Mr. Seán Ó Foghlú:

First, I would like to clarify his role.

In February 2006, Waterford Institute of Technology submitted an application to the Minister for designation as a university under section 9 of the Universities Act. In February 2007, the Minister appointed Dr. Jim Port, of JM Consulting, to conduct a preliminary examination of the application, having regard, first, to the national strategy for the development of Irish higher education, second, to implications for regional development in the south east in the context of the national strategy and, third, to any likely implications for the overall structure of higher education in Ireland. Dr. Port submitted his report to the Department on 31 July 2007, we published it in February 2008 and it is available on the Department's website.

That was his particular role. Part of his undertaking of that role was a visit to WIT to meet various stakeholders. We understand he was given the agenda for whom he was to meet during that visit by the officers of WIT. We have tried to contact Dr. Port since the last meeting of the PAC and we have not been able to do so. We are working, therefore, on the basis of understandings, what we have on the files and whatever information our own officers have.

However, we will be seeking to speak further to Dr. Port. I understand that Waterford Institute of Technology has also been seeking to speak to him. The Department of Education and Skills - at the time known as the Department of Education and Science - paid the invoices provided by Dr. Port for all his travel to and from Bristol of which the Department was aware. This included his travel to Waterford for the visit which was organised by WIT. The Department was not aware that there was any private transport involved. As a result of examining the agenda for the visit, there was more than just Dr. Port in Waterford at one time of the day and in Dublin at a later time in the day. Unless different transport was involved, the president and the chair of WIT could well have been transported as well. Because we have not spoken to Dr. Port, we do not know who may or may not have been on the flight. We were not aware of the privately organised flight. From what we understand, Filton in England is close to where Dr. Port lives. He would have had a series of meetings during the preparation and finalisation of his report.

We were aware that a meeting was being arranged with the then Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern. Our files indicate that the Department did not know. We understand that Waterford was seeking to arrange this meeting and we are not sure whether this was at president level or at governing body level. We know from our files that on 26 June, Dr. Port told us the meeting was still arranged. We learned either the day before or the morning of the meeting - we are not quite sure because we have been unable to contact Dr. Port - that the meeting was going ahead. We sent some briefing material to the Taoiseach for the meeting. I spoke to the assistant secretary general involved. She does not recall whether it was just prior to the meeting or subsequently that she would have learned there had been a privately acquired aircraft involved in transporting Dr. Port. It would not have occurred to us that it had been organised or paid for by WIT. We were working on the understanding that it was privately provided. We did not pay any travel and subsistence for Dr. Port for the meeting on 29 June.

The statement which Mr. Boland read to the committee a few minutes ago is a briefing note which, we understand, WIT provided to the Comptroller and Auditor General late yesterday. The Department was informed by WIT two days ago about the various invoices. We asked for details which were provided. Because we have been unable to contact Dr. Port, we have been unable to verify the details from his point of view. However, he would not have been involved in requesting flights as these would have been organised on his behalf.