Vol. 557 No. 1
1 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the way in which the spending incurred by his Department so far in 2002 compares with the amounts allocated in the Book of Estimates; if he expects his Department to come in on target in regard to expenditure; if he anticipates cutbacks or adjustments in his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16389/02]
2 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the level of expenditure by his Department since January 2002; if this expenditure is within the target set in the Book of Estimates; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21227/02]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.
Expenditure by my Department to date is on target and it is expected that overall spending in 2002 will remain within this year's agreed Revised Estimates. I do not anticipate any specific cutbacks or adjustments to the Department's Vote for this year. Nevertheless, expenditure will be incurred with regard to seeking to achieve best value for money, consistent with provision of the services funded by the Vote. Details of expenditure figures to the end of September follow in a table which shows the Department's spending to be within budget for the first nine months of the year.
Expenditure versus Profile at the end of September 2002.
|
Subhead |
Budgeted Profile(€000s) |
Actual Expenditure(€000s) |
|
|
A1 |
Salaries, Wages and Allowances |
6,945.0 |
7,135.9 |
|
A2 |
Travel and Subsistence |
541.6 |
357.5 |
|
A3 |
Incidental Expenses |
955.2 |
980.7 |
|
A4 |
Postal and Telecommunications Services |
502.2 |
397.2 |
|
A5 |
Office Machinery and Other Office Supplies |
1,067.3 |
908.6 |
|
Subhead |
Budgeted Profile(€000s) |
Actual Expenditure(€000s) |
|
|
A6 |
Office Premises Expenses |
476.3 |
287.4 |
|
A7 |
Consultancy Services |
487.6 |
382.6 |
|
A8 |
Information Society – e-Cabinet and Other Initiatives |
1,091.2 |
616.2 |
|
Total Administrative Budget |
12,066.4 |
11,066.1 |
|
|
B |
B – NESC |
598.0 |
579.8 |
|
C* |
C – Grants under section 2 of the Irish Sailors and Soldiers Land Trust Act, 1988 |
23.7 |
76.2 |
|
D |
D – Forum for Peace and Reconciliation |
0 |
0.0 |
|
E* |
E – Commemoration Initiatives |
45.0 |
99.0 |
|
F |
F – All-Party Committee on the Constitution |
253.5 |
169.0 |
|
G |
G – Information Society Commission |
535.7 |
185.7 |
|
H |
H – National Centre for Partnership & Performance |
0.0 |
675.9 |
|
I |
I – National Economic and Social Forum |
699.0 |
375.0 |
|
J |
J – Tribunal of Inquiry (Dunnes Payments) |
579.7 |
8.8 |
|
K |
K – Tribunal of Inquiry (Payments to Mr. C. J. Haughey and Deputy Michael Lowry) |
2,927.8 |
1,964.2 |
|
L |
L – Millennium Celebrations |
3,800.0 |
2,518.3 |
|
M |
M – Independent Commission of Inquiry |
441.1 |
368.2 |
|
N |
N – National Economic and Social Development Office |
450.0 |
119.6 |
|
O |
National Forum on Europe |
1,348.7 |
1,318.4 |
|
Gross Total |
23,768.6 |
19,524.2 |
|
|
P |
Appropriations-in-Aid |
7.3 |
164.0 |
|
Net Total |
23,761.3 |
19,360.2 |
*Subject to virement for which the Department of Finance has conveyed sanction in principle, subject to expenditure not leading to an excess on the Department's Vote. Overall, spending will remain within the agreed Revised Estimates for 2002.
Do I understand the Taoiseach to be saying his Department is living within the 14% anticipated increase?
It is within the profiled budget expenditure and well within the increases allowed for.
I do not wish to be persistent but is the 14% increase over last year or not?
The 14% was an overall figure. The figure in my Department is well within the 14%, therefore it is not profiled against the 14%. I am not sure what the percentage is. The Deputy is asking if I am taking the figure for the year, plus 14%, and benchmarking against that. I am not. It is within the actual figure profiled for the year.
I call Deputy Kenny.
The figure I have is 19%. Is that the figure the Taoiseach is living within?
No, 19% is not the Vote for my Department.
The provision in the Book of Estimates is 19%. Other areas are asked to take hits when cuts and increased charges are being implemented. Should the Taoiseach's Department not give good example and live within the new figure?
The outturn for the year will be well within the figure. I agree with the Deputy that I should give good example, which I will do. I hope I will also do so next year.
If the Taoiseach wishes to show good example, let me remind him of what he could do. The budget for his Department is approximately £30 million out of a public spending budget of €30 billion. Under the Freedom of Information Act I received information that his Department's expenditure is approximately €2 million per month.
It is not appropriate to quote from documents during Question Time. Has the Deputy a question to put to the Taoiseach?
I am not quoting from the document but I know what is in it.
The Deputy should submit a question to the Taoiseach.
The Taoiseach's expenditure is €2 million per month up to the end of September. That means he could have a saving of €9 million at the end of this year. However, he has not offered up these savings in the context of what the Government requested Departments to do. Will he explain why, under the e-commerce budget, his Department's expenditure was €7,000 in July , €96,000 in August, it will rise to €540,000 in October, €660,000 in November and €683,000 in December? Is this not a complete sham in order that the money will be spent in its entirety in some form or other merely to comply with the budget allocated? The budget the Taoiseach was allocated showed €660,000 expenditure on consultancy, €400,000 of which has been spent. How much of that money has been spent on public relations and how is it proposed to spend the remaining €200,000?
In terms of leadership and good example, would it not be better if the Taoiseach continued the level of expenditure to date, which would give him a €9 million saving? This is the equivalent of one million hospital visits. The charges have increased by €8 because the savings were not coming through. Would this not be a good example and good leadership for the Taoiseach to demonstrate?
The first question is in order, but the second is going into detail.
The devil is in the detail.
As I said in reply to Deputy Rabbitte, overall spending will remain within – hopefully well within – the agreed Revised Estimates for 2002. My budget profile at the end of September was €23,761,300 and the actual expenditure was €19,360,200. The Deputy highlighted a figure associated with the Information Society Commission. The budget profile for this was €535,700 at the end of the third quarter and the actual expenditure was €185,700. The Deputy also mentioned consultancy figures. In my Department this is mainly made up of expenditure associated with outside agencies. The budget profile for this was €487,600 and the actual expenditure was €382,600, so the Deputy will see that I was well within the budget profiles entering the last quarter.
The Taoiseach says he is well within his limit, but he has not explained on what the €382,600 was spent in the area of consultancy. How much of this went on public relations? What will the other €200,000 be spent on? In view of the fact that expenditure has risen by 48% in the past 22 months, is it not clear that the Government has a responsibility to introduce fiscal legislation requiring Ministers to stay within the budget allocated to them by the Cabinet for the running of their Departments for the year? Is that not a moral responsibility, in view of the fact that a total shambles has been made of running the public finances in an efficient, competent and professional manner?
Every Minister must endeavour to stay within the figure allocated to him in the volume of Revised Estimates. As stated earlier, 14.4% was the figure set down and I will achieve that. For other Ministers there are reasons for going outside these figures, particularly on demand-led schemes. In some areas, schemes are totally dependent on how many people turn up for treatment or services. One cannot take an arbitrary budget position, although it would be nice. We cannot say that as soon as the figure in the Estimates is reached treatment must be cut off. That would be neither humane nor practical. Departments such as mine do not provide services like that so figures can be cut down.
The Taoiseach could have offered €9 million himself.
Whatever figure is decided in the budget for my Department is used and in the mid-term review every year I must offer up any savings I have. That is the normal practice and has been so for a long time. It is not as easy for other Ministers in line Departments which provide services to the public.
Which organisations constitute the new National Economic and Social Development Office? Is it fully up and running yet? This seems to represent the biggest increase in the Taoiseach's subheads. What is the approximate range of pay increases enjoyed by the different categories of staff over the last year?
The organisations making up the new office, which come under a range of subheads in my Vote, are the National Centre for Partnership and Performance itself, which is the new agency, the National Economic and Social Council, the National Economic and Social Forum and the National Economic and Social Development Office. They will all come under one heading as soon as the legislation is passed in the House. The organisation is working on an interim basis but for all purposes other than legislative it is up and running. It has the benefit of pulling the organisations together, not only enabling them to share administrative and research services but also streamlining their activities. They will be able to pool their analytical and statistical work. It will ultimately result in increased savings and efficiency. Salary and wage increases in my Department are all as per PPF and there are no increases over and above that. There would have been the 1% lump sum in April and the 4% in October, with other incremental increases.
Is the Taoiseach saying—
The Deputy has asked a number of supplementary questions. I will call him again.
I went to the trouble of tabling a question on this.
I will call the Deputy again.
On the particular point the Taoiseach raised—
I would prefer to call Deputy Sargent. In fairness to the other Deputies in the House, Deputy Rabbitte has asked three or four supplementary questions. Deputy Kenny also has questions.
The responsibilities of the Taoiseach's Department could be broken down into areas dealing with public relations and presenting the message the Taoiseach wants to get across, and other areas dealing with disadvantage, basic income and those affected by drugs. Will the Taoiseach tell the House if, when trying to come within the terms of the budget limitations, he will focus on all areas within his Department or will he target the PR area for cutbacks and not the disadvantaged?
My net total budget at the end of September is €90,360,000. Consultancy services, about which I recently answered a written question, take up €382,000 of that total. Even if I did away with all consultancies, not just those related to PR, and that figure does not include PR consultancies, that would be the contribution to my Department. I do not spend money on PR services and try to direct money towards productive areas.
I doubt the Taoiseach is disinterested in PR. Under subhead A7, expenditure in May was €67,000 while in June there was no expenditure. Is that not unusual? On subhead A8, will the Taoiseach explain why, for the last three months of the year, expenditure will be in excess of 1,000% up on any other month of the year except one? Where is this money being spent? Have contracts been placed that are only now coming into play? Why is expenditure rising so sharply and suddenly in the last three months of the year?
My Department always pays a month or six weeks in arrears. On the information given to the House by Deputy Kenny, in May I spent no money. As for profile expenditure, in the latter months there would not be many commitments or contracts in my Department because, other than salaries and other office expenses, most money is used for committees, such as the information society, partnership and millennium committees. The profile, other than annual bills, does not change that much. I must report each month to the Department of Finance on the profile for the month but the main aim is to come in within the figure in the Revised Estimates, which is my intention.
On consultancy services, the outturn for last year was €163,000. The provision this year is €661,000. What does that comprise? If the figure for PR consultancy is not contained in that provision, how much is provided for PR? Is the Taoiseach saying that staff in his Department benefited in the year 2002 only from increases permitted under the PPF or is he excluding staff in his personal office? Is he aware, either from this side of the House or from his own colleagues in the Fianna Fáil Party, that the Office of the Houses of the Oireachtas employs Deputies' secretaries at €327 per week? Will he agree that this is an anomalous position that cannot be sustained given the job of work that Deputies' secretaries are expected to do?
To start at the end, I know only too well the job that constituency secretaries do for Deputies. It is an important, detailed and difficult job and one which may be more difficult in some areas than others but certainly it is a difficult job, and their pay rates are put forward from time to time. When I was a Whip I was involved in the initial discussions to set up the structures and the whole system 20 years ago. I am not familiar with the detail now because they are not subheads of my Department. I was familiar with them for many years through the negotiations and set up the entire structure. I know they are represented by SIPTU and that they keep those discussions with the Department of Finance and the Houses of the Oireachtas in train. I am sure they fight their case in the normal way.
Can the Taoiseach offer them any redress?
I speak to a fair number of them wearing my party hat but it is not appropriate for me to answer on that issue. I am aware of their circumstances, I appreciate the work they do and I gladly put that on the record.
As regards consultancy services, as I outlined in reply to a question recently most of the figure for consultancy services was for consultants doing various jobs for the Department. There is no PR contract from the Department for me or for the Department as such. They are all consultancy services. I can provide that figure again but I think it is in a reply to a parliamentary question which I gave to Deputy Durkan, if I recall correctly, about a week or two ago.
When I give the figure for salaries, wages and allowances for my Department, of course it includes all the staff in my Department, including the staff who work for me.
A final supplementary, Deputy Rabbitte.
To be clear on that, is the Taoiseach saying that no staff in his Department were in receipt of more than that provided in the basic increases under the PPF?
I outlined, I think it was last week, the salary rate for every individual in my Department and for some of the people who have left the Department. Deputy Kenny asked me a question relating to that issue and about some of the people who have left the Department and have received their statutory amounts. Two weeks ago Deputy Kenny questioned me on that particular issue. The other people in the Department are paid as per the allowances. Some of those who work for me are contract advisers, if that is what the Deputy is getting at, and they are paid as per the terms of the contract which is approved by the Department of Finance.
A final supplementary, Deputy Rabbitte We have spent 20 minutes on this question.
We did, a Cheann Comhairle, if we could get an answer. I do not care what the Taoiseach told Deputy Kenny last week nor what different categories of staff he has or what they are doing. I am merely asking if they got pay increases in excess of that provided by the general public service agreement?
First, that is not the question on which Deputy Rabbitte asked me to provide details. I can give him those details again which I gave to Deputy Kenny. The members of my Department received increases under the PPF. Those on contract received the terms of their contract, but those increases would also be in line with the PPF, other than what I stated, concerning two of the staff in my Department who retired or did not continue on. One was elected to the Seanad and one left my employment. They received their statutory amounts which, needless to say, had nothing to do with PPF. If that is what the Deputy is asking, I put it on the record two weeks ago.
What does the Taoiseach mean when he says the matter of Oireachtas secretaries that I raised is a matter for the Department of Finance? Can that matter be dealt with or can it be dealt with in the context of the new Bill?
It does not arise on this question.
Can it be dealt with under the new Oireachtas legislation?
I can raise the question with the Minister for Finance but I think the issue of the staff will all come within the combined Oireachtas Vote from 1 January which is to give more autonomy to the Oireachtas. I think that is the intention.
Will they come in at the same levels?
Sorry, Deputy, we have gone well outside the brief on these two questions. Question No. 3 please.
