The draft minutes of the last meeting of the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service held on 16 March 2005 have been circulated. Are they agreed? Agreed.
One item referred to in the minutes is a submission prepared by the Department of Finance which should have come from this committee. We will deal with that matter under travel proposals.
On a separate issue under travel proposals, the minutes of the previous meeting refer to investigating the possibility of examining the cyclical development of banking in New Zealand. Has progress been made in terms of considering the possibility of sending a delegation to that country?
It is under consideration but there are no specific conferences. We have made every effort to identify something suitable to the work of the committee. In light of the fact that there are no specific conferences, we can work on developing a programme.
I did not suggest that we should attend a conference. I stated that a delegation should travel to New Zealand on a fact finding mission, particularly in light of developments in banking here and the fact that a state bank in that country was privatised and then nationalised again. New Zealand has come full circle and there was a solid involvement, both politically and commercially, in what happened there. We could learn much from developments in that jurisdiction. It is the only country where such developments have taken place.
We will bring forward a proposal on it for the next meeting.
Will we work with New Zealand's department of finance?
We will bring forward a proposal for discussion at the next meeting.
The committee has received correspondence from the Department of Finance on Statutory Instruments Nos. 79 and 84 of 2005. These have been identified and circulated to members. Under its orders of reference, the committee has the power to consider such statutory instruments made by the Minister of Finance and lay them before the Houses as it may select.
Statutory Instrument No. 63 of 2005 proposes to amend the European Communities (Distance Marketing of Consumer Financial Services) Regulations 2004 in order to clarify the position on services provided by intermediaries, enforceability of contracts to which the regulations apply and the fraudulent use of payment cards in connection with contracts for financial services.
Statutory Instrument No. 13 of 2005 gives effect to the provision of Directive No. 2002/92/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 9 December 2002. The regulations require insurance intermediaries to register with the competent authority — the Central Bank and Financial Services Authority of Ireland — and fulfil the professional requirements set down. Conditions are also laid down for the information with which clients of insurance intermediaries must be supplied. The powers of the competent authority, as well as the offences for non-compliance with the regulations, are also set down.
Statutory Instrument No. 123 of 2005 provides for the commencement date of section 98A of the Finance Act 1999 as inserted by section 50 of the Finance Act 2004. The section provides for the Revenue Commissioners to allow qualified and conditional relief from mineral oil tax on biofuel used in approved pilot projects for either the production of biofuel or the testing of the technical viability of biofuels for use as motor fuel. Is it agreed that the committee does not wish to consider the statutory instruments and merely wishes to note them? Agreed.
The next item is EU scrutiny. The Sub-Committee on European Scrutiny of the Joint Committee on European Affairs has sent this committee a list of documents and proposals it considered and decisions it took at its meeting on 9 March. Members will note that no proposals were referred to this committee. Is it agreed that none of the proposals considered by the sub-committee on 9 March warrants scrutiny by the committee? Agreed.
The next item of correspondence is No. 0082, which is a reply from the Minister regarding the value of uncashed bank drafts. A revised reply has been received from IFSRA in response to a point raised by Deputy Timmins at our meeting on 20 May 2004 regarding the value of uncashed bank drafts in the banking system. I propose we note the letter and send a copy to Deputy Timmins. Is that agreed? Agreed. The clerk has been contacted by an official of the dormant accounts unit at the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs seeking a copy of this revised letter. Is it agreed to forward a copy of it to the official in question? Agreed.
The next item is travel proposals. The Ceann Comhairle has forwarded to the committee an invitation from the European Parliament seeking a delegation of a maximum of four members to attend a meeting of the Temporary Committee on Policy Challenges and Budgetary Means of the Enlarged Union 2007-13 to be held in Brussels on 4 and 5 April 2005. Is it agreed that the committee should be represented at this debate? Agreed. In view of the timeframe involved, will the conveners nominate members to attend the meeting today? Is it agreed that two members from the Government side and two from the Opposition side should attend? Agreed. I ask the convenors to notify the secretariat to the committee of the names of those members who will attend. This must be done today, particularly if travel arrangements are to be made before Easter. The individual groups should discuss the matter and notify the secretariat of their decisions during the day. If the names are not supplied today, there will be difficulties making arrangements.
The rules governing committee travel require that any proposal for travel by a committee must be directly and explicitly linked to an area of work in which the committee has decided to become involved pursuant to its orders of reference and in the context of its work programme. We are also required to state the reasons the travel is considered necessary. I suggest that as the mandate of the temporary committee is to define the European Parliament's negotiating position in the debate on the next financial prospective, it is important that a delegation should attend to improve our understanding of the means to be allocated by the EU in the future. In addition, our draft work programme prioritises economic development and it is necessary for the committee to interact and share ideas with other policymakers and experts whose views can help inform our consideration of matters within our remit. Is it agreed that is the reason for the visit? Agreed. The reason for the destination is self-evident.
Is it agreed that, given the short distance involved, economy class travel, subject to fares being fully refundable, is practical and reasonable? Agreed. Is it agreed that an allocation from the travel budget of up to €800 per member be sought from the working group of committee chairmen? Agreed. The clerk will make the necessary arrangements.
A questionnaire was attached to the invitation to visit Brussels on 25 April regarding European economic policy in national and European perspectives. At our last meeting it was agreed that the reply to the questionnaire, which had been completed by the Department of Finance at my request, be sent to the committee for their views. As there was not time to do so before the initial meeting this was done subsequent to the last meeting and without observations being made or additions requested on behalf of the committee. It was not specifically prepared on behalf of the committee and took the view that a document prepared by the Minister for Finance would have the support of the majority of the Parliament, which was the reason I took this route. Is it agreed that we formally approve that as the submission on behalf of the Parliament? Agreed.
The two topics on our agenda today involve discussions on the expenditure review initiative and with the Irish Farmers' Association. I wish to deal with two other issues beforehand. The draft work programme for 2005 has been circulated and includes all matters for consideration by this committee. Standing Orders require the committee to prepare a work programme that will be laid before the House. That programme has been circulated and discussed on a number of occasions. The paragraphs that follow the introduction describe work that originated outside the committee but was referred here and which may affect the rate at which the committee works through the list of issues chosen for examination. The list of issues carries forward matters selected for examination last year and which the committee may wish to pursue in 2005. This is the second version of the draft programme and has been updated to include our work to date this year. Additions are always possible and will inevitably occur.
I have no great objection but I find the extent of issues external to the main business of the committee increasingly unsatisfactory. We have decided upon two matters for our attention and are trying to ram through a number of other issues due to time constraints. I do not know how we may manage this. I am aware the Chairman must deal with a large number of matters but signing off our work programme on the nod is not good practice for any committee. We should seriously consider our plans for the next 12 months to decide on the committee's priorities. I know this is difficult. A dysfunctional element is creeping into the committee's affairs with this huge volume of work which is beyond anyone's capacity to deal with. I focused on today's ERI issue because that is interesting to me and, I am sure, to Deputy Ned O'Keeffe. In our eagerness to begin discussions on this issue we should not sign off on matters that ought to receive our further attention. I do not object to the Chairman's comments but maybe he needs to consider a way of organising our meetings in order that it does not consist of a monologue from the Chair.
I appreciate that.
May we hold an extra meeting during the recess?
We have done so. People will be surprised to learn that we have scheduled meetings of the select and joint committees over six continuous weeks, which is extraordinary. We have a meeting scheduled for every week including last week, and the next two weeks when the Dáil is not sitting.
May we hold two meetings in one week in order to clear some of our backlog?
That is possible, although we have held meetings each week of the recess.
I am sure it is possible for the secretariat to negotiate the use of a meeting room.
I agree with Deputy Bruton's comments but the work schedule was circulated some time ago and we discussed it in the past. We have agreed in principle that its contents will form the basis of this committee's proceedings. We have also discussed how to prioritise the programme.
I do not want to stop the programme but I find coping with it difficult.
As Deputy McHugh pointed out, we have discussed the revised work programme on a number of occasions and we have already begun work on some elements of it. The programme contains 15 points which reflect the views of this committee. Inevitably further matters will arise during the year.
Is it possible to revise or to add to the programme in the course of the committee's work?
We can make changes and we will do so.
We have a very busy work programme and unexpected matters may arise which can interfere with this programme. Deputy Bruton made a point about the ERI report, which is interesting as well as important to the committee.
As a possible way to speed up the committee's work, I ask the Chairman to list the items with his proposals when he circulates the agenda in order that, unless challenges are raised, they may be dealt with expeditiously. I know some of these directives are important but at least everyone has the opportunity of seeing the Chairman's proposals in advance of the meeting.
I understand that it is boring to listen to the Chairman's long briefing notes. I will try to find a way to condense that. We decided to take on statutory instruments, some of which have been important and others routine matters. I might truncate our comments on matters we believe routine. I will circulate the documents in order that members are free to raise points if they so wish. I take the Deputy's point and will attempt to truncate the Chairman's opening comments. Is it agreed that we will now formally agree the work programme? Agreed.
Members are aware of this committee's responsibility under section 2 of the Freedom of Information Act 1997, on the review of the operation of any provisions of an enactment that authorises a required non-disclosure of a record. This section requires Ministers to furnish to the committee a written report on this review, which every Minister has done. The Act also permits the committee to request the Information Commissioner to produce a report on any matter arising from the operation of this section. I propose that the clerk write to the Information Commissioner requesting her to produce such a report.
A review of the non-disclosure provisions on all legislation is due every five years. Each Department submitted a report. Some of them are large and have not been circulated. Rather than this committee considering these reports the Information Commissioner will be asked to do this work on our behalf and report to this committee. After consideration of the Information Commissioner's report we will then consider further action. There may be a conflict between the Information Commissioner's view and the Minister's view of what should be disclosed. With the commissioner's report we can explore such controversial areas.
Should we lodge reports we have received from Departments in the Oireachtas Library? I do not ask that a copy of each be circulated to every member but if they are important public information any interested party ought to have an opportunity to view the responses.
The Deputy is correct. A voluminous quantity of material has been submitted in recent months. The last arrived in the past one or two weeks. We will find a mechanism to place them in the Oireachtas Library in order that they may be reviewed because they are interesting documents. In the interest of freedom of information we should do so.
We will move on to the discussion with the chairman of the expenditure review central steering committee. We will suspend while the guests take their seats.
