asked the Taoiseach the plans he has for making the Executive more open to parliamentary scrutiny; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Executive Scrutiny.
1.
The Government have initiated many changes in this direction in recent years, taking into account that the primary responsibility of Parliament under the Constitution is legislative and that of the Government is executive. Such changes have included the new expanded Oireachtas committee system, the new Questions procedures and a new format for debating Estimates. Other reforming measures such as new procedures for debating reports, for Private Members' Bills and for improvement of explanatory memoranda to accompany Government Bills are under consideration or will be introduced shortly.
In relation to the annual Estimates, significant changes have been made in the manner of their presentation to the Dáil. A more detailed programme presentation of public expenditure has been produced on an experimental basis in each of the past three years. In addition, the presentation of the public capital programme booklet has been radically improved to provide more detailed information and a better statement of Government capital investment priorities.
I welcome the changes made so far. In view of the proposed second stage of changes, is the Taoiseach aware that since 1979 the Committee of Public Accounts have not had a Department of Finance minute in their report, as this minute was not published, and is it part of the proposal to reform the role of the Committee of Public Accounts, the Comptroller and Auditor General and other people involved in the audit function along the lines of the Canadian Parliament or the British Parliament which introduced a national audit after 1983? Does the Taoiseach see room for improvement in the role of the Committee of Public Accounts in holding the Executive open to further and more beneficial parliamentary scrutiny?
I regret that delays may have occurred in the publication of those reports. As a former member of the committee I am conscious of the desirability of the committee reviewing expenditure within their terms of reference as soon as possible after the period to which the expenditure relates. With regard to the other part of the Deputy's question, I will consider specific proposals he may wish to make. I cannot consider the matter at present but I will when I hear from the Deputy. One important distinction to be made is that that committee are concerned with the administration of public finances and not with policy issues. Within that parameter there may well be improvements that may be considered.
Is the Taoiseach aware that the powers of the Comptroller and Auditor General and, therefore, the Committee of Public Accounts are affected by legislation enacted in 1866? Is the Taoiseach aware that the committee, being what might be considered a senior committee of the House in view of the fact that every Parliament has had a Committee of Public Accounts, have not the necessary staff compared with the staffing arrangements of other committees? Does the Taoiseach consider these arrangements satisfactory given the fact that the Committee of Public Accounts are charged with an audit function in relation to the past spending of the State?
I do not see what the Deputy has in mind with regard to staff. As a member of the committee, I found no difficulty in carrying out my functions by examining the material put before me and then putting questions to the accounting officers relating to their responsibilities in the disbursement of moneys. It did not strike me at the time that I needed staff to help me to do this, and I am still not entirely clear why I would want staff to help me to perform that function. As the Deputy is aware the committee will have other functions than those they have traditionally had and carried out since 1866. This is a matter for further discussion.
Ceist deireanach.
Is the Taoiseach aware that the Government's publication on the outline of financial procedures says, and it is established practice, that the Department of Finance issue a minute on the proceedings of the Committee of Public Accounts annually? Is the Taoiseach also aware that no such minute has issued since 1979 because the reports of the Committee of Public Accounts, though up-to-date, have not been published since 1979?
That is regrettable and the Deputy is right to draw it to the attention of the House.
An bhfuil sé i gceist ag an Taoiseach laghdú ar na coistí a chur faoi bhráid an Oireachtais? The Taoiseach said in his reply that he had expanded the committees but recently it was reported to the newspapers that it was intended to reduce the committees from ten to four. Is it the Taoiseach's intention to consult the Oireachtas on these proposals and why is he taking such a secretive approach in regard to this?
Sin ceist eile.
It is directly related to the original question. The Taoiseach said he had expanded the committees, but there was a statement by the Chief Whip to the effect that the Government intend to reduce the committees from ten to four. Surely this is a relevant supplementary question to the Taoiseach's reply that the committees have been expanded and that he has done a wonderful job in doing so?
Chuala mé an chuid sin den fhreagra. Mar a dúirt an Teachta, tá an cheist ceart go leor.
I am glad to have this opportunity to clarify the position. The Government have not yet considered proposals in this regard but proposals have been prepared and circulated for comment which will come to Government in due course. If the Government take the view that these proposals contain ideas worthy of consideration by the House, they will then be brought to the attention of other parties because any changes in procedure involving the committee system are matters for the House, not just for the Government. When the Government consider this matter it is not certain they will take the view that there is merit in putting forward such proposals but, if there is, other parties in the House will immediately be consulted.