Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS díospóireacht -
Thursday, 28 May 2015

Business of Committee

Are the minutes of the meeting of 14 May 2015 agreed? Agreed. There are no matters arising from the minutes.

We will deal with correspondence sent since 14 May. Item 3A is correspondence from Accounting Officers and Ministers. Item 3A.1, correspondence dated 14 May 2015 from the HSE, is a follow-up to the meeting on 23 April 2015 and it is to be noted and published.

Item 3A.2 is correspondence, dated 24 April 2015, from Mr. John Doyle, CEO, Credit Union Restructuring Board, which is a follow-up to our meeting of 11 December 2014. This is to be noted.

Item 3A.3 is correspondence, dated 20 May 2015, from Mr. Aidan O’Driscoll, Secretary General, Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, regarding the PAC draft report on fisheries harbour centres, which is to be noted. Having received the Department's update, we can now go ahead and prepare a final draft of the report for consideration by the committee. We will do that at our next meeting. The Dail is not sitting next week, so it will be after that. In view of the discussion the committee has already had on this report, is there a need for another draft or will we just go to the final report?

I have not gone through what is in the response from the Secretary General of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine.

We will go through that correspondence and ask the clerk to include whatever is new in that in the report. We will then circulate a final draft arising from that, so the next step will be to publish the report.

We also have a letter from Mr. Doran, which would probably need to be taken into consideration as well.

Yes, we will deal with that now.

Item 3A.4 is correspondence, dated 22 May 2015, from Mr. Seán Ó Foghlú, Secretary General, Department of Education and Skills, regarding compliance by UCC with public sector pay policy. That is to be noted and published. That is a short letter in which he informs us that the overpayments or additional payments being made have now ended. Did we get an explanation as to how those arose in the first place?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

I do not think so, Chairman.

Is that not what we wanted to know?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

I think that is what he is indicating there, that when they have the full information he will come back. However, he is reporting the assurance of the president of UCC that the allowances have stopped.

Okay. Item 3A.5 is correspondence, dated 25 May 2015, from the HSE and is a follow-up to our meeting on 23 April 2015, which is to be noted and published. This issue relates to the procurement of investigators and the use of former staff of the health services. We are due to consider a report on this shortly. Has that report been circulated?

Clerk to the Committee

It has, yes.

Can we determine that it is the final draft?

It is a short report but it is very strong. The work the clerk has put into this is excellent. The kernel of it boils down to chapter two and the recommendations at the end. What we have discovered is that when it comes to individuals it is not possible to put a specific ban on former employees of the HSE. However, the step that needs to be taken is that authority to appoint investigators should be taken away from the HSE. That should be put to one side. That is effectively where we have gone with this. Therefore, even though one cannot ban former employees specifically on a personal basis, taking these investigations away from the HSE, particularly the ones that are extremely sensitive and actually involve potential conflict of interest, is probably the appropriate step. I think that is what the Minister should consider. I have spoken to the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch. She is looking at this entire area, including the idea of putting panels together. The work of her office is working in tandem with the report that we have put together. There is an understanding that this area needs to be dealt with once and for all.

In line with that report, I wish to raise an issue that was brought to my attention by way of correspondence, although I do not have it with me. An investigation took place concerning Kilkenny. When the report arising from that investigation was sought, it was not released and neither were the details of the procurement process. Before finalising the report, we might ask that question of the HSE and determine the details surrounding it.

Clerk to the Committee

Under procurement?

Yes, under procurement.

Clerk to the Committee

Some of it is dealt with in that answer.

I understand that, but notwithstanding that, we have to learn from that as well.

What is the next step with regard to that report? Will we issue the report on a certain date?

We can do the final report in the week after next when we are back. We will publish it then.

Item 3A.6 is correspondence, dated 27 May 2015, from Mr. Seán Ó Foghlú, Secretary General, Department of Education and Skills, regarding the technological university designation process. That is to be noted and published. We will have a follow-up meeting on this with the Department, the HEA and Mr. Michael Kelly. What is the date?

Clerk to the Committee

We have not set a date because Mr. Kelly's report on the Waterford case is not finished. It will probably be in the autumn before we get around to this.

I thought we were going to proceed. Has a date been set for a meeting?

Clerk to the Committee

We have two dates set for the Department of Education and Skills. There are two different reports by the Comptroller and Auditor General, one on Cork VEC and one on SUSI.

Item 3A.7 is correspondence, dated 27 May 2015, from Ms Eileen Creedon, Chief State Solicitor, regarding legal costs borne by the State in prosecutions on behalf of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. It is to be noted and published. This correspondence is relevant to our meeting of 18 June 2015.

Item 3B concerns individual correspondence. Item 3B.1 is correspondence, dated 1 May 2015, from Deputy Sean Fleming regarding wards of court. This is to be noted. We will consider this matter in the context of our upcoming report on wards of court.

It was interesting to hear on the radio this morning that they gave a complete breakdown of their activity and investments. They gave lots of information on the radio, yet they could not give it to the Committee of Public Accounts. It was an interesting intervention at this point. I am sure there was a press release with it, so we must get that and include it in our consideration when they attend. It is funny how organisations like that get up to speed when they are mentioned at this committee. They then head off to the radio to ensure they bypass the committee.

The gentleman who provided all that investment information was Mr. Finn. Would it be appropriate to have him come back when we are doing our preparations?

I think that it would because they were so upfront and upbeat about it this morning. It would be no harm to have them in.

All that information was not disclosed to us previously.

We will ask them in.

Item 3B.2 is correspondence, dated 14 May 2015, from Mr. Seán Ó Foghlú, Secretary General, Department of Education and Skills, regarding Gaelscoil Charraig na Siúire. That is to be noted and the reply forwarded to the school.

Item 3B.3 is correspondence, dated 29 April 2015, from Mr. John Suttle, director of the Irish National Schools Trust, regarding illegality at the Department of Education and Skills. That is to be noted and published. Are there any comments on that?

Clerk to the Committee

We will copy that.

I did not hear the radio programme. It is one thing if they will not come in, but could we write to them and ask how they make their investments as an investment committee, based on what they have publicised now?

I was aware that they outlined it.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

My understanding from the news reports this morning is that they published their annual report and financial statements, so that information is certainly in the public domain.

Would that cover it all with regard to how they make their decisions when it comes to funds?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

When they appeared previously, I looked at the financial statements and they do outline in that what their strategy is around investments. Obviously, however, at a general level it is their investment policy rather than investments in relation to any individual.

They were brilliant this morning.

So the Comptroller and Auditor General does not believe there is anything more to be elucidated from them. Does he think there is anything he could garner from them in an exchange of correspondence?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

The committee already had an exchange with the accountant of the High Court who oversees the financial reporting of it. There is a committee that determines the strategy.

Fair enough. I thank Mr. McCarthy.

We are dealing with item 3B.4, correspondence dated 19 March 2015, from Sean Doran, Howth, Dublin, regarding the Committee on Public Accounts, PAC’s, visit, to be noted and published. We are about to finalise a report on the fishery harbours and Mr. Doran’s comments will be taken into account in that context.

His statement that 30 years after the building of the Synchrolift and boatyard all of the painters, electricians, mechanics, engineers and other tradesmen are still working out of the backs of vans is very damning. We should redraft our report in view of what has come back already. The report we received was very comprehensive, plus the information in this letter.

Correspondence dated 31 March 2015, from Mr. John Corcoran, is in regard to waste of public money in property transactions by the Office of Public Works, OPW. This is to be noted and forwarded to the OPW for a response on the matters raised. This matter was raised through an advertisement in a magazine, which set out several issues and concerns. We will note it but there is no harm in publishing it because it is already well published. We are asking for a comprehensive response from the OPW.

Item 3B.6 is correspondence, from Mr. Joe O’Brien, managing director, Medilink, regarding payment to the Order of Malta. This is to be noted and published and forwarded to Horse Racing Ireland, HRI, for a note on the procurement issue arising.

Item 3B.7 is correspondence, dated 25 May 2015, from Mr. Seán Ó Foghlú, Secretary General, Department of Education and Skills regarding an update on issues in Cork Institute of Technology, CIT. These issues were brought to our attention by a whistleblower and the response from the Department is set out there. The issues raised by the whistleblower, and the response, need to be dealt with in detail with the Higher Education Authority, HEA, and Mr. Ó Foghlú when they come in. One of the concerns I have is that the figures originally quoted, for example, in terms of the due diligence were somewhere in the region of €200,000 and later it was disclosed that in fact it was far more than that. Some of the figures put before us do not match from one piece of correspondence to another. The matter needs to be clarified. We will have to deal with this in far more detail. While we have the correspondence, I do not accept the response to some of the points addressed. We will deal with it when Mr. Ó Foghlú and the HEA come before us.

Item 3C is documents relating to today’s meeting, which are the opening statements, 3C.1 and 3C.2, all to be noted and published.

Item 4 is reports and statements received since our meeting on 14 May. There are three noted there. On 4.3, the Institute of Technology Blanchardstown, attention is drawn to the fact that the required review by the institute of the effectiveness of the system of internal control for 2013 was carried out in June 2014, some ten months after the year end. These accounts are to be noted.

The work programme-----

There is an issue I would like to raise, which is not on the list. Deputy Jack Wall asked me to raise the issue of personal insurance and whether there is any mechanism whereby the Committee of Public Accounts could invite the Insurance Ombudsman or the Financial Services Ombudsman to explain how this operates. There are allegations that because of the six-year rule if insurance companies offer products without fully divulging the payments, there is no recourse to chase them up after six years. Is there any mechanism whereby the ombudsman can be brought in and asked about that issue?

The Comptroller and Auditor General does not audit their accounts.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

I understand that the Insurance Ombudsman is funded by the industry. It does not come within my remit. That, therefore, puts it outside the scope of the PAC’s remit.

Would the Comptroller and Auditor General have any advice as to how these people could pursue a course of justice?

Maybe the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform would have-----

The other ombudsmen go before the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Public Service Oversight and Petitions.

On the work programme, we are not sitting next week. The week after that we are meeting Student Universal Support Ireland, SUSI. The following week we will meet the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and then the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government on local property tax. Did we not agree to bring in the Higher Education Authority, HEA, and the Department of Education and Skills?

Clerk to the Committee

We can bring them in that day if Michael Kelly’s report is released. Would that be better?

I think we should so that we can deal with issues relevant to the correspondence today. The point I made earlier is that in one piece of correspondence it refers to due diligence at €58,999 and in the Munster technical university project it refers to due diligence at €350,185 and in the south east due diligence is at a cost of €42,742. When one sees the figures across the range of activities within that sector there is a huge difference. The separate issues raised by a whistleblower in correspondence can be set out and it is clear there is an issue but the presentation of the letter from Mr. Ó Foghlú would lead one to believe there were no issues in this sector and I believe there are. In the context of that meeting we should ask Mr. Kelly and Mr. Ó Foghlú also to come in so that we can deal with matters beyond those dealt with there. Are we agreed on our work programme? We will probably launch the report the week after that.

Clerk to the Committee

Yes.

Is there any other business?

Has there been any progress in the handling of court cases in the Chief State Solicitor’s office and the Courts Service?

They will not be before us until the autumn but they are putting information together.

Did we get an answer on the anomalies in the two different reports on Thornton Hall?

Not yet. We will send a reminder.

How is our report going on the Docklands, in respect of Hanover Quay and the Jeanie Johnston? There were reports in the media at the weekend about it.

It is a relatively large report so it will be a while before we finish it. I want to get the two or three reports that are before us sorted out the week after next. That is a big report as it covers the Irish Glass Bottle site as well so immediately after that we will conclude it.

I will leave it in the Chairman’s capable hands to expedite it.

We will leave it in the clerk's capable hands, not in mine. Are there any other matters? No. Our next meeting has been agreed as part of our work programme, so we will now turn to today's business and call in the witnesses.

Barr
Roinn