Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1994 > Committee of Public Accounts > Interim Report No. 02 - Appropriation Accounts 1993

MIONTUAIRISC NA FIANAISE

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE

AN COISTE UM CHUNTAIS PHOIBLÍ

COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

Déardaoin 3 Samhain, 1994

Thursday 3 November, 1994

The Committee met at 11 a.m.

MEMBERS PRESENT

DEPUTY JIM MITCHELL IN THE CHAIR

Mr. John Purcell, (An tArd Rechtaire Cuntas agus Ciste), called and examined.

Mr. Niall MacSweeney, Mr. Jim O’Farrel and Mr. Phil Ryan, Department of Finance, in attendance.

VOTE 4 - OFFICE OF THE TÁNAISTE

Ms. Julie O’Neill, Accounting Officer, Office of the Tánaiste, called and examined.

Chairman: This is the first time the Office of the Tánaiste has been before us as a separate Vote. I welcome the Accounting Officer, Ms. O’Neill and ask her to introduce her officials.

Ms. O’Neill: The officials are Séamus Feely, Principal Officer in the Office of the Tánaiste, Mary Austin, Assistant Principal in charge of accounts and Gerry Kearney, Principal Officer.

Chairman: I ask the Comptroller and Auditor General to introduce the accounts. There are no paragraphs in this account.

Mr. Purcell: As the Chairman stated, this is a new Vote. It provides for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Tánaiste and, significantly in terms of expenditure, for the funding of the National Economic and Social Forum. The 1993 Appropriation Account figures represent only part of the full annual costs of this Vote because the Office did not become fully functional until the latter half of 1993. The accounts of the National Economic and Social Forum are subject to audit by me.

Chairman: Are they the subject of a separate report?

Mr. Purcell: No, but if there were to be a critical paragraph on the matter, it would be included in the Annual Report on the Appropriation Accounts.

Chairman: Because we are not dealing with a full year, I have a copy of the Estimate for the 1994 period. The Estimate is £1,597,000 for this year which will be the first full year. This can be compared to the Estimate for 1993 of £1,110,000 and the actual outturn of £918,000.

Deputy Broughan: I welcome Ms O’Neill and her officers to the Committee. What is the Office’s role in relation to the National Economic and Social Forum and also in relation to implementing the Programme for Government?

Ms. O’Neill: Our role initially was to establish the Forum, set the ground rules for its work, organise the staffing and structuring of the Forum and ensure that Members were nominated to participate in the Forum. The Minister of State at the Office of the Tánaiste, Deputy Eithne Fitzgerald is the Government’s representative on the Forum.

Once the Forum is in place, it operates as an independent entity. It is a tripartite structure which provides a new mechanism for establishing consensus across a broad range of interests in Irish society around major economic and social policy issues and particularly on measures to tackle unemployment. The Forum has produced five reports to date. The most recent and probably the most significant report deals with ending long-term unemployment.

As well as providing ongoing administrative back-up and support to the forum, which operates under its own separate grant-in-aid, and ensuring it fulfils accounting obligations in regard to that grant-in-aid, our role in relation to the Forum once it is up and running is essentially to brief the Minister, to participate fully within the Forum and, most significantly, to ensure that there is appropriate and effective follow-up to policy issues raised by the Forum. It is through the Office of the Tánaiste that these proposals are put to Government in the first place and we then look after any necessary follow-up. For instance, at the moment I am chairing a task force on long-term unemployment which is to bring forward the proposals which emerged in the Forum’s most recent report and ensure they are acted on.

Deputy Broughan: Is there an intention at the moment to implement the report on unemployment? We heard reports of a pilot scheme, possibly in south west Dublin and Tallaght. Generally, people believed that it was a brilliant report but implementation is the key element.

Ms. O’Neill: When compiling the report, the Forum itself recommended the setting up of a top level group representing both Government Department and State agency interests and those actively involved in the delivery of the local employment services. This group would examine the precise steps which should to be taken to implement the core recommendations of the Forum’s report which was essentially the setting up of a very effective local employment service which was responsive to individual needs. That group has been set up in the form of the task force which I am currently chairing.

The task force is to make an initial report to Government before the end of November. Obviously I am not in a position to pre-empt the outcome of the group’s deliberations. There are other initiatives being taken by various Government Departments including the Department of Enterprise and Employment through FÁS in relation to these issues. They are all on the table but from part of an overall comprehensive strategy on which we would expect to bring forward proposals to Government.

Deputy Broughan: Would you see the Office’s role essentially as overseeing the implementation of the Programme for Government? What has the Office done in that regard?

Ms. O’Neill: As this is a new Vote and this is the Office’s first appearance before the Committee of Public Accounts, it might be helpful if I described briefly the issues in which the Office is involved. The Office was set up as a result of a Government decision in the context of a coalition Government to contribute to the effective functioning of that Government.

This is done in a number of ways. We ensure that the views of the Tánaiste are fully taken into account in the formulation of Government policy. We assist the Government in response to Government policy issues and fulfil specific tasks assigned to us. In practice we have a specific remit in terms of monitoring and implementing the programme for Government. That role is essentially undertaken by the programme manager who is assigned to our Office and who works jointly with the programme manager for the Taoiseach’s Department.

We have also had to put mechanisms in place to ensure that the Tánaiste is fully briefed on all key issues being considered by Government. This is achieved by examining all memoranda which come before Government and also through our participation in a range of interdepartmental groups and other groups such as the Central Review Committee.

There are a number of specific tasks assigned to the Office. The National Economic and Social Forum was mentioned and it takes up a considerable portion of our time. We also have a legislative remit in the preparation of legislation on ethics in public office. We are also working on freedom of information legislation as part of the Office’s wider remit in relation to broadening democracy.

In order to get the most effective value for money we decided that it would be useful to identify a number of key strategic issues to which we believe the Office can make a useful and worthwhile contribution that is complementary to other Departments of State. In this context we are at present working specifically in the area of long term unemployment which we have identified as being of key strategic importance. We believe we can provide real value in terms of bringing together in a cohesive way a range of Government Departments and interests around this issue. We are also looking at the contribution we can make to tackling disadvantage in Northern Ireland in the new context and the views we can offer based on our experience with the local development programme and other measures for tackling unemployment here. That is the broad scope of the workings of the Office.

Deputy Durkan: How many people are employed in your Office?

Ms O’Neill: The full complement of staff is 23.

Deputy Durkan: Have they all been recruited from other Government Departments?

Chairman: Does that include non-Civil Service staff?

Ms O’Neill: It does. Eighteen of the 23 staff currently in place are permanent civil servants. Eight of those civil servants were redeployed from the Office of the Revenue Commissioners. There was a staff surplus to requirement in the Office of the Revenue Commissioners arising from its decentralisation programme and I recruited them when the Office was set up in March of last year. A further two officers were redeployed from the Department of Finance and from the Department of the Taoiseach respectively. The remainder of the Civil Service staff was recruited, in my case, through the Top Level Appointments Committee and in the case of my Principal Officers and Assistant Principal Officers through Civil Service Commission competitions.

Deputy Durkan: In the ongoing course of your responsibilities, what proportion of time would be divided amongst the various responsibilities, for example, to the National Economic and Social Forum?

Ms O’Neill: You will appreciate that the Office works in a very fluid and fast moving environment. One of my Principal Officers, Mr. Feeley, is responsible primarily for day to day liaison with the National Economic and Social Forum and he has two staff working with him. Mr. Kearney has responsibility for the legislative brief of the Office and he has one assistant principal working full time on ethics in public office legislation which clearly is a very time consuming issue at present. Another Assistant Principal is working on freedom of information legislation and also in relation to the general role of briefing the Tánaiste. Other staff have clerical, back-up and executive duties in relation to the Office.

Basically the Office is divided between the National Economic and Social Forum and administration on one side and the general policy briefing role and the legislation brief on the other side.

Deputy Durkan: Are the staff equally divided between the two roles?

Ms O’Neill: Broadly speaking, yes, although at certain times there might be variations. At present we have legislation before the Select Committee on Finance and General Affairs and obviously that is time consuming until the legislation is passed. We constantly assess, on a monthly basis, how staff are deployed within the Office to maximise effectiveness. In the early days we might have required more staff on administration because that was the initial set up phase. That has been reduced and more resources are devoted to supporting and servicing the task force on long term unemployment which is an extremely time consuming job for a small office.

Deputy Durkan: Are approximately nine members of staff deployed in each of the two areas of responsibility?

Ms O’Neill: Mr. Kearney has two people at management level working directly with him on the legislation brief of the Office and on briefing on Government memoranda. Mr. Feeley has two Assistant Principals working with him - one dealing with the task force on long term unemployment and the Forum and the other, Miss Austin, dealing with administration and general affairs. The clerical and executive staff act as a pool to the Office as a whole and they are used as the need arises. Some staff are involved in information technology, in preparing estimates, briefing for the Committee of Public Accounts and so forth. A Higher Executive Officer is involved in the IT area and one is involved in estimates, finance and administration generally.

Deputy Durkan: With regard to those involved in the compilation of legislation, does that involve only legislation initiated within your Department or does it also entail legislation initiated in other Departments?

Ms O’Neill: We have a specific remit in relation to legislation prepared within the Office and we do the ground work on that legislation. Other legislation that would come before the Office would do so where, for example, proposals associated with the memoranda for Government were being submitted to Government. As part of our general briefing role for the Tánaiste we would examine the legislation as it passes through the Office but we would not be involved in drafting or preparing such legislation. Legislation for which we take direct responsibility includes legislation on ethics in public office and legislation on freedom of information.

Deputy Durkan: In relation to the time commitment given to the other half of the Office’s functions, what type of responsibilities fall within that remit?

Ms O’Neill: With regard to the National Economic and Social Forum we have responsibility to maintain regular contact with the Forum in regard to the grant-in-aid we provide, to ensure that the Forum is fully aware of its obligations and requirements in that regard and to give it whatever advice is necessary. The Minister of State, Eithne Fitzgerald, is the Government’s representative on the Forum and we provide a briefing to her for every meeting of the Forum she attends. She is a member of the executive committee and takes part in plenary sessions and in all aspects of the work of the Forum.

When the Forum produces a report it is submitted through the Office of the Tánaiste. We have the responsibility of bringing that before Government and to make recommendations to Government on what follow up action appears appropriate. When specific follow up actions are identified, for example, as happened in the case of the recent report on long-term unemployment, we might be given the responsibility by Government to take matters further. In that regard we have responsibility at present for the task force on long-term unemployment and all the work that is associated with that.

We also have a number of briefing responsibilities or representational responsibilities in relation to such groups as the Central Review Committee of the Programme for Competitiveness and Work. I am a member of the Co-ordinating Committee of Secretaries on the Strategic Management Initiative in the Public Service. We are heavily involved in the local development programme, a major programme which was initiated by our Office as part of the National Development Plan to tackle disadvantage in unemployment black spots. Much day to day work is carried on in relation to all those commitments.

On the administration side, we must ensure that we fulfil all our obligations in relation to accounts, our personnel function and the administration of the Office generally.

Deputy Durkan: How many non-civil servants are employed?

Ms O’Neill: Five.

Deputy Durkan: What are their grades or equivalents?

Ms O’Neill: A programme manager and a senior policy adviser are both approximately at PO1 level. It is the equivalent within the scale. There is also a legal adviser.

Deputy Durkan: What is their rate of remuneration?

Ms O’Neill: The programme manager is on a salary of £42,000. The senior policy adviser is on a salary of £34,000 and the legal adviser is on a salary of £34,500. There is also a personal assistant and a personal secretary.

Deputy Durkan: What are their rates?

Ms O’Neill: The personal secretary gets £26,000 and the personal assistant receives just under £12,000.

Deputy Durkan: You brief your Minister on various aspects of the Minister’s area of responsibility on an ongoing basis from within the two wings of the Office. You bring information that might be made available to you to the Minister’s attention in the normal course of events.

What is the purpose of the overrun in Vote A.5 - Machinery and Office Supplies?

Ms O’Neill: The overrun was sanctioned in advance by the Department of Finance. When the Office was set up it became apparent that a proper information technology system was required. Initially we operated with equipment loaned from the Department of Finance and from the Taoiseach’s Office. Following an indepth analysis undertaken in conjunction with the Department of Finance at all times, we worked out a programme for the Office’s anticipated information technology requirements. It was agreed, in the light of the way expenditure was panning out on the Vote generally in the first year of operation, that it made sense to accelerate the original computerisation timetable to get as much as possible of the full computer facilities in place in the Office so that we could function very efficiently and effectively.

We were very anxious to keep clerical, administrative and back-up staff in the Office of the Tánaiste to a minimum so the quicker we got a full system in place the better. It became apparent by September 1993 that we had already spent a considerable proportion of our budget under subhead A5. We arranged, with the agreement of the Department of Finance in advance, for the viring of £60,000 into subhead A5 to enable us to accelerate the IT programme. It was consistent with the general principles of an administrative budget arrangement to do that.

Deputy Durkan: Most of the staff were drawn from other Departments. I am a little confused as to why it was absolutely necessary to accelerate information technology programmes, etc., given that staff were essentially drawn from other Departments and there would be some redundant technology in some of those Departments as a result. Was there any offsetting of costs in that situation?

Ms O’Neill: I need to make a distinction between the staff being drawn from other Departments and the need to put an effective physical structure for an information technology system in place to meet the needs of the staff when they came to the new Office. The system we have provides a fully integrated data management system, a communications system, word processing, an FMS package for managing our accounts and all the other usual software facilities. This required us to design a small scale but custom designed system to meet the needs of the Office. While there may have been bits of equipment around in other offices, they would not necessarily have been suitable for our needs. The system we have in place is in itself a substantial asset which is fully transferable and flexible and could be used in other contexts.

Deputy Durkan: Do all Government Departments have the same information technology packages?

Ms O’Neill: No, not necessarily.

Deputy Durkan: Why not?

Ms O’Neill: There is a move in that direction. We introduced a system called Lotus Notes and this is now the preferred option. This is why we worked closely with the Department of Finance, to ensure that in identifying the kind of system we were putting in and the software packages we were using, that we would be consistent with all other central Government Departments. I originally come from the Department of Social Welfare and the computer needs and the type of software which would be appropriate in very large departments, such as the Revenue Commissioners or the Department of Social Welfare, would not necessarily be appropriate for a small policy driven office, such as the Office of the Tánaiste. We now have a system which is entirely consistent with the new system recently introduced in the Department of the Taoiseach. We have proper linkups with CITS and the computer information system in the Department of Finance.

Deputy Durkan: Is it not rather extraordinary that in seven subheads, only one showed an excess expenditure? Regarding all the others, it states that savings arose as the Office was not fully operational until the latter part of 1993. Is that not some what out of step with the trend under all the subheads? Why should one particular subhead mysteriously accelerate its programme while there are savings under all other subheads in that Department arising from the fact that the Office was not fully operational until the latter part of 1993?

Ms O’Neill: The major distinction between that subhead and the others is that the other subheads relate to the ongoing day to day running costs of the Office. The original Estimate was decided early in January 1993 and I took up office in March of that year. The two officers in the Office at the time had to make some guestimate as to what the likely expenditure would be. They did a reasonable job of assessing what might be a full year cost for the Office. I took up duty in March. It took time to recruit the staff an put them in place in the Office and one would expect the associated expenses, such as post, telecommunications and travel, to run lower than a full year cost. We were anxious to keep them as low as possible.

In relation to the Office machinery and other supplies, this is the primary subhead where there is a fixed cost, where assets were required. The nature of acquiring assets obviously means that there is a front loading. One has big expenditure in the first year of operation, which one would expect to reduce as time progressed. Our concern was to get the system in the Office fully operational and fully effective. By the time that computerised system was put in place by the end of September/October of that year, we had our full staffing complement. We knew where we stood very clearly because we had already agreed a broad strategy as to how we would operate.

Deputy Durkan: Is that the most modern package available at present?

Ms O’Neill: I suspect it has already been overtaken by events, such is the pace of development in information technology generally. We were trying to get something which was efficient, effective and modern in the sense that we did not want to put something in place which would be a loss to the public service as a whole in two years time. We went for the best quality, consistent with our needs. We were careful not to go for anything that was over elaborate or over sophisticated for the scale of the Office’s operations.

Deputy Durkan: I wish to ask one further question relating to page 111 and the recoupment of certain travelling expenses and subsistence allowance. It was estimated at £30,000 and nil was realised. Could we have a breakdown of that?

Ms O’Neill: This relates to Appropriations-in-aid which would arise if officers from the Office of the Tánaiste were sent as delegates to meetings of the European Union, the European Commission or the Council of Europe on behalf of the Government. In those cases it can arise that recoupment will be made by the European Union or the Council of Europe to the Department for such attendance. As we were only becoming operational at that stage, the original estimate of £30,000 was put in on the basis that it was not clear at the outset of the Office’s existence whether we would have a formal representative role on particular European Commission working groups etc., In fact, that did not arise in that year so no recoupment arose.

Deputy Durkan: An ex gratia payment of £436 was paid to two officers in respect of “exceptional performance and commitment”. What would be regarded as exceptional performance and commitment? Although the amount in this instance is not particularly high, exceptional performance and commitment could be an interesting heading for future reference.

Ms O’Neill: An ex gratia payment of £435.60 was made to two staff at the end of 1993. This arose because of the exceptional nature of the work of these officers during that year. As we were anxious to take staff on redeployment from the Revenue Commissioners and we wanted to keep the additional costs of the Office to the absolute minimum, we took on clerical assistants who were not paid as typists. They had some keyboarding skills but no typing allowance. Neither had been recruited as typists. Due to the demands on the Office in that year, particularly in relation to the establishment of the National Economic and Social Forum, a huge amount of additional work was taken on by those two staff. They ended up doing considerable typing duties.

The ex gratia payment was calculated on the basis of the typist allowance they would have received for the number of weeks they were on typist duties. This was sanctioned by the Department of Finance at the time. It was effectively a recognition of the fact that while they were not recruited as typists, they had effectively functioned in that respect for a very difficult period in the Office. Since then we have made arrangements to enable them to take whatever examinations are required to get their proper position as typists in the Office. It meant that we did not have to take on new staff.

Deputy Foley: I am a member of this Committee for a long time and Ms O’Neill is one of the most efficient Accounting Officers to come before us. She has been so forthcoming this morning and other Accounting Officers should take note. She is obviously running a very efficient office. At the outset she mentioned that she is chairing a task force on long-term unemployment. What progress has it made to date?

Ms O’Neill: The task force is due to report to Government by the end of November. It has had three meetings to date and the report will be made to Government. The task force is concerning itself at this stage with looking at the most effective mechanisms to put in place at local level for the delivery of a comprehensive service to long-term unemployed people. One of the gaps identified in the report of the National Economic and Social Forum in the difficulty that, while there are many services available to the long-term unemployed, they are not necessarily directly accessible to people on the ground. Information may not be freely available and there is not a guidance and counselling service in place to guide a long-term unemployed person, who may be out of the labour market for a long time, through the system and to provide a planned programme of career guidance and progression for them through the system.

It is that issue we are addressing - looking at the experience of local area based partnerships who have some experience in this regard, the important role of FÁS and the important role of other Government departments and local community based centres. In the next three meetings we will also be looking at the specific options that need to be available to the long term unemployed, the nature of work experience opportunities, the nature of training and education opportunities that are best tailored to meet the specific needs of long term unemployed people.

Long term unemployment is a persistent problem and, in general, once a person is over three years unemployed they have a 90 per cent likelihood of staying long term unemployed. That is obviously a worrying problem and the Government has indicated its commitment to addressing it and we are trying to draw up specific proposals as to how it might be addressed.

Deputy Foley: In your submission to Government will you be suggesting pilot areas?

Ms O’Neill: I would not like to pre-empt the outcome of the group’s deliberations but we are actually not looking at it in that way.

Chairman: The Estimate for the year 1994 projects a staff cost of £722,000. You told us earlier that there are 23 people in the Department and that, if my calculations are correct, gives an average cost of just over £31,000 per employee. Is there any other Department that has such a high average?

Ms O’Neill: I have been told that of that £722,000, a sum of £42,000 is for recruitment to the Department of Finance to meet certain once off costs that arose towards the end of 1993 in relation to the PESP increases which were finalised late in the year.

I have already mentioned the salaries people are paid and a factor that can give rise to that is that, for example, in the case of two of the advisors with the office they are paid on the basis of fee notes, and when fee notes are supplied by the organisations from which they are on secondment certain other costs are associated - PRSI, VAT - which effectively increase the level of funding within the A1 subhead. I have given you the salaries. I am paid the normal rate for an Assistant Secretary and my POs and other staff are on the appropriate rates for their job.

Chairman: It seems to me that £31,000 is an extraordinarily high average. If one divides £722,000 by 23 it comes out as slightly higher than that. It would only be modified slightly downwards by the £42,000 and, presumably, in the course of 1994 there could be another adjustment upwards. It seems to be a high average.

Ms O’Neill: Obviously, the nature of the Office is such that it is comprised of predominantly senior management positions - Assistant Secretaries, two Principal Officers, four Assistant Principals - unlike the balance in other offices where the weighting might be in favour of large numbers of clerical staff as would be the case say in the Department of Social Welfare or the Revenue Commissioners. I can assure the Chairman that the figures are accurately based.

Chairman: Is the Office of the Tánaiste responsible for any part of the Tánaiste’s salary?

Ms O’Neill: No, not in any way. The only cost borne from that subhead are the costs of the 23 people working in the Office. Obviously, there will be some provision in that for overtime and other elements.

Chairman: So the Minister’s salary-----

Ms O’Neill: There is one other thing in that I should mention - we recoup through the Taoiseach’s Department certain salary costs associated with the running of the Government Buildings complex which include the salaries of messengers. Effectively, we pay 14.6 per cent of the contribution of the running costs of the overall Government Buildings complex on the basis of our share of the floor space in Government Buildings. Where those costs relate, for instance, to messengers or to cleaning services they are actually paid out of our A1 subhead. The actual breakdown of salaries is clear.

Chairman: You mentioned that this Office was set up in the context of a coalition Government but this of course is the seventh coalition Government. Do we know of any other coalition Government in Europe, for instance, that has a separate Office of the Deputy Prime Minister?

Ms O’Neill: There are separate offices of Deputy Prime Ministers. It is interesting that a number of countries have approached us. Recently we had a visit from a group from New Zealand where they are just entering into coalition government and where they have asked to come and study the systems we have put in place. They have been particularly interested in the model of the Office of the Tánaiste because the problem of how to make coalition governments work effectively has bedevilled a lot of administrations and that is on many peoples’ agendas. I would have to check out the matter but I am certainly aware of other administrations that have offices of Deputy Prime Minister to assist in that way.

Chairman: The salary of the Tánaiste is not paid in any part out of your Vote. It is paid out of the Vote of the Department of Foreign Affairs.

Ms O’Neill: Yes.

Chairman: The Minister of State is also Minister of State at the Department of Finance.

Ms O’Neill: The legal basis for the Minister of State’s role is at the Department of Finance and the Department of Finance bear all costs in relation to the Minister of State, including the costs of her constituency staff and her private office staff. None of that is attributed to the Office of the Tánaiste.

Chairman: You mentioned that the Tánaiste has a personal assistant and a personal secretary paid in your Department and he has also a personal assistant and a personal secretary paid in the Department of Foreign Affairs.

Ms O’Neill: The distinction with the role of the personal secretary and personal assistant in the Office of the Tánaiste is that they deal specifically and explicitly with queries and correspondence addressed to the Tánaiste in his capacity as Tánaiste. In other words, correspondence addressed to him not in his capacity as Minister for Foreign Affairs and not in a pure constituency capacity are routed to the Office of the Tánaiste and are dealt with there, which is quite a considerable amount of work.

Chairman: This Committee is concerned about efficiency and effectiveness of public money and this is what I am trying to get at. This is a new Vote and I tried to check over the past ten years the costs of the Office of Tánaiste when there was not a separate office but it was borne by the particular Departments. I cannot be exactly sure of this but it seems on examination that there was no increased costs over the normal costs of the office of Minister.

Deputy Broughan: Other coalitions broke up in disastrous recriminations so perhaps we are treading on political ground here. If we go back to 1987 - the last time the Chairman was in Government - and for the last couple of months it was a single party Government. I think Deputy Foley would agree there.

Deputy Foley: That is correct.

Chairman: I have allowed all Members to pursue their question without interruption.

Deputy Broughan: Yes, but we are moving off purely expenditure matters into political matters and it is important that the Committee does not do that. The Chairman was given his answer - most governments in Europe have a Deputy Prime Minister. In Germany, for example, in my understanding the Free Democrats have always had a significant office. There are other countries where a similar situation operates so I think perhaps we should take the answers of the Accounting Officer.

Chairman: Deputy Broughan you will have an opportunity to come back. I just want to explore this question because we do have - even if there are political dimensions - a duty to ensure that there is value for public money.

Deputy Broughan: The Chairman is talking about the 1994 Vote but this is the 1993 Vote and that is our first responsibility.

Chairman: I am only doing that so that we are getting a complete picture for the year.

Deputy Broughan: The Chairman is only doing that because of extraneous matters, Chairman.

Chairman: I will not tolerate any further interruptions as I did not allow any interruption to anybody else. The Estimate for the year 1993 is £1.1 million, the outturn was £918,000; for 1994 it is £1.597 million. One third of that is in respect of the National Economic and Social Forum. Ms O’Neill, you mentioned that you were chairing a task force?

Ms O’Neill: The task force on long term unemployment.

Chairman: Does the National Economic and Social Forum come under your Office solely?

Ms O’Neill: Yes.

Chairman: No expenditure is incurred in other Departments?

Ms O’Neill: No.

Chairman: What is the purpose of the National Economic and Social Forum?

Ms O’Neill: The Forum was set up essentially to achieve three things. It was set up to provide an opportunity where three broad strands in Irish society could get together and debate and deliberate on major matters of economic and social policy. It is the only Forum where members of all parties of the Oireachtas, the traditional social partners and representatives of groups that have been traditionally excluded from the process of policy formulation - representatives of the unemployed, the disadvantaged, the disabled, women’s groups - sit around the one table.

It is designed to operate in a participative manner and, in that sense, it is designed to provide a mechanism where the voices of those who traditionally have not been heard in Irish society at the national level, in terms of the contribution to the formulation of policy, is heard. It is designed to achieve a broad consensus in Irish society around the kind of key issues and key challenges facing Government, and it is designed to come up with new fresh innovative ideas on policy proposals that should be taken on board by Government.

As to the value for money provided by the Forum, one should remember it was only set up in the middle of 1993 and did not get into operation until September 1993. To date in 1994 it has produced five reports, a number of which have been accepted by the Government. For instance their proposals on negotiations for the successor to the PESP were considered in finalising the Programme for Competitiveness and Work. Their proposals for a local development programme within the national plan have been fully reflected in the local development programme as it now stands. The operational programme has just been finalised and there is ongoing dialogue between the Forum and the relevant Departments on that issue. As I mentioned the report on long term unemployment is now being taken seriously by Government.

Its purpose is to ensure issues of the utmost importance in Irish society which pose the greatest challenge to policy makers are given a wide-ranging debate and to ensure an opportunity for wide-ranging participation in that debate. It also has a public dimension; it meets in plenary session in public which gives greater accessibility for the ordinary citizen and more awareness of how these debates take place.

Chairman: Is there a time limit on the Forum’s work?

Ms O’Neill: The Forum has an initial time limit of two years. Members were appointed for that period and their programme of work was submitted to and has been approved by Government. At the end of two years there will be a review of the Forum’s work before decisions are taken on its future.

Chairman: To what extent does the Department of Enterprise and Employment participate in the Forum?

Ms O’Neill: The Minister for Enterprise and Employment addressed a plenary session of the Forum last week. All Government Departments work closely with the Forum through liaison with our Office. It was necessary to put mechanisms in place to ensure the Forum was able to access any background information or analysis it needed for its work. All Government Departments have been extremely supportive and constructive in that respect and have made both information and officials readily available to work in groups and sub-committees of the Forum.

From time to time a Minister may be invited to attend a plenary session of the Forum as happened at the last meeting. If a report is produced which has a bearing on the work of a specific Department, as happens from time to time, it is submitted to Government and forwarded to the relevant Department. We pursue that matter with the Department to ensure appropriate follow up action is taken. We also accept any feedback and give it to the Forum.

Chairman: How is the expenditure on the Forum broken down? What are the main subheads of the cost of the Forum?

Ms O’Neill: It is broken down on a similar basis to Civil Service Departments, although they keep their accounts on an accruals basis. The main components of expenditure in the first year of operation were wages and salaries. Staffing of the Forum is made up of people redeployed on secondment from the Irish Productivity Centre — as was proposed in the Programme for a Partnership Government — and a number of civil servants redeployed from other Departments on a secondment arrangement. The cost of wages and salaries to the year ended 31 December 1993 was £98,000.

Chairman: How many staff does the Forum have?

Ms O’Neill: It has eight full time staff. It also has a part time chairperson and chairs of the two standing sub-committees. The chairs of the sub-committees are not staff of the Forum.

Deputy Broughan: Are members given an attendance fee?

Ms O’Neill: No.

Chairman: Has the mission statement or the terms of reference of the Office of the Tánaiste been written down anywhere?

Ms O’Neill: Before the Government strategic management initiative was launched the Office of the Tánaiste decided it would be useful from our point of view to develop our own strategic plan. We were conscious of forthcoming value for money audits and as a small policy driven Department, we want to be clear what contribution we are making and how it might be assessed.

We have not made this public but we have a written mission statement that the Office of the Tánaiste exists to facilitate the effective functioning of Government by ensuring that the views of the Tánaiste are fully taken into account in the formulation and implementation of all aspects of Government policy by assisting the Government in its response to policy issues and by fulfilling specific tasks assigned to it. We outline the specific measures we take to achieve that.

We will take that further by breaking it down for individuals within the Department into specific objectives for each individual budget holder within the Office. We will be developing effective performance indicators. It is quite difficult to develop such indicators for small policy driven departments but we are anxious to ensure we can establish criteria by which we can judge our effectiveness and assess what we have achieved over a period. We have very specific targets to be achieved within a period.

Chairman: Essentially the role of the Office is political; it is to ensure political problems between the Taoiseach’s Office, your Office and other Departments are avoided. Is that correct?

Ms O’Neill: I would not see it that way. The vast bulk of the Office’s time is devoted to specific tasks assigned to it or jobs we have been given, whether that is the preparation of legislation, overseeing and supporting the role of National Economic and Social Forum or ensuring the Tánaiste and the Minister of State are fully briefed on all issues put before Government. As civil servants we do not operate in an essentially political role, we ensure all matters coming before Government are given scrutiny. We work closely with the Department of the Taoiseach on a day to day basis in order to bring the best quality of analysis to bear.

As Accounting Officer and someone who has worked on this for the last year I am satisfied we contribute to improving the effectiveness of Government decisions by identifying issues and clarifying points made, and proposals put forward, by individual Departments. We try to work in a constructive and positive way with other Departments, not to stop things happening but to contribute ideas where possible on improving proposals brought forward. That has worked well for us in our day to day relations with Government Departments.

Chairman: Do you make sure the Tánaiste’s views on Government appointments are made known?

Ms O’Neill: That is not a matter I would be directly involved with as a civil servant within the Office. The advisers would have a role in providing advice to the Tánaiste on live political issues of the day.

Chairman: You talked about the Office being there to assist the effectiveness of the Government. Deputy Broughan has quoted precedents. I can understand the difficulties in the past and it is quite sensible to overcome them. When some of the key issues will be essentially political it is hard to see how an Office of civil servants can be effective in that role.

Ms O’Neill: As I mentioned a number of advisers are attached to the Office providing that support and advice to the Tánaiste. I would not consider it appropriate for civil servants to fulfil that function and in practice we do not. The advice on live political issues is a matter for the Tánaiste; he can seek whatever advice he chooses. We provide him with a quality and professional service of analysis, information and advice on matters coming before Government where required.

Chairman: We should note the Vote. I thank Ms O’Neill and her staff. I concur with what Deputy Foley has said and thank you for the fluency and lucidity of your replies. I also apologise for not calling you until 1 o’clock. No meeting is scheduled for next week and it is not envisaged that there will be a meeting, unless there is a development on a particular matter.

The Witness withdrew.

THE COMMITTEE ADJOURNED.