I have some amendments tabled. I do not know in what format we will take them.
Dormant Accounts (Amendment) Bill 2011 [Seanad]: Committee Stage
Section 1 agreed to.
SECTION 2
Question proposed: "That section 2 stand part of the Bill."
We will deal with those on section 3.
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 3
Amendments Nos. 1 to 6, inclusive, are related and will be discussed together.
I move amendment No. 1:
In page 4, line 35, before ", relating" to insert "in consultation with the Board".
The purpose of this Bill is to amend the existing dormant accounts legislation by providing for the dissolution of the Dormant Accounts Board and setting appropriate arrangements for the transfer of the board functions to the Department, providing strong Government and Oireachtas oversight in the area and simplifying the administrative arrangements and associated processes in respect of grants awarded from the dormant accounts fund. The objectives underpinning disbursements from the dormant accounts fund will remain unchanged, namely, to assist people who are economically, educationally or socially disadvantaged, or who have a disability. Disbursements must have regard to those three themes and the priorities and the policies of the Government. The money must be available and the process should be cost effective and take into account the outcome of any previous reviews or disbursement plans.
Under the 2001 Act, the Dormant Accounts Fund Disbursement Board was responsible for overseeing the disbursement of moneys from the fund. Following the enactment of the Dormant Accounts (Amendment) Act 2005, decisions on disbursements became the responsibility of the Government and the new Dormant Accounts Board was created. Since then, the role of the board has been to provide independent advice and act as a critical appraisal agent with regard to Government decisions on disbursements from the fund. In addition, under the 2005 (Amendment) Act, the board took over responsibility for disbursement decisions made by the former Dormant Accounts Fund Disbursement Board. In 2007, those disbursement decisions amounted to €11.7 million, although these have been reduced dramatically since then, and the figure was only €408,000 in 2011. In contrast, during the same period the Government approved funding of €129.3 million under the legislation.
This current legislation is also in keeping with the Government's commitment to reduce the number of State boards. A number of amendments to the Bill have been tabled which, if accepted, will completely undermine the rationale for the legislation. I advise the committee at this early stage that I will have some difficulty with amendments based on the background I have outlined.
I remind Deputies that we are dealing with amendments Nos. 1 to 6, inclusive, together and they may speak on the subject matter of those amendments. They will be disposed of separately, however.
I wish to clarify a matter. With regard to this Bill, has there been approval of the spending of dormant account money? It is counted as part of our debt and there has not been a distribution of dormant account money for a considerable period. Are we close to an agreement with those in the programme of which we are part to spend some dormant account money?
We have very little money in the fund.
I understand there is a reserve.
The Department of Finance and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform will decide the disbursements once this legislation is enacted. They will do so in light of all factors, including the general government debt and the ceiling of expenditure. All such factors are taken into account before the Government can make a disbursement from that fund. It is ironic that there was money in the fund but, unfortunately, only a small amount could be spent pending the completion of existing contractual commitments.
Is there money to spend?
No. My predecessor decided to announce five new areas and a small amount of money was given to those sectors lately. That was €440,000 in all, and that is all we were allowed to spend by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform.
It would be useful to know how much is in the fund and how much must be held in reserve. From the Minister's comments, it seems a significant amount must be kept in reserve. The amendments I have tabled are aimed at not having the power taken away from the board. We believe there should be a board, although we do not disagree with the principle of doing away with wasteful duplication, or abolishing quangos not serving a useful function. There is potential for significant funding from this and it goes to areas and projects that look to counter disadvantage, which is very important. We fully subscribe to that. Nevertheless, it is very important there should be a board to advise on the matters, as none of us is as smart as all of us. It is useful for any person making the decision, either the Minister or somebody else, to have advice and a rounded view on what are worthwhile projects. That is the reason the amendments are being tabled.
Costs can be reduced and we would strongly argue there is no need to provide people with huge remuneration to sit on boards. Some people will do the work - particularly on a board like this - on a voluntary basis and will not expect payment. A good small board could be put in place to oversee this work.
I understand where Deputy Stanley is coming from and his idea of an independent board that could make proposals to the Government of the day. The Government has decided there are so few transactions relating to this board that there is no merit in continuing to have a structure specifically for the purpose. There is €102 million in the fund, of which €50 million is held in reserve to cover people who wish to draw on accounts that may be dormant or which have been idle for a time. I do not know the average number of years taken into account in determining if an account is live or dormant, but we must be prudent with the reserves.
The legislation specifically proposes to dissolve the Dormant Accounts Board and transfer the policy functions to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. Assets, liabilities and funds will be the responsibility of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. The Bill is being put before the Houses to give effect to those decisions of the Government.
If we are talking about so little money, it does not really make sense to have a board in place and for that board to be supported. We must ensure there is transparency in how the fund is distributed. I support the Minister's position.
There is €102 million in the fund and €50 million must be kept in reserve. The Minister has indicated that the Department of Finance or the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform has instructed that nothing can be drawn from it now, with less than €500,000 taken from it in the past year. Perhaps I am wrong but is that related to our debt position and our obligations under the Troika agreement? Despite our disagreements, we all hope that by the end of next year that programme will end and we will move to a more independent fiscal position. Within a period of 17 or 18 months we could be in a position where some of this money could be allocated to projects, if everything goes well economically.
I would be pleased if that were the case.
Before the Minister responds, I should ask if it is correct that there is €102 million in the fund and €50 million must stay in reserve. Does that mean there is €52 million to spend, which is not an inconsiderable amount?
It is not available for spending. In accounting terms, this money is still regarded as expenditure. There must be a reserve if people want to draw on it at any time. The prudent amount is decided by the Dormant Accounts Board and the Department of Finance. Once spending takes place, it is reimbursed to the Exchequer from the dormant accounts fund in accordance with the Act in the form of what is called appropriations-in-aid. It is quite a technical way of transferring resources but we must treat the fund as expenditure. We must get permission for use from the Department of Finance as it is up against the ceiling of expenditure that we cannot breach. I wish it was otherwise. If we had €52 million to spend, Rathkeale and other places might receive a little more.
The Minister will have it soon.
I hope so.
Amendment put and declared lost.
I move amendment No. 2:
In page 4, between lines 39 and 40, to insert the following:
"(a) the Board,”.
Amendment put and declared lost.
I move amendment No. 3:
In page 5, between lines 2 and 3, to insert the following:
"(a) to the views of the Board,”.
Amendment put and declared lost.
I move amendment No. 4:
In page 6, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:
"(a) the Board,”.
Amendment put and declared lost.
I move amendment No. 5:
In page 7, line 32, after "with" to insert "the Board,".
Amendment put and declared lost.
I move amendment No. 6:
In page 8, line 18, after "report" to insert "in consultation with the Board".
Amendment put and declared lost.
Section 3 agreed to.
Section 4 agreed to.
Question, "That section 5 stand part of the Bill," put and declared carried.
Question, "That section 6 stand part of the Bill," put and declared carried.
Question, "That section 7 stand part of the Bill," put and declared carried.
Question, "That section 8 stand part of the Bill," put and declared carried.
SECTION 9
Question proposed: "That section 9 stand part of the Bill."
Is this section purely technical in nature? I do not think Deputy Brian Stanley would oppose the inclusion of the words, "final accounts in respect of the financial year, or part of the financial year of the Board". That is good housekeeping, which I am sure the Deputy does not oppose.
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 10
Question proposed: "That section 10 stand part of the Bill."
Again, this section reads, "Following the making of the order under section 2, the Board shall prepare a final report on the performance of its functions in respect of such period". Surely Deputy Brian Stanley is not saying we should prevent this? Is that not a positive function as decided earlier?
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 11
Question proposed: "That section 11 stand part of the Bill."
I support the idea that each record should be held. As such, I strongly oppose the proposal that the section be deleted.
The problem is that the function is being transferred to the Minister and that from that day on it shall be deemed to be held by the Minister. That is why we oppose the section.
We agreed to the abolition of the board at an earlier stage.
If we agree to its abolition, who will hold each record?
We have already agreed to its abolition.
Deputy Brian Stanley is entitled to press the issue.
Surely we are entitled to ask where the records will be held if the proposal is successful?
We propose that there be a board.
It is no more; we have already agreed to this.
I know; that is the Government's position.
The Deputy has indicated he wishes to have the question put.
I have asked a legitimate question about where the records would be held.
Deputy Brian Stanley is not answerable to any other committee member.
Perhaps I might ask the Minister. If the section is deleted, where will the records be held?
In the same places with high lease figures, as in the case of the e-voting machines.
They would be placed in storage.
Deputy Brian Stanley is entitled to oppose the section.
Question put and declared carried.
Question, "That section 12 stand part of the Bill," put and declared carried.
Question, "That section 13 stand part of the Bill," put and declared carried.
Question, "That section 14 stand part of the Bill," put and declared carried.
Section 15 agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment.
I thank the Chairman and members for their co-operation in dealing with this legislation which is not the most groundbreaking ever to come before the Houses. I express the Government's appreciation to the chairman of the Dormant Accounts Board, Mr. Michael Morley, and the entire membership of the board - past and present - for their work.
I thank the Minister and the officials from his Department, Ms Fiona Quinn, Ms Lorraine O'Donoghue and Ms Joan Murphy, for their attendance. I also thank Mr. Sean McLaughlin and Ms Karen Flynn.