I am very pleased to join you this morning to open this Conference on the special occasion of the 10th anniversary of your 1st Annual Conference. I am intrigued by the theme of your conference “Reputation Management in the Age of the Digital”.
It won’t surprise you to know that we politicians are somewhat obsessed with reputation management. When you strip away every other consideration of policy successes and failures, highs and lows of your time in Government, and you approach an individual voter to seek his support, all you have is your reputation – you’re saying you can trust me to represent your interests with integrity.
The members of the Institute are no different. Whatever your past achievements or the competitiveness of your rates, if one’s reputation has been sullied in some way, pitching business to clients becomes an uphill struggle.
But neither you nor I can afford to ignore the opportunities afforded by the social media and other digital communications if we want to effectively communicate with those sections of the population that are of importance to us, particularly the younger generation.
Managing the challenge of using social media and other digital communications while retaining some degree of control over the message is not easy. And the pace of change in this area is incredible. You have no sooner mastered the intricacies of one form of social media before those in the know are networking on an entirely different platform.
Yet, we could overestimate the potential here too.
We need to bear in mind too that communication via social media faces the same challenge as faces more traditional channels. What you say is as important as how you say it or the medium you use. What it does do is rapidly increase the speed of communication. For many years we have been dealing with the issued posed by the 24/7 news environment. Social media has now transformed further that transformation. Comment, almost by definition is immediate and reactive. The need for the reflective and the considered is even more important against that backdrop. In a famous speech towards the end of his tenure as Prime Minister Tony Blair addressed the issue of how the 24/7 news cycle had changed attitudes towards politics and political reporting. We have seen in famous incident here how social media impacted upon our presidential race. We are yet to consider though how social media is changing our perception of politics at a deeper level.
I wonder too whether communicating your message through social media is not especially well suited to the public service environment. For example, social media outlets such as facebook and twitter require instant reaction and constant news feed if they are to be effective. When we use these new media, we do so to communicate our old message - the traditional public service approach of facts being researched and distilled, a brief being prepared and submitted through the hierarchical structure. I am not convinced that we are wrong to do so either.
True public service and the public service retains a responsibility to be accurate and fair in all its dealings with the public. But no more than any other business seeking to get its message out to the public, this is a challenge we’ll have to grapple with over the coming months and years, primarily how to reconcile those public service responsibilities with the instant demands of the digital age and the risk of getting left behind by failure to engage.
And this is the nub of the issue - reputations can be damaged in an instant by the release of a thoughtless comment or an inaccurate fact, such is the speed of an issue “going viral”. I await with interest the results of your deliberations as to how best to marry the competing challenges of “speed of response” and the retention of some semblance of control over the message.
ICT and eGovernment:
But despite those challenges, I am pleased to say that the public service is continuing to explore ways to embrace media technology in its approach to service delivery. We are looking at innovative ways of delivering non-core public services to reduce costs, increase flexibility and allow Public Service organisations to focus on their core activities.
The effective use of eGovernment and ICT in the public service will be particularly critical in this regard. The public service will use new technologies in imaginative ways to improve public service delivery. For example, the
www.gov.ie central government portal now facilitates access to over 300 public services online, with more to be added over time. The potential here to personalize contact between the citizens and the state is enormous.
Cloud computing will also be utilized to meet public service ICT needs in the years ahead. We also have a strong focus on the new Public Services Card which will facilitate easier access to Government services.
Last week, I published a new eGovernment strategy, which will ensure that Ireland will be in a position to benefit from the opportunities offered by new and existing information technologies to deliver public services faster, better and more efficiently to citizens and businesses.
Public Sector Reform:
I’d like to take the opportunity this morning to give you a flavour of what’s currently happening in relation to public service reform.
It is probably fair to say that previous public service reform initiatives have not delivered as much as expected, despite successes in organisations such as the Office of the Revenue Commissioners, Social Protection and many others. In the past, uncertainty about who was responsible for the public service and its reform was a major problem, with public service management and reform being spread across two departments and a certain “disconnect” existing between spending and reform.
I believe that the establishment of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform was a clear statement of the importance of the reform agenda. We now have an opportunity to drive the implementation of the many elements of the public service reform programme in a new way by integrating our approaches to reform and expenditure, and by ensuring that progress and performance is measured and enhanced in a strategic and coordinated manner.
Public Service Reform Plan:
By 2015, it is expected to achieve a planned reduction of 37,500 staff, or 12%, since 2008. Indeed, we have already seen a reduction of more than 30,000 since then. In this context, a key objective of the reform programme must be to continue to provide important public services, notwithstanding the substantial reduction in public service numbers and resources.
On 17th November last we launched the comprehensive Public Service Reform Plan, which outlined key commitments and actions for change across the Public Service.
The Reform Plan set out five main areas for reform. These are:
· Placing customer service at the core of everything we do;
· Maximising new and innovative service delivery channels;
· Radically reducing our costs to drive better value for money;
· Leading, Organising and Working in new ways; and
· A strong focus on implementation and delivery.
The structures and processes to oversee implementation have now been put in place.
The Reform Programme is being driven by the Cabinet Committee on Public Service Reform, and this work is supported by high-level groups of senior officials. Implementation is being monitored by the Reform and Delivery Office in my Department. Individual Departments and major Offices have also established Change Delivery Teams, which will work closely with the Reform and Delivery Office.
Culture Change and Communication:
We also need to focus on cultural change, just as much as on organisational change.
Culture is perhaps the most difficult thing to manage in any system, but it is also often the most important factor too. Changing attitudes - to embrace a more open, flexible and service-centred form of public service - is the key to reform. But this will not happen by accident. We must put in place the structures and processes to empower public servants to assume ownership of the change process.
We have a vision of a high-performing public service that works together to achieve value for money and quality public services that meet the needs of our community.
We must communicate this vision, and the key messages of change, to the public and to business customers, as well as to public servants themselves.
The vast majority of public servants are hard-working and dedicated, with a real commitment to public service. And I am convinced that they want, and will embrace, change. We must provide them with the tools and the leadership to make that change happen.
We need to ensure that leaders at all levels are equipped and empowered to meet their business and service objectives. We will be a leaner and more efficient Public Service. But we must also be more flexible and more outcomes-focused.
Citizens are at the very centre of the reform programme, and it is also important that they know the efforts being made to ensure that their services are delivered as
efficiently and effectively as possible. Citizens and business customers expect more now from the public service than ever before. We have to meet these demands on a much tighter budget - but it is my belief that it can be done. It can be done by being flexible, it can be done through clever allocation of resources, and it can be done through leading, organising and working in new ways.
We must also be open to good ideas for reform, from any source. Indeed, the Government’s Public Service Reform Plan was informed by the public consultation undertaken as part of the Comprehensive Review of Expenditure, and we have had a series of consultations on the issue of reform with Oireachtas committees and other stakeholders.
We fully accept that we do not and cannot know everything that is happening in every part of the public service. We will listen to those who do know, and who are willing to make a contribution to the opportunities and challenges that we now face.
The Public Service is going through a level of change unseen since the foundation of the State. This is not always easy for some people but we must realise that there is no alternative. We have an obligation to the users of public services, which of course includes all of us in some way, as well as an obligation to future generations.
Regulation of lobbyists:
Given the audience present here today I know that there will be great interest in particular in one specific aspect of an extensive programme of political reform contained in the Programme for Government - the proposed establishment of a register of lobbyists and rules concerning the conduct of lobbying. Delivery of this commitment is critical to improve openness and transparency in government and public affairs.
As the PRII has stated in its recent comprehensive submission to my Department on the lobbying issue “in a democratic society, it is entirely appropriate that organisations could and should have a series of engagements and dialogue with decision-makers at a political level”. In my view, lobbyists provide necessary input and feedback into the political system by communicating to government the views and concerns of people. Lobbying can be a conduit for good examples, best practice and different perspectives. In the political environment I recognise that everybody with a view on how public policy should be formulated is a lobbyist. Everybody should be entitled to lobby but it is only proper in the interests of transparency that we recgonise the differential power of those who lobby professionally, particularly in pursuit of changes of commercial sensitivity, and the day to day lobbying that is the essence of politics.
Therefore regulating those involved in lobbying, the Government does not want to obstruct this flow of information but to ensure greater transparency thereby strengthening public confidence in politics, increasing the accountability of decision makers and putting public policy making under closer scrutiny. This will benefit all stakeholders: citizens, lobbyists and legislators.
I don’t think is unreasonable to point out here that lobbying per se has a reputational or brand problem. I’m sure this will not come as news to a profession that frequently breaks this kind of bad news, when necessary, to its clients. The professions are particularly susceptible to the single bad apple syndrome. The legal profession, the accountancy profession and of course the political profession have all suffered reputational damage in recent years despite most of their members being committed to high standards. In light of the recent tribunal report I think it is fair to say that your own profession has been similarly affected. I am pleased to say that PRII has reocgnised this problem and has indicated that it is willing to work with us to put in place structures that will address these issues. While you can’t legislate to ensure good and ethical behaviour per se, you can legislate to encourage an environment where it is more likely to place.
Despite the benefits that lobbying can bring to the political process, the negative connotations associated with lobbying in “private” and the consequent lack of public trust in politics cannot be denied. Ensuring transparency and accountability in decision making through the introduction of effective standards, rules and procedures is necessary to restore this public trust. Public expectations around accountability, transparency and honesty in politics have not always been met as is evidenced by the findings of the Mahon Tribunal Report. That report made a number of recommendations regarding lobbying again highlighting this issue.
The importance of introducing regulations for lobbying activity is supported by the Organisation for Co-operation and Development (OECD) who have stated that “…a sound framework for transparency in lobbying is crucial to safeguard the public interest, promote a level playing field for business and avoid capture by vocal interest groups…”.
My Department has reviewed international approaches to the regulation of lobbyists to help inform the design of national proposals to meet the Government’s commitments. In order to further inform the Department’s work, submissions were invited from interested parties on key issues relating to options for the design, structure and implementation of an effective regulatory system for lobbying in Ireland. Approximately 60 groups and organisations including the PRII submitted views to my Department. A number of these organisations, again including the PRII, have subsequently been invited to meet with officials from my Department to further discuss the issues around this topic. My Department is currently preparing a policy paper taking account of the submissions received, subsequent meetings and drawing on the research undertaken. I intend to publish this paper to communicate the main elements of my approach to the development of legislation. Following publication of the paper a conference will be held, probably in early summer, to provide a further opportunity for interested stakeholders to contribute to the development of policy in this area.
You may be aware also that the Government has adopted a somewhat different approach to the development of this type of legislation involving the submission of the general scheme of the Bill to the relevant Oireachtas committee for discussion. I am minded to do the same with this Bill. I think both the profession of lobbyists and lobbying itself would benefit from an open discussion of the process so that a process of demystification can take place. What it is lobbyists do and not do is due a public airing.
Conclusion:
Clearly, as highlighted in the submissions received by my Department and published on its website, there are very significant and complex issues to be addressed in moving forward on this initiative.
I am committed to working closely in an open and transparent manner with all parties with an interest in the design and structure of an effective regulatory regime. As the professional body representing those working in public affairs I strongly recognise the significance of regulation to the future development of the profession and the expertise and perspective that the profession can contribute to the development of legislative proposals along with other stakeholders.
It is important to emphasise, as I have indicated, that I am committed to advancing these proposals in the course of this year. The pace at which the process proceeds must of course allow for appropriate analysis, consultation and consideration of options for a regime that works and meets the Government’s objectives and expectations for transparency in decision making on public policy.
I wish you all an enjoyable and productive conference.
Thank you.
ENDS