Ruairí Quinn
Question:2 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he proposes to introduce a revised system of programme managers to assist those Ministers who do not have this type of assistance; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4714/98]
Ceisteanna — Questions. - Programme Manager System.
I have no proposals to introduce a revised system of programme managers. Ministers have had the option of appointing special advisers from outside the Civil Service and a number of them have not exercised this option. I understand a number of them will appoint policy advisers from within the Civil Service.
Does the Taoiseach accept the absence of a structured programme manager system has led to inordinate delays in the processing of legislation, as is obvious from the paucity of new legislation introduced in this Dáil? Does he accept a proper structured programme manager system would obviate the need for some of the U-turns Ministers have had to take? Does he accept they would spot major difficulties, for example, the taxation proposals included in the Finance Bill? Is it not time to reimpose a system that works efficiently in the interests of the nation?
I do not agree with any of the Deputy's remarks.
The Government should carry on with what it is doing, it is doing a great job for us.
The system of advisers works well.
The previous Government lost Ministers by the hour.
There were leaks by the second.
The Minister for Defence would still be out in the dark if not for what happened.
A Deputy
Poor old Deputy Hogan crashed after a budget.
Only for good old RACO advocated for the Minister for Defence, he would be in trouble.
The system operates extremely well. The legislative committee has been expanded to ensure legislation is introduced. More Bills were published in the last session than were planned at the outset. We have put in place a system to monitor legislation as it goes through the system. In regard to changes in the Finance Bill, I do not believe a Finance Bill has ever passed through this House or other Parliaments on which the outside world has not had some influence, but there will be fewer amendments this year than in previous years.
It is probably unprecedented for a Minister for Finance to be disowned by his Taoiseach within 24 hours of the Finance Bill being published and for the Taoiseach and the Minister for Finance to say opposite things at the same time. Does the Taoiseach accept the political decision made by the Government to drastically reduce outside supports available to Ministers was wrong and that we would have a more efficient system of Government, with fewer mistakes by Ministers, if another tier evaluated decisions before they were announced?
I did not contradict the Minister for Finance. I supported him on the day the Finance Bill was published. The Deputy is incorrect.
The Taoiseach was not aware of it.
Even though I participated in the system, there is no evidence to show that the bus loads and hoards of advisers, with all their mobile phones and fax machines, did anything to make the previous Government more effective.
Does the Taoiseach agree that one more U-turn will not damage his Government? Does he not agree there is merit in the programme manager system as was formally agreed between himself and his colleagues when they discussed this matter recently? Does he believe it would have prevented the kind of débacle we saw on the credit union issue? A politically-minded person might have prevented the Minister, Deputy McDaid, from ricocheting from one débacle to another, like a dodgem car driver, as we saw recently on the swimming issue? Does the Taoiseach agree that the idea of a manager to look out for banana skins and plan the legislative programme for the Government has a great deal of merit?
Deputy Rabbitte may not have been listening to me. I said all the Ministers had an option to appoint advisers and most have done so. Some have opted for people outside the Civil Service system and others opted for civil servants. They meet and discuss the agenda items coming from Cabinet and elsewhere. That element of the system works. The only difference from the previous system is that it is not as cumbersome.
The absence of such a system is costing the nation.
It would be costly to the taxpayer.