Enda Kenny
Ceist:1 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the arrangements in place in his Department for providing assistance to certain Members of Dáil Éireann; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43906/06]
Ceisteanna — Questions.
Departmental Expenditure.
Pat Rabbitte
Ceist:2 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the procedures in place within his Department for providing special assistance to certain Members of Dáil Éireann; the Members to whom this assistance is available; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3862/07]
Trevor Sargent
Ceist:3 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on assistance and briefing to Members of Dáil Éireann in 2007; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6333/07]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Ceist:4 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the criteria for providing assistance to certain Members of Dáil Éireann based on their support for the Government, over and above the facilities provided to all other Teachtaí Dála; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6767/07]
Joe Higgins
Ceist:5 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach the procedures in place in his Department for providing assistance to certain members of Dáil Éireann. [8933/07]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 5, inclusive, together.
Several Independent Deputies offered invaluable support to the previous Fianna Fáil-Progressive Democrats Government. While in regard to this Administration, their support is not as critical to the Government's majority, given the support they have provided in the past, I have tried, and will continue to try, to be as helpful as possible to these Deputies.
That is a sad day for Ireland.
A staff member in my office assists the Government Chief Whip's office in liaising with these Deputies. This official meets with these Deputies on a regular basis and arranges to keep them briefed on issues as they arise.
I want to confirm that there is no additional cost to the taxpayer in dealing with these Deputies. One assistant principal officer deals with the Deputies and assists the Chief Whip in this matter. In seeking to be as helpful as possible to the priorities and issues of concern to the Deputies, this is managed within the expenditure on programmes within the programme for Government and the national development plan and will be within the parameters of planned expenditure within departmental estimates.
I welcome Speaker Quinn from New York City Council and her entourage to Ireland and thank her for her courtesy in recent weeks.
The Taoiseach's categorisation of the value of Independent Deputies seems to have declined since Deputy Healy-Rae described himself as the fourth wheel on the ministerial Mercedes in Kerry, much to the amusement of the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism. Does the assistant principal officer consult with some or all of the Independent Deputies? Is it possible to name these slightly favoured Independent Deputies in the House?
Deputy Kenny is embarrassing Deputy Joe Higgins. He should stop now.
Yes, and it is hard to embarrass him.
I am sure the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Seán Power, has looked into the future too and can see that the end is nigh. Who are these Deputies and how often does the principal officer discuss current affairs and other matters with them?
The Taoiseach's office is the most important in the Houses of the Oireachtas. Following Seachtain na Gaeilge does the Taoiseach's Department offer any assistance to a Deputy who wishes to have correspondence about the Taoiseach's Department or business translated into Irish? Many people would like to try to do this but do not have the capacity to do so. This may be a matter for the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission, for which the Ceann Comhairle is responsible.
It is well known that four Independent Deputies continuously supported the last Government. The two remaining Deputies in that category are Deputies Healy-Rae and Fox. Contact with them is as required. In the last Dáil there was regular contact because the Government did not have the numbers between its two parties without their support, so they were kept in touch with on a regular basis. Contact is not as necessary for each Bill as it was but whenever it is necessary to brief them on legislation arising this is done. Members of my office and that of the Chief Whip deal with issues raised by Deputies, not only Independent Deputies. Not a week would go by without some Deputy from some side of the House having a request, whether regarding a visitor or some other issue.
In response to the Deputy's second question, within my Department we endeavour as best we can to deal with correspondence in Irish relevant to the Department and to ensure at least one person in each section is fluent in written Irish. There is no particular service in the House for that purpose. That would be a matter for the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission.
As far as the commission is concerned, Deputy Kenny should note such a scheme has already been approved and should be implemented fairly soon.
It is not implemented yet.
It is not implemented yet but it has been approved.
For Members generally.
For Members generally.
That will be helpful.
Would that be open to Deputies who want to translate what has been transacted between the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs and the people of Dingle, or Daingean Uí Chúis? I was down there recently and none of the residents can figure out, in either language, what the Minister said to them.
We are moving well away from the questions in front of us.
I wonder if that service will be available before the general election because there are many people in the Corca Dhuibhne peninsula trying to figure out what the Minister was saying to them. They are very concerned about the impending tourism season and the implications of the madness under way in the region.
The Deputy has made his point and should return to the questions.
If the Taoiseach is less reliant on Independent Members of the House, as he said, why should he discriminate in favour of the small number of Independent Deputies who receive the service and against the rest of the Members of the House? Not many Deputies have an assistant principal officer available to them at a fairly serious level. When the Taoiseach says the service is only available now, as required, one must ask by whom it is required and for what purpose. Now that Deputy Blaney has been drawn on to a sucker punch and has rejoined the old family, will the service still be available to him or will he now be ignored like the rest of the Fianna Fáil backbenchers?
There is no fear of that.
Once a person is in the parliamentary party, he or she, like everybody else, gets the briefing on legislation from the Whip and is well informed. When one is not in the parliamentary party, it is not as easy to be briefed on legislation. Most of the briefing in question is on legislation in respect of which individuals would want to be aware of the Government's position or issues that arise. It would be very odd if somebody supporting the Government did not have that courtesy available to him or her.
Does the Taoiseach want to put the people of Dingle out of their misery?
That question does not arise under these questions. I call Deputy Sargent.
It might not arise but it would be immensely helpful if the Taoiseach would tell them whether the plebiscite will be respected and honoured in the area.
The Deputy should find another way to raise the matter. I call Deputy Sargent. We have a lot of questions to get through and the Deputy's point does not arise.
The Taoiseach might reply, if the Ceann Comhairle will permit him.
We cannot ramble away from the questions before us.
Tá an tAire Gnóthaí Pobail, Tuaithe agus Gaeltachta as a mheabhair ar fad.
Tá sé ag dul i ndonacht.
Allow Deputy Sargent without interruption.
The last time we had this question — such questions seem to be arising more frequently — the Taoiseach said his office and that of the Whip assist all Deputies on a daily or weekly basis. He asked me to appreciate that if he found someone helpful and constructive over five years, he would not just turn over the book and say the numbers are different and that he is not interested any more. He said this is not the way he works because it would be disrespectful. I took note of this because I presume he is considering the post-election circumstances. If, for example, the Progressive Democrats is not in a position to be in Government, will it be in the favoured position of having been formerly helpful, thus resulting in a new tranche of partially favoured Opposition Members, bearing in mind that we cannot say what the outcome of the election will be? Would that be too many partially favoured Opposition TDs and would the Independent Members have to be dropped as they would then be a distant memory? Is there a limit to the number of partially favoured Opposition TDs the Taoiseach puts in that special position?
One day Deputy Sargent may be partially favoured.
We are willing to serve the country.
It is great to see the Government is so concerned about us.
As I explained, and Deputy Sargent has correctly reported what I said previously and today, there is a small number of Deputies who supported the Government throughout the last term and those Deputies continue to be briefed where necessary even if their support is not as crucial in this Dáil. What happens in future Dáils and what happened in past Dáils is a matter for another day or for history.
Are civil servants directly involved in these briefings or the outworking of the special relationship that exists between the Government and certain Independent Deputies? If civil servants are involved in these special advices, is it not inappropriate because civil servants are meant to offer an unbiased and unfavoured service to all in the community and all elected representatives? Will the Taoiseach elaborate on that and indicate whether any such special advices would still be available once the general election has been called and up to the advent of the new Dáil?
First, I welcome Deputy Ó Caoláin back to the House and wish him every strength and success. It is good to see him back working again.
The assistance mainly relates to legislative matters or matters that Members from political parties would be briefed on in the normal course of affairs when legislation is before the House. It is no more than that. Sometimes Members might want to see a Minister or Minister of State but most Members would do that on their own strength. Ministers are always very accommodating to people on all sides of the House.
Will this service apply during the interregnum between the dissolution of the Dáil and the election of a new one and, if so, does it have implications in terms of electoral spend?
No. The House would not be sitting and no legislation would be going through. The questions that normally arise would not apply. One of the two Deputies who is normally briefed is not running for the next Dáil so it would not arise in that case and I do not believe that Deputy Healy-Rae will come to the House to seek advice on legislative issues during the course of the campaign in south Kerry.
The Taoiseach might need to keep the peace between Deputy Healy-Rae and the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism in south Kerry.
That is another reason I do not think he will come to the House during the interregnum.
Public Relations Contracts.
Enda Kenny
Ceist:6 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the work of the group established in his Department to oversee the awarding of public relations contracts by Ministers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43910/06]
Trevor Sargent
Ceist:7 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the changes effected on foot of the establishment of the group in his Department to oversee the awarding of public relations contracts by Ministers; if that group has reported to him; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6334/07]
Pat Rabbitte
Ceist:8 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the progress made by the group established in his Department to monitor the awarding of public relations contracts by Ministers; the number of occasions on which the group has met; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8367/07]
Joe Higgins
Ceist:9 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach the work of the group established in his Department to oversee the awarding of public relations contracts by Ministers. [8934/07]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Ceist:10 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the changes brought about as a result of the work of the group established in his Department to oversee the awarding of public relations contracts by Ministers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9639/07]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 to 10, inclusive, together.
These questions relate to the findings of the Quigley report which was published in 2005. It highlighted the need for special care in cases where services are procured where there is an element of direct service to a Minister or Minister of State, particularly in the public relations or communications area.
As I outlined to the House on previous occasions, following publication of the Quigley report, additional procurement procedures were approved by the Government and are available on my Department's website. These procedures were brought to the attention of all Secretaries General who were asked to implement them and to bring them in future to the attention of all newly appointed Ministers, or Ministers of State where relevant, in their Department or office.
The procedures give the Secretary General to the Government and the Government Secretariat a role in examining certain procurements. There is no special unit in my Department to oversee the awarding of public relations contracts by Ministers and any workload arising from the application of these guidelines is handled within existing resources in the Government secretariat.
What is the function of the Government Information Service in terms of informing members of the public about matters relative to the Government? How many personnel comprise the group that overseas the award of public relations contract by Ministers and how do they differentiate between what is political and public information? For instance, last year the Minister with responsibility for children wrote to everybody about the early child care supplement. I understand the cost of sending out that letter was €250,000, despite the fact that the scheme was well publicised.
That does not arise on this question, Deputy.
It was a public relations contract and I am asking the difference between the political end of that and the public relations end. The Minister with responsibility for children wrote to every family in the country at a cost of €250,000 of taxpayers' money and that contract was awarded to somebody. I ask the Taoiseach who overseas that and what is the differentiation between the politics and the public relations end of it. I understand the Taoiseach is on record as saying the early child care supplement will cost approximately €3 million. Currently, it is €150,000 and rising. Is there a section that examines the business of the public relations side as against the policy side of this area?
If a Minister or Minister of State decides to write to the nation, who would authorise that and in what context would it be decided? Last year, Ministers of State were peering out of feed bags for cattle. I am not sure whether that was public information or public dissemination. Who makes those decisions? Is there an intention to reform this area because there appears to be a massive cost involved in the public relations end of Ministers and Departments setting out their stall to the people?
On the general question of an advertising or information publicity campaign in a Department, clear guidelines are set down by the Department of Finance on what one can do in that regard. Those guidelines have been enhanced and tightened up on a number of occasions in the past six or seven years. A Minister or a Minister of State in any Department cannot simply decide to produce a publicity leaflet without being satisfied that it comes within the procurement arrangements and the guidelines. A number of issues arose in the past six or seven years since the Public Office Commission was set up and they were addressed in the guidelines.
Regarding these questions, if a Minister decided to take on staff by fast-tracking the post and not going through the normal procurement arrangements or if it was somebody in the public relations area, it was considered that there should be a new procurement arrangement where there was any doubt involved. The Quigley report specified that in any such case it should be first certified and cleared with the Secretary General of the Department and, if there was any doubt, with the Secretary General of the Government. That has since happened. I understand there have been four or five such cases to date. If there is any doubt, the matter must go not only to the Department but to the Government secretariat which would arbitrate on the decision. It does not come to the Government or to me. Under existing guidelines, the Government contracts committee and the Government handbook, the Government secretariat would make a call on whether it was permissible.
What is the function and role of the Government information service? Is that information it should be able to dispense? It is the Government Information Service. What is its role and responsibility in that matter?
On a daily basis the Government Information Service dispenses information that comes through Departments, from Government itself or from Cabinet committees. It is mainly about reports or documentation approved for circulation for interested parties, whether it be farming, teachers or whatever. That is its ongoing job. There is not a day that it does not put out information either to a sector or more widely. As well, people seek old reports. There is a large amount of work for people trying to get reports that perhaps were published a year or two ago.
As we all know the period in which election expenditure is taken into account, three weeks before an election date, has an unreal quality to it. Is there any cut-off point in advance of an expected general election period during which new PR contracts would not be signed given the likelihood that they would take into account political dimensions or political work? Between now and the general election will there be any PR contracts or what is the nature of those contracts given the impending general election?
Normally public relations contracts run for the period of the Government, but the departmental public relations contracts would not be engaged in a political campaign or they would not be involved in a period of election.
Deputy Kenny mentioned that coming up to the last general election the Minister of State with responsibility for children misused taxpayers' money to blatantly convey a political message. However, he was not the only one. Several Ministers promoted themselves and their party affiliations under the guise of imparting information to the public coming up to the last general election. Is the Taoiseach satisfied that we will not see a recurrence of that practice on this occasion? On how many occasions has a Minister sought to implement the procedures to notify the Secretary General to the Government of a particular PR or communications contract since the guidelines, to which he referred, were introduced in, I believe, February 2005? On how many occasions has the appointment of a particular person or enterprise in that area been considered by the Government Secretariat? On how many occasions has the Secretary General made a recommendation to the Taoiseach in respect of any special procurement procedures that ought to be observed in this case, and which Ministers were the subject of this process by the Secretary General? How many times have these procedures been invoked since the affair involving the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, that prompted the guidelines in the first instance?
I do not accept that Ministers breached the public procurement guidelines and the various rules in the handbook prior to the last general election. Ministers must follow the guidelines. There were a few cases outside of election times that were brought to the attention of the Standards in Public Office Commission, which were looked at. I do not believe informing people about the FIS system or the other systems where people at times do not take up their entitlements is in breach of guidelines. It is a good service and I do not believe we should not inform people. That said, it is a regular practice for the Government secretariat to inform Ministers or Departments of the proper practice in relation to the Government handbook and the criteria for following up issues.
To reply to Deputy Rabbitte, in regard to the Quigley report five cases which came within the terms of the guidelines have been processed so far. Two of these related to the appointment of an arts adviser at the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism. I approved both of these appointments following appropriate prior consideration by the Government secretariat, the Minister having brought them to the Government secretariat for advice. The other three cases were on investigation by the Government secretariat found not to be within the scope of the guidelines. Those were an IT consultant in the Department of Transport and a PR and communications consultant in both the Department of Transport and the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism. In those cases they were not within the guidelines but followed the correct criteria. Usually when issues arises, they come under the normal public procurement guidelines and the Government handbook and the Department of Finance rules which are very straightforward.
I thank the Taoiseach for his kind remarks earlier and all Members of both Houses who contacted me and my offices over the period of my recent illness.
In relation to the group established in the Taoiseach's Department to oversee the awarding of public relations contracts and the information he has already shared with us this afternoon, surely there must be a wider remit than just oversight. Can he elaborate on the function and the expected performance of the group? It has been mentioned, without specific identification, that in the issue of e-voting some €3 million was expended on PR company work in the promotion of that failed intent. Will the Taoiseach state this is a serious amount of money? Is it his view that part of the role of the group would be to promote the use in the first instance of the Government press office and the respective PR officials in each of the Departments and that it should be only in the most extreme and special circumstances that outside PR consultants would be needed? Are there guidelines in respect of the decision to seek private consultancy in relation to press work and public relations and, if so, will he outline the guidelines to the House?
In regard to any contract in a Department, there is the criteria set down by the Department of Finance, the Cabinet book and directives that cover what Ministers or departmental sections can do in the promotion of any campaign. There is also the Government contracts committee. All of these lay down the rules. The issue in the Quigley report dealt with a PR communications area where there is a significant element of direct service to a Minister or where a Minister is suggesting the name of a person or enterprise for a consultancy contract. In that case the Quigley report recommended a strengthening of the guidelines in the Department of Finance and in the Government contracts committee. It also stated, to remove doubt, that the Secretary General of a Department would have to arbitrate in a first case. If he or she was in any doubt, it was permissible within the guidelines that it would be referred to the Government secretariat, which regularly arbitrates on issues that fall within the Government handbook or Government guidelines. For a normal contract, a departmental section or agency must comply with the guidelines of the Department of Finance and the contracts committee. These documents require rigorous compliance. No one can tender for a contract without fulfilling the requirements of the guidelines.
Departmental Staff.
Enda Kenny
Ceist:11 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the number of political advisers or assistants appointed by the Attorney General; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43911/06]
Joe Higgins
Ceist:12 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on staffing arrangements in the Attorney General’s office and in particular the amounts paid each year to each contract drafter who was utilised by the office in the past five years. [4735/07]
Trevor Sargent
Ceist:13 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the progress made on remedying problems with the on-line Irish Statute Book; the amount expended on this project to date; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6335/07]
Trevor Sargent
Ceist:14 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on staffing in the Attorney General’s office; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6336/07]
Pat Rabbitte
Ceist:15 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the role played by the Office of the Attorney General in regard to determining the level of fees to be paid to legal teams at tribunals of inquiry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7570/07]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Ceist:16 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on staffing arrangements in the Office of the Attorney General; the proportion of work contracted out; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9640/07]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 11 to 16, inclusive, together.
Mr. Loughlin Deegan, a qualified solicitor, was appointed on 29 July 2002 to the position of special assistant to act as a liaison between the Attorney General and myself and other Departments on items relevant to the programme for Government. His duties also include briefing the Attorney General on items arising in the Dáil and Seanad or media which could impinge on, or be relevant to, the role of the Attorney General.
Mr. Deegan does not provide legal advice or legal services directly to Departments but provides advice and assistance directly to the Attorney General on the matters relevant to the work of the Attorney General. He provides assistance to the Attorney General in matters such as the drafting of speeches and public presentations.
The Office of the Attorney General has sanction for 135 staff. Of this number, 15 have recently been sanctioned by the Department of Finance and the office is recruiting these additional staff. Several competitions, organised on behalf of the office by the Public Appointments Service, are in train. These include competitions for advisory counsel grade III and legal researchers. Internal competitions are in train and others are being prepared. There remain a small number of administrative or support posts to be filled from the normal Public Appointments Service general service or decentralisation panels.
In addition to permanent staff, the office retains six drafters on contract. These positions are filled pursuant to Department of Finance sanction. All contract drafters engaged by the office have significant drafting experience either in the State or in common law jurisdictions. In the past, all have previously held senior drafting positions, including former heads of office of the UK Office of Parliamentary Counsel, the Canadian Federal Drafting Office and the Office of the Scottish Parliamentary Counsel. All contract drafters come highly recommended.
Typically, a contract drafter will be given a one-year contract which may subsequently be extended depending on the level of work dictated by the Government's legislative programme and the availability of permanent staff, which can be affected by term-time working arrangements, maternity leave etc. The need for contract drafters is kept under constant review.
The amounts paid in respect of the contract drafters are set out in the following schedule.
Thomson Roundhall delivered its report on 6 February 2007 on the electronic Statute Book. Of the recommendations contained in the report, consideration is being given to two options. The first option could be concluded within seven weeks at a cost of €37,000 and would correct the errors. The second, more technical and less urgent option would involve reformatting and would take 25 weeks at a cost of between €125,000 and €175,000. It is not intended to proceed with it initially. However, this route will be further considered in the context of the electronic Statute Book value for money review which is far advanced. The cost of the feasibility and costs report from Thomson Roundhall was €10,587.50, including VAT.
On the question of the role of the Attorney General in determining fees to be paid, all tribunal counsel fees are sanctioned by the Department of Finance and are paid from the relevant departmental Vote. In that context, the Office of the Attorney General offers a view as to the level of fees payable.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
Schedule — engagement of contract drafters 2002 to 2006
Please note that annual information is presented and that all the contract drafters may not have been engaged at the same time during the year.
During 2002, the office retained four contract drafters and paid amounts of €65,468, €68,755, €72,373 and €137,095.
During 2003, the office retained five contract drafters and paid amounts of €10,158, €69,528, €73,772, €91,390 and €142,270.
During 2004, the office retained six contract drafters and paid amounts of €35,951, €73,807, €81,206, €96,178, €121,682 and €137,762.
During 2005, the office retained seven contract drafters and paid amounts of €1,293, €41,675, €87,668, €114,680, €131,822, €136,462 and €154,668.
During 2006, the office retained eight contract drafters and paid amounts of €15,548, €61,839, €74,536, €92,600, €99,324, €115,904, €144,911 and €168,526.
Does the Taoiseach regard the Office of the Attorney General as a non-political office? I understand the Attorney General has a special adviser who has a political role. As the Attorney General must give advice to the Government, is his office viewed as non-political? When does the Taoiseach expect we will have an on-line version of the pre-1922 statutes that are still legally effective? Persons who wish to gain access to them are very restricted.
Given the on-line version of legislation, which is the one most readily accessible to citizens, researchers, academics, legal practitioners, etc., has been seen to be less than 100% correct, has a trawl been carried out as to the number of items of legislation that are inaccurate in the on-line version? Is the Taoiseach's Department aware certain Acts published on-line are not fully accurate? Is an analysis of that deficiency currently ongoing, and does the Taoiseach have any information as to when, or if, that work will be concluded?
That was the issue to which I referred. Following the completion of the work, the Attorney General's office found an error in the chronological tables. The office has been seeking to correct the error in that work. As I stated in the reply, two possible options have been identified to correct the errors that have occurred. The first would not take too long. It involves seven weeks of work at a cost of €37,000. I presume that is the option that will be chosen.
Another option would take approximately six months to conclude. This would involve re-formatting the work, which is a more technical job. The Attorney General's office will have to make a decision based on value for money criteria. Considering the investment made, it would appear to be advisable to proceed, unless there was a reason not to do so. Most of the work on-line has not been affected. The work involved in the original project is being used, except where the deficiency concerned arises in regard to work carried out by the company that did the original work — Juta Limited.
This company was originally contracted to provide an electronic version of the Statute Book. A computerised process was used by the company to insert the hyperlinks into the electronic Statute Book. Where one item of legislation refers to another, the first item contains a link which allows the user to click directly into the second. This is a helpful resource which, in the majority of cases, makes the electronic Statute Book user-friendly. This facility works very well. However, in some cases, the technical process used by the original contractors resulted in some legislative texts being obscured.
The contract held with the outside contractor in question ended in 1998 and the company concerned has not been awarded any other contracts by the Office of the Attorney General since that time. A second outside contractor has periodically updated the electronic version of the Statute Book. The hyperlinking error has not been repeated by any of the new outside contractors working on the legislation from 1999 onwards. It is a question of correcting errors in work done prior to that date, which is not too expensive.
Deputies will be aware of the efforts being made by my Department and the Office of the Attorney General to modernise the Statute Book by repealing obsolete pre-1922 legislation. The second Bill relating to this area is currently before the House. It is Government policy to ultimately repeal all of the pre-1922 legislation through an ongoing process of legislative reform. In that context, there is little value in making pre-1922 legislation available in electronic form.
The post referred to in Deputy Kenny's question relates to a special assistant, who works with the Attorney General. It is not an adviser, as is the case in other Departments. That individual liaises with Ministers regarding issues in the Office of the Attorney General and also provides a useful point of contact. In the normal course of events, with so much legal and legislative work, and so many other cases passing through the Office of the Attorney General, it is key to have someone who can liaise. It is not a political issue, but it is very important to have someone who can fulfil that role. For some time, a special assistant has liaised between the Attorney General and the Departments on programmes for Government and day-to-day legislative issues. It is not in the political context of an adviser, since the role is quite different.
We are out of time, but I will hear Deputy Joe Higgins very briefly, since he has been in the House all afternoon, having submitted a question.
This is the last opportunity before the election to discuss this important issue. I will be very brief.
Can the Taoiseach tell us the three largest sums paid to contractors and state their nationalities? Is he aware of the extreme concern at the employment of so many contract drafters from abroad, including people who have been pensioned off in their home countries, instead of training young people as full-time drafters in the Office of the Attorney General?
As I said in my reply, some 15 additional staff have been taken on. We have some very able Irish drafters, but there are difficulties when someone is on maternity or special leave as, unlike many other posts, one cannot easily find experienced people. I agree that we should at all times endeavour to have our own draftspeople, and it is to be hoped that the extra staff will help.
I will not go into too much detail as this information is provided with the answer. The three largest sums paid last year were €168,526, €144,911 and €115,904, respectively. We have been using contract drafters for many years. There are normally between four and six in any one year, and other payments tend to be small, depending on the length of the person's employment. We have been lucky, since the House now passes 70 or 80 Bills each year, and without contract drafters we would never be able to keep abreast of the workload.