Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 8 Nov 2000

Vol. 525 No. 3

Ceisteanna–Questions. - Departmental Staff.

Ruairí Quinn

Question:

11 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the number of staff who resigned in each of the past three years from his Department, the Chief State Solicitor's office and the Office of the DPP to take up outside positions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19842/00]

The number of staff who resigned from my Department in 1998 was seven, a further ten resigned in 1999 and this year, 13 staff have resigned to date. As staff are not required to give their reasons for resigning, my Department has no records in relation to the number of those who resigned to take up outside employment.

In the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, one member of staff resigned in 1998 and two in 1999. There have been no resignations so far this year.

In the Chief State Solicitor's office there were 13 resignations in 1998 of which two were from the permanent staff and 11 were contract staff. In 1999 a total of 26 staff resigned, of which 15 were permanent staff and 11 were contract staff. So far in 2000, 25 staff have resigned of which 15 were permanent staff and ten contract.

The majority of staff resigning from my Department are in the clerical grades. This pattern is reflected in the Office of the DPP and Chief State Solicitor's office. The Chief State Solicitor's office is also losing staff in the professional and technical grades both from the permanent and contract staff.

Would the Taoiseach agree that the statistics he has just read into the record concerning clerical, administrative and technical resignations, highlights the very point I made in my earlier question – that we effectively have a crisis in maintaining staffing levels in the areas where the State is under considerable pressure because of legal actions being taken against it by citizens, as is their right? I am not trying to be adversarial but, in light of those statistics, is the Taoiseach satisfied he has the necessary flexibility to hire and retain clerical, administrative and technical staff to ensure the State can do the job with which it is charged? If the Taoiseach is not satisfied, what steps will he take, or what proposals does he have, to provide the necessary resources to do the job?

Work in clerical areas comes under the aegis of the Civil Service Commission. Posts that are being lost in those areas are not creating great difficulties. It is not nice losing any staff who have settled in, but I must commend the commission on filling those posts very quickly. The problems are in the legal area where the norm is always for such offices to have contract staff. Until recent years, contract staff would remain as long as they could hold their contracts. Now, however, because of the strength of the economy they are getting jobs outside the public service.

That is good news for them but bad news for us.

Yes. This year there will be approximately a 7% turnover of professional staff. I would not describe it as a crisis although it is certainly making things difficult and creating pressures. To go back to my reply to the last question, it means that essential work that needs to be done by the State should be done, and it would make sense to contract out work in some areas. It will probably be more expensive, but it will have to be done to keep the system moving, and that has been happening.

The changes occurring on the technical side are even greater. Opportunities in the private sector, including industry, insurance, finance and the law, are provoking a quicker turnover of staff. The core work I have specified in the Chief State Solicitor's office must be maintained, but it also means some other professional technical work must be contracted out, if possible. I have no ideological difficulty with that. It is better to do that than to create undue backlogs which would leave us back where we were with the difficulties caused by pressures on clerical staff. I hope the discussions that are currently going on will be finalised – as soon as the new solicitor in the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions is on board – with the DPP and the Attorney General. That will probably mean another 40 plus staff in the Department. I take Deputy Quinn's point, which is to make sure the system works effectively and there are no backlogs or other difficulties. Where it makes sense we should, as far as possible, not restrict work being contracted out. I have no difficulty with that.

I support the serious point raised by Deputy Quinn. If it is not a crisis then it is heading towards one if our law officers are unable to fulfil their obligations. Does the Taoiseach accept that in quite a number of areas a considerable backlog has been created, perhaps inevitably? In some instances, this backlog could leave the State open to court action. Does he accept that a more determined approach is needed to cope with the problem? He mentioned 40 new appointees, but are they there? Even if approval is given for a further 40 appointments, does the Taoiseach think they can be found on the basis of current terms of employment?

I do not mean this as a glib or simple answer, but the problem in the Civil Service today is not finding people, it is keeping them, particularly in legal grades. We are losing many clerical people because they are doing very well outside the Civil Service where rates of pay are extremely good. I have been noting the rate of increase in pay scales in recent weeks. Many legal staff work under contract in the public service in order to gain experience which they consider is valuable, but then they move on perhaps because the rates are not as good as those in the private sector. Even though numbers have increased and conditions have improved, the main reason the June discussions failed was due to the length and rate of grades which are linked to the analogues. In the end that was the breaking issue. Now they are back in discussions again. I have said we have to be realistic and have to relate grades to what is happening in the private sector, but there is a knock-on effect. That was the real issue, not staff numbers or the work load, even though that is very demanding. I acknowledge the work that is undertaken by staff. Even though improvements were made to the structure of the grades, people still saw that it took too long to reach the top.

In earlier years when we had other jobs, people lived with grades where it took 17 and 21 years to reach the top, but that is not acceptable to people now and it is creating difficulties. People coming into the public service have professional and technical qualifications for which they worked hard. While they are glad to be in the public service, after two or three years' experience they can transfer to the private sector which is growing rapidly. I provided figures for that growth in the financial services sector, both last week and yesterday in the House. If one breaks down the jobs being created in the financial services sector, a great number of them are in the legal and technical areas, even though they are branded in the financial category. The rates of pay are substantially more than anything we can pay. That is the honest answer I have to give.

Would the Taoiseach agree that justice delayed is justice denied? Many of the actions being initiated by small people, or which are taken on their behalf, against the State are being inordinately delayed because of the lack of staff and resources. Would the Taoiseach also agree that some years ago when a similar staffing crisis in competition terms occurred in the IT section of the Revenue Commissioners – I suspect during the time when the Taoiseach was Minister for Finance, and certainly when I held that post – the Commissioners, with the authorisation of the Department of Finance, were able to pay an additional IT loyalty bonus to staff with specialist skills for which there was a high market demand? If the Taoiseach accepts that such a precedent exists elsewhere for skills that can be ring fenced as being unique to a particular category of people, in light of all the extraordinary evidence he has put on the record, would he not accept that there is a necessity for some kind of creative intervention to deal with a haemorrhage of technical and administrative staff, which is undoubtedly denying justice to people at present?

I want to be factual about this. While the work load put in for a number of years past has been heavy, there have not been enormous delays. There are pressures on the system, however. Following the detailed negotiations, there have been improvements in recent years, including significant improvements in staff numbers, promotional outlets and starting scales. They were put to the union again in June but were rejected for the reasons I have stated. While there are serious difficulties I do not think they are insurmountable. They are being addressed and steps have been taken to provide better office-wide IT systems, organisational structures, library and information facilities, strategic planning, training and development. All these items are in place but even so, staff are being lost in both the legal and technical sectors. As regards the negotiations, I have said that they will have to find imaginative ways to proceed.

I will not disagree with the Deputy. The offer in June was a good one but was resoundingly rejected. I cannot remember the figures but they were not in the ballpark of acceptance. It must be re-examined comprehensively to resolve this matter and I have said as much to the people involved.

The model the Deputy and I created – although I must give the Deputy more credit for it – is now causing problems even in the Revenue Commissioners and the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs. Some people are being offered up to £10,000 more than the point at which they are on the scale. That is good news for them.

The working conditions are slightly different.

Work conditions may not always be as good as in other periods but the private sector is giving staff members in the Oireachtas and elsewhere £5,000 more than they earn for jobs which, while important, are linked to clerical and administrative grades. That is not to speak of the information technology area where people can earn £10,000 more. That is great for employment.

The old problem in the Civil Service and analogous grades was always that there was no movement or progress and that a young person had to wait for people to retire to advance. That has been turned on its head. However, I accept we have a job to do and that this work must continue. While we have devoted huge resources to the area of facilities, we must still conclude this set of negotiations with IMPACT to ensure we continue to have an excellent service.

Top
Share