Apologies have been received from Deputies Bruton and Burton and Senator O'Toole.
The draft minutes of the meeting of 19 July will be circulated at the next meeting as we do not have them today. We will proceed with correspondence according to the schedule.
I was unable to attend the previous meeting on 19 July and recorded my apologies accordingly. As the minutes of that meeting are unavailable, how does a member who was unable to attend become up-to-date with proceedings?
The full transcript has been available on the website for several days.
Only in part. Will the Chairman give a synopsis of what happened at the previous meeting? I understand matters arose unexpectedly——
Freedom of Information——
——regarding the deliberations at the previous meeting.
Absolutely. We will come to that matter when we discuss the Freedom of Information Act. I will alert members to where a change was made. The Freedom of Information Act was the main topic of discussion at the meeting on 19 July and is the next item on the agenda for this meeting. The Deputy is correct that a different configuration of members attended the previous meeting.
On correspondence, No. 469 is a letter from the Financial Regulator attaching a booklet on long-term mortgage and dynamic currency conversions which I propose that we note. The next item is a letter with enclosures to the clerk from Deputy O'Keeffe received from an individual. I understand the individual concerned has initiated court proceedings. That being the case, all the committee can do is note the correspondence and make no further comment.
No. 472 is a letter from the chairman of the European Parliament's committee on budgetary control for the chairman of the sub-committee on administration and control of the Parliament of Finland. It is an invitation for a representative of the committee to participate in a joint committee meeting on the role of budgetary control committees in national parliaments in the control of the Community's budget to be held with chairmen of committees of national parliaments within the European Union. It is expected to take place on 9 and 10 October. Does the committee wish to send a representative to the meeting?
Where is it on?
It will be held on Monday and Tuesday, 9 and 10 October, in Finland.
I propose we do.
We will send a representative. We will make the necessary inquiries and travel arrangements.
No. 473 is a letter with two enclosures from Deputy Finneran. One enclosure deals with credit unions. Credit union representatives were invited to attend this meeting but cannot do so as they are attending an international conference. They will be available to come before the committee in September. The other enclosure concerns branch managers in the Department of Social Welfare. I received a similar letter locally. What does Deputy Finneran propose?
I am not certain where responsibility lies in this area.
I propose we forward the letter to the Department of Finance as it deals with retirement gratuities and pensions and request a comprehensive response.
The next item is a letter from the Bank of Scotland on account switching procedures. We will deal with that matter today when representatives of the Irish Bankers Federation come before the committee.
I have comments to make on this topic. May I make them now?
We will leave discussion until the representatives of the Irish Bankers' Federation are here.
We should also invite the Bank of Scotland to come before the committee because there are many anomalies in the letter.
We will deal with the Irish Bankers Federation first.
The next item is an email to the clerk from the Central Statistics Office on the proposed visit by the committee on Friday, 28 July. I suggest we note it. Members travelling should make arrangements with the clerk. It was suggested at the previous meeting that we visit the CSO's facility in Swords, particularly in the light of its most recent publications. The purpose would be to receive an update, avail of an information briefing session and view how it conducts it activities.
Was this Friday the only available date?
We requested a visit on Monday of this week. At the previous meeting members requested that we seek a date this week.
That date should not be set in stone. The first matter to be decided is whether the committee should avail of the opportunity.
It is at the request of the committee. It was agreed at the previous meeting that members would visit the office.
Is Friday, 28 July the set date?
It is the proposed date. It is in the hands of members.
Next week does not suit the CSO. Monday and Friday of this week were the options given to us and Monday did not suit members.
If members are available to go on Friday——
It was agreed with the convenor, Deputy Nolan.
There will be other opportunities to visit the CSO during the course of our work. It was suggested in an ad hoc manner at the previous meeting that it would be worthwhile visiting the facility in Swords and these were the best arrangements we could make.
How many members will be available to go on Friday? The request to visit the office was made by the committee and if only one, two or three members go, it will reflect badly on it. I am not available on Friday. We want to ensure a reasonable turnout rather than a small group.
As I understand it, three members of the Government parties are available to go.
Three members on the Government side have indicated to the convenor that they will go.
The arrangement has been made now.
What time will the visit begin?
At 11 a.m. It is an open invitation to whomever chooses to attend. It is not a formal meeting.
I do not want to upset Deputy O'Keeffe who has indicated the arrangements are already made. I only wish to indicate that I was not conscious of the offer of the date, not having attended the previous meeting. I will not be able to attend on Friday. As the Chairman stated, perhaps there will be another opportunity in the future.
Exactly, we will let members, through the clerk, finalise the details and confirm with both convenors.
No. 476 is a letter to the clerk from the chief executive of the Office of the Financial Regulator acknowledging previous communications. It will be noted.
No. 477 is a letter to the clerk from the clerk to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Transport enclosing documents on vehicle registration tax. We will forward it to the Revenue Commissioners for comment. It is based on previous correspondence we received.
The next item is statutory instruments. The first is S.I. 363 of 2006, Civil Service Regulation (Amendment) Act 2005 (Commencement of Certain Provisions) Order 2006 and the other is S.I. 365 of 2006, Civil Service Regulation Act 1956 (Section 1A) (Revenue Commissioners) Order 2006. They are available in the Oireachtas Library where members can easily obtain a copy if they so wish.
A letter was received from the clerk to the Joint Oireachtas Sub-Committee on European Scrutiny enclosing a list of documentation on proposals considered by the sub-committee at its meeting on 19 July. By way of information, No. 213 was referred to this committee for scrutiny, while Nos. 760 and 762 were referred for information. We have at least one proposal to scrutinise in the autumn.
