Vol. 533 No. 4
2 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the progress made to date in regard to implementation of proposals for regulatory reform; when the OECD is expected to report on Ireland's regulatory framework; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8025/01]
3 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the progress made by the statute law revision unit within the Attorney General's office; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8026/01]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 and 3 together.
Regulatory reform is one of the themes of the "SMI/Delivering Better Government" modernisation programme. The regulatory reform agenda is an important one and its original focus on reducing red tape has been broadened to include issues such as improving competitiveness and reducing the burden of compliance on businesses and citizens. These issues are priorities for the Government and ones in which my colleagues, in particular the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the Minister for Public Enterprise, take an interest and responsibility.
Steady progress has been made on the action programme, Reducing Red Tape. As regards accessibility, the Statute Book has been made available in electronic format. As part of their e-public service strategies, Departments and offices will increasingly use web-based technologies to publish regulations, application forms and explanatory information. As regards quality versus quantity, Departments and offices are required under amended Cabinet procedures to use a quality regulation checklist for each new legislative proposal. As regards simplification, the new statute law revision unit in the Attorney General's office is preparing for a comprehensive programme of restatement which it is expected will commence later this year subject to the enactment of the Statute Law (Restatement) Bill. As regards elimination of unnecessary regulation, Departments and offices have been asked to examine their primary and secondary legislation frameworks to identify scope for revision, repeal and consolidation. This will form the basis of a prioritised work programme which is being finalised by the statute law revision unit in the Attorney General's office. A dedicated regulatory reform unit has been set up in my Department to co-ordinate the delivery of the regulatory reform agenda.
Over the past year the major project in the regulatory reform area has been Ireland's participation in an OECD review of regulatory reform in Ireland. I understand this review is at its final stages and the OECD will formally present the report to me, the Tánaiste, and the Minister for Public Enterprise, on 24 April, 2001. The Government sought to have this review conducted in order to identify areas which might be addressed in an Irish context, with a view to empowering the citizen as consumer and removing regulatory barriers to increased competitiveness.
On the Deputy's question regarding progress made by the statute law revision unit, this unit was established in February, 1999. It is staffed by a director and a parliamentary counsel, with appropriate clerical support staff. The unit has been involved in a number of activities including: drafting legislation, notably the Stamp Duties (Consolidation) Act, 2000, the Industrial Design Act, 2000, and the Copyright and Related Rights Act, 2000. It has been involved in formulating a policy on statute law consolidation and revision.
The unit recommended the enactment of the Statute Law (Restatement) Bill, which when enacted, will enable the Attorney General, in consultation with Departments and offices, to publish administrative consolidations of Acts. Consideration by the unit is at an advanced stage on a policy in respect of the modernisation of the consolidation procedures used by the Houses of the Oireachtas.
As regards the Acts and statutory instruments which could be most usefully revised and consolidated, the unit has worked closely with my Department to identify a prioritised programme for such work. The Acts and statutory instruments selected for consolidation and revision on the basis of objective criteria will have regard to political priorities and the need for greater coherence of the Statute Book. A number of restatement projects are at an advanced stage and will be published soon after the enactment of the Statute Law (Restatement) Bill. The unit is also actively involved in arrangements for updating the Statute Book on CD-ROM and on the web.
I have a number of supplementary questions for the Taoiseach. As regards question No. 3, I welcome the proposal to bring forward legislation that will enable the process of consolidation to proceed, presuming that it is simply consolidation, without the necessity of having to come back through these Houses.
In that context is the Taoiseach satisfied that the unit in question in the Attorney General's office has the resources it requires? If not, will he consider, as a means of providing legal research resources including fees to the various legal departments in our third level institutions, that different sections of consolidation could be contracted out to legal departments of the third level sector? They would come back to the Attorney General to be signed off on that basis, rather than as has been the case in the law departments of the State in the past, that they hold on to the work, the lawyers having a timeframe which is much longer than ours.
I may have misheard the Taoiseach but I understood him to say that a regulatory reform unit had been established in his Department whereas the third progress report from the PPF refers to a regulatory management unit being established in the Department to deal with the regulatory reform agenda. I am not particularly fussy about what it is called but from the OECD reports published last Monday it seems the Department of the Taoiseach, through this unit, will have responsibility for moving the agenda in respect of abolishing restrictions on the location of pharmacies, removing licensing constraints on entry to the pub and taxi trades, eliminating special interest rules such as the groceries order and enforcing competition in self-regulatory professions. Since the Department of the Taoiseach has taken it upon itself to establish a regulatory management unit or a regulatory reform unit, will the Department be accountable to this House and have specific responsibility for giving updates as to where we are in relation to the removal of these restrictive licences?
On the first issue, Deputy Quinn will be pleased to hear that the unit will be staffed by a director at assistant secretary level and a parliamentary counsel at assistant principal level. A parliamentary counsel at principal level will be assigned to the unit within the next few months. The approach that will be adopted has been to research and develop policies and then to identify the means by which statutes can be revised. The aim is to have a nucleus of full-time staff and then to engage external resources, perhaps through the universities, or whatever is appropriate. We will remove all the work except for the core work and there will be only two or three professional staff supported by clerical staff.
I hope it works well and I think it will because it has been given a great deal of thought. We have looked at the range of statutes relating to defence and hope to consolidate them. There are an amount of statutes relating to the sale of goods, unfair dismissals, refugees and extradition. The Acts relating to the prevention of corruption go back a long time. I have also been looking at the older pre-nineteenth century Acts. I hope my information is correct but it seems that many of them are not relevant now. Rather than bringing them to the House and making amendments here, Acts could be consolidated in the unit. The CD-ROM and the statutory instruments could be brought up to date from 1998 and be kept up to date. There is also a major task to be undertaken on the pre-1922 legislation.
I have seen drafts of the OECD report on the web—
It was published last Monday.
—but it is still in draft form. The final OECD meeting took place last Friday, so the proceedings on Thursday and Friday are not in that document. Since 1998, my Department has been ensuring compliance with the OECD review of regulatory reform. My Department co-ordinated the work of the entire report and will continue to co-ordinate on the delivery side of it. My Department cannot be responsible for each area because it does not have the staff to enable it to be responsible. Regulation in the areas of public utilities, pharmacies, the drinks industry and many other identified areas will be co-ordinated. It will affect a number of areas of Government, particularly the Tánaiste's Department and the Department of Public Enterprise. The Department of the Taoiseach does not have the specialist staff required for the various areas. Two or three years have been spent in a rigorous assessment of this work and what the OECD call the regulatory impact analysis will follow.
Will the Taoiseach clarify the purpose of the Department of the Taoiseach setting up a regulatory management unit if all it will do is co-ordinate what is being done in other Departments? The Taoiseach referred to the abolition of the restriction on the location of pharmacies. That was traditionally a function of the Department of Health. Will the Department of the Taoiseach now say to the Department of Health and Children that legislation should be enacted within a certain timeframe to give effect to this OECD recommendation? What will be the politically accountable relationship of the Department of the Taoiseach to this House as against the Department of Health and Children? Will this House be given the run-around? When questions are put down for the Department of Health and Children, we will be told it is a matter for the Department of the Taoiseach and the Department of the Taoiseach will say it has nothing to do with its responsibilities. It seems to be an elaborate device to confuse and obscure, which is exactly the opposite to regulatory management.
It is not. We are following the best standards of the OECD which believes the effort must be co-ordinated. The specialists are based in the line Department which is answerable for the legislation. Members seeking information, by way of parliamentary questions or other means, or members of the public – representatives of industry, etc. – must go to the line Department. There would not be any point in seeking information from a Department in which there are no specialists in this area. The implementation of the report and the political imperative to advance that implementation will come from my Department.
Does the Taoiseach intend to publish the terms of reference of the group of specialists in his Department and does he intend to list, by way of schedule, those areas for which this new group will have responsibility, to which access is currently limited by regulation?
There are various strands to the regulatory reform agenda and particular emphasis is placed on the work of the OECD. The OECD has worked on three main categories in recent years with my Department. These are regulatory impact and analysis which is a method of systematically and consistently examining selected potential impacts arising from Government action and of communicating information to decision makers; increasing competitiveness which involves the promotion and expansion of competition policy, liberalisation of markets and reducing restrictions on entry where possible in regard to licences for pubs, pharmacies, taxis etc. and the systematic review of regulations to ensure these are user friendly and of a sound legal base. This can involve practices such as consolidation, simplification and sunsetting. The priority here is to make regulations more simple for citizens and businesses.
The Government requested the OECD to involve itself in these matters and it has spent considerable time dealing with them. The Departments concerned have carried out self-assessments and audit procedures in an effort to comply with the OECD model. When the OECD report is published, it will be used as a guideline by Departments.
Will the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act apply to this section of the Taoiseach's Department or is it a stand alone unit which must be brought within the terms of the FOI?
It is already within them. The unit comprises a dedicated group of a few people who work on the SMI process. It has worked with the OECD for the past three years on this report and will continue to drive it forward. This area is already covered by the Freedom of Information Act, as are the line Departments.
When statute law is revised, is any account taken of the type of language used or will we continue to see convoluted and somewhat archaic English being used? Will any effort be made to simplify the language used in legislative texts in order that it can be followed by the ordinary person?
It has improved somewhat over the years but I do not think we will see any great changes in legal texts. Those involved in the SMI process to deliver better government have, in their modernisation programmes, sought to simplify the language used in customer service documents, etc. However, legislative texts will remain as they are.
Could a request be made to shorten sentences at least to make it easier for people to follow the legislation and understand its provisions? Surely the Taoiseach could request that.
We could certainly ask that provisions would be expressed in as simple a legal text as possible. However, legislative provisions are open to challenges in the courts and, therefore, legal people will always ensure they are written in a manner suitable for the courts.
Is it not the case that legislative texts have been simplified in other jurisdictions?
No. I was examining some Canadian law recently and it is equally difficult for non-lawyers to understand. The SMI process has now been in train for seven years and literature from Departments and Government agencies setting out their functions and objectives is now being written in simple and understandable language. Legislative texts are a different matter.
