Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The public business before us this afternoon is as follows: minutes, accounts, financial statements, correspondence, work programme and any other business. Before continuing with our agenda, I propose that we briefly go into private session to deal with some housekeeping matters before we resume in public session. Is that agreed to? Agreed.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The first item is the minutes of our 18 November meeting, which have been circulated. Do members wish to raise any issues regarding the minutes? Are they agreed? Agreed. I thank members. As usual, they will be published on the committee's web page.

The next item is accounts and financial statements. Three sets our accounts and financial statements were laid before the Dáil between 15 and 19 November 2021. I ask Mr. McCarthy to address these before I open the floor.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I thank the Chairman. As he said, three sets of financial statements have been presented and are now available in the Oireachtas Library. The first one is the sundry money account for 2020. It got a clear audit opinion. The next is the Arts Council for 2020. It got a clear audit opinion. Last is the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council, IFAC, for 2020. It too got a clear audit opinion. If anybody has any questions on those I am happy to deal with that.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What is the parent Department of the sundry money account?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

It the Department of Finance. The account is used to hold funding that is remitted to the Department of Finance where it may not be immediately clear whether it is to go into the Exchequer or some other fund. It is a holding account.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

So it is resting in my account.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I am sorry Deputy.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is resting in my account.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

It is resting in the sundry moneys account, yes. Obviously, the objective there is for it to rest for as short a period as possible so moneys are brought quickly to the Exchequer.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay. I thank Mr. McCarthy.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As there are no other questions, can we agree to note the accounts and statements? Agreed. As usual, the listing of accounts and financial statements will be published as part of our minutes.

Our third item is correspondence. As previously agreed, items that were not flagged for discussion for this meeting will continue to be dealt with in accordance with the proposed actions that have been circulated. Decisions taken by the committee in relation to correspondence are recorded in the minutes of the committee's meetings and published on the committee's web page. One item of correspondence has been flagged today under category B, that is, correspondence from Accounting Officers or Ministers and follow up to committee meetings.

No. 872B, held over from our meeting last week, is from Mr. Niall Cody, Chairman, Revenue Commissioners, dated 5 November 2021. It provides information requested by the committee arising from the fact Revenue did not accept certain recommendations in the committee in our last report. The committee asked Revenue to clarify to what extent it can investigate the financial and sectoral implications of a voluntary PAYE system agreed by Revenue and courier firms in 1997, as well as a copy of the 2019 European Commission inspection report on the control strategy for customs value and repayments. I have flagged this item for discussion as have Deputies Carthy and Catherine Murphy. Before opening the floor, is it agreed to note and publish this item? Agreed. I call Deputy Carthy.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chairman. It is good to see him back. I have a couple of points. It is incredibly interesting. This relates to the 1997 decision by Revenue to allow couriers be designated as self-employed. I am not sure it was the couriers themselves who benefitted from that arrangement and would argue it was not. The letter states:

A review of the 1997 letters from Revenue bears out the fact that the individuals in question were required to be self-employed and that the conditions to participate in the “voluntary PAYE scheme” were that the individuals were in fact bona fide self-employed.

It goes on to state:

Bearing in mind the significant lapse of time, the information available to Revenue in relation to matters which occurred over 20 years ago is severely limited, particularly in light of Revenue only having access to information returned in statutory reporting.

There are a number of follow-on questions we need to ask. The first is why only information from statutory reporting is available. Is it the case Revenue does not have access to all documents that were created and gave rise to the agreement? I imagine that would have been standard practice. We need to get an explanation as to why that is not the case. It then sets our criteria for where this self-employed status can be used. It talks about the form of payment being based on milage rather than being a standard pay rate. However, I would have expected the first test of self-employment is whether a person is a free agent and able to operate as a self-employed company - in other words, that they are not intrinsically linked to a single company which is the cause of concern for us. It would be useful if we could get clarification from Revenue in the first instance on this form of documentation. Is it the case it simply does not exist - that it was disappeared - or is it the case it is just hard to find? They are two very different things and that clarification would be useful. I would like to get a further note from Revenue on whether it sees this type of approach as being appropriate in the future, where these types of contracts are concerned.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Revenue works to the set of rules provided to it. Obviously, the Department of Social Protection is the one that, in my understanding, has pretty much determined the type of employment it has always designated as self-employment. In 1997 there would have been way fewer people in this particular sector and it may well be that we try to get some data from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment on the number of people now employed in the sector in question. There is a particular concern about precarious employment and that Department has responsibility there. This is probably, in the first instance, a policy issue. Revenue is working to rules set out for it. We should be making contact with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment to seek the number and how that fits in with the approach to deal with the issue of precarious employment.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I suggest that along with looking for that information from the Department, we ask for a breakdown by different sectors, like construction and couriers, for example. The issue with self-employment or misclassification as self-employment is that it may now be operating across other sectors on foot of that judgment back in 1997.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I suggest we agree to look for that breakdown as well, along with the clarificatory question Deputy Carthy has for Revenue on whether relevant documents simply do not exist or are not available to it.

I note there are a number of statements attached to the letter. We will go through them. Appendix 1 states:

By way of background, it is important to note that PAYE is not a tax, but a collection mechanism for Income Tax... The operation of PAYE on bona fide self-employed couriers involved the application of a withholding tax on an administrative basis, which facilitated collection of tax on account from a cohort of self-employed individuals and made it easier for these individuals to meet their payment compliance obligations.

The code of practice for determining self-employed status, published in July 2021, states that an individual would normally be an employee if he or she has his or her tax deducted from his or her wages through the PAYE system. There seems to be a number of contradictions running through that. We will first seek to clarify, from the documentation provided by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, the number of people who are classified as self-employed and the breakdown of the sectors. Is that agreed? Agreed. Representatives from Revenue will be before the committee again and I am sure we will revisit this matter.

The next correspondence is No. 888B from Mr. Seán Ó Foghlú, Secretary General of the Department of Education, dated 12 November 2021. It is an update in relation to a recommendation in the committee's report on our examination of the Department's 2018 and 2019 appropriation accounts. The matter was flagged for discussion by Deputy Catherine Murphy.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am intrigued by this response, which raises questions. When representatives of the shared services unit appeared before the committee, they made a point of saying it would not be appropriate for every part of the public service to have its payroll go through the shared services unit. The HSE and the Department of Education have large staff complements. The Department of Education has 130,000 payees. I am intrigued as to what is the problem. In the last paragraph, there is mention of a "viable technical solution". What is the solution? We need to revert to the Department with some questions. What is the solution it is seeking? Does the solution involve outsourcing to a contractor? Was it included in the original tender? If a company issues a contract for a payroll system, I would expect that payroll system to work and if there are glitches or problems with it, that the obligation would be on the contractor to resolve them. A number of issues arise. If a lot of money is spent on a system, that system should be fit for purpose.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My understanding from the meeting with representatives of the Department is that there is an electronic system and the Department is going to upgrade it. It does not have a full electronic payroll system. Is that correct? In the correspondence, it is mentioned that a technical solution has been identified and is being assessed. I am trying to remember that meeting. I know Deputy Devlin raised the issue with the officials.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I imagine that the issue might be around whether individuals can have access to, let us say, the history of their payments. For example, if, in August, an employee wants to look back and access information in relation to a pay period in March or April, that is probably the kind of functionality that the Department would need to build into the system, as opposed to sending out the payslip each fortnight, it arriving and it being up to the recipient to keep a record. I think that is the area in which the Department is talking about building a viable technical solution.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The fundamental problem here, from a public finances point of view, is that the Department is spending, if I remember correctly, close to €14 million a year sending out paper copies of payslips, which seems to be completely archaic in the modern era and given that most of the public services have moved beyond that practice. From the information we were given by the Department when its representatives appeared before us previously and the timelines outlined in this letter, it appears that there is some improvement in respect of the software upgrades. I think the officials indicated that they would have the issue resolved by the end of this year. It now seems the upgrades were scheduled and completed in July 2021. That is a positive.

My concern relates to the last sentence of the correspondence, which states that the Department will be engaging with stakeholders on the proposed solution thereafter, and the plan is to phase in the option to use this service for all payees by the third quarter of next year. How will that option work? Is it the case that a substantial number of payees could continue to opt to receive paper copies and mitigate against any savings anticipated as a result of the upgrade? I would like some clarification on what precisely is meant by that and whether it is the Department's view that over a period - we could ask for that period to be defined - all employees will be receiving their payslips electronically, and they will have access to the information that the Comptroller and Auditor General has talked about. I think most people would take it as standard that they have access to previous payslips, etc.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is Deputy Murphy okay with that?

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is fine.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We can ask for a clarification in relation to the last sentence in which the Department leaves the matter open-ended and states that the option will be available to use the service by the third quarter of next year. It could be interpreted a number of ways. We can ask why there will be an option and not a uniform electronic system within the Department. We can also ask when the Department hopes to have the system finalised. Deputy Carthy referred to the spend on the postage of paper payslips. The spend on that was €10 million.

The next correspondence is No. 889B, from Mr. Mark Griffin, Secretary General of the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications, dated 12 November 2021, providing information requested by the committee arising from our meeting with the Department on 14 October 2021. Before opening the floor for discussion, it is proposed to note and publish the correspondence except for page 1, which is provided to the committee on a confidential basis. The members will note the sensitivity around that because of the cyberattack. Is that agreed? Agreed. I ask that members honour that confidentiality because there are issues of public interest at stake. The correspondence has been flagged for discussion by Deputies Murphy, Carthy and Munster.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is very useful and long correspondence, which arises from our meeting with the Department. I have a few additional questions that I would like to ask the Department. On page 3, in relation to the use of existing poles and overhead lines, the Department states:

Existing overhead poles and lines will be used where possible to lay/hang the new fibre cables. It is forecast that only 12% of the project will be new build as designs will utilise existing infrastructure to a very significant degree; this approach is consistent with State Aid requirements.

Has it been determined what upgrade or repair costs there will be if the existing infrastructure requires maintenance? There may well be a need for replacement poles or other locations to hang the cables. Has the cost of that been determined? It is not uncommon to see a whole row of poles where one has fallen over. There will have to be an upgrade of that.

Those poles will not be the obligation of Eir; they may well be the responsibility of National Broadband Ireland, NBI. I am trying to establish if it has done any assessment of the cost of maintenance regarding the use of existing infrastructure.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We can get clarification on this. My understanding is that it pays rent or an annual fee for the infrastructure. It could be a fee for the 25 years-----

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It will, therefore, be up to the provider-----

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----of €25 per pole. As the Deputy will know, Eir has been replacing many of the poles in the past two years in order to get ready for this. We can ask whether NBI carries a cost for replacing some of the existing infrastructure or upgrading it.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Or if it is built into the cost.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Like the Deputy, I was surprised that only 12% of the project will be new build. That was a bit of an eye-catcher. The other question that arises out of it is the annual cost for rent of existing infrastructure each year over the next 25 years. Is it being done as a cumulative cost over that period? If only 12% is going on new build, what is the €2.7 billion going on? How much of that is going on the rent of infrastructure from a private company, Eir? The Deputy asked if NBI is responsible for paying for the upgrade of existing infrastructure.

As Deputy Munster is not here, I call Deputy Carthy.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a few other questions.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does Deputy Catherine Murphy want to come back in now?

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Chairman might let me back in; I have a few other questions from this correspondence.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will let Deputy Carthy back in and then come back to Deputy Catherine Murphy.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am very concerned about this section of the correspondence relating to the national broadband plan. It seems the ground is being prepared for a further revision downwards of the targets by the end of 2022. I am anxious that we get full clarification of the portion of the correspondence suggesting that certain legacy issues resulting from Covid-19 will continue to impact the contracted targets for 2022. An Cathaoirleach will recall that at the hearing we asked several questions about precisely what the Covid-19 complications were considering that this was considered to be essential work throughout the pandemic. The sector itself was never closed down in the way the construction sector was, for example.

The answers we got were very broad, with reference to clusters of Covid cases, but when we asked for the numbers of those, they could not be provided. There was also reference to a British company whose personnel were not able to travel over as a result of Covid-19 but when we sought elaboration on that it transpired that the company in question is no longer contracted. Clearly, that is not the reason. It is important to get clarification as to the precise complications that have arisen as a result of Covid in order that we can assess whether there are provisions to ensure that this does not happen if we face further waves in the future.

The correspondence states that the Department expects NBI to submit this plan very shortly. My concern over the entire broadband plan is that NBI is essentially dictating what it considers to be the appropriate targets and then the Department is setting those as new milestones. As a result, it is important for us to get clear definitions of what the targets now are and what justification the company needs to provide in order for milestones to be amended.

The correspondence also outlines that it has spent €24.5 million on procurement advisory services. It would be useful to get a breakdown of the specific expenditure on those services.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish to pick up on the point of certain legacy issues. I echo Deputy Carthy's concerns about the roll-out of this. We discussed this before the contract was awarded and had concerns about the ability of the particular entity to deliver the broadband plan in the intervention area. As there was only one bidder, it was not as if there was a choice. We understand that Covid has been an issue but we are now starting to see serious slippages and it is important for us to keep on top of this. The Department is permitted to apply penalties if the plan does not roll out in the way that it should. That paragraph in the correspondence refers to certain legacy issues resulting from Covid-19. It states that NBI expects to submit a plan very shortly. We should look for a copy of that plan because it will give us some indication. If the Department does not have it yet, we should look for it to provide it to us when it is provided to the Department.

Can we get a schedule of works to be provided for the 679 primary schools along with their locations? We need to keep a close eye on this matter. That was an area where one would have expected-----

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It has stated that those 679 primary schools will be done by the end of 2022.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It would be useful for us to have a schedule because we cannot allow slippage on that. If Covid has taught us anything, it is how important broadband is and that it needs to be provided equally across the country.

I want to raise other issues but they do not relate to broadband.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will try to wrap up the broadband part of it and then I can let the Deputy back in.

There is an issue with the further remedial plan. We should ask it what the legacy issues are. Hopefully, we are not going back into a lockdown. If we are not going back into a lockdown, there should not be legacy issues. There may be issues with the supply chain or something. I know that in construction there have been some issues with getting materials. We need to ask it that question and the rationale for that.

Is it carrying the cost of replacing and updating the existing infrastructure that it is using, which belongs to other companies? What is the annual rental cost of that infrastructure? We are looking for those clarifications, and we will come back to it.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a few other issues. The first relates to the use of landfill in the disposal of waste. We were told there are three landfill sites in the country, one in Kildare, one in Meath and one in Wicklow. In addition, we have the incinerator. That is it. The principle is that waste is supposed to be dealt with as close as possible to where it is created. However, the east coast is receiving most of the national waste. The waste is collected in Kerry, Mayo, Donegal or wherever, baled and shipped east, which seems like an incredible way of dealing with waste. Capacity at the landfill site in Wicklow will be exhausted by 2026. There was an extension because we were on a knife edge and use of the site has been extended to 2026. The one in Meath has eight years left. The one in Kildare has three and a half years left, based on the current planning permission.

However, a planning application has been made for the next 35 years. There is no compensation for road damage, for example, resulting from the very heavy loads that are being transported. Apart from anything else, that is far from ideal. We need to go back to the Department and ask is what is the plan. Is that it in the context of traffic congestion into Ringsend? I know there was a previous planning application. I refer to the site in Kildare. It is down to individuals who live nearby to mount challenges in respect of the impact on the quality of their lives by virtue of the fact that these are essentially the central repository for waste nationally. I know this is not an issue for the Committee of Public Accounts but it is a departmental issue. We need to go back and ask the Department what exactly is the plan into the future. Is what is being described here the plan for the future or how does it expect waste will be dealt with?

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy will recall that at one stage there was a plan for eight incinerators in eight separate regions. I remember a consultant's report that was circulated among the county councils back in 2004 and 2005 and set out the reasons for that. I am sure the Deputy saw that report as well. We are in a situation where the game will be up in respect of those three sites in eight years. There are three and a half years left for the site in Kildare, as the Deputy stated, there are four years on the Wicklow one and then eight years for the site in Meath, although it is stated that there is additional land available that would allow it to continue operating beyond that, subject to permission being granted. We can write back to the Department and ask for clarification on that issue and whether there are other options. There is the very important issue of not just road damage, but environmental damage as a result of all the waste being transported to the east coast. Obviously, waste is being carted long distances and we need to find out why that is and what plans there are to develop landfill sites or waste centres in other parts of the country.

Is there another issue the Deputy wishes to raise?

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are two more issues. One relates to the sustainable energy programmes. It may be something the committee will consider at some point. I am not sure whether the Department's costings are right. I was on an annual call with a local authority last week. It made the point that the money that is provided to fully fund retrofitting of local authority houses is €10,000 short of the actual cost of doing the job and the local authority is picking up that cost. If that is the case, then I am not sure the calculations we are seeing in respect of the cost of it are accurate. That was the experience of the local authority. In the national development plan there was a signal that one sixth of the amount set aside for retrofitting was going to be from public funding. That means the remaining amount is coming from elsewhere. It is not entirely clear what the situation is in the context of the other schemes. Maybe I will follow this issue up separately because I am not sure it is a matter for the Committee of Public Accounts. Many of the numbers just do not make sense. It is very difficult to see how we will avoid incurring penalties if a significant amount of money has to be made up by individual householders in the context of the retrofit programmes. If the calculations of the Department in respect of the cost of doing that are wrong, then the amount of money that is provided by way of grant aid will be wrong as well. I will follow that up with the Department.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is my experience that the grant aid goes some way towards the overall cost but, normally, it does not cover it fully.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I understand that, but even where the grant aid is provided, there is an under-estimation of the actual cost of doing it. The example highlighted by the local authority is a case in point but other people are saying that as well. I have been contacted by people who have told me the amount of money they have to put to it is unattainable. We will end up not being able to deliver on a very important national programme.

I refer to appendix 1 in the context of the national broadband plan advisory services. It gives a breakdown of the total expenditure in respect of some of the providers. Analysys Mason is described there as technical in terms of the advisory. The Analysys Mason report related to the costings. I did not think it was technical. It was about the charging mechanism. I am not sure whether the nature of the advisory services is immediately obvious there. It would be quite useful to get a further breakdown in respect of some of them, such as Analysys Mason and KPMG. I continuously question whether there is capacity to do in-house some of the things that go out to tender to consultancy firms or we should be building the capacity to do that in-house as opposed to the expensive outsourcing. I know the national broadband plan was a one-off so it may not be a great example, but I would like to see a breakdown on both of those providers to ascertain exactly what the work they did was.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will ask for clarification around the usage of the word "technical" in that respect. It might be referring to financial matters, but I doubt it. It looks to me like it is-----

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Having read the Analysys Mason report backwards and forwards, it does not jump out to me that it was purely technical.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay. We will ask for clarification on that. Do any other members wish to come in?

As regards the cover letter, in the final paragraph the Secretary General refers to comments I made during the afternoon session on 14 October after we had completed our engagement with the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications and specifically relating to the attendance of the programme director. The Secretary General goes on to say he can assure the committee that the taking of the evidence of the programme director by way of remote connection from his home accorded fully with the parameters of the committee's invitation. That is fair enough; it is allowed for within the parameters of the invitation. However, the problem is that we were not able to communicate with the person with overall responsibility for the project on a secure or reasonably good quality broadband connection. That is the point we are making. I raised it in the afternoon session that day. Reference is made to a specific reason the director could not attend the meeting in person or attend the Department on that day. That is fair enough. We do not want to know everyone's business and sometimes people are is tied down for a specific reason. There are several reasons a person could be tied down. However, If witnesses are going to give evidence remotely to the committee, we need to hold to the point that they do so from their headquarters or, at the very least, have a good broadband connection where they are. That day was a long way from satisfactory in terms of trying to organise and run a meeting and allow members to ask questions and get answers. I note that. We need to be firm in respect of witnesses ensuring they have a good broadband connection on the day. I understand that things can go wrong at the last minute, technology being technology.

That the Department charged with responsibility for rolling out the broadband plan was not able to communicate with us, or us with it, on the day of the committee hearing is just not acceptable.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I concur with the Chairman. It was deplorable and very obvious. I am surprised that he included this in the letter. It should just have been a case of hands up. If we are to learn anything from this it may be that we will have to include on any invitation a requirement, as far as possible, that there should be a viable broadband connection available just so this kind of thing cannot be said: "fully within the parameters of the committee's invitation dated 30 September 2021".

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will have to start putting that in the invitations.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I think it is terrible that we would have to do that.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We included a note thus: "If you choose to attend from outside the Leinster House complex, in order to avoid technical difficulties, you are requested to do so from your office premises.". That has been sent to them. We will have to mention to invitees that they must ensure they have a good broadband connection.

Next is No. 890B from Ms Laura Burke, Director General, Environmental Protection Agency, dated 12 November 2021 providing information requested by the committee relating to An Taisce. On foot of a proposal by Deputy Sean Sherlock, this is one of 11 requests for information on the use of public funds by An Taisce. This item has been flagged by Deputy Carthy. I propose that we note and publish the correspondence and consider the responses together once we are in receipt of them all. Does Deputy Carthy wish to speak on this issue?

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is a useful piece of work. An Taisce is funded through different schemes by a variety of State bodies and Departments. My specific question relates to the correspondence from the Department of Foreign Affairs on the same issue, No. 892. Does the Chairman want to deal with that now or later?

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We can deal with it now.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a question in respect of the letter from the Department of Foreign Affairs regarding funding for An Taisce for the Green Schools programme. It is mentioned in the correspondence that the Department was aware of the reinstatement of the 2018 figures in An Taisce's 2019 financial statements and reference is made to a follow-up engagement with An Taisce. The letter goes on to state that considering that the amounts did not constitute "a significant portion of overall income", the Department did not consider there was any need for further inquiries to be made. I would like to ask the Comptroller and Auditor General if it would be considered best practice that where questions arise but the amounts involved are considered relatively small, there would not be a follow-up. I am not sure if Mr. McCarthy has had an opportunity to look into this yet. Is it something he will examine further?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I am very interested in the responses that are coming through on this. There obviously has to be a proportionality in the amount of oversight activity that one undertakes in respect of a small grant. Perhaps in this situation, where each of the funders would know that there is a big funder out there, which is the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage or the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications, there may be an extent to which they are placing reliance on the bigger funder to do more checking. Formalising that or obtaining some kind of letter of assurance might be an appropriate thing to do. I want to see the further explanations that we get and how the whole thing meshes together and then I will consider whether I will inquire into it further and maybe even report on it.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thank you.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is agreed that we will note and publish that correspondence.

No. 893 is from Mr. Liam Sloyan, chief executive of the National Treatment Purchase Fund, NTPF, dated 15 November 2021. This item has also been flagged by Deputy Carthy. Is it agreed to note and publish this correspondence? Agreed. Does Deputy Carthy wish to comment?

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wanted to ask whether we have written to the Department of Health regarding the value for money review that is referenced in this correspondence. The Department will be before us in the coming weeks and I suggest we write to request a briefing on the Nursing Homes Ireland correspondence and the national children's hospital, advising that we will raise those issues on the day.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We looked for an update on this report and the report concerning the costs and timelines for the national children's hospital from the Department on 18 October and issued a reminder earlier this month but there has been no response as of yet. It is proposed to provide Nursing Homes Ireland with an update. That is the situation with the Department. There has been no response on that.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Can we let the Department know that we will be raising it at the meeting and that it would be useful to have some written correspondence on it beforehand?

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will do that.

Next is category C correspondence, namely correspondence from and related to private individuals and any other correspondence. No. 881C is from Mr. Tadhg Daly, CEO of Nursing Homes Ireland, dated 9 November 2021, which we held over from last week. Deputy Munster flagged this correspondence but she is not present. Does anyone else wish to comment on the letter?

It is proposed to provide Nursing Homes Ireland with the updates the committee has received on the implementation of its recommendations and to advise that the Department of Health will appear before the committee on 16 December. We will have the opportunity to raise this with the Department on that occasion.

Colm Burke (Cork North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The big concern relating to nursing homes is that people are assessed when they are admitted but if they are then in the nursing home and their medical condition deteriorates, there is no provision currently for support funding to be increased even though the resident needs a lot more care. That is one of the big complaints from Nursing Homes Ireland. When it comes to private nursing homes, that mechanism is not there and that is one of they issues that they want addressed. A person can be admitted to a nursing home who is mobile and moving around. A number of months or years later, he or she no longer has the same level of mobility and therefore, a greater degree of care is required. That is the one big complaint that nursing homes have and we need to take it up with the Department.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I suggest that we raise it with the Department when its representatives are before us. Deputy Burke and others have raised previously the fact that there is no provision made for people who need a higher level of care.

Colm Burke (Cork North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is no mechanism to allow it to be reviewed. I am not saying that every resident needs to be reviewed every six months or anything like that.

There should be a mechanism available for cases where someone needs 24-hour care in a nursing home or more care than previously. That is one of the challenges faced by nursing homes.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We can flag that matter for discussion when the witnesses are here.

Colm Burke (Cork North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chairman.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will ask for that. That concludes correspondence.

Members have the work programme until the end of the year in front of them. Is it agreed? Agreed. There is a list set out for early next year when we will begin with a meeting with RTÉ in January. As no other business arises, we will go into private session, as agreed, before adjourning until 9.30 a.m. on 2 December when we will engage with the Office of the Revenue Commissioners.