The EU's policy of rigorous, independent evaluation of its funding programmes is an important model for domestic spending, writes Frances Ruane.
'It's the economy, stupid!" is the famous Democratic Party slogan that yielded such success for Bill Clinton in two US presidential elections. In Ireland, will the economy be the dominant theme of the next general election or will services, or more particularly service delivery, be the focus of the electorate's scrutiny?
Signs from the recent local elections suggest that voters are increasingly evaluating Ireland's spectacular economic growth, and the corresponding growth in the State's coffers, not only in terms of what they have personally gained (in terms of greater take-home pay and lower taxes) but also what the State is delivering in the way of services.
Put simply, the electorate believes, not unreasonably, that significant levels of economic growth should also lead to the further development and improvement of key public services. Transport, health and education are popularly cited as the top priorities for further State expenditure.
However, the electorate is becoming increasingly confused, and perhaps somewhat disillusioned as to why the undoubted growth in expenditure in these areas is not yielding the expected level of benefit.
Health is the most obvious case in point - the Government has poured hundreds of millions into the health system, without the commensurate increase in services. Why is this the case?
The recent Brennan and Hanly reports strongly suggest that increasing the flow of money into the system is not, and never will be, enough if we do not reform the design and delivery of the health services.
This message is also true for many other public services.
Herein lies the dilemma for Irish politicians - if, for the next election, it is a case of "It's service delivery stupid!" (or "It's the services, stupid!"), then the promise to pump more funds into services in the expectation that this will yield the desired quantity and quality of services is not going to wash with the voters. Voters will want to be assured of better service delivery if votes are to be cast and won.
Is it reasonable to place our expectations for improved services solely on the shoulders of the Government?
It must not be forgotten that the Government's key role is to determine priorities and allocate funds among competing claims. While it may have views on the delivery of services, whether publicly provided, outsourced from the private sector or provided jointly by public and private sectors, the actual delivery of services is ultimately the responsibility of the public service and in particular, the civil service.
Herein lies the problem for the politicians - do they have a public and civil service system capable of delivering what the voters seek?
The history of the Irish economy over the past 30 years should make us all suspect that we may not have such a system. Ireland Inc almost went bankrupt in the 1980s and its public sector experienced a crisis with the loss, without replacement, of many key employees. This in itself should not have severely undermined the system, but promised reforms are slower than expected, remuneration systems continue to reflect only weakly individual effort in contrast to the private sector, and there are questions as to the system's capacity to manage the rapid technological, financial, regulatory and social changes impacting on the economy.
This is not unusual - countries much larger than Ireland struggle to find the skills needed in the public service to manage innovation, regulation and the myriad of other demands; why should we be any different? Indeed, we might be expected to face even greater challenges because of our history.
The perceived failure to deliver services poses problems for politicians as they realistically cannot, and arguably should not, get into the detail of service delivery.
While the Minister for Education, Mr Dempsey, understandably got involved in sorting out a schools problem in Limerick, is there anyone who would argue that this is an appropriate task for a Minister for Education? Rather it is a clear indication of a systems failure in his Department. Collectively, Government Ministers need to foster a public service system that can deliver services to a much higher standard than at present.
The fair and efficient delivery of public services poses serious challenges, especially as the Irish policy system remains disjointed. Clearly, the implementation of the existing programmes for reform and modernisation within the public sector must be supported and resourced. But to achieve the desired efficiency and quality in public service delivery we must clearly also commit to the evaluation and revision, as necessary, of policies and services.
However, Ireland has little tradition of planning and evaluation and indeed, there is often a "fear" of revisiting and revising legislation or service programmes lest the revisions be seen to indicate failure and possibly put the relevant programme budgets at risk. The recent introduction of evaluation into major programmes is directly attributable to European Commission requirements rather than any overwhelming commitment on the part of the public system.
But the benefits of evaluation are increasingly recognised at a national level with calls from the NESC for the establishment of an evaluation culture, following which the Irish Evaluation Network was set up with Government support.
To ensure that evaluation contributes to efficient service delivery and is not seen as simply a validation of existing actions, it must operate to appropriate standards. Crucial to this is the absence of "fear" that a critical evaluation could mean the automatic withdrawal of a budget.
Those who evaluate programmes must be independent of those promoting the programmes and their priority must be for a good-quality evaluation and not for an evaluation that simply pleases the promoters. Where private-sector consultants are involved, this latter issue is vital and points to the need for high professional standards among evaluators. Ireland needs to get to a point where its evaluators are answerable in the same way as its best accountants. Evaluation can thereby contribute not only to better services but also make services and public expenditure more accountable to voters.
Prof Frances Ruane, Policy Institute, Trinity College Dublin