Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 5 Oct 2005

Vol. 606 No. 4

Leaders’ Questions.

I want to return to the issue of the failed €150 million PPARS computer system which the Taoiseach defended in the House yesterday. Before raising a number of matters to which the Taoiseach referred, I point out the difference between the briefing document given to him and the Tánaiste and their presentations on this system. The Taoiseach accused me yesterday of being dishonest in the presentation of facts. This is not an accusation I take lightly. I want the Taoiseach to be honest about his remarks to the House when he defended this system.

The Taoiseach stated the PPARS system is not an IT system. That is wrong. How does he explain that in her statement yesterday the Tánaiste used the term "IT" or "information technology" on ten occasions? Furthermore, the Department of Finance in its letter of 28 June to the Department of Health and Children stated it was also surprised at the seeming IT focus of the national team. Yesterday, the Taoiseach stated that in the mid-1990s the health boards alone decided they needed a better payroll system. That is wrong. The decision to embark on the PPARS system was taken jointly by the health boards and the Department of Health and Children. This was clearly stated in the Hay report, to which the Taoiseach referred yesterday. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government is intervening with his own information. Yesterday, the Taoiseach stated in the House that Deloitte & Touche had trained 140,000 staff. That is wrong. Deloitte & Touche did not train 140,000 staff. It employed 40 young graduates who sought new experience. The Department of Finance letter stated that the Deloitte & Touche staff were "mirroring" house staff, with no added value. Yesterday, the Taoiseach stated in the House that last October the Health Service Executive, with officials from the Department of Finance, stated several times through the news media that it was reviewing the system. That is wrong. There was no such indication of a review of the system last October. In fact, on 2 November last in answer to a parliamentary question, the Tánaiste sang the praises of the PPARS system and stated: "It is anticipated that the PPARS system will be implemented in all health board areas by the end of 2005." However, the Irish Nurses Organisation yesterday revealed that as recently as July and September of this year, the PPARS office was telling the INO that there was no longer any review of the system. On those four issues, the Taoiseach is wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong.

The Taoiseach should take the opportunity to correct those inaccuracies and tell the House whether he has issued an instruction to the HSE to continue with this system despite the Tánaiste saying that if it is wrong, the Government will throw its hands up.

I stated yesterday that the health boards first mooted the idea of a payroll system for the health sector in 1994-95. That is the factual position. However, they did not follow through on that system. To answer Deputy Kenny's first question, discussions took place and the original proposal was broadened out over time from that of a computerised payroll system to one dealing with the recording of personnel information, payments of pensions, recruitment, time management and rostering. In early 2001, the cost estimated by Hay Management Consultants for this expanded functionality, which was an entirely different system from the one initially considered, was €100 million.

Hay Management Consultants were hired at that time to examine the expanded project rather than the original scheme which had not been followed in 1994-95. Some €100 million was considered a realistic estimate and the Hay organisation stated that the project was worth supporting. The summary of its report indicated the PPARS system should be seen as more as a business change programme than a system implementation programme, to answer the Deputy's second question. The timescale was envisaged as being three years. In 2002, the Secretary General of the Department of Health and Children gave permission for PPARS to proceed. The expanded system initially went live in three health board areas, covering approximately 40,000 staff.

To answer Deputy Kenny's further question, I stated yesterday that 140,000 staff were on the system. I heard a good and eminent friend of mine, Maurice Nelligan, question that figure on radio yesterday when he stated that there were only 100,000 staff. However, the figure for 100,000 whole-time equivalents includes voluntary and part-time staff, so my good friend Maurice Nelligan was wrong too.

That is some help.

In implementing the project a number of major IT issues must be addressed, including the accurate recording of over 25 different staff rosters and employment conditions for staff which are entirely dependent on the relevant health board. As a result, there were wide variations in attendance hours, annual leave and attendances.

The Taoiseach should store them with the electronic voting machines.

I am answering Deputy Kenny. A decision was taken to incorporate these variations into the new system, which dramatically increased the complexity of the manual intervention. Of course, considering the current situation, it would have been far better if they stuck to trying to get the payroll system right, but they did not. I am not here to dump on anyone; I am answering questions on what happened.

The Taoiseach is trying to pass the buck.

We are not passing the buck. I do not do that. I will answer——

The Taoiseach should accept responsibility.

This is Deputy Kenny's question.

I will answer the questions and am glad to do so. To answer Deputy Kenny's other question, I am informed the Comptroller and Auditor General raised this issue in his report last year — that is what I referred to yesterday. It was stated——

A Cheann Comhairle——

I am answering Deputy Kenny. I stated yesterday and the Tánaiste stated previously that it would cost another €56 million up to March 2006 to complete the system. Some €20 million of that cost comprises payroll costs, with the rest being consultancy fees to Deloitte & Touche and others.

The Taoiseach's time has concluded.

His time is definitely up.

When the HSE was established, the Department of Finance had concerns. The Department had a number of meetings this year, which have been documented, at which it raised its concerns.

Surprise, surprise.

There is no need for me to list all those concerns.

They are in the letter. The Department of Finance said it believed the costs were excessive, that Deloitte & Touche was being overused and that it would have been better if staff had gone in. It asked for all that information to be supplied to it by 8 July. It is that review between the Departments of Finance and Health and Children and the Health Service Executive which has led to what has been going on for the past few months.

Was the Minister blissfully unaware of that?

As regards any suggestion that somebody here has uncovered something, nobody has uncovered anything——

(Interruptions).

——because it has been clear all year in the discussions between the Departments of Health and Children and Finance that they had concerns about aspects of this system. That is not to say this entire system is a waste of time and that they should undo what they have done. That is a different issue. I do not believe they should do so. They should continue to try to develop the system so the new HSE, an organisation bringing together 11 disparate health boards, has a proper system. They have not done it very well to date but they should continue to try to get it right and use money correctly. That is the right thing to do.

The Taoiseach should put down the shovel at this stage if he is to follow the old maxim of the late Denis Healey that when one is in a hole, one should stop digging. He has not answered the question as to whether he has given some instruction to the HSE, in its independence, to continue with this system. The Tánaiste said the Government would throw its hands up if found out and if things have gone wrong.

I was sent a confidential memo by nurses from all over the country. Does the Taoiseach realise nurse managers and nursing staff were taken off overcrowded wards at busy periods to attend six mandatory four hour courses on this PPARS system? Does he realise the difficulties that created for patients, doctors and nurses, that is, to deal with a system which patently did not work? One nurse in Cork received an overpayment of €3,000. In a sample carried out by the former Midland Health Board, 43% of the sample had one or more errors on their payslip. Some 20 nurses in Wexford were overpaid as were nurses in Donegal. This system which the Government and the people in the Department of Health and Children were supposed to oversee is patently not working. Where were the systems to protect the taxpayer in respect of the consultants brought in to advise on how this should operate and who have been paid €50 million?

Will the review which will be carried out cover all aspects of what went on from the moment this project began? Will it cover the whole business of recruitment? Will we find out who were the experts brought into this country from outside on a regular basis — some from as far away as South Africa? Will it cover all the recruitment given that some experts only turned up for work three days per week despite being paid €1,200 per day?

If the Taoiseach wants to know, as he should do, about what the people are, and were, talking, he should ask himself how he can defend the fact that last Christmas a major social bash was held in Sligo costing in excess of €40,000 to celebrate the ongoing progress of this scheme when the people attending it were all talking not only about its shallowness and vulgarity but about how money could be found to hold something such as that when in October of last year a good and decent man who lived 150 yards from Monaghan hospital died because he could not get into it because of a lack of money.

We all know the challenges of moving from 11 health boards to one HSE. The review which the HSE is undertaking tomorrow will be to see where it has brought this system and whether it should continue in some other way to try to bring the payroll system and all the other functions together. It is clear the amount of money it has taken to date to do it in the way it has been following is far too excessive. The Departments of Finance and Health and Children have made that clear and the HSE accepts that. What it thought it could do in three years is not possible.

What is clear, however, is that one cannot have a manual payroll system for 140,000 individuals and where there is no proper recording of how many individuals work in the organisation and how rosters operate. It cannot have a management system such as that. The fact is it does not have a management system. It has spent ten years trying to get a management system. While I have not been in the former health boards or in the Health Service Executive trying to run the system, I acknowledge that to run the HSE and to have a proper health service based on the reforms this Government has brought in, we need a proper system. That is the right thing to do. This Government is entirely opposed to anyone abusing the way in which money is spent.

(Interruptions).

During its watch this Government has increased public expenditure from €16 billion to €40 billion so that resources are available. In the past, €16 billion was available but now €40 billion is available for people to spend correctly. The various Accounting Officers and agencies have a responsibility to do that. We will accept our responsibility and will work with them to do so. The correct thing for the Health Service Executive to do is to see, based on what the Departments of Finance and Health and Children have said to it, what it can build on, what it needs to abandon and how should move on. That is the correct thing to do. For Opposition Members to suggest one does not need any system to run a staff of 140,000 is so unhelpful and irresponsible and they should be ashamed of themselves.

I point out to Members that Deputy Rabbitte is entitled to ask his question without interruption.

He will not get an answer.

The Taoiseach is entitled to respond without interruption so Deputy Rabbitte will hear the answer to his question.

Thank you, a Cheann Comhairle. That could be very useful as this goes on. Unusually, yesterday I had the opportunity to listen to the Taoiseach outside the House. The only thing more breathtaking than washing €160 million of taxpayers' money down the toilet bowl was the breathtaking and contemptuous disingenuousness and dishonesty of the Taoiseach's response. How can he grow so far removed from people who get up at 6.30 a.m. to commute long distances to work to pay their taxes and stand over his Government wasting their money in this fashion? How is it that no Minister in his Government ever takes responsibility for anything? How is it that the Taoiseach cannot come into this House for a change and admit there has been a monumental cock-up, a Niagara of waste of taxpayers' money, instead of making snide remarks about Deputy Kenny's facility with sums, misplacing the dateline for the origins of this project, telling the House it is not an IT system and simply trying to stonewall his way through it?

This is exactly the same circumstance as we have had with so many other projects. The Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Martin, thinks it is enough to go on television and say the Government will take a hit on e-voting. It is not the Government that will take the hit but the taxpayer. The Tánaiste came in and said the Government would put its hands up if it finds it is wrong. She has not been able to take her hands down since she took over from the former Minister, Deputy Martin. It is one disaster after another. This morning I heard the Minister for Finance, Deputy Cowen, say €160 million was only a small fraction in the context of the health spend since 1998.

Another €160 million would build another Adelaide and Meath Hospital in Tallaght. Is that insignificant? To top it off this morning, we had the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey, the last man standing to defend e-voting.

The Deputy voted for it.

What kind of Government is the Taoiseach running? When will we see any admission for any of the mistakes? On 13 October at a conference on PPARS, the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Tim O'Malley, said "The meticulous attention to detail which was paid during the development and implementation of PPARS in the early phases of the project will pay dividends as the system is rolled out throughout the health service". Is this the kind of dividend the Minister of State had in mind?

Looks like it now.

A Deputy

Turnips.

(Interruptions).

If I could answer this on a serious basis——

Deputies

Go on.

He is very serious.

If that side of the House keeps interrupting when I speak, every time their leaders speak, my colleagues will just interrupt. We can have it both ways.

Deputies

Go on.

Allow the Taoiseach without interruption.

I tell my colleagues not to interrupt the Opposition leaders, but we can have it both ways.

He has not a leg to stand on.

Which Minister is going to be blamed?

The problem, as Deputy Rabbitte knows, is that outside the House one only gets two minutes.

Seldom one gets two minutes.

Yes, but if Deputy Rabbitte had heard all I said yesterday, he would have realised that I was pointing out that a decade ago the health boards decided they needed to move from a manual payroll system to a proper information communications technology system. They did not move on with this in 1994 or 1995. In 2000 they returned to the issue and got approval for a more extensive system. Hay consultants costed the system at €100 million. Up until the end of 2004, it has spent €116 million, €16 million more than projected. They projected that to complete it would take €56 million. Unfortunately, they thought it could be done in three years when that was not possible. I do not know the technical complexities of this.

Approximately, 40,000 people out of 140,000 people were brought into the payroll system. This was not putting money down the lavatory bowl. What has been achieved is useful but not as extensive as it was believed it would be. Following consultations that went on for the last several months between the Departments of Finance and Health and Children and the Health Service Executive, it has been decided that the way in which it has been done in the past few years, and given the excessive costs to Deloitte & Touche, should be reassessed and they should find another way. The executive still needs a proper payroll and management system.

Down the years, the health boards had not been able to tell the Departments of Finance or Health and Children how many staff they had. There was a myriad different rules and procedures. The Hay report pointed out that even if the health boards could get on top of the reduction in absenteeism at the time, they would save €56 million per annum. At the time it was believed that by spending €100 million or even €150 million, it could be dealt with in a three year period. This made sense at the time. It was looked at by Hay and Gartland and they believed these were the best consultants for the project. It has not worked as originally believed.

I am not in the House to dump on every official in every health board or Department that tried to help bring in a good system. I am not a computer expert but it is disingenuous to say that when people tried but did not get a proper management system right for a payroll of €7 billion, then they are all a crowd of nitwits. I do not believe they are. They were trying to do their best.

So were the Ministers.

They overused outside consultants and should not have had a consultancy contract to the extent they had. I accept Deputy Kenny's valid point on this. In my Department, we brought in the entire e-Cabinet project on time and on budget for €5 million. The reason we did this was because we used our own staff. If I did not have that expertise in the Department, it would have cost a fortune. I was not prepared to do that.

Hear, hear.

I understand the politics of the issue.

Indeed he does.

It is important the Health Service Executive gets a proper system so that at least the organisation will know who and how many are on its payroll. It does not have that system and it must be introduced.

Go out and count them.

We do not want to see taxpayers' money wasted but we need a system that will prevent waste in the future.

Would it not be far more honest and decisive for the Taoiseach to take action against whichever Minister is the more culpable? In this case, it seems to be the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Martin. Everything he touches ends up costing the taxpayer at least tens of millions of euro. He is still shooting around the place having his photograph taken.

He is probably having it done now.

He seems to think the job is that of a male model rather than a Minister who manages his Department.

The Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, has a different approach. She adopts this folksy——

Did the Deputy say folksy?

——down-home, everyone-trusts-me style and we all know her background. She will say, "I will put my hands up and is it not terrible how incoherent——

We know Deputy Rabbitte's background.

I would not go there.

Since he was appointed, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has become so oily and self-satisfied, one could plug the national grid into him.

(Interruptions).

The Tánaiste's approach is how could it work if there were so many incoherent, different systems in the health boards.

We remember the Veha factory.

Deputy Rabbitte without interruption.

How could it work if there were all these different pay cycles, people working part-time and people paid fortnightly? However, we knew all that. Is that not the whole point of the exercise?

I do not agree with the Taoiseach that all the people involved are nitwits. These are the people who tried to tell this to the Government and call a halt but were ignored. These are the people who knew a botched job was being made by the consultants, Deloitte & Touche. It would be more appropriate to call them Delighted & Touche because they must be delighted with the kind of money they raked off the Exchequer. Will any action be taken by the Government against the consultants brought into the project and given €50 million? Will the State take any action to recoup the money for making such a botched job of this? This is the money coughed up by people struggling to go to work every day and juggle the responsibilities of family and career to pay their taxes.

Deputy Rabbitte to conclude.

This is money wasted. The character of the Government is to waste this inheritance over the last eight years. While this is one of the biggest cock-ups, the Minister responsible, Deputy Martin, is being photographed somewhere. The Tánaiste adopts the approach that when she came in she tried to clean up the place and one should have seen the mess she discovered. This side of the House is then expected to say the Tánaiste is great. The computer system is not working in the Department of Health and Children and neither is the Minister.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

Some 40,000 people are on the system and it is working.

I am sure they are delighted they are being paid.

Have they been counted?

The issue is how the executive moves to bring the entire system into place. The system was costed at €100 million but up to the end of last year it cost €116 million, €16 million over the estimate. The cost of finishing the job has been excessive for the reasons outlined by the Department of Finance. This is what is being reviewed. I am not getting into the personal remarks Deputy Rabbitte feels necessary to make.

Because he has no argument.

I accept Ministers are responsible for Departments and in turn I am responsible for Ministers. However, in this case——

He will let them off.

With a caution.

The reason we amalgamated the health boards——

No accountability.

Because there was no accountability.

——and moved from 11 health boards to a unified health system properly structured under the HSE was to move away from issues of waste in the past.

This was highlighted in the Hay consultancy report. It stated that a reduction in the costs of absenteeism, which currently stands at €350 million or 5% of the total bill, would result in projected savings of €56 million.

What about the estimates——

A reduction in staff turnover would also make——

They will get paid during the absenteeism anyway.

Let the Taoiseach speak without interruption.

Why is it necessary for the Opposition to ask questions and as soon as I begin to answer, they need ten people to answer?

He is speaking rubbish. He is not answering the question.

That is not the question. I was merely quoting what the Hay Group consultants said, that a reduction in absenteeism would lead to savings of €56 million.

How much did they get?

If the Opposition Members continue like this, these questions will not be much fun, because my colleagues will make as much noise as them.

They are not thinking about this at home.

The Opposition Members should listen.

(Interruptions).

If the Opposition will not listen to my answers, I will stop restraining the Government Deputies.

The Taoiseach should be allowed speak without interruption. I point out to the Fine Gael Members that this is a Labour Party question and only Deputy Rabbitte is entitled to ask a supplementary question.

We are supporting them.

The review that has been taking place for the last number of months is to establish how the objectives of this system might be achieved. The objectives were too advanced. Too many good and correct ideas, from their perspective, were incorporated in a system which they could not then make workable.

They put too much effort into it.

They were not paid enough.

That is what happened. Although the consultants believed it was possible to implement it, they have had difficulty in doing so, as has happened in the Bank of Ireland and a number of other companies.

Do they pay back fees?

They should look for more stupid consultants in future.

Tomorrow, the HSE will decide, having brought the system to a certain point, what is the best way for it to implement a complete system, to both save money in the future and to have a good management system.

What about Eyre Square?

Deputy Rabbitte should note that to build a Tallaght Hospital today would cost in the order of €800 million, not €1 million.

It would probably also have overruns.

Deputy Rabbitte mentioned the phenomenon of flushing money down the toilet. I want to raise a related issue dealing with sewage treatment, which in more ways than one is another example of flushing money down the toilet. At the opening of the Ringsend treatment plant, the Taoiseach covered himself in glory opening what he called a state-of-the-art facility. The fact it was based on old census figures, that it creates an almighty smell and that his Government has not carried out any official investigation, but uses money on a daily basis to try to patch up what was a botched job is a salient lesson.

This is particularly true for people who met last night in large numbers in Portrane in north County Dublin to hear about a surprise proposal to turn what was a perfectly acceptable plan for a sewage treatment plant suitable for a population of 65,000 into one which we are informed will cost €2.6 billion and will serve more than 1 million people. This has come out of the blue as another example of a project to suit "Mr. Big". Even from a technical perspective, whatever about the politics, a large treatment plant will be prone to odours because the effluent must travel such distances in air-free pipes and there will be a stinking mess by the time it arrives at the treatment plant. Can the Taoiseach take on board the clear scientific observations that have been made repeatedly by the community in Ringsend and by people who know about sewage treatment? Can he also take on board that this plan will hide the cowboy polluter? It will be more difficult to trace the source of whatever is being put down the toilet at a greater distance from the treatment plant.

In the interests of his own party in terms of the next election, I ask the Taoiseach to take Deputy Glennon's wishes into account. Speaking on radio today, the Deputy stated he found this proposal unacceptable and was going to bring it to the Taoiseach's attention. The Taoiseach should put Deputy Glennon out of his misery and state whether he agrees with him. Will the Taoiseach state it is wrong to go ahead with this proposal? Will the Taoiseach allow the county council to proceed with the original plant suitable for a population of 65,000? Ultimately, will he respect the wishes of the local councillors who will also reject it, or will he, as he has done previously, overturn the decision and throw out democracy? Will the Taoiseach respect the wishes of the local councillors?

The Green Party is against everything.

We want the plant that was planned.

The Deputy should go back to the county council if he wishes to oppose this.

The Government does not listen to the council.

The Deputy is the leader of a national party. This matter should be dealt with by the council and not in this House.

The Sandymount plant scheme mentioned by the Deputy was a great work by the engineering section of Dublin City Council, working in partnership with the private sector to bring about a totally modern scheme. I am aware there have been some difficulties in trying to deal with all the problems. While I am not a member of the city council, my understanding is that the council's engineers have been trying to surmount them.

Nevertheless, the council has done an enormous amount of work to alleviate the massive problems of pollution that we had in Dublin Bay for the last two generations. It is great to see the beaches on the coastline along Dublin Bay again receiving environmental flags this summer. That has been an enormous and dramatic change brought about by the investment in the scheme.

I will not answer local authority matters. I am answerable for enough other matters. If the council has a project in Donabate and is talking to local residents, I am sure that between them, the local public representatives will make their view clear. Undoubtedly, Deputy Glennon will also make his views clear, and hopefully Deputy Sargent will support them.

The Taoiseach still has not stated whether there will be an investigation into how Ringsend became such a botched job. I still want an answer.

It is under investigation.

I do not see the results.

No one is taking responsibility.

It is not at all satisfactory for the Taoiseach to state he is leaving it up to the council. The European Court will be down on his head on the basis of his failure to, as the European Commission press release puts it, put in place satisfactory rules to prevent malodours from urban waste water treatment plants in accordance with the EU Waste Framework Directive. It is the Government's job to put such measures in place for the local authorities to comply with. The Government has not done so. It has also informed the European Commission that it will introduce promised legislation to better regulate the management of such plants. However, in January, the European Commission noted this has not materialised. The European Commission has been very polite about this matter. Essentially, it is threatening to take the Government to court. I again ask if the Taoiseach will give this matter the priority it needs. Will he learn the lesson from the Ringsend plant and focus on the original plan, which was to have more localised sustainable and manageable plants serving the communities which need them? Has the Taoiseach learned that lesson yet? Will he learn it before he goes cruising for a bruising electorally and legally, as the European Commission will not stand for the current position?

The issue of the treatment plant in Sandymount pertains to the air filter. The difficulties are being examined.

It is a capacity problem.

Deputy Gormley should note that his leader is quite competent to ask questions.

He is not competent to answer them.

The city council has been endeavouring to deal with the air filtering system and some other technical problems which its engineers pointed out last year, after conducting some surveys.

That is incorrect.

As for the second question, the legislation is necessary — in dealing with the EU, all these matters are necessary. However, the Deputy is aware that we have spent approximately €1.5 billion on 75 new waste water treatment schemes around the country, which has brought a major improvement to the quality of water in rivers and lakes. New waste water schemes are being provided with secondary treatment facilities for every location with a population of over 1,000. There have been more schemes such as these in the last few years than in previous generations.

They are smaller plants.

They are the best in Europe.

It has been stated by the European Commission that some of the work done on this has led to extremely high quality water. The Water Services Bill 2003, which is before the Houses, will consolidate and modernise the code of water services. We could not have done that if we had not invested the money we did in these waste water schemes.

Smaller plants work better.

If they work better, then they should be discussed at council level.

What is the view of the Government?

Allow the Taoiseach without interruption.

If the residents of Donabate have concerns, I have no doubt that they will put those concerns to their public representatives. Those concerns will be dealt with by the planners and engineers of the appropriate councils who are well used to listening to people's concerns. Hopefully they will come to a satisfactory resolution.

The Deputy must acknowledge the dramatic improvements in water quality and in dealing with sewage and effluent. In areas of population growth, we are trying to provide the proper and efficient services that are required. The population is projected to grow in 15 years to 5 million and we need to make further investments in these services. We must not go back to the position where we pumped waste water into the bay and polluted it.

No one is suggesting that we do that.

We have stopped that and must make sure we do not go back to that situation.

Barr
Roinn