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

The committee is now in public session. We are joined by the Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. Seamus McCarthy, as a permanent witness to this committee. I welcome everyone back and trust everyone is alive and well and ready for more work. Apologies have been received from Deputy Josepha Madigan. I understand she will be stepping down from this committee to take up her new post as Chairman of the Committee on Budgetary Oversight. It is up to the Oireachtas to announce her replacement so we will deal with that when it arises.

The first item on the agenda are the minutes for the meetings on 11, 12 and 13 July 2017. These were the last meetings we had before the summer break. Are these minutes agreed? Agreed. The next item concerns matters arising from those minutes. Is there anything in particular arising? I do not think so. The one thing I noticed was that we agreed on the last day, when looking at the accounts presented for an organisation called An Chéim, to hold over its 2016 accounts until the next meeting. We will have to deal with An Chéim when we come to the list of financial statements.

The next item is correspondence. We have a long list of up to 60 items since our last meeting two months ago and this volume of correspondence shows how busy the Committee of Public Accounts is. We will move through it as efficiently and promptly as we can while still giving everything proper consideration. Category A correspondence concerns today's public meeting - there is none for today as we have no witnesses in public session. Category B is correspondence from Accounting Officers and-or Ministers along with follow-up correspondence and items that we requested. All these items are for publication. The first item in the schedule is No. 705B, dated 14 July 2017, from Claire Byrne, CEO of St. Raphael's Garda Credit Union, in relation to media coverage concerning comments made about the credit union during the committee's examination of the Garda college. The correspondence states that the credit union confirmed to GIAS that it is happy to co-operate fully with the investigation, subject to the receipt of the appropriate lawful authority to release the information requested. There are some items here relating to our work before the summer. They might sound a bit dated but we have to deal with them in public. This item is noted.

The next item is No. 706B, correspondence 1-2, dated 14 July 2017, from Neil McDermott of the Higher Education Authority. This is in response to a request from the committee for information on Dundalk Institute of Technology's long-term contract with a sole supplier for recruiting international students, essentially from Asia and China. The letter sets out the rationale for these arrangements, principally based on the fact that it is a unique service. The HEA also states that it is surveying higher educational institutions in order to gather an understanding of the issues surrounding international student recruitment. It is not particularly unique; I do not see how these services are as unique as we have been told they are and I imagine that there are a number of agencies providing similar services. I propose, however, that we note this item for the moment and ask the HEA to keep us informed of the review it is carrying out. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The next item is No. 707B, received from the Higher Education Authority and dated 14 July 2017. This concerns further information requested by the committee on contracts, following the meeting with third level institutions and the HEA on 22 June. The committee's request was very extensive, namely, a review of all contracts for the last ten years. The HEA has replied that the colleges contacted have stated that this requires a significant volume of work because many of the records involved are archived and some are manual. The letter states that the HEA proposes to request that the institutions report on the engagement and associated costs of all external consultancy firms and consultants appointed to carry out investigations and inquiries into internal matters going back ten years, as well as on the engagement and associated costs of legal firms and the nature of such services going back ten years. The HEA expects that it will facilitate detailed reporting by each institution on expenditure of specific interest to the committee in terms of internal investigations and legal advice. I propose that we reply to the HEA advising that the committee agrees with its proposal and that the information will be reviewed when received. What we are essentially talking about here is where investigations are carried out and outside consultants and legal firms are brought in. The HEA is going to obtain this information and put it out on a formal basis so that we get a report in the future. Is that okay?