Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To ask the Minister for Finance the progress made within his Department on phasing out the use of LoCall 1890 numbers that can be extremely expensive when dialled from mobile phones and introducing 076 number, which generally included in tariff bundles provided by most mobile network operators and are charged at the same rate as national calls, in view of the fact that the number of mobile phones exceed the number of landlines; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14484/13]

Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In response to the Deputy’s question the CMOD Division of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform provides ICT and telephony services to my Department on a shared services basis. In 2011, CMOD reached an agreement with ComReg to assign a specific block of 200,000 076 numbers to the public service, which it now manages and allocates. Additionally, CMOD architected the Government Networks infrastructure to accept and deliver 076 numbers to anywhere in the country. It also issued a detailed Advisory Note to public bodies explaining how 1890 LoCall numbers work and the charges associated with them, the issues this can have for mobile phone users, how the 076 number range works and how it provides cost savings for both customers and public bodies. It advised public bodies to move to 076 numbers as soon as possible. While both Departments use one shared LoCall 1890 number to facilitate landline calls from outside the Dublin dial-code area, it has also implemented a number of 076 numbers for use from both mobile and landlines for a range of services and units.

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To ask the Minister for Finance if he has considered the use of, or implemented, integrated voice response systems in his Department's phone systems or in the phone systems of agencies within his remit; if the staff and salary cost savings which might arise have been assessed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14500/13]

Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In relation to my Department, the use all technologies including integrated or interactive voice response (IVR) systems have been examined. The decision taken has been not to use the IVR systems because the nature of the work does not lend itself well to an IVR-based approach. Bodies under the aegis of my Department have provided me with the following information.

Office of the Revenue Commissioners

I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that they have successfully deployed a large number of interactive voice recognition (IVR) systems within their operations. In particular, an IVR system was put in place for Revenue’s PAYE 1890 telephone service as part of a comprehensive upgrade implemented over the period 2004/2005. The PAYE 1890 service has the highest volume of telephone contacts handled by Revenue and in 2011 some 1.23 million calls were answered on the service. Shortly after the PAYE 1890 deployment, the Collector General’s 1890 telephone system was also re-configured with a similar IVR system to PAYE. Some 228,000 calls were handled through the Collector General’s 1890 telephone service in 2011.

The particular IVR system deployed by Revenue on its PAYE and Collector General’s telephone services is a very sophisticated system in that, in the first instance, a caller is asked to speak their PPS Number or Business Number into the IVR which then captures the number. By collecting the caller’s PPS or Business Number, the call can be routed to the correct Division directly and the Revenue person handling the call is presented on their computer screen with key tax and other information about the caller at the same time that the call is passed to them to answer. The voice capture technology behind the system is highly sophisticated as it manages to gather both the numeric and alpha characters that constitute PPS and Business Numbers within the one message string.

I am further advised that an additional feature of this IVR system is that it facilitates a range of self-service options that the caller can use to get certain services without human intervention, including for example a facility to request the most popular PAYE forms and leaflets or, to request a statement of account in the case of a business. In these cases, the form or statement of account requested is posted to the address associated with the PPS or Business Number that has been collected from the caller via the voice recognition system.

I am advised that Revenue is constantly reviewing developments with regard to IVR systems and other trends in telecommunications with the objective of making the taxpayer’s experience with their telephone services as smooth and efficient as possible and, in seeking to optimise any process efficiencies. In that regard, I understand that the various services and options available to callers that underpin the PAYE 1890 IVR system were re-vamped during 2012 and have been successfully implemented.

In the past four to five years, IVR systems have also been implemented at telephone switch level in a number of Revenue offices around the country. While the PPS number capture is not a feature of these facilities, they provide callers with a list of options to choose from and the call is directed to the desk of a Revenue staff member who will have the specific knowledge required to deal with the particular query. In these offices, because calls are routed directly to staff members, a switch operator is not required to manage the flow of calls. An IVR system has recently been deployed on Revenue’s Local Property Tax Helpline, and, as a matter of policy, Revenue will deploy IVR in its customer facing telephone systems where opportunities arise.

I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that since their major IVR developments have been in place for a number of years, they are not in position to provide the information sought in relation to staff and salary cost savings. However, the Commissioners are satisfied that savings have been achieved from the use of IVR systems and they have also facilitated significant process efficiencies

ReBo (Credit Union Restructuring Board)

The Credit Union Restructuring Board have advised me that voice response systems are available on their phone systems, and that the salary costs savings have not been assessed.

National Treasury Management Agency

The phone system currently in operation within the NTMA has the ability to provide voice activated automation. Voice automation systems are best used where a specific and repeatable service is required e.g. information delivery. As the NTMA does not in its day to day business activities provide these types of services it does not normally use this feature of the system. However, the NTMA has used automated messaging as part of the Eligible Liability Guarantee (ELG) helpline established to answer queries from the public following the liquidation of IBRC and again following the Minister for Finance’s announcement of the ending of the ELG for all new liabilities from 28 March 2013.

The Financial Services Ombudsman’s Bureau

The Financial Services Ombudsman’s Bureau do not have an integrated Voice Response System and they have no plans to install one in the near future.

Office of The Comptroller and Auditor General

The Office of the Comptroller and Auditor Generalhas not implemented such a system as it is not considered that there is sufficient need for it nor would savings arise.