Cecilia Keaveney (Fianna Fail)

It is funny that today we seem to be speaking about the same topics, in which I have an interest. The publication of the organisational review programme is welcome, particularly in the context of our discussion this morning on the Croke Park agreement. I mirror the comment of Senator White that the important thing is where we go from here. This is probably a greater challenge than identifying the issues. If one speaks to two or three people in any group, they can all tell one what are the problems. It is much more difficult to obtain a consensus on how achieve a solution.

Like any other report, this one acknowledges what has and has not been done well and, on the whole, the organisations and Departments involved in the exercise are credited with embracing technology in running their operations. IT is constantly involving and, therefore, it is of the utmost importance that investment in the latest technologies is supported and encouraged. I mentioned that when I first came to the House I had come from a school environment with every technological advance at my fingertips, but there was little here, although that has changed since.

Access to public services is the cornerstone of any democracy, but access for younger generations can be technologically led, particularly in comparison to decades past. Clearly, substantial strides have been made in this regard. However, much remains to be done in realising the full potential of IT within Departments and various agencies of the State. One of the issues that is always raised is that of duplication. Even though one Department has put all of the information into its system, it cannot be transferred from one computer to another. For example, if a person who is working in Northern Ireland but living in Donegal becomes pregnant and wishes to apply for maternity benefit, the relevant information must be obtained from the UK, and is then put on the system in Donegal. However, if she tries to apply for maternity benefit again in the future, she will have to go back to square one, even though the information is close by. The logic of linking IT systems is obvious.

While it is imperative to grasp all that technology has to offer, I am conscious that for many people technology is a totally alien concept. Therefore, a balance must be struck between embracing technology and ensuring that all clients have adequate access to services. While the report today credits the agencies as generally having a good record of customer service, we must ensure no one feels alienated or restricted in accessing information. I refer in particular to older people who through no fault of their own do not have sufficient IT skills to interact with many of the online services currently being offered. Also, in some cases broadband services are not as available as they should be.

I must also mention people with a disability who wish to work or access services. I have a new intern who will not, I think, be embarrassed if I mention that he has a sight impairment, and it was in working with him that I realised the importance of the technology that is available. His ability is much greater than his disability, and the difference made by technology, for both employees and service users, has highlighted its importance, even over the last day or two.

It is crucial to ensure that all sections of society have the ability to access the same level of services through traditional means. This means there should be face-to-face contact or the possibility of picking up the phone and talking to a real person rather than an automated system. This is still as relevant as it was a decade ago. When it comes to making cuts in budgets in the future, spending on customer service must be protected as much as possible. This cannot be forgotten about. My great fear is that because a service is available online or through some gadget, the human touch will be removed as the box is ticked.

The reforms we all crave in the public service need to be customer-centred and not purely an accounting exercise. It is my firm belief that savings can be found while protecting the public's access to services. We could follow the example of the UK, where the doors of centres for public services have been opened on Saturday mornings and certain evenings. This could instantly improve access for all as well as reducing lengthy waiting lists across the board. To allow it to happen, however, there must be co-operation among all agencies and their personnel. The discussion this morning on the Croke Park agreement is relevant here. Such co-operation will not be easily obtained; however, it is required. The current systems within the public service are not performing adequately for the personnel involved or for the public.

When reading the report this morning, I was not surprised to learn that morale is low among public servants in some of the agencies. This is a well-documented fact. The question is whether we are going to do anything to tackle it. The majority of people agree that the way to introduce reforms is with a motivated workforce, as was mentioned earlier, although the report clearly states this is not currently the case. There is a vicious circle in this regard. In my region, there was a problem last week when the county council sent out a notification that people were three months late in paying their second home tax. People were charged €20 per month, that is €60 extra, for being late. Of course, an avalanche of people then complained that they had not realised the due date was July because they had paid the tax in October of last year. Had the notification come out three weeks before the closing date, rather then three months afterwards with a penalty of €60, the avalanche of criticism would not have occurred. The people within the system must work within the system that is there, while the public complains about the lack of service.

I can understand that public servants are frustrated by the constraints put on them by systems. They are at the coalface every day and they have an insight we can only dream of. The lack of motivation in these agencies is bound to become steadily worse if resources become scarcer. Resources are important at the moment, but money is also tight. Therefore, we need to interact differently with public servants if we want to see an increase in motivation and thus productivity. This is a goal we must all desire to achieve as soon as possible. The necessary policies and frameworks need to be put in place to make sure this is recognised. Again, I refer to the debate on the Croke Park agreement. One realistic and simple step to improve spirits within the service would be to foster and develop the relationship between people at management level and those below. This report seems to identify the gulf that exists between the two elements, which is undoubtedly contributing to the chronic lack of morale. The responsibility for this falls at the door of management. Managing personnel is a basic role of any manager. The report suggests managers and agencies are failing in this duty to a certain extent. Therefore, the question needs to be asked if enough pressure is being exerted on managers to perform the function. That brings me back to the main point I made this morning. There is a need for leaders to lead in as charismatic a fashion as possible. Is there a chance managers at the very top have been included in the Croke Park deal but have failed to feed its provisions down the chain to the lower ranks? Managers voted on the agreement and must sign up to it, but have people at the top forgotten their duty to continuously sell the message to those at the grassroots?

I welcome the report. I would like to add further comments, but as time is short, I wish the Government well with other reports in the same vein.