Caít Keane (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I would like a timeline. The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform asked each Minister to review the public bodies falling under each Department's remit. In surveying the inclusions and exclusions, the Minister has done considerable background work before introducing the Bill. It is based on the recommendations of each Department, so the consultation process has been inclusive of all Departments. The proposals in the Bill are made on foot of the consultation process. It is proposed that non-public bodies, funded in significant part or in whole by the State, will be included on a case-by-case basis by ministerial order. The Minister outlined some of the bodies to be included by ministerial order rather than by amending legislation. I welcome this step because we elect Ministers to have the power to do things. They consult the various interested bodies and we do not want to be in the Chamber changing legislation every day.

Has the Minister outlined who will be consulted and who will help the Minister make the decisions? Some 140 additional bodies were added, both public bodies and bodies that are not public but require public subvention. It is proposed that the Commission for Public Service Appointments will merge with the Office of the Ombudsman. We have spoken so much about the mergers of quangos. Perhaps these two bodies are similar and fulfil a similar role. The last paragraph of the Bill refers to the financial implications, which means more staff. Does merging offices involve more staff or change or taking personnel from elsewhere to the Office of the Ombudsman? I recommend the latter because the Ombudsman needs additional staff. The Minister referred to 80,000 complaints, of which 3,600 were judged valid, in one year. There were also 11,500 queries and I do not know how many e-mails the office receives. The Ombudsman is snowed under.

The additional staffing provided for in the Bill is welcome but we want to ensure those staff are sufficient. Will the Minister make a statement on this?

The Minister stated the primary purpose of the Bill is to extend the Ombudsman's remit. I acknowledge it represents the most significant extension of the Ombudsman's powers in more than 25 years. I thank the Minister for this because the citizens need the Office of the Ombudsman.

The Bill is to extend the remit of the office to a range of bodies, including higher education bodies. The Bill updates some of the provisions contained in the Ombudsman Act 1980 and affords to public bodies certain new powers and obligations. I will not say any more about this because the Minister referred to this in his speech.

There is a provision in the Bill stating powers must be consistent with resources. This ought to be written into every Bill because one cannot go wild and must always operate within resources. The Minister should have a good look at the resources of the Ombudsman's office and ensure they are consistent with the provisions in the Bill. We must cut our cloth according to economic need.

A committee of the Houses of the Oireachtas is to have a role. Which committee has the Minister in mind? I refer to the provision to allow the office to make a general recommendation.

I commend the Minister who is bringing our legislation into line with the freedom of information legislation. It is welcomed by citizens. We hear a lot about openness, transparency and responsibility but this is giving great powers. The Ombudsman will now have the power to bring a case to the High Court if not given the required information. This is brilliant because the Ombudsman's hands were tied behind her back previously. One hit a brick wall and went nowhere. The amendment in this regard is very welcome. I thank the Minister for introducing transparency and openness. A reference to transparency and openness is now a cliché but the Bill puts these principles into action.