Mr. Tony O'Brien:

I will answer Deputy Nolan's question on travel before addressing his other questions. My predecessor commissioned Turlough O'Sullivan to investigate all foreign travel undertaken by HSE staff and paid for out of the SIPTU levy fund. Twelve such staff members were identified. Mr. O'Sullivan conducted face-to-face interviews with 11 of the staff but was unable to interview the 12th, a retired official. He concluded from the evidence provided to him that the study visits seem to have been comprehensive and worthwhile. To deal with the issue of benefits and conflicts of interest, and to be fair to the individuals involved in the trips in question, the view is that they were worthwhile.

When the funding mechanism transferred into the HSE it effectively turned into what I would describe in common parlance as a vacuum. In my opinion the HSE was not ready to be created on the day it was established, particularly with regard to the transmission of funds to voluntary bodies and other grant receivers, because it did not yet have in place an agreement environment or service level arrangements that were fit for purpose. That is a general point.

With regard to the issue of discipline, a particular individual named earlier today - in light of the general injunction I will not name him now - who had a central role in this matter could and should have acted differently. This individual retired at about the time the internal audit investigation commenced and, therefore, before the evidence was available to us. The unfortunate reality is that the ability for an employer to exercise a sanction is lost at the point of retirement. However, the HSE referred the matter in its broadest sense to the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation. The HSE has not been in a position to take disciplinary action against any individual arising from those circumstances.