David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)

I agree with the Minister of State in that there are two issues. If we wished, some of the House's procedures could be brought up to date tomorrow to make the House more efficient and the Ceann Comhairle's job easier. We have been calling for a longer term development for some time. I welcome the Minister of State's assertion that there might be a wider debate on the role of Parliament in the 21st century, the electoral system and so on. We would support that proposal and encourage the Minister of State to table it.

What are the opinions of the Minister of State's Government colleagues in respect of making State agencies more accountable through parliamentary question systems? Does he not agree that many agencies, while called quangos, are autonomous in many ways? FÁS has been mentioned. Does he not agree that the opportunities for Deputies to question, scrutinise and oversee the work of agencies that spend taxpayers' money are limited to the committees? Does he not agree that it would be better for Ministers to answer questions regarding the work and responsibilities of those agencies on the floor of the House? Ministers cannot be responsible for the agencies' day-to-day operations, but surely they could get the information and put it on the floor of the House. This would prevent the types of issue that have caused such recent trouble in many State agencies. For example, I asked a question yesterday about a child with special needs who does not have a school place, but I was told that the Minister for Education and Science had no responsibility for the matter. This was appalling. The Minister should have asked the agencies involved, reverted to the House and answered the question.

Does the Minister of State not agree that we used to ask questions about the HSE and get responses within one week, but that we now get responses privately after three, four or five weeks, meaning that they do not appear on the public record? Many quangos were established to protect Ministers from scrutiny. Is it not time to change the system? The National Roads Authority is another example. When one writes to it, one gets a cursory response. Were our questions to be answered in public in the House, the NRA would be careful about its responses and we might get proper information, particularly if procedures were changed to allow Ministers to be quizzed. Had our procedures been correct, we might not be in our current economic mess. Deputies could have asked questions and scrutinised issues to a deeper level. I would be interested to hear the Minister of State's comments on this important issue.

See this speech in context