Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

We will certainly do that. That is noted and published. We will follow that up.

No. 2546 is on the school transport scheme. It contains two sentences which I find almost mutually contradictory. It is from Mr. Seán Ó Foghlú, Secretary General, Department of Education and Skills, dated 8 November responding to our request on whether Bus Éireann's auditors are satisfied that profits from the school transport scheme have not been used to cross-subsidise Bus Éireann. Mr. Ó Foghlú advises that reimbursement to Bus Éireann is on a cost-recovery basis for a range of costs identified as being incurred in the operation and administration of the scheme, together with other direct and indirect costs attributable to the work carried out for the Department, referred to as the transport management charge. A separate account for the school transport scheme is audited each year by independent auditors in Bus Éireann. The Department is satisfied that the appropriate assurances have been received from Bus Éireann that all moneys in the school transport scheme are retained within the scheme and expended only on the requirements of the scheme. We will note and publish this.

However, Mr. Ó Foghlú also contradicts that statement in his letter. The essential element of what he is saying is that reimbursement is on a cost-recovery basis under an old agreement going back to 1975. The letter refers to that. The last paragraph on the first page states:

The C&AG report referenced a surplus in the Transport Management Charge element of the costs. This amount was held by way of an uncommitted reserve by Bus Eireann to be used solely for the purposes of the school transport scheme. The uncommitted reserve was repaid in full to the Department in December 2018.

I cannot understand this letter stating there is not a surplus and it is on a cost-recovery basis. I can understand that there might be a surplus one year and it goes into the next year to meet known costs coming up in that year because it cannot be cut off at the end of the year. There is a follow through. However, at the end of all that the letter states, "The uncommitted reserve was repaid in full to the Department." Why would it hand money back to the Department if there was not a surplus? I do not understand that sentence.