Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 25 October 2005
1 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the progress made to date by the quality customer service working group within his Department established under the strategic management initiative; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24234/05]
View answer2 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the progress of his Department’s quality customer service working group under the strategic management initiative; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30207/05]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.
The quality customer service working group was established in 1999 to oversee the development of the quality customer service initiative. This initiative has been, and remains, an important and proactive element of the modernisation programme for the Civil Service. The working group, which reports to the implementation group of secretaries-general, is currently chaired by Mr. Frank Daly, Chairman of the Revenue Commissioners, and includes representatives from Departments and offices, Civil Service unions, business, consumer and equality interests.
The working group performs an important role in developing policies to ensure improvements in the level of service that the public receives from the Civil Service. It has overseen a significant amount of progress since 1999, through its own work programme and through its sub-groups and networks.
Central to this work has been the creation of customer service action plans and the recent publication of customer charters, which set out the levels of service that customers can expect. Customer charters have now been produced in all Departments and offices, and an external assessment of this process will take place in 2006. Departments and offices are also required to evaluate in their annual reports progress made on their customer charters.
There are a number of other groups involved in the quality customer service area. The quality customer service officers' network is central to delivering service improvements in Departments and offices. The network meets regularly and acts as a communications vehicle for all Departments and offices to promote quality service and to exchange information on best practice and initiatives. There are also a number of other sub-groups which address specific issues as required.
It should be acknowledged that improvements in the level of customer service ultimately depend on the commitment of management and staff at the level of each Department and office. I have no doubt that this is the case and all the progress to date supports this view.
The quality customer service working group, and its sub-groups and networks, have helped to deliver significant improvements in recent years and will ensure further improvements in the future.
I detect the Taoiseach has a slight cold after his exertions in Killarney.
I had it even before I got there.
Westerly weather. The strategic management initiative deals with the modernisation of the Civil Service and that obviously affects all Departments and offices. I understand that a number of specific aims included customer support, computer-based service delivery and expenditure management. Surveys were carried out in 1997 and 2002. Has any survey been carried out since then?
In respect of the Taoiseach's Department, now that benchmarking has been paid and following the strategic management initiative, will the Taoiseach outline one or two specific areas where he sees a distinct improvement in customer service? The Civil Service inherently wants to provide the very best level of service to the public. Does the Taoiseach detect specific improvements in terms of the service given to customers from within his Department?
As Deputy Kenny said, two reports were undertaken, the last one in 2002. The next one is due before the end of this year. The Department has already tendered for a company to undertake the report. The aim is to target the questionnaire at those who use the Department, both individuals and outside agencies. The findings of the previous report regarding services were subsequently implemented.
A range of improvements have taken place in my Department. The two greatest areas of change relate to progress in human resources development and the adoption of a financial management system. Prior to this, the Department did not have a human resources plan. This was agreed with staff through the benchmarking process. The financial management system is a very detailed one. Effectively, it is a cost centre base of where money goes, including expenses, phone calls and every level of detail. Equally, arrangements on working hours, breaks, lunchtime, starting earlier and working later in Departments which require this have been worked out effectively. The main section of my Department now works from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m., which means a service is provided throughout the day.
During the EU Presidency, the staff effectively operated on a seven-day week basis. They got overtime allowances. This is not usual practice but it was essential during the EU Presidency because of other offices which operated in different time zones. The kind of flexibilities that would have been difficult in the past are now possible, certainly in my Department.
I thank the Taoiseach for that reply. It is not that I want to know every detail but on the issue of financial management, is it in respect of current or past spending? In the case of the e-Cabinet initiative, which was implemented in the Taoiseach's Department, is there any analysis of expenditure before it happens, or any analysis that might be consequential on a project being undertaken? Does the financial management section of the Department consider the projected cost and monitor the roll-out of projects such that it can avoid the circumstances that obtained in many Departments, as have been highlighted recently?
On the e-Cabinet project, there was an initial budget of €5 million, which was an estimate based on the other work done in the Department. Obviously, it included the consultancy work on the design and framework of the project, which was required to set it up. The project is being rolled out and the early elements of the plan, which amount to a quite significant number, have been completed. There are more to complete and the budget of €5 has not yet been spent. I believe the next significant element will be rolled out in January. Thereafter, further developments of the system, which are envisaged and which will be very useful, will have to be costed before they are commenced.
Financial management personnel set out a detailed plan at the start and received a quote of what they would be likely to spend. I believe this was €5.1 million or €5.2 million and that spending to date is just short of €4 million. The next phase of the work will bring spending close to the estimate, and if they proceed to other phases, these will have to be costed.
In most of the areas, and certainly in respect of the human resources developments and the financial services, cost outlays were estimated. They come in spot-on, but I cannot say if this is true in every case as it depends on the amount of development work involved. They are not hugely costly in my case. The relevant officials made an assessment and tried to engage in an ongoing analysis to ensure they were spending within their limit.
The new financial management system in the Department is very detailed and has the benefit of being able to provide very detailed accounts on a monthly basis, not just to the accounting officers but also to the section in the Department. The matter is very detailed and, to be frank, I do not get involved in it much, but it does produce the relevant detail for the individuals concerned. It makes their job more meaningful because they see exactly the costs being incurred in the Department.
Bearing in mind that we are just dealing with the Taoiseach's Department, can I confirm from him that the aim of the strategic management initiative, which affects all Departments and offices, is to make improvements in customer support, computer-based service delivery and expenditure management? If that is the case, how can he reply to the question on progress without referring either to the use of consultants or decentralisation? Does he not agree that these are a fundamental part of the outcome of the initiative? In that context, given that the Taoiseach has stated Departments should not be using so many consultants, is it part of the strategic management initiative that there will be a review of the number of consultants and the cases in which they are used? The Department of the Taoiseach contracted outside expertise 60 times since 2000 alone, which amounts to one contract per month. Will this practice change?
The evaluation of the strategic management initiative carried out by PA Consulting Group cost €21,000 more than the estimate of €471,036. Can the Taoiseach explain why this was the case? Was there no fixed price? Has any mechanism been put in place to avoid overcharging such that the Department of the Taoiseach can give an example to other Departments that have been scandalous in this regard?
This practice is demoralising the Civil Service. How many of the Taoiseach's officials are applying for decentralisation? This is another——
That does not arise under this question.
I am sorry to disagree but the strategic management initiative is about the modernisation of the Civil Service. The Government is known for its use of consultants with a view to bringing about decentralisation. Is the progress of the initiatives in question being followed?
I will answer a question later about the number and grades of officials involved in decentralisation.
Decentralisation will not create difficulties for customer service standards. Various working groups have considered how to deal with this issue and have done some excellent work on it. There is plenty of experience to work with because decentralisation has been a successful practice in the Civil Service for 15 years and the groups are used to dealing with the process. They are considering how it will operate in the future when other Departments move, which I am confident will happen equally successfully.
I answered a parliamentary question last week on the number of contracts in my Department and if the Deputy wishes to put down a particular question I will give him the full details. Most of the contracts have come either from social partnership or the information society group. There will be no change in that. The Department does not have, and would never employ, the expertise to undertake reports and surveys on Sustaining Progress or any other programme. Such surveys will always come from outside the Department. We do not have specialists in those areas and would not have enough work to employ them full-time so I would not recommend taking them on.
The Deputy can see from the list that most of the contracts in my Department came in on, or in many cases under, budget.
What about PA Consulting Group? What is the reason for that?
If the Deputy puts down a detailed question I will give a detailed reply. I do not have the information here.
Did the Taoiseach have incremental reform such as this in mind when he headlined his intention to reform the public service at his party's Ard-Fheis in Killarney? When I asked him last week if he agreed with the views of his Secretary General he said he did not think they were feasible. He then listed the practical obstacles to the kind of reform proposals the Secretary General advocated in Kenmare. Does the Taoiseach have any major proposals in this area or had he this kind of reform in mind?
These questions refer specifically to the Taoiseach's Department.
Significant progress has been achieved. I was outlining some of the many other areas in which there is work to do. We are getting into the next round of benchmarking and, as I have stated inside and outside the House, there has been a demand that the next round should be transparent and we should endeavour to achieve further reforms in the public service through that process.
All Departments, including mine, are examining the areas where reform of the public service will be beneficial. In the last round this was verified independently but when we go into a new benchmarking round it is only right that we should seek reforms and efficiencies on behalf of the public that work differently and more efficiently and extend the service. These are the types of reforms being worked out across Departments so that we can get value for money. The Minister for Finance has outlined his programme in this area in some detail. These are the issues with which we want to engage, and will do, in the benchmarking process which is about to start.
I did not hear any tangible proposal in that response. Is it the Taoiseach's intention that another round of benchmarking goes ahead irrespective of whether there is a new social contract?
I hope the present difficulties regarding the social contract can be resolved. I understand the Irish Congress of Trade Unions at its meeting today is seeking clarification following the letter I gave to its representatives after the meeting last Thursday night. I am open to engagement on that issue. Clearly I cannot resolve the issues prior to negotiations but will attempt to do so following the clarification.
Even if there were no social contract, the State would have to engage with its own staff, the public service, and either way the benchmarking round would have to be dealt with. That would be an obligation for the State.
Does the Taoiseach agree he has not addressed the main issue at the heart of the possibly temporary collapse——
We are moving well away from Questions Nos. 1 and 2.
Everybody finds this matter very interesting. If we carry on talking about the strategic management issue and so on, all our guests will leave. This is a fascinating topic.
Unfortunately the Chair is constrained by the Standing Orders. Questions Nos. 1 and 2 are very specific. Deputy Rabbitte has already been allowed two supplementaries. This matter can be raised in another manner.
I accept that. I wanted to ascertain if the Taoiseach accepts that displacement is the real issue which has created the problem regarding the social partnership talks getting under way again.
I suggest the Deputy raises the matter in another way because in fairness to the House, if the issue is to be debated in a meaningful way, it should get some time, which we cannot give it in dealing with these two questions.
I accept the Ceann Comhairle's ruling, as I always do.
Will the Taoiseach advise us on the make-up of the quality customer service working group, the numbers of people serving, whether the group has consumer representation and the group's gender balance?
The group includes representatives of Departments and offices, Civil Service trade unions, other social partners and customer organisations, the Consumers Association of Ireland, the Small Firms Association, the National Disability Authority, the Disability Federation, the IPA, the Equality Authority, the consultative committee on racism and inter-culturalism, the Northern Ireland Civil Service and others.
The main group meets twice annually or more often if necessary. The sub-groups meet on a regular basis. Some of those dealing with specific issues meet very regularly. Much of the work involving the more specific issues goes through the officers' network group, which also has a high-level working group. This group reports mainly to the committee of Secretaries General. Mr. Frank Daly, Chairman of the Revenue Commissioners, is the current chairman of that committee though the position rotates.
Currently, the quality customer service group is conducting meetings which consider customer and consumer issues. They take the latter fully into account.
What of the gender balance?
I do not know, but there are many Department officials there, men and women.
