SELECT COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE debate -
Wednesday, 20 Apr 2005

Estimates for Public Services 2005.

Vote 2 — Department of the Taoiseach (Revised).

Vote 3 — Office of the Attorney General (Revised).

Vote 4 — Central Statistics Office (Revised).

Vote 13 — Office of the Chief State Solicitor (Revised).

Vote 14 — Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Revised).

Chairman

The purpose of today's meeting is to consider the Revised Estimates for the Taoiseach's group of Votes. A draft timetable for the meeting was circulated with the agenda. Is the timetable agreed? Agreed. Apologies have been received from Deputy Ned O'Keeffe.

On 24 February, the Dáil ordered that the following Revised Estimates for the public service, inter alia, be referred to this committee for consideration: Vote 2 — Department of the Taoiseach; Vote 3 — Office of the Attorney General; Vote 4 — Central Statistics Office; Vote 13 — Office of the Chief State Solicitor; and Vote 14 — Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

We are very pleased to have with us the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, and Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputy Kitt.

The Taoiseach

I thank the Chairman and the committee for receiving the Estimates for the Department of the Taoiseach and the associated offices for 2005. The activities outlined in the Estimates for the Department reflect the central role it plays in advancing the priorities of the Government. In my statement I will give an overview of the key objectives and projects that will be progressed by the Department this year. I am conscious of the range and volume of continuing activity that contributes to the overall achievement of those strategic objectives. I have circulated a document giving a more detailed description of the Department's activities in pursuance of each strategic objective and of the progress that was made last year. I hope it will be helpful in informing a discussion of the Department's Estimates for 2005. I will outline the key objectives and projects that will be progressed this year.

The date of 10 April marked the seventh anniversary of the signing of the Good Friday Agreement. That agreement was ratified by the people in referendums North and South. It is the cornerstone of our efforts to bring peace and reconciliation to all parts of the island. In the negotiations on the Good Friday Agreement, the Government and the various parties were able to address the main issues at the heart of the conflict. Those included the constitutional issues, the institutional arrangements and institutional reform. The agreement has worked in a positive way. Over the past seven years, the agreement has contributed enormously to transforming relations on these islands, and the principle of consent has been accepted by all sides. The value of North-South co-operation is recognised universally. Real progress has been achieved, with a new beginning in policing and a strong partnership between the two Governments in driving progress which has demonstrated the value of good intergovernmental co-operation.

The Government's commitment to the full implementation of the Agreement remains unwavering. The Government will discharge its responsibility and maintain the integrity of the democratic process and the rule of law. The events of recent months have damaged trust and confidence in an end to all forms of paramilitarism and criminality and in full decommissioning. The pursuit of truly peaceful and democratic means is essential if we are to achieve progress. Gerry Adams's appeal to the IRA is significant. However, it can be judged only on the basis of the IRA's actions. We continue to work to implement the Good Friday Agreement in full as the people voted for. That is an inclusive process and the Government continues to work towards an inclusive, comprehensive peace settlement.

The amount of €51,000 in subhead D of the Vote for 2005 is a contingency provision to cover costs associated with any meetings of the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation that might be convened this year. In subhead E, €65,000 has been allocated for commemoration initiatives, to provide funding for the commemorations of different periods or events for which commemoration is appropriate or has been proposed by civil society. The sum of €250,000 under subhead L of the Vote will allow the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Dublin and Monaghan Bombings to complete its work. An additional provision has been made for a commission of investigation into those matters. The Government has established that commission in light of the recommendations of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights.

The European and international affairs division supports my role as a member of the European Council and as head of Government in dealing with Ireland's role in European and international affairs. The division works in close collaboration with the Department of Foreign Affairs and with other Government Departments to promote Ireland's interests in the European Union and in international policy formulation. Co-ordinating a successful referendum to ratify the European constitutional treaty will be a priority for the division over the coming year. My Department is working closely with the Department of Foreign Affairs in particular and with other Departments as appropriate to ensure that a referendum on the European constitution will take place after an informed debate on the matter.

The National Forum on Europe is making its own important contribution to the debate. For more than three years, the forum has established itself as an independent space where public representatives in civil society organisations can debate the important European issues of the day and how they impact on Irish citizens. This has resulted in inclusive participation by all interested parties and organisations involved in European affairs, in the promotion of a wide public debate on the European constitution and in the provision of factual information on the key issues involved. A date has not been set for the referendum, but the Government is putting in place the technical arrangements to ensure that the referendum on the European constitution can be held in due course. The Government hopes to publish a referendum Bill and establish a referendum commission shortly.

In the enlarged European Union of 25 member states, soon to be 27, it is essential that Ireland has strong bilateral relations with its partners, particularly the new EU member states. I visited Bulgaria and Poland in February.

In addition, we will open new embassies in Lithuania, Latvia, Bulgaria, Romania and Malta this year. I will continue my programme of meetings with international partners in the coming year. This forms part of Ireland's strategic approach to further developing our bilateral political, economic and cultural relations with non-EU countries. These meetings also serve to maintain our position at the forefront of international matters and raise our profile in terms of inward and outward economic and investment opportunities.

In January I made a successful visit to China accompanied by a large trade delegation. On 4 April I launched the second phase of the Asia Strategy 2005-09 to enhance the important relationships between Ireland and Asia. I will lead the Irish delegation at the United Nations when the first major progress review of implementation of the commitments contained in the millennium declaration takes place in New York in September, where world leaders will also discuss the role of the United Nations in achieving the millennium development goals. They will consider more generally what reforms will be needed for the United Nations.

Funding of €321,000 has been provided in subhead P to promote mutually advantageous co-operation between Ireland and Newfoundland and Labrador through the Ireland Newfoundland Partnership which was established on foot of a memorandum of understanding between the Government of Ireland and the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. The work of the partnership spans co-operation initiatives and activities in a wide range of sectors. Planned activities in 2005 include initiatives in the areas of marine science and engineering, arts, culture, tourism and education.

The funding provided in subhead R of my Department's Vote for the European Union Science Olympiad is an example of how we can engage in initiatives which promote linkages and co-operation across the European Union, particularly by engaging young people in activities which help to promote a key sector for the economic future of the Union.

As members are aware, the economy has performed well against a difficult international background. Economic growth has been strong, especially compared to other European economies. We have seen inflation fall sharply; unemployment remains low; employment continued to grow last year and the public finances remain on a sustainable path. This clearly shows that the Government's economic strategy is working well.

The economic and social policy division of the Department plays an important role in providing briefings and advice and in adopting a "whole of Government" perspective to policy formulation and implementation. The division works with other Departments and stakeholders in a number of key areas, including the economy, infrastructure, social inclusion, financial services and social partnership. It also works closely with the Central Statistics Office in promoting the use of statistics in evidence-based policy-thinking. A critical role of the division is in the operation of the social partnership process. The regular plenary meetings with the social partners will be held in July this year and I will attend as normal. The negotiation of a new agreement to succeed Sustaining Progress will be a major task in the latter part of the year.

The National Economic and Social Council, NESC, provides advice for the Government on the development of the economy and the achievement of social justice. It continues to be at the forefront in identifying and analysing strategic policy issues and is committed to high quality research analysis. It has recently completed its report on housing and a number of other studies, including its three-yearly strategic overview of Irish economic and social policy, are planned or already under way. There is provision of €790,000 in the 2005 Estimates to fund the council's activities.

The National Economic and Social Forum, NESF, has a particular mandate to evaluate and monitor the effectiveness of policies and programmes to tackle inequality and social exclusion in the context of social partnership agreements. This particular focus has resulted in a number of publications that contribute and add value to our approach in addressing these areas. The NESF, with its four strands of Oireachtas, employer, trade unions and farm organisations, community and voluntary sectors, and central and local government, is uniquely placed to harness the views of a wide range of interests. Uniquely among the social partnership bodies, the Oireachtas is represented on the NESF. This is important since our public representatives have unique insights into the impact of policies and programmes on the lives of people. The Estimates for 2005 provide for a sum of €689,000 to fund the forum's work.

The National Centre for Partnership and Performance, NCPP, will continue to focus on supporting change and improved performance through partnership in the workplace. One of the key issues facing us is how to modernise our workplaces to achieve high performance. The Government, employers and trade unions believe co-operative working relationships are the key to managing change, achieving higher performance and a better workplace. A provision of €1,041,000 has been made in the 2005 Estimates to fund the NCPP's activities which will include completion of the work associated with the forum on the workplace of the future.

The National Economic and Social Development Office, NESDO, comprises the NESC, the NESF and the NCPP. The primary role of the NESDO is to add value to the work of its constituent bodies by creating the conditions under which co-operation between them can be maximised, joint projects pursued and the potential for duplication minimised. The NESDO promotes the development of a shared vision for realising these goals and will encourage the constituent bodies to maximise their impact through co-operation and co-ordinated effort. Through this process of co-operation, knowledge and ideas can be shared and complementary and joint programmes of research and analysis pursued.

The NESDO, together with its constituent bodies, will explore the challenge facing Ireland in achieving innovation-driven economic and social development. Creating a learning economy and society requires the engagement of a wide range of enterprises, the social partners and other organisations which the NESDO is uniquely placed to address. An amount of €1,168,000 has been provided in subhead M of the Department's Vote for the office in 2005. This will fund joint work activities and the costs of running office premises and shared administrative services for the office.

There is an allocation of €200,000 in subhead S of my Department's Vote for the new task force on active citizenship which I recently announced. A vibrant civic society which is so essential to a balanced and ultimately happy community requires us to take steps to support engagement by individuals and groups across society. In recognition of the fact that we need to consider the policies and actions which can help such engagement and the resources which can be deployed to support participation, the role of the task force will be to consider the way forward and stimulate discussion and debate throughout society on a challenge which concerns all our citizens.

Good progress continues to be made on the modernisation agenda for the public service. The implementation group of Secretaries General chaired by the Secretary General of the Department continues to co-ordinate, promote and support implementation of the modernisation agenda. Sustaining Progress contains a substantial modernisation agenda for the public service. There are important provisions relating to more open recruitment procedures, more competitive promotions, an enhanced performance management system and legislation streamlining staff disciplinary processes. The agreement also provides for performance verification groups, PVG, which must verify that there is progress on the modernisation agenda before pay increases are approved.

The progress made across the Civil Service in implementing the modernisation programme was recognised by the PVG in respect of the three separate payments due to be paid under Sustaining Progress in 2004. They also noted the high levels of flexibility, co-operation, commitment and skill displayed by many staff during Ireland's successful Presidency of the European Union last year. Clearly, decentralisation will impact on the operation of the Civil Service. The implications of the programme are also firmly on the implementation group's agenda.

We can increasingly see the improvements to the way we work which are arising from changes implemented under the modernisation agenda. In particular, the select committee will be interested to note that improved information being provided as a result of new systems associated with the implementation of the management information framework, MIF, will in future provide us all with better information for decision-making. Proposals will be considered by the Government in the coming weeks to reform the budgetary and Estimates process so as to utilise the information coming onstream as a result of the MIF and other initiatives in a manner which will enable more meaningful consideration of how we can best allocate resources to achieve strategic priorities. I look forward to being in a position to engage with this more meaningful discussion when we meet to discuss future Estimates for my Department.

An allocation of €10.552 million has been made in subhead K of the Estimate to fund the ongoing work of the Moriarty tribunal and provide for costs estimated at €6.5 million which will arise if the tribunal concludes its work in the current year. There is also a contingency provision of €250,000 in subhead J for any outstanding legal costs that might fall due in respect of the McCracken tribunal. An allocation of €399,000 has been made for the all-party committee on the Constitution which will continue its very valuable work by undertaking a study of the articles in the Constitution relating to the family, including the rights of children.

I turn to the other Votes which are the subject of today's meeting. The 2005 Estimate for the Office of the Attorney General is €15.136 million. This provides for the operating costs of the office. Subhead A5 includes funding for the implementation of a new IT plan under way in conjunction with the Office of the Chief State Solicitor. This involves a number of major projects which will greatly increase the operational efficiency and effectiveness of the office. A provision of €1.9 million is made by way of a grant-in-aid for the Law Reform Commission.

Vote 13 provides for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Chief State Solicitor. The Estimate for the year ending 31 December 2005 is €36.025 million and includes provision for fees to counsel engaged for litigation and advisory work for the office and the Office of the Attorney General. Under subhead C — general law expenses — approximately €4.4 million is provided to cover a range of legal expenses such as expert witnesses, stenographers and the running costs of the AG scheme. The Estimate for the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions is €33.656 million which provides for the salaries and expenses of the director's staff; fees to counsel engaged by the director to prosecute cases in the various courts, and legal awards against the State arising from judicial review and other legal proceedings.

I commend the Estimates to the select committee and thank committee members for their attention. The Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, will make a statement on the Estimates for the Information Society Commission and the Central Statistics Office, for which he has ministerial responsibility.

Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach (Mr. Kitt)

I thank the Chairman and the select committee for receiving these Estimates and the opportunity to discuss the work that this funding will enable the Department and the CSO to advance throughout the year.

The second Information Society Commission was appointed by the Government at the end of 2001. It served until 31 December 2004. During that time its role was to contribute to the formation of Government policy by highlighting the challenges and opportunities presented by information society developments, monitoring Ireland's performance in its evolution as an information society, identifying areas of co-operation with other jurisdictions and providing expert advice on specific areas of public policy development. In its final report, Learning to Innovate, it made a number of recommendations regarding a renewal and reorientation of our e-strategy priorities and the need to develop an appropriate approach to advance the knowledge society foresight initiative in line with the commitment given in Sustaining Progress. Discussions are well advanced with the National Economic and Social Development Office which, in partnership with Forfás, will undertake the foresight exercise which will draw on international best practice to position the country to compete more effectively and realise the full social benefits of a knowledge society. The Department will prepare an updated cross-Government strategy to replace the current New Connections document, taking full account of the European i2010 initiative which is part of the refocused Lisbon strategy.

The information society policy unit in the Department will continue to promote e-government in 2005. The Department recognises the importance of developing a modern and dynamic information society in Ireland, to which everyone will have access. This will open up new business and social opportunities and contribute to our development as a knowledge economy. Developing practical e-government benefits for citizens such as on-line motor tax renewal is an important way of promoting participation in the new knowledge society.

The Estimates for the Department include an allocation under subhead A8 of €1.589 million. This will fund the e-Cabinet project and two research scholarships focused on electronic service delivery in government. The e-Cabinet project is a major enabler of new efficiencies in the governmental administrative process. The first system of its kind in the world, it sets up a framework for the secure electronic creation, management and transmission of documents between all Departments and the Cabinet secretariat. It is a custom designed and built system that makes all necessary information available at the touch of a screen. The initiative is resulting in a significant beneficial modernisation of the Cabinet administrative system. The project has progressed very well and key aspects of the system came into operation during 2004. Further functionality will be added incrementally in 2005.

The e-inclusion fund provides for expenditure on initiatives that support the priority areas for action identified in the review of e-inclusion implementation strategy. The objective of the Government is to provide each individual in the State with an opportunity to access and exploit technology and, in so doing, enable all individuals to participate fully in the information society. This will advance our economic and social development as well as our global competitiveness.

New Connections, the Government strategy to realise the potential of the information society in Ireland, articulated the development of an inclusive information society as a public policy priority. It is clear that if the exploitation of technology is to happen, each potential user of technology must embrace it in whatever he or she is doing. Our priority is to mainstream technologies. To that end, each Department and agency must now include ICT initiatives in its business planning process. The e-inclusion fund of €1.025 million will be used to fund initiatives that target late adopter groups, especially the elderly and people with disabilities.

Vote 4 deals with the Central Statistics Office which is responsible for the collection, processing and publication of official statistics on economic and social conditions. While the main focus is on the statistical requirements of Government, there is a wide community of users of statistics, including the social partners, numerous public bodies, business, universities, research institutes and the general public. There is also a significant international dimension to the work of the office while the demands resulting from new EU regulations are continually increasing. Net expenditure in 2004 amounted to €34.166 million. The 2005 net allocation is €55.247 million. The increase in 2005 will allow the office to undertake advanced preparations for the next census of population which will take place on Sunday, 23 April 2006. The census is the largest statistical project undertaken by the office.

Apart from the census, the quarterly national household survey continues to be a major source of information on demographic and social trends. It provides figures on the labour force within three months of the end of each quarter. It also covers a range of social topics. During 2005 the CSO will collect information on work and family life, recycling and energy conservation, home computing and individual pension provision.

The EU survey of income and living conditions began in 2004 and the first results were published in January this year. This survey is an important new information source for national and EU policies, including the national anti-poverty strategy.

The household budget survey for 2004 and 2005 is under way. This survey provides information every five years on household income and expenditure. The results also underpin the calculation of the consumer price index.

A new crime statistics unit has been established in the CSO, following the publication last year of the report of the expert group on crime statistics. This unit will be responsible for the publication of statistics on recorded crime which are currently compiled by the Garda Síochána. It will also develop related statistics in respect of prisons, the courts, white collar crime and new surveys of crime and victimisation.

During 2005 the CSO will be expanding its statistics on the services sector. This will include more detailed statistics on the retail and tourism sectors and the measurement of output prices for services. A new quarterly survey of earnings and employment costs is also being introduced this year.

The national statistics board's strategy for statistics 2003-08 emphasises the role of statistics in supporting evidence-based decision-making. The office is working actively to promote statistical use of administrative records and to support Departments and agencies in developing their data and statistics strategies. The office will also continue to develop thematic reports such as the recent reports, Measuring Ireland's Progress and Women and Men in Ireland. These reports dealt primarily with social topics and similar work is now being undertaken in respect of economic statistics.

All CSO releases and publications are issued simultaneously on paper and on its website. A new, more user friendly, version of the website was launched in February this year. A significant new feature of the site is the on-line dissemination database which provides easy interactive access to customised tables from a wide range of CSO statistics.

The CSO is implementing an upgrade of its internal computer systems for recording and processing survey information. This project is scheduled for completion in 2006 and will use the latest web-based technologies to process over 100 surveys. The new systems are being designed to support a rapid response to new requirements and take advantage of e-government initiatives as they come on stream.

The number of staff provided for in the CSO's Vote is 814. This compares with a figure of 686 in 2004. The increase in numbers is due to the necessary preparatory work being undertaken this year for the 2006 census of population.

I commend the Estimates to the select committee and thank members for their attention.

Mr. Bruton

I welcome the Taoiseach and the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputy Kitt. I thank the Taoiseach for giving of his time to deal with the Estimates.

There is no doubt a great deal of good work is being done. However, we can do a lot better. The notion that we are on the fast-track of public service reform is a serious delusion and one that cannot be allowed to pass. We know the ingredients of public service reform include effective delegation, genuine accountability, the setting of real targets, encouraging strong performance, conducting regular appraisals, using performance to drive budgets and so on but none of this is happening in our system. The Taoiseach acknowledged this, to some degree, when he said he hoped to have in place the basis for more meaningful debate in the future. However, it goes much deeper than that.

I thank the Taoiseach for sending me a copy of the evaluation of the strategic management initiative, although it is a year or so out of date. Its findings are frightening. Delegational responsibility is clearly in its infancy and the public service feels there is insufficient alignment between political intent and strategy development in that politicians are not giving clear direction to what is happening. The evaluation states that many Departments produce annual reports as required under the Acts but their quality and usefulness are open to question. It goes on to state that there is significant frustration among senior managers across the Civil Service and a lack of a greater flexibility with regard to recruitment, remuneration, motivation and the removal of staff.

There is a strong sense that staff in the Civil Service have been traditionally under-managed in terms of being required to demonstrate routine accountability for the quality of job performance produced. The distinction between under-performance and non-performance is sometimes blurred. Manpower planning systems are virtually non-existent and no Department office has yet established service level agreements with the Civil Service Commission. The evaluations findings go on and on. We must travel a huge distance if we want a modern, effective system of public service.

Ministers have no concept of key performance indicators. I submitted parliamentary questions to ascertain the key performance targets followed by Ministers, but none of them followed such targets or could report on them. The key performance indicators included in their strategic management documents are too difficult to pin down and there is nothing that can be seriously evaluated. The statistical information that is available shows them to be failing dismally in terms of detection rates in crime, drug seizures and the number of patients treated in different areas. The figures are relentlessly going down despite huge spending in these areas.

We are asked to sign off on Estimates for the offices of the Attorney General, Chief State Solicitor and the Director of Public Prosecutions, three very important legal agencies. The staffing of these departments has trebled over the past seven years, yet we are not presented with any indication of their performance or a reason we should expect or accept the number of staff carrying out these legal services should be three times that in 1997. If we are not given such information, what are we stamping approval for?

I recently raised the issue of the collapse of the important expenditure review initiative. This was introduced by Government as a three-year rolling programme which would subject the entire gamut of public spending to evaluation. We received a report from the Secretaries General which stated that only 14% or one sixth of the programme had been delivered. There was no evidence to show that the findings of the delivered expenditure reviews were in any way informing subsequent decisions on spending. The way in which we are dealing with important decisions regarding public money is a shambles and needs to be more urgently addressed.

The Taoiseach has not appeared before this committee since the decentralisation programme was unveiled. It was irresponsible to introduce the programme under the cover of the budget because it avoided scrutiny. There was no Government memorandum or strategic plan, no business case established for any of the proposed moves, no risk assessment and no link to the spatial strategy. The basic ingredients of good governance with regard to decentralisation were stripped away because the Government decided it was too difficult to make these locational decisions any other way than to order everyone out in one go without warning, and say: "There it is. Like it or lump it, you have to take it."

It is a sad reflection on the type of Government we have in this country if this is the verdict on the political maturity of the State and we cannot make important decisions about how we ought to devolve power and decentralise. I do not accept this. The maturity exists to deal with the issue in a serious manner. Botched decentralisation is the greatest disservice we could do to a programme of genuine devolution of power. It would amount to a betrayal of the towns which rightfully expect to receive devolved power and more decentralised activities.

I take issue with the way in which benchmarking was managed. It was a great idea in that it was to end the practice whereby one paid for co-operation with modernisation. That notion was to be thrown out and there was to be an end to relativity. Benchmarking was going to leverage a fresh agenda of reform in the delivery of public services. Some 75% of the money was to be conditional on the new agenda of reform. However, the Government did not put a new agenda reform on the table. It was simply a box-ticking exercise of activities which already existed in the system. One would be paid for co-operation with ongoing modernisation and change. That is what it collapsed down into. The thrust of reform offered by this hugely potential tool was not seized. The taxpayer paid out money but did not get reform. Critical areas in need of benchmarking, such as nursing, have not been addressed. The Taoiseach is familiar with the Mater and Beaumont hospitals. There is a major problem in the nursing profession with turnover and a lack of a career path because the issue of benchmarking has not been addressed.

I would like to raise the issue of the future of social partnership and how we address the next round. It is noticeable from the Taoiseach's Estimates that the institutional elements are developing. We now have three NEFs with different Ds, Fs, and Cs, depending on what they do and people are beginning to get somewhat confused with the distinctions. Does social partnership still maintain its sense of real reforming direction? It has slipped into being the Holy Grail of consensus to which people must tip their hat. It does not offer robust debate on the challenges facing this country. This is evident in many areas. Over the years, the partnership has unwittingly given priority to the interests of producer groups over consumers, both in public or private services. The interests of the consumer, patient or pupil do not dominate the social partnership agenda. Their voices are rarely heard, which is a major flaw.

It has undoubtedly slowed down the pace of public service reform. The Taoiseach has been prominently associated with some of the stalling of that process of reform. For example, he has clearly slowed down the expected process of reform to allow for competition in transport services. It has happened in many other promising areas. The dominance of producer interest has failed to create connected lives. This was vividly demonstrated in the Meath and Kildare by-elections where, despite the partnership and wealth of the country, the connections that make communities work were not present. It has also blunted political accountability and emasculated Parliament. Serious debate about decisions which affect people's lives no longer take place in these committees. If people wish to influence the way in which decisions are made, they do not do it openly and transparently on the floors of Parliament but behind closed doors in various lobbies. I am a great supporter of social partnership, but it must work to a new agenda and address the serious defects which have emerged since its glory days in the 1980s and early 1990s.

This is an opportunity for us to criticise and is not a complimentary session. However, we can do much better in the delivery of public services if some of the agenda is addressed.

Ms Burton

I thank the Taoiseach and the Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, for the presentation and for the information provided. I have a number of questions and I would like to start with one of the areas under the responsibility of the Minister of State, namely, the census. He indicated that a census would be carried out on 26 April 2006. I represent the constituency of Dublin West. I recently tabled a question on the number of births registered in recent years in the Dublin 15 area. The Minister of State was unable to supply this detail. The reply related to the whole of Fingal, a county that covers two separate Dáil constituencies. The Dublin 15-Blanchardstown area is reputed to have a population of 80,000 to 90,000. However, we do not know because we do not have the statistical information.

The Taoiseach will be aware that in recent weeks we have again been hit by a crisis regarding primary school places for four year olds. At present, we are approximately 200 primary school places short and, as a result of insufficient availability, this could rise to 300 by next September. Critical to this problem is the lack of statistics. I often need to oblige community organisations and residents groups to collect such statistics. For reasons that the Minister of State will appreciate, baptismal records for an area like Dublin West do not necessarily give a complete guide to the number of children likely to seek to attend primary schools.

I am disappointed not to have seen greater improvement in the availability of statistical information for new towns and cities like Blanchardstown and Dublin 15. In dealing with Departments, in particular the Department of Education and Science, it is crucial to supply statistics. It is necessary to go to extraordinary lengths to explain to the serving Minister for Education and Science that several thousand houses have been built and occupied and that they contain so many children, who will obviously demand access to education. The same is true of a range of other follow-on services. Without statistical information, regardless of the strategic management initiative, it is not possible to get many of the people from line Departments or local authorities to undertake serious planning regarding essential social infrastructure.

I am glad the CSO is compiling information on crime. One of the difficulties in an area such as Dublin 15, where the crime problem is particularly acute, is that depending on how the Garda Síochána is contacted, a crime may not be recorded as a crime. It depends on whether the caller is sufficiently knowledgeable to ensure it is logged. In many cases, crime statistics are lodged in multiples so that if the Garda apprehends a suspect it may end up charging that person with a series of crimes. It is difficult to establish how the information is recorded.

Regarding the Moriarty report, I ask the Taoiseach whether it is intended to ask the learned judge for an interim report. I do not know how long the tribunal has been sitting or how many years' worth of evidence it has taken. Mr. Justice Flood, his successor, Mr. Justice Morris, and other judges involved in tribunals have been able to produce interim reports. For example, I understand that the section of the tribunal dealing with events relating to Mr. Charles Haughey concluded a long time ago. Why has the tribunal not issued an interim report covering those sections that are complete?

In one of the areas of small print, it is stated that the Department of the Taoiseach prepared 200 speeches for the Taoiseach in 2004, which is probably equivalent to the output of a pulp fiction writer. I question whether, from a management point of view, it is effective for somebody to make four speeches per day on average, which seems astonishing. There must be a lot of repetition.

Some months ago, I asked the Taoiseach and the relevant Minister about the practice of the Office of the Attorney General of contracting out, at a significant cost, legal service work relating to the Central Bank and Financial Services Authority of Ireland Bill. No indications were given on the tendering arrangements. I would be interested to know the policy, if one exists, regarding the circumstances under which the Bill was contracted out. I understand that much of the work carried out by the contractors was not particularly satisfactory and needed to be repeated. It was suggested that much of the Bill was copied from similar legislation in the UK, which, because of our constitutional situation, was not necessarily suitable here and needed to be redrafted.

The Taoiseach has a particular interest in the lands at Abbotstown and he has given consideration to the matter in the past week. Some time ago, a request was made to have a small amount of land along the boundary with the James Connolly Memorial Hospital either handed over or sold to the Dublin 15 hospice group, which has been actively campaigning for two years. I understand the request was forwarded to the Taoiseach, who has been sympathetic to it. There is a high level of frustration that this worthy project cannot get this small amount of land. I ask the Taoiseach if he has been able to reach a conclusion on the matter. I do not believe that giving this small amount of land would interfere with the wider Abbotstown project for a centre of sports excellence.

I have asked the Taoiseach previously about the damage to the National Aquatic Centre. What is the role of the Department of the Taoiseach? The Taoiseach is one of the shareholders in the Campus and Stadium Ireland Development Limited, which is overseeing the €70 million PPP that funded the construction of the aquatic centre at Abbotstown. It is the largest sports PPP in the country. I have been a supporter of the centre since it was first mooted. It was going very well and has now been closed for more than four months, which is a disaster for the sport of swimming. A body of expertise was built up, particularly in specialist areas such as diving and other areas of water-sports. People have now been laid off for more than four months, many of them young swimmers involved in various different areas of swimming discipline. People cannot wait four months for another job and all that knowledge and expertise which was being built up is being dispersed. While the Taoiseach has spoken recently about launching the rest of the Abbotstown project, in particular the centre for sporting excellence, serious management issues have come to light by what has happened at the National Aquatic Centre. Will the Taoiseach comment on those?

Can we have a detailed report on what is happening with decentralisation? As Deputy Bruton said, because this was announced in the budget, there was no opportunity for detailed departmental scrutiny. It appears that the element of decentralisation which was agreed to by everybody has been long-fingered and that little progress has been made.

I note the emasculation of the Freedom of Information Act. The senior civil servants who came before the committee to speak about their irritation with the freedom of information legislation and how it was clogging up their structures had their way. There is now a reduction to 45 applications. Where is the comparative gain in terms of efficiency? In regard to the loss of scrutiny and accountability achieved by the muzzling of the freedom of information legislation, I do not see any concurrent gain in the speed with which projects are being addressed. Where is the gain from the filleting and destruction of freedom of information? It appears there has been no gain in Government management and perhaps only a sense of security from questioning and scrutiny. The problem with the loss of the questioning and scrutiny is that, in turn, Ministers are often not in a position to confront civil servants if there are areas, and there are many, where management is poor.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Taoiseach agus an fhoireann atá leis. I welcome the Taoiseach and his team to the committee. I was looking up my notes for previous opportunities such as this but I could not find last year's notes. In 2003 I noted that we had this exchange in June so the fact that we are having it two months earlier in April this year must indicate some degree of progress.

Nevertheless, this is an unreal exercise where committee members are engaged in the Estimates process several months into the actual year of expenditure. It is to all intents and purposes dealing with the event after the event. We cannot make an impact in any real way on the Estimates or the revised Votes as noted by the Taoiseach and his colleague the Minister of State, Deputy Kitt. It is important that it should be noted. I have no doubt that the Taoiseach's colleagues, if not himself, will be in opposition at some time and will want to have a more credible input into the procedure. Now, when they are in Government, is a good time to wrestle with what changes in methodology can be introduced to make it a more worthwhile exercise for us all. I hope that point will be taken on board.

It was to be expected, and our engagements with the Minister for Finance have demonstrated where this is slowly but thankfully showing itself, that multi-annual budgeting would not only allow committee members to discuss current expenditure, albeit somewhat after the event, but also allow Opposition voices to make an input of serious merit. There is no evidence of multi-annual budgeting in the Estimates for the Taoiseach's Department. I do not know if that can be accommodated within his areas of responsibility but it has come in under the previous Minister for Finance and we welcomed it. I do not know what changes the Taoiseach can introduce but I highlight it because it is an area that would make some difference.

That the Taoiseach is present is a good opportunity for members to engage with him in a forum other than the Dáil Chamber where we are limited in some measure. I noted in the press in recent days that he has been out pressing the flesh and testing the waters. He may have been alarmed at some recent indicators of how the next general election might go. He is keenly aware of what people are thinking on the doorsteps.

The Taoiseach

I was not in the Six Counties.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

The Taoiseach is the only one of his Government who has not been there but I will speak to him about that.

The Taoiseach

Not yet.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

I still hope he will join me on it. There can be no doubt that of most concern to people are the broad health issues, specifically the crisis in accident and emergency departments which I highlighted this morning on Leaders' Questions. There is a tendency on the part of the Taoiseach and certainly his predecessors to take the view that if a junior partner or another figure has responsibility for health care, it will not reflect on the Taoiseach or his Department. The Taoiseach would be well advised to take into account that people will not believe in two years' time that all this was the fault of the Progressive Democrats and the Tánaiste, Deputy Harney. They will see collective responsibility going back over the ten years he was in office, regardless of whether the Taoiseach calls the general election early in 2006 or stays the course until 2007. The Government has collective responsibility in respect of the debacle of the health service and no amount of hand-wringing will convince the electorate otherwise. It is important the Taoiseach recognises the buck stops at his desk.

The Taoiseach's Department has direct responsibility for the peace process. Undoubtedly, and I hope it is a position we share, I would have wished we were much further on in the process. What is essential so far as the Taoiseach and his Department are concerned is that there is a return to a sharp focus on what is required to address and resolve all the outstanding issues. That is important. I believe that focus has been lost by the Taoiseach's Department and by his team in the negotiations for some considerable time past. It is all very well that everybody points the finger at what might be the responsibilities of Sinn Féin, but there is a shared responsibility here. If it has not been said as bluntly and as directly before, I and colleagues are greatly disappointed that there has been a loss of focus on the part of the Dublin Government team for some time past. That has been a problem and it needs to be urgently addressed.

A Deputy

Whose fault was it? It was your own fault.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

I have only just said that.

Deputy P. McGrath

There is very much a loss of focus.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

That is the only line in the chorus that some members present know but there is a collective responsibility and they might do well to brush up on the whole verse rather than on the lines they like.

In his earlier commentary the Taoiseach referred to electoral considerations north of the Border. While he responded to my question regarding backbenchers in the current elections, I believe he definitely avoided responding to my question vis-à-vis Ministers and Ministers of State actively involving themselves in the current electoral contest north of the Border. These points should be taken on board because they are extremely important in terms of people’s opinion of the Taoiseach’s impartiality and the objectivity of his Government when it actively participates in support of one party as against another. While he can say the backbenchers can make their own judgments and decisions, I say that as a Government, as Cabinet members or as Ministers of State, they should not. I would like to know the Taoiseach’s opinion because he steadfastly avoided giving a response to that quite specific question this morning. It is a very serious question which not only members of my party are asking.

It is regrettable but elections on this side of the Border in particular may have been a dominant factor in the Taoiseach's thinking for some time past. At the end of the day he and I and everybody else involved must get to a point where we recognise that our individual party considerations and electoral projects are secondary and of less importance to putting the peace process back on track and steering it successfully to the full realisation of its promise as contained in the Good Friday Agreement. That is a commitment I make, not only on my own behalf but on behalf of the party I am proud to represent in this House.

On the Estimates, I want to raise a few issues. Under subhead A.7 there is an increase of 23% over last year for consultancy services in the Department of the Taoiseach. Perhaps the Taoiseach will explain why this substantial increase is necessary. Such increases are evident right across the board. There is an increase of 10% for consultancy services in the Office of the Attorney General. In the case of the Central Statistics Office the increase is 178%. The Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, might explain why. There is no adequate explanation either in the revised Estimates presented or in the texts submitted to the committee this afternoon. We have to be mindful of the Quigley report arising from the Monica Leech affair in which it recommended tighter controls in the engagement of consultants by Ministers. While we acknowledge that Ministers and Departments have a need for outside consultancy services from time to time, many voices on the Opposition benches — perhaps all voices — would question the extent of that use and whether value for money is being secured. Those percentage increases warrant a response from the Taoiseach.

I commend the work of the National Economic and Social Council, the National Economic and Social Forum and the all-party committee on the Constitution for the work they are doing. However, we have to ask what is the ultimate value of that work if key and critical recommendations, of which there have been many, particularly from the NESF, are not acted upon by Government, if they are shelved and ignored. The landmark report prepared by the NESF in 2002 exposed the inequalities in hospital care delivery in this State and contained a clear recommendation for an end to the two-tier public-private system. Where have all those recommendations gone in the period since, and that recommendation quite specifically? It is now three years later and the NESF has spelt out very clearly something that I as health and children spokesperson for Sinn Féin have repeated time and time again — that there is a fundamental need to tackle the two-tier system of health care delivery through our public hospitals.

I would like to know the Taoiseach's position in regard to the NESF, the NESC and the all-party committee on the Constitution and their ongoing work. If we look at similar reports relating to the severe lack of social and affordable housing, very limited resources have been employed there. The all-party committee on the Constitution produced a whole series of reports, most if not all of which have been shelved. These are legitimate issues that citizens must raise and I hope the Taoiseach will avail of the opportunity to respond to them this afternoon.

The Taoiseach

I will respond first to Deputy Bruton's questions. He referred to public service modernisation, decentralisation and social partnership. I accept and acknowledge his right to make these points and I take note of them. A strategic approach is being taken to public service reform. A performance management system is in place, progress has been evaluated and results are clear. Role profiles have been set up for every person, clarifying his or her job description. Business plans for each unit in Departments as a whole are focused on politically. Determined goals are set out in the statements of strategy. A support and management information system is being kept systematically up to date. Pilot schemes are being generated which have validated ways of linking activity and outcome measures to financial allocations. This will enable Government to adapt comprehensive new budgetary estimates and procedures. If we can improve that, we will. Personal management in performance is also being supported by a streamlining integrated information systems.

The Government has acted on the recommendations two years ago on the evaluation of the SMI. We have increased political oversight. Performance goals for Departments have been set down. The independent verification of change in the Civil Service and other sectors has been prioritised under Sustaining Progress as a condition for payment of increments, both generally and under the benchmarking process. Issues relating to open recruitment and competitive promotion systems — I can go through them chapter and verse — have been dealt with. All of these are fundamental changes to the departmental systems and they are working. There are also new technologies and more flexible working hours.

Emphasis is placed on customer service. We see this in the change programme and in many areas of the public service. I see customer strategies in my own Department and in Revenue where there is online tax administration. Payments for farmers have been streamlined by the Department of Agriculture and Food. These were huge areas of discontent some years ago; they are not mentioned any more. Revenue and the Department of Agriculture and Food have won awards, both locally and beyond, for their imaginative systems.

All this change and modernisation has happened without disruption. Not an hour has been lost in public service working time. The same has not happened around Europe. We are more advanced. Our public servants have been a model in accepting change management. They have not been walking the streets as they have in Austria, Germany, France and the Netherlands. Our public servants have embraced enormous change. We must always accept new processes and build on them. Conditions have been set out under the benchmarking process and industrial peace has been delivered. Numbers employed in the Civil Service have been reduced. In some cases, particularly in my own Department which is not a large Department in terms of staff, there has been a reduction in numbers. There has been no reduction in workload, however, and the Department has become more efficient. This has also happened in other Departments where fewer employees are doing more work to ensure the maintenance of service levels. Benchmarking has forced this change upon departmental staff and we should acknowledge it is not always easy for people to make such changes.

There are no plans to relocate my Department as part of the decentralisation programme. However, all the mechanisms by which the programme will be carried through are under way. The chairman of the implementation group and representatives of the Department of Finance have been before the committee. Perhaps the attempt to achieve everything at once rather than scheduling progress over time was too much, as Deputy Bruton said. Now that 27 locations have been identified as priorities for the first decentralisation phase, I have been questioned in the House about the fate of the other decentralisation locations. Decentralisation will take place in respect of the remaining locations but we must advance according to priorities. Progress is ongoing on this matter.

I am aware of Deputy Bruton's long-held view on social partnership and we have been in disagreement on this matter on many occasions over the years. The ongoing social partnership discussions involve the presentation of what are already very public positions. Negotiations do not take place behind the scenes. The plenary sessions are laid before the House and are available for any Member to read. The trade unions, farmers or employers are not slow about informing the world about their respective views on matters under discussion. It might be better if they were less forthcoming.

There is no hidden mechanism involved in this process. Interested parties sit down to discuss issues in the normal cut and thrust of industrial relations in any event and the social partnership process is not unduly secretive. The community and voluntary pillar which has been added in recent years has been expanded and representatives from these organisations have played an important part in the process. The function of the special initiatives was to address the valid point raised by Deputy Bruton that social partnership should not be concerned only with pay and should have regard for the broader society. I have always accepted that point. The special initiatives deal with issues such as the provision of child care, affordable housing and alcohol abuse. They have led to significant action including a commitment to the provision of 10,000 extra affordable housing units, additional to the social housing programme.

I have answered questions regarding the Moriarty tribunal in the House. The Attorney General has been in discussion with the tribunal chairman about the likely finalisation date for his work, which is expected to be shortly after Christmas. I understand the chairman will not make an interim report and I have no influence in that regard. It is hoped the final report will be issued in January 2006 and will be useful.

Deputy Burton is adept at mathematics but 200 speeches a year is four a week rather than four a day. Rather than claiming I am making fewer speeches than last year, I will say I am making the same four speeches several times in the one week. This is evidence of productivity under the performance management system.

My Department is no longer responsible for Abbotstown but I have asked those involved about the repairs to the swimming pool roof. I accept the Deputy's point that it should be back in operation as soon as possible and I have asked that this be done. I am trying to be helpful in regard to the land along the boundary with the James Connolly Memorial Hospital which has been sought by the Dublin 15 hospice group. I met representatives of this group in Deputy Burton's constituency during the week. I will try to be helpful in this matter but must first consider the legal and planning issues because this particular site is part of the strategic zone of Fingal. Subject to these constraints, I will support this project which is a worthy one. I will inform the Deputy of the position once the preliminary issues are processed.

Ms Burton

I thank the Taoiseach.

The Taoiseach

When the civil servants involved in the implementation of the freedom of information system appeared before this committee, they were asked to give some examples of the nuisance values of those people abusing the system. When it was first established, there was a significant amount of use and there were "fishing explorations" by many people. Personal information is available for those who require it and there has not been much change in this regard. What has changed is that many explorers, members of the media and otherwise, have not been using the facility to the same extent. However, there has been no major change in the operation of the system.

Deputy Ó Caoláin asked about expenditure in respect of consultancies. The Department's Estimate for this year is based on the outturn for last year. It more or less restates what we required last year and illustrates that the Department does not engage very much consultancy work. Consideration of some of the issues arising from the social partnership process may require consultant expertise. However, the comparison is between the Estimate for 2004 and the actual expenditure in 2004 which is somewhat understated. The overall Estimate is €271,000, not a very large sum, and relates to some prudent provisions to allow us to engage the services of experienced consultants who can bring specialised skills to supplement those available in the Department. Whenever we recruit specialists in any area, we try to retain those services into the future.

The figure for Attorney General consultancies is up 90% from 2004, or €800,000 to €1.522 million. Deputies are aware of the never-ending issue of trying to secure the services of draftsmen and the consultancy figure includes provision for the employment of eight contract draftsmen. Qualified draftsmen must often be recruited from other jurisdictions. I have already mentioned the sum of €181,000 for IT work. The restatement legislation, which is the new procedure I have spoken about in the House, is costed at €250,000. Work on the pre-1922 legislation to clean up the old Statute Book has a cost of €150,000 while there is expenditure of €60,000 in respect of the chronological tables and work on the statutes. These are all desirable projects necessary to the endeavour of tidying up Government legislation. Approximately 100 Bills have been enacted since we came to office. The IT projects will make both the Office of the Attorney General and the CSO more effective and efficient as well as tidying up the Statute Book.

Members of Dáil Éireann are entirely within their rights to travel to Northern Ireland and offer support to election candidates there. Several of my Ministers have honoured engagements there which have been arranged for some time. Deputy Ó Caoláin never complained when I travelled to Northern Ireland, as I have done on many occasions over the years, for engagements with Mr. Gerry Adams and Mr. Martin McGuinness although SDLP members may well have done so. There are many Deputies who have long-standing relationships with members of the SDLP and that party has undertaken great work over the years. Deputies may believe it is time to repay that debt. If I am ever criticised for anything, it is for the amount of time I have given to Deputy Ó Caoláin's party at the expense of other parties.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

That is not comparing like with like. This is total electioneering.

The Taoiseach

No. All I can say——

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

Our party is in business, and——

The Taoiseach

Yes, and I——

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

The Taoiseach does give time to all parties, in fairness to him——

The Taoiseach

I have given time to Deputy Ó Caoláin's party and other parties.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

He undertook those engagements in the interests of what——

The Taoiseach

I have marched around Andersontown and Conway Mill——

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

——we have been trying to achieve together, I hope.

The Taoiseach

I do so to be helpful. I resent and reject any implication that my Department or its officials have not given time in this regard. In fact, many in my Department have grown old and weary, particularly in the three abortive attempts that we made in 2003 and 2004 to find a conclusive deal. With the greatest respect — and since Deputy Ó Caoláin said it straight I will say it straight back to him — if his party had been more forthcoming on some of these issues, we would not have had so many problems, and they would have been solved in the first instance, in March 2003. I will not take that from the Deputy, because what he says is just not true.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

We will have to differ on that.

The Taoiseach

There is no loss of focus in our Department, and we continue to engage with all involved. That was a quick run through some of the issues.

Deputy Bruton made a valid point on the subject of NESC. There are three groups, and we are always trying to pull them together. NESC is still involved in the strategic work, examining in detail what we should be doing and the strategies that we should be following, with its housing reports and its reports on social policy. NESF deals more with the ongoing issues and with what is in place now. NCCP works more on workplace issues. There are three distinct bodies, which have come together under NESDO for administrative purposes and to work collectively. That cuts the administrative costs, and there is a good saving from working in that way. Those bodies have three distinct jobs. One is on strategy, on thought-provoking issues and trying to find the way forward, one is on evaluating everyday programmes and one is on helping in the workplace. The organisations accept that it is easy for people to get confused about their work, but they are very much focused on their tasks.

Mr. Kitt

Deputies Burton and Ó Caoláin asked two questions in relation to my own area of responsibility. Deputy Burton raised the question of births in Dublin 15. I acknowledge that the information, as the Deputy requested it, may not be readily available from the 2002 census. The CSO can provide much small-area analysis, and the census that we will hold in 2006 will allow comparisons to be made on population growth. I will ask my officials whether they can provide the Deputy with any new information on that small-area analysis basis. One of the new, additional questions in the 2006 census will be on the number of children born alive to women. That is important, and we will get back to the Deputy on that. I thank Deputy Burton for his comments on crime statistics, which are important. The CSO has not yet decided how crime statistics will be produced. The question of publication is also being considered. I agree with the Deputy's points on that matter.

Turning to Deputy Ó Caoláin's points, I will explain the increase in consultancy under the CSO heading. It all relates to the CSO IT strategy. The implementation phase of that strategy began in October 2003. It is a long-term project to deliver a new IT infrastructure, comprising both hardware and software, for processing all the CSO survey information. Most of the work of writing and installing the new computer system is being done by Cognizant Technology Solutions under a consultancy contract awarded in 2003. The full project will be completed in May 2006. The system will use the latest web-based technologies to process the information. More than 100 statistical survey systems are being designed to respond flexibly to future needs, for new statistics and to be fully compatible with ongoing e-Government initiatives. Some payments that were due in 2004 were delayed. Provision for those payments has been carried into the 2005 allocation. Deputies will agree that we should have the best possible, most efficient systems, so that this independent body, the CSO, can provide information to all stakeholders as soon as possible.

We need to have evidence, as we are involved in evidence-based decision making. Regardless of who is in Government, the CSO should be able to provide that evidence in an efficient way. It is important for us to be able to compare data from this year with those of other years, which have been captured in surveys over time. It is quite right that we have the best possible system. I hope that explanation suffices in response to the Deputies' queries.

The Taoiseach

I did not answer Deputy Bruton's point about the work of this select committee. I know the committee has expressed dissatisfaction in the past over the level of briefing that it receives from Departments, and has expressed a desire for briefings that enable it to determine the performance of Departments in terms of outcomes achieved. I refer to what Deputy Ó Caoláin said about the time, and about the year moving on. Proposals will be brought to the Government in the coming weeks by the Department of Finance in the context of the reform of the process for the budget and Estimates. Among other things, we will seek to change and improve upon the capacity of the select committee to engage in the Estimates process by providing more useful and informed briefing material on how the funding provided in the Estimates can be used to achieve the Department's strategic objectives. That will include high-level performance indicators, indicating progress on achieving the major objectives of the strategy statement. Those proposals are informed by work in business planning and resource allocation, which has been piloted by a number of Departments. I think that covers the point the Deputy was making. The purpose is to align the strategic planning process more closely with the allocation of resources to the Estimates.

The ultimate objective of the project is for each Department to produce an annual plan outlining proposed expenditure, linked to business objectives, with an annual report on the results achieved using resources during the year. One of the benefits of the project is improved accountability to committees. Deputy Bruton's point about that was a valid one. The template developed by that pilot project is proposed as the format for briefing the select committee in relation to the annual Estimates from next year onwards. Systems are being implemented under the management information framework, which will contribute to the Department's ability to provide better information for use in its decision making. That will also assist the select committee's consideration of the Estimates, which will mark a big advance for the committee.

In an effort to bring forward the process for the Department, we are providing a supplementary briefing for the select committee this year. It draws on our strategic objectives and priorities, the strategies that we are pursuing to achieve those objectives, the targets against which we will measure progress and the Estimates for the Vote, so that objectives may be lined up against activities and resources. It is about pulling the process together. The briefing also provides a progress report from 2004. That represents an effort to provide a more meaningful interpretation of how we propose to use the resources allocated by the Estimate.

I have a further point in answer to Deputy Bruton's point about multi-annual budgets. Deputy Ó Caoláin also raised this point. Much of the Department's budget relates to operational costs. We have no capital budget. Overall, we are trying to do more and more through multi-annual budgets. In accrual accountancy terms, my Department is already able to hold a certain percentage of the administrative budget. The Book of Estimates now comes out on the third Thursday in November. We have the Budget Statement at the beginning of December, and the final abridged Book of Estimates comes out in early February. We are now having this debate in April. I think the process is far more meaningful now. I accept, however, that we must always try to improve it.

Deputy Bruton remembers, as I do, that the budget used to be at the end of January and the debates on it continued until June. When the Houses returned to sit in October the debate on the Supplementary Estimates began. I do not suggest we go back to that because we have moved a long way. I acknowledge what the Deputy says with regard to linking all of the aspects together.

Mr. P. McGrath

I welcome the Taoiseach and Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, and their officials. The Taoiseach referred to public service modernisation. In that context, I agree with the strategic management initiative taken in terms of performance of public servants and the setting up of the performance verification groups. How can we see what went into these groups? For instance, a system started last year within local authorities whereby payments were made in respect of the performance of management. I have failed to see any documentation relating to this.

I am not interested in how much a person got. I am interested in seeing the targets set and how achieving them is measured. It is meaningless to set targets in October for that year as a list of what was achieved during the year can be set out. If targets are set and openly available in January or February it would make the entire system more meaningful in terms of their achievement. If the Taoiseach does not have a response to hand I have no difficulty if he wants to return to the issue later, but I would like to know if there is an open process for performance verification groups. Can one see what has been submitted and the way the performance of personnel is documented and verified? I am not concerned with specific personnel or how much money they get, I want to see how it is done. I want to see targets for particular sectors and if they were achieved.

Mr. Finneran

I join with the other members in welcoming the Taoiseach and the Chief Whip, Deputy Kitt. When I look at the progress report for 2004, it was an extraordinary year where the Taoiseach was hands-on in Northern Ireland and he presided over a most successful EU Presidency. Yet, when I look at the report I see there were also 51 Cabinet meetings, which just leaves Christmas week. There were 800 formal decisions taken at Government level and 44 Bills went through the Oireachtas. The record speaks for itself with regard to the engagement of strategic progress. The Taoiseach, his Department and the Government are to be complemented.

Mr. P. McGrath

Is there a vacancy coming up?

Mr. Finneran

It is no harm to have the facts.

Mr. Nolan

I also welcome the Taoiseach and Minister of State, Deputy Kitt. I wish to address questions on the CSO and the manner in which it compiles its information to the Minister of State. I am glad to note a date has been fixed for the collection of the census of the population next year. When does the Minister of State expect the CSO to have a report following on the census next April? Could he expand on the different types of information the CSO is now compiling on family lifestyle, recycling and IT?

Mr. Bruton

I have two brief questions. The Taoiseach did not deal with the issue of staffing of the three law departments for which he presented Estimates, the Attorney General, the Chief State Solicitor and the DPP. Since 1997 staffing levels have gone from 260 to 740 which is an extraordinary growth in numbers. In budgetary terms it has gone from €25 million to €83 million. A ballooning of legal costs is occurring. What is driving that? Is the Taoiseach confident that we have value for money indicators in place for legal services?

Would the Taoiseach comment on the timing of the referendum on the EU Constitution? The French decision is due shortly. Does he feel Ireland should hold the referendum early to continue momentum, regardless of the French decision or is he waiting to see what will happen in the French referendum?

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

I thank Deputy Kitt for his response on the CSO Revised Estimates for consultancy services. We talked in percentage terms but never previously spelled out the figure. It is important that we do so in order to have some sense of what we are discussing. The Estimates provide for €3.730 million for consultancy services in the CSO. With respect, while we can discuss IT, this is the CSO, whose responsibility is the on-going amassing of statistics and information. Will we see such expenditure into perpetuity or will we look at the alternative, which is to increase staffing numbers not only in the CSO but in the areas alluded to by the Taoiseach in reply to my earlier questions?

I would rather see real and sustainable jobs created in the Civil Service for staff who have the capacity and the wherewithal to carry out the necessary work entrusted to them, rather than constantly looking for a crutch in the private sector, to the extent that the CSO is spending €3.25 million in this year on consultants services. It is a large amount of money and I question whether we are getting value for money, as did the Quigley report.

Mr. Kitt

To answer Deputy Ó Caoláin's question, this is once-off work. It will deliver a top-class system and will finish in 2006. I am not an expert but I imagine it deals with software and hardware. It is important work, and I mentioned the importance of having good systems, which brings me to Deputy Nolan's questions. We will have initial information after three months. Again, thanks to a good IT system we will have that information sooner rather than later. It will be available incrementally until 2008 when a final version will be published.

The questions to be asked in 2006 will be repeats of the questions used in 2002, including pc ownership; access to ownership; nationality; disability; time of leaving home to go to work, school or college and time taken; third-level qualifications held; the provision of regular unpaid help for a friend or family member and questions on housing. There are three new questions in the 2006 census — including the one I spoke of earlier to Deputy Burton — the number of children born alive; ethnic or cultural background and participation in voluntary activity, which the Taoiseach and the Government have promoted. A positive aspect of the inclusion in the census of this last question is that it will enable us to compare the number of people involved from one year to the next, which is vital information. There is potentially tremendous information available.

The Taoiseach

On Deputy Paul McGrath's point, I understand that both the submissions and decisions of the verification groups are published and are available on its website. I will confirm that for Deputy McGrath and will drop him a note. Regarding the increase in legal staff, a number of reports from the mid-1990s, including the Nally report in 1998 or 1999, showed a huge workload in the law offices. There were also serious industrial issues with the staff because of workloads from different areas. In the negotiations and agreements reached, staff numbers were increased to high levels. A few years ago it was difficult to fill many posts at the old rates of pay but that has been resolved. There is only one vacancy in the Office of the Attorney General because a staff member is on secondment to carry out OECD work. Deputy Bruton is correct in saying there has been a large increase in the number of staff and related costs but this is due to the increased workload. The office has its statement of strategy in place. It is publishing its annual report and setting out its activities in a transparent manner.

I thank the committee for giving me the opportunity to lay before it the Estimates for my Department.

Chairman

I thank the Taoiseach, the Minister of State at his Department, Deputy Kitt, and their officials for attending and assisting us in our consideration of the Revised Estimates.