Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Thursday, 10 December 2015

Public Accounts Committee

Waterford Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013
Cork Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013

12:50 pm

Photo of John McGuinnessJohn McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I wish to return to this report, because I have been listening to how it is being described, and the timing of it. I understand that there is correspondence, as Mr. Ó Foghlú said, to clarify certain matters of expenditure. The report here is a report to the HEA requested by the HEA. It was prepared in response to a request from Mr. Boland and it refers to the recent media reports. That appears to be its purpose. The report deals mainly with everything that was in question at Committee of Public Accounts meetings relative to the cost centre referred to as the president's office. It refers to the fact that it implied that €3 million formed part of the expenditure of the office, and says that was misleading. It makes other remarks that would discredit the original report that this was a spend that was way above the norm for an individual in an organisation, the president. This report discredits what was said previously. It says "No" and lays it all out. It states clearly that at no stage did Deloitte or the governing body suggest that any expenditure incurred in the president's office was for a purpose other than the institute's. Either the past statements were incorrect or this statement is incorrect.

I know we have moved on, but our task is to look at the accounts, the audit and the evidence before us and decide how best we can improve circumstances as we proceed. I am a little shocked, Mr. Boland, having looked at this report. Regardless of how long ago it was, and it is easy to dismiss it by saying it was four years ago, it is a topic we are dealing with at this meeting and it is part of the evidence and paperwork around that topic. It deals with the credibility or otherwise of an individual who was employed there. That is very important. It is important that whatever might have been there previously, if the record must be corrected it should be corrected. You should know your business. After all, your organisation is responsible for the oversight of WIT and the others. It is a little odd that you expect us to dismiss it on the basis of, "It is a legal matter", "I cannot remember" or "It is a long time ago", because all of the other bigger figures were remembered.

What is Ms Sheridan's role?

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.