COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS díospóireacht -
Thursday, 22 Feb 2024

Business of Committee

An Cathaoirleach

There is a good bit of important business this afternoon. The public business before us this afternoon is as follows: minutes, accounts and financial statements, correspondence, work programme and any other business.

The first item of business is the minutes of our meeting of 17 February 2024, which have been circulated to members. Does any member wish to raise any matters regarding the minutes? No. Are the minutes agreed? Agreed. As usual, they will be published on the committee's webpage.

We will move on to accounts and financial statements. Eight sets of accounts and financial statements were laid before the Houses between 12 February and 16 February. I will ask the Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. Seamus McCarthy, to address these before I open up the discussion to the floor.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

The first is the Royal Irish Academy for 2022. That received a clear audit opinion. The second is the City of Dublin Education and Training Board, ETB, for 2022, which received a clear audit opinion. However, I draw attention to a material level of non-compliance with procurement rules. The third is the Parole Board for 2022, which received a clear audit opinion. The fourth is the Kildare and Wicklow Education and Training Board for 2022, which received a clear audit opinion but, again, I draw attention to a material level of non-compliance with the procurement rules. The fifth is the Land Development Agency designated activity company, DAC, which is a new entity, and this is the first audit of it that I have carried out. It covers the reporting period from 20 December 2021 to 31 December 2022. It received a clear audit opinion. The sixth is the accounts of the Fishery Harbour Centre for 2022. That received a clear audit opinion. The seventh is the Dublin and Dún Laoghaire Education and Training Board. This relates to 2021 and it received a clear audit opinion but, again, I drew attention to a material level of non-compliance with procurement rules in that case. Finally, the eighth is the Laois and Offaly Education and Training Board for 2022, which received a clear audit opinion. I might draw the committee's attention to the fifth one, which is the Land Development Agency. The accounts were certified on 26 September but were only presented on 15 February. That is a bit over the expected time. The committee might want to ask it about the delay.

An Cathaoirleach

What was the timeline again?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

It was 26 September to 15 February, so it was a four-and-a-half-month period.

An Cathaoirleach

Okay. I thank the Comptroller and Auditor General. Does any member wish to come in on that?

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

On the issue of the LDA, does that period cover the first year in which it was capitalised following being put on a statutory footing? I ask because it is a new agency and it would be worth getting it into the process of coming before the Committee of Public Accounts and being exposed to our oversight, rather than having any specific reason to have it before us. I think we should start to introduce it to the level of oversight and governance that we have. This is particularly because we are talking about billions of euro here.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

The turnover in the first period of accounts was only €12.5 million, so I think it was in the process of gearing up. In 2023, I think there will be a much higher level of turnover, etc. Yet, as the Deputy says, it may be of interest to the committee to talk to it about the 2022 accounts.

An Cathaoirleach

Was that in reference to the LDA?

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

Yes, that was in reference to the LDA. Given the clarification that this relates to a much smaller turnover, I would be happy to wait until the next accounting year, if we have that luxury.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

I would hope that we will not be as late in having them certified. It should be earlier. I think it may have been setting up an annual report and that is possibly what the delay was. However, given the scale on which it is going to be operating, it will be of a higher priority. We would hope to deal with it in the first part of the year.

An Cathaoirleach

I call Deputy Catherine Murphy.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

In relation to the Kildare and Wicklow Education and Training Board, there is a Garda case. I think it goes back to when it was a VEC and before it was an ETB.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

No, it is within the period of it being an ETB.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Okay. Well, it is still ongoing. I am looking at the material level of non-compliance with procurement rules and it is bog-standard stuff. It relates to recruitment agencies, school trips, catering, the adventure centre, cleaning services, woodworking and hardware supplies. I would have thought that real energy would have been put into making sure that issues do not turn up when there are already issues. I understand from 2023, which is obviously not related to this set of accounts, that other issues were identified. A review of a contracted employer in the training of a third-party provider was carried out in 2023. A matter has been referred to An Garda Síochána in relation to that.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

I am not aware of that. I have not reviewed the 2023 financial statements yet.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Yes. If an issue is raised on either side of the year we are looking at, does that preclude us from having an entity like that before the committee? I do not think it would be enough on its own. I think we would have to have a few of them in. Yet, it was very patchy the last time a group of them were before the committee. There were very good examples of some poor practice.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Some of it was a carryover from how they were amalgamated and how the systems were not really talking to each other. An Garda Síochána is involved in two specific cases. Once the gardaí are involved are we precluded from looking at them in their totality or just from looking at those areas?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

The practice in the past has been that there would not be specific inquiries into a case that is currently being investigated by An Garda Síochána, but all other aspects of their activities could certainly be inquired into.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Okay. In the future, I might raise us having a group before the committee again.

An Cathaoirleach

Obviously, regarding the matters that are under direct investigation, we would not go there.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

I know, yes.

An Cathaoirleach

Can we agree to note the listing of accounts and financial statements? Agreed. As usual, the listing of accounts or financial statements will be published as part of our minutes.

We will move on to correspondence. As previously agreed, items that are not flagged for discussion in this meeting will be dealt with in accordance with the proposed actions that have been circulated and decisions taken by the committee in relation to correspondence or in accordance with the minutes of the committee's meetings and published on the committee's webpage.

The items flagged for discussion are in category B: correspondence from Accounting Officers and-or Ministers. They are follow-up to meetings of the Committee of Public Accounts. The first is No. R2378B. This is from Mr. Francis O'Donnell, CEO of Inland Fisheries Ireland. It is dated 9 February 2024. It is a request regarding an item of correspondence from an individual which was discussed at a meeting on 25 January. IFI is seeking sight of this correspondence. It is proposed to note and publish this item of correspondence. Is that agreed? Agreed. It is also proposed that rather than providing the correspondence from the individual, a summary of the issues raised in the correspondence will be provided to Inland Fisheries Ireland. Is that agreed? Agreed. It will, therefore, not get the correspondence but it will get a summary of it.

The next item of correspondence is No. R2384B from Mr. Graham Doyle, Secretary General at the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. It is dated 9 February 2024 and provides follow-up information that we requested at a meeting on 14 December 2023. It is proposed to note and publish this item of correspondence. Is that agreed? Agreed. Deputy Catherine Murphy flagged that she wanted to mention something to do with No. R2384B.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Yes, there are a couple of issues. On page 5 in the second paragraph, it reads, "In respect of the oversight of exceptional funding being provided to the Peter McVerry Trust, the Department has put in place an Oversight Group made up of representatives from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage and the Dublin Region Homeless Executive." Obviously, the Dublin Region Homeless Executive looks after the homeless services for the four Dublin local authorities. It has quite substantial contracts. Just as an inquiry, is it completely separate under the remit of the local authorities or does the Department of housing have any remit with the Dublin Region Homeless Executive? The executive has taken out gigantic contracts so is it overseen by the Department? A recent contract is €84 million for ten years. I was shocked that we would be talking about providing a lease for ten years for homelessness, and in a building that was bought for €24 million that €84 million is going to be paid for the lease. Where is the oversight on the Dublin Region Homeless Executive? I ask because the executive spans four Dublin local authorities.

The second point I wanted to raise concerns, page 9, No. 5, planning and development, section 178. It is the Part 8 planning permission process where the land is residentially zoned and in the ownership of the local charity or prescribed State body. Obviously, there is an exemption from receiving planning permission. One of the criticisms about getting social and affordable housing built were the blockages at Department level. Obviously the Part 8 planning process is time limited. That Part 8 process is not one of the blockages. How many projects have happened under the Part 8 process which is exempt from needing planning permission? Has that addressed any of the issues concerned with having to go through four or five different processes to get funding, which can elongate the process within the Department?

An Cathaoirleach

Regarding my experience of Part 8 as a councillor and having observed what goes on, there are dozens of Part 8s in County Laois every year and there is no delay. This keeps getting flagged by the Department as if it were an issue, and by some people who are misinformed. The longest I have seen a Part 8 go on for is two months. It is a month for the normal process, then there is public consultation, etc., and the councillors make the decision. In a case where councillors stall the process, which has happened on occasions and I have been party to that, where an application is held up for a month or so to get further information, for something to be changed such as part of a road network or for some other alteration to be made, the application goes through very quickly.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

They do not even require the councillors to approve this now. It is accepted.

An Cathaoirleach

I have a real problem with that because it removes that democratic input. The point I am making is that it is the Department that holds this up, and some people who are misinformed or deliberately want to mislead people about it put this up as being a big blockage in the system. I do not know about other counties but I have dealt with three counties, including the county the Deputy resides in. I did not have to do with it but a small part of that county was in my constituency at one stage. I can say that in counties Laois and Offaly I do not see it holding up cases or plans.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

No. I agree with a lot of what the Cathaoirleach has said and I do not see where there would be a delay. Has that exemption made any difference at all or are the other blockages still there in terms of getting the financial permission to go ahead with projects? I think that is where the blockage is.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

I cannot comment about other local authorities but there have been occasions in Dublin city where very significant sites were delayed for a Part 8 planning process on the basis of, and I am trying to be as non-contentious as possible, a dispute over the nature of the make-up of the site. It would not necessarily only be about roads. It could be about the mixture of housing, the tenure, the funding model and all of those types of things. The two most controversial ones were the Oscar Traynor Road and O'Devaney Gardens. In both those scenarios, the Part 8 process and the failure of the councillors to agree a way forward was a very significant contribution to the delay. In some cases, I think it was justified and, in other cases, I would have disagreed with them, but I think that is one reason this has come about.

The second reason is, and it is important to say, that it is limited in the sense that people have to be on site and under construction by December of this year. It is a very time limited provision which is, I imagine, how it was able to get past the Attorney General. The third element is that it is limited to pubic housing. Fourth is where it is in compliance with the development plan, which has already been approved by the councillors. We are in a housing shortage so we must react like in an emergency and that is why the provision was introduced.

An Cathaoirleach

We all accept that.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

I would ask that we ask the Department.

An Cathaoirleach

If you want to put that question you have-----

Deputy Catherine Murphy

How many projects have commenced on foot of the exemption?

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

I imagine it would be very limited given the likelihood that any project, even going to tender in November or December of last year, would not be on site by December of this year. I know of only one site in my constituency that is using it.

An Cathaoirleach

The reply, on page 18, has a piece on housing estates where the developer provided infrastructure for water and wastewater and the difficulties in getting those taken in charge. It is disappointing because it seems to go around in circles. Irish Water says it will not take them in charge and it seems to fall back on the local authority. The only thing is that it does bring clarity to the situation. The one I have referred to is The Limekiln in Clogh, County Laois. It brings clarity to the situation in that it puts it on the local authority to bring them in charge where it is developer-provided infrastructure. There is a fund over recent years to assist local authorities to bring water services up to a certain standard and for Irish Water to take them in charge where they are connected to the public sewer and the public water system. The stand-alone ones have been a problem. While it is disappointing it has not moved further, the clarity in this means it is back to the drawing board and back to the local authorities, who are going to have to do this.

Deputy Colm Burke

One of the problems I have had with local authorities is they write back and say they cannot take an estate in charge because Irish Water has not taken over the water services. When we then write to Irish Water, we find that the local authority has never been in contact with it about taking over the water services. These are estates that were built more than 15 years ago and before Irish Water was created.

A second problem is the lack of scrutiny by local authorities to ensure builders are following through in respect of complying with the terms of planning as regards putting in footpaths and a whole lot of services. Then we have builders applying for planning when they have not finished off the previous estate.

Another issue is the stand-alone facilities, where an awful lot of these were done pre-2008, the builder built the sewage treatment, but they are not up to scratch, Irish Water will not take them over and, therefore, the councils will not take over these estates. There are about 500 of these. There are 50 alone in County Cork that have not been taken in charge. These are stand-alone sewage treatment plants.

An Cathaoirleach

That is an extraordinary amount. There is one in Laois, that I know of.

Deputy Colm Burke

There are more than 500 for the entire country.

It cannot be let go on as it is. There needs to be a major programme by the Department to give funding to local authorities to bring them up to scratch and Irish Water would then take them in charge.

An Cathaoirleach

The stand-alone ones probably never will be taken in charge because they are not connected. The Limekiln in Clogh, for example, has a sewerage system.

Deputy Colm Burke

The local authority will not take over the estate unless the sewage treatment is taken over.

An Cathaoirleach

It is one of these environmentally friendly treatment systems. It was requested and agreed they would do that during the Celtic tiger period. It is a small development. Irish Water's argument and the Department's case seem to be that it is not connected to the mains and is a stand-alone facility in a small rural village. They are saying the local authorities gave the planning permission. The system is working perfectly. There is no problem with it that I am aware of. Irish Water will only take in charge and take responsibility for what is connected to its networks. Where it is not connected to its networks-----

Deputy Colm Burke

Not necessarily, because I know of one it is prepared to take over and to work with the local authority on bringing up to scratch.

An Cathaoirleach

It will bring up to scratch certain ones. There is a difference. There is one around the corner from me that needs to be brought up to scratch but that is connected. The difference is the pumping station in that estate is connected to the public sewer. There are two different scenarios. The onus is on the Department and local authorities to address those ones. They cannot use that as an excuse not to take the estate in charge forever and a day. That is the point concerning stand-alones.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

The big selling point for Irish Water was there was going to be one organisation to deal with, rather than all the local authorities. I thought that was daft because the pipes are not located in one place, but all over the country, as are the treatment systems and so on. Irish Water is an issue for all our constituency offices. There is another area in relation to taking estates in charge where, for example, the builder has gone into liquidation and the residents are trying to get all the nuts and bolts together. There are management companies that have to be wound up because the local authority will not accept a dual relationship in terms of management. People who bought a house did not think they were buying all this kind of thing. The consumer protection for people buying a home in a housing estate is pretty poor when they end up having to negotiate all this stuff. They pay local property tax and that tax cannot be spent on the housing estate because the housing estate is not in charge. The whole thing is daft.

An Cathaoirleach

This is a big issue across the 31 local authorities. The lesson has been learned by some local authorities - hopefully by them all - that the bonds in the Celtic tiger period lodged by the developer as surety for works not completed, works not completed properly or deficient works should have been adequate to meet the costs. In many cases, that bond was not acceptable. It was simply a piece of paper. They were let expire and all sorts of nonsense went on. We raised with Graham Doyle when he was in that the Department needs to ensure local authorities ensure a sufficient bond is in place, that the bond can be accessed and that it does not expire over time. Deputy Burke referred to one that is waiting 15 years. There is one around the corner from me built in the late 1990s and part of it is not taken in charge yet.

Deputy Colm Burke

The issue that arose, especially between 2000 and 2008, was that people buying a house were sold the concept that a management company would be set up to manage the estate and the local authority would be kept out of the estate. People bought into that.

An Cathaoirleach

They are another category, though.

Deputy Colm Burke

People bought into that on that basis but not everything was explained well. If it is a management company looking after the estate, it will also be a management company looking after sewage treatment. That was never outlined fully to residents. I remember advising people about their responsibilities on this issue and people did not realise what they were buying into.

An Cathaoirleach

There was a number like that but it is a separate category.

Deputy Colm Burke

There was a huge number between 2000 and 2008.

An Cathaoirleach

In a big urban area like Cork, there are probably more. There are a few of them knocking around in the part of the world I am familiar with.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

There would be loads in our area.

An Cathaoirleach

We will look for the information requested.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

On the points Deputy Murphy made on the Peter McVerry Trust, the housing committee has written to the Department, DRHE and Peter McVerry, asking them to come before that committee to discuss the additional funding which had to be provided. All three bodies replied with similar enough wording outlining that while their investigation was ongoing they were not willing to come before the committee. That committee has remit around service delivery and so on but there was a Cabinet decision to provide additional public funding. When it is appropriate, the Committee of Public Accounts should give attention to that decision. I do not know when it will be reflected in the accounts. We dealt with the Department of housing relatively recently but we should revisit that issue when that happens.

An Cathaoirleach

Noted.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

The appropriation accounts for 2022 were published last September; for 2023, it will be this coming September.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

It is likely to be some time before we have an opportunity to raise it with them.

An Cathaoirleach

They were before the committee on 14 December.

We are moving on to the work programme. Members have been circulated with a draft work programme discussion document and it is being displayed on their screens now.

On 29 February we meet with Tusla in relation to financial statements for 2022. Sláintecare healthy communities parenting programmes have been flagged as an area of interest. Representatives of the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth have also been invited to attend. On 7 March we engage with Inland Fisheries Ireland in relation to financial statements for 2022. Representatives of the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications have also been invited to attend.

We break for the March recess and then meet with An Garda Síochána on 21 March in relation to the 2022 appropriation accounts for Vote 20 – An Garda Síochána. Representatives of the Department of Justice have also been invited.

Our first meeting after the Easter recess is on 11 April. We will meet with the University of Limerick in relation to its 2022 financial statements. One area of interest is governance and associated due diligence of the university's purchase of a site in Limerick city in 2019 and the purchase of houses for student accommodation in Rhebogue. On 18 April we will meet with officials from the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth in relation to the 2022 appropriation account for Vote 40. International protection accommodation has been flagged as an area of interest.

I ask members to flag any other areas of interest for these meetings. If members have something they want to put on the agenda, it is helpful to flag it at an early stage. There are several proposed meetings which have been added to the work programme but which have not yet been scheduled. There are also several chapters of the C and AG’s 2022 report which the committee has not yet examined. I propose we consider a proposed schedule of meetings for the rest of April and May at next week’s meeting. If members have any proposals for meetings to prioritise, please let the secretariat know.

A few other items were flagged. There have been suggestions the Office of Public Works should be added, as well as the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board and Horse Racing Ireland. Next week we will try to firm up on some of that. Members may make additions to it.

Is there any other business on the public agenda? No. Okay, we will move into private session.

The committee went into private session at 2.20 p.m and adjourned at 3.50 p.m. until 9.30 a.m. on Thursday, 29 February 2024.