COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS díospóireacht -
Thursday, 3 May 2012

Business of Committee

Chairman

The first item is consideration of the draft reports on the National Aquatic Centre and the Irish Red Cross. The clerk has circulated revised drafts of these reports and members have until next Tuesday to have an input into them. We have received a number of inputs from members and some aspects of the reports have been changed. It is proposed to adopt the reports next Thursday and to publish them the following Wednesday. Any amendments made to the original drafts will be highlighted in the reports.

Are the minutes of the meeting of 26 April 2012 agreed? Agreed.

There is one matter arising relating to the €3.6 billion in the Department of Finance. That has yet to go to Government and the Secretary General will be before us on 24 May. It is expected the report will be finalised and back to us before then. The clerk has been in touch with the Secretary General on the matter. Are there any other matters arising from the minutes? No.

We will now move on to correspondence received since the meeting of Thursday, 26 April. Item 4.1 is correspondence dated 27 April 2012 from Mr. Martin Frazer, Secretary General at the Department of the Taoiseach, forwarding a briefing paper on matters to be considered at our meeting today has been received.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell

I want to raise a matter to do with the banking inquiry. Do I do that under the minutes or under any other business?

Chairman

It can be raised under any other business when we get to it. The correspondence received from the Secretary General at the Department of the Taoiseach is to be noted and published. Item 4.2 is correspondence dated 27 April 2012 from the Central Statistics Office, forwarding briefing papers on matters to be considered at the meeting on 3 May 2012, to be noted and published. Item 4.3 is correspondence dated 23 April 2012 from Ms Joan Russell, chief executive of County Cork VEC. Correspondence previously forwarded by the committee from Ms Anne Hurley is to be noted. Correspondence dated 27 April 2012 from Mr. Ray Mitchell, Assistant National Director of Parliamentary and Regulatory Affairs in the Health Service Executive is to be noted. Item 4.5 is correspondence dated 27 April 2012 from Professor Don Barry, President of the University of Limerick, about correspondence previously forward by the committee regarding payment of expenses to be noted and a copy to be sent to Deputy Niall Collins. Item 4.6 is correspondence received 1 May 2012 from Mr. Martin Frazer, Secretary General at the Department of the Taoiseach, opening statement to be noted and published. Item 4.7 is correspondence dated 2 May 2012 from Mr. Gerry O'Hanlon, Director General of the Central Statistics Office re his opening statement, to be noted and published. Item 4.8 is correspondence dated 1 May 2012 from Mr. John Moriarty, Dublin Waterworld Limited re National Aquatic Centre incorrect VAT charge, to be noted and published.

Statements and accounts received since the meeting of 26 April 2012: item 5.1, the Railway Safety Commission, financial statement for the year ending 31 December 2010, to be noted.

The work programme will be circulated later. If there are any comments on the work programme, they should be submitted to the clerk.

Finally, any other business will now be taken.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell

I would like an update on the banking inquiry. Issues are coming into the public domain in advance of the inquiry. The integrity of the inquiry is vital and I want to check if there are legal ramifications that so much is already in the public domain prior to areas being discussed by the Committee of Public Accounts beforehand.

I am specifically referring to the private papers of Brian Lenihan. For me, it is simple in that I want this inquiry to work. The integrity of the inquiry is vital and I would prefer if items were not put into the public domain before they are discussed by the committee. If there are private papers, they could be critical to the inquiry. If they are discussed in the public domain prior to being discussed in the PAC and the establishment of a sub-committee, are there any legal implications for the inquiry? We have a huge body of work done and the sub-committee has met a number of times. I am conscious for the main body of the PAC that we come back with a report that is discussed.

I know a fair bit about the background because I was there for the bulk of this when it was going through the Dáil. For me it is always about the result. I am concerned that we might have short-term gains so I would like to clarify if there are legal implications for the committee that items are being discussed in the public domain prior to the report coming out. We have done a huge amount of work and I want this inquiry to work. A report is imminent in the next two weeks. Could the Chairman deal with that point?

Chairman

The dates have not changed; the work on the report is ongoing and the expected date for it is 16 May. Thereafter, 24 May is the date it will come before the committee. The committee then decides on the content of the report, if it is accepted, and presumably at that stage it moves from there to being presented to the Houses, given to the Minister and published. It is a comprehensive work, as the Deputy knows, and it is important to the outcome of the decision on the inquiry.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell

The sub-committee should be allowed to do its work; that is extremely important.

Chairman

The sub-committee is doing its work and has made the decision about 16 May and 24 May.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell

Correct.

Chairman

It has decided on the actions that need to be taken on the document. It will come before us on 16 and 24 May. At the last meeting the committee was brought up to date on the sub-committee and we agree to appoint a senior counsel, Mr. Michael Cush, who has appeared before us on another occasion. That has been done. I understand the work he has to do will come in the context of the timeframe that is set.

As to any other matters that might arise, those were covered in the context of the legal opinions that were given by Ms Melissa English on that day because they cover such things as the framework for such an inquiry and issues like bias.

On the other matters referred to by the Deputy, there are a number of pieces of information in the public domain that we have been asked to comment upon. It is a matter of a person's own view as to their importance in the context of the inquiry. The Deputy can express a view as to whether these papers or any other interventions are important to the inquiry.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell

I am not questioning the importance of the papers. My views are well known on this. The framework we put in place to conduct this inquiry is as important as the inquiry itself. When the inquiry is up and running, I do not want anything to compromise it, subject to it going before Government. I have seen too many occasions where it is like a horse running around the race track twice before the race starts. I prefer to bring the horse down gently and have him run the race at full speed when the race is on.

This may be nothing more than a note of caution on my part but for me this is simple. There are many unanswered questions about the banking situation, with a lack of regulation and the bank guarantee. I am sounding a note of caution that we are near the point where the sub-committee is due to report to the main body of the PAC. I am conscious of coming back to the PAC and getting the full approval of all the members. I am adding a note of caution that there may be nothing in it but I am doing it with the best interests of the inquiry and we are all acting in that collective format with that. Taking the legal perspective, should we be conscious that we may compromise the inquiry, should it get up and running?

Deputy Eoghan Murphy

The sub-group has been doing good work so far and all those who are engaged in the work of the sub-group have done a fantastic job. I share Deputy O'Donnell's concerns that new elements of what the committee is doing or meant to be doing are coming to light through the medium of what the committee discusses. We do not want to undermine the work of a sub-group and we do not want to undermine any future inquiry we may have; that is the reason that it is proper at this stage, as we come to the conclusion of the initial stage, to urge caution, as Deputy O'Donnell does because of the importance of what we are doing. Public expectations have resulted from certain things that have been said before the sub-group has concluded its work. It is important to bear that in mind. We need to manage those expectations. People want to see a robust inquiry and it is very important that we are conscious of what we say and do inside and outside the committee in light of these expectations.

Chairman

I call Deputy Deasy.

Deputy John Deasy

The Committee of Public Accounts has a reputation of not being partisan and operating very effectively. It is fair to say that we have yet to be tested. Should the banking inquiry go ahead, that will be a test not only of the individual members but how the committee operates. I have a concern and will not hold my breath on how I think it will operate. It would be unfortunate if there was grandstanding, which would reflect poorly on politics. To a certain extent, it goes with the territory. We should keep a lid on our views before we decide on the issue as a committee. It is important that we observe that practice until the committee as a whole makes the decision, as otherwise the committee will be weakened as the banking inquiry, if it proceeds, goes on. It is just a hunch, but I think the committee will stop acting as a unit and will act as ten or 11 entities on a subject that is too important to grandstand on.

It is important that we conduct this work properly. We should desist from comment in the media until decisions have been made by the sub-group and the full committee. That is no criticism of any individual, but it is how I feel right now.

I think we are untested as a committee. How we start will have an effect on how we go about our business when the Committee of Public Accounts deals with the banking inquiry.

Deputy Derek Nolan

I will repeat what I said at the meeting of the sub-group. Part of the reason for establishing a sub-group was to meet the expectation that the Committee of Pubic Accounts would be conducting a banking inquiry. We wanted to uphold the good name of the PAC, in having made an announcement that we would follow through on it, and ensure we would be able to say we had achieved something. The expectation has been rekindled in the press that a no holds barred banking inquiry will go ahead, which we all know cannot and will not happen because of the legal framework under which the committee operates since the Abbeylara case and the failure of the referendum to give the Dáil and Seanad express power to conduct inquiries into matters of general public importance

We must be very careful to manage people's expectations and to ensure the reputation of the committee is not damaged by giving the impression that something might happen that will not.

Chairman

As no other members are offering, I will reiterate the decisions the sub-group have made, a full report by the sub-group will issue by 16 May and will go to the full committee on 24 May. Mr. Cush has been appointed. We have made a perfectly valid decision on the matters that we have control over. I am sure we have the same interests at heart, which is to establish an inquiry that can work and to which we can all contribute positively, so nothing has changed.

Is the agenda for 10 May 2012, the 2010 annual report of the Comptroller and Auditor General Appropriation Accounts, Vote 32 - Department of Transport, Chapter 27 - maintenance of regional and local roads, and National Roads Authority - 2010 annual report and financial statements, agreed to? Agreed.

Before we call the witnesses, may I just mention that we are discussing two separate issues? We will finish the Vote for the Central Statistics Office before examining the Vote for the Taoiseach's office. We hope to finish the examination of the CSO at 11.30 a.m., and then suspend the sitting for ten minutes and continue with the Vote for the Taoiseach's office. Is that agreed? Agreed. The speakers will be Deputy Nolan and Deputy O'Donnell for both sessions. Deputy Nolan will be the first speaker on both matters.

Deputy Derek Nolan

I had not prepared for the Vote for the Department of the Taoiseach.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell

I could do that.