Tom Parlon (Laois-Offaly, Progressive Democrats)

The Deputies' proposals seek to introduce an additional system to monitor progress on the agenda for modernisation and human resource management across the Civil Service. As Deputy Bruton said, we had a substantial debate on the issue on Committee Stage at which time I said that we already have a comprehensive and elaborate structure for monitoring progress in these and other areas of the modernisation programme. These have been introduced under the Civil Service modernisation programme, which sets out an accountability framework for Departments and offices. I am satisfied this is appropriate for the structure and nature of Civil Service modernisation.

The framework is set out in the Public Service Management Act 1997 which provides that the Secretary General or head of office must prepare and submit to the Minister a strategy statement in respect of the Department or scheduled office every three years or whenever a new Minister is appointed. Under the Act, annual progress reports on the implementation of the strategy statement must be submitted to the Minister. This system, while providing a legislative framework for monitoring performance, also allows Departments the flexibility to update and change priorities continually in response to specific demands. We clearly already have a well embedded and effective framework for accountability, which is examined and strengthened on an ongoing basis. By specifying the areas where Departments and offices should report on progress, the Deputy's proposal would constitute an excessively inflexible and bureaucratic reporting mechanism.

I would like to comment briefly on the progress that has been made and the monitoring arrangements in place in respect of some of the areas mentioned in Deputy Bruton's amendment. The amendment refers to progress in respect of delegation to line managers. The extent of devolution is a matter to be decided by individual organisations as it differs depending on the size and structure of the organisation and the nature of the policy issues involved. Reporting in this area would be particularly burdensome as different levels of delegation are appropriate in the areas of human resource management and financial management.

Similar issues arise with Deputy Boyle's amendment. The Civil Service employs specialists as and when required. Needs differ from Department to Department and from office to office, and management must have the flexibility to determine the skills required to carry out the business of the organisation on an ongoing basis in line with the devolved reporting structures I have just set out. It would therefore be unduly restrictive to the work of Civil Service organisations to require the Minister for Finance to announce annual targets for the employment of such staff.

The amendment also includes a reference to targets and accountability systems relating to delegated responsibility. Departments and offices have installed management information systems and human resource management systems which are necessary to ensure increased accountability and which will facilitate further delegation. Progress in respect of both these systems is monitored frequently by a number of different bodies, including my Department, and the implementation group of Secretaries General. Additionally, given the high priority of strengthening the financial management information available, each Department makes quarterly reports to departmental management advisory committees and to the central management information framework unit in the Department of Finance as well as biannual reporting to Government.

Strong emphasis is placed on strengthening the accountability framework in place in the Civil Service through improvements to the budgetary process. Following his announcement in the budget for 2005, the Minister for Finance is considering a number of options which will improve the quality of debate and the data available to the House on the budget and the Estimates. Developments in respect of the management information framework, the expenditure review initiative and the pilot project on resource allocation and business planning will inform this process. The increasing focus on the use of outputs and outcomes in accounting for public expenditure will contribute to strengthening further the accountability framework in the Civil Service.

The amendment also referred to progress on performance appraisal. This is monitored on an ongoing basis centrally by the implementation group. Additionally, a comprehensive report, Evaluation of the PMDS in the Civil Service, was recently published by Mercer Human Resource Consultants, and is available to the public. Following the survey, it has been agreed to link the performance management and development system with other HR processes such as increments, promotion and progression to higher salary scales. This will considerably strengthen the focus on accountability at individual level.

The amendment also suggested that progress regarding opening posts to non-civil servant applicants should be included in an annual report. Progress in this area is already monitored by my Department. Progress has been made since the provision was agreed as part of Sustaining Progress and we continue to work on the matter.

These examples illustrate that sufficient mechanisms are in place to monitor progress in the areas proposed by the Deputies. The accountability framework in place under the strategic management initiative, which includes the Public Service Management Act 1997, strategy statements, annual reports and PMDS, puts in place the framework for assigning accountability at all levels of the organisation. It is more appropriate to build on and strengthen existing arrangements, as we are doing in respect of the budgetary process, for example, than to duplicate them unnecessarily and add to the administrative burden. The proposed amendments would restrict the policy of increasing devolution and accountability which is central to the modernisation programme. For these reasons I do not accept the amendments.

See this speech in context