Vol. 490 No. 6
1 Mr. Kenny asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands if she will report on progress on the Irish Genealogy Project under the aegis of her Department; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10908/98]
The Deputy will recall that in the course of replying to his previous parliamentary question on this issue I referred to the need for resources in my Department to enable a review of the project to be carried out and to examine, in detail, the points made about the project in the Comptroller and Auditor General's Value for Money report laid before the House in April last year.
I am pleased to be in a position to inform the House today of progress thus far. My Department now has approval to appoint an officer to conduct this review. This appointment, which will be for a three month period, will enable a detailed examination of the IGP to be undertaken. At present, the arrangements are in train to effect this temporary appointment which must take place within the framework of the agreed measures for departmental promotions.
In advance of that appointment my Department requested the chief executive of Irish Genealogy Limited to produce an interim report on progress to date addressing as many of the issues as possible that have been raised about the IGP. The report has recently been received and will be scrutinised as part of that formal review. Subject to the conclusions of the review the report suggests some grounds for optimism on the future of the IGP, if the funding set out can be earmarked. Unfortunately, those resources are not currently available to my Department without other programmes being cut or eliminated. If the review recommends the continuation of the project it will be necessary to secure a reliable source of funding for the IGP for the life of the project.
The Deputy should also be aware the Heritage Council is currently in the process of examining the whole area of genealogical sources and records. The council advised my Department its final report on the subject is expected to be completed this autumn. To ensure the proposed review by my Department of the IGP project has as much relevant information to hand, I requested the Heritage Council to expedite its findings and it has agreed to do so.
The formal review of the IGP will require about three months to carry out and I am not in a position to commit my Department at this juncture to the long-term future of the project other than assuring the Department and other Members the project will get fair consideration from the aspects of revenue generation and its ongoing costs.
I am very conscious that genealogical services and genealogical data are being offered widely on the Internet to which many people around the world, particularly in the United States, have access. I will ask that the review should consider the use of the Internet and its potential for the success of the IGP.
Will the Minister summarise her view of the objective of the Irish Genealogy Project? What does she want its end result to be?
The Deputy knows the history of the IGP and I am sure I do not need to outline its job in hand. We all know the value of genealogical research, not only its intrinsic value but its value for cultural tourism, not least in the Deputy's constituency but in mine and others throughout the country. It is for that reason we want the project to be in a position to follow through on those principles. I have reason to believe there is optimism for the future of the IGP, but I will wait to see the outcome of the review and based on its recommendations we will then know how to proceed.
The Minister has not given her view of what she wants the end result of the IGP to be. She has had responsibility for it for almost 12 months. I do not mean this in any way personal, but if the Minister was the chief executive officer of a PLC or co-operative trade union her resignation would be called for at this stage because of the unholy mess and uncertainty that surrounds the IGP.
The Freedom of Information Act has been implemented and yet the Archbishop of Cashel and Emly has written a letter to the National Library which prevents people from having access to the primary source for genealogical records in respect of Tipperary. Does the Minister consider that letter is valid? Is the Freedom of Information Act to be applied to people who wish to have access to those primary sources and will she examine this matter?
Will she lay a copy of the interim report she received from the chief executive officer of the IGL in the Dáil Library to enable Members have access to and make comments thereon? The chief executive of Irish Genealogy Limited is due to retire from his position in August. Is the Minister making arrangements for finances to be put in place for the continuation of his position after August?
The experience gained by people in family records offices throughout the country has been exceptional, but the Comptroller and Auditor General's report referred to an error rate of 111 in 3,000 entries, 11 times the rate the quality control procedure allows. Does the Minister regard the Irish Genealogy Project as being fundamentally flawed because it is not overseen by professional genealogists given that the level of error is as high as stated in the Comptroller and Auditor General's report.
I am sure the Deputy opposite is aware of the history of the IGP, that responsibility for it lay with the Taoiseach's Department and that only recently has specific responsibility for it been passed to my Department.
With regard to the report, the Deputy will be aware that the Secretary General of my Department was examined by the Committee of Public Accounts last week specifically on the IGP and that what he told the committee was along the lines of what I stated in my initial reply. I will see what I can do about forwarding further information on the report to the Deputy.
I am aware of the chief executive's position and it will have to be taken into consideration in reviewing this project. Funds will be needed if the review recommends the continuation of the IGP in the way it has been proposed.
I am also aware of the Deputy's point on error rate. For his information, the chief executive of the IGL reports that every centre manager and IGL director, who represents the IFHF, has been made aware of the need to improve the level of accuracy in inputting data. I understand that at a meeting of the Committee of Public Accounts on 30 April last a senior FÁS official reported that following a recent cross-check by her on accuracy she was happy to report a significant improvement in the current levels of accuracy in inputting. I am sure we all recognise such accuracy is important and it is important that question is monitored. From the information I have been given I am led to believe there has been a significant improvement in the error rate. I understand there was a 3.7 per cent error rate and I am glad that position has been put right.
The Minister did not reply to my question about the records in Tipperary or to my request that she lay a copy of the interim report in the Dáil Library. Will she indicate how much has been expended to date on the project and what is the projected cost of finishing it? Will she let me have a report on the participation rate in regard to the 32 counties, as this is an all-Ireland project? I understand quite a number of centres and counties have not participated to the extent it is anticipated they should have by this stage.
With regard to the report, in answering the Deputy's question I referred specifically to the fact that the Secretary General of my Department was examined by the Committee of Public Accounts and this information was obviously available to him. I will see about getting further information that would be of interest to him. I will also see if it is possible to lay such information before the House by placing it in the Dáil Library.
The Deputy also referred to costs. According to the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General on the value for money examination laid before the House in April last year, the amount of public funding spent on the project from 1988 to July 1996 was £15 million. Of this sum, FÁS was responsible for £12.48 million, the Department of the Taoiseach for £0.25 million, Bord Fáilte for £0.68 million, SFADCo for £0.41 million and the International Fund for Ireland for £1.13 million.
The chief executive has estimated that the project is likely to require a further £3.36 million in funding to bring it to completion by 2007. This does not include the ongoing contribution to the project by FÁS, through its training scheme.
I can give a breakdown of the £3.36 million if the Deputy requires it. The technology update is £440,000. The implementation of marketing strategy is £570,000 and the annual market and operational cost is £265,000 by nine years.
The Deputy also raised the question of participation of the centres throughout the 32 counties. I do not have that information immediately to hand but I will see what I can do about accessing it and I will pass it on to the Deputy.
