Vol. 495 No. 2
2 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the progress of the working group within his Department on examining and assessing problems for information systems in regard to the year 2000; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17509/98]
3 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he has replied to the open letter he received from a person (details supplied) regarding the year 2000 problem; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17561/98]
4 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the expenditure to date by his Department in tackling the year 2000 problem. [17570/98]
5 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he has satisfied himself that his Department is on course for full year 2000 compliance; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18429/98]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 to 5, inclusive, together.
I am satisfied the approach being taken by my Department to deal with the year 2000 issues is effective and that satisfactory progress is being made. A number of systems have already been upgraded or replaced and work is ongoing with a view to ensuring compliancy of all critical systems by the end of this year. Of the £20,000 estimated for direct year 2000 costs, a total of £8,400 has been spent to date by my Department.
I can confirm that a reply has been sent to the person referred to by Deputy Bruton. Responsibility for dealing with the year 2000 problem rests with the Minister for Finance for the measures being taken within the public service and with the Minister of State with responsibility for science, technology and commerce for measures to assist in raising awareness and guidelines on tackling the issue in the wider business community.
Regarding Question No. 5, is the Taoiseach satisfied his Department is on course for full year 2000 compliance? Will he indicate how his Department officials are testing the systems? Have they got certificates of compliance or certificates verifying that the systems will work? If the systems go wrong will the consultants who have prepared the necessary changes in the software be liable for payment?
The Department's IT personnel and consultants checked each stage of the implementation of the plan. All the critical equipment, the new servers, the server upgrades and databases have been checked. The building management system has been tested independently. Work has been completed on the two security systems. Work on the telephone system, the personnel administration system, the network management software and server upgrades has been implemented and checked. The Department is carrying out some work in regard to NESC and NESF which are connected to it, but that work is being done independently.
Regarding the Deputy's question on insurance, that is not a major issue in my Department, but it is a major issue in the broader sense. The Attorney General is examining this matter to ascertain the position regarding liability. The question as to what might happen is a much broader issue which has been debated not only here but in other countries. Some countries have tried to legislate on this issue, but have failed. The Attorney General is examining how it would affect the broader public service, but I do not believe it will pose a problem in my Department.
The Taoiseach's Department and the Minister of State, Deputy Treacy, have overall responsibility for ensuring all Departments are compliant and equipped to deal with the year 2000 problem. Have they ensured the suppliers of the software are fully bonded in the same way a building contractor would be bonded for a construction project undertaken by the State? In the event of the design system they have supplied failing and the cost being borne by the citizens of this State, have they ensured there will be some compensation? What bonding, compensation or safeguards have the Government sought in this area?
I am not dealing directly with those issues. The interdepartmental monitoring committee, which is under the remit of the Department of Finance, is dealing directly with them. The question of liability has arisen on a number of occasions in different areas and the Attorney General has been involved in examining how we can attach liability. This affects the Revenue Commissioners and the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs and a good deal of work has been undertaken on this.
This question may relate to more than the Taoiseach's Department, but will he agree the provision of resources next year to deal with the year 2000 problem could coincide with a period of acute credit shortage in the world arising from the current difficulties in Asia and Latin America which may have a significant economic knock on effect that would adversely affect employment? Regarding Deputy Quinn's question, will the Taoiseach agree there is a genuine risk of a cascade of legal actions arising from this which could have unknowable effects?
That is why this issue is being examined. I have heard colleagues discuss this matter and, like other Members, I have read articles on it. The question of liability has arisen in regard to the new airport in Hong Kong. Because of technology problems the authorities have not been able to operate the systems there and that has given rise to many legal actions. The Office of the Attorney General is examining the question of the State's liability in the event of incidents stemming from the year 2000 problem to ensure liability attaches to those who provided services in the area of hardware and software. Regarding Deputy Bruton's question on cost, a significant cost is involved for Departments and agencies, particularly for the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs and the Revenue Commissioners, which have spent a good deal of money, but most of the work has been completed. While it is not under my aegis, the Government is getting a full report at regular intervals so I am aware of what is happening in all areas. We are anxious to complete as much of the work as is possible. There is worldwide concern about how it will affect economic issues next year. From recent conferences and seminars I have attended with the Minister of State, Deputy Treacy, I understand that the wider public service, business services, larger companies, multinationals, financial institutions and many smaller companies have made the necessary expenditure.
I am very concerned about smaller companies and I would be misleading the House if I said differently. That is why I attended some conferences with the Minister of State, Deputy Treacy. He will go around the country with the roadshow, pointing out the dangers of leaving this matter too late. There is a great need to convince small business people that this issue is relevant to them.
In view of the Government's experience of the hepatitis C scandal where the State was found to be negligent and the army deafness claims where the State was found to be negligent through army personnel, can we take steps now to ensure the necessary legal provisions are put in place so any claims for negligence, arising from the consequence of an incomplete preparation for the year 2000 resulting in hardship for individuals, will fall? Can we anticipate this disaster in advance and take the necessary legal steps, if not to eliminate, to minimise the damage? Can we learn from our collective mistakes in the past?
These are very important questions. I hope the answer is yes, but I cannot say that at this stage. That is why the Office of the Attorney General is looking at the matter. It is creating a major problem elsewhere as people have tried to legislate for it but cannot. Perhaps when the Attorney General reports to the committee on the matter, the Minister for Finance will make that information available.
