Analysis: the current public administration system is not greatly unlike that which the State inherited upon independence a century ago
Robert Watt received a lot of attention when the secretary-general of the Department of Health recently appeared at the Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, and Taoiseach. The highest paid civil servant in the State was there to discuss the abortive secondment of former Chief Medical Officer Dr. Tony Holohan to Trinity College Dublin. Watt was appointed to Health in April 2021 having previously served as secretary-general of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform since 2011.
Watt's appearance prompted a lot of commentry afterwards about the civil service and its administrative role. It should be noted that the civil service is primarily accountable to the minister who leads their department and not to the Houses of the Oireachtas. Apolitical servants of the state, their role is set out in the Ministers and Secretaries Act 1924, which continued the 'Westminster' traditions of an apolitical civil service inherited from Britain.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Radio 1's Today With Claire Byrne, Hugh O'Connell from the Irish Independent assesses Robert Watt's performance at the Oireachtas Finance Committee
The Act established line ministers as being the legal head of their department, or 'corporation sole', responsible for all acts and any omissions of their department and its civil servants. It is to the minister that each department's civil servants are formally answerable. While civil servants are allowed in some non-Westminster systems to hold active political affiliations to the parties in power (such as in Germany, for example) senior Irish civil servants, like their British counterparts, are expressly prohibited from carrying political affiliations and must advise governments impartially without preference or favour.
In previous eras, the apolitical nature of the civil service and the singular responsibility of the minister for all acts of her (or, more frequently, his) department extended to an anonymity of civil servants, although this has evolved in practical terms in recent decades. In turn, if something goes wrong, the minister is responsible by default. As they were forced to divide their time between matters of policy making and the localised nature of maintaining an electoral base, the political masters of departments routinely delegated the running of their departments to their department secretary for the first 70 years of the state.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Archives, Mike Burns reports for RTÉ News in 1967 on calls to transform the civil service to be a more efficient organisation able to adapt to new circumstances
This was codified in law under the Public Service Management Act of 1997. This formally delegated responsibility for the administration of the department to the secretary-general following on from formally becoming their department’s accounting officer under earlier legislation. At the same time, they remain accountable to the elected head of the department, the minister, who still retains corporation sole.
This formalisation of responsibility fundamentally did not change the direct reporting relationship between minister and civil servant, however; secretaries-general appear before Oireachtas committees representing their minister, except when they appear before the Committee of Public Accounts (PAC) as accounting officer of their department, in which case they speak in their own capacity. That the civil servant's primary accountability remains to their minister in relation to committee appearances is illustrated in their preclusion from discussing government policy beyond publicised fact.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Archives, Orla O'Donnell reports for RTÉ News in 2001 about Taoiseach Bertie Ahern launcing the first ever gender equality policy for the civil service
Civil servants normally appear before committees relating to matters for which there is a statutory reporting requirement to that committee, as is the case when the PAC scrutinises the reports of the accounting officer. In recent years, as in the recent case of Watt, Oireachtas committees have at times called civil servants to address issues that may involve financial aspects, but tend to be centred on issues of policy that the committee believes the civil servant played an independent role in.
An element of informal convention and mutual understanding is therefore required between committees seeking the appearance of civil servants and the civil servants themselves in facilitating appearances relating to their individual role in matters beyond scheduled appearances. A very public conflict can erupt where there is a difference of interpretation of these statutory accountability responsibilities.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ News, top civil servants in Ireland and the UK discuss Brexit at the Centre for Cross Border Studies seminar in Dundalk in 2019
Such a controversy occured in recent years when a civil servant from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, who was assigned to the board of the new children's hospital project, did not appear before the committee when invited to do so to discuss the overspend on the project. The department argued that his presence on the board was in a capacity that was not subject to statutory reporting requirements, further highlighting the jurisdictional blur that can occur in relation to the committee’s entitlement to call upon civil servants.
At the same time, Oireachtas committees are not responsible for the censure or dismissal of civil servants. As a minister is either a T.D. or (rarely) a senator, they hold themselves accountable to parliament for their department and its staff as a member of the Oireachtas.
The civil service mirrors our wider system of government with a strong central executive that holds predominance over parliament
The capacity and scope of Oireachtas committees have also been challenged in recent decades by constitutional law cases in the courts which have served to curtail their scope. Most notable of these was the Abbeylara judgement, a 2002 Supreme Court ruling which precluded Oireachtas committees from making findings of fact that impugn the good name of individuals who were not members of the Oireachtas.
A challenge of similar magnitude presented itself in the case of former Rehab charity chief executive Angela Kerins against the Oireachtas on grounds that statements made in the PAC damaged her reputation. Although subsequently rejected, the case raised the spectre of future committee proceedings being challenged through the courts.
Overall, the civil service system in its fundamental structure and traditions is not greatly unlike that which the state inherited upon independence a century ago. It mirrors the nature of our wider system of government with a strong central executive that holds predominance over parliament. The civil service's main line of accountability remains more to its internal protocols and the traditional statutory relationship to the minister than to parliament. Within the wider context of constraints on the Oireachtas committee system, though, this places obvious constraints on the external accountability relationship.
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not represent or reflect the views of RTÉ
