Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

No. 9 is the Credit Institutions Resolution Fund and that received a clear audit opinion. No. 10 is the Strategic Banking Corporation of Ireland, which received a clear audit opinion. However, I drew attention to a disclosure in the account which deals with the deferral of a loan facility repayment of €8.5 million which was due from an on-lender and the renegotiation of the terms of the loan facility with the on-lender to provide additional funding of €20 million.

I move to the grouping of State bodies and subsidiary companies. No. 11 is the Private Security Authority, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 12 is the National Standards Authority of Ireland, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 13 is the Child and Family Agency, Tusla, which received a clear audit opinion, but in that case I drew attention to the disclosure of a material level of noncompliance with the procurement rules.

No. 14 is the Residential Tenancies Board. It received a clear audit opinion but I drew attention to three matters that are actually interconnected. The first is the cost overrun and delay in the delivery of an online management system for tenancy registrations.

There is also noncompliance with legislation in respect of the levying of late annual registration penalties and the repayment of penalties that were charged. The third matter is noncompliant procurement of business processing services. All of these were related issues.

No. 15 is the Heritage Council, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 16 is the Environmental Protection Agency, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 17 is the Economic and Social Research Institute, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 18 is the Adoption Authority of Ireland, which received a clear audit opinion.

No. 19 is the Commission for Communications Regulation. The accounting period there is July 2022 to June 2023. That received a clear audit opinion.

No. 20 is the Charities Regulatory Authority, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 21 is the charities fund, which is managed by the Charities Regulatory Authority. That received a clear audit opinion. No. 22 is the Industrial Development Agency Ireland, for 2023, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 23 is the Law Reform Commission, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 24 is the Health and Safety Authority, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 25 is the Office of the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 26 is the Irish Auditing and Accounting Supervisory Authority, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 27 is the Approved Housing Bodies Regulatory Authority, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 28 is Transport Infrastructure Ireland, which received a clear audit opinion.

No. 29 is the National Transport Authority, which received a clear audit opinion. In that case, however, I drew attention to the disclosure by the authority of delays and an estimated €40 million, or 27%, cost overrun on the national train control centre project, which is in development.

No. 30 is the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, which received a clear audit opinion.

No. 31 is Rásaíocht Con Éireann-Irish Retired Greyhound Trust, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 32 is Shelbourne Greyhound Stadium Limited, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 33 is Greyhound Racing Operations Ireland Limited, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 34 is Abargrove Limited, which received a clear audit opinion. These four companies are all subsidiaries of Rásaíocht Con Éireann and the group accounts were presented before the summer break; the subsidiaries were submitted a little bit later.

No. 35 is the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 36 is the National Oil Reserves Agency designated activity company, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 37 is An Bord Bia, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 38 is the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, which received a clear audit opinion.

No. 39 is Teagasc, which received a clear audit opinion. I drew attention, however, to a sum of €503,000 of settlements paid, or provided for, to 49 farm clients due to unsuccessful applications and other work undertaken by Teagasc on the clients’ behalf for a range of Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine schemes. The advice was given and assistance was provided but the applications failed so these were compensation payments. Associated legal fees of €28,000 were also incurred.

No. 40 is the Land Development Agency, which received a clear audit opinion. I drew attention to the agency’s use of a spreadsheet-based accounting system that requires significant manual intervention. The board has stated it is planning to replace the system in 2024.

I will move on to the education sector. No. 41 is Dún Laoghaire Institute of Art, Design and Technology, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 42 is the Residential Institutions Statutory Fund Board, or Caranua, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 43 is the Technological University of the Shannon: Midlands Midwest for the period of account 2022 to 2023, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 44 is An tÚdarás um Ard-Oideachas, or the Higher Education Authority, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 45 is the State Examinations Commission, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 46 is the Educational Research Centre, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 47 is the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, which received a clear audit opinion.

No. 48 is Dundalk Institute of Technology, which received a clear audit opinion but attention is drawn to the institute having an operating deficit of €1.08 million in the year of account. It also incurred deficits in each of the previous three years. Note 2(a) explains the basis on which the governing body is satisfied to present the financial statements on a going concern basis and a plan to move back from operating in a deficit situation.

No. 49 is Mary Immaculate College for the period of account 2022 to 2023, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 50 is the National College of Art and Design for the period of account 2022 to 2023, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 51 is SOLAS, which received a clear audit opinion.

Turning to health bodies, No. 52 is the Irish Blood Transfusion Service, which received a clear audit opinion.

No. 53 is the Health Service Executive for 2023. It received a clear audit opinion on the financial statements but I drew attention to a significant number of issues that are elaborated on in the audit certificate I issued. We noted charges totalling €86.5 million related to the obsolescence of Covid-19 vaccines stocks; a provision totalling €12.5 million related to antigen tests expected to expire before they can be used; and a further €2.3 million spent on storage of obsolete PPE and hand gel to which I referred to on previous occasions. There was also a charge of €3.5 million concerning claims to a private insurer that were rejected as they had not been completed within the required timeframe. The HSE was unable to recover those charges. I also drew attention to a settlement of €30 million reached between the Health Service Executive and a private health insurer relating to the application of private patient treatment charges. This was income previously raised from the health insurer but there will now be a reimbursement of the health insurer. I drew attention to a continuing material level of non-compliance with procurement rules. The HSE has estimated this at 12% of its procurement but it is using a methodology the HSE accepts has limitations so it may not be a fully accurate picture. I drew attention to transfers to section 38 and 39 bodies not being covered by a relevant form of funding agreement and weakness in controls over fixed assets registered by the HSE. I also pointed out for the second year very high remuneration payments to certain employees, with the highest earner receiving almost €1 million in 2022, and some weaknesses in controls over payments to high earners. I drew attention to a settlement of an employment case involving a termination of employment payment amounting to €1.6 million to one individual, including €1.37 million paid in respect of loss of private income during a period of suspension. The individual was suspended on full pay but this was compensation for loss of earnings he or she otherwise might have had.

No. 54 is the Mental Health Commission, which received a qualified audit opinion. The reason it was qualified is that the accounts give a true and fair view except that they account for the costs of retirement benefit entitlements of staff only as they become payable.

That is a standard departure from accounting standards for health bodies. The Health Products Regulatory Authority, HPRA, which is No.55, received a qualified audit opinion on the same basis because of the manner in which it accounted for retirement benefits.

No. 56 is the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, which also received a qualified audit opinion on the basis of its treatment of retirement benefits. However, in that case, I drew attention to the disclosure of a material level of non-compliance with procurement rules.

No. 57 is the motor tax account. These are departmental funds. The motor tax account for 2023 received a clear audit opinion. The finance accounts received a clear audit opinion. The export guarantee account, which is more or less a dormant account, received a clear audit opinion.

No. 60, the credit union fund, received a clear audit opinion. I would just observe that for a group of 60, there does appear to be progress. In particular, there are fewer instances than might have been the case in the past where I am calling out non-competitive procurement. Our focus on it and the committee's focus on it has probably had an effect over time. It is good to note that. If members want to discuss any of those, I am happy to do so.