hours needed to be fulfilled. Does the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, DPER, perform checks on that or refer back to the Department of Health or whatever? Where does the buck stop? Does it stop with DPER or individual Departments to answer for their actions, or lack thereof, and failures to provide services that are budgeted for?

Mr. John Kinnane

On the multi-annual budgeting aspect, we set out multi-annual capital ceilings in the capital plan. Given the long-term nature of capital projects and the need to have a pipeline in place, Departments require a high degree of certainty. That informs the approach towards capital budgeting.

With regard to the allocation of funding to current expenditure programmes, each year we set out the multi-annual expenditure ceilings but the reality is what gets set out on a technical basis is a ceiling for a Department that is in line with the current year's ceiling. The ceiling published for the Department of Rural and Community Development for next year would be the same as this year's expenditure allocation in the Revised Estimates Volume. At budget time, that allows the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform along with the Ministers of the relevant line Departments to enter into a discussion about priorities for the following year. Decisions are made on allocations and increased allocations at a departmental level. Departments have multi-annual funding in place in that a ceiling, which is at the same level as the current year's ceiling, is set out but any incremental increase requires agreement during the budgetary process. That has served us reasonably well in providing flexibility to respond to the evolving situations seen over the past number of years.

The delivery of the programmes is the responsibility of the line Departments, but when it comes to whether funding has been spent during the year, we at an aggregate level report with the Department of Finance each month on spending by Departments. We review the various sections within the Department of Public Expenditure that deal with the relevant and respective line Departments. We go through the expenditure on a monthly basis, identifying areas where there may be underspends or overspends, and that would feed into discussions with regard to allocations for further years.

Finally, if I have a minute, I wish to go back to the capital plan, for instance, the national development plan. Is there a master plan that shows, over the lifetime of the national development plan, what projects will be at the different stages along the way each year so that we can track progress or lack thereof in these projects within each Department? Let us consider, for instance, the building of the cancer care unit in University Hospital Galway.

Is there a project plan for that programme setting out what will be done in each year of the plan to ensure it is completed within a certain timeframe? We see a list of projects and that €110 billion, or whatever it is, is being allocated but how do we track that progress on each project within each Department on a yearly basis to see if the targets are being met so that there will be a stream of work for the construction industry and civil engineering contractors and they will know that there is a plan in place and that everything is moving in the right direction rather than having that stop-go feeling that is out there at the moment? Is there a master plan or a master programme?

Mr. Ed Hearne

There are a couple of sources for that information. It was a key finding of the IMF when it looked at our capital planning system a number of years ago. In 2017, it carried out a wide-ranging assessment of how we budget for investment, how we allocate it and how we monitor implementation. One of the key findings was that, centrally, we did not have a good view of what the overall capital programme looked like in its totality. While individual Departments were monitoring their own investment programmes, there was no consolidated central view.

In response to that, we set about a number of initiatives. Probably the most useful has been the Government's capital project tracker, which started life as a simple list of projects but which has developed to include much more detailed information, much of which is published. Not all of it is published for reasons of commercial confidentiality and other reasons. That sets out the budgetary scale of projects, their likely commencement date, their current stage in the project life cycle and the likely completion date. We have updated that approximately every six months since it started in 2018. That covers the largest projects in the State.

We then have the interactive Project Ireland 2040 map which sets out much smaller-scale investments including community investments and investments by local authorities. That is an interactive map whereby members of the public can look at their area and at the type of projects that are coming. It does not have the same level of information as is available for the larger projects but we plan to develop it further.

The Deputy mentioned the construction sector. We work very closely with the construction sector and the various representative bodies through the construction sector group. We know that this has been a useful tool for them in foreseeing the likely pipeline of work in the medium term. Those in the sector have given us feedback suggesting that more granular information needs to be made available in that regard. That is certainly something we plan to continue to develop over the medium term.

Those are the two principal sources. On individual large projects, Government Departments will publish particular project-level information separately. Any of the major transport, road and energy projects will have its own dedicated website operated by the individual agencies responsible for it. There are a number of sources of information, the capital tracker being the principal central source.

Does that capital project tracker flag up delays in projects so that people will know that projects that have been delayed will have to be accelerated to get them completed? How is that monitored? Is it just a reporting mechanism? If a programme sets out what is to be done over ten years, it will be monitored. I have not looked at the tracking system but it probably just shows progress and where things are rather than where things should be or were projected to be. Can that be compared within the tracker?

Mr. Ed Hearne

It is not currently in the published tracker. That is principally a reporting tool. The primary responsibility for monitoring implementation, ensuring projects are on schedule and so forth is with the sponsoring agency, the relevant Department. Different Departments have their own systems in place to ensure that happens and their own governance processes around their investment portfolios. That more hands-on monitoring of implementation and governance takes place more at the Department level.

Unfortunately, an Teachta Canney is now a good bit over time. I know he was in a rhythm.

I thank the Vice Chair for her indulgence.

I thank the officials from the Department for a very good and interesting report. There is an awful lot of detail to look at but it is very helpful. It is a big reform to now have a document like this containing this much detail and telling us whether the allocation of money made in a budget has achieved what was set out as the rationale for that allocation. This is a lot more information than we used to have before these reports were introduced. They are also improving all of the time. Well done to the officials.

There is so much in the report. It is kind of for each sectoral committee to study the section relevant to it and to then follow-up. However, there are a few things that strike me. The first relates to the Department of Transport. Is there a problem with the Department of Transport? There is absolutely no information on many of its key high-level metrics for 2019, 2020 and 2021. There are no figures on the number of rail stations with accessible bridge crossings, the number of stations with improved accessibility, the number of bus stations with Part M of the building regulations internal and external accessibility improvements, the number of bus stops, the number of wheelchair-accessible vehicles in the taxi fleet and so on. It is not just that there are no figures for this year, but that there are none for the last three years. We therefore do not really know whether the Department of Transport is spending money on the things it was supposed to spend it on and delivering the results it was supposed to deliver. That seems like a big issue. It is the only one I can see that is like that.

Ms Caroline O'Loughlin

For that particular metric, we were working with each of the Departments to capture equality metrics. As I said, our approach to equality budgeting is not about meeting metrics and ticking off a given number so that we consider it done. We want to demonstrate to the Departments that, if they push their policies a little bit further to target specific cohorts of society, they will be much more effective. This was one instance in which the metrics were just not yet available but the Department acknowledged that this was a way to capture that information. The report is published now but, as those details become available, we will update the online version. We wanted to capture the structure in order to demonstrate it to the Department so that it can use it as an example for targeting specific cohorts in other areas. That is an exceptional case.

It certainly is. There is a lot of campaigning going on around the area of access. I particularly note the great work of the disability campaigning group, Access for All. It would probably not be surprised at this, but it would be angry. I have been meeting that group for quite a few years. In a way, this is for the Department of Transport, Dublin Bus and Iarnród Éireann. This is an example of a body telling you it is working on improving accessibility while not managing to gather information on it. It has accepted that these are reasonable metrics but does not gather the information. Access for All gathers information as to the number of DART stations every week where people in wheelchairs cannot get on a train because the lifts are not working. The people gathering that information are volunteers and campaigners. There is a pretty big gap there that is worth highlighting. That is not the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform's fault.

Mr. John Kinnane

It is a timing issue with regard to the collection of data. I will refer to the Revised Estimates Volume.

In the section covering the Department of Transport there are metrics for what its targets are for 2022 and were for 2021. Therefore, targets are in place. When one searches for the number of wheelchair-accessible vehicles in the taxi fleet, there is a target set of 3,300 for this year. Likewise, there is a target for the number of accessible bus spacing stations. This is a timing issue with regard to reporting. As Ms O'Loughlin said, when the data become available they will be included. However, the important point is these are metrics the Department is focused on collecting. They have been identified as important equality metrics and they will be reported against. They have been included in the REV with targets for this year and when it comes to next year we will be able to see how it is delivered.

There will be a massive improvement. We eagerly await that.

On higher education, in the equality section of the report, there are metrics covering students with disabilities, Travellers and quite a number covering women in particular positions and so on, which are important metrics in terms of equality. I suggest one of the biggest issues in higher education in terms of equality is the major inequality in the difference between people from higher socioeconomic and people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds accessing university and higher education. We need to know we are improving in that or not as the case may be. As it is a major issue, there should be some metric that captures that and assesses whether decisions we make about grants, fees, outreach programmes or whatever it may be are delivering any change in terms of accessibility to higher education. I do not know if Mr. Kinnane would have any comment on that but that needs to be added in there.

Mr. John Kinnane

That is a fair point. If we note the section covering the Department of Education in the REV, one of the metrics the Department of Education has selected is the transition rates from post-primary to higher education and separating out the differences between the transitions rates from schools participating in the Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools, DEIS, programme and non-DEIS schools. It is something of which the education sector is aware. Where metrics are available, we will certainly work with the Departments on that. Initially, on equality budgeting, we started off with one dimension and we have broadened it out to include issues such as socioeconomic disadvantage.

I accept it is a work in progress but it would be important to include that area as it is a critical one in terms of equality because there is a gross inequality in that, as I think Mr. Kinnane will be aware and it has been widely discussed.

Another aspect I would note in passing, which is more a matter for the committee to follow up on, is the number of lower-income households who have been provided with energy efficiency upgrades in the equality section. Overall, the numbers indicate we are not meeting the targets. However, it is useful information. These reports are brilliant in that sense but we are massively underperforming in meeting the targets. One might argue the targets are pretty modest in and of themselves and it is useful information to have but we are doing about 50% or 60% of what is targeted in terms of energy efficiency upgrades, particularly for those who need support with respect to the warmer homes scheme and so on.

When metrics are set, who decides on them as to what is a good metric? I am interested in the metrics for the film industry. The metrics in terms of expenditure in that area are the number of feature films funded and the number of participants in training and development. Who came up with them? I frankly think they mask serious problems in that area. The number of feature films produced does not tell us everything we need to know about the development of our film industry. The number of people participating in courses does not tell us how many people are becoming qualified because in my view the answer to that question is none. There is not a proper training and accreditation qualification regime in the area of film despite much money being allocated to it. I am wondering who decides on the metric. On the face of it, one would think that looks good but on digging a little below the surface I would argue it is not so good. One element that sector should be asked about is its employees and people having some security in employment. Who decides on the metrics?

Ms Caroline O'Loughlin

It is up to the Departments themselves to identify the metrics. We provide guidance on how areas can be identified but ultimately it is up to the Departments.

Mr. John Kinnane

As Ms O’Loughlin outlined in the opening statement and as the committee’s report on engagement pointed out, it is through engagement with the sectoral committees that these metrics can be refined as various sectoral committees come up with requests for measurement of performance in certain areas. It is the responsibility of the line Department but certainly engagement with the relevant Oireachtas committee is very important.

It is key for them to identify changes or failures to meet targets. That is all I have to say. I thank the witnesses.

I call Deputy Healy-Rae.

I am okay for questions.

First, this is an amazing document. There is so much information in it. Many of the questions we would have arising from it relates to information to be given by the Departments but this is an extremely useful document to have. I commend the officials on their work on it. My first question relates to the way the work on the report is done. There is such an amount of information in it and it is a significantly long document. On a practical level, how many people worked on it to put it together and how long did it take?

Ms Caroline O'Loughlin

In the Department, it involved our unit and three people worked on it but every Department fed into the process. Every Department put a great deal of work into gathering this information and reporting it to us.

Then the unit collated it. They asked the questions, which makes sense. Those three people had to ensure, on foot of all that information having been received, the report was published. As those of us who have done such work, we know it can be difficult to get back information that has been sought. It is significant to see all this work come together. It is useful to have this report and to take notes on it. When did work on this report start or is it constantly ongoing?

Ms Caroline O'Loughlin

The metrics are first identified in the Revised Estimates Volume in December and we go back to the Departments to provide them with the metrics and ask them for the updates. Basically, they told us what the target was in the REV and we ask them to come back and report on it. However, there are other elements. There is equality budgeting and that work is ongoing during the year with engagement with the Departments to identity the metrics and flesh them out as best we can. A great deal of work has gone into it.

One can see that from this document. Many instinctive questions we would have would be for other Department but that it is a job for another day. Not to add to the officials' work, the queries we would naturally have on foot of the report relate to additional reporting that will be put into it.

One of the questions I would raise with the Minister is on the large capital projects. There could be cost overruns. Often it is difficult for us to see what the underlying cause is. Obviously we know the national development plan outlines €165 billion of spending, which is no small figure, over the next ten years. Measuring the performance of the capital expenditure would be quite important to establish whether cost overruns were as a result of inflation, poor planning or otherwise. I ask Ms O'Loughlin if there are any plans to incorporate that element.

Ms Caroline O'Loughlin

The layout of the report is under constant review. As I said in the opening statement, the feedback from this committee in particular is extremely important. The whole point of the report is to present how public expenditure, public money, was spent and what it delivered in a very clear and accessible way and to facilitate committees to scrutinise that. This is obviously an extremely important element of the budgetary cycle. We very much welcome the feedback from the committee so that we can adapt the report in whatever way best serves the committee's needs. That is something we will include in the future.

Mr. Ed Hearne

To add to that on a capital point, we have an annual report on the national development plan as well which has been published every year since 2019 and that gets into more detail about progress against each of the ten national strategic objectives set out there. It does not quite get into project level information about project costs and forecasts and so forth but it is a good tracker of what is happening across the various programmes. We also publish a report on the construction industry which sets out a lot of detail around those types of trends the Vice Chairman mentioned such as inflation, skills availability and so forth.

Brilliant. Thank you, Mr. Hearne.

The other question I have relates to something I came across when I was a councillor. The spending on agency staff can be quite high. Could that be incorporated in some way? I will not name organisations, but sometimes in the past you would see huge spending on agency staff in a particular place and you would know there were people struggling to get work in the place. It would be interesting to look at how much money is spent on agency staff.

Ms Caroline O'Loughlin

As the Vice Chairman will see, we have a specific section that reports on public sector numbers. It is not something I know off the top of my head but it is certainly something I will look into with that section.

Mr. John Kinnane

With this report, the focus is on the impact and what is being delivered with the money. Whereas the Revised Estimates Volume will include a lot more financial detail on the departmental allocations, we deliberately tend to keep the expenditure here at a programme level to keep the focus on what is actually being delivered. This is a very large document. The REV is hundreds of pages. It is not a very accessible document so the focus here is trying to strike the balance between providing a lot of financial detail and the performance.

I thank Mr Kinnane for that.

My final question is on housing and new social builds versus acquisitions. Could that be documented separately? I am from Galway and I would know when there were acquisitions or new social builds. It is very important for us to have that information as well.

Ms Caroline O'Loughlin

Again, that is something that we feed back to the Department in how it identifies its metrics and encourage that to be part of the dialogue between the relevant committees and the Department in order to improve the metrics.

Brilliant. Those are my key questions.

Something that stuck out as I opened a page was income supports for children. I am not asking the witnesses to comment but it states that the percentage of children from birth to 17 years of age at risk of poverty has increased from 15.3% in 2019 to 15.9% in 2020. I note the percentage of children from birth to 17 years of age in consistent poverty decreased by 0.1% in a year. Sometimes we, as a society, need to look at our failings as well. I understand that is for a particular Department but it is important to note, as a committee, that we need to take a serious look at that.

I will finish up now and then let an Teachta Boyd Barrett in. On behalf of the members, I say well done to the team for putting this together because it is a substantial piece of work and has a huge amount of information in it. We are very thankful that we have that information.

I reiterate that point that it is a great piece of work.

One of the things we are looking at in our committee is tax expenditure and all of this is direct expenditure, is it not? When you give the figures for expenditure under each departmental heading, it is the direct allocations and presumably does not take account of the expenditures. Do the witnesses think it would be plausible - it would certainly be good in my opinion - to also look at the tax expenditures under each of those departmental headings and to look at what they are delivering for us? This is obviously a major step forward in terms of seeing what we are trying to achieve with direct funding allocations. Now we can measure that. We have been discussing the fact that there is no real, or very little, measurement of tax expenditures even though they are supposed to achieve certain things as well. Is it a plausible that we could work towards this report, including that analysis as well?

Mr. John Kinnane

That is certainly a question for the Department of Finance. I know it works with the tax strategy group papers, looking at various items of tax expenditure over time. The production of reports, however, and anything to do with tax expenditure would be a matter for the Department of Finance to look at in the first instance.

Mr. Ed Hearne

Some work has been done over the years looking at how tax incentives support various types of activity. One possible step in the direction Deputy Boyd Barrett is talking about was work that was done last year around budget time. It was similar to the green budgeting side of things, which we have in expenditure terms here. It looked at the climate impact and the balance of various measures in budget 2022. It is certainly possible and some elements of our framework here have been looked at through the lens of taxation.

I have a very brief supplementary question. I understand the demarcation lines but there is a certain sort of lack of "joined-up-ness" here. I will give an example from agriculture where we allocate a certain amount of direct funding to a particular programme while simultaneously there are tax expenditures that are trying to achieve certain things in agriculture but they are not looked at in the round or in terms of the agricultural sector as a whole because they are both trying to achieve things with public money in a particular sector but in two different ways. We have always tended to look at this stuff more and now we are looking at it in even more detail and with more analysis. We are starting to look at this other area but we are not as far down the road and have not joined the two arms yet. I take the point about the Department of Finance. This needs to be said to it as well. It seems there is a logic in seeing how all-of-government efforts and funding, whether it is through tax expenditure or direct expenditure, should be looked at in the round to see if we achieved what we were trying to achieve.

We should take that up with the Department of Finance next time it is here.

Are there any further questions? No. Go raibh míle maith agaibh as ucht teacht os comhair an choiste. Bhí sé an-suimiúil. We will meet the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council to discuss its fiscal assessment report at the next public committee meeting.

The select committee adjourned at 6.40 p.m. until 5.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 1 June 2022.
Top
Share