The meeting is resumed in public session. We are addressing the report and the value for money examination of the driver testing service. Mr. Jimmy Farrelly, Secretary General of the Department of the Environment and Local Government, remains with us. I ask him to introduce his officials.
Driver Testing Service: Value for Money Report.
Mr. J. Farrelly (Secretary General, Department of the Environment and Local Government) called and examined.
Acting Chairman
I am accompanied by Niall Callan, assistant secretary of the roads division of the Department, Mr. Liam Dolan, principal officer of the driver testing division, and Mr. Declan Naughten, assistant principal in charge of the decentralised office in Ballina. He is based in Ballina, while the rest of us are based in Dublin.
Acting Chairman
I draw your attention to the fact that as and from 2 August 1998 section 10 of the Committee of the Houses of the Oireachtas (Compellability, Privileges and Immunities of Witnesses) Act, 1997, grants certain rights to persons who are identified in the course of the Committee's proceedings. That may arise from time to time.
I know you have been waiting a long time because we had a lot of people here. This is an important report. I am sure we will return to it at a later date because I do not know if we will do it justice on this occasion, despite our best attempts. Deputy Ardagh and I will have questions to ask but, in the meantime, I ask Mr. Purcell to introduce the contents of the report.
Mr. Purcell
The management of the driver testing service by the Department of the Environment and Local Government and the level of efficiency achieved in the provision of driving tests are the twin themes of the report before the committee. The report covers a lot of ground so I will briefly touch on what I see as the key points.
In 1991 an EU directive specified the knowledge and driving competence learner drivers are required to have achieved before a full driving licence is granted. A theory test is required under the directive but that has not yet been introduced, although its introduction in the form of a written test has been mooted for a number of years.
Everyone who passes a driving test should have demonstrated the same minimum standard of performance. However, in practice a uniform driving test standard is not being applied. This is clear from the analysis on page 5 of the report which shows a pass rate of 47% for the Gorey centre, while the pass rate for Sligo was 71%. The national average pass rate is 57%. Even when local circumstances and some other random events are taken out of the equation, the report found there was a systematic pattern to the variation in pass rates in recent years. For a significant proportion of candidates, the test outcome depends on where the test is carried out and by whom.
The demand for tests has grown considerably since 1993, reflecting an increasing number of people reaching driving age and higher proportions of the population wanting to drive and being able to afford to drive. In the early 1990s approximately 100,000 applications for tests were received each year. By 1998 and 1999 the level of applications had reached approximately 150,000. The growth in the number of applications has continued and I understand the total number of applications this year is likely to be approximately 180,000.
The Department was slow in increasing the supply of tests to meet the increased demand. This has given risen to a serious ongoing problem with backlogs in the number of people waiting for tests. By the end of 1999 almost 90,000 applications were on hand with applicants waiting over a year at some centres. The average waiting time for tests was over six months. There is a big variation between centres. In Monaghan the longest time one would have to wait for a test at a point in time in November 1999 was 13 weeks, whereas in Finglas one could be waiting for up to 59 weeks. These figures call into question the realism of the Department's stated target of ten weeks being the maximum waiting period. The report suggested that shorter term achievable targets should be set in line with specific improvement initiatives and the performance in that regard monitored on a regular basis.
The unit cost of providing driving tests has increased. Coupled with lengthening waiting times, this indicates that the level of efficiency achieved by the Department in providing the driver testing service has deteriorated. There is considerable scope for the achievement of greater economy and efficiency in the operation of the service, for example, through changes in work practices for driver testers. This is at the heart of the matter, but I recognise that the Department's task in resolving the inherent industrial relations difficulties is not easy, to put it mildly.
There is a stated policy of recovering the cost of driver testing through charging fees for the service. However, the fees currently charged only recover three-quarters of the cost. The shortfall is met by the taxpayer. If fees are to be adjusted to recover full costs, account should first be taken of the scope for reducing costs through increased efficiency.
As a consequence of my report, the Department commissioned consultants to review the whole organisation and operation of the service and to make recommendations for improving its efficiency and responsiveness to applicants' needs. I understand their report is due to be completed some time before the year ends. I am sure the Accounting Officer can clarify that for the committee.
Acting Chairman
Thank you. I reassure members we will be revisiting this hugely important item. Mr. Farrelly's opening statement has been circulated. I invite him to summarise it.
Thank you, Chairman. I was hoping you would say that. The committee has received the statement. I will make a few brief opening remarks.
I want to record our appreciation of the report carried out by John Purcell, the C&AG, and his staff. It is helpful to us in the present circumstances. It has been the subject of debate in the Dáil already where the Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, in particular, emphasised that fair and challenging questions had been raised about the operation of the driving test service in this report. He indicated at the time that, in the interests of our customers, it was his intention these would be addressed squarely and comprehensively. I totally endorse those views.
Our overriding concern in relation to the driver testing service is to reduce the long waiting times. Limited progress has been made and the average waiting time has reduced from 29 to 24 weeks. However, that is totally insufficient and our response must be far greater.
The C&AG referred in his opening remarks to our target of a quality customer service standard of a maximum waiting item of ten weeks. That may appear unrealistic to some. The fact is that it has not been achieved within the timescale one would hope. However, given all the changes we have brought on board - which we can refer to during the course of the debate - it is realistic to expect a ten week waiting time will be achieved by mid to end September 2001.
We are already making progress and we expect waiting periods to decline markedly from now given the recent increases in staffing resources which we have managed to achieve. We have also commenced a new bonus scheme which is contributing significantly to improving the situation. Competitions are ongoing to recruit a further complement of up to 20 additional contract testers. We have increased the number from 70 to 105 over the past year or 18 months.
The major factor which prompted both the value for money report and the various changes and reviews undertaken by the Department itself into the driving test service is the huge increase in demand for driving tests. There were 94,000 applications in 1993 and there are now 176,000 applications per year. As I said, the longest average waiting time is 24 weeks. The waiting list today stands at 85,000, which is reducing and as the complement of additional testers which we have begins to impact, we expect it to reduce very significantly. I am reasonably confident that in that period, mid-2001 to, say, September 2001, we should reach, except if there are major complications in the meantime, the target of ten weeks.
One other issue to which the value for money report referred was the unit cost of driving tests - that it has risen rapidly over the period 1995 to 1998. This situation arises, in a large measure, from the unsatisfactory service situation in which we found ourselves. We resorted to overtime and other arrangements involving extra costs in order to begin to return waiting times to acceptable levels. I would be fairly confident that when these acceptable waiting times are achieved that, in turn, the average cost factor will equally change.
Information was not available at the time of the Comptroller and Auditor General's report but, in fact, unit costs for 1999 already show a significant reduction on 1998. They have been reduced from £37.59 in 1998 to £32.75 in 1999. I would expect that situation to continue. As well as that, as we take on extra testers to deal with the substantial increase in numbers, overheads will be spread over a wider area and will not increase correspondingly.
The Comptroller and Audit General mentioned that we had brought in consultants and their work is ongoing. We expect to have a final report by the end of the year. The issues raised of course, in any consultancy report will not be easy. In terms of deliverability and so on, I expect significant reorganisation and change will be recommended and the industrial relations front has been difficult in this area. For obvious reasons, I do not want to go into it in too great detail but I think the negotiations in this area have been very long drawn out. I think we have made substantial progress to a stage where we are now recruiting at a fairly speedy rate the additional testers who are necessary. We have got clearance to take on contract testers. A bonus scheme has been agreed with the workers. Overtime is being used significantly as well. I would like to express my appreciation to the various interests involved in difficult situations. Negotiations can be difficult but it requires two sides to bring about a successful conclusion. Hopefully, there is considerable light at the end of the tunnel.
One particular factor raised by the Comptroller and Audit General in his report was the uniformity of driving test standards. Of course, policy is that standards for the driving tests should be applied uniformly across the system. It is a clear requirement of any driving test service that you should have equity and public confidence in this aspect and also because of the EU wide significance of the system.
What I would say on that is that variations in pass rates, as between different areas, should not be viewed as evidence of the widespread misapplication of testing standards. In any test system we have, whether car testing, driver testing or otherwise, you will always get variations in results in different areas and across different regions. It would be wrong to interpret them as being solely attributable to different standards being applied in different areas. That said, we must acknowledge the potential for differences resulting from divergent test standards being applied by different testers. That is inevitable in a situation where you have different testers applying, as it were, the same test.
Standards should be maintained through regular refresher training programmes for testers by way of ongoing supervision and assessment by supervisory driving testers. During the last three years it is fair to say that because of the situation in which we found ourselves as regards numbers, the same commitment has not been given to a refresher training on the basis that the demand at the time was to try to dispose of tests. I can give an absolute assurance that for the future we have agreed with the unions a programme of training. It will set training targets for each tester and supervisory tester over the course of his or her career and this will become an important feature down the line as additional resources come into play.
In general where testers are seen to be consistently and seriously out of line with what would be regarded as the normal pass/fail rate, the supervisor tester, as of now, seeks to redress this situation in discussions and in other ways with the tester. There is a kind of limited operation where the supervisor tester will accompany a tester on a test where he would hope to redress these types of problem.
The supply of driving testers is the other big issue here. As I have said already, we have increased our driving test core from 66 to 105 which is a very significant increase in numbers giving us a present capacity to carry out over 200,000 tests per year. You have to look at that 200,000 test per year against an arrears situation of 85,000. If you look at the 85,000, you have to look at the new capacity to carry out 200,000 per year. Saturday testing is being carried out now supplemented by evening testing. A bonus scheme applies to encourage extra tests from testers.
I do not mean to interrupt but it was a synopsis for which we were looking so that we could ask a few questions.
I am sorry if I went on too long. Those are the three main points in the report.
No disrespect intended. It appears from the report that a lot of questions have been asked. You have stated what his happening in relation to them, or it has been already stated in the Dáil. I am concerned that despite these driving tests and the EU standards whereby people should have knowledge and driver competence, young males are driving so carelessly and fast resulting in the cost of insurance for them being so high. What is wrong with the driver testing system which passes young male drivers who are so appallingly costly in terms of life and insurance?
It would be wrong to see the problem of young male drivers, accidents, fatalities and carnage on the road as attributable to a driving test factor alone. It is a feature recognised right across Europe and elsewhere that young male drivers are the major contributory factor in fatalities and road accidents. If we go back to the road safety strategy which is in operation——
Is Ireland not worse than the other European countries?
I will get the figures for the Deputy in a minute but Ireland would be about midstream as regards fatalities and injuries on roads. Countries such as Sweden are top of the league. The UK would be very high as well.
Is Sweden not the top?
Sweden is the best. You start from the countries that are exceptionally good like Sweden, the UK and the Netherlands.
Is there anything that the Department can do in relation to regulations for driver training or driver testing to try to improve the situation for that cohort of drivers who do not seem to be learning properly?
There are two answers to that. After giving much consideration to this, there was fairly wide consensus that to achieve progress in this area, three things should be targeted - speed, drink and seat belt wearing. They are being prioritised in terms of redressing the accident situation on roads. We have targets for road safety. The aim is to reduce accidents and deaths on the roads by 20% over the period up to 2002. There is an interim target as well set for the end 2000. The interim target for the end of 2002 is that we should not exceed what was 116 deaths per million of population.
Is there anything that you can do? Should there be a longer driving examination or should people spend time at a class or on a course? Speed and seat belt wearing relate to the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Is there anything you can do?
The driving test is carried out to an EU requirement which is uniform across Europe. In so far as driving schools are concerned, we are supporting a kind of regime where a driving school operates certification of its members. We have announced a requirement that by 2002 people giving driving instruction will have to comply with a standard. That is one area.
Some people do not even take any driving instruction before doing the test. Is there some way that driving instruction, or a certain number of hours of it, could be mandatory?
We have attempted to bring in a driving instructor register where if you do their pre-test training, there is an arrangement with the insurance companies where you get a reduction. The reduction is probably not sufficient to make it sufficiently attractive. The intention in regard to that driving test register is that instructors will have to undergo exams, certification and so on. The intention in the future is to gradually move to that regime - in other words, to go out and give instruction, you have to be certified and have attained certain minimum requirements and standards.
That would put the onus on the student to take instruction.
The students who take the instruction, the hope would be if you build up to this type of system and you seem to have to undergo certain requirements, that the insurance industry in turn would recognise that by giving a reduction which would attract people to use this system.
You say that the average waiting times have been reduced from 29 to 24 weeks.
That is an average.
Do you think the consultants will have a magic formula you do not already know of to reduce it to ten weeks?
This is a numbers game to some extent. Given the whole organisation structure, it is appropriate it should be looked at now in terms of delivering on driving tests. There are many formulas. At present we privatise out car testing. With regard to the theory test, referred to by the C&AG in his introductory remarks, we are about to appoint consultants to do that. It will be done on a totally privatised basis and we hope to have it operational next year.
This is a fundamental back to basics review of the whole driving test system. We have had problems in the past in recruiting additional testers on time to address a rapidly deteriorating problem. I fully recognise that this kind of consultancy study is appropriate, timely and necessary. I am not prepared to accept that there are not recommendations which can be brought forward and negotiated that will significantly improve the situation. In the final analysis it is a numbers game. It is a question of so many testers for so many tests and how fast they can be delivered. Within the system there is scope for changes which I hope will benefit both testers and workers and, more importantly, the customers and clients.
I am very interested in the issue raised by Deputy Ardagh regarding young people's insurance problems. I suspect it arises because of something that cannot be changed regarding young males who are fun loving, including with their motor cars. How many provisional drivers are there?
There are 380,000, which is 20% of the total number of driving licence holders.
How many of that number have sat and failed a test?
Approximately 150,000 would already have taken a test.
What is that in percentage terms? How many provisional licences can they apply for?
There is no limit to the number of provisional licences that can be held, except that when one gets to a certain stage one will have had to have applied for a test, etc., before one gets a further——
Would it not be obvious in terms of road safety to eliminate that factor, where people can continue to reapply for a provisional licence?
This was carefully looked into when the Government's road safety strategy was agreed. The view at the time was that in terms of prioritisation and getting results, the absolute priority areas to be worked on were the issues of speed, drink and signals. However, it was recognised that the question of provisional licensing should be looked at in the longer term. It is a question of prioritisation.
Prioritisation, yes, but presumably there was a dissenting view that provisional licensing should be a main issue.
Among the kind of people who would generally be regarded as authoritative, the view was that these areas should be absolutely prioritised and focused on and that resources should be given which produce the best results. There are indications. We see the headlines in the newspapers. The carnage on the roads is dreadful and unacceptable. While the situation is improving, there is no point in talking about that when people are being slaughtered on the roads. One must be careful about how it is presented.
The situation is improving, but it is still critical when there are 150,000 people who are not qualified to drive. You have spoken about introducing consultants. The current waiting list comprises 87,000 people. You said one aspect would be delivered on a totally private basis. What was it?
That is the theory test, which will be introduced from next year.
Moving from theory to practice, what is wrong with private sector involvement which would include bona fide people with proper qualifications in driver testing, teaching and instruction, to clear the waiting list? You referred to a numbers game and you are even privatising the function of ascertaining what you want to do to clear this backlog. You are hiring consultants to tell you how to clear the backlog, yet it does not appear to have occurred to you that you could privatise or semi-privatise the function, if only for a limited period, to reduce the waiting list and deal with the provisional licence holders. Where is the problem there?
The purpose of the consultancy study is not just to deal with the backlog. It is a root and branch examination of the delivery of the driving test service. Independent of that, all kinds of changes are being made by us to cope with the arrears. Regardless of what the consultants come up with, there are changes in place. A competition is ongoing.
However, there is no discussion about privatising the function itself.
That is an issue the consultants will look at.
I would have thought that before hiring consultants that would have been an obvious way to proceed.
If one is to privatise something——
What about motor vehicle testing?
Do you mean car testing?
Yes.
That was a greenfield situation.
While it is correct to privatise testing the working of cars, it is not correct to privatise the testing of those who occupy and drive cars.
I do not wish to get too heavily into the whole industrial relations problem, but we are in a situation where there are already 100 workers. It would not be easy to place advertisements in tomorrow's newspapers announcing that privatisation will occur from that base.
The theory test is a new test, therefore, the obvious way to deliver it is through a privatised system. In the same way the car test was introduced on a totally new basis. If a new driving test regime was to be introduced from tomorrow, of course it would be done——
Are there still plans to introduce an advanced driving test? It could be done on that basis. People could then apply for the advanced test without applying for the intermediate test. It would be possible to have a new greenfield privatised test.
I prefer to respond to this on the basis that we have consultants examining the area, to wait for the recommendations and consider the organisational structure and options within which driving tests will be delivered.
From a taxpayer's point of view, are you hiring the consultants to get over your IR problems with this service? Are you spending money to hire consultants who will tell you what you already know?
I would be fairly confident that the money we spend on consultants in this area will produce good results from everybody's viewpoint. This is an area where they can bring added value to solutions and improvements to the problem.
Will they look at the issue of having it privatised?
They will look at the whole organisational issue of delivering services.
Acting Chairman
There are two major factors involved in the numbers game, referred to by Deputy Lenihan. They are the numbers applying and the failure rates. I agree that better training will reduce the latter aspect. I do not want to see the figures levelled upwards to meet the Gorey figures. Perhaps we should get the Sligo instructors to become involved in training. Have any age profiles been done? Demographic studies indicate that there will be a falling population.
A recent study by the NRA projects future numbers.
Acting Chairman
We might get that for our next meeting. There is a little bit of difficulty in that regard in that the NRA seems to be conducting some of the studies and Mr. Farrelly's Department is conducting other aspects of it. It did the study on the learner drivers, for instance.
On the question of displaying L-plates, this afternoon I will be driving to Cork. It is quite likely, even on the motorway where I will be driving at a steady 70 mph, as permitted, that I will be overtaken by five or six L-plated cars. At one time the L-plates used be removed when the son or daughter who was learning to drive was not using the car. What is the requirement regarding L-plates because current practice, whereby people seem to use L-plates continually, is affecting the respect which existed previously for learner drivers? Must one remove L-plates when the person at the wheel is not a learner driver?
I do not think so but I would have to check that out to be absolutely certain. There is a problem in that regard, the L-plate may be in use but it does not mean that the car is being driven by a learner driver.
Acting Chairman
We are losing respect for them because of the speed at which they overtake. At one time there was a requirement that a learner driver must be accompanied by a driver who possessed a full licence. Does that requirement no longer apply?
The legal requirement still applies. A learner driver is required to be accompanied at all times by a qualified driver except where he or she is driving under his or her second provisional licence. In other words, under a first provisional licence, which is valid for two years, the learner driver is required to be accompanied. One then may apply for a second provisional licence for a further two years and one does not need to be accompanied while driving with that licence. In all other circumstances, a learner driver is legally required to be accompanied by a qualified driver.
Acting Chairman
On the questions my two colleagues asked about the carnage on the roads, I understand that in Northern Ireland they issue an R-plate when one passes the driving test which restricts the driver to certain speed limits for a period. Has the Department given any consideration to placing restrictions on people who pass their first test in the context of dealing with the level of fatalities on the roads?
In Northern Ireland the R-plate imposes a general speed restriction on the driver. It is something which is being evaluated. The indications are that it has not achieved a great deal but it will be looked at and evaluated. It is not one of the measures prioritised for immediate action. Certainly it is not clear that it is achieving much but it is in the process of being evaluated.
Acting Chairman
I appreciate it is a bit outside the scope of this value for money report. To return to the value for money report, I suppose one of the critical factors is the division of personnel. Allowing for the fact that tests are carried out in different locations, how many tests does the Department expect a tester to carry out in a day?
The Department would expect that nine tests would be conducted on a normal day during the summer. The number drops to eight in winter because consideration must be made for the light conditions. The Department has all sorts of additional arrangements for overtime. The norm is nine tests. The Department has negotiated an agreement with the trades union that the number of tests per day will be reduced to eight tests by 2002.
Acting Chairman
It is clear from the evidence that there is no uniform standard test. However, all of those points refer back to the survey of the consultants. The key to this is the Department's objective of cutting back the waiting time to the ten week target. The safety aspect to which I referred is slightly outside the scope of this but it is critically important that we would address that also. There will be more questions on that issue. Even if there were more time today, I presume we would need to refer to the consultants on many areas. If tests cannot take place after dark, does the overtime relate to Saturdays?
This time of year one can carry out tests after normal working hours.
For the purposes of clarity, the terms of reference given to the consultants clearly involved them taking on board the contents of the Comptroller and Auditor General's value for money report.
Acting Chairman
I would have thought there were far more testers than the original 70, which has now increased to about 100, in an area where there is a fairly big centre. I would have imagined that there were a greater number throughout the country.
If there are no other questions, I propose that we adjourn and return to this item in approximately three months.
On the number of testers in which you seemed interested, Acting Chairman, in 1995 there were 71, in 1996 72, in 1997 70, in 1998 60 and in 1999 74. There are now 105. The committee can judge for itself that we are only now getting a handle on dealing and coping with this.
Acting Chairman
I appreciate that and I hope the results will be fruitful. It is all about personnel.
I thank Mr. Farrelly for his frank replies. Will he send us some information before the next meeting on the new centres at Tallaght and, I think, Finglas and the changes in practices which have been introduced?
It is at Coolmine.
These new centres are not incorporated in the Comptroller and Auditor General's report.
Acting Chairman
Although we do not normally make such requests, it might be permitted on this occasion that we would add that members might submit a couple of questions. Is that acceptable, Mr. Farrelly? If members have a few specific questions for the next session, they would give you notice of them. It is a fair point.
Particularly regarding the new centres.
Today's meeting did not do justice to the Comptroller and Auditor General's study, which will play a major part in future developments. We will work at that on the next occasion. That paper will be the number one priority on the next occasion. I would be aware that the Department will need support from the committee to make recommendations, to push forward and get more staff, etc. We would be interested in going into this in greater detail.
I thank Mr. Farrelly and his staff for attending and, as Deputy Lenihan said, for his frank answers.
The witness withdrew.
The Committee adjourned at 1.40 p.m. until 11 a.m. on Thursday, 12 October 2000.