Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I would like to make an observation in regard to Standing Order 218(1).

As I understand it, its wording has not changed. Therefore, there should be no change in the relationship between the committee and witnesses appearing before it. It has been standard for Accounting Officers and chief executives appearing to discuss ongoing programmes and projects, exactly as Deputy Burke suggested. There would otherwise be no reason to bring in the paediatric hospital board in particular, given that its sole purpose is the delivery of the hospital project. It would not make sense for it to appear and not be in a position to discuss the progress that is being made. If it were the case that there was a difficulty around a commercial or litigation aspect, there is provision in the Standing Orders to brief the committee privately on that matter or to withhold information if a body judges that the appropriate course to take.

As I understand the matter, the new Standing Order, which I believe is 218(10) or 218(11), is intended to bring those who are in receipt of public moneys but not within my remit before the committee if a case can be made for doing so. My understanding is that this was to be an exceptional circumstance rather than a procedure that the committee would go through regularly in respect of specific issues. Obviously, I am open to correction on that, but it may be better to seek to bring the hospital board and the Department in and see whether they will answer the questions. If they are using the provisions as a reason for not answering, the committee could then seek an extension.