Kieran O'Donnell (Limerick East, Fine Gael)

I ask to be called after ten minutes.

I very much welcome this Bill which is opportune. The recent OECD report outlined proper reform in the public sector, particularly with reference to a customer-oriented public sector. This extension of the powers of the Ombudsman lies very much in this direction. In bringing in extra bodies, we have given power to the Ombudsman to make a general recommendation rather than merely specific ones relating to particular complaints. From now a general recommendation can be made to a body following an investigation. This is welcome and will bring about proper standards. Deputy Bruton made the point that it might lead to a code of practice or conduct for particular bodies. That is most opportune and should perhaps be put on a statutory footing.

Up to now the Ombudsman could request information during investigations but there was no legal obligation on the body under investigation to provide it. The legal route can now be taken in order to obtain that information. That is very important. If needed, recourse to the High Court on a point of law will also be possible and that is welcome.

Some 450 State agencies and bodies are now in existence. One might question the validity of many of them, which are outside the remit of Departments. Ministers are increasingly telling the House that they have no remit over a particular function and that in effect it is now the bailiwick of organisations such as the HSE and FÁS. Power must be brought back within the executive function of Departments. This debate raises the broader question, as to why we have 450 State agencies and bodies, and what they are doing. They are bad value for money for the taxpayer, doing work that Ministers and their Departments should be doing — certainly this is something that must be looked at in depth.

My second point is that Schedule 2 refers to exempted agencies. Why are such agencies exempted? If they have regulatory powers and are involved in regulation, they should be subject to some form of oversight and regulatory procedures in their own right. A typical example is An Bord Pleanála, some of whose decisions are not consistent, and that should be looked at. Every ordinary person is dealing with An Bord Gáis and the ESB on a daily basis. If a person has a query, he or she should be able to register a complaint through the Ombudsman's office. State bodies should have no concern, in the event, if they are operating proper systems in line with suitable codes of practice for dealing with customers. That should not be an issue. We are seeking to bring about a customer centred environment. At the moment a great many public bodies are not customer centred, and basically employ a top-down approach rather than dealing with the customer on a proper basis. Effectively, if a private sector concern is not performing adequately, the customer will go elsewhere. Access to a proper complaints procedure is necessary within the public sector as well. There is no reason that bodies such as CIE, Bord na Móna, the Commission for Energy Regulation and the Commission for Taxi Regulation should not be brought under the ambit of the Ombudsman, in terms of complaints procedures as well.

The Ombudsman, Ms Emily O'Reilly, has indicated that the new legislation should have within it provisions for dealing with queries as regards immigrants and asylum matters. That should have been taken on board. We have to provide a consistent system across all areas, so that people are able to make complaints, as appropriate. Overall, the thrust must be that the Ombudsman's office should be capable of providing ordinary individuals with the facility to make complaints without fear — and allow the Ombudsman to adjudicate as to whether further investigation is required. My understanding is that the Act, in a prudent manner, provides that the Ombudsman can provide formal mediation, if needed. It is a question of looking after the customer. I believe it will also have the effect of improving the quality of services being provided by State agencies, and that is the key focus here.

In summary, I welcome the legislation, which is long overdue. However, other bodies need to be brought within its ambit. The general regulations now being provided for under the legislation mean the Ombudsman can intervene as regards various bodies, rather than making specific recommendations on particular points. That should be examined in a manner that will give rise to codes of practice.

Furthermore, specific proposals that may be made in particular cases that currently have the status of recommendations should be strengthened to ensure they can be enforced. However, these are wider questions that can be looked at on Committee Stage. I welcome the Bill, but there are points that require further examination.

See this speech in context