Dáil debates

Wednesday, 22 February 2006

Ceisteanna — Questions.

Regulatory Reform.

11:00 am

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

Question 10: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation of the recommendation of the OECD report Regulatory Reform in Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39766/05]

Photo of Joe HigginsJoe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 11: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the progress to date in implementing the recommendations of the OECD report Regulatory Reform in Ireland. [1871/06]

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

Question 12: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation of the recommendations of the OECD report Regulatory Reform in Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3211/06]

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

Question 13: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on progress to date in 2006 in implementing the recommendation of the OECD report Regulatory Reform in Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3415/06]

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

Question 14: To ask the Taoiseach the progress to date in 2006 with regard to the implementation of the OECD report Regulatory Reform in Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4183/06]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 10 to 14, inclusive, together.

Significant progress has been made since the publication of the OECD report on regulatory reform in Ireland. Many of the OECD recommendations related to specific sectoral issues and the appropriate Ministers with responsibility for those sectoral areas are reporting directly to the House on progressing the OECD recommendations.

However, as I explained in previous answers on this issue, the focus of our efforts in progressing regulatory reform is on implementing the White Paper, Regulating Better. The White Paper was published in January 2004 in response to the OECD's report. It sets out six core principles of better regulation and a detailed action plan on how these principles will be translated into how we design, implement and review legislation and regulation. Progress has been made in a number of key areas set out in the White Paper.

The better regulation group, which was established in 2004 to oversee the implementation of the action plan arising from the White Paper, met three times in 2005. The first meeting of 2006 took place at the end of January. Three subgroups have been established. The first is to progress certain commitments in the White Paper in relation to developing improved approaches to regulatory appeals and reviewing the issue of penalties for non-compliance with laws or regulations. Another subgroup is looking at improving electronic accessibility to statutory instruments and a third group is completing the audit of the regulatory framework.

In July 2005 I announced the establishment of a business regulation forum. The forum, which is under the aegis of the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, comprises senior members of the public sector and business. It will give business an opportunity to identify regulatory measures that negatively impact on business and competitiveness or issues arising from inefficient, outdated or disproportionate regulation. The forum has met twice so far and is scheduled to meet again on 23 February.

Work is ongoing in supporting the roll out of a regulatory impact analysis, RIA. Since June 2005 a regulatory impact analysis must be conducted on all primary legislation involving changes to the regulatory framework, significant statutory instruments, EU directives and significant EU regulations. Guidelines on conducting the RIAs were published last October and approximately 1,300 copies have been distributed to Departments and Government offices. My Department is providing support and guidance to Departments and offices in respect of the regulatory impact analysis on an ongoing basis. Dedicated training has also been developed and will be run regularly during 2006.

Consistent with the White Paper's commitment to providing greater clarity and accessibility to legislation, the Statute Law Revision (Pre-1922) Act 2005 was signed into law just before Christmas on 18 December. This Act provides for the repeal of 206 statutes, which were enacted before 1922, that are spent, obsolete or no longer of practical utility. The process of streamlining and improving accessibility to the Statute Book will continue in 2006 with the introduction of a new statute law revision Bill. This Bill will clearly set out those Acts dating from before 1800 that are to remain in force. All other pre-1800 Acts, estimated at 2,300, will be repealed by this Bill. A public consultation phase will take place before publication of the Bill, which I hope will be enacted by the end of this year.

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

Will the Taoiseach outline the six core principles he referred to? Has the Taoiseach given any consideration to the issue of a single, powerful regulator, which would bring the benefits of pooling expertise and a higher degree of accountability in the area of regulatory reform?

In its report, the OECD identified telecommunications and energy as being of particular concern. Does the Taoiseach have an up to date assessment of the extent of reform in both of these areas? Does the Taoiseach agree that any answer other than "dismal" would not be true to date?

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

The Deputy's question on energy and telecommunications might be more appropriate to the relevant line Minister.

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

The issue was in the report referred to by the Taoiseach. I know the Ceann Comhairle is trying to be helpful because of time.

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

The issues being examined are where there are significant negative impacts on national competitiveness, significant negative impacts on the socially excluded or vulnerable groups, significant environmental damage or where the proposals involve a significant policy change in an economic market, have a significant impact on competition or customers, will disproportionately impinge on the rights of citizens, impose a disproportionate compliance burden or where the cost to the Exchequer or third parties is significant. These are the types of areas being examined. Before legislation concerning regulation is introduced, this process must be gone through, which is very good. Often, what happens is these things are put on the Statute Book and people find out later about the burden.

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

Is there proofing involved?

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

Yes. Before legislation can get through, it must undergo that process. It cannot happen unless it makes sense.

On the business group, this is so that not just people in the system, as good as they are, are involved. People from outside business have a say and can put forward their case, not just on new but also on existing regulations, so we can try to get away from slavishly following something because an Act was passed 40 years ago. It will help us get rid of that. This process will be very helpful on issues in competitiveness and doing away with the disproportionate compliance burden on whoever is in a society, not just business.

There have been a number of other reports since the OECD survey. The examinations are finished on the engineering, architecture and dentistry professions. In a number of other examinations work has finished in Departments, with upcoming legislation. The pharmacy review group has completed its work. In a number of areas, such as the legal profession, the work has been completed and will form an amendment to legislation.

Much of this is about restrictive practices and areas in which there is a need to reform the law and give more transparency and accountability, not allowing vested interests to hold sway. The legislation being prepared on the licensed trade, and the pubs and licensed liquor trades, has gone for drafting, which will result in streamlining and modernisation.

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

Does the Taoiseach recall that on a number of occasions, I raised one of the actions recommended in the Government's White Paper on regulatory reform in relation to the legislative process, namely, to improve the information flow and, specifically, the publication in advance of legislation of the draft heads of a Bill?

Rather than going over all of the previous points, questions and exchanges we have had over the years on this matter, can the Taoiseach indicate to the House the number of Bills or the proportion of them in which the heads have been published in advance of the legislation since the start of the 29th Dáil and to which Departments they applied?

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

There are two issues. I said to the Deputy the way a Bill is drafted is that the heads are normally taken separately and work is finished on them in the parliamentary draftsman's office. Normally — in most cases — there is consultation on them with the various stakeholders and interested people. I have told Ministers there is an advantage in publishing heads at that stage. Often, Departments seem to engage in dialogue with various interests without publishing the heads. The Tánaiste on the nursing home Bill has stated she has or will publish the heads. Departments have been reluctant over the years to publish heads of Bills but they still engage in discussions. My view is that there is not much point in this. It is just as easy to do it the other way.

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

The Taoiseach knows it is not happening.

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

It is in some areas. I accept there is a traditional reluctance in the system even though I have stated I cannot see the difficulty. There is often a year between making legislation and the heads being agreed. It is useful to put it forward but I will continue my efforts to get people to publish the heads of the Bill because I agree with it.

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

Will the Taoiseach check about the detail in relation to the number?

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

I will.

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

Regarding the OECD's views on regulatory impact analysis, was the Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Bill subject to regulatory impact analysis? Does the Taoiseach accept the comments about the lack of proper regulatory analysis and the regulatory failure cited by Airtricity when it pulled out of the residential energy market in Ireland? What lessons must be learned from this devastating development given that 11,000 customers must change from green, clean energy to something dirtier? Is the Taoiseach satisfied the regulatory impact analysis is working when such a major regulatory failure can be cited?

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

The benefit of the introduction of regulatory impact analysis is an improvement in the way new regulations are made. Departments and offices will assess the likely impact of new regulations across all legislation in a more structured and consistent way. Wider and more consistent consultation is required before making regulations. Regulations used to be made on the basis of people's beliefs and would not work out in practice. Now, people must consult and this is the benefit of this system. The OECD had advised this.

Consultation must also take place with customers likely to be affected so stakeholders on the other side of implementation of an Act have a voice. A practical examination of an Act takes place and consideration is given to downstream compliance and enforcement consequences of regulations, including monitoring and review mechanisms where appropriate.

The arguments do not have to be accepted but at least a two-way process exists rather than something becoming law without consultation. Those who must engage on different sides have an impact on the process. I accept this is early in the process so we are changing from a culture that did not consult widely in many areas to one that must engage. It will take time before we reap the benefits but it is now happening.

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

Have no lessons been learned from Airtricity?

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

I am not sure if the decision was taken for commercial considerations.

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

It was taken for regulatory considerations.