Skip to main content
Normal View

Departmental Investigations.

Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 13 May 2004

Thursday, 13 May 2004

Questions (16)

Phil Hogan

Question:

15 Mr. Hogan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment her views on the belief of a person (details supplied) that an alleged fraud perpetrated by an NGO on her Department, of which she was informed, never took place; her further views on the fact that, despite this information being available to her Department, the chief executive of that NGO was dismissed; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [13756/04]

View answer

Written answers

In June 1996, my Department approved grant assistance of 104,000 ECUs, or approximately £83,000, under the EU-funded small business operational programme for a project proposed by the organisation concerned. In accordance with the normal procedures for the relevant measure, an initial grant of 50% of the total approved was made at that time, while a further grant of 30% was issued in September 1997, following the submission of a progress report on the project by the organisation.

On 29 January 1999, the organisation wrote to the Department advising it that it appeared to the organisation that it had received an overpayment from the Department in respect of expenses amounting to £16,500 on foot of which a grant had been paid at the rate of 75%. At a meeting with the Department on 5 March 1999 to discuss this matter, the organisation advised the Department that it had decided to alert the Garda fraud squad to suspected irregularities in relation to the claims submitted to the Department for funding for the project. The Department was advised that the fraud squad had been alerted to the organisation's concerns about invoices in the amount of £16,500 received from a supplier of services to the organisation which had been used to support the drawdown of funds from the Department. The Department was advised that the organisation's auditors had also been informed about the matter and that the Department would be kept informed about developments. At that stage, the Department suspended any further payments in respect of this project pending the conclusion of the investigations into the matter.

On 23 June 2000, the organisation wrote to the Department and confirmed that an extensive investigation by its auditors had found no evidence of fraud and that, following a fraud squad investigation, a file had been referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions, who had decided that there were no grounds for action. The organisation indicated that it had accepted the results of these investigations and, accordingly, the invoices, which had been the subject of the investigations were paid by the organisation on 23 June 2000.

I would like to stress that I have not, and never had, any role in relation to the individual's employment with the organisation or the termination of his contract by the organisation. These are matters between that individual and the organisation. Furthermore, it should be clear from the foregoing that the Department was only advised about the outcome of the Garda and auditors' investigations in June 2000, that is, more than a year after the organisation took the decision to terminate the individual's contract in May 1999. As I indicated in my reply to Deputy Quinn on Tuesday, 6 April 2004, my Department does not have any issue or concern to pursue with the individual to which the question refers.

Top
Share