Phase 1: Demand for policy - tasks

The demand for a policy may come from various sources. For example, a demand may come from:

• a commitment in a Programme for Government document
• EU directives requiring implementation through Irish law
• analysis by officials highlighting a current or future issue, for example, through the use of ‘strategic foresight’ (a structured and systematic way of using ideas about the future to anticipate and better prepare for change)
• public alarm over an issue
• a campaign spearheaded by a group
• evidence of a risk to economic or social stability, or
• the decision of a court

It is useful to consider these demands as falling into the following categories:

• political
• public/civil society
• institutional
• judicial/the Courts

Political

This refers to the demand and expectations for policies, services, or changes from political actors such as:

• government ministers
• legislators
• political parties, and
• supra-national bodies, for example, the European Union

These political actors may make policy and other demands based on their assessment of societal issues. This assessment and the subsequent demands can be expressed in documents such as policy statements, manifestos, and Programmes for Government, or may take the form of a Ministerial request or instruction directed to department officials. Other ways these types of demands are expressed are through parliamentary questions (PQs), budget submissions, Private Members’ Bills, and the work of Oireachtas Committees. The work of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Health, for example, gave rise to the Sláintecare health policy.

Policy imperatives can also emerge from agreements reached or resolutions passed at supra-national political institutions – this includes, in Ireland’s case, the EU, the UN and the OECD. For example, the EU Social Charter, the UN adoption of Sustainable Development Goals, and the OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) approach to corporate taxation, all have significant implications for the development and formation of policy in Ireland. Civil servants must incorporate the provisions of these international agreements in identifying and developing policy initiatives.

Public/civil society

Users of public services, and the people and organisations who are subject to the laws and regulations of the State, expect to have a voice in determining policy – not just through the democratic electoral process but through direct canvassing of policy makers.

In this context the public/civil society comprises:

• individuals
• local communities
• specific group or sectors of society that use public services or are subject to State laws and regulations. For example, young people experiencing mental health difficulties may be users of the state-provided Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). Farmers are subject to state laws regarding the cutting and selling of peat turf
• individual businesses and organisations, and
• community and voluntary organisations that are involved in the delivery of services on behalf of the State (some of which have an advocacy as well as a service delivery role)

Policy demand can be articulated by individuals but is more commonly championed by advocacy or interest groups. In the case of the farming community for example, this might be the Irish Farmers Association. In the case of business interests this might be the Chambers of Commerce. In the case of the Traveller Community this might be Pavee Point. The policy demand, particularly at a local level, can lead people and groups to directly engage with elected representatives.

Administrative/institutional

The Irish civil service is not just a passive advisor on policy issues referred to it from other sources but has a key role in identifying issues that need attention and proactively proposing solutions.

This role can be manifest in specific programmes of work including Strategic Risk Management and Planning, Strategic Foresight exercises, IGEES evaluations, and Value for Money and Impact Reviews. Operational experience within departments can also identify gaps in law or service provision and trigger policy development (see below).

The role of the civil service in articulating and sustaining the case for long-term policy changes and repeatedly restating the need to take action to ensure that it remains on the policy agenda is particularly important. For example, the development of Childcare and Early Learning services can be traced back to the work of some officials in the mid to late 1990s who argued that childcare provision needed to catch up with availability in other countries. (4)

(4) F. Lynch (2024) The Early Years Sector: A Case Study in Policy Development. Galway: UNESCO Child and Family Research Centre, University of Galway, pg. 12.

The Irish civil service is not the only ‘non-political’ institution with a mandate to propose policy initiatives. Just as international political institutions can influence policy so can administrative bodies, including the EU Commission (EC), the ECB, the World Bank, and the IMF. In Ireland’s case the role of the ECB, the IMF, and the EC (the Troika) was pivotal to the post-2010 recovery from the global financial crisis. This Troika specified policy actions that it required to be delivered as part of the programme of financial assistance to Ireland. While we would hope never to return to this situation, we still need to be aware of the policy preferences of these institutions, in particular, the EC as part of the EU semester process where member states align their budgetary and economic policies with the rules agreed at EU level.

Finally, the day-to-day front-line experience of the civil service and other public institutions in implementing policy and delivering services can also identify issues that need a policy response. These issues might emerge from, for example:

• customer/client feedback (including through customer service channels)
• staff feedback
• performance against service targets (for example, the number of people in hospitals waiting on trolleys exceeds the agreed threshold)
• recommendations from audits and inquiries, or
• public feedback and campaigns

The Courts

Ireland’s legal system is based on both constitutional and common law. This means that the Courts have a significant role in interpreting our written laws or statutes and our Constitution. The Courts determine the scope of the rights and obligations set out in the Constitution and statutes. Additionally, the Courts establish law using precedent, under the Common Law system, where decisions of a higher Court bind lower Courts. These precedents form ‘case law’.

The government or the Oireachtas is therefore often required to change the law or to adapt existing policies or develop new polices in response to Court decisions. This is most evident in the case of social policy but can also arise in respect of other policy areas.

It is clear therefore that the Courts are important sources of policy demand. In responding to Court decisions policy makers often have a choice – either to propose a change in the law to support the status quo that applied before the Court decision or to accept the decision and adapt policy accordingly. To make this decision requires fully understanding the rationale or the ‘demand’ of the Court decision.

These four categories of demands described above are not entirely separate. We can imagine how public and political demands reinforce each other and may resonate with operational issues highlighted by the administrative system or with rights and obligations articulated by the Courts. Again, the case study of pension reform shows that public concern about an increase in the pension age resonated with the political system which established a Commission on Pensions. The work of the Commission emphasised increasing operational concerns about the inadequacy of a ‘one-size-fits all’ approach to accessing the contributory state pension to due to people living and working longer.

We need to regularly monitor and evaluate a programme or initiative to remain aware of emerging issues. This also highlights that these policy phases are not just a set of linear tasks. In reality they will often loop back, we may need to repeat and revisit phases as new information comes to light.

Sometimes the demand for a policy may escalate quickly. We may find ourselves under a lot of pressure to provide a policy solution. While we often have to act quickly, we must still take the time to check that we understand the policy demand, its purpose, legality, and legitimacy. This filtering and refining is particularly important as we live an in an age ‘where unfiltered information is produced and widely consumed long before it can be properly verified or responded to effectively’. (5)

(5) Effectiveness and Renewal Group for the Department of Justice and Equality (2018) First Report. Dublin, pg. 9. Available below

We need to ask for clarification about the policy demand, so we are clear where the demand has come from, understand the exact problem or opportunity we are required to address and, in some cases, understand a proposed solution. Once we are clear and understand these elements, we can assess the policy demand in line with the three pillar framework: data and evidence, feasibility and implementation, and legitimacy. Questions to help us do this are given later under Task Four.

We need to expect a range of policy demands. They can range on a continuum from:

• vague and ill-defined demands such as a request to improve a particular service, to
• highly specific demands to put a strategy in place or to meet a legal requirement

When we get a policy demand that is too vague or broad, we must ask questions to clarify what specifically is being asked – and why. We also need to be mindful that, given the very broad scope of public policy, it is not unusual for a demand to arise regarding an issue or service that has already been dealt with but those raising the demand are unaware of its resolution.

For example, calling on the government to ‘share data’ is too general. We would have to ask questions such as:

• ‘what data?’
• ‘between whom?’
• ‘for what purpose?’, and
• ‘is it already being shared’?

When we get answers to these, we can then refine the policy demand and what the policy is expected to achieve.

We can then start to assess the policy demand.

When the demand is specific

At the other end of the spectrum, the policy demand may be a precise demand to implement a specific strategy.

For example, we may get a policy demand to increase household micro-generation using wind turbines. In this case, we need to stop and first clarify the purpose of this policy demand. In this example, the purpose would be to help meet the Programme for Government’s ambition of using up to 80% renewable electricity by 2030. When we are clear on the purpose, we are in a better position to assess whether the proposed strategy will achieve the expected purpose, or to offer an alternative, and perhaps better, approach.

The key point here is that we should first focus on the issue to be addressed and then turn our mind to a solution.

In some cases, the policy demand may be highly specific, and the government’s view is clear on the solution. As advisors, our focus needs to be on recommending how it can be delivered and where there are any unintended consequences to be avoided.

As well as being clear and assessing the policy demand in terms of its purpose and expected results, we also need to confirm, or refute, if the policy demand is compatible with the law.

To help us establish the legal issues relating to the demand, we often need to start by considering if it fits in with or might require changes to existing legislation.

For example, a new policy to change the qualifying factors for an application of guardianship of a child, may have to consider a number of existing laws, including:

• the Constitution
• the Civil Registration Acts, and
• Children and Family Relationship Acts

If the policy demand, as defined, is incompatible with the Constitution or existing legislation, we would need to consider if the policy can be developed in a way that is compatible. If not, we need to consider if the policy demand is important enough to justify changing the existing law. If existing law is to be changed, we need to consult with colleagues in relevant departments to determine the scope of the changes required and the capacity to undertake this work.

Even if there are no direct legal impediments we still need to explore further. We need to check other relevant legislation. For example, if we wish to change the qualifying factors for the guardianship of a child, we might need to examine if this would require changes to other legislation in areas such as family law, parental leave, and inheritance.

As already stated, the 5 Ds are not a simple step by step process – tasks can overlap.

In particular, in the initial phase of examining the demand for policy, it is important to consider the data that is already available to help understand and define the problem. This might mean examining sources of readily available data from bodies such as the Central Statistics Office, EuroStat, or published research by IGEES, government departments, or the ESRI. A review of this initial data can help to estimate the scope, scale, and cost of a policy initiative. It can also help to define the issue at hand.

For example, there may be a policy demand to “reduce poverty levels” among people with disabilities. A review of data could find that the key driver of poverty among people with disabilities is low levels of employment, even among those people with a high capacity to work. This, in turn, could lead to redefining the policy demand for “supporting people with disabilities in accessing employment”.

In this way, considering available data on a policy demand at an early phase can, usefully, help to narrow and define the scope of a policy question. To use the cliché, it can help us to focus us on the smaller bites rather than the whole elephant!

It is not unusual for policy to be criticised as being detached from the real world or designed in an ‘ivory tower’. Nor is it unusual for a policy initiative to require co-operation and input from multiple stakeholders, including colleagues in other government departments and those in public bodies involved in service delivery, as well as external stakeholders who may be the subject of the policy initiative.

Engaging these stakeholders at an early stage can help to gather valuable information, define the policy problem, and ensure that the scope and effort required to implement a solution is appreciated. Questions that can arise during this process are what’s driving the policy demand, what’s the underlying problem to be addressed, and is the proposed policy initiative the right ‘fix’? Most importantly, it ensures that key actors in subsequent phases will not be ‘surprised’ by the policy initiative at a later point in the process, and instead gives them the opportunity to be part of the process and contribute to the design of a policy solution.

Of course, in some circumstances it is not possible to engage with stakeholders early in the process for reasons of confidentiality or to avoid creating false expectations. However, it is always wise to engage as early as possible to the extent possible, and where necessary, stressing that the policy issue is at a tentative stage of exploration.

On the basis of the previous five tasks we should be able to recommend whether or not we need to explore the policy issue in more detail. This recommendation should be based on evidence and help make an informed decision as to whether we should:

• reject the policy demand
• redefine or modify the policy demand, or
• move to Phase 2 of the five-phase policy process

Phase 2 is about deepening our understanding of the policy demand. It is where we will conduct a more in-depth analysis of the policy issue. If we recommend moving to Phase 2, we should also list next steps.

Our analysis of the policy demand and recommendation will likely be documented in a short briefing paper. We have included a template for this briefing at the end of this phase. If you are writing the paper, your role is to make a recommendation based on the data and evidence. The actual decision on whether to proceed further with policy development may often be made by someone else, for example, a more senior official, an internal policy committee, or the Minister.