Senator O'Toole's contribution focused almost exclusively on audit matters. I thank him very much for that contribution, informed as it was by his experience and expertise in this area. Before addressing the proposals he made, the first point to make is that although good corporate governance should apply to all institutions, it does not necessarily mean corporate governance is the same in all institutions. Institutions, whether stand-alone corporate bodies, civil society bodies, semi-State bodies, Departments or the Houses of Oireachtas Commission, are all entities but the same rules of governance do not necessarily apply to all of them. What applies in the private sector in terms of good corporate governance is not necessarily applicable to other entities.
I draw a distinction between the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission and other Departments. Unlike other Departments, the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission effectively administers expenditure. It accounts for expenditure channelled to Members, committees and so on. Salaries are an enormous part of it. There are no major spending programmes, or there is no major outsourcing of programmes, where the commission's expenditure would be channelled to other parties or entities which would give rise to the potential or capacity for things to go wrong. This is effectively the proper and appropriate accounting of money which is administered in this building in a very limited way.
Therefore, the question which arises is that raised by Senator O'Toole as to whether the audit committee should report to the chairman of the commission as distinct from the Secretary General. There is a very real distinction here in that the Secretary General is by law the Accounting Officer. He or she is personally charged with accounting for the moneys over which he or she is responsible because of the position he or she holds. In turn, he or she must account to the Committee of Public Accounts. That is a personal responsibility held by one person.
