I would like to move away from what has been dominating Leaders' Questions to an issue that is causing a great deal of concern for many people in both rural and urban Ireland. That concern has been brought about because of the way in which Citizens Information Services, CIS, has been dismantled because of decisions taken by the Citizens Information Board, CIB. CIS comprises 113 local information services and 100 outreach services. Services link clients with Free Legal Advice Centres, FLAC, Women's Aid and migrant services and address a wide range of issues such as employment, family law, tax and finance. They also source translation services because CIS is used by many of our new communities. In one year alone, there were more than 600,000 callers nationally. In the north east and north west of Dublin's inner city services engaged with 16,000 residents and the figure for Dublin overall was 40,000. Those availing of services have difficulty in dealing with Departments and agencies, local authorities and in understanding Government schemes and services.

CIS has proved to be a trusted intermediary between the public and the State. Staff have been efficient and professional. One of the service's strengths has been their independence but recently the CIB decided to put in place a restructuring implementation committee. The changes it proposed have led to a great deal of disquiet about adverse effects. The concerns of CIS were outlined to the CIB, but they were ignored. The National Association of Citizens Information Services, NACIS, together with the Money Advice and Budgeting Service, MABS, national management forum and managers network, brought these concerns to the Joint Committee on Social Protection. Its report concluded that the restructuring plan was "flawed and ill-considered", but it was ignored by the CIB. A motion was passed in the House by a large majority calling for a halt to the proposed restructuring, but it was also ignored by the CIB.

The reasons given by the board for restructuring were that it would lead to efficiencies, save money and improve services, but there was no evidence to support this. It will cost between €8 million and €9 million to dismantle the current system and that money is going to private consultancy firms in accountancy and law. One aspect of the restructuring will create another tier of regional managers and boards which will lead to additional costs. With regard to efficiencies, the organisation has been efficient. The restructuring will damage services, with some having to close. Staff and volunteers are demoralised and demotivated by the total disregard shown for their concerns and the determination of the CIB to bulldoze its way through them. The restructuring goes against everything the service stands for, especially its independence. The joint committee asked that there be a new, inclusive and transparent consultation process. I am seeking such a process before further damage is done to a service that is efficient and professional.

I thank the Deputy for raising the issue. There was an almost five-year consultation process before the decision to reorganise and restructure CIS was taken. This is about reorganising governance and providing for more efficiencies, not about reducing services. There will be a smaller number of governance bodies, but the services will not change. Many organisations go through such reviews. It is not about reducing services but about making sure we have a better governance model, better decision-making and more consistency throughout the country in performance and delivery for clients and so on. I agree with the Deputy that CIS provides important services. I have witnessed how helpful, efficient and informative staff can be. These are important services which we are not downgrading. We have implemented a series of recommendations following a long consultation process. When governance is changed in an organisation, some people will not be happy because it changes their role in the decision-making processes and so on. We are trying to provide better outcomes for people working in the CIB and those who rely on its work. I am told that a number of months ago there was a significant meeting in Kilmainham which was attended by 800 individuals in the CIB and that there was no evidence of demoralisation among staff and so on. It is important to give a clear signal that this is not about reducing services. The review is trying to improve services and make changes in the governance model in how management, decisions and governance happen within the CIB. While these aspects have reduced in scale, it is about better governance and delivery by the CIB which, by and large, does a good job.

Nobody disagrees with better delivery or a review, but at a recent meeting in the audiovisual room volunteers and staff disputed what the Tánaiste has outlined. The Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General has said nothing which suggests it had concerns about the existing structure, although there may have been an issue about internal capacity. I ask the Tánaiste to read the transcript of the meeting at which CIB representatives appeared before the Joint Committee on Social Protection because he will see the disdain they had for concerns Oireachtas Members raised with them. CIS saves money because it reduces the need for costly processes such as appeals, employment hearings and court cases. Staff work directly with people experiencing disadvantage and there is a huge voluntary input, which saves a great deal of money. They also provide unbiased, impartial feedback for public authorities. CIS recently received a gold star award for service excellence from the European Foundation for Quality Management. It has also been part of a European project as a role model for Balkan countries in respect of its independence and transparency as a civil society organisation. Now it has go back and state what it has been doing has been dismantled. I am concerned by the CIB's total disregard for CIS, the authoritarian way it deals with concerns expressed by Oireachtas Members and staff and the way in which all of these issues are being addressed. The staff and volunteers deserve much better from the board.

In reply to a recent parliamentary question on the issue the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection said:

The CIB have assured me that there will be no job losses, no diminution of existing services, no closure of services and no disruption to services. The rationale for the CIB's decision is to improve its governance arrangements in accordance with the Code of Practice for the Governance of State Bodies and to meet the requirements of the Comptroller and Auditor General.

An implementation advisory group is overseeing implementation of the new changes and so on. Of course, the Government wants to listen and hear about it if there are issues in the implementation of the new arrangements. That is what the House is for. We raise questions to make sure supports for the many people who face disadvantage, and receive assistance and support through CIS, are delivered to the fullest extent possible. However, it is also important to acknowledge that when governance is changed and the structure of decision-making bodies changes, it sometimes creates friction. Our job is to assess whether it is working for the people who rely on the services and those working in them. That is what the Minister will do.