Vol. 963 No. 3
6. Deputy Aindrias Moynihan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will report on the progress of flood defences in an area (details supplied); the next step in the works; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53473/17]
I have raised this issue of concern for Baile Bhuirne residents time and again in the House. They are concerned about flooding from the Sullane river anytime there is heavy rain. Residents need to see some progress. The issue has been ongoing since 2011, when we saw the initial designs, yet six years on, no works are in place. We need to see a plan of the works. The issue with the pearl mussel has already been set aside and resolved. There needs to be work and action at this point. We need to get an update on where flood defences for Baile Bhuirne stand.
The Baile Bhuirne and Ballymakeera scheme is currently at outline design stage and the preferred options for the scheme are being finalised.
A submission to the National Parks and Wildlife Service was approved, allowing the scheme to progress to site investigations, at which point the results will inform the preferred options of the scheme. A surveying contractor was appointed in September 2017 to carry out a site investigation survey. On-site survey works were completed in November 2017 and the results of the site investigation will determine the preferred options and assist in developing realistic costings.
It is proposed to hold a second public information day followed by a public exhibition of the preferred scheme in the first half of 2018. When these stages are successfully completed and the proposals are broadly accepted by the public and stakeholders and the scheme is deemed technically, environmentally and economically viable, it will proceed to detailed design stage and secure formal confirmation by the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform under the Arterial Drainage Acts.
My office continues to liaise with Cork County Council and local representatives on the scheme. I assure the Deputy that my office has included provision for the estimated costs of the proposed works in its financial profile in the period up to 2021.
The detailed design was due in 2016. That was after the National Parks and Wildlife Service had cleared everything with the pearl mussel. A second exhibition was due in spring 2017. Again, when works were under way in the summer, the exhibition was expected at the end of 2017. Is there now further slippage? When will we get to detailed design stage on this scheme? Has a cost-benefit analysis been conducted at this point?
Numerous agencies have looked at this, including the National Parks and Wildlife Service, the Office of Public Works, the Department, fisheries organisations and various consultants. Even the Railway Procurement Agency has looked at the scheme, yet we seem to be nowhere near getting it built.
We are in much the same position as we were in 2011 and 2012 after the first exhibition. We need to see concrete works in place. Is the plan moving away from flood defences to digging in the river? Can the Minister of State confirm what kind of works are being lined up? Will we see the next exhibition in the spring in spite of the fact that it has slipped repeatedly?
As Deputy Moynihan is well aware, I was in Cork. I have visited most areas throughout the country, but I have visited Cork in particular because of this scheme. Since I came into this office in the past four and a half months I have made a high priority of several schemes, and this scheme is one of them. I assure Deputy Moynihan and the people that this is at the forefront and I intend to deliver on the scheme.
There were issues relating to the pearl mussel. We held extensive negotiations with the National Parks and Wildlife Service. It has been criticised, but the service has worked closely with my Department. I am happy to inform Deputy Moynihan that the scheme will start, hopefully, towards the end of next year. Deputy Moynihan should trust me.
Tá sé fíorthábhachtach do mhuintir Bhaile Bhuirne agus do mhuintir Bhaile Mhic Íre go mbrúfaí chun cinn leis an gcosaint ar na tuilte ón Sulán. Is ábhar mórbhuartha é do mhuintir na háite agus teastaíonn uathu go mbrúfaí chun cinn leis gan a thuilleadh moille. Has a cost-benefit analysis been conducted on the scheme at this point? If not, why are we going so far down into it without doing that? Surely, if the analysis had been conducted earlier, it would raise the red flag and allow us to get on with it quickly. So many homes are impacted. The national primary road is impacted and the possibility of schools and businesses flooding also arises. It would really raise the profile if the cost-benefit analysis was carried out. It would be recognised as a high-profile scheme.
I acknowledge that the Minister of State has been around the Cork area. It is good that he is taking a hands-on interest. I am keen that the Minister of State would also take a hands-on interest in this scheme in Baile Bhuirne and push it on as quickly as possible. We have seen so many delays all the way through since 2011. The fresh water pearl mussel has not been a major issue for us in so far as we can live together. There are solutions that can work around that. We need to get the different agencies moving on it.
I know this is an important issue for Deputy Moynihan and the people he represents, especially the people in that area. I assure Deputy Moynihan that everything will be done to deliver on the scheme. I assure Deputy Moynihan that since I came into office, I have highlighted several schemes throughout the country, and I see this scheme as important. I have talked to the people who have made representations in this area. I want to deliver on this scheme for Deputy Moynihan and the people of the area.
We will move on now to Question No. 9, which is grouped with Questions Nos. 5 and 18.
5. Deputy Jonathan O'Brien asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform to outline his plans to reform freedom of information legislation. [53245/17]
9. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he has satisfied himself with the functioning of the freedom of information system in place under the Freedom of Information Act 2014; if he will consider amending section 44 of the Act to confer power on the Minister to instruct the Information Commissioner to carry out a review of the operations of the Act; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53475/17]
18. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he has satisfied himself that section 27 of the Freedom of Information Act 2014 is functioning properly; if all agencies that come under freedom of information legislation following the Act are applying fees and charges for FOI requests in an open and transparent manner; if guidelines are issued to the agencies with regard to calculating fees and charges; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53476/17]
The questions relate to the current freedom of information legislation. Is the Minister satisfied that the legislation is functioning properly? Will the Minister consider amending section 44 of the Act so that he can instruct the Information Commissioner to carry out a review of the operation of the Act?
My interactions with numerous freedom of information departments, State bodies and Departments lead me to believe the legislation is not working. I do not believe this so-called world-class legislation is offering the transparency and accountability promised.
We discussed this in September and the Minister stated he was not against the idea of looking at it. I am wondering what he thinks at this stage.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 5, 9 and 18 together.
As specified in section 43(3) of the Freedom of Information Act 2014, the Information Commissioner is fully independent in the performance of his functions, including those under section 44 of the Act. I have reviewed this area and I have no plans to amend the Act to allow for a Minister to instruct the commissioner in this regard. To do so would adversely affect the important independent role of the commissioner.
However, as Deputies may be aware, an extensive review of the operation of the freedom of information, FOI, framework fed into the development of the Freedom of Information Act 2014 which introduced a modernised, consolidated, restructured and more accessible system. The Act, alongside an FOI code of practice, seeks to bring about greater efficiency and consistency and promote best practice in the operation of FOI throughout public bodies.
Section 27 of the Freedom of Information Act 2014 relates to fees and charges. Among the key reforms of the Act was the removal of the requirement to pay upfront fees for making requests to public bodies and the significant reduction in the cost of applying for internal reviews and appeals to the Information Commissioner. In addition, in relation to non-personal requests, a minimum threshold of €101 was introduced below which no search, retrieval and copying fees can be charged. This means that if a request is focused and takes no longer than five hours to search for, the requests will be processed free of charge. However, I, as Minister, have no role in monitoring or policing of individual decisions, including in relation to fees.
For the information of the Deputy, some 30,417 FOI requests were processed by public bodies in 2016. It is a record number and a doubling of the number reached under the previous Act, with 73% of those requests granted either in full or in part. It is also worth noting that in only 3% of cases did requesters avail of the review mechanism available to them.
Speaking of charges, there needs to be a reform of the system. It lacks consistency in how search and retrieval fees are estimated or applied across various State bodies or Departments under FOI. Certain Departments are looking to charge crazy fees and it acts as a deterrent. Even though the Minister is telling me that the numbers are up, I would like to see what exactly is being retrieved.
I put in an FOI request to the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection on correspondence between the Department and the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner and the Road Safety Authority since 2010. I was given an estimate that the services of four staff members would come to a total of 654.5 hours search and retrieval work on my request and they were charging €20 an hour. The total bill was to be €12,912, not including photocopying. That, obviously, was a little on the prohibitive side and put me off somewhat. It is worth looking at.
Before I forget, if the Minister is writing to Santa Claus, will he ask him for two tickets for Spurs v. Juve and he can bring me to London for Christmas?
Now there is one for the Minister.
The Minister will oblige at a price.
They have a lot in common.
Deputy Wallace and I have that in common anyway.
On his point in relation to a freedom of information request, there is an economic cost involved in meeting freedom of information requests. I am sure what the Department told the Deputy is correct, that it would take four civil servants that period of time to meet his request which means there is other work that cannot be done by them. As a result, it is reasonable to outline and charge applicants a portion of that cost. However, as the Deputy will be aware, we have brought in a minimum threshold and if the request takes no longer than five hours to search for, it will be dealt with free of charge.
The freedom of information legislation, despite the point made by Deputy Wallace, has yielded to him and others huge insights into both good things and challenges in our country.
Another area worth looking at is the recording of records. Neither the FOI Act nor the National Archives Act 1986, which covers Departments' records, specifically require Departments or State bodies to make records in the first place. We now have a situation where civil servants are recording less and less and are not taking minutes of meetings all the time or notes of calls.
I was looking at a document entitled Governance Framework of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, the Minister's own Department, written in 2016. It states, "It is proper to maintaining a meaningful record of the department's activities to regularly thin out the documents you work with and to retain only those that provide for efficiency and contribute to transparency, accountability and a meaningful archival record." I take it that "thin out" is another word for shredding. It needs to be looked at. Currently, it is only an offence under the FOI Act to destroy a record after a request has been received in relation to that record. We have a situation, for example, where NAMA can destroy all the emails of staff 12 months after they have left and it is not illegal. Is that right? Should it be that way? Does the Minister agree this is information that is in the public interest? Surely it is hardly good enough that NAMA should be allowed to destroy it after one year.
I cannot comment on the particular incident that the Deputy has referred to in relation to NAMA because I am not aware of it. I cannot comment on something unless I have more information on it. By and large, public bodies should be retaining all of their records that support decisions, either in relation to individuals or policy matters.
However, it is the case, certainly at political level, that the existence of freedom of information legislation has had an affect on the way Ministers communicate with their Departments and how they detail matters. I myself see it. It has happened to me. If I make a comment on a particular matter, the comment, when revealed under FOI, can then be interpreted in any way people see fit. There was an issue recently where I made a point in relation to the number of SNAs in the State. I merely made the point, in the context of a document I was assessing, that we now have more SNAs than gardaí. Within hours of that being revealed under FOI, I was being attacked for not appreciating the value of SNAs which, of course, I never said. It is a reality that freedom of information legislation has affected the ability of people like myself to communicate on matters like that.
In relation to freedom of information, Departments should be retaining all records on either individual or policy matters unless there is an exceptional circumstance to say they should not.
As Deputy Wallace has another question grouped, he is entitled to one more supplementary.
The previous Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, gave permission for NAMA to destroy information a year after staff had left. Would the Minister consider looking at that, if he was not aware of it? I get the impression from the Minister's previous reply that he thinks information should be on record. It is in the public interest that it is available. NAMA is a public body. Would the Minister consider looking at it in order to change the current arrangement?
As I said, I will not comment on the NAMA matter that Deputy Wallace has raised with me until I have more information on it and I can see was that decision taken and why. When I have had a look at that, I will be in a position to comment better on the matter.
We are going back to Question No. 7. Deputy Barry was just coming in the door. There has to be a penalty and the penalty is that we will go straight to the reply.
7. Deputy Mick Barry asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the way in which he will ensure that public servants who opt to work until 70 years of age will be doing so out of a desire to work as opposed to feeling compelled to do so for economic reasons; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53259/17]
The Deputy will be aware that last week the Government decided to increase the compulsory retirement age from 65 to 70 for public servants recruited prior to 1 April 2004. I announced this on Wednesday last with the Ministers of State, Deputies O'Donovan and Moran. The decision to remain at work beyond the age of 65 will be completely voluntary on the part of the employee.
There will be no change to the minimum pension age, that is, the age at which a public servant can retire and receive his or her pension. Once the necessary legislation is commenced, public servants, when they reach the minimum pension age, will be free to retire and receive their pensions at the time of their choosing but will also be free to continue in work up to the age of 70. This will enhance the options available to employees as they approach retirement.
The gap between the current compulsory retirement age of 65 for the pre-2004 cohort and the age of eligibility for the contributory State pension, which is 66, is one of the key policy considerations which gave rise to the changes I announced last week. The pensions of post-1995 public servants are integrated with the contributory State pension. This results in a situation where the pensioner generally applies to the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection for social welfare benefit, which is usually jobseeker's benefit, for the intervening year. Many pensioners are not comfortable with that arrangement because they are required to register for social welfare benefits despite the fact that they have retired. Pensioners feel that they have earned their pensions and should not have to sign on as jobseekers for that period. Many would prefer to continue to work until normal State pension age rather than engage in such a process. This process is likely to become more protracted as the age of eligibility for the State pension increases in 2021 and 2028.
Many public servants want to continue to work beyond the age of 65 because they are fit and healthy and have the ability to contribute further. Others might not feel the same. This decision recognises the rights and interests of both groups.
Public servants will now be able to work until the age of 70. The question is whether they will be compelled to do so or whether they will they do it out of a desire to work. The Minister says that the decision for those public servant workers is completely voluntary. I put it to him that he has put in conditions which mean it is not completely voluntary. I will list three: the increased take in the form of the now consolidated public service pension levy; the replacement of half final salary with half career average earnings; and the breaking of the automatic link between salary and pensions post-retirement and its replacement with periodic non-automatic links with the consumer price index. Any reasonable analysis would show there is an economic push factor that will force many public servants to work until 70, long after they would wish to be the case.
If I came in here and told the Deputy that I am going to create a socialist republic in which the means of production are owned by every citizen of Ireland and would guarantee basic State income for everyone, it would not be good enough for him. This is a progressive measure that has been well recognised, appreciated and noted by unions, those they represent and civil and public servants across the State. There is no coercion or compulsion; it is entirely voluntary. As the Deputy well knows, the issues he has just raised have nothing to do with this decision. They are concerned with trying to ensure that our pensions in the future are on a more solid and sustainable footing. If they were not on a solid and sustainable footing in a few years' time, the Deputy would be the first into the Dáil to lambaste the Government for not making the right decisions. His kind of government - and his abdication of responsibility and continued commitment to rhetoric - takes no account of the fact that this is a good decision, as recognised by many.
That was a very interesting reply. If the Minister comes into the House to propose a socialist republic with public ownership of the means of production, I will second his proposal.
Hear, hear.
I bet, however, that the Minister would not do it. He is a defender of the capitalist system and the rule of the 1% elite. Despite all the bluff and bluster from the Minister, many people will be smelling a rat here. It is well known that the Government intends to bring the State pension age up to 68. It is not a wild leap of the imagination to suspect that the ultimate aim of the Minister and the political establishment is to eliminate the difference between 68 and 70 and make the latter the normal retirement age. When we have that socialist republic, which we will have, we will reduce it to 65 years and below so that workers will have a decent lifestyle. That is very different from what is on offer here.
No one will have to work.
The chances of a socialist republic coming about will always be significantly reduced by the unwillingness of the Deputy and those in his party to take any position of responsibility or to ever seek to enter office to better those whom we represent and take the inevitable consequences involved in holding public office. I do not know who the Deputy is looking at over here when he speaks about the establishment.
I am looking at the Minister.
I am not a member of any establishment. I represent the people of Dublin Central. I do not represent the 1% of which the Deputy speaks. I am trying to make good decisions, which involve compromise, for the betterment of all. This is a sensible decision. The Deputy is right that there will be changes in the retirement age between 2021 and 2028. This is about ensuring that we have a State pension that is at a good level and affordable for all. This is trying to do the right thing by people who work and by those who will depend on the State pension and the non-contributory State pension in the future. These are not the actions of an establishment but of a Government that is trying to do the right thing by ordinary people.
10. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if his Department provides funding to organisations (details supplied) to facilitate pay restoration; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53432/17]
This question relates to workers paid out of the public purse, particularly in hospices but also in other section 39 organisations, who voluntarily took pay reductions during the country's darkest hour when the economy crashed. As these salaries are entirely funded out of the public purse, what are the Minister's plans to make a declaration on providing properly for pay restoration for these people who took a hit in the public interest? When will the Minister restore their wages?
The particular work of these organisations in the community and voluntary sector is greatly appreciated, particularly in light of their commitment, dedication and hard work. The organisations deliver a wide array of much-needed support services at community level to a very varied range of users on a day-to-day basis throughout the year.
The Deputy will be aware, however, that the organisations to which she refers are concerns and operations in respect of which my Department does not have actual corporate responsibility or direct involvement. Let us bear in mind the number of people involved. As non-public servants, the staff of such organisations could exceed 100,000. There could be more than 100,000 individuals working in these sectors. Some 300,000 people are working directly for the State. As many as one third more could be working for these organisations. These individuals did not fall within the application of the FEMPI legislation, which involved reductions in pay and increases in pension contributions for public servants. It is correspondingly the case that current public service pay policy does not extend to such organisations. This is a matter for those organisations, which are self-governed and accountable to their management for their own financial resources. It is not the case that many of these organisations are entirely funded by the State. Many of them have their own sources and streams of funding.
Since the Deputy raised the matter with me - she and Deputy Calleary have done so on a number of occasions - I sought to deepen my understanding of what is involved. It is not a uniform case that all of these organisations cut wages. Some organisations did cut wages, which I acknowledge, but others did not. Other organisations may have changed the number of people working for them or made changes to find cost savings elsewhere. A huge number of these organisations come within the remit of the Department of Health, not to mention those that come with the remits of the Departments of Employment Affairs and Social Protection and Children and Youth Affairs.
As the Minister knows, my correspondence on this has been particularly directed to the hospices. He knows St. Francis Hospice, which serves my constituency and his. The other sources of funding the Minister refers to are the donations of the public in each area to develop, build and rebuild the absolutely vital services for people in the last stages of terminal illness. Not only that, but the hospice movement has evolved in an absolutely wonderful way in recent years. Nowadays it has service level agreements with big general hospitals to provide a hospice service where people could be dying under bright lights in a ward full of people. The Minister can make a declaration and there is a precedent in respect of the salaries of school secretaries. I do not deny there are problems with some organisations but the Minister must address this.
On foot of the Deputy raising this matter, I asked the Department to do some work for me to tell me how much funding goes to section 39 organisations and what has been the trend in that funding over the past few years. I also asked for an update on whether organisations implemented pay reductions that were consistent with the financial emergency measures in the public interest, FEMPI, and if so how they did that. I acknowledge and am familiar with the work of the hospice movement and with the hospice the Deputy refers to.
In 2016 just over €1 billion was made available to section 39 organisations. I then asked for an assessment of how that had changed over the past few years. Between 2014 and 2016 that figure has gone up by 15%. I then asked the Department to tell me whether, for organisations that did go ahead and implement wage reductions, there was any consistency in that. The complexity of this matter arises from the fact that there is not. I have no evidence to say that organisations that, for example, did decide to pass on the pay reductions passed them on at the same time as they were made within the public service. We have to make an assessment that it happened at the same rate as in the public service. That is why it is very difficult for me at this point to give the declaration the Deputy is asking for.
She was good enough to acknowledge the complexity of this issue. It is deeply complex and potentially involves up to 100,000 people in organisations in the State.
Last week we in the Dáil passed a Supplementary Estimate for the Department of Health of €195 million, which is additional to the huge extra funding that has been put into that Department over recent years. I do a lot of voluntary work for the hospice, as do so many other citizens. The hospices in Limerick, in Milford, in my area, in Raheny, which is in Deputy Broughan's area, and in Cork are all recruiting staff nurses, doctors and other staff from the general HSE system. I do not think it is the Minister's intention but he is in effect asking somebody who leaves, for example, Connolly or Beaumont hospitals to go to St. Francis Hospice in Raheny or Blanchardstown to take, from this year on, a reduction of up to 3% in basic pay. Does the Minister as a manager understand the difficulty that poses for the hospices? It is almost impossible to continue to recruit with a drop in pay levels for those transferring.
As there is a lot of interest in this question, under Standing Orders I can call on others for brief supplementary questions.
I want to express my frustration because I sought to table this issue as my first priority and the Minister's office transferred it to the Department of Health. I thank Deputy Burton for tabling it.
The HSE wrote in the immediate aftermath of the FEMPI legislation, in 2010, to all of these section 39 organisations and withdrew the equivalent amount of the FEMPI reductions in public service from their budgets. There may not have been a direct link between FEMPI and the section 39 organisations but they and, more importantly, their employees paid the FEMPI price. Now that we are reversing FEMPI, and it was the HSE that made the link not the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, it affects the hospice movement and all sorts of other organisations. We are telling them they took the hit for the State but now that we are in a position to give the funds back to State employees, we will not do the same for them. Can the Minister share the work his Department did with us here in the House so that we can actually see what organisations are playing ducks and drakes with this?
The Minister's response to Deputy Burton is disingenuous. I am familiar too with the hospice movement. When the Irish Wheelchair Association, IWA, and Rehab came in here they showed how they had cut salaries in step with FEMPI, as they were asked to do at the time. The Minister may not be aware that the IWA took a case to the Labour Court recently and was vindicated. The trade unions obtained a decision that workers in that organisation should get a 7% rise in salary. I raised this at one of the first Leaders' Questions taken by Deputy Varadkar when he became Taoiseach. There is a clear case for this House to do justice to these very valuable 100,000 workers.
The Department of Health and in particular the HSE will receive additional funding next year of over €580 million. Deputy Burton referred to the Supplementary Estimate of €180 million that went through the House some days ago in respect of health, a portion of which was to continue to fund an access plan later this year but most of it was to continue to contribute to the funding of essential day-to-day services.
Giving an answer that recognises the complexity of an issue is not the same as being disingenuous. They are different things.
For many of those the Minister is employing his response is disingenuous.
I have not attempted in any way to under-appreciate the contribution these workers make or the value of these organisations. I am making the point that the funding available to these organisations has gone up substantially over recent years. I have every reason to expect that upon publication of the HSE service action plan funding for those organisations will go up again next year, as it has in previous years. If organisations have made changes in payment to their staff during the period of FEMPI cuts taking place for those who worked directly for the public service those organisations should re-engage with their staff now. There are 100,000 individuals working in this sector across a wide variety of organisations but they do not work for the State and I cannot single out one sector, such as the hospices, which do great work because every other sector will expect the same ruling to be applied to them. This is why it must be a matter for the employers to work out with their employees.
11. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform his views on whether the guidelines for public procurement are being applied consistently throughout the public service; the specific measures that have been implemented to ensure that there is adherence to the rules on public procurement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53462/17]
The Minister and I have had several discussions on procurement and particularly on making it a friendlier process for small business. Is he happy that the guidelines for public procurement are consistent across the public service? Is he happy that those rules are being applied? Will he comment on an issue that arose overnight, the spending of €135,000 by the Central Bank on a lighting installation in its new headquarters? Is that a good use of taxpayers' money?
I thank the Deputy for his question. As he and the rest of the House know, public procurement is governed by well-established European Union, EU, and national rules and guidelines. The aim of these rules is to promote an open, competitive and non-discriminatory public procurement regime which delivers best value for money.
As Minister of State at the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform with special responsibility for public procurement, I launched new public procurement guidelines for goods and services in July this year. These guidelines replace previous guidelines published by the Department of Finance and take account of 2014 EU directives on public procurement, as implemented in Ireland. The purpose of these guidelines is to promote best practice and consistency of application of the public procurement rules relating to the purchase of goods and services. The guidelines form part of the national procurement policy framework, which consists of five strands. These are legislation, policy, capital works management framework for public works, general procurement guidelines for goods and services and more detailed technical guidelines, template documents and notes issued periodically by the policy unit of the Office of Government Procurement.
These new guidelines are aimed at demystifying some of the more complex rules and procedures around public procurement and making them more accessible to both contracting authorities and suppliers. They are intended to serve as a tool kit for practitioners and a general reference document for suppliers. They have been written in plain language with a view to providing a clear appreciation of the rules and best practice attached to the various stages of the procurement process from specification through to selection and award stages, and through to the contract management stage. They promote and reinforce improved best practice, standardisation and consistency of approach among public procurement practitioners. The guidelines facilitate public bodies in meeting their corporate governance requirements relating to procurement. However, it is the responsibility of each contracting authority to ensure they comply with EU and national rules relating to public procurement.
Public procurement practices are subject to audit and scrutiny under the Comptroller and Auditor General (Amendment) Act 1993 and the Local Government Reform Act 2014, and Accounting Officers are publicly accountable for expenditure incurred. Individual contracting authorities are responsible for establishing arrangements for ensuring the proper conduct of their affairs, including conformance to standards of good governance and accountability with regard to procurement.
I do not have the details of the last point mentioned by the Deputy. I did not hear of it overnight but I will certainly have my office and the Office of Government Procurement look at it and I will facilitate the Deputy with an answer later.
I thank the Minister of State. It is in this morning's Irish Mirror and I recommend that the Minister of State look at it. It sends a very bad signal as people are still struggling. We have discussed the shortage of money for section 39 organisations but in some sections of the State there is a level of extravagance.
I acknowledge the work being done by the Minister of State and his office in "demystifying" procurement. What complaints procedures are in place and are the complaints procedures around procurement demystified for people who want feedback on why they failed or lost a contract? What is the Department doing to ensure small businesses can access Government procurement? I have quoted the case before of libraries - I know this relates to the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government - that buy their books centrally. This inhibits small, independent publishers from getting access to local libraries because of the manner in which procurement in libraries is done. There are countless examples of small and niche businesses being excluded from Government procurement because of the way rules are applied. What is their avenue for getting involved with procurement and complaints?
Deputy Calleary has acknowledged before that the vast majority of Government expenditure on procurement is spent in the State. It is in excess of 90%. Of that, over 50% is spent with small and medium enterprises, SMEs. I chair the SME section within the procurement element of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. We meet regularly and tease out matters that representative organisations of the SME sector have. There are a number of matters we are working through, particularly in the communications area. We will launch a more user-friendly communications strategy early in the new year to identify how people would best facilitate their own business with respect to procurement.
We do not disagree with the Deputy's comments on appeals. That is why the tender advisory service is being updated so people can get proper feedback when they do not succeed. It is important to say it is ultimately the awarding contract authority that has the responsibility for managing the contract and not the Office of Government Procurement, which deals with the implementation of frameworks.
The Deputy raised the matter of library books and I appreciate that. I come from a place where local journals are very important but those Limerick journals might not be as important in County Louth. The same would apply in Mayo. It is something on which we are reflecting to see if we can reach an accommodation.
12. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the extent to which, in the context of the capital review programme, he expects to be in a position to make provision for the projects previously identified as being integral to crucial infrastructure investment; if he will extend the remit; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53471/17]
157. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the extent to which investment in infrastructure is likely to remain part of reform within the public sector while meeting necessary objectives to facilitate economic requirements; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53942/17]
In the context of the capital review, what is the extent to which the Minister has managed to identify the most critical elements of infrastructure with a view to completing them in a reasonable period?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 12 and 157 together.
As I announced in budget 2018, the Government has allocated significant increases in public capital investment amounting to €4.3 billion over the period 2018-21. This was in addition to the additional €2.2 billion for housing already allocated prior to that for the implementation of the Action Plan for Housing and Homelessness. These funding allocations were informed and advised by the detailed analysis and assessment carried out in the context of the recent review of the 2015 capital plan, Building on Recovery, which I published in September. Consequently, between 2014 and 2021, public capital expenditure in Ireland will have more than doubled and as set out by the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council, this will see public investment in Ireland moving to among the highest in the European Union, EU. I am satisfied this new planned level of public capital investment represents an appropriate balance between the need for additional investment to realise the economy's long-term growth potential, the capacity of the economy to deliver sustainable public infrastructure consistent with fiscal and macroeconomic sustainability and the need to adhere to the responsible and reasonable spending.
In the meantime, the delivery of a large number of public capital investment projects and programmes is proceeding. The position relating to any individual project is a matter, in the first instance, for the relevant responsible Minister and the review of the 2015 capital plan includes an update for each Department setting out the significant progress already being made in implementation. A copy of the review has been supplied to all Deputies. My Department also published a major projects tracker, providing an update on progress on all projects above €20 million.
I thank the Minister for his reply. Has the Minister placed special emphasis on the need to identify particularly sensitive infrastructure items with a view to recognising the fundamental elements they present in terms of delivery to a wider circle? To what extent does he see the possibility of advancing those as a priority?
It is a priority and we want to advance a number of projects we believe will benefit many of our citizens. I would point to what we want to achieve in the housing area, where signs of progress are beginning to become tangible. We need to see more of that happening next year. I look at parts of Dublin with which I am familiar and see, for example, the opening of Broome Lodge in Cabra. Tomorrow morning we will confirm the project will go ahead at Mary's Mansions, in the heart of Dublin's north inner city. It has long needed further investment and the set of homes there needs more support than is currently available. We need to move ahead with hundreds of these types of projects across the length and breadth of our country. There has also been the completion of the Gort to Tuam road and the Luas cross-city project. I know the Deputy has a strong interest in road projects in his own county.
They are very important.
We will see them move ahead soon.
I thank the Minister. If the Minister intends going in that direction, will favourable consideration be given to requisitions from the various bodies whose responsibility it is to deliver in these projects, whether they relate to road, rail, bridge or elements of health and education services?
To what extent will he sympathetically deal with those in the event of the responsible bodies and Ministers approaching him for advancements or expedited processes?
We could be on tricker ground there.
That is why I asked the question.
We were going well for a minute.
From my extensive experience of this issue in recent years, it is one that will increase next year and beyond. Understandably, every Government agency only considers expenditure needs in its own area of responsibility. When all of that is added together, though, it represents a figure the Exchequer is not capable of meeting. If we could meet it, there would be a separate issue regarding the ability of our economy to translate those projects into reality on the ground because of the need to have workers available to do the work and projects delivered in a way that does not contribute to prices rising even further within our economy.
I have noticed a trend in recent years. There are a number of Departments whose demands, when combined at budget time, usually exceed by multiples all of the money that is available to the Government on budget day. I am beginning to notice that this is even more the case for Government agencies. If left to their own devices, each of them would make a pitch for nearly all of the additional resources that are available to the Government. We must monitor that and manage the balance carefully next year.
I might be able to help the Minister with that.
13. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will report on the Civil Service People Strategy 2017-2020 and on the way in which this is being delivered to create a high-performing Civil Service; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53255/17]
Obviously, we have all been reading Our Public Service 2020-----
Excellent.
-----which is a fine summary of the work of our 315,000 public servants, to whom we are greatly indebted, across all of the key sectors of the public service - health, education, security and so on.
I wish to ask about this matter because the public service resource is our people, the men and women who are all around us in the Chamber today, in Departments and throughout the Republic. How will the great slogans and 18 actions contained in "Our Public Service 2020" operate in terms of the three pillars of the HR function, those being continuous professional development, strengthening performance management and promoting equality, diversity and inclusion? One wonders why we do not achieve equality, diversity and inclusion all the time as we recruit. How do we manage the outstanding people who work for us?
I am delighted that the Deputy has read the document. It was great to launch it earlier this week with the Secretary General of my Department.
The Minister did not invite me.
Now that I know the Deputy has such an interest in it, we will make sure to invite him to the sequel and other events that happen in the run up to it.
As the Deputy knows, this is the third iteration of what we have been doing in terms of Civil Service reform. In direct answer to his question on how we will make these things happen, two developments will allow for much of that. I will then conclude with an observation on the interesting point that the Deputy made about diversity and inclusion.
First, we will soon set up a public service management leadership board, an entity that will have all of the senior leaders, not only in our Civil Service, but across the public service, coming together on a regular basis to review progress in delivering this plan. That is not something that we have done previously. It is separate to the Civil Service Management Board, which considers how to implement Government decisions, policy and so on. This will all be about how we bring that document to life.
Second, we now have a chief HR officer, who is looking to roll out consistent HR practice across all Departments. In the next three years, HR sections in Departments will be strengthened and supported more from the centre, which is the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, to make that strategy happen.
It is interesting that the Deputy made a point about inclusion. I have noticed, as recruitment into the Civil Service has returned to reasonable levels in recent years, the significant quality and diversity of young civil servants who have joined. This is encouraging for the future of the Civil Service but we cannot take it for granted. We are examining ways of better recruiting on university campuses, for example.
I welcome the Minister's establishment of a public service development board, if that was the name mentioned, but a basic point must be acknowledged. The report includes the findings that our Civil Service ranks as first in the European Union as the most professional and least politicised public service, ranks sixth for the quality of our public administration and ranks fifth in terms of the perception that government decisions are implemented effectively. Reading this is heartening, given the fact that the austerity and cutbacks across the public service since 2008 and 2009 were devastating.
I wish to address some issues specifically. Is the Minister concerned that, for specialist areas in the public service, salary structures, rewards and so on are insufficient? Yesterday, Members were discussing the Department of Defence and how some specialists needed by the Defence Forces, for example, in the medical corps, are not available.
Do we have another question?
Regarding professional development, is there a role in Ireland for third level specialist colleges like those in, for example, France, where the cadre of leading civil servants receive continuous professional education?
The Deputy has asked his two supplementary questions.
The Deputy asked a number of questions. We will also have a strategic advisory board, whose job it will be to oversee the implementation of the strategy.
Regarding salary levels and the retention of specialists, there could be an issue with a number of specialist roles across the public service. I have asked the Public Service Pay Commission to investigate the matter, beginning with the health service. I met the commission and its chairman, Mr. Kevin Duffy, a number of weeks ago. That work is under way. I must be careful that any decision we make regarding individual roles does not unravel or adversely impact on the integrity of our overall pay policy.
The answer to whether I believe that a specialist university is required beyond what we already have is "No". We make great use of bodies like the Institute of Public Administration. My Department has started running a number of diplomas and certificates in specialist areas to support the professional development of our staff.
Does Deputy Broughan have another question?
Just a follow-up. The report stresses service delivery and public feedback. There is incredible dissatisfaction among our constituents with the delivery of a modern health service or the delivery of any kind of social housing pipeline. People are much happier with the delivery of basic services in other areas, for example, education and the Civil Service generally. Is communication with the public something on which the public service is relatively weak and that needs to be strengthened in order that people are aware of the acute dissatisfaction with many areas of service delivery?
The Deputy is right, in that the strategy points to customer engagement as something that we need to do even better in future.
It is something we have begun to do a lot of work on over the past 18 months. The two examples I offer to the Deputy are, first, the survey the Minister for Health launched during this week regarding the patient experience for people looking to enter hospital and, second, the publication earlier in the year of a customer satisfaction survey for businesses that engage with the Civil Service. We did that by focusing on businesses. I was very pleased to see that, across a range of different areas, businesses felt they were getting fair and effective treatment from the Civil Service, with a particular focus on the professionalism of and role played by the Revenue Commissioners.
14. Deputy James Browne asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the status of the development of the Enniscorthy flood defence scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53251/17]
The River Slaney-Enniscorthy flood relief scheme is being progressed by Wexford County Council as the contracting authority, with funding by the Office of Public Works.
Good progress is being made in advancing the scheme and a significant amount of the necessary ground work to inform the detailed design of the scheme has been carried out to date. Further work is required on the technical and cost aspects before the scheme is ready to be brought to a public information day. It is planned, however, to hold a public information day, on which the current design of the scheme will be outlined, in quarter 2 of 2018. Subject to a satisfactory outcome to the public information day, it is anticipated that the scheme will be ready to be submitted for confirmation or formal ministerial approval and to go to tender in quarter 3 of 2018. Subject to formal confirmation of the scheme by the Minister for Finance and for Public Expenditure and Reform, we hope to commence construction in late 2018.
As the Minister of State is aware, Enniscorthy has been prone to consistent flooding and there has been extreme flooding in the town on numerous occasions, most recently in 2015 during Storm Frank. Obviously, the townspeople, including the business owners, are distraught every time this happens. The town lies in a valley and the flooding does huge economic damage, but the psychological damage to business people and those living in the area is also significant. We are very anxious that this scheme is advanced as quickly as possible. One of the first things I did when I became a member of the town council was to help to try to resurrect the scheme, to which people had previously objected. It is very important for the town that it be advanced as quickly as possible.
I will visit the area very shortly, as the Deputy is aware. The Minister of State, Deputy D'Arcy, has also contacted me in this regard. I assure Deputy Browne that this is a top priority for the Government and me.
I thank the Minister of State. It is very welcome that he is coming to Wexford and I know he is very interested in the area. When he comes to Wexford, I am anxious that the Minister of State should visit the Enniscorthy flood relief scheme, which can be a good news story if it is advanced. I particularly want to praise the staff of the council, Slaney rescue services personnel and the members of the other blue-light organisations, who, on every occasion there are extreme weather conditions in Enniscorthy, risk their lives to help local people.
I am happy with that.
17. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the flood relief projects undertaken in 2017; the projects planned for 2018; the status of CFRAM; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53461/17]
I ask the Minister of State to provide an update on the status of CFRAM and on the major projects that are planned. I do not want a long list of everything the Minister of State has done, which I am sure he had planned to give, just an update on CFRAM and the major projects planned for 2018.
I could, of course, mention many schemes. Since I was elected, Deputies have raised a huge number of issues in respect of CFRAM. In 2017, five schemes were completed. There are seven schemes ongoing at present and ten are planned for commencement in 2018. I would also acknowledge the minor works scheme, under which 60 projects have been completed in 2017. The latter is a considerable improvement on the position this time last year.
The Deputy has referred to Crossmolina on many occasions. I assure him that the Minister for Rural and Community Development, Deputy Ring, has been living in my offices for the past while. I do not hear Deputy Calleary praising the scheme that has been announced to a value of €10 million for the people of Crossmolina.
Give me time.
I assure him and all other Deputies that I made a commitment regarding CFRAM. It is nearly complete and people will see the outcome.
Given the season, I was going to be nice to the Minister of State and acknowledge that he has woken up many people in the OPW. I hope that continues. I acknowledge the progress on CFRAM. If the Minister for Rural and Community Development, Deputy Ring, has been living in the Minister of State's office, I have been living in his ear in respect of this matter. However, it is important that it actually happens and that progress is made. The difficulty for people in Crossmolina and so many other communities is that, in the coming weeks, their properties could still be flooded, depending on how the weather goes. We need to keep the pressure on and keep the foot on the pedal. I have no doubt that the Minister of State will do so. If he does not, Deputy Eugene Murphy will have something to say.
In many cases, the maps being used for CFRAM have been misappropriated by insurance companies seeking to turn down cover or to use them as an excuse to increase premiums. Is the OPW dealing with that issue and dealing with insurance companies that are using the very valuable work being done under CFRAM as a reason to increase premiums in certain areas?
I assure the Deputy those maps have not been made public and that insurance companies are not using them. At the same time, I know what the insurance companies are doing. The Minister of State, Deputy D'Arcy, and I met representatives from Insurance Ireland in the past couple of months. As Deputy Calleary is aware, my job is to defend and protect homes throughout the country. This matter also falls within the remit of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and the Minister of State, Deputy D'Arcy. We are working closely with Insurance Ireland to ensure that wherever people need cover, it will be provided.
20. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the degree to which his Department plans to incorporate further reforms throughout the services with a view to achieving better value for money, improved economic impact and delivery of services to the public; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53472/17]
Since the first public service reform plan was published in 2011, a comprehensive programme of reform has been implemented and this continues to be a key priority. This is important as the performance of the public service has major implications for the management of our finances and for economic development and employment creation.
The public service reform plan for the period 2014 to 2016 put the public ever more to the centre of what we do, both in terms of service delivery and of transparency, openness and accountability. The final progress report on this plan, published in July 2017, was sent to all Deputies and is also available at www.reformplan.per.gov.ie. The report set out a wide range of improved services for the public and savings across a range of projects. Work continues on implementing reforms initiated under the 2014-2016 plan, including the ambitious programme of reform initiated under the Civil Service renewal plan and other sectoral reform programmes. The plan aims to create a more unified, professional, responsive, open and accountable Civil Service that can provide a world-class service to the State and to the people of Ireland.
As the Deputy may be aware, my Department has been developing a new phase of public service reform, called Our Public Service 2020, which was published earlier this week. This will build on the achievements of the last six years and set a path for improvements beyond 2020. It aims to deliver better outcomes for the public, to support innovation and collaboration and to build public service organisations that are both resilient and agile.
I thank the Minister for his reply. Does he remain satisfied regarding the extent to which ongoing reforms are likely to continue to be of benefit in a meaningful way to the public, the public sector and the taxpayer in general?
Yes, I do, although it is not something we can ever take for granted. It is the case that many of the reforms initiated in recent years in our State were instigated at a time of deep crisis. What we need to do now is to anchor the reform efforts of the Government and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform more to the desire that all of our civil and public servants have, which is to do a good job for the people they serve. From dealing with many Government Departments, I know that those who work in front-line services in particular are motivated by the desire to provide a good service to our citizens.
We must have a reform agenda in place that makes it even easier for them to do so.
If Members are agreeable, there is sufficient time to accommodate Deputy Niamh Smyth's Question No. 21, which is taken with Question No. 33, if we proceed directly to the Minister's reply and the Deputy confines herself to one supplementary question. Is that agreed? Agreed.
21. Deputy Niamh Smyth asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the progress by his Department in acquiring the new site identified in recent months for Bailieborough Garda station; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53256/17]
33. Deputy Niamh Smyth asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform his plans for the Office of Public Works to purchase property for State organisations in counties Cavan and Monaghan; the stages in negotiation for each; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53257/17]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 21 and 33 together.
The Office of Public Works and the Chief State Solicitor's Office continue to progress the acquisition of the preferred site for this project as a high priority and expect the process to reach a conclusion shortly. The Minister of State, Deputy Moran, is happy to confirm that the contracts for sale have been executed by both parties and final completion of the acquisition process will take a number of weeks. Until the process is fully completed, he is not in a position to identify the particular site or advise on the timeframes for further stages of the project. He has requested the Office of Public Works to inform the Deputy once the acquisition process is complete and give her details of the property at that time.
The Commissioners of Public Works in Ireland do not at this time have any further property purchases planned for Cavan or Monaghan.
I thank the Minister of State for his reply. An announcement was made regarding this project more than two years ago, but no progress has been made in the meantime. Gardaí in Bailieborough are working in terrible conditions, in portakabins and dilapidated buildings. It is unfortunate that the Minister of State cannot confirm the location of the site but I am pleased that the acquisition is complete. Will he undertake to ensure this project is progressed as quickly as possible? We need to see bricks and mortar being put down, not more announcements from the Government.
When the Office of Public Works placed advertisements in both local and national media seeking submissions from property owners, 17 responses were received. As with all major public contracts, the construction of the new Garda station will be tendered openly and all builders and contractors, including locally based firms, will have the opportunity to tender for the works. I appreciate the Deputy's frustration but she will understand that we must adhere to the procedures that apply within the Office of Public Works, the Garda housing unit, An Garda Síochána and the Department of Justice and Equality. I will refer her concerns to the Minister of State, Deputy Moran, who has responsibility for this area. I am sure he will correspond directly with the Deputy.
