Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 15 Feb 2000

Vol. 514 No. 3

Ceisteanna – Questions. - Consultancy Contracts.

John Bruton

Question:

4 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the total expended by his Department on external consultancies in 1999; the average spent on each engagement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1717/00]

During 1999, the expenditure on consultancies by my Department amounted to £502,249. This represents expenditure on ten projects or engagements, with an average spend of £50,224. In addition, a further 21 consultancies were commissioned by the Information Society Commission, the Moriarty Tribunal, the National Millennium Committee, the National Economic and Social Council, the National Economic and Social Forum and the All-Party Committee on the Constitution. These costs were met from my Department's Vote, at a total cost of £534,462 which is an average of £25,450 per consultancy.

What method is used to approve consultancies commissioned by bodies that are independent of the Department of the Taoiseach? How is the cost of the consultancy settled?

It is based on whether there is an alternative way of carrying out the work within the Department, whether the consultancy is of sufficient benefit and whether we get value for money by engaging the consultants. There are different types of consultancies. They are not all outside people, some of them work on various committees and there are a number of individuals. Not all of them are professional consultancy bodies.

Let me rephrase the question. I am referring to consultancies undertaken by bodies such as the Moriarty tribunal, the National Economic and Social Council, the National Millennium Committee and the Oireachtas All-party Committee on the Constitution, all of which are independent of the Department of the Taoiseach to one degree or another. How is the appropriateness of the nature and cost of a consultancy engaged by such a body determined, and by whom? Who is the Accounting Officer for such consultancies, both as to their appropriateness and value for money, a factor which must be taken into account in the annual audit?

There are two issues in question. Consultancies are only engaged if there is clear justification, for example, if a specialist expertise is required. Most of the bodies I mentioned engaged consultancies because they did not have the required expertise. Competitive tendering ensures that consultancy costs are minimised. My Department monitors the outcome of all projects to ensure that they are satisfactorily carried out in accordance with the terms of reference outlined.

The Department complies with EU regulations regarding procurement. It also follows guidelines issued by the Department of Finance regarding public contracts and it is standard practice to invite at least three tenders, except where clear justification exists for engaging a person with particular expertise.

Where is the final decision taken as to whether a particular matter should be the subject of a consultancy? Is this a matter upon which the independent body has the last word, so long as it follows the procedures outlined by the Taoiseach? Does the Accounting Officer of the Department of the Taoiseach oversee the procedure to determine whether the matter is an appropriate subject for a consultancy?

The Accounting Officer in the Department takes more than an interest as this is part of the Department's Vote. This issue has arisen on a number of occasions and it is not a case of an outside agency requesting a consultancy which is adhered to automatically. They must satisfy the Department. The Department co-operates with some of the tribunals if so requested. In other areas it takes the view that the money is coming from its Vote for which it is accountable. That is why it insists that procedures regarding procurement, EU regulations and value for money are followed.

Top
Share