Ms Ita Mangan:

I apologise to Senator Humphreys. I should have addressed the local advisory boards in my earlier reply. Currently, the local boards that run MABS are helping the people who work in the MABS centres and they are the administrators. All we are asking to do is not have them as administrators. They can still remain as local advisory boards and be helpful. The range of people who serve on MABS boards is very wide. They include many local credit union people and some community welfare officers. Various people serve. There is nothing to stop them being available to assist the staff in the delivery of the services. What we are trying to do is take away that administrative burden. They can still operate as boards if they wish. We would encourage them to do that and to provide their expertise, if possible.

Some MABS boards have the same people as members since the day they were established. Some boards change very frequently, so the level of interaction varies hugely throughout the country.

On the costs and risks, we have done a cost-benefit analysis and a risk analysis. We will forward the results of both of those to the committee. I have not seen the figures from the representative, Mr. Clarke, so I cannot comment on them. We recognise that the initial change will cost some money. Ultimately, they will save some money but that is not the object of the exercise. The object of the exercise is to do with improved governance, and saving money is not a particular objective of it.

Deputy Kenny asked what would happen if MABS services do not co-operate. Our plan is to set up the eight regional companies. Under the normal terms of the law, transfer of undertakings will apply and the staff will transfer to those companies so they will not be affected. They will transfer on their normal terms and conditions.

The companies will have to dissolve themselves. That will be their job. The Citizens Information Board, CIB, cannot tell any particular company to dissolve. They can stay in place but the CIB will not be providing financing to it. That is the significant difference.

On the question of no change during the lifetime of the restructuring-----