Vol. 322 No. 11
asked the Minister for Transport if he will make a statement (i) on the recent NESC Report on Enterprise in the Public Sector which states that civil service controls are seriously inhibiting enterprise in that sector and (ii) on the situation whereby a co-author of the report is the chief executive of a State company for which he has responsibility.
186.
asked the Minister for Transport if he intends to implement the recent NESC recommendation that in cases where State sponsored bodies have diversified into areas which are removed from their original remit, these activities should be separately identified in the accounts of the State-sponsored bodies under his control.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 185 and 186 together.
In common with other Ministers who are responsible for State-sponsored bodies, I welcome the NESC Report on Enterprise in the Public Sector as an important contribution to discussions on the future development of the public service and particularly on the relationships between central Government and State-sponsored bodies. Because a number of the issues raised in relation to organisation and personnel matters are relevant to the work of the Public Service Advisory Council, the Minister for the Public Service is asking that council to take the report into account in its deliberations.
The Taoiseach met the chairman and chief executives of the main State-sponsored bodies primarily concerned with economic and commercial development on 9 June 1980, and had a wide ranging discussion with them on matters arising from the NESC Report, on the development of enterprise in the public sector and on the contribution which the State-sponsored bodies can make to economic development. It was agreed to hold a further meeting.
I am glad that the chief executive of Aer Lingus-Aer Linte was associated with the study. I have no doubt that his wide expertise was of considerable benefit to the study group.
The report made a number of wide-ranging recommendations including a recommendation that where new enterprices are being established, these should be set up as separate corporate entities in order to establish working practices appropriate to the particular enterprise concerned rather than to the parent body. The study group report did not recommend that in cases where State-sponsored bodies have diversified into areas which are removed from their original remit these activities should be separately identified in the accounts of State-sponsored bodies. I should mention however that the ancillary activities of a number of the State-sponsored bodies under the aegis of my Department are already separately identified in the accounts of these bodies.
