COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS debate -
Thursday, 26 Jan 2012

Business of Committee

Chairman

The first item on the agenda is the minutes of the meeting of 19 January 2012. Are they agreed? Agreed. No matters arise from those minutes.

The next item is correspondence received since the meeting held on Thursday, 19 January 2012. Correspondence dated 13 January 2012 was received from Mr. Michael O'Leary, chief executive, Ryanair, forwarding a letter sent to Mr. Cathal Guiomard, Commissioner for Aviation Regulation, regarding the 2010 annual report of the Commission for Aviation Regulation. It is to be noted and published. It is to be forwarded to the Commission for Aviation Regulation for a note on the issues raised and the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport for appropriate follow-up. I would like to see a copy of the reply to Mr. O'Leary. Arising from the information we receive on the matters raised, we may schedule a hearing with the Commission for Aviation Regulation before the summer.

Deputy Simon Harris

It is absolutely appropriate that we try to schedule that hearing. When Mr. O'Leary or any other individual involved in job creation and enterprise reports concerns about the spending of public money in his industry, we should take it very seriously. The letter raises many issues regarding the role of the Commission for Aviation Regulation and how it spends public funds. I would be very interested in that hearing.

Chairman

No. 3.2 is correspondence dated 16 January 2012 from Mr. Tom Hayes, secretary of the Alliance Victim Support Group, in respect of right of place. It is to be noted and published. We have been assured by the HSE that it was dealing directly with this matter and we will forward this correspondence to the Accounting Officer asking that the concerns raised by Mr. Hayes be dealt with comprehensively.

Correspondence was received on 18 January 2012 from Ms Geraldine Tallon, Secretary General, Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, providing a note on the compulsory purchase order on lands at Three Trouts, Charlesland, Greystones, as previously requested by the committee. It is to be noted and published. Deputies Ferris and Harris were particularly interested in this issue. Would they like to comment?

Deputy Simon Harris

I find the response more baffling than the lack of a response over six months. The response we finally received, signed not by the Secretary General but by the private secretary to the office of the Secretary General, refers to the fact that this committee wrote to the Department and that it received the letter on 22 July 2011. We received our first response, of any description, on 18 January 2012. That, in itself, is strongly insulting. There is no explanation as to what the Department did with our correspondence over the six months. I would be very interested in hearing one.

There are more issues. Both Deputy Ferris and I sought clarity on the purpose of the investigation into the Department's role, the terms of reference, the name of the senior counsel and the timeframe for the investigation. We received none of these details other than the fact that the investigation exists. If one reads the last paragraph on the first page, one will see it states the Attorney General contacted the Department and that in response, the Department wrote back seeking the appointment of a senior counsel to carry out the review. It is within the Department's gift to give us this information. It is not an investigation arising from the Attorney General's office but one a Department has requested. I ask respectfully that we be provided with a written brief. This is an issue both Deputy Ferris and I raised on numerous occasions.

As a message to all Accounting Officers, the Chairman should reiterate that it is absolutely appalling that there has been media comment on this. There have obviously been leaks from the Department, yet the first time the Department bothered to correspond with the committee was six months after it wrote to it. It is simply not good enough. Our constituents in County Wicklow will look at this letter none the wiser, despite two members of this committee having raised the matter on so many occasions.

Deputy Anne Ferris

I agree with Deputy Harris. The information in the letter we received was wrong. The third paragraph states the elected members of Wicklow County Council raised this issue for the first time with the Committee of Public Accounts on 19 July 2011 and that it was brought to the attention of the Department. It was not raised by members of Wicklow County Council. They did not contact this committee. I wrote, as the Chairman knows, and we followed on with the Department. The Department did not even see the origin of the letters from me and the Chairman. That just reflects how tardy the Department has been in dealing with this. If it gets that much wrong, I despair about the outcome. Deputy Harris had asked for the terms of reference of the inquiry and we have noted what we got back. If a comprehensive reply is sent to us, that will be good, but at present I believe this committee has been treated with absolute contempt by the officials, as has been stated.

Chairman

I will ask the clerk to write reflecting the views expressed this morning by both Deputies Ferris and Harris and that those views represent those of the committee on this issue. The letter will seek a response. Following last week's meeting, the clerk wrote also. We will do the same this week because we need to get on with our work.

A copy of the correspondence we received will be forwarded to Councillor Barry Nevin for information. Further correspondence is awaited arising from concerns raised by the two members, and members will have an opportunity to raise this issue directly with the Accounting Officer at our meeting of 15 March 2012. Arising from this meeting, we will send another letter.

No. 3.4 is correspondence, dated 18 January 2012, from Mr. John Moriarty, Dublin Waterworld Limited, regarding the National Aquatic Centre and an incorrect VAT charge. It will be noted and published. A copy will be forwarded to the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport for its information. The committee will revisit chapter 31, National Sports Campus, on 16 February and any issues related to this correspondence may be raised at that meeting.

No. 3.5 is correspondence received on 20 January 2012 from Mr. Ray Mitchell, parliamentary and regulatory affairs division, Health Service Executive, regarding the forwarding of updated information on matters to be considered at the meeting of 26 January 2012, as previously requested by the committee. It will be noted and published.

No. 3.6 is correspondence, dated 23 January 2012, from Mr. Gerard Moyne, life member, Irish Red Cross Society, regarding the appearance of the Irish Red Cross Society before the committee on 19 January 2012. It will be noted and published. A copy will be forwarded to the Irish Red Cross Society and the Department of Defence for their information. It is clear that further correspondence is to follow.

No. 3.6 is correspondence received on 25 January 2012 from Mr. Cathal Magee, chief executive, Health Service Executive, regarding his opening statement. It will be noted and published.

No. 4 is reports on the statements and accounts received since the meeting of 19 January 2012. Everything from No. 4.1 down to No. 4.10 is to be noted, unless members have any comments they wish to make thereon. If not, the work programme is to be noted.

If there is no other business members wish to raise, can we agree the agenda for the meeting to be held on Thursday, 2 February: 2010 annual report of the Comptroller and Auditor General and appropriation accounts - Vote 20, Garda Síochána - chapter 21, fingerprint system. Is that agreed? Agreed.