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

My apologies for being late. I will explain later on. Are the minutes of the meeting of 11 December 2013 agreed? Agreed.

We will deal with matters arising from the minutes. The CRC contacted the clerk to inform him that following the resignation of the board of governors and the chief executive on 13 December 2013, John Cregan of the HSE is now acting interim administrator for the CRC and that with regard to follow-up information requested from the CRC at the meeting on 11 December 2013, Mr. Cregan will prepare a response to each matter as soon as the information is gathered. He took up duty yesterday.

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

There were some queries put by the committee.

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

There was some issue around those but that has been resolved now and we are going to have the information as requested brought to us.

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I understood the chief executive, who has since retired, had indicated he would come before the committee in a couple of weeks.

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

Yes. Next, we will deal with correspondence received since the meeting on Thursday, 12 December 2013, beginning with correspondence from Accounting Officers or Ministers.

No. 3A.1 is correspondence, dated 12 December, from Mr. Robert Watt, Secretary General, Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. It relates to further information requested at the meeting on 3 October 2013. Were all of the queries answered?

Clerk to the Committee:

They have all been answered but we need to analyse them and go back again because there were one or two issues whereby the answer was not full. I will go back to that.

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

No. 3A.2 is correspondence dated 12 December from Mr. Peter Brazel, remuneration, industrial relations and pensions division, Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, re follow-up from 27 November and 11 December. This is to be noted and published. This is relevant to today's meeting, at which we will deal with the unauthorised payments to staff under section 38.

No. 3A.3 is correspondence received on 13 December 2013 from Ms Mary Day, chief executive, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, re correspondence with CRC on pension arrangements. The correspondence is to be noted and published. We will deal with the matter this morning.

No. 3B is individual items of correspondence received. No. 3B.1 is correspondence dated 10 December from Mr. Martin Whelan, head of relationship management at NAMA. The correspondence is in reply to questions raised at the meeting on 27 November re SME and VAT payments to Revenue. The correspondence is to be noted. This was in response to an issue raised by Deputy Collins at the meeting on 27 November 2013.

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

Almost everyone has been following what has been carried in the media on NAMA in recent days.

That is significant. Because the matter is so pressing, NAMA should be given an opportunity to respond to the committee immediately while these allegations are ongoing. It seems many people would like to see NAMA damaged and leaking information to the media is one way of doing this. We need to be careful and cautious in how we deal with this issue. The first thing we need to do is to give NAMA an opportunity to respond, even if that means inviting its representatives to the committee. I know that we only have one day left in this session, but it is important that we give them a chance to respond.

Today's newspapers report on the issue of undervaluing loans. I understand that under the NAMA Act, the Comptroller and Auditor General carries out a review and audit every three years of how loans are valued. I ask Mr. McCarthy if he has looked at this issue and, if so, did he find anything concerning how loans are valued?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Yes, it is an issue at which we have looked. In fact, we have already reported twice on the issue of loan acquisition. Members will recall from previous occasions when NAMA's representatives were before the committee that the concern was that NAMA might have overpaid, not underpaid, the banks for loans. I wish to provide some information on the process used and what the findings were. The loans acquired by NAMA were initially valued by valuers on behalf of the banks transferring the loans. NAMA reviewed all of these and accepted the valuations for around 73% of the loans by value. For the remaining properties, it sought a second valuation which it commissioned. As a result of these valuations, there was a write-down relative to the banks' valuations which in total were about €2.3 billion on that 27% of the loan book. Some 90% were reduced in value; therefore, 10% were accepted on the bank's valuation.

Another point worth bearing in mind is that part of the strategy for NAMA was to add an uplift for the long-term economic value relative to the market value at the time. What NAMA would have done, taking the valuations, was to add an uplift, which averaged out at about 8.3% on top of the market value at the time of acquisition.

Overall, it is difficult to see how across the portfolio there would have been an underpayment, considering the approach NAMA took. From an audit point of view, we looked at that issue and sought the assistance of the Valuation Office and of a former Commissioner of Valuation in Northern Ireland to review the process NAMA had applied. The conclusion was that the valuations had been carried out in accordance with industry standards.

In addition, because there was an element of an overpayment relative to market value, the valuation process was examined by the European Commission which approved it. Effectively, the concern was that there was an element of State aid built into it. It is difficult to see how, on a broad scale, there would have been an undervaluation and an underpayment on the assets taken on.

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

That is really what I am getting at. The Comptroller and Auditor General looked at this issue comprehensively.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I did.

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

He has carried out a review and found that it is in accordance with industry standards. The European Commission has also carried out a review. It is, however, front page news today, which is dangerous. Mr. McCarthy has done his job and found nothing. He has found that it was carried out in the way it should have been.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Yes, as set out.

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

It is dangerous for an organisation like this if it continues over Christmas. We need to be cautious. I would give NAMA's representatives a chance to answer these questions and say they would welcome an opportunity to do so.

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

For the information of members, arising from the media reports and the concerns expressed by all sides about NAMA and not coming down on any side but dealing with the issue of leaks to newspapers and media commentary, it is hugely important that NAMA clear up the matter. We should hear from it. In that regard, I contacted it and asked its representatives what they were going to do. It was that serious and important that we ask them; otherwise we will go through the Christmas and new year period with significant information being given to the media by whatever party. NAMA's representatives have indicated that they will be putting out statements in response to some of the material already in the public domain. They will also make statements to counter other statements made. As a result, NAMA's representatives are anxious and willing to come before the committee having heard the concerns expressed by me and others. They have suggested that even if members want to invite them today or tomorrow, they are willing and anxious to come. They will be issuing statements on issues and out of courtesy said to me: "All of these statements are going to be out there and we have no opportunity to put them before anybody formally." The question for members of the committee is, having been told this, what exactly do they wish to do. What is their choice? Do they wish to bring in NAMA's representatives? I suggest we bring them in today.

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

Today, yes.

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

One issue that arose when NAMA's representatives were last here, in September, was that there was a revolving door, with information being passed from NAMA to the private sector. There are questions, beyond what the Chairman has said, that need to be answered. Are the constraints rigorous enough on people who work in NAMA when it comes to passing on information? NAMA's representatives mentioned the Official Secrets Act, the NAMA Act and the personal contractual arrangements they had made with individuals. However, they need to answer that question. If there are no constraints, the matter needs to be dealt with both by NAMA and the Government. There are pertinent questions to be answered.

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

I have made it clear to NAMA's representatives that, in coming before the committee, they will have to answer all of these questions. There may be difficulties concerning court cases, but they say they are willing to come before the committee. They want to put their case before they start to release all of their answers in response to the accusations or allegations made. Aside from this, if the committee agrees to ask them in today, it is only proper that we ask for any documentation the Department of Finance has on this matter because the Department is being accused of withholding 16 files, depending on which news outlet one listens to or reads. That is also important.

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

I agree that representatives of NAMA should be afforded the opportunity to come before the committee. I am heartened by the fact that its representatives are willing to come before us. We also need to bring in representatives of the Department of Finance. I advise that we invite them in tomorrow for the simple reason that we must give committee members the opportunity to have in their possession whatever documentation is forthcoming. We need to consider it because we need to be in a position to question in an informed fashion. It cannot simply be an opportunity for NAMA to set out its stall. It has to be an opportunity for members to question both NAMA and the Department of Finance as completely as possible, cognisant of the fact that there will be legal restrictions in terms of what either party can state. I personally would like us to have whatever documentation can be made available to us.

Then we should we reconvene tomorrow and tease matters out. In doing that, we would give NAMA the opportunity to clear the air and clarify its position. I agree entirely that it would be most unhelpful if this matter were to be dragged out over Christmas and into the new year. The committee has to be given space to absorb whatever documentation is forthcoming, to note that which is not forthcoming and to prepare for such an engagement.

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

On the same point, I do not have a difficulty with sticking around until Friday, but some members might. We might need to check to see if people can stay until tomorrow.

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

The matter needs to be clarified. The fact that NAMA's representatives can come in before the end of the week is very important. An invitation should be issued by the clerk to the committee to that effect. We should deal with the matters relating to the HSE and the Mater hospital today.

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

I will ask the clerk to check with members, the Department of Finance and NAMA to arrange a meeting, bearing in mind members’ availability.

Clerk to the Committee:

Okay.

Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not particularly mind whether they come in today or tomorrow. If they come today, there needs to be a period for us to review correspondence. We cannot curtail the meeting we intend to have.

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

We are not going to do that. The material available from NAMA or anywhere else should be before us. There can be no excuses. I will ask the clerk to the committee to make the arrangements.

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

I endorse what Deputy Mary Lou McDonald said. Meeting tomorrow would be far more appropriate. It is not convenient, but we have to get up to speed on this issue. In having them in immediately after the HSE we would not be properly informed.

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

We will check with members, the Secretary General of the Department of Finance and others. All members will be briefed and will understand the direction the committee is taking.

No. 3B.2 is correspondence, dated 26 November 2013, from Galway County Councillor Thomas Welby on an application by Bord Iascaigh Mhara for a fish farm in Galway Bay. The correspondence is to be noted and a copy forwarded to the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine for a note on the issues raised.

No. 3B.3 is correspondence, dated 6 December 2013, from Mr. Paul Dillon on the contract conditions of Mr. Adrian Neilan, chief executive officer, Bord na gCon. The correspondence is to be noted and the matter forwarded to the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine for a note on the issues raised. The chairman of the board should be reminded that a commitment was given that the information requested would be given to the committee within ten days.

No. 3B.4 is correspondence, dated 8 November 2013, from Mr. Hendrick Verway, Cobh, County Cork on the national postcode system. The correspondence is to be noted.

No. 3B.5 is correspondence, dated 12 December 2013, from Mr. William Treacy on correspondence noted at the committee meeting held on 12 December 2013. The correspondence is to be noted.

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On that issue, there is a long-standing agreement to have representatives of Horse Racing Ireland attend the committee. There is considerable correspondence on this organisation which I hope will be dealt with when its representatives attend the committee.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The 2012 financial statements of the organisation in question have been placed in the Oireachtas Library.

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

No. 3B.6 is correspondence, received on 9 December, from Mr. William Treacy. We have received considerable correspondence from this gentleman.

No. 3B.7 is correspondence, dated 11 December 2013, from an anonymous source on the Office of the Revenue Commissioners, customs and excise division. The correspondence is to be noted and a copy forwarded to the Revenue Commissioners for a note on the issues raised.

No. 3B.8 is correspondence, dated 5 December 2013, from Mr. Brendan Ryan, Courts Service, re follow-up on the Wexford courthouse project. The correspondence is to be noted and a copy forwarded to Ms Bernie Lloyd.

No. 3B.9 is correspondence, received on 9 December, from Deputy Robert Dowds on a request for a meeting with Enable Ireland, the Irish Wheelchair Association, Rehab Care and Our Lady’s Hospice. The correspondence is to be noted. Our Lady’s Hospice is one of the section 38 bodies that feature in the internal audit report. We will ask for a note on the extent to which the other bodies which I understand are bodies funded under section 39 are compliant with public pay policy. I am concerned as some of these bodies are receiving a huge amount of taxpayers’ money.

Robert Dowds (Dublin Mid West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It would be a good exercise to see how these organisations which are receiving taxpayers’ money are operating. Naturally, we cannot have respresentatives of every organisation attend the committee. Another organisation that has been mentioned to me since is St. Michael’s House.

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

These are matters that can be addressed at today’s meeting with the HSE.

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

At the last meeting we discussed NAMA taking over some work from the IBRC. This will mean a significant workload for the committee. In this instance, we do not have the professional capacity to deal with it. The committee has asked the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform to consider this issue. All of the professionalism is on one side of the room when representatives of NAMA or other organisations attend the committee. The committee needs access - they are not permanent positions - to advice and opinion. Specific issues are raised when the committee hears from the representatives of the many bodies that attend it. However, there is not the ability in the Comptroller and Auditor General’s office to undertake the forensic examination required in some cases. Mr. McCarthy may comment on this. The committee has requested the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Brendan Howlin, to give it the support it needs to conduct its job fully and thoroughly.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I thank the Chairman. I saw his recent comments about the lack of forensic expertise in my office. I am satisfied we have the resources to do the work we do. My understanding of forensic auditing and forensic accounting is that they are to prepare a case for presentation in a court setting rather than in a Committee of Public Accounts setting. Where we take on a piece of work we have the resources to do it. If we need additional resources we have a budget line that allows us to contract in a forensic accountant or whatever. That would have to be in a situation where I felt the work they would do and the contribution they would make would be additional to what we have. Regarding whether we have sufficient resources to examine every issue that is of interest and might warrant public accountability, we could use more resources. However, my office is very conscious of the constraints on the public finances. Deliberately for the last number of years we have not wanted to be first to seek an increase in resources. I am satisfied we have the skills we need to do the work.

Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Eoghan Murphy makes a valid point. The Committee of Public Accounts is constantly being asked by the Government to do more and I am conscious of the pressure that must put on our secretariat. We have been referenced in the Dáil and by Ministers regarding the body of work on NAMA and the section 38 agencies in terms of the Government's response. We have been told that part of the Government's response will be a thorough examination of various issues by the Committee of Public Accounts.

My fear, as I outlined at our last meeting, is that section 38 is a major issue. We are still only scratching the surface and we have a long way to go on it. More than €1 billion of taxpayers money is involved and we cannot have a situation where CEOs or chairpersons of section 38 agencies are sitting in their offices today hoping and praying that we run out of time or resources or move on to the next issue. We must be able to get to the bottom of issues thoroughly.

I am not sure it is an issue of an additional cost for the taxpayer. Surely we could do it with redeployment from within the public service, which is the responsibility of the Minister, Deputy Howlin. If we are to be constantly asked to undertake more work, we should, politely and respectfully but determinedly, ask the Minister to consider redeploying additional secretarial resources to this committee to protect the good name of the committee and allow it to do the job thoroughly.

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

This should not be interpreted as our complaining about the work. I would be quite happy to sit five days a week.

Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, we say that all the time.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

It is about doing the work thoroughly and having the resources to do that.

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

We want to do it more thoroughly. In dealing with the biggest property company in the world, NAMA, one needs certain expertise when all the experts are on one side of the room. That is the case with many agencies and Departments. We need to be equipped to do that job fully and properly. While I accept what the Comptroller and Auditor General said, and this is no criticism of his office, we need to have greater detail available to us to question the witnesses.

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

Both the Comptroller and Auditor General and the secretariat of the Committee of Public Accounts do fine work. When witnesses come before us, we are well prepared. However, issues arise on occasions which require a short timeframe and the accumulation of specific information. We must examine specific instances where this arises whereby we have access to bring in expertise for a specific project with a specific timeframe. For the general work we do, the Comptroller and Auditor General's reports and the briefings from the committee secretariat is fine work. We are well briefed. However with advances in how society and the business world work, we sometimes need access to specific resources on specific occasions for specific projects.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

When we present reports we try to make them as accessible as possible and, hopefully, we do a reasonably good job at that. I recognise that preparing for a meeting requires additional work by the committee. I can see the efforts the secretariat and liaison officer put in to prepare material. It is a very significant challenge. It would be a support for the committee to have additional resources.

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

It is in that context that it should be seen.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I do not take it as any criticism of what we do.

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

No. 3C is documents relating to today's committee meeting, correspondence received on 18 December from Dr. Ambrose McLoughlin, Secretary General, Department of Health, re opening statement, to be noted and published; correspondence received on 18 December from Mr. Ray Mitchell, HSE, re briefing material for today's meeting, to be noted and published; and correspondence received on 19 December from Ms Mary Day, CEO, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, re opening statement, to be noted and published. Nos. 4.1 to 4.6, inclusive, are reports, statements and accounts received since our meeting of 12 December.

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Comptroller and Auditor General mentioned No. 4.5, which is Horse Racing Ireland. The annual report and accounts have been submitted. We said when we had the 2012 annual accounts we would see about setting a date for Horse Racing Ireland to come in. I am surprised there is a note on the audit outcome in the summary sheet we got today that attention is drawn to a number of instances of non-compliance with public procurement rules. It is not a major issue. That is signed off by the chairman in the statement of internal financial control for Horse Racing Ireland in his report saying there are a limited number of circumstances where that arose. There are issues we could usefully discuss with Horse Racing Ireland in addition to the specific correspondence item we have. Can we try to set a date now that the accounts are in?

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

That brings us to our work programme. We will review our work programme again on 16 January 2014. I propose that on that date Mr. Brian Conlan, former CEO of the Central Remedial Clinic, CRC, would be before us. Depending on the information that arises from today's meeting we may agree to others in terms of section 38. Is there any other business? Can we agree the agenda for 16 January, Mr. Conlan's appearance and anything that may arise from today's meeting?

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In today's meeting are we dealing with the section 38 agencies or the Vote on the Department of Health and the HSE? What are we doing today?

Clerk to the Committee:

We are dealing with the section 38 agencies but in the context of the Vote because most of the section 38 agencies would not be accountable to the Committee of Public Accounts.

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are not dealing with the broader Vote.

Clerk to the Committee:

No.

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When I saw that on the agenda I wondered if it was the broader issue.

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

I suggest that in today's meeting we deal with the pension aspect of the CRC staff and the payment to the Mater hospital first. Once we get that dealt with, the person concerned can leave. It is a separate issue.

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

Will all the witnesses come in together?

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

Yes.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Deputy Harris referred to the expenditure in relation to section 38 agencies and in that regard mentioned a figure of €1 billion or thereabouts. The amount involved is significantly greater in that it is in excess of €2.1 billion. Subhead B5 of the-----

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On what page is subhead B5?

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

What is the total amount and what is the purpose of the funding?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Subhead B5 is grants in respect of certain other health bodies, including voluntary and joint board hospitals. The amount involved is €2.2 billion.

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

Is that the total amount in respect of funding?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

It is the amount of funding under subhead B5. In addition, there are some section 38 entities that are funded from subheads B1 to B4, inclusive. There is also the capital element, which is subheads C1 to C3, inclusive. The total amount is significantly more than the figure mentioned by Deputy Harris. I mention it only to ensure members are aware that the amount is higher than stated by Deputy Harris.

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

The clerk will now bring in the witnesses.