Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)

I am sympathetic to this amendment which makes a great deal of sense. This proposal has been suggested and debated at various committees before. Social welfare legislation is not as such the place to introduce such legislative measures as it is primarily a matter for the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government.

There is the wider issue of examining outcomes from social welfare policies and programmes. We need to put in place a strong evaluation system of such programmes that reports on a timely basis as to how different social welfare changes impact on people. Such a system would also assist in preparing advice and guidance for people on how to get back into the labour market and access employment and training.

One difficulty in this regard is the restrictive approach to using personal data in a scientific and academic context while maintaining confidentiality at all stages. The Deputy referred to the use of PPS numbers as a verification mechanism in respect of elections.

There are similar difficulties with regard to using data relating to individuals and their PPS numbers in the context of evaluating such data.

This is a matter which is worthy of examination. We are trying to give opportunities, advice and information to people on social welfare in order that they might become active and try to return to the labour force. Our best-known State agency for dealing with such matters is FÁS, which provides job training. It is most important that we evaluate the latter relative to the experience of people who come off jobseeker's benefit or allowance or some other social welfare payment in order to take up training and so that we might discover how these individuals fare subsequently.

The current process of evaluation, whether it is carried out by academics or the ESRI, is extremely slow. The system in this country is much slower than those which obtain in other European countries. A balance must be struck in the context of using the data that is available for public purposes or for the type of evaluation purposes to which I just referred. High standards are required on the part of officials in Departments who have access to such data. Officials must not use their position in order to access this type of data for purposes other than those relating to their work. Where such data has been accessed for almost personal purposes in the past, the management within the Civil Service has taken the matter very seriously. That was the correct response.

This is a topic to which we might return at a later date. I do not propose to accept the amendment because I do not believe it is suitable in the context of the legislation. However, there is much merit in the suggestion put forward by the Deputy.

See this speech in context