Vol. 530 No. 1
1 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will outline his Department's legislative programme for 2001; when the promised Office for Economic and Social Development Bill to establish the National Economic and Social Council and the National Economic and Social Fund on a statutory basis will be published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1596/01]
2 Mrs. Owen asked the Taoiseach the legislation which his Department will bring forward in the current Dáil session. [2155/01]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.
The only item of new legislation I will be initiating this year on the legislative programme for my Department for 2001 is the Bill to establish an Office for Economic and Social Development. Drafting of this Bill is proceeding. Deputies will be aware that, arising from the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness, it is also intended to locate the National Centre for Partnership and Performance within the proposed office alongside the National Economic and Social Council and the National Economic and Social Forum.
This has necessitated a considerable degree of discussion with the social partners and at Government level before the necessary amendments could be sent to the parliamentary counsel for incorporation into the Bill. The revised text of the Bill is currently being examined by my Department and contact with the drafting office is continuing. I still expect that the Bill will be published during 2001, probably in the latter part of the year.
If the legislation will only be published by the end of the year, it is unlikely that it will be enacted in 2001. When does the Taoiseach consider the new structure will be in operation and the executive chairperson appointed? Does he envisage an interim arrangement whereby the presumption would be that the three bodies would be brought together, accommodation would be found for them and that, on an interim basis, for which there is practice and precedent, the executive chairperson would be appointed? In such circumstances, the operation could commence in anticipation of the legislation being enacted. I understand matters are well advanced in that respect and perhaps the Taoiseach could indicate his intentions in this area.
Deputy Quinn is correct that matters are well advanced. I hope to shorten the timescale for the legislation, but I am advised that is the expectation at present. However, aside from the legislation, it should be possible to go ahead and appoint the executive chairperson and interview for the key remaining member of staff and the other small number of staff. It should be possible to proceed with the three bodies, the office and the administrative arrangements. There is agreement between NESC, NESF and the NCPP in this regard.
On the resource side, management has made recommendations on the scope for sharing administrative support services by NESC and NESF, who will be working side by side in the same building. There should be no unnecessary delay or duplication in the support areas. I hope it will be possible to appoint the chairperson next week. It is my intention to move ahead quickly after that.
What other legislation is being examined in his Department that may be published during this or the next session? What is being worked on in his Department? How many people in his Department form the legislation group? What role does his Department have in the ongoing preparation of the legislation for Campus Ireland? The Taoiseach led that issue but, when it began to run into deep water and face criticism, he gave a dirty pass to the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation. What liaison is ongoing in his Department? Are people in his Department working with officials in the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation on that legislation?
I am glad the Deputy's Fine Gael council colleagues voted strongly in favour of it recently.
It is called local democracy.
They are in tune.
They also spoke in favour of it. There is no other direct legislation in my Department at present. The people who deal with legislation in my Department are in the Northern Ireland and economic areas and they are all engaged in other work also. They do not only work on legislation. The only Bill being worked on was the interpretation Bill and that is awaiting Second Stage.
It disappeared some time in November and has not been seen since.
It is ready and awaiting Second Stage.
It is off being interpreted.
It is waiting in the grass.
A lot of business has gone on since November.
It is a good Bill which will modernise the legislative basis we discussed yesterday, in addition to the Bill relating to statute law restatement.
As I said previously, the initial work to get things up and running has progressed. The German architects who did the overall design are due to report shortly. The legislation will be drafted and the first phase of the work on the aquatic centre, which the Deputy strongly supports, is already under way. The contracts have been signed and that work will be carried on by the Minister, Deputy McDaid, with my full support, vocal and otherwise.
How much of the work on the project is dependent on the legislation, which is not promised until later in the year? The Taoiseach did not answer my question about whether staff in his Department or part of his extended service are liaising with officials and helping to prepare the legislation in the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation.
Three of my staff were seconded to Campus Ireland and they are now working with it. Nobody else is working on it. The remaining work will be done by the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation in conjunction with Campus Ireland.
How much is dependent on the legislation?
The legislation will underpin the whole project but work is ongoing. The legislation is not needed for the work that is going on.
Why is there a need for legislation?
It will underpin the structure and put it on a legislative footing. It would be wrong to leave it on an ad hoc footing. Campus Ireland will be in existence for the next 100 years.
How do you underpin something which is already there, if you have not got the underpinning ready before you start?
On the question which I have just answered, NESC, NESF and NCPP have been in existence for many years. They have no legislative base even though they have been in existence for 20 or 30 years. They all have played an enormous role in Irish life and it is only now, after all these decades, that we are bringing them together to underpin them with legislation in the same way as with Campus Ireland.
But they are different.
No different.
To turn to the first question, the one to which the Taoiseach just referred, my understanding from his reply to me is that there will be interim arrangements, that the executive chairperson will be appointed fairly soon and will assume his or her responsibilities which at this stage are envisaged and set out in draft form in the legislation. When will all that become known and what will be the operational changes, if any, affecting the affairs of the three bodies to which he referred – NESF, NESC and the national centre for partnership? Will they be located in one place or is he in a position to tell me now about these matters?
They will be located in one place. The CMOD, the management organising section, has already examined the knitting of the three together from an administrative point of view. They will be able to share accommodation and services. Both NESC and NESF are working side by side in the same building at present. Now they will be added to on this site.
As far as their overall structures are concerned, NESC will continue to provide the same strategic analysis through its reports which it has been providing for many years and it will continue to develop the national framework which will be used for discussions on many national issues and national programmes in the future.
The National Economic and Social Forum will continue its focus with the Members of the Oireachtas and the social partners on monitoring initiatives taken in the context of social partnership, especially regarding social exclusion, the marginalised and the less well off.
The National Centre for Partnership and Performance will take its initial brief from what was agreed and decided from two areas: first, from what was agreed and negotiated as part of the Programme for Partnership and Fairness; and second, the major study done on partnership, mainly, but not exclusively, arising out of what happened in the NCPP for the past number of years. As Deputy Quinn will recall, as he knows this area well, the NCPP was working on taking best practices and trying to build a model which would be useful for developing social partnership, but much of it has moved on over the past ten years or so. Through deliberation, consensus building, dissemination of information and monitoring, they hope to build, more aggressively, on the partnership groups in the public service and the many such groups which have been set up in the private sector, and to tackle the new issues and the new difficulties there, but to move on the programme rather than just analysing and gathering information.
If we can, as I believe we will, we will recruit people who have the ability to take this on. The legislative base is not important in that regard but it is important for many other reasons. With the three bodies working side by side, this could potentially give a whole new focus to what we have all been trying to do for the past decade.
Do I take it that the personnel currently involved in the national centre for partnership will be retained and will be part of the new structure?
No, because they were on a contract which expired last autumn. It was open to them to reapply. Frankly I am not sure if they did. Perhaps they did. Their three-year contracts were up. At least some could potentially be new people and some of them might be from the existing staff who have been there for the past three years.
I appreciate what the Taoiseach says about putting the three organisations on a statutory basis with legislation, but can he tell me if the functions of NESC, NESF and NCPP will radically change in any way? Will the funding of those organisations change in the light of the legislation? Will the Government be following more closely the recommendations of the NESC after this legislative change? Is the legislation based, for example, on the Opportunities, Challenges and Capacities for Choice document, published by NESC last year, which discouraged any moves to reduce the top rate of tax, for example? Regarding such recommendations, is the Government to pay more attention to NESC following the enactment of this legislation or will there be any other real change?
The role of NESC and NESF will not change. The Government, like successive previous Governments, will continue to take account of their work to provide a broad national framework, which has come directly from NESC. Increasingly the same is the case with NESF. Most of the current concentration across a broad spectrum of Departments, areas and Votes on the disadvantaged, the marginalised and the less well off in society are coming from NESC proposals.
The National Centre for Partnership and Performance is different. It is changing its remit. The National Centre for Partnership and Performance was put in place for a three-year experimental period but that has now moved on through the examination which has been done on the partnership report by all the social partners and by Departments and others, that is, the people involved in the partnership groups who are the staff of the Civil Service, the public service and the private sector, some of whom are within the trades unions but most of whom are not.
The three bodies have separate remits but they all are in the area of trying to produce and develop partnership programmes in order that the country continues to develop in a sustainable way for the betterment of all into the future. The National Economic and Social Council and NESF will not change their remit but NCPP will change dramatically.
For the purposes of clarification, will the Government still be free, following the legislation, to ignore key recommendations from NESF? It is simply an advisory body. There is no obligation to have those recommendations implemented. Is that the case?
The National Economic and Social Council puts forward views and NESF monitors views and of course the Government and others are there to make the decisions, but by and large the major reports of NESC in the past 15 years, since its first document on which Congress built the jobs crisis document of the autumn 1996, have all been accepted and developed successfully.
