Albert Dolan (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

329. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if his Department has access to data that identifies the top contractors by total payments received from public procurement contracts within the State, broken down by year; if this information is collected centrally or if it must be sourced from individual contracting authorities, listing the top suppliers by total payments made to them for each of the past five years, in tabular form. [7388/25]

Albert Dolan (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

330. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if suppliers awarded public contracts across different contracting authorities are assigned a unique universal identifier to track total payments received across all State bodies; if not, the reason a standardised identifier is not in use; and if his Department has considered introducing a centralised supplier tracking system to improve transparency and oversight of State expenditure on procurement. [7389/25]

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 329 and 330 together.

The questions asked by the Deputy relate to the payment processes and financial systems of individual Contracting Authorities. My Department does not have a role in these processes.

Albert Dolan (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

331. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if his Department uses any metrics or evaluation systems to monitor whether suppliers successfully deliver on public procurement contracts they are awarded; if so, to provide details on the way supplier performance is assessed across contracting authorities; and if not, the reason supplier performance is not systematically tracked at a national level. [7390/25]

Albert Dolan (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

332. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the way his Department becomes aware of cost overruns in public procurement contracts; if cost overruns are centrally monitored, audited, or formally reported to his Department by contracting authorities; and if not, to clarify whether contracting authorities are required to notify his Department when contract costs exceed the original award value. [7391/25]

Albert Dolan (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

333. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the datasets and systems his Department uses to track public procurement spending. [7392/25]

Albert Dolan (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

334. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the way his Department assesses value for money in procurement without a centralised tracking system given his Department does not track final contract costs against the contract award value; and the enforcement mechanisms that exist to address cost overruns and procurement inefficiencies. [7393/25]

Albert Dolan (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

335. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the way his Department ensures procurement transparency, efficiency, and accountability without a national system to compare contracted and actual costs; the metrics or KPIs it uses to evaluate procurement performance; and the way it fulfils its role in National Development Plan oversight. [7394/25]

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 331, 332, 333, 334 and 335 together.

The questions asked by the Deputy are matters of contract management. Individual Contracting Authorities manage the expenditure incurred on their contracts, in their relevant financial systems. Contract performance is managed by the individual Contracting Authorities, in line with the terms laid out in their individual contracts with suppliers. My Department does not have a role in these processes.

With regard to National Development Plan oversight, as Minister for Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform I am responsible for setting the overall capital allocations across Departments. The responsibility for the management and delivery of individual investment projects, within the allocations agreed under the National Development Plan (NDP), rests with the individual sponsoring Department in each case.

My Department’s wider Vote Sections also support delivery of the National Development Plan through their day-to-day oversight of spending and delivery by sectoral Departments, including the sanctioning of capital spending, and providing policy advice on Government and sectoral Department policies.

Albert Dolan (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

336. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform further to Parliamentary Question No. 404 of 22 January 2025, if his Department actively monitors compliance with the requirement to publish purchase orders over €20,000; if all oversight responsibility is entirely delegated to the Information Commissioner; and if so, if his Department receives regular reports or updates from the Commissioner on compliance levels. [7395/25]

Albert Dolan (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

337. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform further to Parliamentary Question No. 404 of 22 January 2025, if his Department has ever communicated with the Information Commissioner regarding non-compliance issues related to the publication of purchase orders over €20,000; and if so, to provide details of any recommendations or actions taken as a result. [7396/25]

Albert Dolan (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

339. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform further to Parliamentary Question No. 404 of 22 January 2025, the reason certain public bodies are able to produce quarterly prompt payment reports while failing to publish purchase orders over €20,000 on the same schedule; and if this discrepancy indicates a lack of enforcement or a failure to standardise reporting obligations across public bodies. [7398/25]

Albert Dolan (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

340. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform further to Parliamentary Question No. 404 of 22 January 2025, the way instances of non-compliance with the publication of purchase orders over €20,000 are identified; if compliance is proactively monitored; if not, if it is only addressed when complaints are made; and if he will provide data on the number of non-compliance cases identified in the past five years. [7399/25]

Albert Dolan (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

341. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform further to Parliamentary Question No. 404 of 22 January 2025, if any penalties or corrective actions have ever been applied to public bodies that failed to publish purchase orders over €20,000 as required. [7400/25]

Albert Dolan (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

342. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform further to Parliamentary Question No. 404 of 22 January 2025, if his Department plans to introduce legislative or policy changes to address the gaps in monitoring and enforcement of purchase order publication requirements; and if not, the reason no such measures are being considered. [7401/25]

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 336, 337, 339, 340, 341 and 342 together.

FOI applies to a highly diverse range of approximately 450 organisations across the civil and public sector. This ranges from large bodies such as the HSE, to entities with only a small number of staff. In this context, the Freedom of Information Act 2014 is necessarily structured around a devolved model. In the first instance, it is a matter for the Head of the body, as defined in the legislation, to put in place the necessary structures to support the FOI function, according to the particular circumstances of the individual body.

One of these functions is creating and maintaining a publication scheme under section 8 of the 2014 Act, having regard to the model scheme and guidance published by this Department. This model includes the publication of purchase orders valued at over €20,000, or €100,000 in the case of the HSE. It should be noted that this mechanism is distinct from other administrative arrangements relating to purchase orders.

The FOI model relies on independent oversight and review. This role is reserved to the Information Commissioner, who is independent in the performance of his functions in practice and as a matter of law as set out at section 43(3) of the 2014 Act. In the specific case of the publication scheme, section 8(10) of the 2014 Act sets out the Commissioner's role.

The Department cannot encroach upon the Commissioner's statutory role by purporting to review or monitor compliance with this section. Moreover, it would be inappropriate for the Department to purport to direct the Commissioner in the performance of his functions, given his independence in law and in practice. It also follows that this Department does not hold statistics or other information of the type sought by the Deputy. If the Commissioner identifies issues in this regard, any steps that might follow from this are a matter for the Head of the public body concerned.

A comprehensive review of the FOI legislation has been undertaken, with the final review report to be published in due course. In the course of this process, submissions were sought from public bodies, stakeholders across all sectors, and the general public, in relation to a range of themes. The themes included possible measures that could taken to encourage and promote proactive publication of records, including in relation to the section 8 publication scheme.

Once the report has been published, consideration will be given to whether updates to legislation and practice are required to ensure that the FOI regime continues to deliver on its goals of openness, transparency and accountability of public bodies.

Albert Dolan (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

338. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform further to Parliamentary Question No. 404 of 22 January 2025, the reason his Department cannot compile a definitive list of all public bodies subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2014; if he will provide details on any challenges or barriers preventing such a list from being maintained; and if he will confirm the way the Government ensures that all required bodies comply with their reporting obligations if no formal register exists. [7397/25]

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Freedom of Information Act was substantially reviewed and updated in 2014. Among the steps taken was a significant change to the method for determining whether FOI applies to a particular entity. The 1997 Act had taken a prescriptive approach, whereby FOI applied to an entity only if it was specified in a schedule to the Act, updated from time to time by way of Statutory Instrument. Accordingly, at that time there was a definitive and conclusive list available of all bodies to which the legislation applied.

The 2014 Act takes a different approach. Instead of a definitive list, it instead sets out criteria at section 6(1) by which it is to be determined whether or not FOI applies. If an entity meets the criteria, it will be subject to FOI by default. This had the effect of making a large number of additional bodies subject to the legislation. In addition, it means that where a new body is created that meets one of the criteria, most notably where a body is created by or under an enactment, it will become subject to FOI without the need for specific provision in the legislation or being prescribed separately.

This approach makes it a matter in the first instance for an entity to form its own view on whether or not FOI applies to it. The position can be complex in relation to smaller entities that were not established by statute. Disputes may arise between an individual and an entity and an individual who wishes to make a request and the entity concerned as to whether FOI applies. In such cases, the matter may be reviewed by the Information Commissioner, and, if necessary, finally resolved by the Minister for Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform. In addition, instances may have arisen where bodies have acted on an assumption that the legislation applied to them, where in fact they did not meet the criteria.

In general, however, this mechanism has been largely successful in meeting its goals. This change expanded the scope of the FOI legislation and it applies with certainty to core public sector bodies, such as Departments and other statutory entities, including all of the entities that were covered by the 1997 Act, insofar as they are still in existence. However, due to the structure of the 2014 Act, it is not possible to compile a fully exhaustive and definitive list of all the bodies that are subject to FOI.

A comprehensive review of the FOI legislation has been undertaken, with the final review report to be published in due course. In the course of this process, submissions were sought from public bodies, stakeholders across all sectors, and the general public, in relation to a range of themes. The themes included the mechanism for designating whether FOI applies to an entity, including on whether it may be preferable to revert to a prescriptive list, or to otherwise deal with the issues that have arisen in practice.

Once the report has been published, consideration will be given to whether updates to legislation and practice are required to ensure that the FOI regime continues to deliver on its goals of openness, transparency and accountability of public bodies.