Vol. 482 No. 8
3 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach the proposals, if any, he has for a package of measures on regulatory reform; if he will outline the main features of his Department's Customer Services Action Plan; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19277/97]
4 Mr. Creed asked the Taoiseach if he will give details of his address to the annual conference of the Institute of Public Administration where he indicated a Government commitment to reduce the amount of bureaucracy and red tape confronting the small and medium enterprise sector. [19383/97]
5 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will give details of the additional staff, if any, that will be dedicated to overseeing his Department's Customer Services Action Plan; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19435/97]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3, 4 and 5 together.
The Customer Services Action Plan for the Department of the Taoiseach, which I was pleased to launch on Wednesday, 12 November, has a number of key features. It sets out clearly details of the services provided and the structures to deliver those services. It specifies the standards which have been set and which will be achieved over the next two years for the delivery of these services. It details the arrangements for getting in touch with my Department by telephone, letter and personal visit. It explains the arrangements for consulting customers on the services being provided. It outlines the arrangements for monitoring and review on a regular basis and for reporting on the achievement of targets.
This action plan was developed in consultation with the staff of the Department of the Taoiseach. Everyone working in the Department recognises and is committed to their role in achieving the commitments in the plan. Where necessary, changes to systems and structures, including allocation of resources, will be made in support of the delivery of a quality service. There are no proposals to appoint additional staff to oversee the implementation of the plan.
On 7 November 1997 I delivered the opening address to an IPA conference on governance and accountability in the public sector. During my speech I mentioned a number of measures I would like to see advanced, including a package of measures on regulatory reform to remove the barriers for important economic sectors, such as small and medium enterprises, and to provide clarity and accessibility to ordinary citizens. The SMI working group on regulatory reform has made recommendations in this area which are under consideration. I hope a package of measures, drawing on these recommendations, can be brought forward next year for implementation. This will require consultation with Departments and offices. Consideration must also be given to the timing of the introduction of these measures because of a number of ongoing initiatives under the SMI Partnership 2000 modernisation programme which Departments and offices must deal with in the coming months.
During the Taoiseach's speech to the IPA conference he referred to a package of measures on regulatory reform. To what type of regulatory reform did he refer? He mentioned removing the barriers for important economic sectors, such as small and medium enterprises, and providing clarity and accessibility to ordinary citizens. What regulations is he proposing to reform and do they only apply to the Department of the Taoiseach or to other Departments as well?
What is the Taoiseach's view on the treatment of people who contact his Department as customers? Customers are generally understood to be people who avail of a service for which they pay. However, we are not talking about that type of service. Would it be better to frame this in the context of citizens availing of the services of the Department of the Taoiseach since we are not talking about a tangible product which is being bought and sold?
I had thought about that.
I am sure the Taoiseach had.
The titles have been taken from Delivering Better Government. The then Minister of State, Deputy Avril Doyle, held a conference at which these titles were agreed, following the deliberations of each Department and how they understood the initiative. It was decided to give the title "customer" to all their callers; perhaps the word "citizen" would have been better.
On regulatory reform and reducing red tape, Delivering Better Government set out 12 priorities. The working group looked at issues it thought worth tackling. Some of those initiatives I referred to on 7 November have been mentioned by the Deputy. It focused on people having a check list to decide whether the regulation was a good idea, whether there was another way round it, whether it should cease by a certain date and the clarity of the regulation. It examined all the initiatives and believes its recommendations would be better and less bureaucratic than the present system where regulations tend to be complicated, cumbersome and continue forever. The working group has now worked its way through the lengthy report and 12 priorities will be given immediate consideration. It is a detailed report and will be worked on over time. I do not believe this can be done in the short term. The programme agreed last April will continue to next April and I have no doubt it will achieve the targets set out. It wishes to improve the quality rather than the quantity of regulations issued; to eliminate unnecessary and inefficient regulations, including legislation; to simplify necessary regulations and relax procedures as much as possible; to lower the cost of regulatory compliance; to make regulations more accessible to the public and in each case protecting the public interest. Those are the benchmark points set out.
The SMI working group has also identified from the programme carried out some years ago on the small and medium sized industries its frustrations and the compliance costs to small industries of regulatory powers and asked that they be examined. That process which is a detailed one is proceeding. It states that apart from all new regulations which should commence from now the working group should try to look at all existing regulations. That is a mammoth task. The previous Attorney General did a useful exercise in putting all the legislation since the foundation of the State and before on computer. Similarly, it should look at regulations but that is a longer process.
Will the Taoiseach agree that the most tangible method available to the Government to compensate the SME sector for the bureaucracy and red tape is through the corporation tax regime? If so, will he commit the Government to building on the progress made by the previous Government by introducing a tiered arrangement of corporation tax for the small business sector and further reduce the rate and increase the thresholds at which small companies pay at the lower rate? While I welcome the Taoiseach's commitment to look at the whole question of bureaucracy and red tape facing the SME sector can we have assurances, in our search to lift the burden from the sector, that there will be no discrimination against employees who are working for smaller companies, no diminution in health and safety regulations, holiday and pay entitlements or any other worker protection regulations in place?
I cannot give any budgetary commitments today but I will pass on the Deputy's points on corporation tax and the thresholds for SMEs to the Minister for Finance. On compliance costs, as the Deputy knows, the 1993-4 report made clear that the regulatory framework for SMEs is cumbersome and costly. The SMI process on regulatory reform which has been ongoing for at least 12 months is a useful one. Because of time restrictions it is difficult however to get everyone to work together. That is the reason launches and promotions are necessary. We can undo some of the regulations in place.
What plans does the Taoiseach have to amend the legislation relating to the Ombudsman as promised in the speech to which Deputy Creed referred? Who, in the Taoiseach's mind, are the customers of his Department and what means should he use to communicate with them to indicate the services available from his office?
The legislation relating to the Ombudsman is under examination. It was stated in the programme for Government that a number of aspects would be looked at. That is being done. As the Deputy is aware, the Ombudsman has made a lengthy submission in which he has indicated the areas where the Act should be amended. The customers of the Department of the Taoiseach — and all other Departments — are those who contact it by telephone, letter or in person. The SMI was the title given to the process under the Deputy's reign. I do not disagree with it, the officials of the Department have found it a useful title to which to work.
We will be monitoring the position to ensure the Taoiseach gives satisfaction. The price is high.
I am sure Deputy Bruton will claim the credit but it predates——
It was the former Minister of State, Avril Doyle, who came up with the title.
It was the Taoiseach's colleague sitting next to him who initiated the customer oriented process in the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs long before Deputy Bruton took office.
He was always ahead of the rest.
There is a distinct philosophy underlying the theory that a person who approaches a Department is a customer who, by definition, does not have specific rights whereas a citizen does. It is important to maintain within the public service an ethos of public service to citizens, not just those who lift a telephone to make an inquiry. There are millions who will never contact the Department of the Taoiseach by telephone but who are entitled as citizens to a service. Therefore the idea of treating someone as a customer has its limitations. The notion of service to the citizen should be pre-eminent under the strategic management initiative. Will the Taoiseach also draw a distinction in promoting the strategic management initiative between protecting the public interest and the rights and responsibilities of citizens? The public interest can change depending on the context of a given issue whereas the rights and responsibilities of citizens continue regardless of the circumstances of the day.
I do not want to enter into an argument on an interpretation of the difference between the terms "customer" and "citizen". We are now endeavouring to motivate staff into taking greater interest in and having greater understanding of problems encountered by members of the public rather than see a continuance of a public service once considered an overall bureaucracy.
The service is good within its limits.
While that is the concept, I accept those limitations. Nonetheless, the overall issue should not be viewed from that aspect only. As the Deputy will know, the provisions of the Public Service (Management) Act have been implemented since 1 September last, the regulatory reform I have just mentioned to Deputy Creed — a much broader statement of strategy covering citizens' rights and a quality customer service — in addition to the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, which is very citizen-orientated, will come into being on 1 April next. From that date, all Departments, unless otherwise excluded, will have to provide members of the public with details of everything on record about them. While there has been a huge surge forward on all of these issues, the real difficulty is in ensuring that all of those involved perceive their additional efforts as worthwhile — not involving new jobs, recruitment or promotions - and meaningful to the public generally. While it entails much extra work hopefully it will render State services generally more humane than has been the case for many decades past.
I suggest that the use of the word "customer" rather than "citizen" may be of little comfort to citizens although perhaps of some comfort to non-citizens such as various asylum seekers awaiting the enactment of the Refugee Act, which is probably for another day.
Does the Taoiseach view this action plan as affording an opportunity to put in place a bi-lingual service, not simply for those fluent in one or other language but rather for those who speak English but who would wish to have English and Irish versions of documentation available? This would be a new departure and recognise some people's wish to use Irish even though they may not be sufficiently fluent to use it to the exclusion of English?
Yes, that is built into the action plan. I know that there is a cross-departmental effort to deal with a number of difficulties, for example, in endeavouring to shorten the period within which letters are answered and have a departmental official communicate with a correspondent in the interim, dealing with regular arguments that arise about the use of names, addresses and so on, all constituting part of the overall service to the public.
Since the Taoiseach will be overseeing the delivery of such services to consumers across all Departments, including that of the Environment and Local Government, will he guarantee that whenever a consumer establishes contact or corresponds with a Department or a local authority, he or she will be assured of a reply within a reasonable period, say, a fortnight to three weeks? In addition, will he ensure that those who attend public offices to discuss very personal matters such as a history of bad health, personal means or whatever will be guaranteed a private hearing rather than having to discuss such affairs in front of a queue of others? Does he agree that, if we could begin with those few but important issues, we shall have begun to provide an efficient vital service to the consumer?
Yes. They are two fundamentals. I believe Departments have agreed on the criterion that replies to correspondence received must be issued within 15 days. In addition, a number of Government offices have begun to provide proper, appropriate interview rooms. It is our aim to make such provisions readily available across State offices and services. I agree it is unsatisfactory that people should be forced to discuss very personal matters, even if not entirely in public, across counters, through grills or in front of others.
We move on to questions nominated for priority, the first being No. 16.
