Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

No. 2198C, from Deputy Marc MacSharry, is dated 29 May 2019 and is with regard to correspondence from Mr. David Hall on the IBRC liquidation. This item has been referred to and we will deal with it in private session in a few minutes.

No. 2200C, from an individual, is dated 31 May 2019 and requests an independent review of the technological, roll-out and investment options for the national broadband plan.

He highlights the importance of emerging technologies, such as satellite and 5G. We will take that matter into consideration when we are drafting our report. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The next item, No. 2204C, dated 3 June 2019, is from an individual responding to correspondence from the committee regarding the Social Welfare Appeals Office and the use of precedent test cases. The individual believes that legislation is being breached. Basically, there is legislation on the operation of the various schemes operated by the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection and by the appeals office. Not everything is covered in the legislation. Obviously, they have their own procedures to deal with similar-type cases. The correspondent wants to know if there is any legislative provision for this and he is saying it is illegal that they have procedures in place that are secret and that are not covered in legislation. If somebody thinks it is illegal, he or she can take it up legally but it is not a matter for the Committee of Public Accounts. We will note the item. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The next item is No. 2205C, dated 3 June, from an individual regarding Kerry County Council and costs associated with the Tralee and Listowel bypasses. Matters related to the local authorities are not within the remit of the committee and I propose to advise the correspondent that she may wish to bring the matter to the attention of the local authority audit service. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Nos. 2207C to 2216C, inclusive, are correspondence received from a glazing company, dated 4 and 5 June, requesting the committee to make inquiries regarding what the individual sees as procurement failures by the OPW of anti-ligature glazing in Garda stations. I must be upfront on this one, without revealing the person's name. This is a company which has a commercial interest in tendering for all these projects and which did not get any of the jobs and is dissatisfied with how the OPW has done it. It is an issue between himself and the relevant body which we are not getting into. The anti-ligature issue he raises is that the window, the window frames and the window openers are not designed in such a way that somebody could try to hang himself or herself in a Garda station and that the glass in the windows should be free from anything that could assist that process. This is a company that is involved in the industry. It is not our business. That is all I would say.