Are the minutes of the meeting of 13 October agreed? Agreed.
Business of Committee
Mr. John Buckley (An tArd Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste) called and examined.
Have the correspondence and minutes been sent to the Irish Red Cross?
We have written to the Irish Red Cross arising from our examination of the organisation last week. It will have an opportunity to present evidence to the committee.
On that point, Mr. Wardick has written to the committee requesting that he be allowed to attend the relevant meeting and address the committee. Should we address that matter now?
Clerk to the Committee
Mr. Wardick has written to the committee and it is a matter for it to decide, when it examines this issue, whether it needs to hear evidence from him. Perhaps the appropriateness or otherwise of having Mr. Wardick before the committee should be discussed in private session once we take counsel from the Comptroller and Auditor General.
Is the meeting in private session now?
Clerk to the Committee
No, we are in public session.
Correspondence dated 12 October 2011 has been received from Mr. Paul O'Toole, director general of FÁS, forwarding correspondence from Mazars regarding inaccurate information given to the Committee of Public Accounts. Deputies will note that FÁS has, via Mazars, submitted a reason for the 18 inaccuracies in the evidence given by its officials in 2008. To avoid wasting the committee's time, I propose that, as substantive issues relative to FÁS will be considered at our meeting on 1 December 2011, we read each of the explanations into the record at this meeting. Unless members have ongoing concerns or believe the information provided is not sufficient, I propose that we accept these explanations as corrections of the public record.
While I do not disagree with the Chairman's proposal, the correspondence received from Mazars is interesting in respect of the statement at the end of the letter about the preparations made by FÁS officials before appearing before the committee. Mazars makes some important and pertinent points regarding how FÁS prepared for the meeting and the respect or lack thereof shown to the committee in its preparations. This information may also be pertinent for other witnesses coming before the committee. While I understand that there was a great deal happening in FÁS at the time and this would have made matters difficult for the witnesses, it is extremely important that this committee is treated appropriately, particularly by bodies such as FÁS and especially at a time when so much attention is focused on the organisation. Having been requested to appear before us to be asked serious questions, FÁS officials should be prepared to answer our questions and afford the committee respect. This is an important point.
The two points made in respect of FÁS are the issue I covered and the matter the Deputy has just raised.
That one, in particular, can be taken up in December when FÁS appears before the committee and it is a legitimate point to make in its presence. As for the record, I must ask the members for agreement in terms of the suggestion about correcting that record and how we propose to do it. Is that agreed? Agreed.
Clerk to the Committee
There were two occurrences of incorrect references to the timing and the use of suppliers and suppliers' names. It gave the wrong name of the suppliers. Can we take that as a correction?
Agreed.
Clerk to the Committee
In the case of one occurrence responsibility for the launch of a specific initiative which related to the complainant was incorrectly attributed as it was the former responsibility of a senior colleague. That is straightforward.
Agreed.
Clerk to the Committee
There were two occurrences which referred to instances whereby procurement processes were not initially followed but retrospective approval was secured. Is that agreed?
Agreed.
Clerk to the Committee
Partially in the case of one and fully in the case of another, our investigation found that the FÁS officer who attended the Committee of Public Accounts did not present, in response to questioning by members of the committee relating to a FÁS website and a FÁS event, a fully accurate sequence of events in so far as they related to the complainant.
Agreed.
Clerk to the Committee
Four occurrences of incorrect details regarding the individual to whom the complainant reported in FÁS at a specific point in time. This just gave the wrong-----
Agreed.
Clerk to the Committee
Four occurrences of incorrect details regarding the timing and terms of the complainant's employment.
Agreed.
Clerk to the Committee
One occurrence of information on controls that was inconsistent with the details contained in a FÁS report in so far as it related to the complainant.
Agreed.
Clerk to the Committee
Partially in the case of one occurrence relating to the reasons for the initiation of an investigation and three occurrences relating to participation in internal FÁS employment processes, that is, recruitment and promotion of the complainant.
Agreed. Item 4.2 is correspondence received on 13 October 2011 from Mr. Dermot Quigley, chief executive and Commissioner of Valuation, providing updated information on matters scheduled for examination at this meeting on 20 October 2011, as previously requested by the committee, to be noted and published.
Item 4.3 is correspondence dated 13 October 2011 from Mr. Dermot Quigley, Commissioner of Valuation and Accounting Officer, Valuation Office, re his opening statement to be noted and published.
Item 4.4 is correspondence dated 17 October 2011 from Mr. Noel Wardick, former head of the international department at the Irish Red Cross, re the Irish Red Cross. We have dealt with that issue and will deal with it at the beginning of the meeting next week.
Item 4.5 is correspondence dated 19 October 2011 from Mr. William Beausang, assistant secretary, Department of Public Expenditure and Reform re the Houses of the Oireachtas (powers of inquiry) Bill 2011. We have dealt with that issue in private session.
Item 4.6 is correspondence dated 19 October 2011 from Mr. Ray Mitchell, parliamentary and regulatory affairs, Health Service Executive, re providing information requested at the meeting of 29 September 2011 to be noted and published.
Under the heading of reports and statements, 4.1 - National Treatment Purchase Fund, 4.2 - the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, 4.3 - the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland, 4.4 - the Legal Aid Board, and 4.5 the National Library, all of these to be noted. We will defer the notation of the National Library accounts as we will deal with Chapter 9, public procurement, in the new year and will examine the reasons for the commissioning and subsequent withdrawal of a book that cost the taxpayer €98,000.
No. 6 is the work programme. This is to be noted. I will take note of the earlier arrangement in regard to the Pensions Board and I have asked the clerk to liaise with the committee in regard to dates and so on of that meeting. Do members wish to raise any other issue before we go into public session? No.
The agenda for Wednesday, 26 October 2011 is NAMA and the annual report and financial statements for 2010.
If the Pensions Board is to come in that day would it not conflict with that meeting?
Mr. John Buckley
I think NAMA should be given a full meeting and we could have the Pensions Board at a subsequent meeting.
NAMA is such a big issue it would be difficult to share the time with another group so we will work our way around that and try to get them into a separate meeting.
In regard to correspondence, the previous Committee of Public Accounts made 22 recommendations to the Minister, to which we did not receive a reply. I suggest we write formally to the Minister requesting an update on those 22 matters to bring us up to date from the last committee.