COMMITTEE of PUBLIC ACCOUNTS debate -
Thursday, 14 Dec 2000

Vol. 2 No. 32

1999 Annual Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General and Appropriation Accounts.

Mr. Fergus Glavey(Director of Audit) called and examined.

Vote 10: Office of Public Works.

Vote 44: Flood Relief.

Mr. Barry Murphy, Chairman, Office of Public Works, called and examined.

Acting Chairman

The relevant documentation from the Office of Public Works, which was requested at the 1998 examination, has been circulated, that is, the correspondence dated 21 February 2000 re proceeds from sale of former Chester Beatty Library and correspondence dated 30 August 2000 re cost of installing the drainage system at Castlerea Prison.

I must inform the witnesses that they do not enjoy absolute privilege. As and from 2 August 1998 section 10 of the Committees of the Houses of the Oireachtas (Compellability, Privileges and Immunity of Witnesses) Act, 1997, grants certain rights to persons who are identified in the course of the committee's proceedings. You are aware of that list of rights. Notwithstanding this provision in the legislation, I remind members of the long-standing parliamentary practice that members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I ask Mr. Murphy to introduce his officials.

Mr. Murphy

I am accompanied by Commissioner Seán Benton, Mr. Joe Farrell, head of financial services, Mr. Gerry Doyle, head of the accounts branch, Kilkenny, and Mr. Tony Smith, director of engineering services.

Acting Chairman

In the absence of Mr.Purcell, Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. Fergus Glavey, the director of audit, is substituting for him. We are moving on to paragraph 10, services contracts. It is relevant to this Department and to the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development and the Office of the Revenue Commissioners. We will not be noting that paragraph today, we will be discussing it. Does Mr. Glavey wish to make an opening comment?

Paragraph 10 of the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

Services Contracts

Background

Traditionally, security and cleaning services in Civil Service establishments were provided directly, i.e. by unestablished civil servants, employed for these purposes. With the passing of time the practice of employing people to carry out these services directly was phased out in favour of contracting private companies. At present, while there still are a small number of people employed on cleaning and security duties, outside contractors now provide almost all these services.

The rules governing the awarding of contracts are laid down in An Outline of Government Contracts Procedures which were issued in 1986 and updated in 1994 in the booklet Public Procurement. The Department of Finance has issued various circulars over the years clarifying the procedures laid down in the two publications. These rules and guidelines govern such matters as the advertising and awarding of tenders, the use of a restricted tendering process, tax clearance procedures etc., with the objective of having equity and fair competition in the award of public contracts.

Reference was made in my report for1995 to deficiencies noted on the audit of this area in the Office of the Revenue Commissioners.

Audit objectives and scope

The audit was undertaken with the view to determining the level of compliance with the procedures laid down in An Outline of Government Contracts Procedures and Public Procurement and to ensure that once they had entered into contracts, the organisations had procedures in place to adequately monitor and manage the performance of the service providers. The examination also focused on compliance with tax clearance procedures and whether the contractors had adequate insurance cover in respect of employers' liability and public liability. Because of the amounts involved, the provisions in EU and GATT procurement regimes did not apply.

It was decided to examine the procedures and systems under which contracts for these services are awarded and to examine the procedures in place to ensure that the terms of these contracts were being fulfilled. The audit was carried out in four of the biggest organisations in the Civil Service, the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs, the Office of Public Works, the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development and the Office of the Revenue Commissioners. The audit entailed a detailed review of existing cleaning and security contracts in the four organisations. Some 213 cleaning contracts currently in operation were examined in detail during the audit, including contracts dealing with window cleaning. Four of the 22 security services contracts were examined. Expenditure on security and cleaning services by the four organisations examined totalled £3,926,342 in 1999 as outlined in table 2.

Table 2

	Security	Cleaning	Total
	£	£	£
DSCFA	161,115	1,030,085	1,191,200
OPW	-	117,404	117,404
Agriculture	261,991	345,759	607,750
Revenue	1,134,063*	875,925	2,009,988
	1,557,169	2,369,173	3,926,342

*Includes expenditure on cash in transit.

Audit Findings

Tendering Procedures

The examination revealed that the procedures relating to advertising for tenders and the awarding of contracts as laid down in the regulations on public procurement were being adhered to. However, there were some instances where, on the termination of a contract before the end of the contract period, a new contract was entered into with the second lowest tenderer without new tenders being invited.

Renewal of Contracts

Notwithstanding the fact that most of the contracts examined were for a specified time span and that it is generally considered good practice that new tenders should be sought on a regular basis, say, every three to five years with a view to entering into a new contract, the examination revealed that with the exception of cleaning contracts in the Office of the Revenue Commissioners there was no systematic review of contracts awarded and that some of the contracts were in existence for over ten years. The prices quoted in the tenders were, however, subject to increases when pay rates for the industry were revised by the Joint Labour Council.

Tax Clearance Certificates and Insurance Cover

Of the four Departments-offices examined the Office of the Revenue Commissioners was the only one which had evidence that tax clearance certificates were renewed annually and that the contractor continued to maintain adequate insurance. In the other three organisations, evidence of tax status and insurance cover was sought and verified at the commencement of the contract but there was no evidence available to show any subsequent review by the bodies.

Monitoring and evaluation of performance

All the contracts examined contained detailed descriptions of the services to be provided by the contractors. These descriptions stipulated the exact nature of the work to be undertaken and the frequency with which each operation was to be carried out. The contracts also set out how many staff the contractor was to provide on site. With the exception of the cleaning contracts in the Office of the Revenue Commissioners, the examination indicated that a documented procedure to ensure that the terms of the contract were being followed did not exist. There was, however, evidence available to show that in cases where the staff in the sites were unhappy with the standard of service these complaints were drawn to the contractor's attention, leading in a few cases to the contract being terminated where the complaints persisted. All the bodies audited relied on staff in local offices to approve invoices for payment.

Conclusions

In cases where a contract is terminated the tendering process should always be repeated unless the time span between the initial receipt of tenders and the termination of the contract is of such a short duration as to make the repeat process meaningless.

Contracts for services such as cleaning and security should be for a limited time. At the end of the period new tenders should be sought and a new contract put in place.

The tax clearance status and the insurance cover of every contractor should be reviewed on an annual basis to ensure that both are in order during the full term of the contract.

Every Department and office should clearly document procedures to ensure compliance with all contracts for services. These procedures should ensure that the section of the organisation which negotiates and enters into the contract have a role in evaluating and monitoring the service provided.

The Accounting Officers of the Departments concerned have indicated that appropriate measures will be put in place to address the weaknesses noted in the report.

Mr. Glavey

Chairman, as you said in your introduction, the Comptroller and Auditor General has given the accounts a clear certificate and there are no paragraphs on the accounts as such. However, the Office of Public Works is mentioned in paragraph 10 which deals with services contracts. I ask the committee to note one small point, that under the heading Tax Clearance Certificates, the Office of Public Works should more correctly be associated with the Office of the Revenue Commissioners in having its tax clearance certificates up to date.

Acting Chairman

We are now opening the general account as well as paragraph 10. I mention paragraph 10 specifically because it is a cross-departmental issue and I will be keeping it under further observation later. I invite the chairman, Mr. Murphy, to make an opening statement.

Mr. Murphy

On paragraph 10, services contracts, the number of services contracts is small. On our domestic cleaning services we have renegotiated the contract in the past two months. A new contract is in place from 1 December. It lasts for only a year. We will be putting these contracts out to tender in the normal way in future.

On the question of tax clearance, it is a matter of consistent and continuing policy that we do not pay money to people in general without up-to-date tax clearance certificates in front of us.

Acting Chairman

We are now open for questions from members. We lead with DeputyDurkan, followed by Deputy Conor Lenihan.

Deputy Durkan

In regard to paragraph 10, may I ask a question in respect of another item? In respect of the tendering procedures the Comptroller and Auditor General said in page 9:

The examination revealed that the procedures relating to advertising for tenders and the awarding of contracts as laid down in the regulations on public procurement were being adhered to. However, there were some instances where, on the termination of a contract before the end of the contract period, a new contract was entered into with the second lowest tenderer without the new tenderers being invited.

Is that normal practice?

Mr. Murphy

Certainly not. I do not have that document in front of me. I am not sure that the director of audit was referring to the Office of Public Works contract.

Deputy Durkan

He was.

Acting Chairman

We will correct that. Does Mr. Glavey have a comment to make on that? Is the interpretation correct?

Mr. Glavey

The paragraph refers to the cross-departmental examination which covered four Departments. In the particular case of the Office of Public Works it does not apply.

Deputy Durkan

The note did not indicate that.

Mr. Glavey

It did not say which Department.

Deputy Durkan

Does it apply similarly in the renewal of contracts?

Mr. Glavey

That does apply in the case of the Board of Works.

Deputy Durkan

The Office of Public Works is referred to in the next paragraph which reads:

Notwithstanding the fact that most of the contracts examined were for a specified time span and that it is generally considered good practice that new tenders should be sought on a regular basis, say every three to five years with a view to entering into a new contract, the examination revealed with the exception of cleaning contracts in the Office of the Revenue Commissioners there was no systematic review of contracts awarded and some of the contracts were in existence for over ten years. The prices quoted in the tenders were, however, subject to increases when pay rates for the industry were revised by the Joint Labour Council.

That refers to the Department.

Mr. Murphy

It certainly does. This is a matter we have been working towards changing in the Office of Public Works. I welcome the views put forward on them. In our own case we have ended the service contracts we have had for some years. It is gone back out to tender. There is a new contractor from 1 December and that contract will be reviewed annually and will go out to tender annually.

Deputy Durkan

The next part of the paragraph which deals with tax clearance certificates and insurance cover for the four Departments reads: "Of the four Departments-offices examined the Office of the Revenue Commissioners was the only one which had evidence that tax clearance certificates were renewed annually. . . " What is the position in relation to renewal of tax clearance certificates?

Mr. Murphy

In the case of the service contract, the existing contractor would not have got the job without having a current tax clearance certificate. They would have had it in the last month, so it would be an up-to-date tax clearance certificate. That would be the case whenever we go out to tender. A successful tenderer would not get a job until a current tax clearance certificate becomes available.

Deputy Durkan

For how long would that certificate have validity?

Mr. Murphy

It normally has currency of one year.

Deputy Durkan

A renewal is sought at the end of each year systematically.

Mr. Murphy

That is right.

Deputy Durkan

That is not what this says.

Mr. Murphy

I think what that is saying is that we have not been reviewing the contract. We have changed that situation. We are reviewing the contracts now and we will be reviewing the tax clearance certificates. We have one other methodology to keep up to date on tax clearance certificates. Any bill that goes to our accounts branch for payment must have evidence on the instruction to pay that there is a current tax clearance certificate in operation for that company.

Deputy Durkan

I draw your attention to the penultimate paragraph on page 9 which reads:

Of the four Departments-offices examined the Office of the Revenue Commissioners was the only one which had evidence that tax clearance certificates were renewed annually and that the contractor continued to maintain adequate insurance.

Is that the truth?

Mr. Murphy

This is simply for the services contracts we are dealing with here. That is not a general comment. That was unfortunately true. It is not true now.

Deputy Durkan

It is not true now.

Mr. Murphy

It is not true now.

Deputy Durkan

That is the point I wanted to get at. In respect of tax clearance certificates for new contracts, what procedure is followed in subsequent years where, perhaps, a contract takes two or three years? Is the position reviewed annually?

Mr. Murphy

When a request for payment goes to our accounts branch, the official sending that request for payment must have in front of them an up-to-date tax clearance certificate. That is the process. That certificate has got to be produced by the recipient of the payment.

Deputy Durkan

Under the heading Conclusions at the end of the paragraph, the Comptroller and Auditor General said: "In cases where a contract is terminated the tendering process should always be repeated unless the time span between the initial receipt of tenders and the termination of the contract is of such a short duration as to make the repeat process meaningless."

Does that refer to ongoing service contracts?

Mr. Murphy

Yes. That is exactly what we would do.

Deputy Durkan

Is that happening?

Mr. Murphy

Yes.

Deputy Durkan

On a regular and systematic basis.

Mr. Murphy

Absolutely. We will be repeating the tendering process at the end of the year. In other words, the contracts will not roll over.

Deputy Durkan

Are there circumstances where a contract is entered into and proceeding that changes are made in respect of the original contract? Does the issue always go to tender again in its entirety or for the part that forms the extra works involved?

Mr. Murphy

It depends on the scale of the contract. If the changes to the contract are absolutely minor and negligible, we would not go out to tender again. However, if they are of significance, the question of continuing the contract would have to be raised and one would have to go out to tender again.

Deputy Durkan

Are there any circumstances where a contract could be in progress and the contractor is given an extended or expanded contract to carry out extra works that would involve extra expenditure?

Mr. Murphy

This depends on the kind of contract. We are dealing with service contracts here. If I can expand on it——

Deputy Durkan

Mr. Murphy can depart from the service contracts as well.

Mr. Murphy

That is fine. For normal building contracts, for example, the GDLA contract form allows for variations in the contract. There are rules in the contract itself to allow this to happen. My personal preference and our common practice within the Office of Public Works is that even with an ongoing contract, where there are major variations, we would retender for it or make it the subject of a separate contract. We would have to be satisfied in either making a variation under GDLA or in making a separate contract that the rates being quoted are fair and reasonable and in line with the original open tendered bid.

Deputy Durkan

What would constitute sufficient grounds for seeking a new contract? For example, if a contract was worth £1 million, would Mr. Murphy regard the cost or the extent of the extra works as the primary reason for going to tender again?

Mr. Murphy

I would say the extent of the extra works, and often the nature of the extra works. If the extra works were not envisaged when a contract went out to tender in the first instance, they would be the subject of a separate contract.

Deputy Durkan

Regarding flood relief, which is a topical issue, a surplus of £171,000 was surrendered under Vote 44 on 31 December 1999. Given the propensity of various locations to flood, the repeated warnings about floods and the potential damage to private and public property, has the Office of Public Works carried out any nationwide assessment of potential flooding danger points with a view to involving itself in a comprehensive and integrated drainage programme?

Mr. Murphy

Yes, we did that in 1995. It was carried out for us by Ove Arup & Partners. They came up with a list of areas that were in varying degrees of danger from flooding. We operated off that and also the evidence of our own eyes. Some towns have been subject to various serious and damaging floods in recent years. Given the funding that we had, the programme we set forward included the obvious areas, such as Kilkenny, Clonmel, Carrick-on-Suir etc.

Deputy Durkan

They were all identified in the Ove Arup report.

Mr. Murphy

Yes, with about 200 more, as far as I can recall. The Ove Arup report confirmed them and added a list of others. However, we are concentrating on the most susceptible towns first and we have a programme now which is well under way. The Deputy may have this information. As the Deputy knows, we have completed schemes in the past three years on the Nanny River, in Sixmilebridge in County Clare, Gort town and Lacken, in addition to the Cappaghmore scheme on the Mulcair River. At the moment, we have a list of schemes at construction stage - the Deputy may know about them - which include Maam Valley, Bandon, Carrick-on-Suir - the contractor will be on site there within a matter of weeks - Freemount in County Cork, Drumcolliher in County Limerick, Bridgend in County Donegal and Scotch Quay in Waterford city.

The Deputy knows the list of schemes at the various design stages. We have been in touch with him about them. Regarding the Clonmel scheme, we are in the course of reporting to the local authority there. Mr. Tony Smith was down there on Monday. We will have the tender competition for the Nore River scheme in Kilkenny immediately after Christmas. The list is much longer than that.

Deputy Durkan

The Chairman has a greater interest in Munster than me. I mean no disrespect to my friends in Munster, but I hoped I might encourage the Office of Public Works regarding schemes which are closer to my territory. How many of the blackspots or wet spots which showed up in the past three weeks were identified in the survey carried out by Ove Arup? What was the cost of the survey carried out by Ove Arup? How many of the wet spots identified did or did not flood in the intervening period?

At the Hazelhatch railway station in my immediate area, the water was level with the platform. Not only could people not get on trains, but trains could not get within a mile of the station. The Office of Public Works has undoubtedly indulged itself in that project for some considerable time, in addition to other Departments, but unfortunately the credibility of public representatives is strained when the public inquire about what precisely is happening.

Acting Chairman

The question of how many of the Ove Arup spots were affected and how many flooded areas were not identified is a good one. The pertinent issue is how accurate was its analysis.

Mr. Murphy

We have not done that particular comparison, but the question is exact. We will do it and we will supply that information to the committee. I do not have the cost of the Ove Arup study, but it was not particularly expensive. I will come back to the committee on the central question of what it identified and whether it was correct. May I come back to County Kildare?

Deputy Durkan

Certainly, we pointed you in that direction.

Acting Chairman

We will bypass Fermoy, as I had to do last Thursday evening.

Mr. Murphy

Regarding Kildare, I was happy to note that the Deputy mentioned Government Departments because we are not the only people involved.

Deputy Durkan

That is correct.

Mr. Murphy

From our point of view, theHazelhatch scheme - the Deputy may know this - has gone on statutory exhibition. We must wait the statutory period for views to come to us. Regarding nearby areas that were flooded, including Lucan and Leixlip, we have been in touch with the local authority there. The circumstances there are more complex than simply a river flooding. There are planning issues there that do not affect us.

Deputy Durkan

Not the Leixlip one, that is a simple one.

Mr. Murphy

The Lucan one.

Deputy Durkan

I have nothing to do with Lucan. I am sorry but I am not allowed to go near Lucan.

Mr. Murphy

I strayed over the border.

Deputy Durkan

The Lucan one has nothing to do with Lucan.

Mr. Murphy

Hazelhatch, the scheme to which you referred, is gone on statutory exhibition now.

Deputy Durkan

The point at which I am trying to get is that there is a number of serious drainage defects in that region, the effect of which is that when it rains for 24 hours or whatever the case may be, they are all under threat from flooding. The water table rises and there seems to be no outfall. If there is no outfall, there will be no drainage. I worry about the Office of Public Works and certainly other Departments, which seem to have notions about drainage that are totally incompatible with reality. I will not labour this but I make the point - it should be borne in mind in the future - that I listened to an expert recently debate on radio the night after serious flooding all over the country that the earth was a natural sponge, that the sponge had to fill up and this was the natural flood taking place. That was fine 5,000 years ago but, unfortunately, times have changed and people's requirements have changed. Not only that but the sponge effect referred to is a totally incorrect analogy for the simple reason that if the earth is allowed to fill up to the top, it pans. When dry weather comes, the top seals. There is no percolation and the result is what we have seen over the past six months. The top three or four feet are not supposed to be saturated, hence the need for drainage.

I worry whether this notion about the sponge filling to the top has percolated - no pun intended - to other Departments as well as the Office of Public Works. I hope that is not the case. I travelled by a section of a major river in the past fortnight in which there were obstructions in a 200 yard section. There were more obstructions in the river than outside it. The river and the land around it were at one. One cannot get drainage if one obstructs the water courses. There seems to be no emphasis placed on this anymore. Unless something is done to address that issue in the shortest possible time, billions will have to be spent in about ten or 15 years on that problem.

Mr. Murphy

I fully agree with what has been said in the sense that a number of Government agencies have to co-operate in this. There are our own drainage programmes, local authority ones and the road building arrangements. There are all kinds of effects causing and giving rise to the flooding we have seen. The Minister will be reassembling the interdepartmental committee to take account of the effects of bad weather. That will be done during the coming months to see what kind of co-operation we can get between the various agencies, including the Department of the Environment and Local Government, the local authorities, the National Roads Authority and so on, so there is a concerted effort to make sure that the actions of one are not setting the actions of another at nought.

Deputy Durkan

Will somebody take control because interdepartmental committees fall between two stools? That has never been more pertinent than in this case. The local authorities have their area and the Office of Public Works has its area which includes waterworks, canals and inland waterways, and this all combines to create a problem. The crème de la crème was when a newly built motorway flooded to a depth of six or seven feet. That is crazy.

Acting Chairman

We may go back to the Comptroller and Auditor General on this and look for an assessment of the damage that has been done in terms of value for money but also in terms of the failure to co-ordinate the effort. The National Roads Authority was set up after 30 or 40 years of complaints about mismanagement by local authorities and different standards. We do not want to see the same with this. It is obvious from what Mr. Murphy said that it is a bit of a shambles, that is, the effort at co-ordination by the local authorities, the Office of Public Works, the Department of the Environment and Local Government and so on. There is big money involved and the public is suffering. We will come back to this and will ask the Comptroller and Audit General to examine where the money is going.

Deputy Durkan raised a point about engineering works. Am I correct in saying there was a 40% underspend on engineering works under subhead H4? Was there a 40% differential? Does that mean we are returning funding at a time when half the country is being flooded?

Mr. Murphy

That question arises from something that was raised here, believe it or not. There was an underspend on the engineering works. This year the underspend is more significant. While there was an underspend under subhead H4, I really look at all the H subheads which fund the various flood and arterial drainage maintenance programmes. There is an underspend on flood relief. There was an underspend in 1999 and there is one in the current year. Members welcomed this when I mentioned it to them last time. We have decided to consult locally. In the past, the Office of Public Works had legal powers in that it simply went in and did work whether local communities wanted it. Work was done simply on our say so. We do not do that now. We will only do work in Clonmel, for instance, if the Clonmel Urban District Council wants us to.

Acting Chairman

Was this following theLimerick fiasco?

Mr. Murphy

I do not recall why but since I became chairman I did not wish to go thundering into anybody's village to give them flood relief regardless of whether they wanted it. We have instituted consultation processes. The down side is that it takes time and that is why we have the underspends. As our consultations begin to build up again, we will spend the full amount annually. The consultation phases in Clonmel, Carrick-on-Suir and various other places have taken longer than I would have expected and that is not a criticism of anybody involved. The consultation is correct, it is right that local people have the right to their say.

Acting Chairman

The complaint and criticism is directed at the public representatives in each county, whether councillor, TD or Minister. People are not aware that the Office of Public Works would have sent back this 40% even though consultation is taking place. That fact has not emerged. Fermoy was mentioned, and we were diverted around it last Thursday or Friday week and had to drive an extra 30 miles. The suggestion was that money was not available. I take it that there is plenty of money available.

Mr. Murphy

I hate to use the word "plenty".

Acting Chairman

Sufficient money.

Mr. Murphy

There is plenty of money available for the programme we are doing. We have to get the tempo of consultation faster.

Acting Chairman

We might return to that.

Deputy C. Lenihan

I am rather intrigued at the idea of consultation and I accept you were urged to do that. Are you saying to this committee that if you objectively assess an area to be potentially dangerous from a flood point of view, the local authority, for whatever financial or other reasons best known to itself, can turn back your assistance and support?

Mr. Murphy

That is absolutely possible.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Has that occurred in some cases?

Mr. Murphy

It has. For instance, a river going through a nice looking town may need a two metre wall to keep the water out. A two metre wall means the view, summertime walks and all that are lost. People who live in the area have to make their own judgment. Are they prepared to take the one month in three years' or ten years' flood or do they want a prettier place to live in? This is a choice that has to be made.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Mr. Murphy mentioned the example in Clonmel. Is that the case there? The scenes from there were very dramatic. Does Mr. Murphy suggest the authorities in Clonmel preferred the view rather than protecting the place from damage?

Mr. Murphy

The Clonmel scheme is still at negotiation stage but, in the Carrick-on-Suir one, for instance, we certainly changed to a lower standard because the local residents wanted to preserve the amenities they had locally.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Would the local authority in Carrick-on-Suir seek assistance from Government to deal with flood damage having opted for a lower standard? Does such a position obtain at present?

Mr. Murphy

That has not happened yet, but the Deputy is right, there are consequences. In Great Britain, where they have this same process, Shrewsbury flooded recently, and they refused a flood protection scheme because the meadows are beautiful in summer.

Deputy C. Lenihan

How is a compensation claim from, for example, Carrick-on-Suir, treated where the local authority opted for a lower specification in protection and safety and seeks compensation? It is the taxpayers' money which is the interest in this.

Mr. Murphy

We do not pay compensation. We have a humanitarian aid scheme.

Deputy C. Lenihan

However, the Government does, in general.

Mr. Murphy

No, the Government does not pay compensation.

Deputy C. Lenihan

It assists, does it not?

Mr. Murphy

No, not at all. Only for hardship.

Acting Chairman

That is underlined.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Should a hardship claim be made against the local authority in that case? How would the State handle it? If Carrick-on-Suir has taken a risk and decided on a lower specification, why should central Government shell out for the local authority's bad call? That is an issue for this committee because it is taxpayers' money.

Mr. Murphy

It is and it is an issue that has not been addressed fully yet.

Deputy C. Lenihan

The case is that the Exchequer shells out for hardship cases——

Mr. Murphy

For hardship cases.

Deputy C. Lenihan

——where a local authority has deliberately decided on a lower specification.

Mr. Murphy

That may well be the case.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Does the Office of Public Works not have any right to overrule the local authority if it decides to take this risk?

Mr. Murphy

I would certainly be very slow to override the local democratic process. If the local authority wants a particular level of protection, it is certainly not for us to second guess it.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Is there a formal warning procedure? Is it or should it not be part of the democratic process that, in places such as Carrick-on-Suir, the example cited, where the burghers, the elected representatives, or the unelected officials deliberately decide, for financial reasons or otherwise, to go for a lower specification, a public warning or something similar should be issued to the town and its inhabitants that this is what the local authority is doing?

Mr. Murphy

The normal practice or steps that we have taken would be to design to the maximum protection. It is at that point that we start negotiations with the local authority or local interest groups. We would not propose anything less than something good. That is the generally accepted standard.

Deputy C. Lenihan

I understand the Office of Public Works goes for the maximum but it is possible within this scheme of arrangements, and Carrick-on-Suir is the best example, to go for a lower specification for whatever reason, be it financial, visual, amenity or whatever, and without any warning being given of this. If it is decided at a council meeting by the elected and unelected people together to opt for the lower specification, no warning is issued to the public other than that there has been a technical discussion.

Mr. Murphy

There certainly is. There is a clear warning given.

Deputy C. Lenihan

To whom?

Mr. Murphy

First of all, to the local authority involved as to what the lower protection is. That is carefully explained.

Deputy C. Lenihan

To the engineering section.

Mr. Murphy

Apart from dealing with the local engineering section, we also deal with the elected representatives and the council. When we have an agreed scheme, that is put on public display and the effects of that scheme are made publicly known.

Deputy C. Lenihan

I do not suggest the Office of Public Works has done anything wrong. I accept it designs to the maximum specification. I am talking about the local authority. A clear warning separate to the normal public presentation should be given to the public and electorate in a town such as Carrick-on-Suir where the local authority has deliberately decided for a lower specification, and it should be spelled out in any future public notification that this is a potential threat. People are probably not aware of that. Few understand the full import of what Mr. Murphy said.

Mr. Murphy

We have done that in Carrick-on-Suir. We have met the various groups and the local authority. The advice I am getting is that, in Clonmel, we not only put the desirable option but we put the alternatives on public display also. The entire warning process is there.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Was the desirable option ignored in Carrick-on-Suir?

Mr. Murphy

Yes, we are going for a lower standard of protection.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Was that decided by elected representatives in Carrick-on-Suir?

Mr. Murphy

Yes.

Deputy C. Lenihan

What is the consequence of that? Is there a greater risk? Will the hazard factor increase?

Mr. Murphy

We have reduced the flood protection from the 100 year flood to the 50 year flood.

Deputy C. Lenihan

It is halved in other words. It is 50% more likely in probability terms because of the reduced specification.

Mr. Murphy

Yes.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Are people aware of that?

Mr. Murphy

Yes, they are fully aware of it.

Deputy C. Lenihan

That is grand, but it is important people are aware. Whatever way is chosen in future to notify people, from a taxpayer's point of view they should be made aware of what is involved in opting for the lower hazard threshold.

Can I continue my questioning on a separate issue, Chairman?

Acting Chairman

I know Deputy McCormack wishes to contribute. If it is on flooding, perhaps Deputy Lenihan would not mind if that issue were dealt with first so that it may be finished with.

Deputy C. Lenihan

That is fine.

Acting Chairman

I can return to Deputy Lenihan for his other questions.

Deputy McCormack

I wish to continue on from what Deputy Lenihan said. My experience of dealing with the Office of Public Works has been the opposite. It has insisted on lower protection rates than the maximum required for flood relief. I am talking principally about south Galway. I was very involved and know the scene there very well. This is not a personal issue because it is not in my constituency. Where road crossings of 3.6 metres had been requested, the Office of Public Works insisted on only 2.6 metres so as not to affect winter turloughs. It is the opposite to what Mr. Murphy said. My experience has been that the Office of Public Works has gone against local opinion in curtailing flood relief schemes rather than opting for the maximum flood relief available.

My experience is that the Office of Public Works will do all the service in the world and that it does not present a problem to it. It spent £1 million on the previous scheme in south Galway and not one drop of water has been drained from that since except by the unofficial scheme in which I was involved a number of years ago which was opposed and obstructed at every level by the Office of Public Works. The county manager was warned that if he attempted to give a road opening licence for that scheme grants to the county council might be restricted for the next number of years. I have a copy of that letter in my file. Mr. Murphy should not tell me about the co-operation of the Office of Public Works in drainage schemes. The opposite was the case in south Galway at that time. I will stand over the unofficial scheme which was eventually sanctioned by the Office of Public Works. The nine houses, the school, the nursing home, the main road and the side roads have not been flooded since the work was done. The scheme is working perfectly, although we did not get the levels we sought at the time.

Mr. Murphy

My conscience is clear about the south Galway area. We have a local committee there which is representative of all local interests. One of the local interests is Dúchas, the Wildlife Service, and it has imposed many conditions on the people locally and on ourselves which relate to wildlife rather than to flooding or anything else. We must take those into account. As the Deputy knows, we are doing work now at Kilternan. We are putting together schemes with local advice.

Deputy McCormack

I did the work in Kilternan. If Mr. Murphy can improve on it, he should go ahead.

Mr. Murphy

We have Cregaclare and Mannin Cross and so on. A list of work is being put together.

Deputy McCormack

One million pounds was spent on the last survey which was done inconsultation with the local people because the consultants did not know the first thing about the problem until they asked the farmers what they could do. Has any drainage work been carried out in south Galway since £1 million of taxpayers' money was spent on the last survey, although we have had several surveys over several years? It is not the case that south Galway floods for one month every three or four years. The four orfive different locations Mr. Murphy mentioned are flooded for three, four or five months every year.

Acting Chairman

The Deputy should ask a more specific question. Are too many surveys being carried out?

Mr. Murphy

I would prefer to do the work. The reason for having the local representative group is to try to decide what can be done locally. There are differing sets of opinion in south Galway about what should be done. One set of work may discommode another group. The reason for having this group is to reach a conclusion on what is practical and what will give the best return. That group is sitting as we speak.

Deputy McCormack

I still have an interest in my former friends in south Galway. When will the first of those schemes be put in place? I made representations about the Frenchfort Oranbeg scheme in Oranmore and the reply I received from the Office of Public Works stated that the county council would carry out the work. The council will not carry it out. Why is the buck being passed from the Office of Public Works to the county council when it does not have the funds to carry out such schemes?

Acting Chairman

Do you, Mr. Murphy, have a list of what schemes will soon be implemented?

Mr. Murphy

Yes. In the south Galway area we are giving the local authority money to carry out the work for us around Kinvara. That is the quickest way to do it.

Acting Chairman

Will it happen this year?

Mr. Murphy

Immediately.

Acting Chairman

We will move back to the Deputy's constituency before I go back to Deputy Conor Lenihan.

Deputy McCormack

What about the Frenchfort Oranbeg scheme?

Mr. Murphy

We have done our survey, although I do not wish to stress that end of it. We feel the work which needs to be done there would best be carried out by the local authority or under a local improvement scheme. We have sentwhatever surveys we have done to the localauthority. If it needs more help from us, we will give it.

Deputy McCormack

The amount of grants we get for local improvement schemes in County Galway would not do a fraction of that scheme. We get £440 million under the local improvement scheme for the roads of the county. Will the Office of Public Works give the money to the local authority to carry out the work in Oranmore as it seems to be doing in Kinvara?

Acting Chairman

I raised a point earlier about funding. Could some of that 40% be given to the people involved in this difficulty?

Mr. Murphy

We have only recently got our legal opinion that we can give money to local authorities to carry out work for us. That is how we are doing the Kinvara work. If Galway County Council comes to us on this scheme, we will see what we can do. We have money.

Acting Chairman

I am anxious to get back to Deputy Conor Lenihan. Could you give me an idea, Mr. Murphy, when the analysis of the Ove Arup report might be done? I am interested to get that to see how accurate it is.

Mr. Murphy

We will do it in the next couple of days.

Acting Chairman

Perhaps you could send us a note on that towards the end of January.

Mr. Murphy

The end of January is perfectly sound.

Deputy Durkan

It might be a good idea from the point of view of value for money if the Office of Public Works submitted a list of its preferences in respect of drainage and of the groups impeding it from doing its work. If someone looks for compensation and someone impedes the work which would obviate the need for compensation, the people——

Acting Chairman

That is a fair point which Deputy Conor Lenihan already raised. It must be taken into consideration. I call Deputy Conor Lenihan.

Deputy C. Lenihan

I thank Deputy Durkan for raising that important issue. As regards new works, alterations and additions and the analysis of major expenditure, why is there an underspend in the erection of new buildings and in major improvement schemes at Garda stations? It was estimated that £6 million would be spent but the turnout was £3.5 million. At a time when the Government is committed to increasing the number of gardaí, I am worried they will be squashed into existing space. Are they being forced to work in small Garda stations, although their numbers have increased? Why is the outturn lower?

Mr. Murphy

I will answer that question in the longer term. I was involved in the setting up of the Garda building programme with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform in 1984. We have tried to average around the £5 million a year. There are ups and downs in it but we have managed an average over that long period of £5 million a year. The year in question where the dip happened was a year where we were having planning problems in a number of stations. We have picked up in 2000 and brought the 2000 figure up to £8.5 million. We had a dip in one year and we are back on our £5 million level over the two years.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Is the average of £5 million expected to increase, given that the numbers in the force are increasing and that extra accommodation will be required?

Mr. Murphy

We have found it a satisfactory way of going forward. We are meeting all the Garda requirements with that type of regular programme. Where there are real peaks of need, we will deal with them separately. Store Street Garda station, for example, was not included in that £5 million.

Deputy C. Lenihan

As regards the budget provision, is there a constraint on a priority Garda need to expand the station in Tallaght, for example?

Mr. Murphy

No. If there was that kind of requirement we would provide separately.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Provide separately under a separate heading of some kind.

Mr. Murphy

I note that in fact the total budget provision for 2001 is £14 million.

Deputy C. Lenihan

So it is significantly increased.

Mr. Murphy

Yes.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Is there any particular reason for that? Are we moving to a higher average?

Mr. Murphy

Some of the planning delays of 1999 are now coming through.

Deputy C. Lenihan

The rationalisation of office accommodation is here again and rather curiously the Estimate provision was £3.5 million but the outturn was £14 million. Is there a conundrum in this regard, namely, that office accommodation is being rationalised but costs are increasing? Perhaps there is some good explanation.

Mr. Murphy

In my experience we have never spent the budgeted amount; rather we have always spent a multiple of it. There are two reasons we call it rationalisation of accommodation. The provision began after the last decentralisation programme when we had to reduce Departments' accommodation and dispose of vacant property, etc. Out of that grew the idea of rationalising Departments' operations, so Departments can effectively carry out their work by usually being in one location or in as small a number of locations as possible. Departments tend to change shape and size so the process of keeping Departments operationally effective is ongoing.

Deputy C. Lenihan

I would like that explained in plain language. The Estimate for rationalising refers, I presume, to down sizing or reducing the number or level of office accommodation.

Mr. Murphy

Not necessarily. In fact the number of civil servants being added to the overall total is quite significant. It can be seen through the "agentisation" of civil servants and through the setting up of regulators.

Deputy C. Lenihan

I do not want to introduce a Sir Humphrey factor, but how can a rationalisation result in an increase from £3 million to £14 million? Adding accommodation can hardly be called rationalisation.

Mr. Murphy

One may have to rationalise. For example, I think there are around 300 staff dealing with asylum seekers——

Deputy C. Lenihan

So there is a huge additional number.

Mr. Murphy

Exactly.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Let us get it right. Rationalisation does not necessarily mean down sizing as far as you are concerned.

Mr. Murphy

That is correct.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Rationalisation implies making it more rational.

Mr. Murphy

Exactly.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Fair enough. So there are additional costs.

The disabled access programme seems to have risen in value from £2.5 million to £7 million. Is there a policy or other reason for this?

Mr. Murphy

There is a continuing policy of providing access for the disabled. Even the higher figure does not give a full flavour of what we are doing, for example, in terms of the disabled access element in the building and rationalisation projects we undertake.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Will the figure of £7 million increase?

Mr. Murphy

I do not know what the budget is for 2001.

Deputy C. Lenihan

I notice the receipts from Dublin Castle have again increased in terms of the realised amounts. Apparently more visitors are visiting that venue. The last time I put questions I was told Dublin Castle has been a huge success and that it is almost paying for itself on an operating basis as a venue or location.

Mr. Murphy

Yes.

Deputy C. Lenihan

There was huge criticism at the time of the Taoiseach - Mr. Haughey I think - for spending the money, but now it is almost paying its own way.

Mr. Murphy

It is paying its own way. What are itemised are the cash receipts we receive, but we have full commercial accounts for Dublin Castle which bring together cash receipts and notional payments from Departments, etc., which show an operational surplus of £200,000 per year.

Deputy C. Lenihan

How much of that is notional, i.e., State work for which a payment is not received?

Mr. Murphy

Notional payments are real in the sense that Departments use Dublin Castle rather than hire a hotel or another venue for which they would have to pay.

Deputy C. Lenihan

So there is a saving to the State.

Mr. Murphy

There is a saving to the State.

Deputy C. Lenihan

But there is no argument for internal transfers.

Finally, regarding Leinster House I note that figure to date has been £3 million for our offices. I want to publicly record our pleasure at the great job which has been done. I do not accept that you were delayed or late in your targets - you achieved your targets very well in terms of a tight deadline for accommodation. I note £16 million has yet to be drawn down.

Mr. Murphy

Yes.

Deputy C. Lenihan

When will it be fully finished in terms of the expected provision of child care facilities, gymnasium, etc.?

Mr. Murphy

The main contract, namely, the new building, has a budget of £25 million and we will be within that figure. The crèche and gymnasium are part of a separate project which involves the refurbishment of Kildare House. That cannot begin until the committee rooms are located in the new extension, which will happen next March and April. We have a completion date from the contractor of 6 March. The committee rooms were always on a different timetable to the main offices.

Deputy C. Lenihan

What is the completion date for what is envisaged in Kildare House?

Mr. Murphy

We have planning permission for the work in Kildare House, including the crèche and gymnasium. We have the money in place. The contract will begin here as soon as possible after the committee rooms become vacant. We will be asking the contractor to ensure the crèche and gym are the first to be completed.

Deputy C. Lenihan

What is the estimated time scale?

Mr. Murphy

We are talking about next autumn.

Deputy C. Lenihan

That is very good. Will it be the same contractor as did the extension?

Mr. Murphy

We have to go to tender.

Deputy C. Lenihan

The people in Leinster House were very good. I again say well done on the project. Despite the hype on our return it was on time and we can all live with the small inconveniences. I have found some of your staff to be excellent and very accommodating.

Regarding Vote 10, section 10 - Details of Extra Remuneration - I do not think there are enough merit payments in the public sector which is part of the problem in terms of losing staff. Section 10 talks about higher, special or additional duties. Are these merit payments? I cannot get to grips with higher, special or additional duties. There is a reference elsewhere to duties and merit payments being pooled for a staff party or something. I am curious about the level of merit payments. What are higher, special or additional duty payments?

Mr. Murphy

They are fairly standard items. The Minister's private secretary, for example, and my own private secretary get a special payment. Higher duty payments are made to some engineers and some Government supply agency inspectors.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Is this where they are doing work to tight deadlines and are being pushed beyond the normal working hours, etc.?

Mr. Murphy

They are working at a higher grade than their own.

Deputy C. Lenihan

I understand.

Mr. Murphy

They are short of promotion——

Deputy C. Lenihan

——but they are acting up, as it were.

Mr. Murphy

Yes.

Deputy C. Lenihan

I note that the maximum individual payment was about £10,000 in that category. How does that compare with merit payments in your own section? Is it possible to achieve similar figures for a one year merit payment?

Mr. Murphy

Certainly not. The merit payments are limited to 1% of our pay bill.

Deputy C. Lenihan

I have a bee in my bonnet about this issue. If a person can make money in the region of £10,000 by doing a job beyond his or her title or grade in a pressurised situation, it seems grossly unfair that a person who achieves some saving or efficiency in the service cannot expect to make a similar amount. Someone acting up goes beyond his or her grade duties. People who do a particularly good job in the private sector get a bonus. It seems unfair that the merit payment system does not allow people to make similar amounts of money annually. What is the limit on the merit scheme?

Mr. Murphy

Individual payments are not limited. It would be possible to give all of the merit payment to one person.

Deputy C. Lenihan

What is the average annual merit payment given in the Office of Public Works to people who work very well and save the office several million pounds in regard to property disposals, etc.?

Mr. Murphy

Our partnership committee has decided not to make individual merit payments but to pool them.

Deputy C. Lenihan

There must be an average payment.

Mr. Murphy

The merit payments total some 0.2% of our pay bill.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Surely you have individual breakdowns of the amounts provided to civil servant A, B, C or D. Do they get £2,000 or £5,000 extra for doing a particularly good job?

Mr. Murphy

No, they have actually refused to accept merit payments; the staff opted to pool the payments, therefore, we did not allocate them.

Deputy C. Lenihan

Does that not indicate that the amounts are regarded as utterly insignificant by the staff and do not act as real incentives to people to be more efficient or to perform to their optimum abilities?

Mr. Murphy

I am highly critical of the bonus scheme because it is far too low.

Deputy C. Lenihan

I thank Mr. Murphy for his interesting remarks.

Deputy McCormack

Did I hear Mr. Murphy saying that a survey was carried out on the Frenchfort Oranbeg scheme and, if so, what is its estimated cost?

Mr. Murphy

I do not have that information to hand but I will obtain it for the Deputy.

Deputy McCormack

It would be futile to attempt to carry out projects under the local improvement scheme system. Such a suggestion displays a complete lack of knowledge of how the scheme works. In County Galway, we have a three year backlog for local improvement road schemes because we only receive a grant of less than £500,000 every year. As I recall, last year's grant totalled £435,000. The first three or four roads schemes eat up the available funding. It is simply not viable to carry out major drainage schemes under the local improvement scheme system. What evidence must local authorities present to the Office of Public Works to get a special grant? Are local authorities equipped to carry out such schemes? Have they the same expertise, machinery and knowledge as the Office of Public Works?

Mr. Murphy

We will contact the Deputy's local authority following this meeting to see what it requires. We have already been in touch with it and have provided it with certain material. I take the Deputy's point about the local improvement schemes.

Deputy McCormack

On the consultation process which results in maximum protection plans going down to lower protection rates, where does Dúchas come into this? If Dúchas says it is not possible to offer maximum protection in a certain area and if local people suffering the effects of flooding on an annual basis feel maximum protection should be provided, who wins?

Mr. Murphy

There are statutory requirements and EU directives which must be adhered to in this regard and Dúchas is acting in accordance with these. When Dúchas gives us instructions, we are obliged to carry them out.

Deputy McCormack

In other words, Dúchas wins, irrespective of the views of local people who experience the problem. What exactly is the nature of local involvement in the process?

Acting Chairman

That is a key question. Dúchas does end up winning.

Mr. Murphy

Statutory requirements oblige Dúchas to act in a particular manner.

Acting Chairman

This is an issue which we could perhaps discuss on a future occasion.

Deputy McCormack

Dúchas has gone as far as issuing letters threatening that other grants would be withheld if county councils breached any of the recommendations laid down. One could not blame the local people in south Galway for seeking maximum protection.

On the relocation compensation for people whose houses were destroyed by flooding under subhead A, I presume that many of the 13 families relocated up to the end of 1999 lived in south Galway. The compensation averages at £44,500 per house. Some of the houses abandoned cost £100,000 or more.

Acting Chairman

A figure was agreed in each case, based on the cost of a local authority house of a particular size. It was not compensation for what was lost, rather it was a reinstatement evaluation based on local authority house costs.

Deputy McCormack

So, irrespective of whether people lived in a house valued between £100,000 and £200,000, of which there were some in Gort, they only received the cost of replacing a local authority house?

Mr. Murphy

Yes.

Deputy McCormack

That was not made clear at the time. Those people suffered considerable losses both personally and in the value of their houses. I am glad the point has been clarified. I will await clarification from the Office of Public Works on how the Frenchfort Oranbeg scheme might be advanced.

Acting Chairman

Two points were raised in regard to the flooding. Regarding the serviced land initiative of the Department of the Environment and Local Government, is there any mechanism for co-ordination of effort? In this case a large amount of money is being spent to free up land for building that would be otherwise liable to flooding or where there is a lack of sewerage facilities. Do you co-ordinate your efforts in this regard?

Mr. Murphy

We are not party to that and we have not co-ordinated with the Department of the Environment and Local Government or the local authorities on the issue. We will undertake the flood mapping initiative which will be of help to local authorities in relation to this work and planning work generally.

Acting Chairman

The more I hear, the more concerned I am about the amount of money being spent. Everyone is ploughing away trying to do their own job, but it appears that cross-fertilisation does not apply.

Deputy Lenihan raised the issue of pooling the merit money. I do not disagree with that approach. It seemed to emerge from the discussion that this was because the money was so low. Football teams and rugby teams pool their income from advertising and so on. On the basis that one person will be in a position to take greater advantage of this because they are more popular, I believe the same would apply to a Department. Obviously different people are given the opportunity to make more, if they wish to come up with ideas. I agree that we could try to provide greater merit money. Deputy Lenihan seems to think this would not work but I agree with the pooling approach.

In relation to our building across the road, there are different views on the efficiency of the transfer and so on. Given my background, I have great experience of an annual shutdown period and trying to do 12 months work in three weeks, when every minute is critical. Wearing that hat, I thought the job was done excellently. I appreciate that a week extra would have helped. Someone got the time slightly wrong but it was a small amount of time considering the work done, which was excellent. There are still snag lists to be dealt with. The heating was unreal; one could have grown tomatoes in the building for the past two months but that matter was rectified last weekend. I did not have a complaint with my office. Perhaps if I were in a different office, I might have had a complaint.

When we discussed the 1998 appropriations accounts, you told us that a liaison group was being set up, which would include Members, to see what we could do. Did that ever happen?

Mr. Murphy

That happened immediately afterwards. The group was chaired by Martin Cullen and it met on several occasions during the year. I should say that we would even do better if we were running the Leinster House campus. That is something to drop into your lap.

Acting Chairman

I will have to convince the——

Mr. McCormack

You would need to convince the electorate.

Acting Chairman

Is there any way you can seek the views of Members at this stage? Last week there was a notice from Office of Public Works on everyone's desk pointing out the items that would be supplied and that the heating would be dealt with. Will you formally seek the views of Members through either the House committees or by way of a survey? Would that be a worthwhile exercise? I believe, on the one hand, you were wronged in many instances and, on the other, people had legitimate complaints. Will you now seek the views of Members?

Mr. Murphy

The mechanism we use is that we work through the Whips' committee, and through it to the House committees, such as the Committee on Procedure and Privileges and so on. We try to get feedback through the formal committees. These people know what——

Acting Chairman

They operate on a different plain, with all due respect. I wish to put on record my appreciation of the work done, which was excellent. Perhaps you would survey Members in relation to the facilities in general.

Mr. Murphy

You may have met some people who are dealing face to face with Members.

Acting Chairman

I would like to have the survey carried out formally for future reference. Is it true that an undergound car park is being built under the building?

Mr. Murphy

Absolutely, it is true.

Acting Chairman

When will that happen?

Mr. Murphy

I hope the work will begin next summer. The purpose of this is not to add to the car parking facilities. I hate to have to say there will not be an extra car park. The point is to return the courtyard on the Kildare Street side and the gardens on the Merrion Square side to the public. The public can be invited in at the weekends and so on, there will be no cars and the gardens will be returned to their original shape. Before any of the surface work is carried out, Members will be consulted on what we have in mind.

Acting Chairman

I would be worried about it collapsing. Obviously you have read the headlines and you have a PR department. I am sure the media are taking note of this meeting. A huge figure was quoted to provide me with a car parking space, about which I was extremely concerned. Are you saying, Mr. Murphy, that this work is being carried out to return to the public the gardens, which were beautiful?

Mr. Murphy

That is the point. Car parking spaces are expensive but I believe the benefit to the city and the public will be worthwhile.

Acting Chairman

On the subject of the surveys, we deal with our staff and the secretariat generally. Could the administrative office be surveyed also because they are the permanent Government, so to speak? We could be unlucky enough to go out of office at some stage regardless of what the polls say. For example, the Office of Public Works nor anyone else could not answer our call if we were without Johnny, the engineer in charge of heating. It is a huge expenditure but, as Mr. Barry correctly stated, as this is the House of Parliament for the State, the workmanship should be of top quality and presentable to everyone. The administrative staff should also be surveyed because they have learned a lot over the years. I saw Mr. Belton on site a few times when the difficulties arose and he brought a calming influence to the whole proceedings.

We will not note Vote 10, which runs across three Departments, for the reasons I outlined at the outset. However, we will note Vote 44 on flood relief.

Mr. Durkan

With reference to value for money and cost analysis, given the conflicting views likely to be put forward in relation to drainage and the fact that you, Chairman, and the rest of us are likely to be in the front line in relation to this matter for the foreseeable future, would it be advisable to bring the Office of Public Works and the other Departments who are likely to be in conflict with the views expressed by the Office of Public Works, before the committee in the New Year with a view to attempting to determine some general thrust of policy for the future which would eliminate the nonsense about a conflict of interest, because it is serious?

Acting Chairman

I agree with you, Deputy. We have published an extensive work programme. The minimum we need is the Department of the Environment and Local Government, representatives of Dúchas and Mr. Murphy's section. I am sure there are others. Huge amounts of money are involved. Great damage is being done, possibly because of global warming. It has been suggested that the weather is not getting any worse but bad weather is being reported more widely. There is no doubt people are suffering. Difficulties are being experienced and the matter must be discussed fully. We may need to examine the value for money aspect of the problem. We will return to this matter, Deputy.

We do not have time to discuss the Leinster House buildings again. I propose we set a deadline for a survey of Members on the question of Leinster House. Is that agreed?

Mr. Murphy

Certainly.

Acting Chairman

Let us say the end ofJanuary, like the Ove Arup survey. The work, including the car park, will be finished by the time we return.

Mr. Murphy

Most Members will not be in Leinster House during the month of January. I suggest the survey continue until the end of February.

Acting Chairman

I agree totally with that. On behalf of the committee I thank Mr. Murphy and his officials for their attendance, for their frank answers and for the information they have given us.

Mr. Murphy

Thank you, Chairman.

Sitting suspended at 12.32 p.m. and resumed at 12.36 p.m.

Vote 41 - An Comhairle Ealaíon.

Vote 42 - Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands.

Mr. P. Furlong (Secretary General, Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands) called and examined.

Acting Chairman

We now examine Vote 42 - An Roinn Ealaíon, Oidhreachta, Gaeltachta agus na Oileán and Vote 41 - An Comhairle Ealaíon. We are joined by Mr. Philip Furlong, Secretary General of the Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands, who will deal with both Votes.

Witnesses do not enjoy absolute privilege. I draw your attention to the fact that from 2 August 1998, section 10 of the Committees of the Houses of the Oireachtas (Compellability, Privilege and Immunity of Witnesses) Act, 1997, grants certain rights to persons who are identified in the course of the committee's proceedings. The list of rights is quite lengthy. I draw members' attention to the convention of not naming officials or criticising officials who may be identifiable.

I welcome Mr. Philip Furlong and ask him to introduce his officials.

Mr. Furlong

I am accompanied by Mr. Michael Canny, assistant secretary with responsibility for the Dúchas, the heritage service of the Department; Mr. Seán Ó Cofaigh, assistant secretary with responsibility for corporate affairs, Gaeltacht, islands and heritage policy; Mr. Liam O'Connell, principal officer, who is finance officer of the Department; Ms Patricia Quinn, director of The Arts Council and Mr. David McConnell, finance officer of The Arts Council.

Acting Chairman

Substituting for the Comptroller and Auditor General is Mr. Fergus Glavey. I ask him to open the discussion.

Mr. Glavey

There are no paragraphs in the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General on either Vote 42 or Vote 41. In both cases the C&AG has given a clear certificate on the accounts.

Vote 42 covers a very wide variety of activities, including matters relating to broadcasting, arts, culture, Gaeltacht and heritage. The committee may wish to examine it in detail.

Acting Chairman

Mr. Furlong, do you wish to make an opening statement?

Mr. Furlong

Not at this stage. We will help in any way if we can elaborate on material in the accounts or on the Department's activity generally.

Acting Chairman

Thank you. I call Deputy Durkan.

Deputy Durkan

In relation to cultural projects, members of the public frequently raise the question of balancing protection, restoration and refurbishment with public access. Work on a number of projects is ongoing throughout the country. To what degree are you satisfied with, for example, the programme to make safe semi-derelict and derelict heritage buildings? Will you look at heritage buildings in private or semi-private ownership where you may not be able to get involved in their protection? There will be a clash of interest from time to time in relation to modern developments vis-à-vis the protection of our heritage. I know you do everything possible to ensure our heritage is protected. However, when I am driving I see a number of heritage sites - old houses, castles and other buildings - in a derelict and semi-derelict state. I have tabled questions on this issue, some of which may be for answer today.

Mr. Furlong

The Deputy will appreciate that it is difficult to strike a balance between what is practicable and achievable within the resources available. In so far as it is possible we give priority to the 700 national monuments in State ownership, that priority has been reflected in the Minister's recent announcement in regard to the funding available to her under the national development plan. There are more than 100,000 monuments, the vast majority of which are not in State ownership and some of which are in a semi-derelict condition. Under the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1999, there is a procedure for greater local authority control over development activity. Responsibility for enforcing protection is devolved on local authorities in such cases.

The practical issue for us is to ensure that we are effective in protecting what is already there. Under the last round of structural funding under the operational programme for tourism, which ran up to the end of last year, the focus was more expansionist, whereas under the latest round of funding under the national development plan we are much more concerned with conserving what we have got. This is reflected in the significant allocation for Castletown House. When making choices the other matters to which members referred cannot be dealt with under the resources available. It is a balancing act.

Deputy McCormack

If priority is given to the 700 national monuments, what is the status of the other 1,000 monuments in private ownership?

Mr. Furlong

I said there were more than 100,000 monuments.

Deputy McCormack

I am following up a case and want to know the protection afforded to a land owner who has a derelict castle on land which is adjacent to a public road. He cannot get permission to demolish the castle or get insurance to cover the children who run around it. It is an accident waiting to happen, yet no one will do anything to help this man who has full responsibility for this castle. Where does responsibility for this matter lie?

Acting Chairman

The Deputy may be referring to a specific case and Mr. Furlong may wish to deal with the general position.

Mr. Furlong

The general principle is that a person who has a national monument on his property is not prohibited from doing something to it but there are strict conditions attaching to it.

Deputy McCormack

There is the cost involved. He cannot get permission to demolish it or get insurance cover or help from you to do it up. It could cost £200,000 or £300,00 to make it safe. No small farmer can be expected to pay this amount.

Acting Chairman

Mr. Furlong will have a few minutes to think about the question while the sitting is suspended so that we can vote and ensure we do not become national monuments of one kind or another.

Sitting suspended at 12.45 p.m. and resumed at 1 p.m.

Acting Chairman

I apologise for the interruption. Votes in the Dáil take precedence over the proceedings of committees.

Officials from the Office of Public Works came before the committee recently and it emerged that specific difficulties had arisen in south Galway - this relates to the case to which Deputy Durkan referred - in respect of flooding. We were informed that when everything was ready to proceed in south Galway Dúchas raised some objections. Apparently that body can veto certain projects, in this case, a flood relief programme. We were concerned about this matter from the point of view of achieving value for money and also protecting the public. The committee believes that there should be no conflict between Departments. There should be co-operation in relation to flood relief projects. I believe an interdepartmental initiative has been put in place in that regard. Will our guests indicate if there are any difficulties in this area which we intend to deal with in detail in March on receipt of further information from the Office of Public Works?

Mr. Furlong

Let me make a few introductory remarks. I might then ask Mr. Canny if he can provide that type of local detail. I am surmising that the type of difficulty about which you are talking arises perhaps in relation to agreement about what ought to be done at local level where a portion of the area in question may be part of an SAC. The difficulty for us is that the SAC exists and is defined solely on scientific bases. We are, if you like, the guardians of EU law under the habitats directive in that regard. That is the reason we do not have a huge amount of flexibility. We are not permitted to take economic or social considerations on board generally. Perhaps I will ask Mr. Canny to provide some detail.

Acting Chairman

I presume the term "social issues" refers to people's homes being flooded.

Mr. Canny

The particular issue, as far as I can remember it now, was in south Galway when we had floods in certain turloughs. There were proposals to put drains between the turloughs running out to the sea about which we were very concerned. As the Secretary General said we have a responsibility to ensure special areas of conservation are protected on environmental grounds. We actually halted some works while we carried out investigations. Some of the works we then agreed with the county council could and did go ahead. There were other works which we felt would cause environmental damage which have not gone ahead. Subsequently there were some very substantial studies done, funded by the Office of Public Works as far as I remember, in which we collaborated and on which there was actually quite good liaison.

Acting Chairman

One of our primary tasks is to ensure there is value for money. In addition we must ensure services are delivered properly and that any impediments to their delivery are removed. It is obvious that there are difficulties between the Office of Public Works and the Department of the Environment and Local Government. It must also be noted that a number of local authorities want to carry out works for which they cannot obtain funding while others are being given the funding but do not want to proceed with the works. We believe there should be less conflict between these various bodies.

Mr. Furlong referred to the EU aspect of the matter which takes precedence over national laws. However we should discuss the matter to see if it can be resolved. Work on the Kildare bypass was stopped on one occasion because a particular species of snail was discovered in a certain field. I have twice stopped in the middle of Kildare town to watch elderly people trying to cross the road and to witness the extent of the pollution caused by traffic. I felt on those occasions that our priorities were not right. However that was just my opinion. If the work of other Departments is interfered with ways to resolve the problems that arise should be found.

A national study was carried out on behalf of the Office of Public Works into the areas subject to major flooding. Last month we inquired whether this study was analysed and whether investigations were carried out to see if the areas covered were actually flooded. When the analysis to which I refer is presented to the committee it may emerge that conflicts have arisen in respect of certain areas throughout the country. However these can be overcome. If it is the case that people will not take action about flooding because of statutory considerations there will be a national crisis. I do not wish to challenge the EU in respect of this matter but we should be able to resolve our own difficulties.

Mr. Furlong

We have a pretty good liaison relationship with the Office of Public Works, in particular. We would be involved in looking at environmental impact statements in areas where there are conflict points, where there would be SACs. Certainly there is a problem in southGalway because it is a very important environmental area which comprises part of the Burren. The drainage there is extremely difficult, technically. I think the Office of Public Works may have mentioned this.

Acting Chairman

We will have to conclude on that point, Mr. Furlong. Deputy McCormack may have further questions but I must call Deputy Durkan at this point.

Deputy Durkan

On the issue of conflict, the Acting Chairman will be aware that the Joint Committee on European Affairs examined the impact of SACs in certain areas in the midlands and the west. Although inspired by EU legislation SACs are not sacrosanct because it is possible to amend the relevant directive.

My main objection in respect of this matter relates to illogical conflict. I can understand when there is a need to protect certain items of historical interest, etc., but an arbitrary decision taken in Brussels that all areas of a particular nature are to be designated as SACs will have an impact on the quality of life of the people living in those areas. Ultimately we, as politicians, are accountable to the public. On each occasion an election is held members of the public ask questions of us and if they do not like the answer they receive they do not take long to communicate their displeasure. It is that incompatibility which creates most problems in this area. It has been stated that there are more SACs per kilometre in this country than there are in Germany and no one has contradicted this assertion. We need to do something about that as a matter of urgency. Otherwise somebody will say: "If you do not want to do it that way, we will change the whole thing", and there will be no control. That is the last thing we want.

Mr. Furlong

In the last couple of weeks we have completed the notification process for 362 SACs which have been put forward to Brussels as candidate SACs. We found ourselves in fairly serious difficulty with the Commission over the last few years because of our tardiness in getting material to it.

To address the issues you have referred to, a process was put in place following the initial designation of a site as a candidate SAC whereby an appellate mechanism was put in place. That was independent of the Department and operated over a period of years. The outcome of the process was that out of 15,000 farms affected by SAC designation, there were approximately 100 appeals against the designation. So there was extensive consultation. There were regular meetings at local level and we are reasonably content at this stage that we have got the balance right. The difficulty for us is, as I mentioned earlier, that we are regarded by the Commission as the custodians of EU law. If we are seen to be negligent in the manner in which we uphold EU law, the Commission will step in and initiate legal proceedings against us. In fact, there are proceedings against us under SACs generally.

It has also, as you are aware, made it a condition for the release of EU funding under the current round of Structural Funds that we meet our obligations in relation to the notification of SACs so we have had to do that. I fully take on board your point about, for example, the Kildare bypass where, if things had been handled differently, a lot of the difficulties we experienced at the time might not have arisen. It was to get around that difficulty that an agreement was reached between my Department, Dúchas and the National Roads Authority on a code of practice for, as it were, getting together and identifying well in advance of the actual point of implementation of a project where difficulties may or may not arise and to get a way around those difficulties. That consultative process with the NRA was put in place about six months ago and we believe it is working well. We believe, also, that the NRA would agree that it is working well.

We would have to take cognisance of the fact that there is a major national development plan with very significant investment committed to it. Inevitably that is going to bring into conflict development versus conservation. We are hoping that this process of consultation and agreement on a code of practice in relation to archaeology is going to mitigate many of these problems. We are under pressure again however and it is only fair to put it on record. There is what I would describe as the NGO sector looking at this country and complaining to Brussels that we are not doing as much as we ought to do in terms of protection and notification of SACs. We have a problem in keeping that particular lobby on side, as it were, with us.

Deputy Durkan

The only problem is that that particular lobby does not have to stand forelection. It usually lobbies and makes representations——

Mr. Furlong

They bear listening to, Deputy.

Deputy Durkan

There are those who would suggest that it exerts too much influence for its size, importance and so forth. There are other agencies that have the same job but they seem to do it better. It should be mentioned too, in the context of implementing the various directives from Brussels, that there are other European countries that ignore those directives and the basic principles of EU law. They are not the smallest countries either.

Acting Chairman

The Comptroller and Auditor General has compiled a paragraph but the 9,900 good things that were done are ignored and everybody focuses on one particular thing. Dúchas has this problem but as Mr. Furlong pointed out there were 15,000 farms affected and 100 appeals. That paints a different picture. One could say that Dúchas got it right in 14,900 cases. I do not want to argue about that but for Dúchas there are negative connotations because there is publicity about the bad cases, not the good ones.

I prefer to look at the principles involved and my hierarchy of priorities would be different from those of some conservationists. I would always put health and safety first. I am a former industrial safety officer. In Kildare town we did not put public health and safety before conservation. I would not wish to speak about this without experience of it but in both summer and winter I have stopped in Kildare town and either sat or stood around. The inconvenience factor, where elderly people just cannot cross a busy national primary route, is one thing but health and safety is being badly affected by the permanent pollution. If 150 vehicles are stationary on the road and pumping out exhaust fumes, that is a health hazard.

I appreciate the arguments are made in Europe by other people who decide on a hierarchy of priorities but I would put health and safety first. I do not know if that comes under the social aspect as well. Do we have any right to appeal and to say to the person in Europe who is drawing up the directive or applying it that it is a health and safety matter? Would that ever take precedence? Would it come under the social aspect you mentioned?

Mr. Furlong

As we are talking about the Kildare project at the moment——

Acting Chairman

I am using that example because I would rather be specific than generalise. I have taken an interest in it. I go through the town a couple of times a week. It is a specific matter that has to be dealt with. I am not worried about your Department's function in it as such, but about the directive that can force you to do something and what recourse we have to get it changed if it does affect health and safety.

Mr. Furlong

I will ask Mr. Canny to address that, particularly in the case of the Kildare project.

Mr. Canny

The directive allows damage to happen to a SAC if there are reasons such as public health and safety, if it is a project of overriding national importance and if there is no reasonable alternative. I am not sure how familiar you are with the Kildare situation but the idea was to put the road into a cutting. We felt there was an alternative to raise the road which would have done no damage to Pollardstown fen. Initially we objected in the early 1990s but the road was to go ahead. Subsequently, there was an approach from Brussels and the council or the NRA changed the road and raised it higher. It was studied again and there were still concerns. The most recent solution is that the road will be put in a cutting but it will be almost encased in plastic, in a tube. It was really devising an alternative solution which took so long in that case.

Acting Chairman

I am very concerned even though it is not my constituency. I will go back to what the Minister, Deputy de Valera, said recently. If people have to suffer for eight or nine years because of an EU directive, there is something wrong with that directive and I should highlight it and look for change. Kildare is an appalling case, as far as I am concerned. There might be other examples such as south Galway but I am not familiar with it so I will not argue about it. That is not true of the Kildare example. It also shows conservationists and environmentalists in a bad light in that they put that ahead of public health and safety. I might be labouring the point but I would like to know that we have options and an argument. I presume our guests will be arguing these points with their European counterparts and that they will be putting forward the case for alterations to the directive. In my opinion, health and safety is of paramount importance.

Mr. Canny

If I may just reinforce the point, it was agreed by the county council and the NRA that the original plan was not appropriate and that it was going to do environmental damage. In some senses, it is slightly unfair to infer that Dúchas was the cause of the delay. Some of the delays resulted from our pointing out that there were problems with the design. It took a long time to prove that point.

Acting Chairman

When I asked why a particular road was not being built I was informed that it was due to the presence of snails in a certain field. I want to ensure that this does not happen in other areas throughout the country. At this point, I wish to compliment our guests on the work carried out by Dúchas. We are focusing on a particular case, whereas it must be remembered that Dúchas does good work in respect of many other matters.

Mr. Furlong

I wish to emphasise that what has happened in the past has happened and we have all learned lessons from it. Because of the need to ensure that we do not find ourselves in the unfortunate situation of being ready to proceed with major projects with unresolved heritage or archaeological issues, we have now opted for this method of getting in at an early stage, identifying the problems, seeing what the options are and negotiating an agreement. That is the way forward. I am hopeful that we will be able to avoid the problems of the past, the Kildare bypass being the most egregious example of that.

I do not want to belabour the point unnecessarily, but not just the EU monitors what is going on but also NGOs which will signal that a problem exists and get a ready hearing from the Commission. This happened in the case of another variety of snail at Dunbeg golf course, where a development was held up simply because some conservationist group took a view that the golf course management plan - which had been agreed by all concerned - was not as effective as formal SAC protection. We managed to win the argument on that one. So we do argue and we do try to represent the needs or priorities of the State. We are not in the business of, as it were, slavish adherence to directives where it is clear that they are imposing an undue requirement and where there is scope within the terms of the directive to negotiate an easement under particular circumstances, including on health and safety grounds.

Acting Chairman

I would not like to equate the development of a golf course with issues of health and safety. Deputy Durkan is correct that many of those who receive a ready hearing have, if they sought election, been rejected. In my opinion the general public will want to see the approach outlined by Mr. Furlong adopted. It is a pity that this approach was not taken sooner but perhaps the necessary funding was not available. It is important that early dialogue should take place, particularly in the context of the major national programmes we are putting in place.

Deputy Durkan

I referred earlier to heritage houses, a matter in which the Office of Public Works would also have an interest. With regard to heritage sites that are in good condition or which have been restored, the Rock of Cashel, for example, is an impressive sight by day but also by night because of the way it is brilliantly illuminated. I read a number of newspaper articles which outlined why the town of Cashel should be changed to bring their appearance into line with that of the Rock. I do not accept the arguments put forward because, in my opinion, the modern and historical aspects of a place can stand side by side. If we kept everything as it was in the 13th or 14th centuries, there would be no progress. I reject the notion put forward in these articles and I urge the Department to ignore them.

There is a castle - I believe it is of Norman origin - on the road to Cork which has been derelict or semi-derelict for many years.

Acting Chairman

A Kilkenny flag has been flown from that castle on a number of occasions.

Deputy Durkan

I suspect a native of Cork does not own it because I also saw the Kilkenny flag flying from its walls. I suspect that Cork people might want to see it demolished. However, that is not my desire. As Deputy McCormack stated earlier, the person who owns a castle of this nature might find it the subject of a preservation order, a listing or whatever. That is as it should be, but we must find a means - particularly in these affluent times - to renovate such castles and develop them for tourism and educational purposes. Young students would benefit from visiting a restored castle and learn things that they might not otherwise have an opportunity or an inclination to learn. We should ensure that, wherever possible, monuments are floodlit. There are many monuments which are in reasonably good condition and which should be floodlit so that they can be fully appreciated. A number of these are situated in my constituency and I will be putting down further parliamentary questions in respect of them.

There are those who believe that by the gradual erosion of existing settlements the countryside can be restored to what it was 500 years ago. That is an unrealistic, unattainable and unnecessary goal. It has been stated that drainage works, for example, should be limited to particular areas. That is the most ridiculous notion I have ever heard. Most of the people who subscribe to it know nothing about drainage. If all drainage was neglected for a period of 50 or 60 years, the water table would rise throughout the country. Our recent difficulties with flooding did not arise on foot of climatic change, it came about as a result of a lack of drainage.

I was born in the west and when I was growing up the major issue people discussed was the drainage of the River Moy. Everybody said natural fisheries would disappear but they did not disappear. That was 25 years ago and in the last number of years there were more salmon caught in the River Moy than in Scotland and England combined. It is possible, therefore, to marry the two objectives of preserving the environment and ensuring a reasonable quality of life is enjoyed by the people who live in that environment.

I could speak forever on this subject but the Chairman is anxious to bring our proceedings to a conclusion. I will finish with one observation. There are countless old ring forts throughout the country. In the local areas, however, the children see them as mounds unless somebody carries out an archaeological dig. More should be done by way of archaeological research on those ring forts. It need not necessarily be carried out on a rota basis throughout the country but rather to identify them from a local interest point of view to ensure that the younger generation will know more about them. I used to climb into them when I was a child. It is necessary to emphasise the educational benefit of the excavation, for conservation purposes, of these locations.

Acting Chairman

I compliment all involved on the brochures, programmes and so forth that have been produced. A huge amount of good work is being done. That is why I emphasised the point of trying to iron out the negatives.

Mr. Furlong

I appreciate your kind remarks about the work that has been done. Two things might be of interest to the committee. First, there will be a draft heritage plan. It is at an advanced stage of preparation and will be published early next year. The plan will address many of the issues Deputy Durkan mentioned. There will also be a short discussion paper on issues arising in relation to the National Monuments Acts and how they are being policed. This will be an opportunity to promote public debate on them. That is something which should be encouraged.

My final point again emphasises the importance of bringing back to the locality values related to the protection of heritage. One of the more recent initiatives in the Department was the concept of heritage week. There was a heritage week for the first time in 1999 and we repeated it again this year. The focus of heritage week is the type of thing Deputy Durkan spoke about, the richness that exists in a locality and developing better interpretation of projects. Dúchas and the Department want to be fully supportive of all moves towards better and more comprehensive interpretation of national monuments.

Acting Chairman

We have not discussed many items although I am sure you were prepared to do so. However, what was discussed was of great interest and probably had the greatest impact generally in that a great deal of work was involved. You said there were 100,000 sites and monuments. Is there a breakdown of that figure in terms of major and minor sites and in terms of geographical location? Would Cork have more, for example, given the number of settlements in ancient times? I appreciate counties will have different numbers due to the patterns of how people settled. Is there a preponderance in given areas of different things?

Mr. Furlong

There is an archaeological survey done for each county. That is being made available and will be published. Mr. Canny might be able to comment further about the geographical breakdown.

Acting Chairman

I know exactly how many are in Cork.

Mr. Canny

We have a series of maps for each county. There are probably more than 100,000 but we do not have them broken down in that fashion. We can give you a copy of the County Cork survey.

Acting Chairman

I would be interested in that. I appreciate the work——

Mr. Canny

I hope Cork is finished now, after making that promise. If it is finished, we will give you a copy of the Cork survey.

Acting Chairman

All of us would subscribe to the view that the work is excellent. We will from time to time offer criticism but you have got little today. You have a clean bill of health financially and otherwise. We will note Votes 41 and 42. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I thank Mr. Furlong and his staff for their attendance and the answers they supplied. Our apologies for the break in proceedings but voting in the House takes precedence. We do not wish to be national monuments yet.

Is there any other business under Item 8? We need to agree the agenda for Thursday, 21 January, which is Tipperary North Riding VEC, annual financial statement, 1994-95, and the general report of the Comptroller and Auditor General on the education sector, 1995 accounts, relevant sections, all resumed. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The witnesses withdrew.

The committee adjourned at 1.40 p.m. until11 a.m. on Thursday, 21 December 2000.