Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 6: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on progress in respect of the implementation of the recommendations of the OECD report on regulatory reform; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8767/05]

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 7: To ask the Taoiseach the progress made to date with regard to implementation of the OECD report on regulatory reform; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11817/05]

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 8: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on progress in implementing the OECD recommendations on regulatory reform; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11879/05]

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 9: To ask the Taoiseach if there is a deadline for implementation of the recommendations of the OECD report on regulatory reform; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11935/05]

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 to 9, inclusive, together.

Considerable progress has been achieved since the publication in 2001 of the OECD report on regulatory reform in Ireland. Many of the OECD recommendations related to specific sectoral issues and appropriate Ministers with responsibility for those sectors report progress to the House.

A key recommendation of the OECD report was the development of a national policy on better regulation. As Deputies will be aware this recommendation was acted upon with the publication in January last year of the Government White Paper, Regulating Better. The White Paper sets out six core principles of better regulation and a detailed action plan to translate these principles into how we design, implement and review legislation and regulations. Accordingly, the White Paper contains the thrust of the Government's efforts on regulatory reform rather than the original OECD reports. Key actions include the introduction of regulatory impact analysis, RIA, currently being piloted; improvements to our approach to sectoral regulation; greater clarity and accessibility of regulation especially by means of Statute Law revision and a renewed drive on red tape.

The OECD report made long-term strategic recommendations that do not particularly lend themselves to fixed timetables. However, the White Paper gave a number of time-bound commitments on a range of actions. Four specific actions include the establishment of the better regulation group, the development of consultation guidelines, the piloting of regulatory impact analysis and the updating of the Statute Book.

A better regulation group comprised of senior officials was established to oversee implementation of the White Paper and promote better quality regulation across the public service. To date, the group has met four times and has focused on a number of better regulation issues, including aspects of the enterprise strategy group's report relating to regulatory reform and a proposal to map the regulatory framework in Ireland. The group has also held initial discussions with representatives of both IBEC and ICTU and will engage in regular dialogue with these and other organisations as necessary on better regulation issues.

A central commitment in the White Paper was the development of guidelines to promote better quality public consultation. A sub-group of the better regulation group was formed in 2004 to oversee the development of these guidelines which are intended to act as a practical resource for Departments, public bodies and any other organisations that consult stakeholders. They are also designed to help those interested in participating and responding to consultations. The guidelines are close to completion and are expected to be published shortly.

In addition to these developments, my Department established a steering group to oversee the piloting of regulatory impact analysis, RIA, in Departments. Five Departments and offices are piloting RIA and are represented on the steering group which is chaired by my Department and also includes a representative from the committee for public management research. Based on the experience of piloting RIA, the group will make recommendations to Government on the most appropriate form of RIA for the Irish context. The piloting process is close to completion and it is hoped the final report will be published in the next two to three months.

RIA is a tool which contributes to the quality of regulation by ensuring regulatory proposals are subject to robust analysis prior to being brought to Government. It involves formal consultation in advance of regulation, better quantification of impacts, including costs, structured consideration of alternatives and greater focus on compliance and enforcement. RIA ensures the social and economic implications of regulations are considered as well as the burdens on small and medium enterprises. By incorporating the consideration of a wide range of impacts, it helps to ensure regulations strike the right balance between the need to protect the interests of the citizen and consumer and meeting the needs of business.

My Department has also made substantial progress, working in conjunction with the statute law revision unit in the Office of the Attorney General, to progress the commitments in the White Paper in respect of statute law revision. The Attorney General and I initiated a review of all legislation that predates the foundation of the State and Deputies will recall that in April 2004, I announced a public consultation process on the repeal of more than 100 Acts. The Statute Law Revision (Pre-1922) Bill 2004 was subsequently published in November 2004. The Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, is sponsoring this important legislation which passed through Second Stage in the Seanad on 13 April. The Bill will repeal almost 100 Acts that are spent or no longer of any practical use. A further round of consultation is under way and may lead to the inclusion of additional Acts before the Bill completes its passage through the Houses of the Oireachtas. This is an important first step in delivering on our commitment. The next stage is the identification of the pre-1922 Acts which are still in force and the development of a strategy to repeal and re-enact these in a modern, consolidated form.

Better regulation remains a significant and important component of the public service modernisation agenda and considerable progress has been achieved in implementing the White Paper, Regulating Better, and the recommendations of the OECD report on regulatory reform.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not know how long the author laboured over that answer but one would hardly get away with it during Leaders' Questions. To translate it into understandable English from a business perspective requires some thought.

Since 1999, 11 regulators have been appointed, each of whom has built his or her own little empire in respect of the appropriate area of responsibility. Does the Taoiseach consider the time has come for the appointment of one powerful office of regulation with the capacity to pool resources of knowledge and expertise and which would carry a much greater degree of accountability? Does he believe this is a concept that should be followed?

Ireland is losing out from a business perspective. The report commissioned for the Oireachtas Committee on Enterprise and Small Business observed it takes an average of four days to set up a new business in the United States while the figure for Europe is 38 days. In addition, the cost is much higher in Europe than in the United States. The Dutch authorities have undertaken a detailed analysis on reduction of regulation for business in the EU and its findings are important for Ireland. The Department of the Taoiseach estimates the cost to business of compliance with existing legislation is approximately €4 billion per annum. According to the Government White Paper on regulation, 15% of that burden is avoidable. That is €600 million a year. In the context of a reduction in regulation and making it easier for business to do business in the national interest, does the Taoiseach consider that the Government is doing enough to achieve that? Does he see a role for the Department of Finance and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment in focusing on a real reduction in regulation, so that businesses can find it tangibly and demonstrably easier to set up companies and do business without having such a burden pressing down on them? Would there be value in that, given that, according to the Department of the Taoiseach, €600 million could be saved a year?

When does the Taoiseach expect the introduction of proposals to put in place a modern framework for pharmacies? The situation in pharmacy is causing a great deal of concern for qualified people and for those who wish to enter that business.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The regulatory impact analysis and the whole question of regulations are not the most interesting of topics, but they are hugely important. Deputy Kenny is correct about Europe, in that the system of bureaucracy and legislation in Europe is very different from that in the United States, where it is very simple. In OECD terms, we are considered not to be a very highly regulated country, and we should keep it that way.

Irrespective of whether the figure of €600 million is right, the analysis my Department undertook was based on what happens in other countries. The cost of regulation is considered to be somewhere between 2.5% and 4.5% of GDP. Approximately 15 % of that is considered to be not necessary. Taking that in the Irish context, my Department took those figures of 2.5% and 15% of that, and it worked out as €600 million. That was the calculation. It is crude enough, but the figure is probably as accurate as it would be if it were calculated any other way. In 1999, we were one of the early countries to put ourselves forward to the OECD to get engaged in this area. The White Paper and the various processes that have developed very much follow what is happening in Europe. I hope we are ahead in some areas; perhaps we are not so in others. The whole concept is that we do not do anything any more without checking whether there is another way or a simpler way of doing it, or whether we need to do it at all. Might a measure be just red tape or bureaucracy?

To answer Deputy Kenny's question, there are many things we can do. Much of what I read out in my reply covers the detailed work being done. There are some really good officials in my Department working in this area and interacting with business. It is extraordinary how things have moved forward in recent years. The position used to be that nobody was too interested in the subject. Now, chambers of commerce, small and medium-sized businesses, the Competition Authority, IBEC and other bodies are all very interested in this area, because they see the added value involved. People were recently getting excited about the issue of the companies Acts and regulations for directors, which was an interesting debate.

The issue of the super-regulator or combining the regulators is now being discussed. The enterprise strategy group with its publication last year of "Ahead of the Curve" recommended merging a number of regulators to create a larger, multisectoral regulatory body. A group in my Department considered that recommendation, and it has been tasked with implementing it. The group does not think a super-regulator is the way to go, because it would cover such different areas. It believes that, before we set up any new regulators, we should try to match existing regulators with any new focus taken, rather than simply adding to them. The White Paper recognises the value of having an ongoing assessment of the possibilities of rationalising the current system. It accepts that it would be beneficial to strengthen the ties between the regulators, the Office of the Director of Consumer Affairs and the Competition Authority. The group is not ruling out the whole lot. A super regulator approach would lead to certain cost savings, for example, the availing of shared services and expertise and, according to the group, this would make sense. However, given the disparate nature of the functions carried out by independent regulators, from the licensing of travel agents to the building of new power stations, the synergies could be overstated. Therefore it does not agree with the Enterprise Strategy Group and regards its view as over-simplistic. However, it does not suggest that we should keep adding to them but that we should try to match them.

The debate regarding the number of regulators misses the point. The issue is the quality of decision-making by regulators. Are we getting better outcomes in key regulated areas? If not, why not? Are regulators fulfilling their functions, both in respect of market players and consumers? Have they sufficient powers to carry out their mandates? Can they strengthen those powers of sanction? Can we limit recourse to the courts by parties wishing to frustrate regulatory decisions? This happens a lot in that if somebody is not happy with a decision they want to fight it in court. This seems contradictory to the idea of a regulator listening to everybody and coming up with a decision. One does not get far if such a decision is challenged in court.

All of these issues have been examined and it is my Department's view that we should try to tidy up the system and not put new regulators in place unless absolutely necessary. One must rationalise where possible. A super regulator would result in too much power resting with one organisation. The Better Regulation Group feels that we would be dealing with the issue of an overly powerful super regulator in five or ten years' time, and I tend to agree with this view.

With regard to other questions raised, there are literally mountains of analysis and material. The model that has been piloted in five Departments is almost finished and will be rolled out in other Departments. Discipline is then required to ensure that people, before jumping to the call of an organisation with regard to new legislation, think in terms of the RIA as to whether the legislation or regulation is needed. They must consider the cost and burden for everybody, not just in terms of business and industry. They must decide whether it is necessary to update legislation.

Europe is different to the US in that countries keep filling their Statute Books with complex legislation which costs more and, in many cases, does not solve the problem. This view is held everywhere. I am not saying that legislation does not need to be updated in some instances, but costs are involved and it affects modern business. There is endless data, some of which I have read, which proves this issue.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is on days such as this that I am glad I do not have to write a cover piece for tomorrow's newspapers. It is hard to see much colour in issues such as waste paper, business partnerships in Newfoundland and Labrador and regulation.

I would like to address the OECD recommendations and tangible matters such as complete liberalisation of the pub trade, the elimination of restrictions on economic freedoms for pharmacists and seven or eight other issues. As distinct from theory, has any of this been done? I have a cutting from one of the national newspapers of 25 July 2001. The headline reads, "Coalition To Abolish Curbs on Pubs and Pharmacies Within a Year".

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy should confine himself to questions because we are rapidly running out of time.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are not running out of time because of me. I am confining myself to questions.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is not appropriate to quote at Question Time and this is a long-standing rule of the House.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I was only showing the headline and not quoting from it. The Tánaiste committed to the abolition of such curbs on 25 July 2001. Four years have elapsed and very little has been achieved in any of the areas relating to the OECD's tangible recommendations. Rather than having the Tánaiste torture him about deregulation and multiple terminals at Dublin Airport, does the Taoiseach not believe we would be better off if his Ministers implemented some of the OECD recommendations on deregulation? Does the Taoiseach believe it would be possible to leave the terminal problem at Dublin Airport if adequate space were provided to the regulator to deal with the consumer issues that arise?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I was asked about the pharmacy area, which was mentioned by Deputy Rabbitte along with other areas. I have a brief note which I can give the House. A number of these are implemented or in the process of implementation. The Competition Authority has made considerable progress in the non-life insurance market, the banking sector and architectural and engineering professions. The document on the legal profession was published in February and is now open for consultation. Considerable consultation is ongoing between the Bar Council and the Law Society in trying to come to an agreement on the final report which is due in a few months.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Even the Taoiseach will have reached——

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach should be allowed to reply without interruption.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

At what age did the Taoiseach say he would retire? He will have reached 60 before we do anything.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are all right. We will get there yet. The Tánaiste has carefully considered the complex issues raised by the pharmacy review group. The memorandum outlines her plans to consolidate and update the existing legislation to provide for the safe and effective delivery of pharmaceutical services to all citizens in a comprehensive manageable and robust legislative framework. In particular it will address the education, training, registration and fitness to practice provisions for pharmacists and will incorporate recommendations from the pharmacy review group as necessary. That memorandum is being revised on foot of observations received and it is expected to come to Government shortly.

Without going through them all individually the Competition Authority expects to complete them all by the end of this year. It has already completed six. The professions involved are construction, medical, legal, engineers, architects, veterinary surgeons, solicitors, barristers, medical practitioners, dentists and optometrists. These will all be completed by the end of the year. A significant body of work is already finished. Each one of those areas raises its own problems with particular professional groups. They have all been challenged in the work that has been done by the Competition Authority and by the pharmacy review group.