asked the Minister for Health if he will give details of the unauthorised expenditure by the Eastern Health Board to which he referred on 21st January, 1976.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Eastern Health Board Expenditure.
3.
The funding of health boards is organised on the basis of periodic grant payments to the boards related to annual budgets. These budgets represent, in general, the financial allocations for funding the approved health services administered by the boards. As Deputies will appreciate, control of public expenditure on health services can only be exercised if these allocations are adhered to unless authority is given to any specific additional expenditures. In so far as the Eastern Health Board is concerned expenditures in excess of allocations have been incurred, and in some instances these were on services for which my Department's prior approval had not been obtained. I do not regard it as appropriate to detail these instances since such matters are best dealt with by way of direct consultations between the board and my Department, but they would consist, in the main, of a number of building and maintenance works the funding of which had not been fully agreed with my Department.
I am not very pleased with the reply, as a member of that board. On 21st January last the Minister made an allegation that the board were guilty of incurring unauthorised expenditure. I have now asked him for details of the unauthorised expenditure.
There was unapproved unauthorised expenditure of about £700,000 on capital works. No prior approval had been given by the Department. As far as details are concerned, these will be discussed between the officers of the board and the Department. In respect of one hospital, there was provision for a number of extra beds and this had not been approved. I am not saying they would have been disapproved if application had been made. That would amount to about £700,000 but there is a small number of other projects. Unauthorised expenditure was engaged in in this case. There may be some doubt about it and there will be consultations between the officials of the board and the Department.
Has approval since been given for that expenditure and would the members of the board be surchargeable in a situation where such members authorise payments of that level?
I have heard about surcharges but in my experience of health and other bodies I have not seen them implemented.
Is there provision in law for it?
Yes.
This will come up at a meeting of the board on Thursday. They can be surcharged.
I cannot say specifically in this case. All I can say is that there has been unauthorised expenditure and that there are consultations between the board officials and the Department.
The Minister will agree that it should not necessarily affect the officials. It obviously affects members of the board and is it not with them that the consultations should be held?
I do not know whether the officials discussed it with members of the board.
This question arose when we were dealing with the plight of the health boards who owned £8 million and the Minister said this unauthorised expenditure was the cause of the board owing so much.
That is a different question.
Is this question of unauthorised expenditure peculiar to the Eastern Health Board or does it affect all health boards?
I cannot allow an extension of the question which deals only with the Eastern Health Board.
Is it not a fact that Supplementary Estimates come before the Dáil from the different Departments after the expenditure has been made? Can the Minister say if this is not a regular feature of the running of Departments and boards of this nature?
I have information of the Eastern Health Board only, but as far as expenditure of that kind is concerned, there were two Supplementary Estimates to provide for increases in salaries and for increased prices.
Do they come for approval of the Dáil when payments have already been made?
No.
Is it not the case that we clear Supplementary Estimates in the week before Christmas to cover expenditure that has accrued in the course of the year?
The last Estimate was some time in November and immediately it was passed by this House it was passed to the health board.
And there was no over-expenditure by the Department since then?
4.
asked the Minister for Health if the allocation of £33.59 million to the Eastern Health Board for 1976 for direct expenditure is an increase of 13 per cent on the figure provided for similar purposes for 1975; and, if not, if he will indicate the percentage increase.
The allocation of £33.59 million to the Eastern Health Board for 1976 in respect of direct expenditure by the board shows an increase of 13.1 per cent on the corresponding revised allocation for 1975.
Can the Minister give the House the figure for the corresponding allocation for direct expenditure for 1975?
The original allocacation was £23.5 million and the revised allocation in 1975 was £29.7 million.
The figure I have from the health board is £31.5 million.
The Deputy is imparting information rather than seeking it.
Is the Minister aware that this figure—£31.5 million—was circulated by the Eastern Health Board? Is the Minister saying that that figure is incorrect?
I replied to the question put by the Deputy. I told him the original allocation was £23.5 million and that the revised allocation as per the Estimate given by the health board in September-October was £29.7 million.
Is the Minister in a position to hazard a guess as to why the health board have the figure of £31.5 million while his Department have the figure of £29.7 million?
Towards the end of the year there was unusual expenditure which was provided by way of Estimate. For example, £1 million of that was due in respect of non-recurring payments such as back pay to nurses and pharmacists. That was included in the Estimate I referred to in the course of my reply to the Deputy.
Was it included?
Yes.
Obviously, I will have to take this matter further because there seems to be a disparity here.
I have explained to the Deputy that this was non-recurring expenditure of back payments to nurses and pharmacists.
Would the Minister agree that this was direct expenditure even though it was non-recurring expenditure?
Of course it was.
I am moving to the next question.
Just a moment, a Cheann Comhairle.
Deputies may not dictate to the Chair.
It is time for the Minister to reveal that the figure is 6.3 per cent and not 13 per cent.
I am not saying that.
The Minister ought to come clean on this matter.
Does the Deputy feel that because he has used a figure I should use it?
It is obvious that the amount of grant money from the Minister's Department to the Eastern Health Board last year was not £29.7 million but £31.5 million.
Yes, but in determining the allocations for 1976 surely I would not have to repeat non-recurring expenditure.
The amount of money paid by the Department was £31.5 million.
Those arrears will not be repeated in 1976.
That does not get away from the fact that it was direct expenditure.
Direct expenditure was £31.5 million and this year's grant is £33.59 million which does not show an increase of 13 per cent.
Is the Minister telling the House that the difference between £31.5 million and £33.59 million is 13 per cent?