John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Are the minutes of the meeting of 7 November agreed to? Agreed. Is there any matter arising from them?

Shane Ross (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On the work programme, can we ask representatives of the Central Bank to come in again? There have been at least three extremely high profile events in which there has been Central Bank intervention. One is the finding of the €70 million gap in Royal & Sun Alliance which is without a proper explanation at this stage. While the Central Bank's involvement is not clear, we need to get to the bottom of it. It opens the much wider question of how many other insurance companies are involved in the sort of practices we suspect are going on elsewhere and which have a major effect on profits.

The second issue is the takeover of Newbridge Credit Union by Permanent TSB. That was initiated, led and directed by the Central Bank. In that case there is direct Government involvement in which we will certainly be looking for value for money because of the relationship between Permanent TSB and the State.

In recent days news has broken of the credit card issue, where again the Central Bank is the regulator. I am talking about the regulator coming in in all three cases. An enormous number of questions need to be answered in all of them. We need to know if the Central Bank is doing its job properly and what it is doing in all three cases and generally. We need to ensure these types of problem are not spreading throughout the three industries involved.

Kieran O'Donnell (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The committee's role is to get value for the public purse. From that perspective, would it be in order to call in the Governor to discuss Newbridge Credit Union? He visits once or twice a year. We should do so on the basis of the potential cost to the State. We should take it from that perspective, linking with what Deputy Shane Ross said.

Mary Lou McDonald (Dublin Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I support Deputies Shane Ross and Kieran O'Donnell. It would be appropriate to call in the Governor of the Central Bank at this time.

I wish to raise another issue on the State's procurement practices. As members will know, there is a new office for centralised procurement and a move under way to save substantial moneys for the public purse, which is welcome. However, there are some issues of concern about certain sectoral competitions. I am thinking specifically about the stationery contract for schools and academic institutions. I have acquainted myself with some of the issues involved, which are quite serious. I would go so far as to say there is a real possibility that far from saving money in some instances, this centralised procurement arrangement might prove costly. There are concerns about quality, proper invoicing and predatory pricing. I intend to write to the Cathaoirleach officially on the matter, but I am taking the opportunity to flag the matter as an issue of concern that would most appropriately be examined by the committee.

John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will deal with the first item, Deputy Shane Ross's request. The Central Bank is not accountable directly to us, unless the Comptroller and Auditor General carries out a report. Therefore, we would not normally ask its representatives to appear before the committee; we are precluded from bringing them before it. However, I agree with the Deputy that a considerable amount of taxpayers' money is now being directed towards saving institutions. In some way the Committee of Public Accounts needs to have some overview or input into the conversation on these matters because they may come before us for consideration in years to come. Why not do it now when the issues are live in order to express concern? The electorate expresses concern, as do members. While I understand the accountability role, we need to have some input. Perhaps we should ask the clerk to follow up on Deputy Shane Ross's proposal. We should ask him to find some way of bringing in the regulator, representatives of the bank or whoever it might be to discuss these issues. We might also call in departmental officials who would be directly responsible in terms of their accountability for taxpayers' money; that is from where the money comes.

Clerk to the Committee:

I shall pursue the issue.

Shane Ross (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chairman for his response. I would like us to invite the Governor or the new regulator who is pretty much invisible - it would be nice to make him visible. However, I am talking about something immediate; I am not talking about negotiating with them about coming in. If the committee is to be relevant, we should be seen to respond to these issues immediately. We do not want the people concerned to simply come in at at a time that suits them; we would like to see them next Thursday. Can we do this?

John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Arising from public concern, the Deputy has expressed his point of view that we ask the clerk to go ahead and make these inquiries and facilitate a meeting, if possible, in the shortest period of time.

Shane Ross (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will the clerk specifically ask that we have a meeting in the next week?

Clerk to the Committee:

I can do so.

John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Shane Ross (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chairman.

John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The second item with regard to procurement raised by Deputy Mary Lou McDonald is a big issue, one I had hoped we would discuss with the representatives of the Department when they last came before the committee. I requested the newly appointed person responsible for procurement to come before the committee on that day, but we did not discuss the procurement issue. What the Deputy has stated is quite true; there is much concern in the small and medium enterprise sector about procurement policy. We are running out of days as we fill our work programme, but it is a big issue and I will ask the clerk, with the agreement of members, to schedule an early meeting in order that we can deal with procurement issues, as outlined by the Deputy. If she wishes, we can write informally and this can be part of the request.

The meeting requested by Deputy Shane Ross will be held as soon as possible, while the meeting requested by Deputy Mary Lou McDonald will be held if we can schedule it. As agreed last week, even if it is not held on a Thursday, we will have a meeting to facilitate the people concerned.

John Deasy (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The person we should invite is the director of credit institutions supervision who is the head of oversight within the Central Bank when it comes to credit unions, as opposed to the Financial Regulator as such.

John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will include that in the proposal. Is that agreed? Agreed.

No. 3A on the agenda is correspondence from Accounting Officers and Ministers. Correspondence was received on 7 November from the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Alan Shatter, on the need to review the legal code and investigate processes with regard to white collar crime. This correspondence arose from proceedings at a previous meeting. I ask committee members to note this correspondence and perhaps we might examine it in the context of the bank stabilisation report which is being concluded.

No. 3A.2 is correspondence, dated 8 November 2013, from Mr. Martin Whelan of NAMA on the involvement of NAMA in Mill Shopping Centre, Clondalkin. The correspondence is to be noted.

No. 3A.3 is correspondence, dated 12 November 2013, from Mr. Robert Watt, Secretary General, Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, providing information requested at the meeting of 3 October. The correspondence is to be noted. It was only received yesterday and is now on the agenda. I propose that it be published, but some of the answers are not answers. It is quite appalling that it took so long for the Department to respond to us and, in my opinion, the information contained in some of the answers is simply not good enough. We should consider it more fully at our next meeting. I will give members the opportunity to read the correspondence and look at the questions asked and the replies given. They should bear in mind the length of time it took to provide us with the replies and that some of the questions have not been answered. Deputy Sean Fleming raised this issue at our last meeting. I propose to include it for discussion at our next meeting before the witnesses come before us and include with it the minutes we receive from the Department to examine the quality of the answers given.

No. 3B.1 is correspondence, dated 5 November 2013, from Augustus Cullen Solicitors for Marie O’Sullivan regarding The Warrens Wicklow Hostel. The correspondence is to be noted.

No. 3B.2 is correspondence received on 7 November from an anonymous source regarding consultancy fees of €186 million paid by AIB in 2011. The correspondence is to be noted. This is not a matter for the committee. As AIB is 99% owned by the State, we will send it to the Department of Finance for its view on the use of consultants, how they were paid and the tender process involved. While it is not specifically a matter for the committee, it is similar to the question raised by Deputy Shane Ross. We should insist on a full and comprehensive answer from the Department of Finance on these issues because taxpayers' money is involved. There is no point in examining the matter long after the event.

No. 3B.3 is correspondence, dated 16 November 2013, from Mr. Seán Ó Foghlú, Secretary General, Department of Education and Skills, on complaints made to the Minister in 2008 by Councillor Padge Reck. The correspondence is to be noted and a copy forwarded to Councillor Reck.

No. 3B.4 is correspondence, dated 23 October 2013, from an anonymous source on governance issues at the Institute of Technology, Tralee. The correspondence is to be noted and a copy forwarded to the Department of Education and Skills and the Higher Education Authority for appropriate follow-up and a note on the action taken in dealing with the matter. I propose that we invite people involved in the sector because we have received a number of complaints about institutes of technology. An issue in one institution was raised in the House yesterday by a Deputy who will be writing to us about it. Perhaps we might examine the correspondence collectively as a unit. We will produce a report on Waterford Institute of Technology and it may be opportune to bring in the complaints we have received about the institutes of technology and include a commentary on them in the report.

No. 3C is documents related to today’s meeting. No. 3C.1 is correspondence received on 11 November from Dr. Ambrose McLoughlin, Secretary General, Department of Health regarding a report on medical cards and matters to be considered at this meeting. The correspondence is to be noted and published.

No. 3C.2 is correspondence received on 11 November from Dr. Ambrose McLoughlin, Secretary General, Department of Health, on briefing material on matters to be considered at this meeting. The correspondence is to be noted and published.

No. 3C.3 is correspondence received on 13 November from Mr. Tony O’Brien, director general, HSE, including his opening statement. The correspondence is to be noted and published.

No. 3C.4 is correspondence received on 13 November from Dr. Ambrose McLoughlin including his opening statement. The correspondence is to be noted and published.

No. 4 is reports, statements and accounts received since our meeting on 24 October. No. 4.1 is the annual report from Pobal, while No. 4.2 concerns the local government fund. These items are to be noted. Pobal allocated money to the Tipperary hostel, which is a question which is to come before us again. We should ask it about the money it allocated and perhaps obtain information from the other agencies on the amounts allocated by them to this project and examine the company now in charge on whether it is sustainable with reference to the accounts.

The work programme is on screen. I propose that we meet the Dublin Docklands Development Authority, DDDA, on 6 February 2014 to examine its financial statements for 2012. We are finalising a date with Professor Niamh Brennan in respect of the DDDA Glass Bottle site. As soon as we agree a date, she will appear before us.

No. 6 is other business. The agenda for the meeting on Thursday, 21 November is that at 10 a.m. we will meet representatives of the National Gallery of Ireland to examine the 2012 annual report of the Comptroller and Auditor General - chapter 15, staff appointments at the National Gallery of Ireland, and Vote 34 - National Gallery of Ireland. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Shane Ross (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Are representatives of the Central Bank coming in on that day? I imagine we could dump the National Gallery of Ireland for the Central Bank.

John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We can deal with both, one after the other. It is agreed to meet the National Gallery of Ireland on 21 November, as stated, and that if the Central Bank is agreeable to coming before the committee on that date, we meet its representatives before or after the session with the National Gallery of Ireland. We have also agreed to examine at that meeting the replies and minutes from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. Most members have indicated they are anxious to make a contribution during this meeting.