Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 22 May 1996

Vol. 465 No. 7

Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Efficiency Audit Group.

Willie O'Dea

Ceist:

2 Mr. O'Dea asked the Taoiseach the work completed to date by the Efficiency Audit Group; and the timescale for the implementation of its recommendations. [10205/96]

The Efficiency Audit Group has undertaken a number of studies to date. Apart from a study of the former Department of Industry and Commerce and work on the need to introduce administrative budgets, the work carried out by the group has been primarily in the defence area. In 1991, the EAG examined the organisation of the Department of Defence and, following on this study, a number of changes were introduced including the delegation of greater financial responsibility to the military authorities. A further study by the EAG in 1992 focused on internal military administration and sought means by which efficiencies could be implemented within the military structure.

In 1993, the Government decided that a radical overhaul of the Defence Forces should be undertaken under the aegis of the EAG, based on a revised statement of roles for the PDF.

The EAG commissioned Price Waterhouse to carry out a comprehensive review of the operations of the Defence Forces and the group then made proposals to Government for change. The Government accepted the broad thrust of the EAG recommendations and decided that an implementation group should be set up under the aegis of the EAG to draw up a detailed and fully costed three year plan for the first phase of the reorganisation of the Defence Forces. This plan was approved by Government and details were announced in March of 1996. The implementation plan covers the first three year phase of the implementation of the change process and is being implemented on an ongoing basis.

The plan recommended, among other things, that further in-depth studies should be carried out on the Air Corps and Naval Service. The EAG is currently in the process of selecting management consultants to carry out these studies. It is expected that the selection process will be completed very shortly and the reviews will be completed by the end of the year.

It appears the administrative budget system which was very much part of the EAG's initial work has been changed by the Minister for Finance — I am not sure if he has changed the name only or the system. Perhaps the Minister will give some information on the system. The subject matter of the changes in the defence area are before the House and I will leave that to my colleague, Deputy Smith, who put down a Private Members' motion on the issue this week. One of the functions of the Efficiency Audit Group when it commenced operation many years ago was that in the examination of areas of the State in terms of staffing it would identify areas with excessive requirements and recommend where those people could be redeployed. Has that body suggested any area where staff could be redeployed and has its recommendations been implemented in the State structure?

On the Deputy's first point about administrative budgets, my Department does not have details on how effective they have been, but overall they are deemed to be a success. It is no secret that their one drawback in terms of numbers employed in each Department is that they allowed for numbers in the Civil Service to increase more quickly than the Government expected at the time. Generally we must give more autonomy to Departments, and administrative budgets are considered to be very effective.

If the Deputy wants more detailed information on the specifics, Department by Department, he should put down a question to the Minister for Finance who is in a better position to provide such information. What was the Deputy's second point?

The purpose of the EAG was to identify excess staffing and suggest areas where staff could be relocated. Has that been done?

A study on that has not been completed by the EAG, apart from the study on the former Department of Industry and Commerce, the recommendations in relation to administrative budgets and a major body of work on the Defence Forces. The EAG is examining efficiency and effectiveness in the area of non-national roads and county councils. The Department of the Environment has requested that a study be undertaken on the efficiency and effectiveness of council operations on non-national roads. The terms of reference are being finalised and it is hoped to conclude the study by the end of this year. Apart from what I have mentioned, a major study has not been completed, but if the Deputy wishes to table a specific question on that matter or if he wants a specific response I can arrange for it to be forwarded to him.

It is bad policy if the Efficiency Audit Group is trying to undertake a specific task while the document, Delivering Better Government, which is the Strategic Management Initiative, is before the House and at the end of December last the Minister for Finance announced a new embargo on staffing in the Civil Service. That embargo has now been altered but it is meaningless until we get further details; I will table a separate question to the Minister to find out what he intends to do in that regard. Administrative budgets seem to have been sidetracked. In trying to manage the Civil Service we seem to be going nowhere in a hurry.

On the point about the Efficiency Audit Group in relation to the SMI and the document, Delivering Better Government, the question of the most appropriate structure and method of operation of the Efficiency Audit Group within the overall framework of the Strategic Management Initiative is currently being reviewed, particularly in light of the structures for implementation proposed in Delivering Better Government, and decisions will be made on this shortly. The Minister for Finance announced changes in what has become known as the embargo — although there never was an embargo. Positions had to go to Government for ratification as they could not be automatically ratified — because of the framework now provided in Delivering Better Government to deal with these issues. Nobody can deny that the so-called embargo was always accepted as an unscientific and crude weapon. Procedures are now in place to deal with these matters so that fire brigade action is needed — the reason for the embargo. The EAG, numbers in the public service and other such issues are all part of Delivering Better Government and later today, time permitting, we will embark on a discussion of that document.

Arising from her reply, has the Minister of State given any consideration to the International Standards Organisation which is now taken up by many national and service organisations in providing better services to their clients? A similar situation should apply to Government Departments. Has any consideration been given to that matter?

Is this not a separate question?

We are trespassing somewhat but I can give a brief reply. I have given some consideration to that matter. This morning I met some members of a large strategic group on customer services. The NSAI delivered a paper on its position in the public sector, what it has done to date and its recommendations for the future. We are cross-fertilising with the NSAI, the private sector and various others to ensure we get it right in relation to customer relations focus and standards generally. Delivering Better Government, announced by the Taoiseach on 2 May, is the overall framework and details are coming through daily in this regard. This afternoon I will attend a meeting with officials on the detail roll-out for the next 12 months. It will take up to five years to get all the pieces in place but there is a serious political commitment to it. There is political commitment on all sides to get the renewal of the public sector right because it is in all our interests that we deliver on this. We are doing that with the civil and public service and all parties who have gone on the record both in this House and at the Select Committee on Finance and General Affairs on this matter. The Deputy will recall it was the former Taoiseach, Deputy Reynolds, who launched the SMI two years ago last March. This is not a political issue. It is in all our interests as public servants. We are elected public servants; civil servants are appointed. We are here to deliver a service and I hope in the years ahead we deliver a quality service that is more customer focused. If there is not a press release or a glossy brochure every day the Deputies opposite should not assume action is not being taken in this area. I assure the Deputy that is not the case.

The Minister of State had her own press release and so had the Minister Deputy Lowry.

We fully endorse the Strategic Management Initiative. May I ask the Minister of State if the administrative budget arrangements continue to apply in Government Departments?

To my knowledge they do, but I am not an expert in this area. If the Deputy wants more details on their workings the Minister for Finance is in a better position to give those to him.

Barr
Roinn