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

We will deal with No. 1, the minutes of the meeting of 14 November 2013. Are the minutes agreed? Agreed. If there are no matters arising from the minutes, we will deal with correspondence.

No. 3 is correspondence received since our meeting on Thursday, 14 November 2013. No. 3A is correspondence from Accounting Officers and-or Ministers. The correspondence from the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform providing information requested on 13 October 2013 was published with the exception of point 11 relating to public private partnerships. This was deferred from our last meeting. At the last meeting, we agreed to look at the various minutes received up to now and at what the responses have been and maybe do a note for the members.

No. 3A.1 is correspondence dated 13 November 2013 from Mr. Martin Shanahan, chief executive officer of Forfás, in response to questions raised at our meeting on 17 October 2013, to be noted and published. This issue relates to the rent of office space which is vacant and it is a matter on which we will follow up in a forthcoming report. We will also take up this matter with the Office of Public Works because it is a scandalous waste of public funds, amounting to €1.4 million per year.

No. 3A.2 is correspondence dated 7 November 2013 from Dr. Olive Braiden, chair of the governor and guardians of the National Gallery of Ireland. It is a response to the invitation to attend the committee today and it is to be noted. In terms of how we will deal with this matter, I note the point made by Dr. Braiden that the issues relating to the payment to the director are for the gallery and the oversight Department and are not directly for the director who accepted the job. However, the committee can decide how it will approach this.

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

Mr. Rainbird should be present and available for questioning, if necessary. I cannot see any reason he should not be. It would be very odd for him not to be here.

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

In regard to the Garda Commissioner contacting the committee about the data or the letters sent to it-----

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

We will wait until we get to it. I will call the Deputy then. No. 3A.3 is correspondence from Mr. Tony O'Brien, director general of the HSE, regarding the internal audit report, section 80, agencies' remuneration, which is to be noted. This report was circulated to the committee last Thursday while the HSE officials were present dealing with the issue of medical cards. The issue of top-up payments made to senior staff in the voluntary sector is the subject matter of considerable public comment. We had intended that the matter be dealt with when HSE officials appear before us again in February, but given the level of payments revealed, it may be appropriate to deal with it sooner than that.

Gerald Nash (Louth, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As the Chairman pointed out, the public is appalled at what has been revealed in this report and what has been in the media in recent days in regard to top-up payments in voluntary hospitals and in a range of State agencies which depend on the public purse for a significant amount of their resources. It paints a picture of a "because I'm worth it" sort of culture which was endemic in some of these organisations throughout the Celtic tiger years but it seems it has not gone away. Looking at the report, some of the reportage around it and some of the public commentary, some of the agencies involved have been playing a game of cat and mouse with the HSE and the Department of Health. It is appropriate we hold special meetings on this issue of serious public interest. I suggest we do so next week and not only should we invite the Department of Health and the HSE to appear before committee but we should also invite the CEOs of the voluntary hospitals and the chairs of the boards of management. One might ask why we should invite the chairs of the boards. The chairs of the boards and the boards themselves are responsible for setting pay policy in those hospitals and agencies. It is important to insist on their appearance before the committee.

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

We have an internal audit report from the HSE before us. We held meetings on public sector allowances which the various body attended. This is very much in that vein. We should follow a similar procedure in terms of what we do. We have a defined report, which could form the basis for further work by this committee. The meetings we held on public sector allowances, where we brought in the various groups, provide a framework which worked well. It is very much in the public interest that we look at this issue. We have a base document from which to work. That is the way we should proceed.

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

There is obviously an urgency to this and we should be seen to react quickly. We should do so next week, if we are going to do so.

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

I understand the report was given to the clerk just before the last meeting when the HSE was present dealing with the medical card issue.

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

We should have had advance sight of that. It was not sufficient for the director general of the HSE to state he had provided a report at the start of the meeting. We should have had advance notice of this report.

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

I did not become aware of the report until the clerk mentioned to me after the meeting that it had been made available. It is not the right way to do business. The Committee of Public Accounts had expressed the view that it needed clarification on this when it first emerged in 2012. The report was given to the clerk when we were discussing the medical card issue, but it was too late for us to mention it, flag it or have a briefing on it. I am disappointed with the HSE and the Department of Health that that was the case.

Given the content of the report and the concern being expressed in all quarters about the payments, I agree with Deputy Nash that we should bring in those concerned as soon as possible. We have a timetable for next week and a schedule for Thursday, but we should insist the HSE appears before us on Tuesday or Wednesday to explain the circumstances of this report. I will ask for clarification to see if the CEOs and the chairs of the boards can be brought before us, or on how we will handle this. That will be a matter of procedure. We cannot have them all in on the same day, so perhaps we should start with the Secretary General of the Department of Health and the HSE. We should insist on an early hearing and I suggest Tuesday or Wednesday to accommodate members in terms of other meetings and so on.

Perhaps we could write to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform on the practice of top-up payments, although that might be the wrong Department and I am open to advice on this. Can this be found in other Departments? We have an example today in regard to the National Gallery of Ireland of, I think, roughly €90,000 gross. We want to establish whether these payments are being made across the system. Perhaps we need to raise it with all Departments to see what their understanding of these payments is in the context of senior executives or employees in the agencies for which they are responsible. I suggest we bring in the Secretary General of the Department of Health and the HSE next Tuesday or Wednesday and that we write to each Department to determine whether the practice exists in other Departments and that we seek that clarification. We can conduct our business from there. Is it agreed we start with the HSE? Agreed.

No. 3A.4 is correspondence dated 14 November 2012 from Mr. Fred Barry, chief executive officer of the National Roads Authority, providing further information arising from issues raised at our meeting on 7 February 2013, to be noted and published. No. 3A.5 is correspondence dated 18 November 2013 from Mr. Neil Whoriskey, secretary of the Central Bank of Ireland, in response to an invitation to attend a meeting with the committee. That was circulated to members. I understand a date has been set for the Central Bank of Ireland to appear before the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform and that the Governor has relied on the fact that the only time he appears before this committee is on foot of a report from the Comptroller and Auditor General but we do not have such a report.

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

I think we should note it, without accepting what the Governor says. What he is trying to say is that he will appear before the Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform on his own terms. This is important because the Governor did appear before. There was a reply to the Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform to the effect that the bank does not go into specific cases. On television last Wednesday or Thursday, however, the Governor went very deeply into the case of Newbridge Credit Union and answered specific questions on it. I would not like to accept the assertion, therefore, that representatives from the Central Bank do not answer questions on specific cases posed by this committee or the Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform when they do so on "Prime Time". It is probably not worth making a huge issue of this right now because we have enough on our plate. That is the practical aspect of it but I would not accept what he says.

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

I would be very wary of any State body constructing a convention with regard to its appearance or non-appearance before an Oireachtas committee. That is the issue for me. The Central Bank's interpretation and definition of when and why its representatives should appear before an Oireachtas committee is questionable.

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

One particular sentence says that it would be the "preference of the bank" that its encounters with the Oireachtas on such matters of policy should be through the established channels, but I do not give a hoot about the preference of the bank.

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

This is a question for the committee and also the public. It is very important, in the context of what has happened in this country in the past five or six years, that these bodies must be accountable to the Oireachtas. We must insist upon our mandate with regard to the appearance or non-appearance of representatives of State bodies. To use the Comptroller and Auditor General as a trapdoor is unwise of the Central Bank.

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

I have a question for the Comptroller and Auditor General. In terms of various chapters his office has completed on the banking and credit union systems, is there a specific area that would have been covered by previous reports that relates to the work of the Governor of the Central Bank?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

There is not anything that is directly related, as far as I can recall. I can certainly check that and revert to the committee on it.

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

Was there not a chapter on bank stabilisation at some point?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

There was a chapter on bank stabilisation in 2011.

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

Would it not be reasonable to say that the office is doing a follow-up report on bank stabilisation? Our role as a committee is to ensure value for money for taxpayers in the context of public spending. Would it be possible to propose an extension of previous work done on bank stabilisation, involving the credit union movement and to suggest that the office of the Comptroller and Auditor General do a follow-up report? Would that fall within the ambit of the Comptroller and Auditor General?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

What we did over a succession of reports over four years was to try, in effect, to bring the whole thing together because it was a very confused picture. It was difficult to try to summarise all of the interventions. There were transfers of funding between one entity and another, multiple sources of funding to support credit institutions and so on. The report that this committee is preparing is drawing the threads of that together, based on the various hearings that were undertaken. It is certainly something to which we will constantly have an eye but it would be something that would fall to be reported in 2013 and that is not the timescale this committee is looking at.

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

In the context of the continuing reports to be done by the Comptroller and Auditor General on bank stabilisation and the fact that we have forthcoming report of our own regarding costs to taxpayers of the problems with the banks and credit unions, there might be follow-up correspondence with the Governor of the Central Bank to explain the context in which we are inviting him to appear before us. We are seeking an overview from him, following on from the general process to date, and a discussion about the fact that €54 million of taxpayer's money has gone into a credit union in Newbridge.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The funding the Deputy is talking about is coming out of the credit institutions resolution fund. Since August of this year I have been given responsibility for the audit of the account of that fund. That is prepared by the Central Bank but it is not an account of the Central Bank itself. I am not sure when that will be complete-----

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

Can the Comptroller and Auditor General explain that again, please?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

In essence, the Central Bank will be producing a special account relating to the credit institutions resolution fund. It is not a financial statement of the Central Bank itself. I am not quite sure how that fits in with this committee's remit.

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

I think the Comptroller and Auditor General has answered the question very well. There is a clear responsibility in the office of the Comptroller and Auditor General for credit institutions. I think we invited the director of credit institutions and insurance supervision to appear before us, if I am not mistaken. I think her name is Fiona Muldoon. She is the individual at the Central Bank who is responsible for credit unions. It is very clear the office of the Comptroller and Auditor General has that kind of remit now.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

In a way, it is not so much my remit as the remit of this committee because its Standing Orders determine that the Central Bank-----

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

Yes, I will rephrase that. This committee now has that kind of remit.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Certainly the clerk to the committee and the legal people present could look at the process that will be followed once the credit institutions resolution fund account is audited and presented to the Dáil.

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

I will try to clarify with the members the way we go forward from here. We received a letter which was received yesterday from the retired regulator of the credit unions offering to come before the committee because of the fact that some of these issues would have come up during the course of his time in office. Would it be acceptable to members to launch our report when it is finished and, arising from that report, to ask the retired regulator, the Central Bank, the person responsible for banking in the Department of Finance and credit union officials to come in?

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

We should invite representatives from the office of the director of credit institutions and insurance supervision.

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

Yes, and the retired person who has offered to come in.

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

Is the Chairman saying that the former Financial Regulator has offered to come in?

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

No, not the regulator. The former registrar of credit unions.

Paul Connaughton (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Was there any previous questioning of him at all?

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

No. He just wrote to us. He wrote to us in relation to the Newbridge Credit Union issue.

Paul Connaughton (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Did he write regarding just Newbridge Credit Union and not the credit union movement as a whole?

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

I do not have the letter with me but he mentioned the difficulties in credit unions that came to light during his term in office. He volunteered to come in. Perhaps, in the context of the examination of the bank stabilisation report, with the people we have identified as potential witnesses, we could include the person who wrote to us and the current holder of that office.

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

It is worth recapping on what has been said. We are dealing with public money. In the context of Newbridge Credit Union, that may be the case. I am saying that the taxpayer may, in some cases, be affected by this. What is more important, I understand it is the Comptroller and Auditor General's opinion, in the context of this committee's remit in this area and in terms of dealing directly with the Central Bank, that this committee has jurisdiction.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

We certainly need to look at it in regard to the Credit Institutions Resolution Fund. That fund was established at the very end of 2011 and before the end of 2011, a total of €250 million was transferred into it from the Exchequer under legislation. There was no provision for accounting and audit of the fund at that time but this was rectified in legislation in July 2013. I was given audit responsibility for it.

Mr. Whoriskey has mentioned that the Resolution Fund was established by the Minister for Finance and that he "agreed the provision of the required funding for the transfer of Newbridge Credit Union to Permanent TSB". There is a role for the Department as well as the Central Bank.

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

That joins the dots. That opinion should be relayed directly and immediately to the Central Bank. Its interpretation should be questioned by the committee.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Could I ask that it be looked at by the legal advisers before it is put forward? I am reacting to the correspondence that is front of me.

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

We will draft a reply in line with the opinion that has been expressed this morning. We will check it with the legal section and then issue a response.

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

That is fine as long as we do not accept the thesis of the Central Bank. To put it bluntly, it seems the Central Bank is ducking us. There is no doubt the Central Bank officials do not want to come before the committee. They are finding all sorts of reasons and sounding all sorts of phantom precedents that may or may not be a reason for not coming before the committee. I think we should make it clear in the letter that we do not accept their thesis that they should not come before the committee to discuss Newbridge Credit Union when they are talking to the media about it.

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

I must agree with Deputy Ross. If the management of the Central Bank were present this morning they would be embarrassed and would accept what the Comptroller and Auditor General has had to say. I do not think they can construct such a convention.

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

We will express robustly the opinion of members, check the remainder with the legal section and then issue the letter. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Is it agreed that we will publish the report on bank stabilisation next week and extend the invitations to various people to discuss it? Agreed.

I will deal with the next two items together: correspondence dated 19 November 2013 from Mr. Billy Hawkes, the Data Protection Commissioner, on the unauthorised disclosure of data of the Committee of Public Accounts, and No. 3A.7, correspondence dated 15 November 2013 from Commissioner Martin Callinan on the same topic.

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

My understanding is that the information was sent unopened by the committee to the Oireachtas legal adviser. Is that the case? As I understand it, the information may have been taken from the Garda PULSE system and the Commissioner has registered some concern that there may have been personal data on those files and that he has responsibility, in his opinion, for that data. Has the Oireachtas counsel given advice in this regard to the Committee of Public Accounts and have we engaged in drafting a response to the Commissioner? If so, what will that response be?

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

I will ask the clerk to state the position.

Clerk to the Committee:

I will respond to the final question first. Members will see on their screens a draft reply which has been perused by the Parliamentary Legal Adviser. The position is that documentation was sent to the committee, but given our sensitivity to the related issues of data protection and privilege, and the law that now states that we can refuse certain documentation, the committee agreed a number of weeks ago that we would immediately forward the documentation to the Parliamentary Legal Adviser for appropriate counsel to look at and identify the issues. We have not received that legal advice. We have scheduled the meeting with the Commissioner for 23 January, the second week after the Christmas recess. We will look at the Comptroller and Auditor General's report. As Deputy Deasy stated, no member of the Committee of Public Accounts or the secretariat has the documentation that was sent to the committee in their possession and the documents are with the Parliamentary Legal Adviser.

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

Can we deal with this issue quickly and ask for an opinion to be given rather than wait until 22 January 2014?

Clerk to the Committee:

Yes, we will. It is proposed that we issue a formal reply to both Commissioner Martin Callinan and the Data Protection Commissioner, Mr. Billy Hawkes, explaining what we have done and, as soon as the committee is briefed by the legal adviser, we will deal with the substantive issue of what to do with that documentation. The Chairman has a letter ready and we will issue a reply today.

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

Pending the advice, will the Clerk to the Committee clarify that the personal data has not been compromised in any way? That is the critical issue. The documentation has gone straight to the counsel's office and we are awaiting their decision.

Clerk to the Committee:

Yes, absolutely.

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

That was a decision of the Committee of Public Accounts. The reply that is being issued has been checked by the Parliamentary Legal Adviser.

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

I would not like there to be any suggestion of compromised documentation, so it was worth clarifying that that was the case.

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

To whom was the documentation sent?

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

It was sent to the Chairman and I gave it to the Clerk immediately.

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

Why did we not open it?

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

It was agreed by the committee to send it to the Parliamentary Legal Adviser for legal advice. The whistleblower had come forward and asked to appear before the committee and supplied the information. The information needed to be checked by the legal advisers so that the committee could be protected.

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

I was probably not present at the time this decision was taken. Is there a reputational issue?

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

To make it clear, at the time that we received the documentation, it was made clear by the Committee of Public Accounts that we were only interested in the system failure and the loss of revenue to the State. That is all we are interested in. The committee is not interested in names or places. Arising from the Comptroller and Auditor General's report on the same type of issue, the committee acted on it. I understood at the time the Comptroller and Auditor General had received information from Garda sources; perhaps this information should be given to the Comptroller General. It is relevant to our discussion because it is information above and beyond what the Comptroller and Auditor General has included in his report. It was felt that because of the nature of the information, we should get legal advice. That is what we have done.

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

We must be very careful that we not allowing information that should be in the public arena to be kept out of it. I would be slightly worried about that.

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

We are trying to strike a balance. We are having it examined in the context of the claim of the significant loss of money to the State and the breakdown in the system, while at the same time working in accordance with the data protection laws. I think we should not be stopped in the context of our examination of the information relevant to the systems failure and the loss of funds to the State. Whether that means we hand the information to the Comptroller and Auditor General to do a report or give it to somebody else will depend on the legal advice that we receive.

I agree with members that we should deal with this as quickly as possible. It is a matter of public interest. It is a matter of concern to the Garda Commissioner. It is also a matter of concern to the whistleblower, who claims he was within his legal rights to present this to the Oireachtas. In fact, he says he was encouraged by the Minister to do so. He wrote to this committee and we acted on it. He would claim that it was within the law for him to do what he did, and that we can examine it on the basis of loss of revenue. That is the angle he is taking on the matter. It is not a question of naming names or anything like that. It was decided that it was only fair and proper, in order to protect the committee, to ask for legal advice before getting to the examination. That is what we have done. The data is also protected. It has not gone anywhere. It has not been examined. It is with the legal advisers. I think that is appropriate and proper. I agree with Deputy Ross that any information which should be in the public domain should be placed in the public domain. Would Mr. McCarthy like to comment?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Obviously, this is a classic pass-the-parcel situation. I have not seen the information that has been provided to the committee. It sounds from the description as though it is similar to the material we received. As I said in my report, we do not have the power to investigate any allegations of illegality or wrongdoing. We did not deal with that in the examination or in the report. We have also written to the Data Protection Commissioner to ask for his advice on what we should do now with the material. Obviously, we have to retain certain information, such as working papers, in support of the report we presented. We need to destroy or return to the Garda Commissioner any information that is not relevant to that.

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

Should we not give Comptroller and Auditor General the information and documents that have been received by the committee, given that he has been able to receive and deal with similar documentation? It relates to a loss of revenue to the State. We are not investigating individual gardaí or the individuals who were given these points. We are investigating the loss of money to the State. If the paperwork is similar, is it not right for the Comptroller and Auditor General to examine these documents and produce a report based an extension of his existing report?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I imagine that the committee could possibly ask the legal advisers to comment on that. There is an obligation on someone who receives or holds personal data in terms of what can be done with it and how it can be protected. Our policy is to take the information we require for the purpose in hand. Obviously, if material is presented to us and it raises questions of concern-----

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

If the Comptroller and Auditor General had received the information, rather than its having been sent to the Chair, what would he have done with it?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I do not know whether the information the committee received is very similar to or the same as the information we received. When we got our information, we looked to identify the systemic control issues of relevance to our responsibilities, which are to investigate and report on the proper collection of revenues due to the State. We have reported on it. We have completed that process, unless some other aspect of the examination is thrown up by the information the committee has received. We cannot know until we have looked at it. The committee would need to be sure it has the power within the data protection legislation to hand that information to anybody other than to the Garda Commissioner.

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

Many issues such as this are going around right now. The Garda Commissioner appeared before an Oireachtas committee meeting yesterday to discuss criticism from the Garda Ombudsman Commission with regard to information relating to informants. They had asked for information to be passed on from An Garda Síochána, but it was not forthcoming. There was some criticism in that regard. This has gone to the legal counsel. There may be policy issues here with regard to delineation. Obviously, there is a policy opinion in the Comptroller and Auditor General's Office and they are comfortable with that. I think there are larger policy issues when it comes to a committee such as the Committee of Public Accounts with regard to using and dealing with information. In the last few days, I have been dealing with the HSE and the Garda in my constituency. In this instance, the HSE did not share the information with the Garda, which is unbelievable considering what the actual issue is. Legal counsel deals strictly with what is prescribed by law. I think there could be policy issues with regard to the balance surrounding this. Deputy Ross pointed to that. It seems to be an issue that is growing every day in this building.

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

The Comptroller and Auditor General has a report before us that is based on the same issue. The information that has been given to the committee seems to be about the same issue. It is about the loss of revenue to the State, and it is about a system failure of some kind. Therefore, on foot of the Comptroller and Auditor General's report and because of the apparent nature of the documents in the files that have been given to us, I will ask the Clerk to ensure the parliamentary legal adviser is asked specifically whether it is possible for the files to be examined by the Comptroller and Auditor General, with a view to providing an extra comment with regard to his report if the documents prove to be of importance to that report. If they are of importance to the Comptroller and Auditor General's report, that means they are of importance to our work. We should explore that with the legal adviser so we are clear on what we are trying to do here. It seems to me that we are examining fresh information which has come forward and which relates to the Comptroller and Auditor General's report. Clearly, we should examine this and get back to the Garda Commissioner as soon as possible on it. There is a public interest here, as Deputy Ross has said. We should not forget that. If we can conclude all of that investigation, particularly the question around the Comptroller and Auditor General and the current report, then we will be able to try to resolve the issue. Is that agreed?

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

It is agreed. I presume there is no question of our seeing the documentation. It has not been circulated to the committee. I understand it cannot be circulated. Is that the case?

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

It will not be because we have decided to seek legal advice. That is only right and proper for the protection of the committee and its members.

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

Okay. That is fine.

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

I will move on to individual correspondence. No. 3B.1 is correspondence dated 8 November 2013 from Bernie Lloyd, who is the PRO of the Davitt Road North and Windmill Hill residents' group regarding the Wexford courthouse project. It is to be noted. This correspondence is ongoing. It seems that different positions are being taken by different groups. We will forward this correspondence to the Courts Service to see whether there is any value to be added in engaging in a further round of correspondence. If the Comptroller and Auditor General, having audited the service's accounts, is satisfied about the procurement of this property in Wexford, there will not be a role for the committee in this regard. We will ask for that clarification.

No. 3B.2 is correspondence dated 7 September 2013 from Mr. Eamon Power of the Tipperary hostel project. It is to be noted. We have contacted the relevant bodies and Departments that funded the hostel project. We will discuss it further when these submissions are received. As this is a matter of public concern and urgency, we ask the Departments to which we have written to respond promptly.

No. 3B.3 is correspondence dated 13 November 2013 from Mr. Tony O’Brien, who is the director general of the HSE, regarding St. Catherine's special school. It is to be noted.

We will defer consideration of Nos. 3B.4 and 3B.6 from Mr. William Treacy until next week.

No. 3B.5 is correspondence dated 6 November 2013 from Mr. Harry Lawlor, Managing Director, HL Commodity Foods Limited, Hospital, County Limerick. This correspondence is to be noted and a copy forwarded to Shannon Development for an update on the matter. We have had previous correspondence from the company. I am anxious to get clarification on the issue as soon as possible. No. 3B.7 is correspondence dated 14 November 2013 from Mr. Tom Keary, Kilcolgan, County Galway, re issues pertaining to unpaid hours by Mid-Western Health Board, now HSE - to be noted and forwarded to the HSE for a note on the matter.

No. 3C is documents relating to today's committee meeting. No. 3C.1 is correspondence received on 19 November from Dr. Olive Braiden, Chair of the Governor and Guardians of the National Gallery of Ireland, re opening statement. No. 3C.2 is correspondence received on 19 November from Mr. Sean Rainbird, Director, National Gallery of Ireland, re his opening statement. No. 4 is reports, statements and accounts received since our meeting of 14 November - Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology, Local Government Fund and safefood.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I think the Chairman's note refers to the Local Government Fund. It is actually Letterkenny Institute of Technology.

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

Is that No. 4.2?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Yes. The correct reference is on the screen. Therefore, it is Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology.

Clerk to the Committee:

It is appropriate that-----

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

No. 5 is our work programme. We have agreed to have a meeting with the HSE and the Department next Tuesday or Wednesday. The Clerk is suggesting that we take the HSE first and then the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, as that is the oversight Department, followed by the voluntary bodies. We will work on the schedule of meetings and determine who is available and bring them in as soon as possible, starting next Tuesday. Next Thursday we shall have a meeting with the Dublin Docklands Development Authority, including the former chief executive. How soon can we deal the matter? I think there is another person who has to come in to give evidence.

Clerkk to the Committee:

I have asked Professor Brennan but she has not yet replied. I will contact her this afternoon.

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

Tell her we are to wrap up on the report.

Clerk to the Committee:

Yes. We need to wrap up on the report.

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

No. 6 is other business. Can we agree the agenda for Thursday, 28 November 2013, when we will meet Mr. Paul Maloney, former chief executive of the DDDA, for our continuing examination of that issue? Is that agreed? Agreed.