Bertie Ahern
Ceist:2 Mr. B. Ahern asked the Taoiseach when the strategy statement for the Office of the Attorney General will be published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7513/97]
Ceisteanna — Questions. - Strategy Statements.
Bertie Ahern
Ceist:3 Mr. B. Ahern asked the Taoiseach when the strategy statement for the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions will be published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7514/97]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 and 3 together.
I am happy that the statement of strategy for the office of the Attorney General has been completed and was sent for printing last week. I understand that publication is expected later this week. As soon as it is printed, I will arrange for copies to be placed in the Oireachtas Library and for a copy to be made available to each Member.
The work on the preparation of a strategy statement for the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions is at a very advanced stage. The document is in the final drafting phase and I will endeavour to ensure it is published as quickly as possible. Copies will, in due course, be placed in the Oireachtas Library and made available to each Member.
I have pursued this matter for months and I am glad my repeated questioning has pushed along the preparation of the report. This is the fifth time I have been told that it is almost ready and it appears the Minister of State has some good news.
Is the Taoiseach's office happy that the early warning system operated by the legal assistants in the office is functioning satisfactorily? I have pursued this matter for months and I am sure the Minister of State has been briefed on it. It was stated in the summary of progress and recommendations, which the Taoiseach forwarded to me, that the development of the information technology systems would assist the overall system. I was told the offices were to have moved into the final stages of this information technology development by early February. Did that happen?
I raised questions over a number of months about staff appraisals, which were due to take place at the end of last year. Has this issue been addressed? I was also told that the position of the senior claims manager would be addressed. However, I am not aware of any moves in that regard.
I received a commitment during the Judge Lynch affair last October and November that two parliamentary draftsmen would be recruited. However, I understand from a reply I received last week that there are still six long-term contract parliamentary draftsmen. Two of the six should be appointed rather than continuing to employ them on contract.
That should be adequate for now.
I have several other supplementary questions.
I know but I dissuade Members from putting too many questions together.
The Deputy raised at least four supplementary questions, each of which deserves a substantive question in its own right. I refer the Deputy to the publishing timetable for the statements of strategy. At that stage I and the Taoiseach will be delighted to answer specific questions in relation to the items. The detail sought by the Deputy does not arise from his questions today.
I expected that response which is as helpful as all the replies I receive to questions about the office of the Attorney General.
The Deputy should table specific questions.
All my questions arise from a reply I received on 12 February last. However, I appreciate that the office which briefs the Taoiseach does not brief the Minister of State any better. My questions arise from the schedule the Taoiseach gave me on 12 February. He stated then that he would give me the information in a schedule rather than answer detailed questions. When one asks detailed questions on matters about which nobody has thought, there is spin doctoring from the office.
If the Deputy tabled the questions, we would have a chance to reply to them.
I tabled the questions for 12 February. It is obvious I will not receive information today. The Taoiseach's office wanted some questions postponed until next week but it wanted these questions to be taken today so the Taoiseach would not have to answer them. That is odd. Will the Taoiseach's office or the office of the Attorney General ensure my points, which arise in relation to the schedule I received on 12 February 1997, are included in the strategy statement? I would be happy if that was case but I doubt it will happen. Will the Minister of State at least ask the office to do that?
I will forward the Deputy's request to the office.
The Minister of State said the strategy statement in relation to the office of the Attorney General would be published next week. Does it take into account the report carried out at the request of the office of the Attorney General by Professor Stephen Mason? The Government has apparently had this report for the last six months but has not published it. The report apparently states that the office of the Attorney General was starved of resources in recent years. Will the Minister of State outline whether it is the Government's intention to divide the office of the Attorney General into two offices, with a separate independent office for the drafting of legislation? This was one of the recommendations contained in the report.
That is not a matter for a statement of strategy. While the office of the Attorney General can present statements of strategy currently in operation, it has not been directed to implement any specific changes, nor can I foretell what will happen in the future. I am not party to the detailed consultation thereon nor am I involved at that level.
I understand Professor Mason's report published some time ago is now a matter of history and considerable progress has been made since it was written. Deputy Dermot Ahern referred to one or two points of its overall 90 recommendations. Since then the Government has acted and provided considerable additional resources, in terms of staff and money, to the Offices of the Attorney General and the Chief State Solicitor.
Obviously someone in the Attorney General's office decided to provide an answer to a question about resources. One of the main recommendations of the Mason report was the establishment of a separate parliamentary draftsman's office, the view being that the Attorney General's office was top heavy with requests for and preparation of legislation in recent decades, and the workload would worsen rather than lessen. Surely the Government should express some view on that recommendation rather than the Minister of State merely saying she does not know and is not involved?
Let us hear the Minister of State's reply.
It is a subject which would perhaps merit a substantive question rather than a supplementary. The questions I am answering today relate specifically to the publication of strategy statements for the offices in question and, if I make a statement on the matter, it is on their publication. As far as I can ascertain from the question, the point the Deputy is making is a matter for Government — he will be aware I am not a member of the Cabinet — not one falling to be dealt with in the strategy statement of any of the offices in question.
Last week I raised an issue with the Taoiseach which he acknowledged had some validity, relating to communication between the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Garda Síochána on the fact that the Director of Public Prosecutions had decided not to prosecute in cases of child sexual abuse. Unfortunately, there is a difficulty of communication——
The Deputy is straying into very specific matters now.
We are talking about a strategy statement for the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions; either it is a strategy or it is not.
I have allowed some latitude in respect of this question but it would appear to merit a specific separate one.
Then could somebody inform us what is a strategy statement? The Minister is saying it merely relates to what is happening in that office at present whereas a statement of strategy suggests that it would relate to the direction we should take in the future, to remedy some of the difficulties experienced in these offices.
It has been a term used to avoid answering questions in the past two years or so.
A statement of strategy published by all Departments and State agencies is a statement of how each envisages Government policy rolling out over the next three years or until a new Minister is appointed or there is a change of Government which I hesitate to suggest, in most cases, will not make a great deal of difference anyway. Those drawing up the statements of strategy cannot presume what changes this or any future Government will make in their constitutional office.
On a point of order, will the Minister of State please give way?
Will Deputy Dermot Ahern allow me to finish?
Let us hear the Minister's reply.
The Deputy asked me whether the strategy statement in the case of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions would contain X, Y or Z. I will tell him what it will contain, which might eliminate the necessity for some of his supplementaries. The statement of strategy for the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions will build on the findings and recommendations in the initial assessment report prepared by Grant Fortune Consulting, commissioned to assist in the first phase of the strategic management process in that office. The Deputy will be familiar with that report which was laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas in June last. The statement of strategy will cover the period 1997 to 2000, will address the mission for the office, stipulating key goals and objectives relating to justice, quality, efficiency and value for money in the provision of a prosecutory service for the future. A key goal will be the establishment of a best case management system which will serve to optimise the use of resources and deliver increased effectiveness, efficiency and value for money in the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. A working group, comprising a representative of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Office of the Chief State Solicitor, the Garda Síochána and personnel from the Department of Finance, has been established to address ways in which the quality of investigation of files received by the office can be improved. The Deputy must accept that I cannot go into specifics. The working group has met, decided on a course of action which is being implemented and will convene further meetings to monitor implementation.
I should have thought the Minister or the Government would have had some view on one of the major proposals to make the Office of the Attorney General more efficient, that is, the establishment of a separate parliamentary draftsman's office. Given that we have experienced so much trouble, in one shape or form, in the Attorney General's office over a considerable period, one instance being the Judge Dominic Lynch affair——
There is no need to elaborate.
I am not elaborating, I am merely trying to instance difficulties experienced. When that issue arose the Office of the Attorney General passed it over to the Office of the Chief State Solicitor which, in turn, passed it on to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. The lack of communication between all of three offices was unbelievably bad.
The Deputy has made his point effectively.
I am sure the Government has a view but it does not relate to the question tabled.
Will the Minister of State let us hear it?
Will the Deputy please let me finish and stop playing politics with a serious issue?
Who sent the Minister of State in here? Is she speaking for the Government or on her own behalf?
Let us not personalise the matter.
The question relates specifically to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, the strategy statement relating thereto and similarly in the case of the Office of the Attorney General. It does not deal with present or future relationships between those different agencies of State.
The strategy statements should.
The question does not deal with them. I am answering the specific question tabled by Deputy Bertie Ahern: when the statements of strategy for those two offices will be published, to which I gave a specific, detailed reply.
In regard to question No. 3, will the Minister of State say whether those strategy statements will be amended in the light of the report of the high level review group on the law offices of the State, in particular on the interaction between the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions and other agencies involved in prosecutory offences not highlighted at the time of their preparation? In the course of their preparation was any consideration given to the Director of Public Prosecutions being obliged to give reasons in any case being referred to the Special Criminal Court?
I am not in a position to respond specifically to the Deputy's second question but I will correspond with him on the matter.
On his first question, any Minister of a Government Department or with responsibility for an agency can order a new strategy statement or have an existing one amended at any stage. In any case, that will be done every three years and on a change of Government if a new Minister deems it necessary.
We come now to questions nominated for priority. Before proceeding I advise the House that, due to a printing error, Question No. 8 on today's Order Paper is shown in the name of Deputy Eoin Ryan whereas it should have appeared in the name of Deputy Raphael Burke and will be dealt with as though that were the case.