Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Annual appropriation accounts record the cash transactions related to the various services provided directly, or funded, by central government Departments and offices. The primary focus is on a comparison between the funding voted by Dáil Éireann and the out-turn recorded. Spending in excess of the amount voted is not permitted, and any amounts unspent in the year of account are liable for surrender back to the Exchequer.

The appropriation account for Vote 26, Department of Education and Skills, records gross expenditure of €10.37 billion in 2019. This represented an increase of 5.7% on the €9.81 billion spent in 2018. Expenditure under the Vote in 2019 was divided between three expenditure programmes, as indicated in the diagram which can be put up on the screen for members. For the record, programmes B and C will in the future be part of a separate Vote administered by the new Department of Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, under a different Accounting Officer. I understand Mr. Ó Foghlú will provide further information in that regard.

Given the nature of the education system, the largest element of spending was the pay and pensions of teachers and other education staff. For example, in 2019, pay and pensions expenditure under programme A amounted to €6.55 billion, or 79% of gross programme expenditure. There was also a significant level of expenditure under the programme on capital assets. This includes funding provided for the construction, extension and refurbishment of schools and ongoing maintenance works. In that regard, I have presented reports on the Department’s site acquisition for schools and on schools estate management. I understand that the committee will deal with these matters in a separate meeting. I issued a clear audit opinion in relation to the appropriation accounts for both 2019 and 2018.

The Accounting Officer makes disclosures in the statements on internal financial control for both years in relation to contracts for goods and services where non-competitive or non-compliant procurement processes were employed. In both years, the level of non-compliant procurement disclosed was low. Non-competitive processes were used for some contracts but this is allowed under procurement rules in certain circumstances, for example, where there is a genuinely urgent requirement for services that could not have been anticipated, or where there is only one supplier of required goods, such as proprietary computer software or licences.