Séamus Brennan (Dublin South, Fianna Fail)

I am not disputing the reasonable nature of the case made by the Senator but I am advised that it might be counter-productive to do this in a brand new service at this stage. Not all individuals will be in need of a personal advocate. Many will have family members and carers and it is probable that only the most vulnerable will come forward initially. They will be prioritised and this has been clarified by the board. They will be dealt with immediately. I reiterate that many people will not require the service as they will be well able to speak up for themselves and to pursue an action or case on their own behalf. The Citizens Information Board has a strategic plan for 2006-09 which contains performance indicators which state that decisions will be taken promptly, without delay and within reasonable timeframes. This is the commitment in the strategic plan.

This is a point for which a strong argument can be made either way. However, I am satisfied that the assurance of the Parliamentary Counsel that the word "reasonable" when used in legislation is fairly well used and defined. A reasonable timeframe in this case could be a week, depending on the case. The timeframe for a very simple inquiry could be a week but a complicated issue could take a year. This is unknown territory and it is better to allow the board some flexibility.

The board and the director are required by legislation to deal promptly with applications. If we were to impose a time limit it should be done in future legislation. Two social welfare Bills come through this House every year and there would be little difficulty in putting an amendment to one of those Bills if a backlog occurred by inserting a timeframe of two or three months. There would be no need to draft a new piece of legislation as it could be incorporated into a social welfare Bill. This would be the most sensible way. The social welfare Bills must be enacted and they would provide for such an opportunity.

If the Senator forgives my pun, I advocate that we leave it to the board's requirement to act promptly. I would not be opposed to making an amendment similar to this amendment in future legislation if it is warranted at that time. I know the Senator would share my wish that it would not be needed at all and that the board would deal expeditiously with cases.