Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I will make just a couple of observations on the points raised. Regarding the car, I think what was applied for was a car allowance, which, effectively, would be a payment made to the chief executive as part of his or her salary, and there would be benefit-in-kind taxation of the allowance, but that was declined. What was agreed was that a company car would be provided, presumably on the basis that this person would be travelling around to racecourses and so on. That was that aspect of it.

NewERA is part of the NTMA and has a specific focus to advise Departments on commercial State bodies and issues that arise in that regard. Its role, therefore, was to examine the case that was made regarding the salary and to express a view on it. Because NewERA is part of the NTMA, it has a role that can be examined by the committee when it has the NTMA before it to explore a little more what it does, the nature of the advice it gives, how it arrives at its conclusions and so on.

Finally, my understanding is that when a pay level is determined, it is determined in relation to the post and not in relation to the individual. The example given was the Secretary General of the Department of Health. Anybody filling that post will attract that salary. It was not a salary determination for an individual. Similarly, here, it was, I think, the lower salary scale that was originally approved in, let us say, 2012 or whatever. It was never applied. The application was, effectively, to revise the pay rate for the role to the higher level. That was agreed, or at least recommended, by NewERA and approved by the Ministers.