Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 14 Dec 2006

Vol. 629 No. 5

Citizens Information Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages.

Mr. Boyle

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 3, lines 30 to 32, to delete all words from and including "com-" in line 30 down to and including "Centre" in line 32 and substitute the following:

"commonly known as a Citizens Information Service (CIS) [being an independent non-statutory body Incorporated and Limited by the Guarantee of its Members] or a Citizens Information Centre (CIC) [being an Unincorporated body operating under the authority of a CIS]".

The Minister for Social and Family Affairs was disinclined to accept the amendment on Committee Stage because he felt outlining the status of the citizens information service and citizens information centres was superfluous. However, unfortunately, I refer to a second issue, which I did not raise previously, that obliges him to accept the amendment. A serious drafting error has been made. The Bill refers to "citizen information service" and "citizen information centres" but the plural should apply. These are usually known as citizens information centres and citizens information service. The only way to address this in the legislation is to accept my amendment. This places the Minister for Education and Science in a difficult position because if it is not accepted, the legislation will be passed with incorrect titles for both the service and centres involved.

Minister for Education and Science (Ms Hanafin)

The issue raised by the Deputy has been checked and the plural of the word is the correct version and, for that reason, it is not proposed to accept the amendment.

Mr. Boyle

Therefore, the amendment is being accepted.

Ms Hanafin

It is not being accepted.

Mr. Boyle

Does the Minister not understand the Bill, as drafted, refers to the singular for both bodies? That cannot be corrected unless an amendment is made.

Ms Hanafin

I am assured by the officials that they have confirmed this is the correct form.

Mr. Boyle

They are wrong. The centres are know as citizens information centres and the legislation is titled the Citizens Information Bill, which is intended to streamline and co-ordinate services, names and branding. Citizens information centres are referred to in the singular in the legislation.

Ms Hanafin

The main purpose in including the citizens information services and citizens information centres in the definition of "voluntary bodies" is to provide statutory recognition for these frontline services, which form the primary channel through which information on social and civil rights and entitlements is provided to the public. However, the Deputy is questioning the use of the word "citizen" as opposed to "citizens" in their titles, not their inclusion.

Mr. Boyle

I am not sure how this issue could have been checked because I did not raise it previously. The amendment should be accepted because both the Minister for Social and Family Affairs and myself missed the reference to the centres and services in the singular where it should be used in the plural.

Ms Hanafin

This was checked with Comhairle prior to the drafting of the legislation to ensure the correct form was used.

Mr. Boyle

These bodies are autonomous and separate from Comhairle and they should know their own titles. They are known as citizens information centres.

Ms Hanafin

They are fully funded by Comhairle.

Mr. Boyle

The Deputy is Minister for Education and Science. She knows these are information centres for many citizens, not a citizen.

Acting Chairman (Mr. Carey)

The Chair is constrained to a certain extent by the number of times a person can be allowed speak. I do not wish to be awkward.

Mr. Boyle

This is an important point relating to how this Bill will proceed.

Acting Chairman

If the Minister is not accepting the amendment, the Chair has no discretion other than dividing the House if necessary.

Mr. Boyle

Well, I tried.

Acting Chairman

The amendment is not being accepted. Is Deputy Boyle pressing the amendment?

Mr. Boyle

I am pressing the amendment.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Acting Chairman

Amendment No. 2 arises out of committee proceedings in the name of Deputy Boyle.

Mr. Boyle

I move amendment No. 2:

In page 4, line 22, to delete "family support" and substitute "family support and childcare".

I formally move this because I do not think much will be achieved in terms of etymology today. I will let the arguments I made on Committee Stage stand.

Acting Chairman

Is the Deputy pressing the amendment?

Mr. Boyle

Yes.

Ms Hanafin

It is not my intention to accept this amendment because the definition of social service is broad ranging and includes what Deputy Boyle is trying to add.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Acting Chairman

Amendment No. 3 arises out of committee proceedings.

Mr. Boyle

I move amendment No. 3:

In page 4, between lines 24 and 25, to insert the following:

"(d) Section 2(2) of the Principal Act is amended by the insertion of the following new paragraphs:

"(c) Nothing in this legislation will detract from the primacy of the judiciable obligation placed on government departments, state agencies and publicly funded bodies to be proactive in making information publicly available on the schemes and services they provide and on their decision-making processes as prescribed in the Freedom of Information Acts 1997 and 2003.

(d) Government departments, state agencies and publicly funded bodies may co-operate and liaise with the Board, the better to be proactive in making information publicly available on the schemes and services they provide and on their decision-making processes.”.”.

Given the debate we had on this issue on Committee Stage, and not having received information since then suggesting the position of the Minister for Social and Family Affairs and his Department was likely to change, I am happy to withdraw amendment No. 3.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Acting Chairman

Amendment No. 4 is out of order. Amendments Nos. 5 and 6 are to be taken together.

Amendment No. 4 not moved.

Mr. Penrose

I move amendment No. 5:

In page 4, lines 26 to 28, to delete all words from and including "in" in line 26 down to and including "Shaoránaigh" in line 28 and substitute the following:

"in the Irish language as Comhairle — An Bord um Fhaisnéis do Shaoránaigh or, in the English language as Comhairle — the Citizens Information Board".

I think this is reasonable and that the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, who is something of a gaelgeoir, will understand our perspective. It is important that the emphasis on the citizens information board is also highlighted in Irish.

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Mr. Brennan)

I apologise for my delay due to the Social Welfare Bill in the Seanad.

Mr. Penrose

We understand and we feel the same as this is the last sitting week.

Mr. Brennan

It is one of those weeks, but not to worry, it will be a long Christmas.

I explained previously that we changed the name for branding reasons. I have ensured that the line "advocacy, information and advice" will be present wherever the title is used. The word advocacy will always appear as a strap line and that is very important.

Mr. Boyle

Can I confirm that amendments Nos. 5 and 6 are being taken together?

Acting Chairman

Amendments Nos. 5 and 6 are being taken together.

Mr. Brennan

The board's intention is to promote the new personal advocacy service as a distinct service and to target people with disabilities and those who work with them. On the passing of the legislation, the statutory body will be called the citizens information board, an bord um fhaisnéis do shaoránaigh. However, the board's important function in the provision of advocacy services will be referenced in the strap line and it will read "information, advice and advocacy".

My first instinct is always to support the Irish language title but there was a greater priority in this case to tidy up and create a brand we can sell, one that everybody, particularly visitors, can immediately grasp. I felt that this service was spread all over the place between Comhairle, Oasis and citizens information boards and needed to be unified and tidied up. Though I can see the other perspective, this view means that the service must do what it says on the tin, that is, information will be provided to people across all State services. It is best to simply call the service what it is. It would be ironic if a board with €24 million of State money, charged with giving information, could not give information about itself in simple, clear terms.

On this occasion we will not be able to satisfy our great love of the Irish language and the requirement to put everything in the title, such as "advocacy, information and advice", though this phrase will be in the strap line. I think this is the best way forward, though I understand the other view.

Acting Chairman

Amendment No. 6 is a technical alternative to amendment No. 5.

Mr. Boyle

I will speak briefly on amendment No. 6 because the argument I made on Second and Committee Stages was important and the Bill is meant to be on the matter of branding and how the organisation will be perceived.

I do not accept the Minister's argument and feel it is important that advocacy plays an important part in the title of the organisation, given that the Bill is meant to promote advocacy services through this new vehicle. I will, consequently, press my amendment.

Acting Chairman

Will Deputy Penrose press his amendment?

Mr. Penrose

I will not press my amendment as I accept the Minister's rationale.

Acting Chairman

I gather if amendment No. 5 is agreed, amendment No. 6 cannot be moved.

Mr. Boyle

Deputy Penrose will be withdrawing amendment No. 5 and amendment No. 6 is, therefore, valid.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Boyle

I move amendment No. 6:

In page 4, line 27, to delete "Citizens Information Board" and substitute the following:

"Comhairle — The Citizens Information and Personal Advocacy Services Board".

Amendment put and declared lost.

Mr. Penrose

I move amendment No. 7:

In page 6, line 45, after "behalf" to insert ", either at all or in an effective manner,".

We had an extensive discussion on this matter on Committee Stage and I do not wish to unduly prolong the issue as I heard the Minister's point of view at that stage. Comhairle can only provide an advocacy service for children under 18 years of age when it is not reasonable to expect that a parent or guardian would be able to act on behalf of a child. The Labour Party believes the Bill should be broad enough to cover a situation where a parent is able to act on behalf of a child, but is not sufficiently skilled to do so in an effective manner. Advocacy could be needed in such a situation but I have heard the Minister's views in that regard and I do not think he will accept this amendment.

Mr. Brennan

I accept the good intent behind this amendment but I feel requiring the director to consider whether a parent could act effectively on behalf of a child, when considering entitlement to a personal advocate, would make qualifying conditions for the service more stringent. This amendment could be counterproductive in practice because it introduces to the qualifying criteria the notion of whether a parent is in a position to act at any level on behalf of a child.

The word "effective" introduces a judgmental angle to the legislation which could have the opposite of the good effect the Deputy seeks. For that reason the legislation is best left as it is in this regard.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Stanton

I move amendment No. 8:

In page 7, between lines 8 and 9, to insert the following:

"(5) Each application for a personal advocate shall be considered within a reasonable timeframe of the date of application.".

We discussed this issue on Committee Stage. The amendment tries to insert a timeframe in the Bill as no specific timeframe is indicated. All the Bill stipulates with regard to dealing with applications is "within a reasonable timeframe". The amendment tries to give some impetus so that each application will be considered within a reasonable timeframe from the date of application. I am concerned that because of the lack of a timeframe people could be left waiting for some time, despite the fact that is not the intention of either the Minister or the Oireachtas. Other legislation has a provision such as that provided by this amendment in order to give some impetus and to place an onus on the people providing the service.

Mr. Brennan

The amendment is not necessary. The strategic and business plans of the citizens information board, now Comhairle, should include — I will seek to ensure they do — some kind of time target. To put it into legislation could have the kind of effect mentioned previously, as for example in the planning area where people kept returning for more information and the issue ended up going round in circles. Not including it means that in many cases decisions can be made more quickly. We can achieve the same objective by ensuring that some kind of time targets are included in the strategic plan of the new board.

Mr. Stanton

The Minister seems to be contradicting himself. He says that he will not include any time target in the legislation, but he says he will include specified targets in the guidelines. He criticises their inclusion in the Bill by saying if they are included, we will end up with a situation like that in the planning area. If he is going to include them in the guidelines, he may be hoist with his own petard when he ends up with the same problem as that in the planning area. The amendment is quite modest and only suggests that every application should be considered within a reasonable timeframe. Therefore, if someone was left waiting a long time, the impetus would be in the Bill to deal with the situation. If the Minister intends including a similar provision in the strategic plan, he can fall back on the primary legislation and say that it was the wish of the Oireachtas that a reasonable timeframe be set.

Mr. Brennan

I do not have a problem with what the Deputy is trying to achieve. At one level it is reasonable to use the word "reasonable" in legislation. However, at another level an army of lawyers could spend time dealing with what is "reasonable" where somebody has a particular advocacy issue. "Reasonable" for that person might be two days, but "reasonable" in other circumstances could be two months. What the Deputy seeks appears reasonable, but in the circumstances it is better to try to include the timeframe in the strategic plan.

We are feeling our way somewhat. We need to know how many cases there will be and the kind of processing time required. The situation is too new for us to lay down a firm deadline which could end up being counterproductive. It is something for the future. Perhaps it should happen once the system is flowing.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Penrose

I move amendment No. 9:

In page 11, line 44, after "advocate" to insert "is instructed to do so or".

I made the point on Committee Stage that it is a strange advocate who is not liable to instructions from his or her client. The wording of the Bill seems to leave it up to the advocate as to whether to launch an appeal, for example, against the refusal of a social welfare entitlement. That is incorrect in principle and should not be accepted in any legal situation. It is surely a matter for the applicant for payment, the client, to decide whether to appeal a refusal of payment. The Minister made a counter argument in that regard which I will probably hear again. Therefore, I will not press the amendment.

Mr. Brennan

The point I made on Committee Stage was that the legislation requires the advocate to act in the best interests of the person. The advocate is statutorily required to do so. It may not always be simple to take direct instruction and therefore it is better to rely on the legislative requirement to act in the best interests of the person. The giving, receiving and misunderstanding of instructions could cause a difficulty.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment No. 10 not moved.

Mr. Boyle

I move amendment No. 11:

In page 13, line 45, to delete "3" and substitute "4".

On Committee Stage, the Minister undertook to come back on this important issue, but I am not sure whether he has reconsidered his position. The element of the Bill this amendment seeks to amend has to do with the reduction in size of the board to make it more manageable and the consequent reduction in quorums to allow meetings take place regularly. This is something with which I agree, but the effect of one of the changes proposed by the Minister means the proportion of people representing those with disabilities will reduce from 25% to 20% on the new smaller board. I want to remedy that. There were five representatives on the old board, but the Minister wants three on the new board. Four would be a fairer figure and would keep up the proportion of representatives of people with disability on the new board. On those grounds I press my amendment.

Mr. Brennan

We are reducing the size of the board from 20 to 15 for operational efficiency. The percentages are tweaked as a result and there is a reduction from 25% to 20% in the representation of people with disabilities. I undertook to take account of that when making appointments. That is the better route to take at this stage.

When one reduces a board dramatically, one gets this type of distortion in the percentage membership. I remind the Deputy that the board still has statutory requirements and is required to take certain actions to support people with disabilities. The composition of the board is critical. However, no matter who is on the board, it has a statutory duty to act in a certain way. I am confident we will have a board that will achieve that. I stress that there was no agenda here. The reduction in the percentage is purely consequential from when the board membership was reduced from 20 to 15. I will try to take full account of the reduction when making appointments to the board.

Mr. Boyle

I wish to record that my preference is for the higher number representing those with disability.

Question,"That the figure proposed to be deleted stand", put and declared carried.

Amendment declared lost.

Mr. Penrose

I move amendment No. 12:

In page 14, between lines 42 and 43, to insert the following:

"(2) The Principal Act and this Act may be cited together as the Citizens' Information Acts 2000 and 2006.".

This is an amendment the Minister can accept. It is a collective citation to a Bill and brings some formality to it.

Mr. Brennan

I propose to accept the amendment subject to one change. There should be no apostrophe after "Citizens" in line with the word used in the Short Title of the Bill, Citizens Information Act 2006. The marginal note will also be changed by the Bills Office to read "Short Title, collective citation and commencement".

Amendment agreed to.

Bill reported with amendment and received for final consideration.

Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Mr. Brennan)

I thank the Deputies opposite for their consideration of and work on the Bill and, in particular, for agreeing to the timetable. I had hoped the Bill would be passed in the Seanad tomorrow but, unfortunately, this will not prove possible. I am sure it will be passed in the Upper House as soon as its sittings resume.

Question put and agreed to.