Joe O'Reilly (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Seán Haughey, to the House. We on this side of the House have no fundamental, philosophical objection in principle to what is proposed or to rationalisation per se. We are not opposed to saving money. The only caveat we would enter is that we do not want savings to the detriment of a quality service. My difficulty with what is presented is that it is very hazy and woolly and lacks specifics. I hope in his response to the debate the Minister of State will allay these concerns. I am very open to having them allayed.

The first issue that arises is the timeframe. How long will this take? It is a very valid and relevant question in terms of potential savings and outputs and the destabilisation of the service in the interim. What changes in legislation will be required and when? The Government should be in a position to answer these questions.

What will happen to the democratically elected committee members? People might say as a Senator I would ask that question, but I applaud very sincerely the committee members of our VECs, past and present. I served on County Cavan VEC for a couple of terms and it was genuinely awe-inspiring to see how seriously ordinary members of the committee took their role and how genuinely committed they were to the meetings. They sat through entire meetings, briefed themselves and were interested. There was nothing in it for most of them. Effectively, there is no saving in getting rid of committee members as their costs are minimal and that is verifiable. Where does the Minister of State see the great resource that is the membership of the committees going? What will happen to them? What level of rationalisation will take place? How will they be structured in future? They have a right to know given their patriotism and self-service. With very few exceptions they are a credit to what they do.

What process of dialogue is envisaged with the committees and the stakeholders, to use the contemporary jargon? How quickly and effectively will this take place? How will it be structured? What about the chief executive officers, given that there are more of them than potential committees? What methodology will be used in the rationalisation of chief executive officers? How will they be got rid of if they have to be? How will they be redeployed, to where and at what cost? These are relevant questions and it is reasonable to ask the Minister of State for specific answers. By definition those who became chief executive officers were by definition brilliant teachers and administrators at school level and rose through the system. They are highly successful and are obviously tremendously skilled people. That is a given, although there is always an aberration.