John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome Ms Mangan in this morning but I have to say that I am deeply concerned by her attitude towards this committee, particularly as displayed in the letter she sent to us in response to our request that she come in and talk about the cost-benefit analysis. She writes in the last line of that letter that she cannot see what benefit could be derived from the attendance either of herself or of the chief executive, Ms Black.

This attitude stinks. There was an exhaustive process carried out by this committee, with a thorough examination of the proposed changes. We published a comprehensive report, which seems to have fallen on deaf ears. I wish to put on the record that I think it is very concerning. The fact that the Citizens Information Board, CIB, could not or would not even submit an opening statement in advance of this meeting this morning is regrettable. In the contributions to us at this hearing, witnesses said that the opposition to these changes seemed to be coming from board members, not staff on the ground. That is totally contrary to the evidence that this committee has heard. It is also contrary to what I have found, particularly during my engagement with the Money and Budgeting Service, MABS, offices and staff across the State, who are not just concerned, they are fearful. We have heard evidence that volunteers have walked away from offices that had provided excellent services to the community. Ms Mangan must rectify this.

I wish to raise the issue of the last board meeting. It was said that the minutes of that meeting have only been signed off on in the last couple of days. Was the cost-benefit analysis signed of on by the board at its last meeting? Was there any opposition from board members to the cost-benefit analysis? Surely we do not need to wait for that information to be put on a website. Surely our witnesses can provide information now on whether the minutes have been signed off.

I have a couple of specific questions on the cost-benefit analysis and I hope the witnesses can provide some answers. The rationale for the proposed re-organisation states that the CIB had been requested by the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection to come into line with best practice. What concerns did the Department raise with the CIB, and when were those concerns raised? The rationale also states that the current structures are resulting in a poor use of resources at local level. Where exactly is the evidence of that? If the witnesses have that evidence, can they please let us know?

There were also set-up costs of €1.9 million. That is an estimate. How can those set-up costs be justified, and how do they compare with initial estimates given to this committee in our hearings? In addition to the initial costs, I ask the witnesses for a breakdown of the additional annual running costs under the restructuring.

I have some more questions that I think are important, if the Chair will bear with me for a couple of minutes. The cost-benefit analysis projects costs over an eight-year period. It is very difficult to understand these projections, let alone make any sense of them. Is it now accepted that the restructuring will not be cost-neutral? Having regard to the substantial additional cost to the Exchequer, what additional benefits will accrue to the end user? Why did the consultants not consult with anybody other than the CIB? Consultations with existing service providers would have been very beneficial. Can the witnesses elaborate on how a figure of €14.97 million can be achieved and 50% of managers' time can be freed up through restructuring? What work are they doing now that they will not have to do? Will there be no requirement to manage the local offices?

The cost-benefit analysis suggests that the only additional cost will be the employment of 16 new regional managers, at yearly salaries of roughly €65,000 each, plus pay-related social insurance, PRSI, contributions and pensions, etc. Can the witnesses confirm that no additional staff will be required? Will these regional managers incur any additional costs other than their salaries? The cost-benefit analysis suggests that there will be no additional cost.

I will leave it at that for the moment. There are other questions that I will hopefully have an opportunity to raise.