COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS debate -
Thursday, 26 Apr 2018

Vote 24: Justice and Equality

Ms Oonagh McPhillips (Acting Secretary General, Department of Justice and Equality) called and examined.

Chairman

I welcome everyone to consideration of the Chapter 13 - development of ICT systems by the Department of Justice and Equality, and the appropriation accounts Vote 24 - Justice and Equality.

We are joined by officials from the Department of Justice and Equality and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. From the Department of Justice and Equality I welcome Ms Oonagh McPhillips, acting Secretary General to the meeting. It is Ms McPhillips's first meeting at the Committee of Public Accounts in that capacity. She is accompanied by Mr. Donncha O'Sullivan, Mr. John O'Callaghan, Mr. Michael Kirrane, Mr. Seamus Clifford, Mr. John Kennedy, Mr. Noel Dowling and Ms Anne Marie Treacy from the Department. From the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform we are joined by Mr. Eoin Dormer. All of the witnesses are very welcome to today's meeting.

I remind members, witnesses and those in the public gallery to turn off their mobile phones. Putting phones onto silent mode is not adequate because it will interfere with the recording system.

I advise witnesses that by virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, they are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to this committee. If they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and they continue to do so, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of that evidence. Witnesses are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and they are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person, persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.

Members of the committee are reminded of the provisions of Standing Order 186 to the effect that the committee shall refrain from inquiring into the merits of a policy or policies of the Government or a Minister of the Government or the merits of the objectives of such policies. While we expect witnesses to answer questions put by the committee clearly and with candour, witnesses will be treated fairly and with respect and consideration at all times, in line with the witness protocol, which is standard in the House for all Oireachtas committees.

The lead speaker for this session is Deputy Alan Kelly, who will have 20 Minutes, and the second speaker is Deputy Jonathan O'Brien who will have 15 minutes. Other members have indicated in the following sequence: Deputies Marc MacSharry, David Cullinane, Catherine Connolly and Catherine Murphy.

I invite Mr. Andy Harkness from the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General to make the opening statement.

Mr. Andy Harkness

Vote 24 for justice and equality provides funding for a broad range of services and activities undertaken directly by the Department of Justice and Equality, or funded by the Department through the provision of grants. This includes the Irish Probation Service, the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service, the Office of the State Pathologist, the Garda Ombudsman Commission and many others. An overview of the main funded services and agencies is given in a summary diagram attached to this statement.

Members will also be aware that, in 2016, Vote 24 was one of eight Votes that made up the justice group. The others were the Votes for An Garda Síochána, the Irish Prison Service, the Courts Service, the Property Registration Authority, the Valuation Office, the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, and the Policing Authority. These were all areas for which the Department had policy and legislative responsibility, but which are funded and accounted for separately.

Since 2016, there have been a number of significant changes in the organisational landscape of the justice group. For example, responsibility for the Charities Regulatory Authority transferred from the Department of Justice and Equality to the Department of Rural and Community Development in 2017. The Votes for the Property Registration Authority and the Valuation Office transferred to the housing, planning and local government Vote group in 2018. The 2016 appropriation account for Vote 24 records gross expenditure of almost €390 million in the year, spread across five spending programmes, as indicated in the figures provided. More detail on the composition of the respective programmes can be seen in note 3 to the appropriation account.

On the receipts side, appropriations in aid of the Vote totalled almost €65 million in 2016. Almost three quarters of this related to a range of fees charged in respect of immigration registration, nationality and citizenship certification and visa issuance. For the Vote as a whole, there was a net underspend of €25.5 million relative to the Estimate provision for 2016. This surplus was liable for surrender.

The Comptroller and Auditor General was satisfied, following the audit, that the account properly presents the transactions on the Vote during 2016. He drew attention, however, in the audit report to certain concerns around the development by the Department of a number of information and communications technology, or ICT, projects.

The Department provides ICT support services for many functional areas and for agencies within the Vote group. Between 2012 and 2016, its activity in this regard included projects for three of the agencies it grant funds: a case management system for the Insolvency Service of Ireland; a reporting and registration system for the Charities Regulatory Authority; and an online licence renewal system for the Private Security Authority. The Department had incurred direct project costs of around €4.6 million to the end of March 2017 on these projects, with €3.6 million of this relating to the Insolvency Service of Ireland. Functional gaps remain in the systems developed for the Insolvency Service of Ireland and the Charities Regulatory Authority. Both organisations are in the process of procuring replacement systems from the marketplace.

Our examination found that the projects, which were different in scale, complexity and background, had a number of shortcomings in relation to planning and oversight. The report includes recommendations in relation to strengthening the Department’s systems and procedures in the areas of business case development, adoption and monitoring of project budgets, and project governance. The Accounting Officer accepted all the recommendations and will be able to brief the committee on their implementation.

The Comptroller and Auditor General's report on the audit of the appropriation account also drew attention to non-effective expenditure of €3.89 million in relation to the fit-out and rent of a property leased for the Probation Service in 2008. Due to planning restrictions, the property could not be used for the purposes for which it was acquired, and the Department could not find an alternative use for the premises. Legal proceedings in relation to the lease were settled in late 2016. A summary of the events leading to the settlement is presented in note 6.8 of the account. The Comptroller and Auditor General reported in 2012 about the problems with the lease.

The previous Committee of Public Accounts sought to examine the matter on foot of his report but could not proceed at the time because of the legal proceedings.

Finally, the Comptroller and Auditor General drew attention in the audit report to non-competitive procurement of goods and services to the value of €6.1 million disclosed by the Accounting Officer in the statement on internal financial control.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Harkness. I now call Ms McPhillips to make her opening statement.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Vote of the Department of Justice and Equality covers a wide remit, encompassing both the administrative divisions of the Department and a broad range of offices and agencies across the justice and equality sector. In all, there are approximately 60 individual subheads reflected in the Vote across five expenditure programmes.

I refer first to the Comptroller and Auditor General's report on the development of ICT systems. It is important to note at the outset that the Department fully accepts the recommendations in the report and there is now in place a much stronger governance structure than when the projects in question commenced. The largest project mentioned in the Insolvency Service of Ireland started over five years ago and was completed in 2016 at a cost of €3.6 million. The context in which this was achieved was, by any standard, unprecedented. The establishment of the new service was a top troika priority and was monitored weekly at the time by the Government and the Cabinet committee on mortgage arrears as well as by the troika in their regular reviews. The Department was given the task of setting up the Insolvency Service of Ireland, ISI, and the director designate was appointed in November 2012 while work continued on the draft legislation going through the Oireachtas. Given the state of national indebtedness, this was a core deliverable in the troika agreement and, obviously, an ICT system would be required in order that this commitment could deliver on its mandate. This was achieved in very pressurised circumstances and the ISI opened its doors in September 2013. While key staff were still in the process of being recruited, the Department's ICT division has engaged in respect of the development on an urgent basis of an online case management system. Because of the need to deliver the system quickly, a decision was taken to develop it in-house within the existing Lotus Notes environment. This was undertaken by the Department's own IT team with support from contractors under established contracts. While the case management system, the OCMS, is sometimes described as a single project, it is in fact an extensive and complex system which supports several elements linked to the personal insolvency infrastructure introduced by the 2012 Act. It comprises two websites and three separate elements: the interface with the Money Advice and Budgeting Service and registration of practitioners; the interface with the Courts Service, which is unique and groundbreaking and works well; and the case management system itself. Various developments in the legislative structure meant the requirements were somewhat difficult to define, which contributed to the complexities of the system design and implementation. Nevertheless, it was recognised in an external review we commissioned in 2016 that the hard work and co-operation by the joint project team resulted in the initial application going live on day one, as required, in September 2013.

It is accepted that difficulties emerged in the project for a period after this, which led to the then Secretary General putting in place strengthened governance arrangements, including the appointment of an experienced external chair and a new project board from February 2015. It is also acknowledged that there are ongoing shortcomings within the existing system, particularly the level of manual intervention required as well as gaps in the management information and reporting needs of the service. In the past year, the ISI, with support and oversight from the Department and the Office of Government Procurement, OGP, has gone to the market for a new system, and I understand that procurement process is now nearing conclusion. By the time this is implemented, the existing ICT system will have been operational for approximately five years and will have been depreciated in full. As Accounting Officer, I continue to work towards strengthening controls and implementing both internal and external audit recommendations. In addition to the strengthening of the project management and governance arrangements, we are undertaking a comprehensive risk assessment across all aspects of ICT operations. A further ongoing audit is reviewing the controls in place in a representative number of the bodies and agencies and how these organisations link back to the central ICT shared service. The outcome of these audits will assist us in further strengthening the controls and management of the function across the Department.

Turning to other matters in Vote 24, members may recall that my predecessor provided an update to the committee last May on the leased premises on Wolfe Tone Street, which was procured in 2008 for use by the Probation Service. As the Comptroller and Auditor General's office has pointed out, this was the subject of legal proceedings which were concluded in late 2016. This is now reflected in the 2016 appropriation account. It was previously the subject of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General in his 2011 report. The central issue in this case was assurance provided by the vendor in respect of planning permission for the premises. In his 2011 report, the Comptroller and Auditor General outlined that it was reasonable for the Department to rely on the legal advice provided in respect of the planning permission. The total cost in respect of this matter, including the legal settlement in 2016, was €3.89 million. The settlement was based on strong legal advice and resulted in closure of the matter, thus avoiding any further costs accruing to the State. The Department relied on legal advice at all times in respect of this matter.

Throughout 2016, the Department was also implementing its programme for change arising from the 2014 Toland report. Over the past four years, we have focused on measures to strengthen our revised culture and identify and embed behavioural change. All of this is supported by robust governance frameworks, revised management processes and formal agreements with the relevant agencies of the Department. We continue to review and update these with a view to driving further improvement in the processes. In 2017 the management board decided it would be timely to review progress on the implementation of the programme and engaged external experts to do this in a rigorous and independent manner. That report was published earlier this year and it identified that significant progress has been made and also where more has to be done. The board agreed with the analysis, which reflects its own view and feedback from staff across the Department. I circulated details of the progress being made, and this is also published in more detail on the Department's website, so I will not detain the committee with that.

Arrangements for the governance of agencies, which is a particular focus, have been formalised and strengthened. At the end of 2017, framework agreements were in place with 23 agencies. These are all published on our website. The process of updating and renewing annual oversight agreements for 2018 has begun and, again, these will be published when agreed. Seven have been published to date this year.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Can we get this up on the screen properly? I was reading it and I got lost.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Sorry. I skipped a page to facilitate the committee.

Deputy Alan Kelly

We have so many people here that we tend to read from the screen. Can we get online?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Is the Deputy okay now?

Deputy Alan Kelly

Yes.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Responsibility for a number of agencies was transferred during 2017, as the Comptroller and Auditor General has said. Again, this move is in line with recommendations in the Toland report. Obviously, these moves are a matter for Government and policy, but we continue to evaluate the strategic fit of agencies within the Department with a view to achieving better alignment.

An ongoing and key aspect of the change programme is the proposed restructuring of the Department, which members will have heard about. In 2016, we engaged external experts to help us evaluate the broad structure of the organisation and to advise how it could be more effectively organised to deliver on strategic and business objectives.

Members will also be aware of the report of the independent review of the response of the Department to a request for a document from the disclosures tribunal, carried out by Mr. Michael Collins, SC, which was published at the end of March. Obviously, I cannot trespass on the tribunal's ongoing deliberations but I note the finding that there was no attempt to conceal information from the tribunal and that officials acted in good faith at all times. It is also reassuring that the review found no evidence of any failure to comply with orders from the tribunal. It is of course a matter of concern that emails were not located as part of the discovery process, and we are putting new measures in place that are aimed at ensuring that an oversight of this kind cannot happen in future. These new measures include the use of specialist consultants, where needed, for discovery and the establishment of a separate unit to interact with tribunals and commissions. There is also a Civil Service-wide initiative under way in respect of electronic file management which will help to ensure that electronic documents can more easily be associated with relevant files. The report of this was submitted to the Department's management board in October 2017, and the primary recommendation - sorry, I am after messing up my own pages, I think. I am on the page that begins "The report was submitted to the management board in October 2017". This concerns the restructuring. I have just a few paragraphs left.

Chairman

How many paragraphs are there to go?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

About three or four, if that is okay. This is about the restructuring.

Deputy Alan Kelly

There is an issue of different versions going on here, I think. There are two different-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am just trying to skip little bits rather than delay the committee. I apologise for delaying the committee in doing so.

Chairman

It is hard to keep up.

Deputy Alan Kelly

The lady operating the equipment cannot know when Ms McPhillips is going to skip certain parts.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Sure. I will read the rest of it then.

Chairman

Where are we now, so we can-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am talking about the restructuring of the Department.

Chairman

What is the start of the paragraph?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

"The report was submitted to the Department's management board in October 2017."

Chairman

Where is that in the script?

Deputy David Cullinane

It is on the missing page.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

My apologies.

Chairman

We will work it out. It is just a question of relying on-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Sure.

Deputy David Cullinane

It is an ICT problem.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I think the problem is that I have got my pages mixed up. Can members find the paragraph?

Chairman

Not yet.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

In the script Ms McPhillips has, the paragraphs are very-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes, exactly.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

It is the second paragraph on page 6.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I have a larger type version, so the page numbers are not the same.

Chairman

I understand. What is the start of Ms McPhillips's next paragraph?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

"The restructuring is a key priority". Does the committee have it?

Deputy Alan Kelly

I believe this is a different version.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Actually, the committee has it. What I read is towards the end of the paragraph in question.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

"The restructuring".

Deputy Bobby Aylward

I see it. "The restructuring is a key priority".

Chairman

The issue is simple - we have a submission with a longer paragraph than Ms McPhillips's.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am sorry.

Chairman

Where she started her paragraph was half way down ours. Ours starts: "An ongoing and key aspect of the change programme". Will Ms McPhillips return to that point? That is page 6.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

An ongoing and key aspect of the change programme is the restructuring of the Department. We have engaged external experts to help us evaluate the broad structure and advise on how it could be more effectively organised to deliver on strategic and business objectives. The report was submitted to the management board in October 2017 and its primary recommendation on restructuring the Department into two portfolios - home affairs and justice and equality - was agreed. The restructuring is a key priority and an implementation group has commenced work, which will assist the work of the independent effectiveness and renewal group appointed by the Minister in January. This group, chaired by Mr. Pádraig Ó Ríordáin, has met the Minister and me as well as the management board and is currently engaging with a range of stakeholders.

In line with its terms of reference, the group will assess progress in implementing the recommendations of the Toland report, reviewing the structure and culture of the Department and examining the relationship between the Department and An Garda Síochána. The group will provide progress reports to the Government and the Oireachtas, the first of which is due at the end of June, with quarterly reports thereafter. The Minister will then provide a progress report and recommendations for any further action in the first quarter of 2019. We will continue to engage with and fully support the group in its important work.

Members will be aware that the report of the independent review of the Department's response to requests for documents from the disclosures tribunal was published at the end of March. I cannot trespass on the tribunal's ongoing deliberations, but I note the finding that there was no attempt to conceal information from it and that officials acted at all times in good faith. It is also reassuring that the review found no evidence of any failure to comply with orders from the tribunal. It is of course a matter of concern that emails were not located as part of the discovery process and we are putting new measures in place. I believe I have read the rest of this section before, so I will not do so again, if that is all right with the Chairman.

The final part of my submission relates to the post of Secretary General. As deputy secretary, I became acting Secretary General.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Where is that in the submission?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is not. My comment is just for the information of the committee.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

It is ad lib.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. I became acting Secretary General when my predecessor retired last November. I have been designated as Accounting Officer and I fulfil most, if not all, of the functions of that position, including accounting to the committee. My understanding is that the Government will advertise the position when the effectiveness and renewal group reports in June.

I apologise for the confusion.

Chairman

It is fine. Before I call Deputies, I will seek some clarification for people who are watching this meeting. Ms McPhillips stated that the Department was to be restructured into two portfolios. The first was home affairs, a name we are used to hearing where the British Ministry is concerned. Ms McPhillips might explain what is meant by "home affairs" and "justice and equality".

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

In the UK, "home affairs" is policing, prisons, probation and everything else we think of as being the criminal justice system and its related agencies. In the UK, "justice" largely refers to the courts, tribunals, access to justice, legal aid and so forth.

Chairman

Under which one are the courts?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Ministry of Justice. Essentially, the old Lord Chancellor's office became the Ministry of Justice.

Chairman

Where would immigration issues fall?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

In the Home Office in the UK. Our model is slightly different, as our Department covers a range of issues that the Home Office does not, for example, insolvency. A range of matters must be decided.

Chairman

As well as policing and criminal matters, our home affairs would cover immigration and insolvency.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is exactly what we are working out.

Chairman

Ms McPhillips might send us a briefing note.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am happy to do that.

Chairman

Is there a draft document within the Department that a member of staff could have emailed to us?

Deputy Alan Kelly

The document should relate to the Irish version. We should not be----

Chairman

We do not want to see the British version.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely. It is based on the Mazars report, which is published on the Department's website.

Chairman

Does that specify what falls under home affairs?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Chairman

Ms McPhillips might ask one of her officials to contact her office or liaise with our secretariat in the next few minutes. There will be a break at lunch.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is no problem.

Chairman

I would like to have the document in my hand as the meeting progresses.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

A new system is being proposed.

Chairman

With big changes.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

When is this-----

Chairman

No, I will let Deputy Kelly contribute first. Big changes lie ahead.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I am only-----

Deputy Bobby Aylward

I am just asking for clarification. I am not going to-----

Chairman

This is an important issue and, before we do anything else, we want to have an understanding of it. I am not even clear on it myself.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

To be clear, I may have misled the Chairman concerning the UK. It has two separate Ministries. In line with the Mazars report, we have decided on an administrative split into two portfolios within the Department.

Chairman

With one Minister.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is why each will be headed by a deputy secretary. For the time being, it will remain a single Department. Whether it splits in two is a political decision. The effectiveness and renewal group is examining the report and will make recommendations in terms of a political split.

Chairman

I will get our staff to speak with some of Ms McPhillips's staff now off camera. If the information is on the website, we can download and circulate it.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is.

Chairman

I am not referring to the full report, but to the key point on the division into two.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That would be no problem.

Chairman

Having it would be useful so that the committee might know where the Department is going. We will be able to have it circulated shortly if it can be downloaded.

Deputy Kelly is the lead speaker today.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I welcome the officials and wish them the best of luck, in particular the acting Secretary General. I appreciate that she has a difficult job. Indeed, it is probably one of the most difficult jobs in the Civil Service. I say that genuinely.

Before I discuss IT matters, I will ask Ms McPhillips to bring a message to her Department's policing division. Yesterday, I attended the justice committee for three hours. Without much notification, the acting Garda Commissioner and the deputy commissioner did not bother to turn up. It was an insult to the democratic institutions of the State and a joke. I do not doubt that one of them could have attended. For example, the deputy commissioner was handing out certificates at Templemore, but no one was being conferred until 2 p.m. and the meeting was at 9 a.m. I hope that Ms McPhillips will communicate my message through the Department. The committee was disgusted by what happened. We could not get accountability because the chief person who attended was not able to answer many of our questions, given his role in the organisation. He was not ranked.

Turning to the IT projects that have come under scrutiny, there was an ICT governance group. I welcome that Ms McPhillips has openly stated that there were issues in this regard, as it is not always the case. An ICT governance group was in place, but did it actually do much? Did it not spot some of these issues? I am a former IT manager. Did the group not see the-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The governance group's remit was focused in its initial few years on new programmes, large developments and so forth. There was a governance process around them. The decision taken in respect of the Insolvency Service of Ireland, ISI, was to do it in-house, so it did not form part of a new contract. There was no procurement process, as it was done by developers attached to our IT division. That choice was made deliberately in order to achieve speed and avoid a lengthy procurement process like the one we are now going through with separate projects.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Should the Department have involved outside people?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

To be honest, the decision taken was the only viable one at the time because of the pressure to have the ISI up and running within a short period following the legislation's passage. That happened.

Deputy Alan Kelly

The Department was a victim of the circumstances, in that, after the legislation was passed, it had to put these provisions in place.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That applies to the two issues.

Deputy Alan Kelly

It was bad planning, although I do not mean on the Department's part.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It had to do with the circumstances at the time. Everyone will recall the troika's priorities and the pressure to deliver on same. The Department did deliver on them.

The system is not perfect, but large elements of it are working fine. In fact, the piece I mentioned in terms of the interface with the courts is unique in its approach. The court based process for insolvency is paperless with things being done on screen, just as the committee does things on screen. It was a choice made at the time to make sure it could be done as easily as possible.

Deputy Alan Kelly

One of the recommendations is that the Department should review its governance approach to planning and managing complex ICT development projects to ensure the system developed is fit for purpose and will achieve value for money. What lessons have been learned? In large-scale IT projects - I have been involved in a number, including the bringing in of the Leap card which was an IT project - there is always an iterative learning process and a process of continuous review. It is part of management practice. Did that take place?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. The governance process has evolved quite considerably since 2012 and 2014 when this was done. Now with the Department's ITC governance group, it covers all projects. As usual, new business and any development in terms of upgrades have to come to the governance group with a business case and a set budget. They are also tracked by the governance group through their development and it reports back within various timelines. As well as this, we carry out a post-implementation review when a project is over to try to take up the learnings.

Deputy Alan Kelly

What were the key learnings in the post-implementation reviews of the three projects?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The main issue is governance and keeping an eye on it. The other thing is the need to be very clear at the beginning on requirements. As I mentioned, one of the complications is that we were trying to design something for a moving target. Initially, the legislation was still being developed and staff were still being recruited. Their requirements were still being defined and that was an issue in developing an IT system. Clarity at the beginning of a process is key. The other issue is the processes of the governance group and making sure people are clear on their roles and to whom they report. We have also appointed external members to the governance groups; therefore, we have an expert from Revenue which has a very large IT operation, from which we have gained. We also have an external member who gained a lot of experience in a past life of development.

Deputy Alan Kelly

On reading the documentation I had a degree of sympathy - I say in jest that this is coming from me - because if we look at the projects, there were moving targets. In a previous life I was involved in large-scale IT projects. If those involved do not have defined terms and goals, they really face extended costs and timelines. As part of the process with the troika, potentially we could see other IT projects that were still ongoing and coming before us from other Departments as a result of similar circumstances.

I will jump around the place with reference to other areas. The premises of the Probation Service constitutes a very unusual story, of which Ms McPhillips outlined a little in her opening statement. From where did the calculation of €1.8 million as the settlement figure come?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am not sure. It was the settlement figure agreed to between the parties. I presume there was an element of a lease cost-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

Will Ms McPhillips get it and break it down for us?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

the figure of €1.8 million.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Yes.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am not sure I can break it down, but I can ask my colleague to come back to me on it and revert to the Deputy, if that is okay?

Deputy Alan Kelly

No problem. What were the issues with planning permission?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

As far as I can recall, planning permission had been granted in 2001 for office use and lapsed in 2006.

Deputy Alan Kelly

My real issue is how could the legal advisers who worked with the Department recommend that it sign the lease when it did not have planning permission.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Permission for a change of use had been granted early on.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Did someone just mess up?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely, a mistake was made.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Are there consequences for the people who made the mistake because it involves a lot of taxpayers' money?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The decision taken subsequently was to try to reduce the exposure of the State as quickly as possible. When we discovered the mistake, we very quickly stopped paying for the lease, which obviously left us open to possible liability because we were involved in a legal contract, but we felt it was the best thing to do to reduce the liability of the State.

Deputy Alan Kelly

It is bizarre that the Department received legal advice to take on a lease when it did not have planning permission. Somebody did not do their job. There is an exposure to the taxpayer and there has to be some way of chasing it down the line.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Deputy understands legal advice comes from a different agency.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I know that.

Chairman

According to Ms McPhillips's opening statement, the total was €3.89 million.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Ms McPhillips might not have it today, but-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is no problem; I can break down the figure of €3.89 million. It is the figue of €1.8 million with which I have a difficulty.

Chairman

Will Ms McPhillips briefly gives us the breakdown?

Deputy Alan Kelly

This is on the Chairman's time.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It breaks down as follows. The figure of €1.8 million is the legal settlement. There is a write-off of €1.068 million in terms of the fit-out and refurbishment costs-----

Chairman

Will Ms McPhillips go through it line by line?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There was a write-off of €1.068 million which was the amount spent in the fit-out.

Chairman

Therefore, the Department spent that amount, but it did not get to use the building.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There was €1 million paid out in rental costs before the lease was ceased.

Chairman

Therefore, €1 million was paid in rent.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Chairman

Approximately another €1 million was spent in kitting out the building.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Exactly.

Chairman

There was a settlement figure of €1.8 million-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

To get out of the lease.

Deputy Alan Kelly

It is extraordinary stuff and an absolute waste of money.

Chairman

Yes.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No doubt.

Deputy Alan Kelly

My real issue is that I know that the Department received legal advice from somewhere else, but for the taxpayer, there has to be a chase-back.

Chairman

Is it the Office of the Chief State Solicitor? Will Ms McPhillips just tell the public who-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is the Office of the Chief State Solicitor that advises us at all times and that advised us on the lease.

Chairman

The committee can write to the Office of the Chief State Solicitor.

Deputy Alan Kelly

That would be advisable because in this scenario there has not been a process to recoup the money.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There is no way to recoup it.

Chairman

It is a write-off.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Then we will have to chase it.

Chairman

The committee should agree that if poor legal advice cost the taxpayer €3.8 million, we need to write to the author of the advice.

Deputy Alan Kelly

We should write to the Office of the Chief State Solicitor asking for an explanation.

Deputy Alan Farrell

How many years ago was it?

Chairman

It was several years ago.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

In 2011.

Chairman

The figure was finally settled on in 2016.

Deputy Alan Kelly

That is why it is included in this year's accounts. It is a scandal that something of this scale cost the taxpayer this amount of money.

Chairman

It is the Office of Chief State Solicitor.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Before the Chairman makes a definitive decision on what we will do - I agree with everything Deputy Alan Kelly has suggested - we will be talking more about this issue throughout the meeting and might refine or add to our actions.

Chairman

We will probably do so.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I will jump around the place with reference to IT contracts. There is an ongoing internal audit process for An Garda Síochána IT projects. Does the Department have a concern about how IT contracts have been managed in recent years by An Garda Síochána?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Obviously, I am accountable to the committee for the Vote-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

I know that. I am only asking Ms McPhillips her opinion.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Our involvement in Garda IT projects or any other IT project across the sector is at a strategic level in providing resources. Obviously, we have an interest in making sure they are expended in the best possible way for the taxpayer.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Has concern ever been expressed internally in the Department? I have very strong opinions about where this is going. That is a very specific question.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

"Ever" is a long time.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I am sorry, but I am not being facetious. Is Ms McPhillips aware if concern has ever been expressed internally about the way in which serious volumes of money are spent on IT contracts and the way in which procurement is ongoing in An Garda Síochána?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Garda informs us on a regular basis and we have governance groups to assess how things are going. Obviously, the Garda is accountable to the committee and other fora for its expenditure. Generally, we do not get into that level of detail on contracts.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I am aware of that. That is not what I am asking Ms McPhillips. I am asking her or anyone else from the Department if any concern was ever expressed to anyone internally on the contracts for IT in An Garda Síochána. If there was not, she should just say so.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am not aware of any.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Is anyone else aware of any?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

To be fair, none of these colleagues work in relation to An Garda Síochána.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Some people are here from the policing area. I note that there is no concern and there never has been any.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, sorry, that is not what I said. I said I was not aware of any.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Ms McPhillips said she was not aware.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Chairman

Ms McPhillips was not aware.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Yes, or that nobody here was aware of it. If anyone is aware, they might say so now. No? This is for clarity, because I do not want to mislead anyone or misrepresent anyone.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Ms Barry just pointed out to me that we did get a copy of the audit report in 2017, so it was brought to our attention in 2017.

Deputy Alan Kelly

What was the Department's opinion on that?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Maybe Ms Barry can assist on this.

Ms Anne Barry

As we understand it now, we received it in January. There has been engagement with the Garda on it and steps are being taken to ensure that the recommendations are being implemented. The new Office of Government Procurement framework is in place and is being used by An Garda Síochána to tender for its skills requirements, so it is seeking to address the issues that have been raised.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I think they probably went through some of this yesterday but I did not see it myself.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Some of it. I am not trying to catch anyone out but my issue here is whether there was concern within the Department. I asked parliamentary questions on this, as did others, and the report came through in January. The Committee on Justice and Equality discussed this yesterday. An IT audit report will come before this committee in the future. I believe that this will require an external investigation on the scale of the projects, the tendering or lack thereof, the verbal sign-off on contracts, the volume of people on site in An Garda Síochána, and the manner in which those people were allowed access on site. I believe there are issues here on taxpayers' money, security, and tendering-procurement across the board. A report is coming through on that. As the overseeing Department, I want to know if the Department of Justice and Equality had any concern on this issue. The witnesses have clarified that. We will deal with that in due course and take on board what Ms McPhillips said.

I turn to other issues. On taxpayers' money, and I will not encroach on the tribunal, the Department made a decision to sign off verbally on funding for the Charleton tribunal and for the Charleton liaison committee. Is it normal that a Department would give verbal sanction without Department of Public Expenditure and Reform co-agreement? Is it normal for the Department of Justice and Equality to do something verbally and then proceed to give it in writing a substantial time later on something like that? Is that proper practice?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

By and large we would deal with sanctions in writing, obviously. These were particular circumstances and, as the Deputy will be aware, sanction took some months to come through. In the meantime the tribunal was up and running and would need someone to liaise with. The verbal sanction that was given was ultimately confirmed by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. It would not be a daily practice, it would not happen very often, but it would need to be able to happen. One needs to have the flexibility where it is needed.

Deputy Alan Kelly

In normal practice that would not happen.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Generally, we deal with these things in writing.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Are the people who were hired under that process still in place? Is that unit still operating?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The unit is operating but I think that the sanction in relation to contracts employing retired people has timed out.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I am not asking for names, but the people working there-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Deputy would have to ask the Accounting Officer.

Deputy Alan Kelly

On the immigrant investor programme, IIP, under the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service, INIS, how does Ms McPhillips feel this is working? Does she feel it is working well?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. The Government entered into this commitment in 2015 to receive a number of people from Italy and Greece. Apologies, I thought the Deputy meant the Irish refugee protection programme, IRPP. Yes. There are a lot of things happening in relation to it. I will ask Mr. Kirrane to respond as he is much more familiar with the detail.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I will get to my specific issues first. I supported this. I think it is a very good project. We have had correspondence on this. I want to know if all the money is being spent, if everything is being processed in time, that there are no conflicts of interest in the Department regarding it, and that we will see greater funding coming through it soon.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is something we are keeping under review. I will ask Mr. Kirrane to expand.

Mr. Michael Kirrane

The investor programme has been operating since 2011. It was initially very slow to take off but in the past two years in particular there has been a major expansion of it. Currently, €300 million has been approved for investment. Most of that is now geared towards primary healthcare services, social housing and boosting certain parts of the economy in terms of job creation in the tourism sector and so on. It is a little early to say how much of that investment has been reviewed. Once we give a permission, it takes time to get up and running, and most of the investment has taken place in the past year.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I accept that. Mr. Kirrane is not aware of any conflicts of interest in the operation of this scheme.

Mr. Michael Kirrane

No. The approval of the investors is done through a committee, which I chair, composed of INIS, the Department of Business, Enterprise and Employment, IDA Ireland and others-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

I am aware.

Mr. Michael Kirrane

-----and I am not aware of any conflict.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Okay, that is fine.

Chairman

Will Mr. Kirrane explain the scheme, for the benefit of the public watching?

Mr. Michael Kirrane

It is an opportunity for non-EEA nationals to invest €1 million in the State in particular objects, which are outlined, and in return they are given an immigration permission for a period of five years.

Chairman

That is permission to remain in the State.

Mr. Michael Kirrane

Permission to remain in the State.

Chairman

And to work or whatever.

Mr. Michael Kirrane

Yes.

Chairman

Can that be renewed after the five-year period?

Mr. Michael Kirrane

The five years is contingent on the investment having been made. There is a review after two years, after which permission may be given for a further three years. After the five years, the permission can be renewed subject to the person fulfilling the requirements of residency. In other words, the scheme is finished after five years and they would have to have basis for being resident in the State thereafter. If they were continually resident in the State during that period, they would be entitled to apply for citizenship the same way as any other non-EEA national who would fulfil the residency requirements.

Chairman

Will Mr. Kirrane give the name of the scheme again?

Mr. Michael Kirrane

It is the immigrant investor programme.

Chairman

Mr. Kirrane knows about it but the public does not.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I think it is a very good programme. I have concerns about it, which is why I raised it, but I may take that up with the officials separately rather than taking up time here. I use it as an example of where we need to go regarding the future work in the Department of Justice and Equality. There is an issue of whether this should be a core issue for the Department of Justice and Equality compared with everything else it has going on.

On the accounts, I see the amount of funding for commissions of investigation, Cavan-Monaghan and O'Higgins, is €1.792 million.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Is this O'Higgins?

Deputy Alan Kelly

Yes. On the breakdown of these costs, where are the costs for Mr. Justice Iarfhlaith O'Neill's review in these figures? They came in the same year.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

They possibly did not get settled until 2017.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Will the Department confirm that to me?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The cost for O'Neill would be very marginal because Mr. Justice O'Neill is a retired judge of the High Court, so it would be a marginal cost and it was a very short piece of work.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Will Ms McPhillips send the committee a breakdown of these costs?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I want to raise a couple of issues. I have received a letter which purports to be from a member of staff at the Department of Justice and Equality. To be fair, the detail in it, in terms of the workings of the Department, would suggest it is from a member of staff and it raises some very interesting questions. On whistleblowers, the committee has before it today a fairly detailed letter on the issue from the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Flanagan. Members of this committee continually receive letters from whistleblowers in respect of which we have to make judgment calls. In Ms McPhillips opinion, are the procedures in place in the Department of Justice and Equality, and in the agencies and organisations for which it has oversight, adequate to deal with such cases? The Department of Justice and Equality is probably one of the most sensitive in terms of protected disclosures. What is the volume of protected disclosures in the Department and in each of its agencies?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

In regard to the Department and the Irish Prison Service, which are taken as one in terms of internal audit unit, since the coming into force of the Act up to the end of April, there have been 39 potential disclosures. On investigation, not all disclosures turn out to be disclosures. One has to apply the test in the Act. Only ten of the 39 disclosures are disclosures that are relevant to either the Department or the Irish Prison Service and the remaining 29 are either not for the Department or they are not a protected disclosure in that they are not from an employee or people named under the Act. Of those ten, six have been investigated and the investigation is closed, two are ongoing and two have not yet commenced.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I thank Ms McPhillips for her response. I continually receive letters about a case involving a person who was in the Irish Prison Service in the 1980s. I do not propose to mention any names but the case has been written about extensively and there was a shooting in the prison. Does Ms McPhillips believe the Department has taken a duty of care in terms of its dealing with this case?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I do not think I should be dealing with individual cases today. I can assure the Deputy on the process that we have in place.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Okay.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The policy is in existence since 2015 and it is constantly reviewed. We consult externally on it, including with Transparency International Ireland on a number of occasions. We continue to refine it and the investigation processes that are in place. I should add that the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform recently put in place the framework of external investigators. We intend to draw from that framework, which is only in place since yesterday.

Deputy Alan Kelly

The Chairman knows this case as well as I do. We have both met the person concerned. Had the process in place now been in place some time ago, we may not be discussing this issue. I believe that process needs to be reviewed again.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

As I said, it is reviewed constantly. We have been trying to apply the learning referenced earlier by the Deputy.

Deputy Alan Kelly

While I agree with Ms McPhillips, many years have passed in regard to this case and there is a genuine grievance involved. I am asking that that be taken on board.

There are media reports on another case, in respect of which the Workplace Relations Commission, WRC, has made an adjudication. This adjudication is costing the taxpayer money. Following on from this adjudication the head of the Irish Prison Service wrote to the individual apologising for the manner in which he had been treated. I can read the letter into the record if Ms McPhillips so wishes. The case is now being challenged. A letter from the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Charles Flanagan, about the process around how whistleblowers are to be dealt with was received by the Committee of Public Accounts today. The WRC has adjudicated on the case of this individual and the head of the Irish Prison Service has apologised to him for the manner in which he was treated. The Irish Prison Service is now challenging the Workplace Relations Commission, WRC, and the Minister, Deputy Flanagan, has sent the letter I mentioned to this committee. This does not add up. The manner in which the Irish Prison Service is acting suggests that the letter we received today from the Minister, Deputy Flanagan, about the process in place for whistleblowers is not real.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I do not agree with the Deputy's analysis.

Deputy Alan Kelly

That is the belief of most people.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The process is real. As I said, it is audited and the Department of Justice and Equality is party to Transparency International Ireland's integrity at work framework which externally validates the process, ensures that it is robust and meets best practice. The Department of Justice and Equality was the first Department into the framework. We are wholeheartedly engaged with the process. As I said, I cannot discuss an individual case.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I am not asking Ms McPhillips to discuss an individual case. I find it bizarre that the WRC would adjudicate on a case and the Irish Prison Service would challenge it. This is very strange and contrary to the spirit of what has been agreed in regard to the treatment of whistleblowers.

The letter which was sent to me by a staff member states that despite the protected disclosures legislation, the person does not propose to give their name, that managers in the Department receive training from a law firm on how to take disciplinary proceedings against that, even if they did make a protected disclosure, and that the person is not willing to take that risk. Will Ms McPhillips confirm if managers in the Department of Justice and Equality received legal training on to how to deal with protected disclosures?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. Eight hundred staff received training in how to deal with protected disclosures.

Deputy Alan Kelly

That is as I expected. Did the option of taking legal proceedings against individuals form part of that training, even if they were in the protected disclosure process?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Deputy may be mixing up two separate processes.

Deputy Alan Kelly

No.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

With respect, Deputy, there is another process that is led by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and has been developed over time in regard to the disciplinary code for the Civil Service, in respect of which training has been rolled out from the centre across all managers in the Civil Service on how to deal with performance issues.

Deputy Alan Kelly

That is very interesting. That training is necessary in its own right.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Surely there should be some crossover in that training. People should understand that training on the disciplinary process, which is necessary, and training on protected disclosures-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There is a nuance-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

I would ask Ms McPhillips to allow me to finish.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Sure.

Deputy Alan Kelly

A situation arises where a manager is required to make a decision in regard to prioritisation of the two processes. Surely, to err on the side of caution, the decision should be to deal with the protected disclosures first.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The protected disclosures-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

The process within the Department in this regard is not clear.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

According to the correspondence.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Yes.

Chairman

Perhaps we could get clarification-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am not familiar with the correspondence.

Chairman

Where a person makes a protected disclosure, the legislation provides that during that process no action should be taken against him or her.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely, non-victimisation.

Chairman

Separately, somebody else could be dealing with the same person under the disciplinary code and can threaten to take him or her to court. Is that the point the Deputy is making?

Deputy Alan Kelly

Yes.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No.

Deputy Alan Kelly

The point is that both processes could be happening but they are not joined up.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Deputy has not allowed me to answer the question. There is a disciplinary code and grievance procedures and all kinds of codes that are operating all of the time. The protected disclosures legislation is very specific. The protected disclosure must be taken on its own merits. The disclosure has to be investigated regardless of whatever else is happening or whatever other processes the person may be involved in, as is their right and the right of the employer as well.

They are very distinct processes and managers are trained in them. It is explained to them in the protected disclosures training. It is complex and nuanced but that is what they are paid for. They are managers and they have to balance all these rights.

Chairman

We are on-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

I have had a lot of interruptions. I have three questions.

Chairman

To clarify, a person who has made a protected disclosure can at the same time have the Department taking legal and disciplinary action against them.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

In a separate stream.

Chairman

It is the same person.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That may be the case.

Chairman

Okay.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

In many other organisations-----

Deputy Alan Farrell

To assist Deputy Kelly, we, of all committees, know there is often confusion over what qualifies as protected disclosures.

Chairman

We all know that.

Deputy Alan Farrell

We, as a committee, get an awful lot and perhaps that might have informed the author of the letter to the Deputy. I am not assuming that.

Chairman

I have cut in and out a few times but we are well over time.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

To clarify, we have centralised the process to a large degree. It is overseen by our internal audit unit and the people there have developed a large degree of expertise in dealing with them for the reasons the Deputy outlines. It is a complex area and the factors in the Act have to be balanced in making a judgment on whether it constitutes a disclosure or not. Internal audit oversees that in an independent way and it reports to our audit committee on it. To clarify further, if a thing is not a protected disclosure on a technical basis, audit would still follow it through if it is a concern. If it is systemic in the organisation it will be followed through.

Deputy Alan Kelly

It leads into my question. I accept Ms McPhillips needed time to explain that. I accept the last part of what she said where it is not a protected disclosure. The Department deals with sensitive issues. Is there a process in place? It was a suggestion from the person in the Department. Is there a process in place, which has been outlined to staff, whereby staff can elevate issues? It is very similar to the Garda Commissioner's role in section 41. Is there a process internally, which has been communicated to staff, whereby staff can elevate something to Ms McPhillips or the Minister without having to go through the channels?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely. There are meetings with staff all the time.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Is there a process in place to communicate to staff to do it?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Protected Disclosures Act is the process.

Deputy Alan Kelly

It is not a protected disclosure. These are serious issues they feel need to be brought to Ms McPhillips's attention immediately.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There is no reason they could not bring them to my attention, their manager's attention or to the attention of internal audit through the protected disclosures-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

With regard to-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Sorry, to answer the question, we are encouraging people to speak up. It is part of the integrity at work framework for people to speak up regularly and call things out.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I am sorry for interrupting Ms McPhillips but I know I will be caught for time.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I just wanted to answer the question.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I have had a lot of interruptions. I will jump to another thing. I have a keen interest in the restructuring of the Department. In the restructuring of justice and home affairs, where is the policing division in the Department and where did it come from? Has it moved?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No.

Deputy Alan Kelly

What division is it under now?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The policing division is a division in itself headed by an assistant secretary.

Deputy Alan Kelly

The alignment of divisions into the future and looking at separating them will be done by June.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, the effectiveness and renewal group chaired by Pádraig Ó Ríordáin is to report by June. That is a process looking at the future. We are involved in an internal reorganisation within the Department-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

That is right, but surely-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

-----and we are doing that in conjunction with the effectiveness and renewal group.

Deputy Alan Kelly

That is my point. They are on the same timelines because it would make sense.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

What we are trying to do at the moment, and I might ask Mr. O'Sullivan to come in on this because he is leading on it, is trying to think it out and make sure we have all the-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

In fairness, I think it would be strange if the Department was not allowed the time to do it in parallel because they are interconnected.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely, yes, but we will need to wait for June to decide on what the timing is for implementation. Is that fair?

Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan

There is a lot to be figured out in terms of assigning responsibilities, figuring out where shared services go and things like that. It needs to be thought through. The idea is to dovetail the two strands of analysis so that over the summer the thoughts of the renewal group and our own thoughts will be available and it is hoped there will be a degree of crossover between the two of those benefiting from both sets of insights.

Deputy Alan Kelly

My last question-----

Chairman

The Deputy will get in again. He will have a second opportunity.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I was interrupted five times.

Chairman

That is true.

Deputy Alan Kelly

My last question relates to issues that were dealt with before on the search for documentation. I am not drifting into issues dealt with by the tribunal. The Collins report said there was no meaningful explanation for why certain email accounts of Ministers and advisers were not searched. At the Committee on Justice and Equality, at which Ms McPhillips appeared on 6 December, she said she would - again I am not drifting into it - ask the tribunal if it wanted a full trawl of all emails of senior people, including private emails and phone records of Ministers, advisers and senior people in the Department. Did this happen?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. I do not want to drift into tribunal stuff. It happened and it is set out in the Collins report in detail.

Deputy Alan Kelly

As a consequence of the meeting on 6 December, all phone records of senior people in the Department, including Ministers and advisers; all emails of Ministers, advisers, and senior people; and all private emails of senior people, Ministers and advisers were checked and trawled through.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No. Following the meeting in December, I engaged with the tribunal directly. The tribunal suggested areas we might want to trawl through. That encompassed the electronic emails of the Department and that is what was trawled through.

Deputy Alan Kelly

It is for clarity and it is very important. I have read the Collins report and it said it was an issue that certain people in the policing area were not checked, including the Minister and advisers. Are we saying that to this day, as a Department, mobile phone records, private emails and departmental emails, or some combination of those, have not been trawled through?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

To be clear, what was trawled through were the electronic records of the Department which is emails and electronic files held in the Department. That encompassed 30 million records going back to 2012.

Deputy Alan Kelly

My specific question-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That was the engagement with the-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

My specific question has not been answered.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Phone records were not covered and neither were private emails. They are not within the scope of the Department.

Deputy Alan Kelly

To be clear for the public, the phone records of senior people in the Department, former Ministers and advisers, and the private emails of the former Minister, former advisers and senior people were not gone through.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The trawl took place under guidance from the tribunal. We had an engagement with the tribunal and I do not think I should go beyond-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

I am not asking Ms McPhillips to do that. I am only asking for the facts.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I will confirm what the Deputy is asking. The records he is talking about were not covered by the trawl. The trawl covered 30 million records in the Department of Justice and Equality.

Deputy Alan Kelly

For the record, private email and phone records of all senior people in the Department, the Minister and advisers have not been gone through with regard to the work-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We are trespassing on the tribunal to a significant extent. There are circumstances in which the tribunal asked organisations for their phone records. It did not ask me for the phone records of the Department and that is why they were not-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

I am not making any judgment on the work at all. I am just asking for facts.

Chairman

I acknowledge that I interrupted the Deputy on several occasions during the course of his questioning. I came in four or five times. I am not quite sure whether Deputy Cullinane or Deputy O'Brien is next. Deputy O'Brien is listed as the speaker.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

I apologise for being late. I had another engagement. I do not know exactly what Deputy Kelly has gone through. I will focus on some of the ICT projects and the recommendations from the Comptroller and Auditor General.

The Accounting Officer has said that only in very urgent and exceptional circumstances will a project be initiated without a detailed budgetary planning where the priority of the system is deemed critical, as was the case in the Insolvency Service of Ireland. Could Ms McPhillips outline what the specific features of the modified project approval and tracking systems are? What shortcomings noted in the Comptroller and Auditor General's report do they address? Can she confirm that his recommendations in this area have been fully implemented? What criteria have been put in place to determine what constitutes a very urgent and exceptional circumstance, where the priority of the system is deemed critical? Will she also outline who, in the cases of these procedures, actually makes that assessment? Who is the person responsible for making the assessment that this is a very urgent and exceptional circumstance? Does the ICT governance group have a role in that? Could Ms McPhillips give us, if she has it, a list of the membership, the roles and the terms of reference of the ICT governance group for starters?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Sure. I thank the Deputy. The main learning concerned business cases on budgets. The Deputy will note from the Comptroller and Auditor General's report that there was no business case or specific budget ring-fenced for the development of the ISI project. That cannot happen now, so all projects that go to the governance group must have a business case and a budget line. The governance group then monitors progress. If there were any drift in terms of expenditure going beyond the allocated budget, that would be noted by governance in the course of the development of the project.

The other major development in respect of governance is the ongoing monitoring, as I said, but also the post-implementation review. We go back and do a "lessons learned" and see whether it is achieving the things it set out in its business case that it would achieve. That is the main thing. I know the Deputy was not here earlier, but the other thing about governance is that the membership of the group has been refreshed and there are now two external members who have a great deal of expertise in their own organisations. There is a principal officer from Revenue, the former head of ICT in one of our agencies, and the Property Registration Authority which, again, no more than Revenue, has a very large ICT responsibility. We also refresh the representative of an agency from time to time. The current representative is the head of the Charities Regulator. He has stayed on the governance group post that agency moving, so, again, he brings a certain independence and is not within the reporting restrictions other than in respect of relationships in the Department.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

Is one particular individual responsible for determining the criteria to-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Deputy is referring to the unusual things. If, for argument's sake, there was another insolvency service in the morning that had to be established within a set period, I think what we would lose now a little is the flexibility to develop something very quickly because I think we prioritise the governance of the project as much as we would the delivery of the project. That is right and proper when we are talking about public funds. There are ten members in total on the governance group. Mr. O'Sullivan chairs it at the moment; I chaired it previously, in a different life. As I said, there are three external members and then the relevant people in the Department: a representative of a line division user, a representative of an agency, etc.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

So it is the governance group that determines whether something is urgent and exceptional.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The governance group, I think, would make a recommendation to me as acting Secretary General as to whether that was the case.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

Each project manager who is assigned has to put in a monthly statement for review.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Exactly, and there is a system in place, an online application - well, an electronic application - that captures those reports from the project sponsor.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

Could Ms McPhillips give us a bit more information on the post-implementation reviews?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Basically, the post-implementation reviews would go back to the original business case that is made to the governance group and tested as to what it has delivered. As the Deputy knows, people can make extravagant promises as to what something will achieve. What the implementation review tests is whether it has delivered on that, whether it is doing all that it is supposed to be doing and whether there were any lessons to be learned from how it was carried out. We do those regularly now.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

How many has the Department done?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We have done five to date. We do one more or less at every meeting, and the group meets quarterly.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

Are the reviews made public?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, they are an internal learning experience. We make them available to the Comptroller and Auditor General, obviously.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

Could Ms McPhillips give us a bit more information on exactly what the new features in terms of the approval and tracking systems are?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I will ask Mr. Kennedy to elaborate on that, if that is okay?

Mr. John Kennedy

Basically, we have developed an application whereby the business cases are submitted for consideration by the governance group and then go to the technical subgroup for evaluation based on whether or not they conform to the architecture, the strategy, that kind of thing. The technical subgroup will then either make a recommendation to the overall governance group or go back to the project sponsor if there are further clarifications. The output from the technical subgroup then goes to the governance group. This is all on an automated workflow application that has been developed in the past year.

The governance group then, at the governance group meeting, either approves or queries any projects. We get the project sponsor of any major project with significant spend to come in and present their business case directly to the governance group. Once the approval has been granted, the system takes that into a list of the active projects. Then, the project sponsor has to give a monthly report on that. At the governance group then, as well as evaluating the projects that are for approval, any previous projects that are still open and active are reviewed. The project sponsor has to give us what we call a red, amber and green status. Anything that is green is fine, on schedule and within targeted budgets and so on. Anything that is flagged as amber or red gets discussed at the governance group. The reason for the status has to be explained in the report submitted by the project sponsor.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

If something in one monthly review is amber or red, we track it and there is-----

Mr. John Kennedy

It gets highlighted and discussed by the governance group. Red is a stop, so one would not go on with that. Basically, they are brought in and we review and seek an understanding of the reasons for the status being red. We then make a decision as to where to go with the project and whether the project gets canned or changes are made to it. A lot of them are amber because of schedules and competing priorities. The timeline might be drifting but they would be still within the budget and the effort. All of this is reviewed at the governance group meeting.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

I presume they are not just reviewed; I presume that if something needs investigating, it can be investigated.

Mr. John Kennedy

Yes, absolutely, and the subsequent status reporting can change that, but any deviation from schedule, budget or effort is flagged as red, amber and green.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

So it is not the case that if something is flagged as amber, it goes to the governance group, it is reviewed and then it goes off the agenda.

Mr. John Kennedy

No.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

There are no more presumptions that this is being addressed; it is followed through and there is a process to do so.

Mr. John Kennedy

As a consequence of the Comptroller and Auditor General's report and the lessons learned from it, the governance group has expanded its role. As well as doing project approvals and post-implementation reviews, it is now also getting involved in the area of project and portfolio management.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

That is all I have on the ICT stuff, so I can either come back in on the Votes-----

Chairman

The Deputy has the floor-----

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

I can discuss the Votes as well. Okay. I have a couple of questions on them.

I refer to the immigration, asylum and direct provision costs. In 2016, the costs were €64 million, which was an increase on 2015. However, the State has given a commitment to take in 4,000 additional refugees, the vast majority from Syria. Is Ms McPhillips confident that the money is available to ensure that target is met for integration? Will she outline the process? How many have arrived in the country or been resettled to date? The latest figures I have relate to 2016. I do not know if the 2017 figures are available yet.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I have an up-to-date figure for resettlement. It is in the order of more than 1,000 at this stage. Mr. Kirrane might know the detail. We have more or less satisfied our obligations in respect of Greece and those people have been brought in and accommodated. The Deputy is correct that we are under a little pressure. Most of the pressure relates to procuring accommodation in the context of accommodation pressures generally. We have some issues around that and we are in the market at the moment with expressions of interest for additional accommodation. Those have been received and are being evaluated.

Chairman

Are they for hotels or is the Department buying individual houses?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

They are largely hotels. There is a hotel in Clonea, County Waterford, and Ballaghadereen is included as well. There is a minimum threshold of 60 or 80 units. We would not go into some place smaller than that.

Chairman

Is the Department funding the purchase of houses in different locations around the country?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, that is a matter for local authorities. We have a multi-agency group that the Minister of State, Deputy Stanton, chairs. We met a few weeks ago on that. The chair of the CEOs of the local authorities is on the group as well as representatives of the Irish Red Cross and each Department affected such as health, education and skills, and the HSE.

Chairman

Is the Department providing funding for the purchase of houses?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We are not providing funding for that. That is funded through local authorities and the other Votes

Chairman

And the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We fund the initial accommodation----

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

The initial accommodation costs. How does the Department source the initial accommodation?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We went to tender for that accommodation and people came forward and offered it. We entered into contracts with them. There are different types of contracts. Some of them relate to the services provided in the centres and others relate to the provision of the accommodation itself.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

It comes under subhead E5.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I would like to confirm the numbers the Deputy requested. We had resettled 1,040 people up to the end of March.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

Subhead E5 does not provide a breakdown of the figure. It provides an estimated outturn for asylum seekers' accommodation of €119.185 million. How much of that relates to payments to landlords, refurbishment and fitting out of accommodation? Is a breakdown available?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It all relates to accommodation and the centres. It is mainly spent on contracts and not so much on landlords. The money is used for large-scale centres, not houses.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

If somebody owns a hotel, does all the money go to him or her? Is the Department financing the fitting out or refurbishment of accommodation as well as the provision of accommodation?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am speculating a little but my understanding is that under the contact, they have to provide us with a certain standard of accommodation and that is the requirement.

Chairman

Mr. Kirrane might clarify that.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I have the breakdown of the €64 million in immigration, asylum and direct provision costs in 2016 to hand. A total of 28 centres are owned commercially and they received €51.7 million. State-owned centres cost €7.6 million.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

How many are owned by the State?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Seven.

Chairman

Could Ms McPhillips outline the figures again?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

A total of 28 centres are owned commercially and they received €51.7 million in 2016.

Chairman

How many people were accommodated in them?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I do not have that figure in the table. I will come back to the Chairman on that.

Chairman

Does Mr. Kirrane know how many people are in the 28 centres on average? The Department pays a capitation fee per person per week.

Mr. Michael Kirrane

Currently, there are approximately 5,300 in total in the system but I do not have a breakdown between commercial centres and State-owned centres.

Chairman

I would have thought the Department would know that.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We can certainly get that for the Chairman.

Chairman

Would approximately two thirds of refugees be in the commercial centres?

Mr. Michael Kirrane

Proportionately, if there are 28 commercial centres and seven State-owned centres, the vast majority are in the commercial centres.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

Could the committee be furnished with follow-up information on that?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is no problem. There is more information on the list to which I referred. Two commercially-owned centres are self-catering and they received almost €1 million in 2016. We cover other costs such as preschool services, light, heat, telephones, transport and so forth. An amount is also set aside for miscellaneous costs.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

We pay utilities in the 28 commercially-owned centres as well but light and heat are not part of the contract.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, it is part of the contract in the commercially-owned ones. Gas and electricity costs relate to the State-owned centres.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

When additional accommodation is needed, it goes out for tender. Do the State-owned centres have to tender as well or is there no more availability within the seven centres?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

They all have capacity limits but my understanding is we have contractors in the State-owned centres providing food and services and running them. There are contracts in place for that.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

But not for the accommodation.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Exactly.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

Are there plans to increase the number of State-owned centres given the ratio of four commercially-owned centres to one State-owned centre?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The difficulty for the State is getting into the market at the moment. If we tried to buy centres, we would be competing to buy a hotel or accommodation generally. The market is off-putting for us to enter into such an arrangement. The commercially-owned centres give us the capacity to flex as needed. Demand goes up and down. We were closer to 4,000 refugees at some stage last year but now are back up to 5,000. Purchasing accommodation and so forth does not give flexibility and we would have to compete on the open market.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

What type of contracts are in place for the 28 commercially-owned centres? Are they long-term or short-term leases or is that decided on a case-by-case basis?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

They are not long term. They are for a few years.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

What is a few years?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

A year or two. They are reviewed on a regular basis. We do not get into longer term leases for the reasons I outlined. We might not need the accommodation.

We have been working on the development and implementation of the recommendations in the McMahon report in respect of the accommodation. They place certain restrictions on the accommodation. We are trying to make it more family friendly and so forth.

However, it means one restricts one's capacity a little. Obviously, it is a positive development for the residents.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

I move on to the Magdalen fund. Can the witnesses provide the committee with an up-to-date position on the 19 cases in respect of applicants with capacity issues? I think there were 25 other cases on hand at the end of 2016. Can we have the up-to-date position on them? Can the witnesses tell us how many applications have been received in total, how many have been successful and what the total pay out has been to date?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I will ask Mr. Dowling to assist me on this.

Mr. Noel Dowling

To date, 691 awards have been made totalling €25.9 million while 106 applications have been refused. The figure relating to women who lack capacity has varied over time. In some cases, the medical certification has changed to the effect that they have capacity or else they have been made wards of court. As things stand, there are 15 cases in which the women concerned lack capacity. This brings me to the developments in relation to the Magdalen scheme. The Ombudsman issued a report last November which was critical in some respects of the operation of the scheme. He made a number of recommendations, two of which are being dealt with by a recently appointed senior counsel, Ms Mary O'Toole SC. She is looking at how best to address the issue of the 15 women who lack capacity. She is also looking at cases where the assessed duration of stay was lower than that originally claimed by an applicant with the result that the award was reduced. There are approximately 220 such cases.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Could Mr. Dowling repeat that? I did not hear him.

Mr. Noel Dowling

There are 220 cases in which applicants made applications stating they had stayed for a certain period in an institution covered by the scheme but the assessments carried out determined the period was shorter than claimed.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We are revisiting those.

Mr. Noel Dowling

We are revisiting them. There is a review of those cases being undertaken by Ms Mary O'Toole SC as well as her work on the 15 cases where there are capacity issues. There have been developments on that only this morning. Ms O'Toole has suggested that rather than to give a general recommendation on how we deal with capacity issues overall, she has suggested that she should make recommendations on each of the individual cases. I do not think we will be standing in her way in respect of that.

To stay on the issue of capacity as the Deputy has raised it, there were three routes we were looking at to deal with these cases. We have no desire to hang onto the money which is properly the property of the women concerned. The original intention was to use the assisted decision-making legislation, but there have been delays there which mean the necessary regulations and processes will not be in place until next year. As such, that approach is not really possible. The next route is the wards of court process, but it is a very significant decision in respect of any person to make him or her a ward of court. The third route is one we have been exploring with the HSE which is the possibility of using the private property accounts scheme whereby the money belonging to each woman would be held by the HSE and disbursed to her according to need. We cannot, obviously, predict what recommendation will be made by Ms O'Toole, but it seems the principal route will remain the ward of court procedure.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

The Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Act was enacted in 2015. Is that right?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. It is a 2015 Act and it assigns responsibility to a new decision-support service which is to be developed. The service is being established in the Mental Health Commission under the remit of the Department of Health.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

Is that what is causing the delay?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. I understand a director was appointed in the course of the last year and that the funding is in place. However, there are very complex processes to be worked out and those are being worked on very actively.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

Is the Department confident that will be done by next year?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I cannot answer for the service.

Mr. Noel Dowling

The assessment we have is 2019 which is actually too late to deal with the particular cases under discussion. We are not following that route in determining those 15 cases.

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien

We are looking at the other two options.

Mr. Noel Dowling

Yes. We will be advised by senior counsel in respect of those two options.

Chairman

How many sections of the 2015 Act have yet to be commenced?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am sure they relate mainly to the decision-support service, but I can come back to the Chairman.

Chairman

I ask for a note describing those sections which have not yet been commenced.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

I welcome the witnesses and thank them for taking the time. I want to continue from some of the things Deputy Kelly mentioned. I start with the historic building on Wolfe Tone Street and the debacle involving €3.89 million. I appreciate that there is a report on this but it is from before my time. As we are dealing with the final figures for 2015-2016 incorporating the crystallisation of the cost to the State of €3.89 million, can the witnesses remind the committee how this all came about? Is it correct that the Probation Service needed a building for offices?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, it was not for offices. It was for the Bridge Project, which works with high-risk individuals and violent offenders. The project was looking for new accommodation as it was having to get out of the accommodation it was using in Parnell Street. It was there for quite some time and it was well-established.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Are these serious offenders or offenders in a particular category?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

They are high-risk offenders is what it says.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

What is the high-risk? Is it a high risk of reoffending or do they post a high risk to society or themselves?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I would say it is a high risk of reoffending.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Was it sexual offences or anything in that area?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

A new premises was needed. Did they find the premises themselves and say "this looks good for us"?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I understand the Bridge Project board of management identified Wolfe Tone Street as suitable.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Is the board part of the Probation Service apparatus?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is a grantee or funded body under the Probation Service.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Does the Bridge Project still exist?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. It has been in existence for a very long time and has done a great deal of excellent work.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

I have no doubt. They are not public servants, however. It is a private entity that receives money from the State.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Exactly. It is a non-profit.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Is it a section 38 organisation?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We do not have that. That is not a categorisation in our area.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

That is fine. However, it operates on the same kind of basis. Who governs the project?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It has a board of management.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Do Department of Justice and Equality or Probation Service personnel sit on the board?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am not certain. I can check for the Deputy.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Okay. How much does it get per annum?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is a good question. I will come back to the Deputy.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

We will continue on while somebody looks. It is a third-party organisation which does excellent work and it has a board of directors. We are not sure whether there are personnel from the Department or the State on that board.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There is probably a Probation Service representative on the board because it does a lot work with it. The Bridge Project's main function is to fulfil the Probation Service's requirements.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

It does very good work. It picked a building and said it would work for the project. Were auctioneers involved?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I cannot tell the Deputy that. He will understand that it is a long time ago.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

I appreciate that. It is just that €3.89 million is a huge amount of money. I am interested to know what level of professional expertise was engaged and whether such professionals are covered by professional indemnity insurance to see if the State has some recourse for some of that €3.89 million.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is fair enough.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Were any legal personnel other than the Chief State Solicitor advising the board? If they were, they would have to have professional indemnity insurance. If they played a role in advising that everything was tickety-boo on planning-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The contract was entered into with the Department and the Department was advised by the State's legal officers.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

The State's legal officers were in the Chief State Solicitor's office. They are exempt from professional indemnity insurance because the State indemnifies-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes, I would say they are like CIÉ.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

We are in the area of a monumental mistake, as opposed to an error. One would do a planning search on a building in accordance with the first principles of conveyancing.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Deputy is more familiar with this than I am but-----

Deputy Marc MacSharry

One would try to find out at the outset if something had planning or did not. The Chairman said we needed to write to the Chief State Solicitor's office to ask what sanctions there are. We need to ask who made the error, without actually naming the person. How did this error occur and were they provided with false information by other experts for the landlord or agents, be they legal or auctioneers? If they were providing the Department with false information there may be a potential for recourse. If the mistake was in the Chief State Solicitor's office, was there sanction against the person or persons responsible for this error and what procedures have been put in place to ensure such a calamitous error will never be made again?

Chairman

Was it the OPW which did this on behalf of the Department or the Department itself? We have to bring the OPW into this.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

That is not what I understood. I understood that the Bridge project sought to procure the building-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Bridge identified it but did not procure it. The Department entered into the contract. We were advised by the Chief State's Solicitor's office and the OPW.

Chairman

Do we need to send correspondence to the OPW as well?

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Yes, to the OPW and the Chief State's Solicitor's office. I appreciate that this is historical and that personnel are different.

Deputy Kelly quoted from an anonymous letter from somebody claiming to be a civil servant.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I do not have the benefit of the letter.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

I will read from some of it to put it on the record and give Ms McPhillips an opportunity to say something is or is not the case and to say what has happened since. It said managers were moved in the Department every two years. Is that true?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

There is no mobility policy.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There is a mobility policy but it is generally between three and four years. It may be longer.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Even if it is three or four years, is it not disruptive? Are we not allowing people to get their feet under the desk and then shipping them out?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is based on international best practice

Deputy Marc MacSharry

I hate the line "international best practice". Who decides that other countries are the best? It seems disruptive to me.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Most best practice is based on academic research and evidence and we try to base our policies, as much as we can, on evidence. The practice is to implement mobility as far as we can. Obviously, there are some circumstances where people are in the middle of a project.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Does Ms McPhillips believe it is good value for money to move people around every three to four years?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

In the context of other themes and the need for people to learn lessons, a fresh pair of eyes every few years is not a bad thing in a manager.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Are we losing value in terms of the learning curve?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No. I think the opposite is the case. My experience has been that a move every three, four or five years is valuable in bringing a fresh perspective to a portfolio of work and a fresh set of skills. It also means we develop people with a breadth of experience across the organisation and who can work in various different places. One of the difficulties in the recession was that it was hard to implement mobility because people were not coming into the organisation and there were not the same opportunities as there have been in recent years.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Is it correct that the Department was shedding people from 2008 onwards?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The numbers across the Civil Service were reducing.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Has the Department of Justice and Equality been substantially adding numbers and expertise over the past number of years?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

In the past couple of years we have, to a certain extent, caught up. We have a lot of agencies which we have to ensure are properly resourced. One of our key priorities of the past couple of years has been the Data Protection Commissioner's office, which has gone from a relatively small office to a medium-sized operation. I have no doubt it will continue to grow as its responsibilities are added to. We have staff demands across the sector, as well as in the core Department.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

In light of events of recent years, are there guidelines for personnel on what, for example, should be reported to the Minister or the Secretary General of the Department?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am not clear on the Deputy's question.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

If I am a principal officer and I have information that could be useful, is a determination given to my role that states that if I come into contact with information about X or Y, the Minister should be apprised?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. There is a clear onus on a principal officer to make sure matters of significance are brought to the Minister's attention.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

It is a given, rather than something that is defined.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is probably written down in our governance framework, which is published on the website. The terms and conditions for each position make it clear what people's responsibilities are.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

I do not think we are getting to the issue here.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am conscious that the Deputy has a letter. If he wants to ask me a question-----

Deputy Marc MacSharry

I do not want to get into specific cases because Ms McPhillips will not be able to answer anyway. I am interested in what the procedure is for the stage at which a Minister has to be apprised. If the Department has not visited this-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We visit it every day in respect of all our business in relation to the Minister who, legally, is the Department. Our interaction is constant.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

I am thinking about certain events over the years where somebody did not know about this or that. What guidelines are there? I know they may be difficult to verbalise but we need a procedure on it.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I can come back to the Deputy on that.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

I know Ms McPhillips does not have that now so it would be brilliant if she could drop us a note on it.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We also have methodologies and systems by which things are brought to the Minister's attention. An electronic submissions system exists.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Ms McPhillips might include that in her note.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Chairman

To be clear, Ms McPhillips will get back to the committee with a note on the items requested.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

It is worth putting this anonymous letter out there so that Ms McPhillips can say what is in it is not the case, as it may well not be. It states that many of the new managers coming in are inexperienced or have little previous experience in the Civil Service and that, in fact, the psychometric testing that the Public Appointments Service now conducts for new managers now favours candidates who will not refer matters upwards on the grounds that it shows more initiative.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am not in a position to comment on psychometric testing. It is applied by the Public Appointments Commission to all entrants to the public service.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

I am flagging it because it would be a matter of concern if our psychometric testing encouraged, inadvertently, a culture of containment or people to keep an issue at one's own level.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It would be a matter of significant concern but I have absolutely no reason to believe it is the case. My experience of the millennial generation is that they are much more questioning of things than people were in the past and less willing to accept what has always been done.

They are very well educated, they are very confident and they assert themselves in the workplace. That has been my experience of it.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

It might be Ms McPhillips's experience, but as we have all seen through the media and various exposés, it seems not to be exclusively the practice. When an anonymous letter comes in like that-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is from an anonymous letter.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Exactly. Ms McPhillips can say it is rubbish if she wants to, and that is fine-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am saying it on the basis of my experience as a senior manager in the Department. I certainly would not damn a whole generation of managers recruited through the Public Appointments Service, PAS.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

I am certainly not doing that. I am not damning a whole generation of anybody, but I believe that we have learned by our mistakes in the past by not listening and by choosing to ignore dissenting voices. Albeit this was an anonymous dissenting voice but I am merely putting it out there. If it identifies any anomalies we can address them together, or dismiss them if they are groundless.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I have no doubt there are many dissenting voices among the new recruits. The other aspect that may be of interest to the Deputy, and which he might like to take up with the Public Appointments Service, is that the PAS bases its practice on evidence based policy and best practice internationally. The service really tests that and reviews it again and again. It might be an interesting conversation to have at some point.

Chairman

Does the Public Appointments Service come under Ms McPhillips's Department?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Not my Department. It comes under the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform.

Chairman

Yes, we have the Secretary General-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I believe the CEO is the Accounting Officer.

Chairman

Will Mr. Dormer clarify if the Public Appointments Service is under the remit of Department of Public Expenditure and Reform?

Mr. Eoin Dormer

It is a hub within the group.

Chairman

Mr. Watt will attend this committee on 10 May and we can ask questions about recruitment services through the PAS.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Am I finished or am I okay for time?

Chairman

The Deputy is okay for the moment and can ask a last question.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

If it is my last question, I must prioritise. Reference was made to external investigators, internal protected disclosures and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Is it more appropriate to ask the representative from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform about this? Have external investigators been appointed?

Mr. Eoin Dormer

I will have to get back to the committee with a note on that as I do not have the details to hand. I will follow up on that.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

I want to be specific-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I can answer that for the Deputy.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Great.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

This contract is being procured through the Office of Government Procurement. A framework was put in place from which all Departments can draw.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Is this a panel of external investigators that is appointed and approved, and if a Department needs one it can say-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes, that is my understanding.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Typically, who would these be? Are they private investigator firms?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I believe they are from various backgrounds, mainly lawyers with some human resource experts and so on. Different kinds of disclosures deal with different areas so various levels of expertise are needed.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Okay. There is a full schedule of a panel of experts that could be financial or legal-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I do not think it is a vast array of people. It is contained but it is according to expertise and it brings the independence that the Deputy referred to.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Does it tend to be one company that has all this expertise?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am not certain. The framework is in place and it has been published as of yesterday. The Department of Public Expenditure and Reform could probably elaborate on that.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Perhaps Ms McPhillips could forward on to the committee a note on that, including who won the tender so we know who they are - one big international name that specialises in this sort of work or a list of-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Individuals maybe.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

-----five or six different companies offering differing ranges of expertise.

Chairman

Is it a framework or is it one process?

Mr. Eoin Dormer

I will follow up on that.

Chairman

I understand this to mean that each Department can hire in line with the framework but each Department has to follow the framework set out by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. Can each Department have its own arrangement or is it one for the public service?

Deputy Marc MacSharry

A public procurement process was held, so there must be some-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Chairman is correct.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

-----panel approved or something. I am interested in that.

Chairman

The committee will get more information on that. We shall move on and I invite Deputy Cullinane..

Deputy David Cullinane

I thank the Chairman. We could be interrupted by a vote but hopefully not. I should have enough time. I welcome Ms McPhillips and her team. How long has Ms McPhillips been the acting Secretary General?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Since 28 November.

Deputy David Cullinane

How long has Ms McPhillips been with the Department of Justice and Equality?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Since 1989.

Deputy David Cullinane

That is a long time.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy David Cullinane

Ms McPhillips's predecessor left prematurely. Was it early retirement?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

My predecessor announced his retirement in November.

Deputy David Cullinane

Was it an early retirement?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

He had done 40 years in the service. I am not sure we should be talking about an individual's service.

Deputy David Cullinane

I am not talking about that. I am just saying that Ms McPhillips's predecessor left prematurely and his predecessor then-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I do not believe there is anything premature about it, Deputy.

Chairman

If a person has done 40 years in the service and leaves, he or she is not leaving prematurely.

Deputy David Cullinane

He was not due to retire - I will put it that way.

Chairman

He could have stayed on longer.

Deputy David Cullinane

He could have stayed on longer, as could his predecessor who, I believe, left early also. What was the reason for the departure of his predecessor?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

His predecessor went to another job in the public service.

Deputy David Cullinane

He went to another job in the public service. Is Ms McPhillips applying for the job?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is a personal matter.

Chairman

It would not be fair to the Public Appointments Service for this committee to discuss one applicant - if Ms McPhillips is an applicant - and we do not want to know.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is a personal decision.

Deputy David Cullinane

Okay. We will see what happens.

Chairman

The witness does not have to answer that question.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I thank the Chairman.

Deputy David Cullinane

How long has Ms McPhillips been with the Department?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Since 1989.

Deputy David Cullinane

How many years is that?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is 29 years.

Deputy David Cullinane

I assume that Ms McPhillips has read the Toland report.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy David Cullinane

The report said that the Department operated in "a closed, secretive and silo driven culture". Was this Ms McPhillips's experience over the 29 years in the Department?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is not my experience, but I can see instances where we could be more joined up in the Department and across the criminal justice system.

Deputy David Cullinane

When Ms McPhillips says it is not her experience, is it that it is not her personal experience or is it not her view that there was "a closed, secretive and silo driven culture" in the Department?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There are stereotypes with regard to institutions and people-----

Deputy David Cullinane

I am not asking the witness about stereotypes of people or institutions. I am asking about a report-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

My experience is that it is not particularly closed or secretive. I am not a particularly closed or secretive person and the Department is made up of individuals like myself.

Deputy David Cullinane

With respect to Ms McPhillips, the Toland report was not about her as an individual-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy David Cullinane

-----it was about the Department. The report said that the Department operated in "a closed, secretive and silo driven culture". This was an independent report, was it not?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was and we accepted the report in full. I suppose-----

Deputy David Cullinane

Ms McPhillips does not accept the report in full if she does not agree that the Department operated in "a closed, secretive and silo driven culture". Maybe the next point in the report about significant leadership and management problems-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I think what the Deputy asked about was my own experience. My own experience is not that.

Deputy David Cullinane

I did not ask that. I said-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Deputy did. He asked me about my experience-----

Deputy David Cullinane

I am sorry. I said that I was not just interested in her own personal experience. I asked Ms McPhillips if that was her view of the Department, aside from her own personal experience. Ms McPhillips said it was not her experience.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There are loads of things we could do better at all times.

Deputy David Cullinane

That is not the question. The conclusion that Mr. Toland came to was not that things could be done better. It was quite a hard hitting report and it spoke of "a closed, secretive and silo driven culture." I am concerned that the acting Secretary General cannot agree with the findings of the independent report. If we do not accept the failures, how do we implement changes?

The next issue highlighted in the report is was significant leadership and management problems. Is this something with which Ms McPhillips can identify after 29 years working in the Department?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There were significant failings in 2014 that are reflected in the Toland report in full.

Deputy David Cullinane

What about the findings of undue deference given to An Garda Síochána? Has Ms McPhillips read that?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Again, I have read the Toland report many times and I have implemented the recommendations-----

Deputy David Cullinane

I know that Ms McPhillips has, but that is not what I am asking. I am asking if, in her 29 years of working in the Department, Ms McPhillips found undue deference was given to An Garda Síochána by the Department at the highest level?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It has not been my experience. This is not to say that I disagree with the findings in the Toland report - in any way, shape or form - but it was not my experience that undue deference was given to An Garda Síochána or to any of our other agencies.

Deputy David Cullinane

It says this in the report. I will read directly from it. It reads: "This oversight role demands a delicate balance between accountability and respecting the independence of An Garda Síochána. In the view of the Review Group there is a deferential relationship with An Garda Síochána with a lack of proper strategic accountability being brought to bear upon them by the Department."

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Since 2014 we have done-----

Deputy David Cullinane

I do not want to know what has been done since 2014. I am asking if that was Ms McPhillips's experience. With respect, Ms McPhillips is the acting Secretary General. I am reading a report, which was very hard hitting and which looked at the Department of Justice and Equality going back over an awfully long time. Ms McPhillips worked in the Department for most of that time period, although not all of it. She is in a very good position, not just as someone who worked in the Department for a long time. Ms McPhillips is now the Accounting Officer appearing before the Committee of Public Accounts and I am putting this to her.

I did not dream this up. It is contained in an independent report which was carried out as a result of failings in Ms McPhillips's Department, one of which was that there was undue deference paid to senior gardaí by senior representatives of the Department. I am asking her, as the Accounting Officer for her Department, if that is a view she would share.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I will answer the Deputy's question in full. Since 2014 the Department has been implementing the recommendations made in the Toland report. An independent report from an independent body is published on our website that states the management board of the Department of Justice and Equality took the recommendations made in the Toland report extremely seriously and has been doing its best to implement them. On the individual aspects of the report, in particular the question of deference, we struggled to identify what the group was talking about. We have really tried to understand it.

Deputy David Cullinane

I can provide an example that might help.

Chairman

Was Ms McPhillips finished?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I was not.

Chairman

The Deputy should let Ms McPhillips finish her answer and he can then come back in.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The governance of An Garda Síochána has changed radically since 2014 and very formal arrangements have been in place since which are implemented to the letter. We have done our best to address the issue and understand it. It is not a question of seeing the word "deferential" on a page and saying we will not be deferential any more. What does that mean? We have explored the issue in detail.

Deputy David Cullinane

I am not the Accounting Officer, but I am someone who can put himself in the shoes of the review group and try to understand why it would come to the view that there was a deferential relationship. Does Ms McPhillips consider it acceptable that an Accounting Officer, one of her colleagues, would send a text message to the Garda Commissioner following the Garda Commissioner's appearance before the Committee of Public Accounts saying, "Good job"?

Chairman

Is that a matter before a tribunal?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is.

Chairman

It can be dealt with at the tribunal rather than here. If it has come up at the tribunal, it is not coming up here.

Deputy David Cullinane

It is a matter of public record. The entire workings of the Department might be subject to-----

Chairman

It has not been mentioned to me. I cannot allow the Committee of Public Accounts to be accused of trespassing on the work of a tribunal. That is my job as Chairman. It is not going to happen. We cannot go there.

Deputy David Cullinane

As a separate question, would it be considered deferential if a Garda Commissioner - not a particular Garda Commissioner but any Garda Commissioner - effectively was writing press releases for a Minister?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Again, I believe we are trespassing on the-----

Deputy David Cullinane

We are not. With respect, it is a general question. It is outside the scope of the tribunal because it does not relate to a particular Garda Commissioner. To put it in other words, is it current practice for the acting Garda Commissioner to write drafts of press releases for the Minister? Is that a practice used by the Department?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Generally, there is a fair degree of consultation with An Garda Síochána and other agencies when it comes to media management issues and it would be strange if that were not the case. We need to obtain information from the agencies to allow the Minister to do his job.

Chairman

Does that apply to parliamentary questions?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely; for parliamentary questions we receive reports from the agencies.

Deputy David Cullinane

Profound changes are required in the Department. I hope the person who will lead it will be someone who, in the first instance, will accept its failings in the past, accept all of the recommendations made in the Toland report which are very clear and serious and raise profound questions for the Department and will be in a position to drive the changes. Whoever is in the position should accept all of this and have the ability to deliver the changes.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We all want that.

Deputy David Cullinane

We will see. I am a little concerned about it. What did the Collins report deal with specifically?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It dealt with the issue of discovery to the disclosures tribunal.

Deputy David Cullinane

What did it find?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It found that the Department had acted in good faith and that there had been an issue with the filing of emails and a further issue about electronic discovery.

Deputy David Cullinane

If we leave aside the good faith aspect which is important, it also noted that there were systemic failures in how the Department categorised and filed emails. Is that correct?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It found that there were issues related to these particular emails and that there were weaknesses in the system. We are addressing them.

Deputy David Cullinane

It also found that the weaknesses and failures had led to non-disclosure of relevant emails. Is that correct?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The findings are published in the report.

Deputy David Cullinane

I am citing the report to Ms McPhillips. I am reading from the report. It showed, "Systemic failures which resulted in the non-disclosure of relevant emails".

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy David Cullinane

What changes have been made since to make sure it will not happen again?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We are in the process of setting up a legal unit to deal with tribunals and commissions generally. It will deal with the discovery issue. What happened historically was that whatever policy division was dealing with the matter also had responsibility for establishing a tribunal, carrying out searches and all of the work associated with it. It would also have had the discovery process to deal with during that very busy period.

Deputy David Cullinane

Ms McPhillips might send a note to the committee outlining the work that has been done and what will be done and perhaps the timeframes within which we might have some closure on some of these issues and see real, tangible changes that will make a difference.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Since Christmas we have engaged in a search process. We brought in IT consultants and have approached the matter in a substantially different way than we have in the past. It takes account of the nexus between old-fashioned paper files and electronic records and involves making sure nothing will fall between the cracks.

Chairman

Ms McPhillips will send a note on what the Department has done arising from the Collins report.

Deputy David Cullinane

Teachta Alan Kelly asked about what had and had not been disclosed. I understand Ms McPhillips told him that emails within the Department relevant to the issues that had been sought by the commission had been sent but not private phone records or private emails. Is that the reply she gave?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Emails outside the Department's system are not within my control.

Deputy David Cullinane

They are outside Ms McPhillips' control. Only departmental emails were sent.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. There were 30 million emails involved.

Chairman

As a general remark, normally when a tribunal seeks information, it asks people to provide information within their power of procurement or possession. It includes information that may not be in one's possession but that one is in a position to obtain somewhere else. Would they have been within Ms McPhillips' power of procurement?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

If anyone emailed something to a private account, it would be captured on our system.

Chairman

The reverse is also true.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Exactly.

Chairman

Those emails were included.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Correct.

Chairman

What about other items in a person's private email that had nothing to do with the Department?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

If the Chairman and I were emailing on Gmail, I obviously could not capture it in a search.

Deputy David Cullinane

I want to move on to the question of direct provision. Is that Mr. Dowling's area of responsibility? Did he answer questions about it earlier?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, not any more.

Deputy David Cullinane

I will put the questions to Ms McPhillips. If any of her colleagues can provide any more detail, that would be great. Teachta Jonathan O'Brien asked questions about this. There are 28 centres in total. Is that correct? That is the figure that was given.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There are 28 commercial centres and seven State-owned centres, with two commercially owned self-catering centres.

Deputy David Cullinane

I will follow on from Teachta Jonathan O'Brien's questions. There are seven State-owned facilities that could act as direct provision centres. Is it the case that there are 28 private centres because the State does not have the capacity to deliver more? Perhaps it might not have buildings available. Is that why there are 28 private centres?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The model is the main reason we have 28 private centres. It gives us the flexibility to flex when we need it. When we need additional capacity, we can procure it. If we were in the business of buying premises all the time, it would take so long to purchase and so on -----

Deputy David Cullinane

So the demand -----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

---- then they would be there while they were empty.

Deputy David Cullinane

So it is about demand, and it might be easier and quicker to outsource it in order to get a centre up and running.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is.

Deputy David Cullinane

Is there a service level agreement between the Department and these 28 centres?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes, there is a contract.

Deputy David Cullinane

What do these service level agreements -----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

They are contracts, commercial contracts.

Deputy David Cullinane

I will give Ms McPhillips some of my experience of these centres, which I have raised with one of her predecessors -----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I think I may have been here that day.

Deputy David Cullinane

---- and I might raise it again in order to familiarise Ms Phillips with it. I have never been barred from anything in my life but I was barred from a reception centre in Waterford.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I recall the Deputy talking about this.

Deputy David Cullinane

I will recall it again because it is still a sore point for me and the people I represent who asked me to go to that centre. I was asked to come in my capacity as a councillor by residents of the centre who had established a residents' association. I arrived at the time they had asked me and the centre manager told me that because I had not been given her permission, I was not allowed to be on the premises or take part in the meeting. I told her that I had no difficulty with that and asked to reschedule and I was told that there would be no rescheduling and that I was not permitted to meet with the residents.

When I asked was it a place where people lived or was it a prison, I was asked to leave and gardaí were called, although they never came. I had to meet the residents outside in the rain. I have not been granted access to the centre subsequently. Is there any provision in the service level agreements whereby if the people who live in the centres have grievances with the centre, they can interact with their public representatives. Ms Phillips or myself would have the right to form a residents' association. Can any of the officials say why it would be the case that public representatives would not be allowed to meet residents in the place where they live to discuss issues which affect them where they live?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I cannot except that, as we have discussed, these are commercial premises that are owned by other people.

Deputy David Cullinane

They are commercial premises that house people -----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely.

Deputy David Cullinane

----- and that get taxpayers' money. There are real concerns that in years to come we will look back at how people living in direct provision centres may have been treated. I do not think the State will emerge smelling of roses.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The initiative -----

Deputy David Cullinane

Sorry, I am not finished. There should be something in the service level agreement that if the people who live in those centres want to interact with the democratically-elected people in the areas where they live, they should be able to do so.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I would not disagree with the Deputy at all.

Deputy David Cullinane

If Ms Phillips does not disagree then it is a matter that can be addressed because it is not in the service level agreement.

Second, at the time of the local election I posted correspondence addressed to each individual resident, all of which was binned. That was confirmed to me. Perhaps Mr. Dowling can answer how someone can post something to someone who lives in one of these reception centres, and that post not be passed on. Is that acceptable?

Mr. Noel Dowling

No, that should not have happened. All post, if directly addressed to somebody, should be given to that individual.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

As I say, I agree with the Deputy in relation to what happened there.

Deputy David Cullinane

My frustration is not with Ms McPhillips or Mr. Dowling, by the way.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I understand that. Over the last year or so, we have given residents access to the Ombudsman and the Ombudsman for Children, which is a very welcome development in the type of matters that the Deputy raised, although that is a separate matter.

Deputy David Cullinane

I want to make one last point. Deputy Jonathan O'Brien said that we have more refugees coming into the system because thankfully we are taking in some of the Syrian refugees. The asylum process can be very slow. Is it the case that that is increasing the cost for direct provision and that if we put more resources into fast-tracking the applications, that would reduce the cost? If we are spending €51 million on people in reception centres - some of whom are living in these centres for years on end, out of sight, out of mind, which is not a good way to treat people - surely it would make sense to put more resources into faster processing of their claims, which would reduce the cost to the State. Would Ms McPhillips agree? Is this being examined?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Deputy is correct. In recent years we have enacted the International Protection Act which concertinas a whole lot of processes into a single process with a view to streamlining the system, so that there is not so many layers to the process. That is with a view to reducing the processing time. We have put significant resources into processing. Mr. Kirrane might wish to expand on this.

Chairman

A vote has been called in the Chamber so we will have to suspend.

Deputy David Cullinane

I will not get back to the meeting, so I want to reiterate that none of the questions that we put are personal to Mr. Dowling or Ms McPhillips. I want to wish Ms McPhillips well in whatever she does.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Thank you.

The committee suspended at 1.06 p.m. and resumed at 2.35 p.m.

Chairman

The committee is now in public session. We will resume our discussion with the Department of Justice and Equality in respect of Vote 24 and Chapter 13 of the annual report of the Comptroller and Auditor General. I call Deputy Catherine Connolly.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

The issue of information and communications technology, ICT, has been dealt with and I will not repeat the points that have been made. The management oversight committee, or whatever name is given to the board------

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Governance.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Governance. When did that come into being?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Approximately 2011 or 2012. However, at that time its remit did not extend------

Deputy Catherine Connolly

It did not extend to that because it was concerned with bigger projects.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes, exactly, and contracts and tendering.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

That was internal.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was internal, with support from an existing contract.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

In this regard, the highest spend was on the Insolvency Service of Ireland, ISI.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The highest spend of the projects examined.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Yes. It came to approximately €3,647,000.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

The agencies which incurred the highest spends, namely, the Insolvency Service of Ireland and the Charities Regulator, are in the process of getting new information technology, IT, systems.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

They have gone to tender or are in the process of so doing.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

In the case of the ISI, the tender is in the final stages. The Charities Regulator is no longer under our Department. It has moved to the Department of Rural and Community Affairs.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

It moved in January of this year.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, in July of last year.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Okay. In terms of the expenditure that is being accounted for here, the Comptroller and Auditor General has drawn our attention to a lack of governance and management but Ms McPhillips is saying that has been sorted out.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. The new procedure-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

That is fine. I listened to what was said in that regard and accept it, up to a certain point. It seems extraordinary that the agencies need a new computer service after such expenditure on them. Although I accept what Ms McPhillips set out, the troika determined a need for the urgent delivery of an insolvency service. In this case, the troika, which was supposed to bring openness and accountability, was responsible for a system being set up without openness and accountability. Does Ms McPhillips accept that?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I do not. To be fair to the troika, it had no control over the governance processes in the Department of Justice and Equality. The pressure it exerted related to the delivery of an insolvency service but the detail was ours-------

Deputy Catherine Connolly

The pressure also related to speed of delivery.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely. The speed of delivering the service.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Did the pressure relating to speed of delivery come from the troika?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There were two aspects to it. The Government was keen to deliver on it because it was a troika commitment.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Departments generally follow the directions of the troika. After listening carefully to what has been said, it seems ironic that when that was done in this case, it led to a total lack of openness. Ms McPhillips does not like the way I put that.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is not fair to the troika. The way the Department set up the service was our own business. The troika did not tell us how to run an IT system.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Everything I have read on this matter, including Ms McPhillips's briefing note, leads me to conclude that it resulted from directions given by the troika. We understood that the service had to be brought in and speed was of the essence. It has now cost over €3.5 million. The Department has learned an awful lot and set up new procedures but it has cost a considerable amount of money and there is now a tender for a new computer system.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is a new element of the computer system - a case management system.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

All right.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The imperative at the time, as I have no doubt Deputy Connolly recalls, was the level of indebtedness in the country and a methodology to deal with that through the establishment of an insolvency service.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I understand that Ms McPhillips has a role to play in terms of answers. It is a privilege to sit on this committee and, each week, to hear of the decisions that were made. What was done under the guise of saving banks and the financial system led to huge problems that cost the taxpayer a huge amount, in addition to the bank bailout. This is a perfect example of that.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I do not pretend to be an expert on the insolvency service but my understanding is that it was set up to be of assistance to individuals who were in debt.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Absolutely. I know that. It arose from circumstances where banks overstretched and gave out money. We are not getting into that. It arose from the crisis.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

One thing we have learned, as I said to a member earlier, is that if we look at both the Insolvency Service of Ireland and the Charities Regulator, they were both effectively start-ups. The requirements were not as clear as they became later.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I do not really accept that with respect to the Charities Regulator as the Act came into being in 2009.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was not commenced until 2014.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Yes, and perhaps that is a reflection on the Government and not the Department. It was introduced in 2009 and there was plenty of warning. We needed a Charities Regulator in response to major problems.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

We did not implement it until 2014 and when we did, it was not implemented very well.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I would not accept that the regulator has not been implemented well.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I am sticking specifically with the governance.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is the IT.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Absolutely. I am not making a comment on this. We do not need to do that.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is grand.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Would the witness accept there was no governance?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, I would not accept that there was no governance.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Would Ms McPhillips accept there was bad governance?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, I would not.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Would Ms McPhillips accept there was a problem with governance?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I absolutely accept there was a problem with governance.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

All right. I will leave that as there are many more questions I want to ask. I will look at the Toland report, which was done the way a report should be carried out. It was set up by the former Minister, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, on 3 June and it reported on 11 July.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

That is breakneck speed. I acknowledge that it paid tribute to the Department, pointing out good elements and core strengths, which is very important. I accept those as they balance what comes afterwards. As one of my colleagues said earlier, this is quite hard-hitting. The report also indicates that time was short and there was no time to do comparatives.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I acknowledge the limitation. Notwithstanding all that, there are some very hard-hitting conclusions. Does the witness accept all those conclusions?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We did at the time and we have implemented-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

That is okay. I am coming to the implementation. One suggestion might have saved much bother. The group offered services to make reviews on a regular basis. The witness is aware of that.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am. If the Minister wanted to bring them back in-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

It states that "the review group is prepared to meet twice yearly, if required by the Minister, over the next two years to review progress made in implementing these recommendations". I see it is the Minister's role but was it discussed in the Department that it was a good recommendation that this review group should meet twice yearly and make a review?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Good. What was determined?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

In 2014 we designed a programme for change and we had engagement with the Toland group later in 2014 around that. It formed part of the stakeholder engagement in November 2014 when we were finalising our programme for change and the response to the report.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

There is a specific reference to meeting twice yearly to review the progress in the implementation. Was that discussed in the Department?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Not that I recall.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Was it a good suggestion?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was very generous.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

It was very generous but it was not taken up. I am asking the witness. Was that because it was the Minister's role? Did the Department believe it was a good suggestion and tell the Minister it was a very good idea in view of the findings and recommendations?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We monitored implementation as we went on.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I am specifically referring to the Toland group. The mental health strategy A Vision for Change is a good example of what I am referring to. It was brilliant ten years ago. It had an independent monitoring set-up, with two periods of three years. That was abolished because it was doing such a good job. An independent group was offering to monitor the recommendations because it took them so seriously but did the Department take them seriously?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Okay.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There is a report from 2017 relating to the implementation. The first sentence indicates it is clear that the management board took the recommendations of Toland very seriously.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Okay. That is not my question.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That was an evaluation of the implementation.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Did the Department think the offer worthy of being taken up?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

As I said, it was very generous but it was not taken up.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Okay. Why was that?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I cannot tell the Deputy. As it states in the report, the Minister could have opted to do that.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Absolutely. I will certainly take it up with the Minister and I have done it in the Dáil.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It would have been the previous Minister.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

It does not matter who it was. It is the system we are trying to hold to account. I do not like to use the word "damning" but it was certainly very hard-hitting.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

It has been quoted already. There are phrases that include a "silo culture of secrecy" and so on, notwithstanding the Department's strengths. Surely the most obvious action was to grab the offer to independently monitor the implementation if the Department was serious about this.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Department was absolutely serious about this. The biggest priority was to implement the recommendations and we did that.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

It was a missed opportunity and I use the phrase carefully. I will come to the Magdalen laundries matter and an opportunity lost in a moment.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I do not know if the Deputy had the opportunity to look at the other report to which I refer.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I saw the reference earlier.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is an EY report.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I will make it my business to look at it.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is on the website.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I saw a reference to it. What did it cost?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was approximately €60,000 or €70,000.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Will Ms McPhillips come back to clarify that?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was in the course of 2018.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

We agreed earlier we would clarify what we were looking for. I am asking Ms McPhillips a very specific question and she has answered as best she can. It was a golden opportunity lost and that offer from the Toland group to independently monitor the implementation should have been taken up. The next matter is the recommendations. There were 18, so have all of them been implemented?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There were in the region of 80 in total as the 18 recommendations are broken down. The programme for change took those 80 recommendations and put them into 11 work streams. There was implementation across the 11 work streams with different responsible officers and in a programme management process.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Which have not been implemented or are still in the process of being implemented.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

They are identified in the report I have just mentioned to the Deputy. It is the most recent report. They are very much what we are conscious of, and structure was one. There was a clear recommendation relating to structure.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

The division.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes, it relates to internal division. The Toland group accepted that more work needed to be done in that regard. As the Deputy mentioned, the group's evaluation was very short and sharp and it accepted that detail was required. That is one. Should I go on?

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Yes. The witness has told me the report will tell me what has been implemented.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Has there been any change from that report? What date is on the report?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was published in January this year.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Has there been any big improvement since or other progress?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The work we are doing on structure is informed by another report we published at the same time that identifies the methodology relating to structure. As Mr. O'Sullivan said earlier, we are working through that.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

What report is that?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is the Mazars report we referred to earlier.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

What did it cost?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was €48,708.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Were any other reports carried out following the Toland process?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Not relating to this.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Were there any arising from Toland and the recommendations? This is not a fishing exercise and I am confining myself.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I do not think so. At least, there were no reports from consultants.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Will the witness check that?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, I am fairly certain that those are the two.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

So the cost of the reports was €80,000 and €48,708.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The other report was €76,567.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

When will all the recommendations be done, dusted and implemented?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

This is the work that the new effectiveness and renewal group is looking at. It is looking at what we have done since the Toland and there is a body of evidence that we have provided. There is much material.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

It is going back and forth. When is D-day?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There must be an initial report by the end of June and quarterly thereafter until all the recommendations are implemented. In addition to looking back the group is looking forward to see if other actions must be taken. It has been working with us on that.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I thank the witness.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The other areas include structure, the relationship with An Garda Síochána, succession planning, external communications and things like that. We zeroed in on structure.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

There is the matter of the reporting mechanism for the Garda ombudsman and the inspectorate. Has the reporting changed? It was one of the recommendations.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That relates to structure.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Yes.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

What they said in respect of structure was that it needed further evaluation and it has received that further evaluation.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

They did not say that in this document. They said the reporting back was not appropriate or was not-----. I will find the exact words they used before I finish. Has the reporting mechanism changed?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The reporting mechanism for GSOC is in the course of changing at the moment. We are moving it from reporting into the policing division to reporting into the civil governance-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I ask the witness to just stay with me for a second. On page 11 it is stated that the review group believes there is a conflict with the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission and the Garda Inspectorate reporting into the Garda division of the Department. That was November 2014 and we are now April 2018. Has that changed?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is being changed at the moment in respect of GSOC.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Only in respect of GSOC?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

What about the Garda Inspectorate?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

All these areas are being examined. The Deputy will be familiar with the Commission on the Future of Policing in Ireland.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Yes. I see.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

All the architecture around An Garda Síochána in terms of oversight is being examined by the commission, which has to report by September of this year. We have also established the Policing Authority since 2014, which is a major change.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I suppose I can go all over the place as well. I understand where Ms McPhillips is coming from but these are specific recommendations which they made, set and offered to review independently. We are in 2018. One has not been implemented and is pending further reviews outside of Ms McPhillips's control while the second one is in the process of being changed.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I think the Deputy would recognise that where things report into is part of the structure. It was considered - genuinely - in that context and would fall to be implemented in that context.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I will tell the witness why I am going around. It is to come back-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is what I meant earlier. I apologise for interrupting the Deputy. That is what I meant when I said we took the recommendations and grouped them thematically so as to make sure they made sense together.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

There has been a loss of personnel in the Department for various reasons and in very public circumstances. There have been many debates in the Dáil. I am now relating this report on the Department of Justice and Equality back to the Garda. If I look at the Department's own Vote, on page 30 we have all of the tribunals. We do not have all the tribunals; I will rephrase. We have a tiny section of the tribunals that have been set up in the last 30 years. In respect of the Morris tribunal, am I correct that it is almost €70 million?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Is that the final figure or is there more due?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There may be some third party costs still outstanding but our sense is that if there are, they are very small. The estimate is that the figure is more or less final.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

So that is €68.69 million - approximately €70 million. Let us just say the words slowly again: €70 million for the Morris tribunal.

Chairman

Can we remind the public what the Morris tribunal was?

Deputy Bobby Aylward

There were probably about 30 millionaires made after that tribunal.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Before we talk about millionaires, what was exposed was the most serious difficulties in the Garda. Whatever about barristers or solicitors making a killing, they were very serious issues.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

To answer the Chairman, it was an investigation into the conduct of gardaí in the Donegal division.

Chairman

We have spent €70 million on it.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. To be fair, in terms of to date, I think there is very little outstanding.

Chairman

On that, at the end of 2016 it says €68.659 million had been expended and over the page it states that it is estimated to be about €70 million in total. Throughout 2017 and up to date in 2018, what has been paid?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I think there was some expenditure in 2017 alright, I recall seeing it. I will come back to the Chairman when we locate it if that is alright.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

At this figure of €70 million-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was €78,000 in the course of 2017.

Chairman

And the Department is still expecting another €1 million or so, is it?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is estimated that there may be some third party costs. The Chairman is probably familiar. We have no control over when they will come in. The Morris tribunal was an incredibly detailed piece of work-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I am not trying to-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

-----over five phases-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Respectfully, I have only limited time and want to stay focused.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Sure.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

These figures stand, €70 million. If we do not learn something for €70 million, certainly the price is given to solicitors and barristers which I fully agree should be looked at. I accept that. If we do not learn from it - arising from that we had the Garda Síochána Act and lots of recommendations. That was in 2005, was it, the Morris tribunal?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. It was 2002 to 2005.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

So the final report was in 2005.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It might be a bit later.

Chairman

The Morris tribunal concluded its work in 2008.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Here we are, ten years later with the Department of Justice and Equality. We have a Smithwick tribunal again inquiring into the Garda. Is that right?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

And further down we have an inquiry under section 109 of the Garda Síochána Act into the conduct of a GSOC investigation. Then we have a commission of investigation in respect of Cavan-Monaghan, the O'Higgins report.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Is that the total figure there?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There may be some third party costs in the course of 2017 from O'Higgins but probably not. It did not run on. I think that is the end of O'Higgins.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I agree that it did not run on. It was my introduction to the Dáil and I read every bit of it. There were serious lessons and a finding that was very moderate.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Sorry, was there a question?

Deputy Catherine Connolly

No, there was not a question. There was a statement about learning from O'Higgins, which made very moderate findings. I would have preferred if he had made stronger findings but he did not. All of these inquiries were into Garda behaviour supervised or managed by the Department of Justice and Equality because the Garda comes under that Department.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Deputy will be familiar with the framework-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

The division of labour, yes.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Commissioner is the Accounting Officer since 2006.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I understand all of that. It is not that. It is about a Department learning, reading all these reports and learning about openness, accountability and change and about moving quickly. That would be the purpose of all of this. This leads me into the opportunity lost for the Magdalen laundries. On the factual side, there have been 691 awards, 106 refused, 15 are outstanding in respect of capacity and there are, I think, 25 others. Are there others to come forward? Has the closing date passed?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There was not a closing date.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

It is open-ended, so other applicants can come forward.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Of those who came forward, 691 received awards and 106 were refused.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Presumably some of those who were refused are among the 27 complaints made to the Ombudsman. Are they?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Ms McPhillips has read the Ombudsman's report.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I have read it. It does not make for very pleasant reading. Does Ms McPhillips accept the findings of the Ombudsman's report in respect of the interpretations from the Department of Justice and Equality in respect of this scheme?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Government has accepted the Ombudsman's report in full.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I am delighted that the Government has finally seen sense and is taking a hands-on approach because that is the least we can do. However, I am asking the Department now in respect of the Ombudsman's report, which was very hard-hitting. It refers to maladministration on more than one occasion. Does Ms McPhillips accept that?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I accept that there was a difference of opinion between ourselves and the Ombudsman in respect of the interpretation of the scheme.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I see that and I see the Department has come back-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We have resolved that.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

The Department has resolved this. It was not resolved from an internal investigation or from the Department examining what it was doing with this. It was resolved for a number of reasons that had nothing to do with the Department, is that not right? It was resolved because of the Ombudsman's report and because of the Government taking a hands-on approach.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Ombudsman reported, as the Deputy is aware, last November.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Okay. Was the Department carrying out an inquiry before the Ombudsman's report into how it was operating the scheme?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No. The scheme was designed on the basis of reports from Mr. Justice Quirke, who made recommendations that were implemented, and the scheme was approved by Government.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I do not accept that and I have read this. Ms McPhillips might tell me where I am wrong. Mr. Justice Quirke was very generous in the way he said the scheme should be administered. He said somebody who attended an institution should not be excluded from it. Does the witness accept that?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Then the scheme was administered in such a way that anyone who was in an institution that was listed under the redress scheme could not benefit under this scheme. Is that not the way the Department interpreted it?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes, that is my understanding.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

It is my understanding and I have read it. It was not even if someone applied and received redress but simply if she attended.

For example, Lenaboy industrial school in Galway was listed under the redress board. If someone who attended it did not make a claim to the board but had subsequently gone to the Magdalen laundry in Galway, that person would be excluded under this scheme.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am afraid the Deputy has the advantage over me. I am not familiar with the details.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Ms McPhillips does not need to be familiar with Galway. This is about the principle of the matter. I am giving a particular example in order to simplify. There was an industrial school at Lenaboy in Galway. Some of the people who resided there ended up in a Magdalen laundry. According to Mr. Justice Quirke, if someone attended an institution and got redress, she should not have her separate time spent in a Magdalen laundry excluded. The Department did not just interpret this scheme as excluding someone who had received redress, but also anyone who had been in an institution that had been listed.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The point about the scheme as administered related to whether people were resident.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

No. Will Ms McPhillips read that part again? I often make mistakes, but I have taken a particular interest in this and have not made a mistake. The scheme was interpreted as meaning even if an institution was listed. The Department interpreted it in a narrow way that excluded people. That is the basis of the Ombudsman's report. It is one of the report's primary findings. There are 27 substantial complaints, 15 of which relate to exclusions. People were excluded under the scheme because of the Department's narrow interpretation. If the Department has learned from the Toland report and the comments about secrecy and a silo mentality or culture, how could it interpret a scheme in such a narrow way that results in an Ombudsman's report that more than once refers to maladministration? Has Ms McPhillips read the report?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Good. How many times was maladministration mentioned?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I did not count that.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I counted three. I am sorry - I will give Ms McPhillips a chance to answer. This matter is close to my heart.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I appreciate how genuine the Deputy is on this. I should point out that 691 applicants were paid under the scheme. The Department's approach was to administer the scheme in line with what had been approved by the Government. The Government re-examined that and we are considering extending the scheme.

I must apologise. My colleague who was present this morning is much more expert on this matter than I. There will be a meeting this afternoon about the scheme's future and he had to leave to attend that.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I will leave it with my next point, as this is the Committee of Public Accounts. I acknowledge that 691 applicants got awards. I acknowledge the Ombudsman's statement that some of the people whom residents dealt with were good, friendly and professional. There is a balancing exercise, but the Ombudsman also refers more than once to maladministration of the scheme. I do not accept the Department's interpretation of that. It is not learning if that is what it maintains. I suggest that Ms McPhillips read the report.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I have read it.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I suggest that Ms McPhillips read it again. I do not mean to be sarcastic, but the Ombudsman is setting out his problem with the way the Department handled the scheme. The report is a result of only 27 complaints, so how many people have died who applied but did not get awards? Does the Department know?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, I am sorry.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Is the Department aware of how many people came forward but were not around subsequently to get an award?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Anyone to whom an award was made - I believe there were 25 cases - and who died before it could be paid had it paid to that person's estate instead. Obviously, that was not much benefit to the people in question.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Twenty-five had died.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Those are people who got awards. I believed the Deputy's question related to people who did not get awards and subsequently died.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

No. I beg Ms McPhillips's pardon. I should have made myself clear.

I have a few practical questions on our obligations under the relocation and resettlement programme. Ms McPhillips mentioned a figure of over 1,000 people under the resettlement programme.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is 1,040.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I accept that. It is progress. Our commitment was to take in 4,000. Where are we in that regard? Was that commitment to be fulfilled by the end of this year or last year?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I believe it was last year, but we are continuing to work on it.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

We must be clear. The Government committed to taking in 4,000 refugees by the end of 2017.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I believe so. I will check the note.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Please. I do not want to take up too much time.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The figure is 4,000. I just cannot remember the date. Mr. Kirrane will be able to help the Deputy.

Mr. Michael Kirrane

The Government decision in September 2015 was to take in up to 4,000.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I had thought it was 4,000. By when?

Mr. Michael Kirrane

No particular date was set in the Government decision.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Is Mr. Kirrane sure?

Mr. Michael Kirrane

A date of last September was set under the EU relocation programme.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

How many people were we to have taken in by that date?

Mr. Michael Kirrane

Let me get the precise figures. The original decision was for 2,622 under the EU relocation programme. That figure was based on a total of 60,000 people to be distributed across Europe.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I will be stopped shortly, so could we get a note on that, please? It was my understanding that we were to take in 4,000 under the relocation and resettlement programme. Could we get a note on how matters stand currently?

Mr. Michael Kirrane

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

That will save me time, as I have a few more practical questions to ask.

Chairman

The Deputy has referred to the resettlement programme, but what is the exact title?

Mr. Michael Kirrane

Relocation and resettlement.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

There are two strands under the protection programme.

Mr. Michael Kirrane

Yes.

Chairman

We need a report on each strand.

Mr. Michael Kirrane

It is part of the overall-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Is "protection" the overall heading?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I have it here. I saw it earlier but I cannot find it now. "Irish refugee protection programme" is the main heading. As the Deputy said, the pledge was to bring 4,000 people to the State - 2,600 through the EU relocation mechanism, which relates to Italy and Greece, and 1,040 under the UNHCR-led refugee programme.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

The Syrian refugees.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. They are mainly from Lebanon.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

That does not come to 4,000.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The first one is 4,000, 2,600 of whom-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Rather than-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am sorry. There is an unallocated amount whom we can take from that large-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

That does not add up. Could we get the figure? Not now, as I do not want to waste time on this here, but I want to be precise.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There is a kind of "other" category of 300 or 400 people at the end.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I do not know what there is, but we made a commitment of 4,000.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Deputy is right.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

That is the end of that.

Chairman

Ms McPhillips might send us a note.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is not a problem.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

There was a vacancy in the Garda Inspectorate or GSOC. I had it marked in my documents but I have lost it.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There have been vacancies in both in recent years.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Are there vacancies now?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No. The inspectorate is fully staffed with the chief inspector and two deputy chief inspectors. GSOC has a chair and an ordinary member. We are in the process of appointing a third person so that it is up to its full complement.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Are there vacancies currently?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There is a vacancy that is about to be filled through an open competition run by the Public Appointments Service, PAS.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

What is that vacancy?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

For a member of the commission.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

A general member of the commission.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is a three-member commission. Currently, there is the chair, with whom the Deputy will be familiar, and an ordinary member. This vacancy relates to the other ordinary member.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

There is one vacancy.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That appointment will be made within weeks, as the person has been identified.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

For how long has the position been vacant?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Since October, November or thereabouts. That is how long the competition to fill it has taken.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I thank Ms McPhillips.

There was an underspend in respect of Cosc, which deals with domestic, sexual and gender-based violence. According to the Vote, there were savings across a range of activities. Given the level of domestic, sexual and gender-based violence, though, how are we making savings?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I will get the details for the Deputy. The saving is attributed to staff costs.

It was basically that staff were not recruited at the rate that was hoped.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Why not? Domestic and sexual violence is at crisis point.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely. It takes time to get staff in place.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I ask Ms McPhillips to explain. I will not describe this issue as a pet project because that would be the wrong phrase, but it is an issue I have followed up since I was elected. How can there be vacancies?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There are vacancies across the Department at any stage.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

This area must be given absolute priority.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is given priority.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

How many vacancies are there?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I reckon there are about two vacancies.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I do not want Ms McPhillips to reckon. She should revert to me with the figure on vacancies in Cosc and the reasons for the vacancies in the organisation.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I do not think there are vacancies now. This was in 2016.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Will Ms McPhillips revert to me with clarification?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Chairman

She should provide a note on vacancies in Cosc in 2016 and the updated position.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

The other issue was the asylum, migration and integration fund. Savings arose because the fund did not become operational. Was that a procedural issue?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, it was because of the issue the Deputy identified earlier - the numbers did not come from Greece as quickly as we had originally hoped.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I thank the witness.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

As I was not present for part of the meeting, some of my questions may be repetitious. Unfortunately, I cannot do anything about that.

Deputy Connolly referred to a figure of €17.8 million for the Mahon tribunal, which has not yet concluded. We also had the Smithwick tribunal and other tribunals.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

What I said was we do not have many more. I think we are more or less there.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Does Ms McPhillips believe tribunals offer value for money? I am not arguing we should not have tribunals. Members of the public want answers and a way must be found to get them answers, but are tribunals the solution given the costs involved? Money is scarce and we have spent a couple of hundred million euro on inquiries. Do they provide value for money and are there easier ways of getting to the truth?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Deputy is absolutely right. The tribunals are very expensive. That is why, as the Deputy may recall and the Chairman will recall, the Commissions of Investigation Act was brought forward in the mid-2000s. It provided for a mechanism for inquiring into similar matters but in private and at a much lower cost. If the Deputy looks at the list, the O'Higgins commission, for example, was a commission of investigation conducted in private. One does not need the same level of legal representation etc., so the costs are not nearly as high. As we have seen, however, there are some matters that need to be aired in public and the Government can decide to use the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act, which dates back to 1921. Obviously, people before a tribunal are entitled to legal representation and so forth.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

I mean no disrespect to the legal profession, whose members are well trained and educated professionals. While I know a newspaper is only ink on paper, one often reads in newspapers about people who received millions in payments from the Exchequer and taxpayers. It annoys me that this kind of money is paid. One sees the costs per day for members of the legal profession and the support they have. The money involved in monumental and it is very annoying, given that the country was in recession at the time. I know the costs must be paid but the legal costs are extravagant. I do not mean any disrespect to anyone.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I would much prefer to spend money on other things but obviously there are things we need to find out about and so forth. If the Deputy looks back, most of the tribunals were in the 2000s and preceded the enactment of the commissions of investigation legislation. The tribunal in place at the moment is one of the first tribunals set up in about ten years but there are particular reasons for that and the Oireachtas approved it this time last year.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Does Ms McPhillips envisage a better system being put in place for public inquiries, which would have lower costs?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is generally acknowledged that the commissions of investigation process has generally worked very well and done its-----

Deputy Bobby Aylward

I want to move on. Nearly every speaker has referred to the rent paid for departmental premises on Wolfe Tone Street, Dublin. I thought the witness was a little blasé this morning when referring to a sum of €3.5 million, which went to waste. The attitude was dismissive. It was as if this happened and no one will be held responsible. This money would achieve a great deal in areas such as housing and medical cards, which are crying out for money. Was any individual or group held responsible for that mistake? Who owned the premises? Was it privately owned and rented? Who did the legal work on the contract and failed to examine the planning permission? Why was the problem with planning permission not found for 12 months? Why did the Department wriggle out? Why did it furnish the premises? Why was someone not monitoring the position and shouting "Stop"? Why did the costs escalate to €3.8 million before someone finally called a halt? I presume the settlement of €1.8 million was to compensate the owner of the premises, in other words, to allow the Department to buy its way out of the contract. Why did it take ten years to do all this? There are major questions about how this was left to drag on. Someone has to take responsibility.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I can certainly answer the Deputy in relation to what happened. I did a little more research at lunchtime. The 2011 report of the Comptroller and Auditor General goes into some detail on the question of legal advice, who gave that advice and who was responsible for that.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Was it internal or external legal advice?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The due diligence on it was done by the vendor and the assurances were given by the vendor.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

The vendor is the person to whom the Department paid all the money and subsequently compensated.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

He was compensated for giving wrong information.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The 2011-----

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Will Ms McPhillips respond to that? Did we compensate him?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

This is reported on in the Comptroller and Auditor General's report, which states-----

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Rather than giving the vendor money, should we not have taken money back from him for giving wrong information? Am I missing something?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There is a practice in place since the 1970s in respect of contract law generally where, apparently, a solicitor acting on behalf of a purchaser insists on an opinion on compliance with planning permission from the landlord or vendor showing that the development is in substantial compliance with the planning permission. That is a practice across all contracts apparently and the view of the Comptroller and Auditor General in 2011 was that the Chief State Solicitor's Office, CSSO, was entitled to rely on that in relation to this.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Instead of giving the vendor compensation, should the taxpayer not have sought compensation on the basis of the information given originally? Someone gave clearance in respect of planning permission. Why does the taxpayer have to give the vendor more than €1 million on top of what was paid for the site. We should have taken back the money we gave the vendor.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Deputy is right. That is why we initiated-----

Deputy Bobby Aylward

We were right, yet we still paid money.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Sorry, can I answer? We initiated legal proceedings against the vendor in 2012 or 2013 along the lines the Deputy outlined because of the situation that arose. However, we were not successful in those legal proceedings and the case was eventually settled.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

The Department failed in court.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, it went to settlement and the settlement was €1.89 million.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

The Department settled out of court. Is that correct?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

If the Department had pursued the case further, would it not have got its money back?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The legal advice was that that was not the best option and that the best option was to settle.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

I am baffled but as a layperson, I may not understand the issue. A vendor and legal person stood over the contract, or whatever one wishes to call it, the Department took on the contract believing in good faith it had planning permission but subsequently found out that planning permission had not been granted, then spent money furnishing the premises and then, ten years later, settled a case out of court and gave the vendor €1.8 million in compensation. I would have expected the taxpayer to have been compensated.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I totally follow the Deputy's logic but logic and the law do not always mix.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Who gave the Department legal advice to settle the case?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We received strong legal advice from counsel.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Was it in-house legal advice?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, it was the law officers of the State.

Chairman

I do not understand the logic.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

I do not understand it either, perhaps because I am a layperson.

Chairman

Perhaps the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General will explain in layman's terms what happened.

Mr. Andy Harkness

The point in the Comptroller and Auditor General's conclusion was that the Department relied on the CSSO to provide legal advice in relation to the negotiations of the lease.

The comptroller went on to say that the Chief State Solicitor's office had followed an established conveyancing procedure in relying on the vendors or lessors to provide an architect's opinion of compliance with planning requirements. An opinion was provided in the required format by a registered person, and the CSSO was entitled to rely on this in accordance with recommended Law Society practice. Nevertheless, the statutory period to act on a change of use had expired, and the basis on which a change of use would be recognised by the planning authorities was specifically averted to in the correspondence between the CSSO and the legal representatives of the property owners.

Chairman

Mr. Harkness is saying that when the commitment was given, there was still valid planning permission for the change of use, but by the time the building came to be occupied that had expired. I ask him to explain that. I do not get it.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It had already expired, because it expired in 2006.

Chairman

I ask him to repeat that sentence about the-----

Mr. Andy Harkness

The statutory period to act on a change of use had expired, and the basis on which a change of use would be recognised by the planning authorities was specifically adverted to in correspondence between the CSSO and the legal representatives of the property owners.

Chairman

Is Mr. Harkness saying to the committee that the Chief State Solicitor's office knew that the planning permission had expired?

Mr. Andy Harkness

Or it should have been aware.

Chairman

Mr. Harkness said that this was referred to in correspondence.

Mr. Andy Harkness

Yes.

Chairman

In other words, the witness is saying that the landlord alerted the State that planning permission had expired, and the Chief State Solicitor's office went ahead. I am confused.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am only speculating because I have not seen it, but I think it was more the case that it might have been obvious that there was a window which had expired. It was not obvious whether or not the option had been taken during that window.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

I must ask about the legal advice that the Department of Justice and Equality got in the very beginning. Was it the case that the vendor himself got that legal advice, to the effect that there was planning permission, and the Department took the advice on board?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No-----

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Did the Department have any legal advice of its own, in-house or external, on the whole deal?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Did the Department have advice all the way along?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Its own legal advice?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

From the Chief State Solicitor's office, yes.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Who made the mistake?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

This is what I was clarifying. Apparently the CSSO was entitled to rely on this practice.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Ms McPhillips is saying that according to its advice, the Department was forced to settle. Is the person who gave that advice not responsible? They actually told untruths. I do not want to say "lies", but falsehoods or something-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am not in a position to answer some of those questions.

Chairman

I have been around here for a while and I have heard this going on before. I just do not understand the basic picture. I do not mean all the complications. I do not understand why the State paid compensation if the State was correct. That is a simple question.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Let us hear a simple answer. It is a simple question.

Chairman

The Committee for Public Accounts is here to ask the question the man in the street would ask. I understand the witness might not have the answer to hand and might need to come back to me.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, I have the answer to that. I do not have the answer concerning the ins and outs of events in 2008, although it is rehearsed in that 2011-----

Chairman

Why, if the State was right-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Because the advice at that stage, which was separate advice pertaining to the litigation, was that we would lose the case.

Chairman

If the State was right, surely the courts of the land would follow what is right.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Throughout all of this we followed counsel's advice. The strong advice from counsel was that-----

Chairman

I have to put it bluntly. Was the counsel advising the Department to pay up rather than expose another member of the legal profession who made a mistake?

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Were any second opinions sought?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was tested very strongly by the Secretary General of the day, who was sceptical about it, because successive Secretaries General had taken the view that the committee is taking, that if we were not in the wrong there was no need to settle. That is why we went into the litigation in the first place. That is why we took them on. However, one has to cut one's cloth according to the advice.

Chairman

We understand, but we still do not get it, and we are reasonable.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely.

Chairman

I still do not get why the State wrote that cheque.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

What if this was a private business and that was done? The State is a soft touch for everyone that comes along seeking payment because it is taxpayers' money. No-one seems to mind. If Ms McPhillips does not mind me saying this, no-one seems to be concerned with taxpayers' money and no-one is responsible for it. If I was running a private company there is no way I would let this happen, because I could not afford it. How did the Department arrive at the figure of €1.8 million? I want to know this.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

As I understand it, it was calculated on the loss in the lease costs. It was based on that to some degree, with some discount.

Chairman

Did the passage of time have an impact on this at any stage? It might have had correct planning permission at one point, but did not have it later? Was that what went on?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, it never had planning permission in the course of our engagement.

Chairman

Did the Department sue for the professional indemnity insurance of the other legal practitioners whose advice was relied upon?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am not sure what the basis of the case was, but it was based around that, yes.

Chairman

I do not think we can get there.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

The lease was based on the belief that it had planning permission. All of a sudden, it was realised that one part of the planning permission had expired in 2006, if I am reading it right. Then the Department was left holding the bag. At the end of the day, the Department had to pay all the compensation. Or rather, the taxpayer had to pay it.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

With the Chair's permission, I will come back to something the Deputy said earlier. He mentioned the word "blasé". I really do not want to come across as blasé in any sense, because-----

(Interruptions).

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

-----my predecessors and I have all taken the view that this was an extraordinary set of circumstances. We could not understand, just as the committee struggles to understand, how the State was in the wrong on this. If we were entitled to rely on it, then as the Deputy says-----

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Are the Department and its officials taken for an easy target?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

As I say, my predecessor would attest to the strength of counsel's advice.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

It is no good though.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

He was very reluctant to settle, and he was only persuaded in the end because the advice, that by going on we might incur even greater liability for the State, was so strong.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

I have two more questions and then I will be finished, because I think we have thrashed this out as much as we can. I do not think we are getting satisfactory answers, but-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am doing my best.

Chairman

We are very clear. We have not finished. I do not understand this. We cannot sign off-----

Deputy Kate O'Connell

I apologise, I got delayed. I wish to follow on from Deputy Aylward. I refer to the costs of the fit-out. The witness mentioned a figure of €1.068 million. What was the square footage of this unit?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I will get that information for the Deputy.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

I think it is very relevant in the sense that-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is quite a big office.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Who got the value of the fit-out?

Deputy Kate O'Connell

I am getting to that.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We will come back to the Deputy on the square footage.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

I am concerned with this fit-out of €1.068 million. Can we have any detail on what went into the place that could possibly have cost €1.068 million? Where did that go? The Department gave in on the case, for want of a better word-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Eight years later.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

-----eight years later but gave in nonetheless, and the State lost €3.89 million. I am assuming this fit-out was as normal; air conditioning, carpets, desks, whatever.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It included partitions and things like that. Some structural-----

Deputy Kate O'Connell

There are a lot of partitions in €1.068 million.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Cumulatively, yes.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

That is an awful lot of fit-out. I speak as somebody who has fitted many places out. There is a tonne of fit-out in €1.068 million. Did the Department rip the fittings out and sell them on? Normally when one takes on a lease, one returns the property in the condition in which one got it. What happened here? Did the Department clear the fittings out and put them in a skip? Was there any attempt to recoup value from the fit-out, or was there any attempt to recoup some of the money by cutting a deal with the lessor? In the real world, a deal would be struck on the fit-out. If a vacant building with bare concrete walls is bought, and air conditioning and floorboards are added, some sort of arrangement would be made whereby this would be reflected in the price. What happened with the fit-out? I am shocked by that particular figure.

Was the figure of €1 million in rent a settlement?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The settlement was €1.8 million. It related mainly to the lease costs that we had not paid. We stopped paying the rent in 2011.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

So €1.8 million was a legal settlement?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

The figure of €1.068 million was accounted for by the fit-out.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Moreover, the Department paid €1 million in rent.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Roughly, yes.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

As such, this €1 million in rent was paid while the Department was attempting to arrange not to pay it?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

In the beginning, before it was realised that the-----

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Before it was realised that there was no planning permission.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

It took five years.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Exactly.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

It took five years.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Oh, no, it did not take five years to realise.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Grand.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

From 2006 to 2011 is five years.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

How much is €1 million rent? Is the figure for six months?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Those are the wrong dates.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Is €1 million six months' rent?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

What is it then?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was roughly €500,000 a year. Was it?

Mr. Seamus Clifford

It was €300,000, I think.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Sorry, €309,000 a year.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

So the Department of Justice and Equality paid three years' rent. If one divides €1 million by €309,000 one gets three, give or take.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was 2008 to 2010-11.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

The Department of Justice and Equality paid three months' rent on a building-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Years.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

-----before it was copped. Is that right?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. What happened was, I think we went to occupy it in January 2010 or thereabouts.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Yes.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Somebody objected to it on the basis that planning was not in place.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

So the objection only came in-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That triggered the knowledge then that the planning was not in place.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Am I correct to say a lease was signed, €1.068 million was spent fitting out the premises and three years' rent was paid before the objection?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

I am trying to get the timeline.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

My colleague will comment.

Mr. Seamus Clifford

Sorry, if I might just on some of those figures. There was rent paid up to 30 September 2011. As I understand it, the amount of the rent was €528,000 so with an annual rent of €310,000 that would indicate slightly less than two years' months.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Eighteen months.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

This morning, unless I heard it wrong-----

Chairman

The Deputy heard it right.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

-----the figure we were given here this morning, which I wrote down, was €1 million in rent.

Mr. Seamus Clifford

Yes because there is another element to the rent on the creation of the lease VAT of almost €500,000 or €460,000 became payable.

Chairman

Can I run this again?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Chairman

Was there VAT worth €500,000 on top?

Mr. Seamus Clifford

VAT of €500,000 was payable on the creation of the lease.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I would say it is on the value of the lease-----

Mr. Seamus Clifford

Yes.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

-----over the lifetime.

Chairman

Is that on the full life of the lease?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Mr. Seamus Clifford

That is where the €1 million comes from that was mentioned this morning.

Chairman

Was that sum paid to the landlord or Revenue? Where was it paid?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Paid to Revenue.

Chairman

Was €500,000 paid to Revenue on a property?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Upfront.

Mr. Seamus Clifford

That was obviously one of the terms of taking out the lease.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

The phrase "easy come, easy go" springs to mind.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Again I would say, Chairman, that is a standard practice.

Mr. Seamus Clifford

Presumably-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Easy come, easy go. I do not know any company that does so. It is not normal to pay VAT for a lease upfront.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is normal in some circumstances. What I am familiar with is, for example, PPPs.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Is that the rule?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

PPPs.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Sorry, for what?

Mr. Seamus Clifford

Public private partnerships.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Public private partnerships. For those where one enters into a PPP at the beginning, one pays a VAT bullet over the lifetime of the-----

Deputy Kate O'Connell

This was not a PPP.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Was this project a PPP?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No. I am just saying in terms of practice.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Then a PPP should not be given as an example as this project was not one.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am just saying in terms of that advance-----

Chairman

In certain circumstances.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes, exactly.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

It can happen in a PPP circumstance.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

This is not a PPP.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

In the real world one never pays €500,000 VAT upfront-----

Deputy Bobby Aylward

One would not.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

-----because one would be trying to sustain a business so one would not have it.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Deputy-----

Deputy Kate O'Connell

What I have taken from what has been said, with respect, is that when it is taxpayers' money the attitude adopted is easy come, easy go and €500,000 can be paid to Revenue.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I do not accept that it is easy come, easy go. What I would assert is that we follow the practice that is in place.

Chairman

Let us move on.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We did not make that up ourselves.

Chairman

We just had to pull the witnesses up on the matter.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

It was my turn to question.

Chairman

Yes.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

With respect, Chair, I think-----

Chairman

We are not finished discussing this topic and I will allow the Deputy back in. Deputy Aylward is in possession. I shall not let this topic go and we will resume discussing it when he finishes up in a few minutes.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Yes.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Can the witnesses clarify the reference to €1 million?

Deputy Bobby Aylward

The Deputy can go ahead.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

The matter is very important. We were told this morning that €1 million was paid in rent but now we have been told the sum paid was €500,000 in rent, give or take, and €500,000 in VAT.

Chairman

And VAT on rent.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Yes.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Thereabouts, yes.

Chairman

Deputy Aylward, please. Deputy O'Connell will get another opportunity to comment.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

I shall finish on this matter, we have-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Apologies, I did not mean to mislead at all this morning. It is just that that was-----

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Grand.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Was furniture and desks involved in the refit?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I do not think it was about furniture. I think it was about refurbishment. It says refurbishment costs.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

We did not gain anything. This vendor had this property that was not occupied for five or ten years. Was anyone in it at all?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Was anybody in it at all?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Was the property ever used?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

The property was never used.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Again, that is a point. We tried to identify another use for it.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Was the property every used? Was it idle for the whole time?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was, yes.

Chairman

Did the Department of Justice and Equality occupy the premises for two or three years?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No. We never occupied it, Deputy.

Chairman

The Department of Justice and Equality paid rent-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Chairman

-----because it worked on refurbishing the building.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Exactly, yes.

Chairman

How many years was rent paid?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Eighteen months or something.

Chairman

Was rent paid for 18 months while the property was being kitted out?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Chairman

That means the Department of Justice and Equality was in possession of the premises.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely, we were in possession. As I said earlier, we stopped paying the rent.

Chairman

We understand that.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Chairman

The Department of Justice and Equality eventually paid it by way of settlement of the €1.8 million-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is it.

Chairman

-----because the Department stopped paying it.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

The Department of Justice and Equality stopped paying it but then it paid €1.8 million in compensation.

Chairman

The Department of Justice and Equality stopped paid at the end but we have not reached that matter yet.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

That is not stopping paying rent. The Department of Justice and Equality paid €1.8 million in compensation.

Chairman

I know we are crossing over. The Department of Justice and Equality suspended paying the rent for a period-----

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Yes.

Chairman

----and it went back and repaid the rent. Is that correct?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The main reason we stopped paying the rent is because we were the litigants. We were the people who took the action.

Chairman

Can I ask one question?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Sure.

Chairman

Was it the owner of the building that the Department of Justice and Equality dealt with or was it somebody who had leased the property or an intermediary? Did the Department of Justice and Equality deal with the owner of the building?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I would say there was an intermediary because I think it was in NAMA at one point.

Chairman

This matter is getting worse.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

This matter is getting worse. A minute ago PPPs were mentioned and now we've heard about NAMA.

Chairman

It was not a PPP project.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

No but PPPs were mentioned.

Chairman

Right.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Just to say about the ceasing of the paying of rent, and I accept what the Deputy has said about what happened subsequently, the purpose of that was we were going to litigate to extract the State's entitlement out of it. We felt that if we kept paying the rent we might not have been able to ever recover that regardless of what way the case went.

Chairman

Maybe on that argument, the Department of Justice and Equality ended up being-----

Deputy Bobby Aylward

I have one last question.

Chairman

Yes.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Has the Department of Justice and Equality learned anything from this matter? Can such a situation reoccur tomorrow morning or next week? Has system been put in place to prevent this situation from happening again where €3.5 million has gone down the drawn?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It certainly would never happen again.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

What measures has the Department of Justice and Equality put in place to counteract this situation? Can the acting Secretary General guarantee that such a debacle will not happen again next week, next month or in two months' when another villa must be rented?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We get our own opinion about the planning.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Is that the lesson that has been learned?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Will the Department of Justice and Equality get its own opinion?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

The Department of Justice and Equality trusted a legal adviser but he or she let the Department down and no-one had to pay anything for the cost of same.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We relied on the legal advice.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

I shall move on. I want to discuss accommodation for asylum seekers, which Deputy Connolly spoke about. A sum of €65 million in 2016, which is an increase of €7 million on the 2015 figure. As many as 4,000 have sought refuge in Ireland and 519 refugees have arrived in Ireland, and 320 persons under another heading. Can I have the most up to date figures? How has the programme that we have stared progressed? Are we up to date? Have more people to be brought here? Have we met the quotas? Are we finished when we reach 4,000 refugees or do we keep going?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No. We have not reached the 4,000 figure. Mr. Kirrane might elaborate.

Mr. Michael Kirrane

I can give the Deputy the up to date figures.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Yes.

Mr. Michael Kirrane

In total there are 1,850 people who have come in under the programmes.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Is that more than under all of the programmes?

Mr. Michael Kirrane

Yes. Under the relocation strand, there is a 1,022 and under resettlement there is 792, to date. There are 41 unaccompanied minors from Calais. That brings the total to 1,850.

Just to say in relation to the original EU relocation figures were, the two EU legal instruments, which mandatory allocated out numbers for each member state, totalled 2,622. That figure was based on a total number of 160,000 people to be relocated across Europe. The reality was that those numbers did not materialise and the overall numbers amounted to about 37,000. We ended up taking 1,022 of those numbers. It is recognised and acknowledged by the EU Commission that Ireland has taken more than its proportion of what it would be obliged to take under the original key of distribution.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Has this country taken more people?

Mr. Michael Kirrane

We have taken more, under relocation, based on the lower figure of 37,000 in total that was available for redistribution across Europe. Under resettlement, we have taken 790 to date. The intention is to take 1,985, under pledges for this year and for next year. We intend to take an additional 530 under the family unification and humanitarian programme, which is an additional programme. All of this is designed to meet our overall allocation of 4,000. We have had to redistribute where we are taking those numbers from with what has happened in Europe but the intention and the commitment of Government is still to take those 4,000.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

The overriding factor is that we have to fulfil our quote. If we are given a quota then we have to take so many and that is it. Once we have that number taken in here, are we clear? Will we have done our bit for the refugees?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is it. The Government-----

Mr. Michael Kirrane

We have already met-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Basically, yes.

Mr. Michael Kirrane

We have already met our commitments and exceeded our commitments.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Will we be asked to take another 4,000? If the European Union sees that there are good, well behaved, obliging people, will it ask the Department to take another 4,000?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is possible, but it would be a matter for the Government to decide.

Mr. Michael Kirrane

Yes, it would be a matter for the Government to decide. A common European asylum system is being negotiated and one of the provisions is about a future mandatory approach to relocation.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

It is policy. Has accommodation been procured? If there are additional requirements, how is it found? I know that it is spread throughout the country and we have done our bit in Carlow and Kilkenny. I am from Kilkenny and we have allocated houses to Syrian families, in particular. Do we have accommodation for them? Who paid for it? Was it the Department of Justice and Equality or the local authorities? From where does the money come for the houses given out? Who pays the rent? I presume the houses are rented from landlords. Who pays the fit-out and maintenance costs? I want to know who pays for what when refugees are taken in.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There are two phases because people are accommodated initially when they come in the emergency reception and orientation centres, EROCs. We procure and pay for the accommodation. We have a range of accommodation in place, but we need some more and are in the market for it.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Whose responsibility is it? Is it the responsibility of the local authorities?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, it is us. That is the initial phase of providing accommodation when refugees come to the country. They are accommodated together mainly in hotels which we procure. Within a relatively short time, approximately six months, the aim is to disperse them into homes and houses. That is the responsibility of the local authority. I referred to a multi-agency group chaired by the Minister of State in the Department through which we co-ordinate, but essentially it is the responsibility of the local authorities to provide the accommodation.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Does any rent have to be paid by the refugees? I suppose they do not have an income. Are they allowed to work? Some are and some are not.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes, they are allowed.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

If they do find some employment, do they have to pay something back in rent or make some reimbursement to the State?

Mr. Michael Kirrane

The cases who come in under the heading of relocation are considered for asylum within about six weeks and granted refugee status. Those who come in under the heading of resettlement automatically have refugee status on arrival. They all have what is known as stamp 4 permission to be in the State which means that they are entitled to work and have the same access to services as every other person in the State. Therefore, the same rules are applied by the local authorities to their income as apply to other people.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Therefore, if they have an income, they pay accordingly.

Mr. Michael Kirrane

In accordance with local authority rules.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

I do not wish to drag out the questioning, but did Kilkenny County Council receive compensation for the houses that were provided, either to buy or rent them? Who paid? Was it the council through the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government or is a special fund given to the council from a central fund to buy such houses? I am speaking about Kilkenny because that is where I am from, but the same applies to other places throughout the country.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Not to buy the houses. I am not aware of what arrangements are in place to fund local authorities. It is a matter for the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government. We have funding in place to support councils in some of the work they do. It is relatively small, but there is a scheme in place to give some nominal funds to county councils.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

The reason I am asking is that I was told that Kilkenny County Council had to cover the costs from its own funding to provide the houses for refugees that have been made available to date. I did not send any letter or make an inquiry. At this stage approximately 12 families have been housed in Kilkenny. My understanding is the cost falls on the local authority, rather than a central fund. It is wrong that we are not receiving any compensation. There are rules coming from the Government and there is no conversation. We have to carry the can. When I say "we" I mean Kilkenny County Council.

Chairman

We have raised this issue before and are not clear on it. We will write to the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government to explain the position. It looks to me as if it was probably done through one of the housing agencies that deals with local authorities.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

In our case, it is the local authority.

Chairman

The funding to meet the capital cost of the house did not come from the Department of Justice and Equality. We can only presume it came from the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government. There are other costs attached. We will write to the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government for an explanation of how the funding scheme operates on a local authority basis.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

If I can add to the committee's knowledge, the resettlement has taken place in nearly every county at this stage. It has taken place in counties Cork, Clare and Donegal, among other places. I can forward the list.

Chairman

Yes, Ms McPhillips can forward it.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There is further resettlement planned in counties Longford, Offaly and Roscommon. All counties are allocated a proportion based on their population.

Chairman

I think the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government probably comes up with the money. We will write to it to seek information.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

I am asking the question because of something I heard. I will ask a final question. Can refugees apply for Irish citizenship after they have been here for seven years?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is three years in the case of refugees.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

They can apply for Irish citizenship.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes and they do.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

I just to ask about the payroll. I have spent a long time on two issues and have a few other issues to raise, but I will finish on this one and can come back in.

Chairman

The Deputy is okay.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

There were overpayments of €550,000 to 150 employees. What are the circumstances surrounding an overpayment? Why is anyone overpaid? I am not overpaid for anything I do. I am glad to be paid what I earn, but I am not overpaid. I have no come-back. I get what I get, from which tax and everything else are taken out. Why is there overpayment in the Department?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Actually, if the Deputy exceeds the sick leave threshold, the overpayment will probably kick in for Deputies also.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

I see that there are 73 such employees.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It arises where employees exceed the sick leave thresholds; where they have failed to provide certificates for sick leave; where they might take unplanned sick leave at short notice or where there is late notification of exit cases by an employer or his or her manager. Some mistakes can occur in the PeoplePoint payroll process also. I know that the committee has heard from the National Shared Services Office, NSSO, in that regard. There can be some delays in instructions being issued or a delay in the Payroll Shared Service Centre, PSSC, in implementing the instructions. They are the circumstances in which the overpayments arise.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Is there a recovery plan to get back the money? If someone is overpaid by €20,000 or €30,000, in two years a person will not be able to afford to pay back all of the money at once. Is there an option to pay back the money over a specified period?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Exactly, they enter into agreements with the employee.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Is interest applied?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Not that I am aware of.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Is the Department modernising its system in order that it will not happen?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes, we are driving it down. We are working constantly with the National Shared Services Office to try to address the issue. We have made some progress, but the system does need to be improved. Some modifications are necessary.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

My last question relates to claims made by members of the public. I do not understand this. Total legal costs for claims made by members of the public amounted to €6.1956 million, while awards amounted to €100,000. How did legal costs come to €6.1956 million and the awards to €100,000 in compensation? That sounds extravagant on a like-for-like basis. How could it cost almost €7 million in legal costs to pay out less than €1 million in compensation? That is jumping off the page at me as being totally unequal.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

By and large, they are not actually our legal costs but the legal costs of third parties. They are costs that arise from parties who have engaged in litigation with us.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

It cost €7 million to pay €100,000.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

If I could start with the figure of €5.5 million. Roughly €5 million relates to immigration cases. There is a large number of judicial reviews at any one time of immigration cases. It relates to the costs of the appellant, arising either from an order of the court or a settlement of the case following legal advice.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Is it value for money? What system is in place that it could cost €7 million to pay out €100,000 in compensation?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, they are not related. They are totally separate issues. They are not legal costs in cases of compensation. They are legal costs in separate cases.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

They are overall costs. Is the cost carried by the State? Does it relate to free legal aid?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, it is not. It is the cost of employing private solicitors by people who take actions against the State.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

The State has to pay for those costs. Is that correct?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes, when we lose a case we have to pay for it. We do not lose all the cases.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Ms McPhillips did not show any figures relating to where the State won either. I only see the figures that are costing us money, which is what we are here to investigate.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Exactly.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

I have a brief question on the previous issue. When we are writing letters and we want further clarification, we need to know what we are asking. I want to be sure that I am not misinterpreting. Ms McPhillips said the lease was signed on 30 September 2011. When was the lease initiated? When did the Department take over the lease?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was in 2008.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

In 2008 a lease was taken over. Do we know or have we access to who the leaseholder was?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Is the question about the original owner of the building?

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Yes. Who got the money?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am not sure whether the person was the leaseholder the whole way through, so I can come back to the Deputy on that.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

I think we need to know who the leaseholder was, if it was anything to do with NAMA and if the State had any involvement. It is relevant, especially if we are losing €3.89 million and playing around with money ourselves – that is what I am getting at. I cannot understand it. Things were terminated on 30 September 2011. Am I right? It sounds like three years elapsed from 2008 to 2011.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

What happened in the interim was that in March 2010, Dublin City Council issued a warning letter to the project informing it that the change of uses of planning permission obtained by the landlords had expired in January 2006 and consequently no valid planning permission was in place. The premises could not be occupied on that basis.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

At that point was the fit-out complete? The cost was heading towards €1.1 million. A two-year period is a long time to be fitting out any place. Had the fit-out started in March 2010? Was the money gone?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

There was a delay in the fit-out because at the time, between 2008 and 2009, the funding was precarious and so there was a delay in starting the fit-out.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

It is a pity it was not a little more precarious.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Indeed.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Due to the recession we saved a few pounds. Is that what Ms McPhillips is saying?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. It got parked for a while.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

There was a delay. When did the Department start spending the €1.068 million?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was in January 2010.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

In January 2010, the Department started the fit-out. In March 2010, two months later, the Department got notification from Dublin City Council to the effect that the change of use had expired, but the Department kept going with the €1.068 million fit-out. Is that correct?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, it stopped immediately.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

The Department spent €1.068 million in 60 days. Is that correct?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is my understanding.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

It is not physically possible unless the Department was wall-papering the premises in gold. That is what the committee needs, because something is wrong here. How could a fit-out cost this much money? How can the officials sit here and tell me that today? I am not blaming Ms McPhillips personally but logic and common sense must come into it. The Oireachtas is not spending that amount here in 60 days doing up this building. Does Ms McPhillips know what I mean? There is something wrong with the timeline.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The only information I have, to be honest, relates to the planning and the halting. I do not have any detail on the fit-out but I will see if I can get it for the Deputy. Committee members will understand that it was a long time ago at this stage and it was not a Department-occupied office. It was being done by a project at arms length.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Ms McPhillips referred to a long time ago.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I will get as much detail for Deputy O'Connell as I possibly can.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

In the real world the company would not have recovered from this and would have gone under.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

It would not be a long time ago in the real world.

Chairman

Was it poor timing on behalf of the State if you say it was not a Department office?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Absolutely, that is an issue. The lease was in the name of the Minister because the project was funded from one year to the next and the project itself was not in a position to enter into a lease.

Chairman

It was not the Probation Service.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Probation Service does not have a separate legal identity. It was the Department that held the lease.

Chairman

The Department was the tenant. Is that right?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Minister was the leaseholder.

Chairman

The Department was the tenant. Was it not for some project? You mentioned a project.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was to be occupied by the project but legally and for the purposes of the lease, the lease was in the name of the Department.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Was the re-fitting work done by a sub-contractor?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was done through the eTenders process.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

The contractor did €1.1 million worth of work in two months. Is that correct?

Chairman

Is it possible that the contract was for €1.1 million but that only a fraction of the work had started and the contractor wanted €1.1 million before doing the rest of it?

Deputy Bobby Aylward

That is the question.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

That is the question I am asking. I am asking whether a contract was signed with a fit-out company for €1.1 million. Did the contractor walk in the door and simply put down a couple of floorboards? Did the State have to stump up the money because someone had signed the lease?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I will find that out for the Deputy. I simply do not have that information.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

The whole thing is vague.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

It is altogether vague. I was working out the figures, although I have lost the piece of paper. Anyway, VAT was charged at 23%. I cannot understand how the VAT was paid upfront. I cannot understand how a claim could not be made back to the Revenue if VAT was paid in error on a lease deemed invalid. Was any attempt made to try to recoup that money from the Revenue?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I am unsure whether we would attempt to try to recoup money from another State body. It is State money. In fact, we could argue that that money is not lost to the State, but I will not dance on the head of a pin.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

We could argue that. The whole conversation we have had around this question from this morning up to now is rather shocking, especially the things we have discovered and the things that we have had to drag out.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

My apologies - I have given all the information I have.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

It is frustrating given there is such a vast sum of money at stake. Then, we hear the lease was in the name of the Minister and that there was a 60 day fit-out. None of it makes sense. The committee needs to know who the leaseholder was and who was acting on behalf of the leaseholder.

I gather Ms McPhillips said this morning that the Chief State Solicitor carried out due diligence. It seems like the most basic thing someone would check is whether there was valid planning permission.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Let us go back to the 2011 report, which is quite detailed on the matter. The Comptroller and Auditor General's report on the matter is far closer to the events. The practice in respect of due diligence is far wider than this instance.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Sorry, can Ms McPhillips expand on that? What practice?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Sorry, I am referring to the practice of relying on the vendor's assurances.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

The practice of the Chief State Solicitor simply accepting-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Sorry, perhaps Deputy O'Connell was not here for that discussion.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

The practice of the Chief State Solicitor accepting-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is not only the Chief State Solicitor; it applies to any solicitor.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

That is not the case.

Chairman

She is referring to assurance from another solicitor.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Why would any person pay a solicitor if the solicitor was simply going to take the word of another party? Why would anyone do that? It would be pointless.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

As I said, this is from the Comptroller and Auditor General's report in 2011. It quotes an established practice by the Law Society of Ireland that has been in place since the 1970s to the effect that a solicitor acting on behalf of a purchaser or lessee insists on an opinion and compliance with planning permission from an architect or agent engaged by a landlord vendor showing that the development of the property is in substantial compliance with planning permission.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

If it is based on that, then why are we not suing the legal people on the other side?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is what we did. We initiated proceedings against the other side in 2012.

Chairman

Did the Department pay the legal fees for the other side?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No, we did not. There were no legal fees associated with that settlement.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Does Ms McPhillips think this was a scam?

Chairman

No.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I do not in any sense think it was a scam. I have no basis for thinking it was a scam.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Was there any attempt to get retention on what the Department had or was dealt?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

What we tried to do was identify another use for the premises. Committee members will understand that through those years we were not in expansion mode. We were not setting up agencies left, right and centre. We ran the rule over the premises for anything that needed accommodation. It was top of our list for something suitable but that did not come to fruition. If we had had a purpose for it we would certainly have sought planning permission for it.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

The Department had no purpose for that building under the planning arrangements. Is that correct?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Office of Public Works explored that as well.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Given the planning in place at the time the Department had no use for it. Did the Department attempt to get retention for the use intended by the Department?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

None was identified. No purpose was identified for it other than the bridge project.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Did the Department try to get retention for that project? When the Department attempted to fit it out, or whatever we are going to find out, for this purpose and discovered the planning was not valid, did the Department go for retention?

When the Department discovered that the development was not valid, did it apply for retention permission?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The legal advice was that it would weaken our case if we accepted that the planning problem was our problem; it was their problem to solve. That was the logic of it.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

Were those boys ever pulled up for giving false information about planning permission to the Department? It was false information.

Chairman

At this stage we will draw the discussion on this item to a conclusion, although this is far from over.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

We are ending the discussion on this one particular issue.

Chairman

Yes, but I will allow Deputy O'Connell to come in on other issues. On this issue, it is very important to read what is in front of us today, namely, the appropriation accounts for Vote 24, Department of Justice and Equality. The Comptroller and Auditor General in his report of 26 September 2017 on this matter heads the paragraph on page 7 as: "Non-effective Expenditure". The figure under that heading is €3.89 million. Non-effective expenditure in lay man's terms is a waste of taxpayer's money. It is the polite way of saying a waste of taxpayer's money. Effectively the Comptroller and Auditor General's report contains a paragraph which says that €3.89 million of taxpayer's money was wasted. It is one of the most egregious wastes of taxpayer's money that this committee has seen in that there was no value for the taxpayer when it was all over. Despite the reports that were done in 2011, this committee is far less satisfied on this topic now than at any other stage. We want a complete report on this from the Department. This has nothing to do with Ms McPhillips personally because she was not in her current position at the relevant time. However, we will want to hear-----

Deputy Bobby Aylward

We are more puzzled now.

Chairman

One of these days we will want Ms McPhillips to appear before us with a full team, including representatives from the State Solicitor's Office, the Office of Public Works, the professional architects who were advising the OPW and any other relevant parties to discuss this €3.89 million waste of taxpayer's money. That is what the Comptroller and Auditor General called it and it is very rare for him to write a paragraph like that in one of his reports. This is a saga. Ms McPhillips has said that the Department has closed the book on it but from the public's point of view, we are only getting to discuss the final outcome now. Up until now, it was an ongoing situation. We now have a final outcome which looks like a complete disaster. In truth, none of us can understand the logic of what happened. If we were so right, how did we end up paying out that money? None of us understands that.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I understand what the Chairman is saying.

Chairman

The Department of Justice and Equality has a big job to do to convince the public, through this committee, of the logic of what happened because the Comptroller and Auditor General has said in lay man's English that it is a waste of taxpayer's money. The most difficult issue is the fact that the Department is struggling to explain this issue here today-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

In detail.

Chairman

That suggests to me that if senior personnel in the Department - I am not being personal here - are struggling to understand or explain the details of this, then lessons will not be learned. The Department cannot learn any lessons if it does not know exactly what went wrong. Ms McPhillips has said that she does not know the details-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The main lesson is that we cannot depend on others to do this, regardless of what practices are in place from the 1970s or the legal advice. We absolutely have to-----

Chairman

When the Department comes back-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We relied at all times on legal advice.

Chairman

We understand that. People buy and sell sites all the time and one solicitor gets documentation from the other and ticks the boxes when there is no dispute regarding the property or issues regarding rights of way or way leave. There are standard questionnaires upon which we thought people could rely. In any event, Ms McPhillips understands the point we are making. We want a detailed, comprehensive note explaining the logic behind it all so that we can try to understand what happened. We now accept that this money has been wasted.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Could I just add-----

Chairman

We also need information about the Revenue, in terms of-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The VAT, yes-----

Chairman

-----how that figure was arrived at and how it was paid over so quickly. As Deputy O'Connell said, we also want to know how the €1.06 million was spent. There are lots of questions here and we would be remiss in our duty if we did not come back to this issue.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

In terms of the settlement, my predecessor was reluctant to settle but was adamant that the settlement could not be done in such a way as to mean that we could not account for it to this committee. He wanted to account fully for this and was very concerned about that, as was his predecessor.

Chairman

There is probably good information on the files.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes and I can gather it all together.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

How did it take until 2018 for this to be highlighted?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It was settled in 2016.

Chairman

The matter was fully concluded in 2016 but we are only looking at the 2016 accounts now.

Deputy Bobby Aylward

It took that length of time-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We brought it to this committee's attention last year. I am just coming to account for it now.

Chairman

Yes, it was ongoing and is only now being brought to a conclusion. Does Deputy O'Connell have further questions?

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Yes, I would like information on the square footage and the relative rent at the time. One could give property away at that time to rent-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

In 2008.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Maybe not in 2008 but still, it is relevant.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That would have been at the height really.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

I want to know what we were paying relative to the market rate - the usual details really.

Deputy Aylward made reference to 73 cases of overpayment and Ms McPhillips said that the Department has made "some progress" on this. Can Ms McPhillips put a figure on that progress?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The committee had representatives of the National Shared Services Office, NSSO, before it recently. It has put a lot of effort into addressing overpayments. Part of the issue relates to how the PeoplePoint part of the NSSO, which is the HR side, talks electronically to the payroll side and how quickly those electronic messages go through. That is one of the things about which Departments have been talking to the NSSO since its establishment. Progress has been made and resources within the NSSO have been dedicated to resolving it.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

Again, a private business would not be long about getting its electronic messages to move fast if it was going to go under because of overpayments.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

These are not things that are within our control. They are under the control of the NSSO.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

That is fine; we will take it up with the NSSO.

Chairman

The NSSO handles the payroll centrally for all Government Departments. I ask Ms McPhillips to contact the NSSO and ask for an update on the situation in her Department.

Deputy Kate O'Connell

We want to know the proportions. If 73 were overpaid, what percentage of the Department's workforce does that represent and what improvements have been made?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is less than 0.5% of our employees.

Chairman

I have a few other questions. Asylum seeker accommodation is referenced on page 24 of the report and the amount paid for same was €64 million. Ms McPhillips told us earlier that there are about 5,300 asylum seekers in the system, with approximately 80% in private accommodation. That would mean that roughly 4,220 asylum seekers are in private accommodation. Therefore, the per annum payment for each person is approximately €12,000, or €230 per week. When the Department is negotiating contracts with the 28 private providers in various locations, does it have a rule of thumb or does the rate per person change depending on the location? Would the rates vary significantly between Dublin, Cork, Portlaoise and Donegal, for example?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

What influences it more than the location is the level of service that is required. Families, for example, would have different menu requirements and would need full bed and board. The requirements differ according to the centres but there are standard rates.

Chairman

On the basis of the figures provided it looks as if €12,000 is the approximate annual cost per person. Would that be a reasonable estimate?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Chairman

How much spending money, for want of a better term, does each person get? Is it €19.20 per week?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The allowance is €21.30 now.

Chairman

That is in addition to the accommodation costs. Is that correct?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes, but the allowance is paid by the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection.

Chairman

Is it not paid by the Department of Justice and Equality?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

No.

Chairman

That is fine. We know asylum seekers need that allowance and there is no argument about that. I was just wondering about the figures. The €64 million is strictly for the accommodation.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes. The allowance was increased from around €19 to €21.30 following the publication of the McMahon report.

Chairman

We like to give people an understanding of the figures. A figure of €64 million does not really mean anything but that works out at approximately €12,000 per person per annum or €230 per week, which is roughly in line with the State pension. Does Mr. Kirrane wish to make a point?

Mr. Michael Kirrane

With regard to the commercial centres, the average rate paid per day in 2016 was just over €30 per day.

Chairman

Some €30 multiplied by seven is €210 and I said approximately €230, so I was very close. That is approximately where we are. That is a kind of verification. The other thing, as Deputy Aylward mentioned, is that on page 33 of the accounts, legal fees are mentioned. I am conscious that people ask about the length of stay. We have all had asylum centres in our constituency and still have. I have never seen a case that they can go for legal challenge yet.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is their right.

Chairman

It is their right. Page 33 says that €5 million of the €7 million for legal costs, 72%, relates to the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service. For all the people who go to all the solicitors and take all the cases, the taxpayer tends to cover that cost as a result when they-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

When they win.

Mr. Michael Kirrane

That is right across the immigration system. It does not necessarily relate to the asylum process. The asylum process would only make up part of that. It would also relate to the broader immigration system.

Chairman

What does that mean?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Somebody looking for a visa or permission to remain on the basis of EU treaty rights or such-----

Chairman

And the legal costs if they challenge-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The immigration side of Mr. Kirrane's business is much larger, proportionally, than asylum.

Chairman

Many of the people in the centres arrive here and survive on €21 per week. They take these legal challenges, and according to the witnesses, they would obviously lose in some cases, for which the State does not pay their costs. Where do these people get the money to pay private solicitors?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I presume the solicitors may do it on a no foal, no fee basis.

Chairman

Do they?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes.

Mr. Michael Kirrane

They may operate on the basis of the totality of their business.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

People are entitled to look for legal aid too, and there is a refugee legal services scheme under the Legal Aid Board which may apply in very-----

Chairman

To conclude on this, the witnesses can send us a detailed information note regarding the locations and number. They probably supply it through parliamentary questions all the time. They can include the number of locations and how many are in each, to complete our file, because we just talk globally.

On a different topic for the Department of Justice and Equality, people all over rural Ireland are trying to roll out closed-circuit television, CCTV, through community alert and various schemes.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

That is in the Garda Vote.

Chairman

Is it the Garda Vote? It is not the Department's Vote at all. I will reserve that.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Apologies. One less.

Chairman

I will hold it over until the next meeting. The next thing I want to ask the witnesses about is the various agencies under the Department. We got a briefing note and there is a list of dozens of agencies under the remit of the Department. Has the Department a service level agreement with every one of these agencies?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We have a governance framework in place with each of the agencies. It sets out the legislative basis for the existence of the agency, the relationship with the Department, their annual budget, what we expect from them and what they can expect from us.

Chairman

I am not asking any of these but am looking at-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We have two meetings a year with each of the agencies to test that.

Chairman

Whether it is the Mental Health (Criminal Law) Review Board, the Parole Board, the Prison Service, Legal Aid Board, the Probation Service or whatever, there is the equivalent of a service level agreement.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We have and we have two formal meetings a year just on the agreement, with regard to governance.

Chairman

I assume, because the Department is giving them substantial taxpayers' money, that they are required to produce their annual financial statements within a period of three months at the year end.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It varies according to the legislation because many of those provisions are in the legislation. The Legal Aid Board, for example, has to produce it by the end of September. It varies according to the requirement in the legislation.

Chairman

Does Ms McPhillips mean to have them published?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Yes, to publish the annual report.

Chairman

Many public bodies have a requirement to submit their accounts for audit within a three-month period. That is not about laying them before the Oireachtas.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

The Appropriation Account, yes.

Chairman

That is the Department. I am talking about these agencies.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I will yield to Mr. Clifford, if that is okay.

Chairman

The witnesses can see where I am going with this.

Mr. Seamus Clifford

The Chair is correct.

Chairman

What I want next week is for the Department to verify that all the agencies under its remit have submitted their accounts within three months. If the accounts are for the end of year in December, which they probably all are, the Office of the Auditor and Comptroller General should have all their accounts. The Committee of Public Accounts has written directly to each of the agencies audited by the Comptroller and Auditor General, not just-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

They might not be signed off by the Comptroller and Auditor General yet.

Chairman

We are not talking about that at all-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Submission.

Chairman

-----just about the submission for audit. We know the audit process will take months, but in our job as the Committee of Public Accounts, the first task is for people to submit accounts. If they do not submit accounts, we have nothing to talk to them about. The first step of that is them meeting their statutory requirement. I, as Chairman, wrote before Christmas to every body and organisation audited by the Comptroller and Auditor General to remind them of this. In a week or two, we will review that list, and any major agency that has not submitted its account for audit will be in here with the chairman of the board and chief executive. We are on that mission separately so we want confirmation that that is done in all cases.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Sure.

Chairman

I want to ask the witnesses about one or two small items on various agencies. I am looking at page 19. What is compensation for personal injuries criminally inflicted?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal.

Chairman

I go to page 30 of the accounts and there is a permanent commission, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal. Is that the same thing?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is.

Chairman

I think I saw a note that the amount paid by that board-----

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

What is paid out of-----

Chairman

The note reads, "The saving arose mainly due to a lower number of awards than expected partly due to vacancies in the membership of the Tribunal for a period during 2016." It is outrageous that people cannot get compensation just because a position has not been filled on the tribunal. I have had parliamentary questions on this. The witnesses have probably seen that over a period. There are vacancies and people are asking when their cases can be dealt with.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

I think they were filled in September of that year, so there have not been vacancies since then.

Chairman

It is still a bit slow.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It has a bit of a backlog since then.

Chairman

Ms McPhillips has answered that question. I want to address two other agencies.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

For clarity, the amounts on page 30 refer to fees paid to tribunal members and the compensation is the other element.

Chairman

There was an underspend for the Coroner Service. The note mentions section 60 of the Coroners Act.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Does the Chairman have the page number?

Chairman

It is page 21. Explain that to the ordinary people. What does that mean? It is page 21 in the bottom paragraph.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

Part of it was payroll and part was legal costs. On the payroll, it looks like there were a couple of vacancies that it took longer to fill.

Chairman

What does "Implementation of Section 60 of the Coroners Act 1962 as amended" having "not yet been implemented" mean? That is a reason given.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is about provision of legal services to a family member. There was a provision in the amendment Act of 2012 which amended the Coroners Act 1962 which provided for legal aid. There was provision for that and it took longer than anticipated to implement that but it has since been implemented.

Chairman

Are core services in the Department's Vote or someone else's?

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

It is somebody else's.

Chairman

Ms McPhillips is off the hook. I will hold that over for somebody else. I thank the witnesses for their time, patience, effort and helpfulness to the committee. There are a number of items to return to.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We will get back to the committee as soon as we can.

Chairman

We are very confused about the issue mentioned, so start assembling a group that can come to explain, through us, to the people what happened to that €3.8 million because we do not get it. We do not have it in our heads.

Ms Oonagh McPhillips

We are not happy about it either.

Chairman

What happened? I thank Ms McPhillips for her first appearance here as Accounting Officer, and the officials from the Departments of Justice and Equality, and Public Expenditure and Reform, and the staff from the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General. We will adjourn until 9 a.m. next Thursday when we will deal with matters in the Department of the Taoiseach relating to the strategic communications unit and, in the second session, Vote 29 - Communications, Climate Action and Environment. Raidió Teilifís Éireann will also be here to deal with broadcasting licences and fees and matters arising.

The witnesses withdrew.

The committee adjourned at 4.20 p.m. until 9 a.m. on Thursday, 3 May 2018.