Vol. 455 No. 2
13 Mr. Cullen asked the Minister for Finance if he will abolish the dual structure in line with the declared objectives of the Strategic Management Initiative in view of the fact that it affects professional accountants and other professional bodies and in the interests of improving efficiency and professionalism in the Civil Service; if so, when he intends to do so; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11884/95]
The term "dual structure" refers to the situation which applies in a number of Departments with significant functions whereby there is a separate technical structure, often headed up by an officer at assistant secretary level; parallel to these technical structures, there exist general service administrative structures.
I am aware that over the years, certain difficulties have been associated with the dual structure, most of which are being addressed in the context of the strategic management initiative. However, I am not certain that Deputy Cullen's concerns regarding accountants arise from the existence of the dual structure; rather they seem to relate to the fact that certain professional grades, including accountants, do not have access to the inter-departmental scheme for promotion to principal officer posts.
As I explained to Deputy Eoin Ryan in a written reply on 25 April, the principles governing promotion in the Civil Service are open for discussion under the conciliation and arbitration scheme. The existing arrangements, including the details of the grades in which posts are fillable under the scheme and the grades which are eligible to compete for such promotion posts have been agreed with the staff side under the scheme. As the scheme is currently constituted, it is confined to grades represented by the Association of Higher Civil Servants in both instances.
I am positively disposed to the removal of traditional promotion barriers in the Civil Service. Indeed, I understand that my own Department made proposals some years ago which would have effected significant changes in regard to eligibility for the principal officer scheme, but it was not, unfortunately, possible to secure the agreement of the relevant staff interests to those proposals. Rather than take unilateral action in regard to this issue, I propose to await the outcome from the strategic management initiative.
It is only fair to acknowledge, however, that eligibility for the most senior Civil Service posts, those which are filled through the Top Level Appointments Committee, is open to all civil servants, within a certain salary band, regardless of the "stream" to which they belong; while, in relation to the scheme for promotion to principal, eligibility has been extended to include a number of grades outside of the general service stream.
I thank the Minister for his reply. I was a little despondent with the first part of it but much happier with the second part. Will the Minister agree it is not in the best interests of the public service that people who are highly qualified, many of whom have a background in the private as well as the public sector, are debarred from principal officer grade and higher grades? The position has changed dramatically in that the administrative role of these people has become much more involved in recent times and their expertise is in more demand. It is important under the strategic management initiative that all grades be open to merit and ability. The present system has been abolished in the UK, from where it derived, and in most other commonwealth countries.
I agree with the Deputy. This matter must be negotiated with the relevant interests. Proposals in this regard, were put forward by the Department of Finance some years ago. There is an element of a closed shop here and all professional associations — perhaps the law profession being the worst, with my own profession not far behind — are fairly good at operating closed shops. At the end of the day good people regardless of their training and background have nothing to fear from the opening up of competition in those areas. More importantly the public service in general and the Civil Service in particular would benefit from such an opening up. There are genuine fears that must be recognised and addressed. Progress has been made and I would like to build on that progress.
I commend the Minister for putting on record that there is a closed shop. People have vested interests and nobody can be blamed for wanting to protect their own interests. Since the Minister has used the phrase it brings to the fore what we are dealing with. I accept this is a sensitive area and we must ensure that everybody has a reasonable opportunity. The opportunity that exists under the strategic management initiative is probably the best one available to allow the changes to be made. Will the Minister agree that this matter must be included in consideration of the strategic management initiative? Otherwise it may be ten years before the position is changed. A target must be set in this regard within the current proposals.
I hope in the implementation of the strategic management initiative, which is supported by all parties in the House and by the wider Civil Service, this matter will be addressed satisfactorily. I hesitate to lay down conditions or set timetables in that respect. I agree with the Deputy and I hope the progress already made and the positive gains derived from that progress will encourage people to move forward to the next stage.
