Skip to main content
Normal View

COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS debate -
Thursday, 4 May 2023

Business of Committee

The public business before us this afternoon is as follows: minutes, accounts and financial statements, correspondence, work programme and any other business. The first item is the minutes of the meeting of 27 April, which have been circulated. Do any members wish to raise any matters relating to the minutes? Are the minutes agreed? Agreed. As usual, the minutes will be published on the committee's web page.

The second item is accounts and financial statements. Just one set of accounts and financial statements was laid before the Houses between 24 and 28 April. I now ask Mr. McCarthy to address this.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

The account that has been presented is the Account of the Receipt of Revenue of the State collected by the Revenue Commissioners. It is the first account for 2022 which is coming to the Oireachtas and to the committee. It received a clear audit opinion. The turnover for the year on that account was €118 billion which is significantly up on the prior year.

It is good to know that the Revenue Commissioners have their accounts in order. Do any members wish to comment on that or speak to it? Can we agree and note the listing of accounts and financial statements? Agreed. As usual, the listing of accounts and statements will be published as part of the minutes.

We will move on to correspondence. As previously agreed, items that are not flagged for discussion for this meeting will continue to be dealt with in accordance with the proposed actions that have been circulated to members, and decisions taken by the committee in relation to correspondence are recorded in the minutes of the committee’s meetings and published on the committee’s web page. The first category of correspondence under which members have flagged items for discussion is correspondence from Accounting Officers and their Ministers, and follow-up to committee meetings.

The following item was held over from our last meeting: No. R1824 B from Ms Sorcha Fitzpatrick, chief superintendent, An Garda Síochána, dated 25 March 2023. It provides information that the Committee of Public Accounts requested regarding non-compliant procurement. We agreed a note and published an item of correspondence at our last meeting. Deputy Catherine Murphy flagged this item and requested that we hold over No. R1824 B for a further week. She is unavoidably absent. We normally do not hold items over. Normally we just hold it over for one week if a member requests it. In the circumstances however, I suggest that we agree to hold it over. Is that agreed? Agreed.

No. R1850 B is from Ms Sara Maxwell, office of the CEO, HSE, and is dated 21 April. It provides information requested by the committee arising from our meeting with the HSE on 2 February. It is proposed to note and publish that item of correspondence. Is that agreed? Agreed. I flagged this item for discussion because there are a number of things in it that we need to address. As regards the nursing home charges - when I say "charges" I am referring to residents being charged for items that normally would be covered under the medical card scheme - we raised this with the Secretary General of the Department of Health and I do not feel at this stage that we have got a satisfactory answer to it. We asked whether the HSE is ensuring that residents in nursing homes are not charged for items covered under the medical card scheme. The HSE states in its reply:

The HSE has no role in or control over the contractual arrangements that exist between private ... nursing homes and their residents.

The question arises, then, as to who does. It goes on - there is a very long reply:

As communicated previously to the Public Accounts Committee the HSE wrote to the CEO of HIQA ... outlining the services available to Medical Card Holders and provided the relevant supporting guidance.

The problem, however, is that the response to date has been that there is no one who completes all these contracts that are in existence between every nursing home and the Department. It is not a satisfactory answer. Members have raised previously the matter of people being charged for those items that are normally available under the medical card scheme. I suggest we write to the Secretary General of the Department of Health pointing out the answer we got, to the effect that the HSE has no role, and asking what exactly the Department is doing at this point to ensure, first, that the contracts it has with the nursing home providers are water-tight. Second, given the fact that this situation still continues, I suggest we ask what the Department is doing now to implement whatever measures are there to ensure that this halts. It is really unfair to families and the people in nursing homes, particularly those on low incomes. They have medical cards and they are being charged for these services which, if they were provided outside the nursing home, they would get free of charge. I just make that proposal. Any member who wishes to come in on that should feel free. Is that proposal agreed? I will take it as agreed.

If any other member wishes to come in on this, there is a HSE reply regarding the out-of-hours GP service, which we raised previously with the HSE at the committee. The HSE says there is a strategic review:

With the improved situation regarding Covid-19, the Minister has ... announced and recently published the Terms of Reference of the Strategic Review of General Practice that is now commencing, with the intention that the development of a reformed model of Out of Hours service will be brought forward as part of that process.

Members will recall that we dealt with this earlier this year. It is welcome that it is happening. This was supposed to happen a few years ago, but the Department and the HSE say that it got held up due to Covid. It would be useful to know what the timeline for that is, when that review will be completed and when we will be able to see some of the actions carried out on the back of that. If that is agreed, we will request that information from the HSE. Is that agreed? Agreed.

No. R1855 B is from Mr. Graham Doyle, Secretary General of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, and is dated 25 April 2023. It provides information we requested arising from our meeting with the Department on 26 January 2023. It is proposed to note and publish that item of correspondence. Is that agreed? I will take it as agreed. I flagged this item up for discussion. Any other members who wish to come in on it should feel free. I do not think anyone else flagged it, but they should feel free if there is anything in it they want to raise. Page 13 of this report shows information in response to a specific question I asked the Secretary General when the Department was before the committee in respect of local authority and approved housing body, AHB, builds. I had thought the figure was much higher but I note that the number of local authority builds for all of last year was 1,666 houses, or homes. Some of them would be apartments. There were 1,196 turnkey homes and 716 LAPVs. I am not sure what that is. Maybe somebody else can shed some light as to what LAPVs are. That comes to a total of 3,601, so the actual number built by local authorities was 1,666.

The dependence on AHBs is significant because they provided 469 plus, under another funding stream, 3,363. I think that shows that the local authorities are somewhat restricted in what they can do, and the delivery seems to be very slow. The fact is that it is only 1,666. The impression I got - we have quizzed the Department intensely about this when it has been before us - was that the Department was to make it easier for local authorities to build. We all know that we are in a housing crisis. When compared with the 1970s and the 1930s, when we were building - actually building - 8,000 local authority houses, it is a significant fall-off and only a fraction of what was being done at that time. I think we should write back to the Secretary General of the Department thanking him for his comprehensive response but pointing out that the delivery of actual local authority-constructed houses is at a very low scale, at just over 1,500 last year, despite the fact that there was a huge amount of funding available, and asking what specific steps are being taken to try to address this. Are the local authorities using more standardised designs? Are they using standard plans to try to speed up delivery? Given the report that came out yesterday regarding the comparison with other European countries, this seems to be a real issue. The fact is that, as regards local authorities and housing in general in this country, we tend not to use uniform plans or standard plans, which would appear to be hampering delivery. The fact that the Department is insisting on architectural design of every house that is built would appear to be slowing things up significantly. If it is agreeable, I ask that we write back to the Secretary General and ask if there are plans to change that in the current year. It is a very comprehensive response, and I welcome what the AHBs are doing - it is a significant number of homes - but local authorities would seem to be under an awful lot of restrictions, regulation and bureaucracy. The fact is that we are coming in only at over 1,500 a year when we have a housing crisis. I acknowledge a very significant budget allocation from the Government.

In fairness, the local authorities did not build the houses themselves; they got contractors in to build them. However, the whole process of getting local authorities to get work done is just a minefield. I will give the committee an example. In my constituency there was a private housing estate finished and ready to occupy recently, and it took eight weeks to get a county council engineer to sign off on a road opening licence in order that a water connection could be made. With all due respect to everyone, to take eight weeks to sign off on a simple piece of paper about a road opening licence does not make sense to me.

As a result, there was a delay of two months in delivering those houses. AHBs are able to get in and get the job done because there is a team specifically focused on a project to get it done. Local authorities do not seem to have that mechanism. Everyone is doing a bit of everything but no one is in charge of any particular project. If a local authority does ten housing projects, there is no one person in charge of them and it appears to go from department to department and takes forever to get a decision. The structure of local authorities and decision-making is a problem.

I agree with 95% of what the Deputy said but the 1,666 houses were built by contractors brought in by local authorities.

That is what I am saying. They are not built by local authority employees, which is my point. If you go back 30 years, workers were employed by local authorities to physically build houses. That has all changed. All of these houses were built by contractors contracted with the local authority.

The fact is that the pace of delivery is pedestrian.

Just over 1,600 homes a year are being built. We must find out from the Department what steps it has taken since it was last before the committee to try to speed it up and whether there is a problem. The Deputy highlighted that there may be an issue, particularly in some local authorities where people are not designated to projects. We are told more funding is available to bring in extra staff such as engineers and technicians to oversee the delivery of certain projects, which needs to happen. Until we put those pieces in place and move to standardised design and standard plans, we will not get the scale of delivery we need. We are in the middle of a housing crisis and there is a significant housing budget, which I think everyone is on board with. I would argue to go even further, as I am sure some other members would as well. We are not seeing delivery on the ground. Processes between the Department and the council must be simplified and focused. We need to house people. This is the level of delivery at a time when there are 12,000 people homeless and 130,000 households in need of social housing, counting those on rent supplement and the waiting list, which is a significant number. If the committee agrees, I request that we write to the Department and ask what steps have been taken in that regard. Is that agreed? Agreed. We will include Deputy Burke's point about local authorities because there may be issues in some of them. They may be short-staffed or do not have the staff they need to oversee and sign off on these projects.

No. R1867 B is from Mr. Mark Griffin, Secretary General, Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications, dated 28 April 2023, providing information requested by the committee regarding Inland Fisheries Ireland, IFI. It is proposed to note and publish this item of correspondence. Is that agreed? Agreed. This item provides information relating to a request from Deputy Catherine Murphy, No. R1865 PAC33, which seeks an update on when IFI's 2021 accounts will be available for the committee to examine. Deputy Murphy has requested that the committee dispose of this item in her absence. I propose we note this item. Is that agreed? Agreed. According to No. R1867, the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications “is preparing a submission for the Minister on the 2021 financial statements and annual report of IFI, which he will bring to Government in the normal way and then arrange to have them laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas”. Does the Comptroller and Auditor General wish to add anything further?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

All I can add is that I signed the certificate on the IFI financial statements for 2021 on 29 March. The obligation was then on IFI to submit them to the Department or the Minister, which I understand needs to be done pretty quickly. Thereafter, the Department is obliged to present them to the Houses of the Oireachtas. There is no particular need for a great delay in that case, I think. I would expect they will come pretty soon to the Oireachtas.

We have agreed to note that other piece of correspondence. I thank Mr. McCarthy for the update on the matter.

There is one more B item, No. R1870 B, from the Secretary General of the Department of Health. It is proposed to consider this in private session. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The next category of correspondence is category C, correspondence from and related to private individuals and any other correspondence. No. R1853 C is from Deputy Catherine Murphy dated 25 April 2023 in relation to information provided by the Department of Social Protection regarding the public services card. Deputy Murphy’s proposal is to request clarification from the Department regarding information provided at a Committee of Public Accounts meeting on 1 December 2022 and related information provided in response to a parliamentary question on 20 April 2023. She is looking for that because there is a clear difference between the answer given at the Committee of Public Accounts by the Secretary General of the Department on 1 December and the reply to the parliamentary question she received recently on 20 April. It is to do with biometric information in relation to the card. Is it agreed that we request clarification from the Department? Agreed.

The next item on our agenda is the work programme. At our next meeting on 11 May, we will engage with the HSE and the Department of Health in relation to the Comptroller and Auditor General's special report on the emergency procurement of ventilators by the HSE and resume our examination of the HSE's financial statements for 2021. We have flagged the National Treatment Purchase Fund, NTPF, as an area of interest for this meeting. I propose that we add the Department of Health’s 2021 appropriation account to the agenda as funding to the NTPF is allocated under subhead E3. Is that agreed? Agreed.

On 18 May, we will engage with the University of Limerick in relation to its financial statements for 2021. I remind the committee that the document is available for members to read. The secretary will make it available for anyone who wants to re-read it or has not had the opportunity, new members in particular. On 25 May, we will engage with the Department of Justice to examine its appropriation account for 2021. On 1 June, we will engage with the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage to resume our examination of its appropriation account. Does any member wish to raise any matters in relation to the work programme? I remind members to flag any areas of interest for our upcoming meetings. That concludes our consideration of the work programme.

The last item on the agenda is any other business. Do any members wish to raise anything? No. We will now go into private session.

The committee went into private session at 1.59 p.m. and adjourned at 2.13 p.m. until 9.30 a.m. on Thursday, 11 May 2023.
Top
Share