I welcome everybody to the meeting. Before we deal with the annual report of the Comptroller and Auditor General and 2008 appropriation accounts on Vote 23 — Property Registration Authority, chapter 18 — Digital Mapping, and special report No. 69 — Managing Sickness Absence in the Civil Service, I invite Mr. Buckley to make a statement on the issue of the Central Bank and travel.
Business of Committee.
Mr. John Buckley (An tArd Reachtaire Cúntas agus Ciste) called and examined.
Mr. Buckley
Footnote 41 to appendix C to chapter 3 of my report, Internal Control and Governance in FÁS, which was laid before Dáil Éireann on 28 January 2010, indicated that in one organisation a single trip, on which 52 spouses travelled, was undertaken as part of an official spouses' programme.
The survey response upon which the material was based had stated that the agency paid for the flights of 52 spouses of staff members travelling by invitation to an official spouses' programme where attendance was expected, or of benefit to the country. It went on to say that any such attendance was approved on an individual basis.
The agency involved has now clarified that the 52 trips involving spouses were undertaken in connection with a set of international meetings. The original information was derived from a survey response which, as indicated in the report, at Footnote 19, was not subject of independent audit check.
Because the survey response referred to a programme in the singular, it was wrongly interpreted as a single event. I regret the fact that this has happened and that politicians and the press who relied on the content of our report were misled.
The reasons the agencies involved in the survey were not associated with detailed findings in report 73 was because of the following: the report dealt with the public accountability of FÁS only; any reporting of the material relating to surveyed organisations in an accountability context, other than in aggregate terms, would have to be done in a context where the agencies had an opportunity to comment on the report and where there was an appropriate level of independent validation of the content by my office; and while the aggregate findings were used for benchmark purposes in report 73, in future it is intended to use the material provided in the course of the survey generally as a basis for follow up inquiries in the course of financial audit work which is now proceeding and any results following normal clearance procedures will be publicly reported.
The text of the revised footnote is as follows:
The survey response from one agency had stated that the agency paid for the flights of 52 spouses of staff members travelling by invitation to an official spouses' programme where attendance was expected or of benefit to the country. Subsequent to the publication of this report the agency has clarified that the flights did not relate to a single event but rather to a set of events connected with its business. This is, therefore, an amended version of the original footnote.
Arrangements have been made to amend the Internet versions and insert errata slips into hard copies.
This issue arose from the publication of the report on FÁS by the Comptroller and Auditor General on Thursday last. We will pursue the issues raised in that report at a hearing here on 14 February.
On the issue referred to now by Mr. Buckley, the committee has decided to write to the Central Bank requesting full information on the visits by spouses abroad. We will ask for the number of trips, the specific business related to the trips, who travelled on the trips and the purpose of the business of the spouses on those trips. We would expect to receive that information because the committee has jurisdiction over the Central Bank in matters of value for money and it will be under that heading that we will seek that information.
On our draft programme for the coming sessions, over three sittings in the period between 22 April and 6 May, we have planned to invite in the Financial Regulator about a report on financial regulation that will be issued by the Comptroller and Auditor General shortly.
We will also have the office of the Minister for Finance with us, as well as the National Treasury Management Agency. We will deal with the Comptroller and Auditor General's report on national debt, the functions of the National Treasury Management Agency and the performance of the State Claims Agency as well as the National Development Finance Agency.
In the context of what went on in recent days, we will invite the Central Bank to appear before this committee at one of these sessions on value for money. The committee believes the issue that has been referred to comes under the umbrella of the value for money responsibilities and our responsibility to ensure that value for money is obtained by the Central Bank.
This must be taken in the overall context of the Central Bank's role to police the financial institutions in the State. We must keep in mind the bigger picture, that it is estimated that approximately €11 billion was lost to us by the failure of the financial institutions and the Central Bank to police them over recent years. We cannot lose sight of the bigger picture in all of this.
On the Chairman's comment on €11 billion, this committee has not concluded that there was €11 billion lost.
That is my estimate.
It is a personal comment.
It is just an opinion.
If we are talking about that period, we must invite Mr. Patrick Neary. He was the man in charge during the years. It is no good bringing in the current man who had nothing to do with it. We want Mr. Neary in here to answer for decisions.
All right.
We should bring in Mr. John Hurley, who was Governor of the Central Bank. As I understand it, if we read the Act properly, Mr. Neary should have reported to Mr. Hurley and the questions were not asked.
We will take all those recommendations into account and we will decide on the people to whom we would like to speak over the coming weeks. I provided an outline of our plans to deal with this issue and to deal with the bigger picture, which is of far more relevance.
To clarify, we intend pursuing the issue of public moneys being spent on foreign travel by State agencies as a separate piece of work.
Yes.
Obviously, the 52 spouses who travelled from the Central Bank would form part of that.
On 14 February we will deal with that report, which was done by the Comptroller and Auditor General. One issue missed totally by people who commented on the report, was that other agencies had been involved in travelling first class at an unacceptable level. I do not remember fully, but I believe there were 14 or 18 first class trips taken. We must get to grips with what is going on in other State agencies. I realise the Comptroller and Auditor General will examine this in more detail.
I refer to the Central Bank and the report in question. I wish to know more of the background to the 2003 Act because that legislation split the agency into two, with one reporting to the other. There is a debate going on throughout the country and a suggestion that the Act was weakened as a result of previous Act, and this has led to many of the problems we have now with the Central Bank and regulation.
We should bear in mind that may be a policy issue.
No, it is in the public arena.
We will plan our programme accordingly. The committee will take legal advice regarding its powers in respect of the Central Bank. We shall get on with the business of today because I am aware people have a schedule to keep.