Brendan Griffin (Kerry South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if the Implementation Body for Croke Park 2 will have representation from the private sector as distinct from public sector employers/management; his views on whether the non inclusion of private sector representation would jeopardise the credibility of the Implementation Body; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6594/13]

Brendan Griffin (Kerry South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he has reviewed the methodology used by all Government Departments, in view the lack of clarity that has arisen in the past, in relation to the calculation of savings under the Croke Park Agreement; if he will state the methodology he expects to be employed to calculate savings under Croke Park 2; his further views that the figures given by all Government Departments in relation to savings achieved to date are reliable; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6595/13]

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 310 and 311 together.

The Deputy will be aware that negotiations on an extension to the Public Service Agreement 2010 – 2014 are currently underway aimed at achieving savings of €1billion in the public service pay and pensions bill by end 2015. It would not be appropriate to comment on possible future implementation arrangements whilst those discussions are ongoing.

In regard to the verification of savings under the present agreement, I wish to make a number of points. Firstly, the Implementation Body is required to assess the savings being facilitated under the framework of the Agreement on an annual basis. As part of this annual review process, savings returns are completed and returned to the Body in respect of every sector, Department and Office. These returns are required to be signed off by relevant accounting officers.

Secondly, the Agreement allows for the engagement of external financial advisors to undertake independent verification of reported savings. This involves a review of the methodology, quantification and estimation used by managements to identify savings that have been achieved and savings that will be achieved as a result of agreements reached and initiatives taken.

The Deputy will appreciate that it is not possible, on time and cost grounds to externally evaluate every saving made under the Agreement. Therefore, the approach the Body has taken has been to put forward a number of significant projects each year for external evaluation. This verification process serves as a useful quality assurance check on what is being reported and public service management are aware that progress reported may be subject to such external evaluation.

The Body has carried out two annual reviews to date. Those reviews found that approximately €1.5 billion in savings has been achieved during the first two years of the Agreement, comprising of €810m and €678m in sustainable pay bill and non-pay (efficiency) savings respectively.

Significantly, the external financial accountants engaged under both annual reviews found that, in all cases, the savings reported were reasonable estimates of the savings that have arisen or will arise due to the successful implementation of the projects concerned. I understand that a similar verification exercise is being undertaken for the Body’s third annual review (currently underway).

In regard to the question of private sector representation on the Implementation Body, it is important to point out that the Public Service Agreement is an agreement between the Government, as employer, and its employees, represented by the public service unions. The Implementation Body is, accordingly, comprised of the representatives of the parties to the Agreement – this is provided for under its terms – and so the issue of private sector membership does not arise. However, I understand that the Chair of the Body, who is independent, has briefed private sector interests on a number of occasions on behalf of the Body and is happy to continue to do so. I am satisfied that the Body has approached its task in a thorough, transparent and objective manner, as evidenced by its two Annual Progress Reports published to date.