Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Thursday, 28 April 2022

Public Accounts Committee

Business of Committee

9:30 am

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

The business before us this afternoon is as follows: minutes, accounts and financial statements, correspondence, work programme, and any other business. We will then go into private session briefly before adjourning.

The first item is the minutes of our meetings of 31 March and 7 April, which have been circulated to members. Do members wish to raise any matters in relation to the minutes? Are the minutes agreed? Agreed. As usual, the minutes will be published on the committee's web page.

Seven sets of financial statements and accounts were laid before the Houses between 28 March and 22 April 2022. I will ask the Comptroller and Auditor General to address these before opening the floor to members.

Deputy Catherine Murphy took the Chair.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

As the Chairman said, there are seven sets of financial statements. The first is the financial statement of the Ireland-United States Commission for Educational Exchange. People may be aware of it as the Fulbright scholarships body. These are the 2020-2021 financial statements. It is a clear audit opinion. The second is the Citizens Information Board 2020 financial statements. It is a clear audit opinion. The third is from Inland Fisheries Ireland, as well as the 2020 financial statements. It is a clear audit opinion. The fourth is that of Legal Aid Board. It is a clear audit opinion, but I draw attention to disclosures in the statement on internal financial control relating to the level of resourcing of internal audit and to non-compliance with procurement rules. The fifth is the Public Trustee for Ireland, which is a function established under the Land Act of 1903.

It concerns the 2021 financial statements, and there is a clear audit opinion. The sixth concerns the Kilkenny and Carlow Education and Training Board financial statements for 2020. There is a clear audit opinion. The final set concerns the Housing Agency. There is a clear audit opinion for 2020.

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

Since no one wants to raise any issues, can we note the accounts and statements? Agreed. As usual, the listing of accounts and financial statements will be published as part of our minutes.

Moving on to correspondence previously agreed, items that were not flagged for discussion at the meeting will continue to be dealt with in accordance with the proposed actions that have been circulated, and 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.

Due to the Easter break, we have a lot of correspondence to address, so we will move through it as best we can. On the first category of correspondence under which members have flagged items for discussion, Deputy Carthy wanted to raise an item.

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

On section A, the matter I wish to raise follows on from our meeting with the officials from the Department of Justice and the Irish Prison Service this morning. The responses to my questions on the Shane O'Farrell case were very frustrating. The Secretary General of the Department of Justice indicated a number of times that she could not comment on the questions I was asking because, if I am correct, a statutory inquiry was ongoing. There is no statutory inquiry; there is a scoping inquiry that has no statutory powers whatsoever. The Secretary General indicated on a number of occasions that she would provide some written responses, but this committee should have a view on expenditure on trying to find ways to avoid delivering a public inquiry into this matter that is obviously necessary. In the follow-up correspondence, will the secretariat make that point and ask for full information? Will it also ask the Department, following on from the completion of the scoping inquiry, which we hope will be sooner rather than later, to give the timeframe it envisages if a public inquiry is initiated? What is the timeframe for the establishment of such an inquiry?

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

To be clear, are we talking about the scoping inquiry or all the-----

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

The questions I asked were not related to the scoping inquiry at all, but the scoping inquiry was cited as a reason answers possibly could not be given. I do not buy that. The questions will be on the record. The Secretary General indicated on a number of occasions that she may provide a note of the matter. As well as asking for the information, we should point out that the scoping inquiry should not be a reason not to answer the questions. Second, could we get a view from the Secretary General on the timeframe for establishing a public inquiry if one is to be established?

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

We can come back to that once we get a response. Correspondence group B comprises correspondence from Accounting Officers and Ministers following up on meetings of this committee. No. 1147B, from Mr. Brendan Gleeson, Secretary General of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, dated 24 March 2022, provides information requested by the committee regarding remuneration for the CEO of Horse Racing Ireland. Is it agreed to note and publish it? Agreed. Before opening the matter to the floor, I will address the next flagged because the two are related.

No. 1149B, from Mr. David Moloney, Secretary General of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, dated 25 March 2022, also provides information requested by the committee regarding the remuneration of the new CEO of Horse Racing Ireland. Is it agreed to note and publish it? Agreed. These items were flagged by Deputy Carthy and me.

Deputy Brian Stanley resumed the Chair.

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

Again, the correspondence does not provide the clarity required. It appears to me that the justification for a salary above the scale previously set down was justified from a business case presented by Horse Racing Ireland itself. The new CEO was appointed before the new salary was approved. I would love to know what would have happened if the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform had not approved the new salary. Would the CEO have stepped down? If not, there would have been no need for the increased salary in the first place. It is public money. I do not know whether we can secure a route to assert whether the salary was justified and necessary and represented value for money. Perhaps the Comptroller and Auditor General could point us in the direction we need to go to seek clarification. I am aware representatives of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform will be before us shortly. Perhaps that is the best avenue but I am open to direction.

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

Was the application process open to a wide group of people, including people from other jurisdictions? Did NewERA advise on recruiting or was it just on the salary?

Another issue arose over a car that was declined. I believe this pertains to the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. We need to make inquiries into what transpired. A salary is one thing but an overall package is entirely different. What happened? It is a bit too open-ended for my liking.

The second last paragraph on the second page of the response from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform states that, in line with the statutory remit referenced, the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine sought an independent assessment by NewERA of the remuneration proposed by Horse Racing Ireland. Following its assessment of the proposal of Horse Racing Ireland, NewERA recommended that the proposed salary of €190,773 be approved. It appears that the basis for this seems to have been the salary of the outgoing person and that there is established custom and practice in relation to that. That actually raises another issue, concerning, for example, the salary scales of the Secretaries General and the deviation. Is what I am referring to a standard now? The response is coming from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. Where there is a deviation, is it now going to be the basis for why a salary should commence at a particular level, that of the previous incumbent? For example, if the Secretary General of the Department of Health moved out of that role and somebody else moved in, would that person’s salary represent the standard set by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform? I would like some clarification on that.

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

Essentially, new salary guidelines were issued for this position but we were told they could not affect the incumbent and would apply only to the new CEO, whenever the position arose.

What happened, according to freedom of information, FOI, releases I have received, was that NewERA effectively reviewed a business case that was provided to it by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, which in turn was provided to it by Horse Racing Ireland. As I said, there are then other questions because the appointment had been made prior to the formal approval being granted. As Deputy Catherine Murphy rightly said, these decisions can subsequently be used as justification for future decisions, so it is important we pursue this issue to find out how exactly we arrived at this point. It does not appear to be the type of robust analysis we would expect of NewERA.

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

Obviously, that is going by the figures given by NewERA. The rationale for the car is set out as well in the correspondence.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I will make just a couple of observations on the points raised. Regarding the car, I think what was applied for was a car allowance, which, effectively, would be a payment made to the chief executive as part of his or her salary, and there would be benefit-in-kind taxation of the allowance, but that was declined. What was agreed was that a company car would be provided, presumably on the basis that this person would be travelling around to racecourses and so on. That was that aspect of it.

NewERA is part of the NTMA and has a specific focus to advise Departments on commercial State bodies and issues that arise in that regard. Its role, therefore, was to examine the case that was made regarding the salary and to express a view on it. Because NewERA is part of the NTMA, it has a role that can be examined by the committee when it has the NTMA before it to explore a little more what it does, the nature of the advice it gives, how it arrives at its conclusions and so on.

Finally, my understanding is that when a pay level is determined, it is determined in relation to the post and not in relation to the individual. The example given was the Secretary General of the Department of Health. Anybody filling that post will attract that salary. It was not a salary determination for an individual. Similarly, here, it was, I think, the lower salary scale that was originally approved in, let us say, 2012 or whatever. It was never applied. The application was, effectively, to revise the pay rate for the role to the higher level. That was agreed, or at least recommended, by NewERA and approved by the Ministers.

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

We will seek an answer from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform to that. It is a vital fact that NewERA recommended the approval and granted the proposed salary of €180,773.

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

May I ask that the committee find out what the car costs and whether it is a company car? What are we talking about here?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I expect to sign off on the 2020 financial statements for Horse Racing Ireland today. There has been a delay in the completion of its accounts but I expect to sign them today. It may be timely for the committee to call Horse Racing Ireland before it when they are presented.

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

We will consider that as part of the work programme.

The next correspondence is No. 1154B. It is from Ms Bernie McNally, Secretary General of the Department of Education, and is dated 29 March. It provides information requested by the committee regarding funding for disability services and related Department of Education expenditure for transporting children to avail of the services. It references a review of the school transport scheme. The proposed action is to request that the Department provide the committee with a copy of the review once it is completed. Is it agreed to publish this correspondence and request a copy of the review once completed?

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

Agreed.

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

That is agreed. It was flagged by Deputy Carthy for discussion.

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

Given the time constraints, I am happy enough to move on.

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

No. 1157B, from Ms Vivienne Flood, head of public affairs, RTÉ, is dated 25 March and provides information requested by the committee arising from our meeting with RTÉ on 20 January. It includes information on the top earners and the RTÉ Player. Is it agreed to note and publish this correspondence? Agreed. It was flagged for discussion by Deputies Carthy, Catherine Murphy and Munster. I call Deputy Carthy.

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

I am okay for now. I will allow others in.

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

I wanted, in addition to what is in the correspondence, to query the revenue generated by the player from advertisements, not across the whole platform but just on the player, and the duration of the ads.

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

Is everybody else okay? Sorry, Deputy Munster. I have got used to looking at the rest of the Members in the room, do you see? You are the odd one out at the moment.

Photo of Imelda MunsterImelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

You forgot about me. I wanted to flag this correspondence, particularly because it relates to previous correspondence and engagement with RTÉ, specifically No. R1198B from the Department of Social Protection. It is about bogus self-employment and RTE workers' cases. I do not feel the Department of Social Protection's related correspondence adequately addresses our question as to why it cannot provide interim updates on the outcomes of those cases where a decision has not been reached. That is very clear in its correspondence. I suspect it might relate to the fact that it has been reported that RTÉ is appealing those decisions that have gone against it to the Social Welfare Appeals Office. I would see that as a way of delaying justice for those concerned by up to six months. From our engagements with RTÉ and the reports in the media, I still find it bizarre that RTÉ has committed to back pay of up to only four years and-----

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

We have correspondence on that which we will come to.

Photo of Imelda MunsterImelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, but the two items are tied in with RTÉ. RTÉ has committed to back pay of up to only four years and nothing at all in respect of holiday pay or pension contributions. I do not see how it could get away with that. I know the Chairman has referred to the other correspondence, but could we write to both the Department of Social Protection and RTÉ to ask them both whether RTÉ has appealed every single case that went against it or just a handful of cases? We should have been getting those interim updates because there seems to be a lack of understanding that RTÉ exploited these workers. I for one would not accept Ms Forbes's assertion that this is a legacy issue because RTÉ continues to deny these workers their entitlements by unnecessarily prolonging the process. My big fear is that if these cases end up in court, I have no doubt but that a future director general of RTÉ will tell a future Committee of Public Accounts that spiralling legal costs are a legacy matter. That may well be Ms Forbes's legacy. Can we write to both and ask-----

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

Deputy, could you just hold that? I want to be fair to the committee members. The issue you raise is very important, and I concur with what you say about the matter and its importance and that the workers should get what is rightfully due to them, but we are dealing with No. 1157B now. If you can bear with us, Deputy Munster, the correspondence relating to the matter you raise is just a little further on and we can stop on it when we reach it. It is No. 1198. I will come back to it.

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

No. 1161B is correspondence from Mr. David Moloney, Secretary General of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, dated 29 March, providing information requested by the committee regarding the decision to stop funding the Benefacts database.

It concerned the non-profit sector, which is reported to receive €7 billion in public funding each year. The proposed action is to note and publish and request the Department of Rural and Community Development to set out the rationale for its decision not to fund Benefacts. Is that agreed? Agreed. We have also included this matter on the agenda for our meeting with the Department on 19 May. The issue has been flagged by Deputy Catherine Murphy.

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

I cannot for the life of me understand why the Benefacts database was dispensed with, but it has moved on and the Department of Rural and Community Development is exploring options that essentially involve duplicating what was already there. It was a very useful database. Is there a role for people who were involved in Benefacts? I know databases go out of date if one does not continue to populate them but is there a role for retrieving some of the information that was there? It was very well used. I cannot understand what the Department is trying to achieve that will be different. Is there a role for some of the people who were involved in running Benefacts? Can the information that populated the database continue to be used or can the platform be retrieved?

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

We will ask for clarification on that.

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

It is an awful waste of money.

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

There was discussion previously regarding whether the information from the Benefacts system would be retrieved or retained. I am not clear on what is the position in that regard. We will seek clarification on that. It has also been agreed that we will write to the Department of Rural and Community Development to ask it to set out the rationale for the decision not to fund Benefacts. Are members happy with that?

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

Another question that we probably have to ask the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform when it comes in is why it did this, given that a duplicate will be required and there will be a gap in timelines. Where does value for money come into it if you get rid of something that functions and then create something that is similar? This is a prototype for how to waste money. It is infuriating.

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

It is a relatively small amount of money. The database was useful.

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

Yes.

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

They are coming our way. The Department of Public Expenditure and Reform will be appearing before us soon.

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

I agree with everything Deputy Catherine Murphy said. An additional line of inquiry might be to ask the Central Statistics Office what its data source for the non-profit sector will be in the absence of Benefacts. We should get broader information from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform in respect of its envisaged timeline for the procurement of a new provider, what it intends to do to manage the gap in coverage and whether its new provider will provide something less than what is currently in place with Benefacts.

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

We will seek that. We will also put it on the agenda for when the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform appears before the committee.

No. 1162 is correspondence from Mr. Ken Spratt, Secretary General of the Department of Transport, dated 28 March, providing information requested by the committee arising from our meeting on 3 March. The proposed action is to note and publish. Is that agreed? Agreed. This issue was raised by Deputies Catherine Murphy and Carthy.

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

I will come in on this issue on another day. I am okay for now.

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

We have a very ambitious target for something like 100,000 electric vehicles. This relates to the second-hand car market. There is a world of difference between second-hand electric vehicles and other second-hand vehicles. If one buys a second-hand petrol car with 60,000 miles on the clock, one will have a rough idea of the lifespan of the car but if one buys an electric vehicle, the battery is the issue. It is very expensive to replace. It seems that targets are being set at national level in the context of our climate obligations but it is then stated that it is a market function. Maybe the committee should write to the Department of Finance regarding the vehicle registration tax, VRT, implications in respect of second-hand electric vehicles. There will be implications in that regard in the context of reaching our targets and the policy. That will obviously have an implication in the context of fines and all sorts of things.

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

The Department is saying, based on its figures, there is a need to have 845,000 plug-in electric cars by 2030. That figure seems optimistic, to say the least. The Deputy is proposing that the committee write to the Department of Finance.

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

If we are going to be relying on imports, which appears likely because of the cost, as electric vehicles are quite expensive anyway, and people are probably going to rely on the second-hand market, what are the VRT implications in that regard?

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

We will seek that information from the Department of Finance.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The Department of Finance is due to appear before the committee next week. The issue could be raised then.

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

Okay. We will hold off on writing to the Department. I will ask the question in person next week.

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

No. 1164 is correspondence from Ms Marguerite Ryan, finance officer at the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, dated 30 March, providing information requested by the committee arising from our meeting with the Department on 17 February. The proposed action is to note and publish. Is that agreed? Agreed. It has been flagged for discussion by Deputy Catherine Murphy.

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

What number is it?

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

It is No. 1164 from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage.

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

I do not have it with me. We will leave it.

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

No. 1176B is correspondence from Mr. Brendan Gleeson, Secretary General of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, dated 31 March, providing information requested by the committee regarding a legal review being undertaken by the Department in respect of the proposed relocation of a Horse Sport Ireland facility to Greenogue in Dublin. This item follows on from our consideration of a previous related item from the Department on this matter, that is, No. R1049. The proposed action is to note and publish. Is that agreed? Agreed. Deputy Catherine Murphy flagged this issue.

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

I refer to paragraph (d), which states that Horse Sport Ireland should obtain legal advice on whether the procurement rules apply to this transaction in advance of finalising an agreement with the landlord at Greenogue. It is an industrial estate. I would like greater clarity from Horse Sport Ireland in respect of whether it believes procurement rules apply in this context and whether it has already obtained legal advice.

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

Okay.

No. 1181B is correspondence from Mr. David Moloney, Secretary General of the Government accounting unit at the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, enclosing the minute of the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform in respect of our report on the 2019 appropriation accounts for Vote 24 - Justice and Equality and Vote 21 – Prisons. These are important items of correspondence as they contain the responses to the recommendations of the committee.

The proposed action is to note and publish. Is that agreed? Agreed. Deputy Catherine Murphy flagged this for consideration.

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

We had the Department in this morning. Let us see what comes back in relation to the note they said that they would provide and we can come back on it then.

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

Okay.

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

It was not acceptable this morning. One could have this crazy scenario in order to avoid any questions on a particular line of expenditure that one would simply move it to another Department and then no historical questions can be asked because the new Department says that was historical and the old one says it can no longer answer questions in relation to that because it has moved.

It appears that these issues of emergency accommodation are arising all the time. The Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth, in the new Department that is dealing with these areas, confirmed in the Dáil today that the catering firm Aramark has been given a contract to provide meals to Ukrainian refugees and that there has been no procurement process employed at all. That raises a red flag to me. Every time there is an emergency and there are poor people in difficulty someone manages to make a lot of money out of it and there are always question marks in respect of the process employed.

In respect of this correspondence, I suggest that we write to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform requesting whether or not it has evaluated this move on the part of the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth and whether it has a view on this contract. We should seek from the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth the full details of the contract - the timeframe, the money involved and the safeguards that have been put in place.

It strikes me that it is never a set of local catering companies that get these contracts. It is always huge corporations and in this instance, one that has had a lot of question marks with regard to previous ones.

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

Okay.

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

I am only making that point. I suggest that we write to both the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, DPER, and the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth and that we may seek to hold a hearing on this matter.

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

We will seek answers from both. We will have DPER in before us as well. They got noted for that day. I thank Deputy Carthy.

The next correspondence is No. 1195 B from Mr. Robert Watt, Secretary General, Department of Health providing the Department's response to an inquiry from the committee regarding pharmaceutical industry payments to HSE-funded healthcare organisations and professionals. The proposed action is to note and publish it and to forward the Department's response, along with the correspondence that gave rise to it, which was R0947, to the Joint Committee on Health for its information and any action it may deem appropriate. Deputy Imelda Munster flagged this.

Photo of Imelda MunsterImelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This correspondence has raised an issue of significant concern in that the response of the Department seems to substantiate in particular the idea that high level civil servants would not have to declare gifts of as much as €2,500 in relation to travel, accommodation and meals. I note the Department had made specific reference to legislation by Deputies O'Rourke and Cullinane that would seek to address the issue. I suggest the most appropriate follow-up by this committee might be to refer it to the Joint Committee on Health.

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

Is that agreed? Agreed.

We will move on to No. 1198 B from Mr. John McKeon, Secretary General, Department of Social Protection, dated 14 April 2022, providing information requested by the committee regarding the status of the investigation of certain workers engaged by RTÉ. The Department commits to providing an interim update later this year. The proposed action is to note and publish. Is that agreed? Agreed. Deputy Catherine Murphy wishes to comment on this.

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

They are making it clear that they want time to complete. I completely understand Deputy Munster's frustration and the frustration of the employees who have waited a very long time. It is not only a question of recognising the other issues, such as holiday and other entitlements and backdating some of what was found. I am not sure the Scope section, at the same time, can give us an interim report. They are pretty much saying that they are not going to.

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

What they are saying is that they are reluctant to provide a series of interim updates relating to decisions made on appeal but they can provide a more comprehensive update - one interim update is what they state - later this year.

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

I would say this is a serious review by the Scope department. I have seen some of the work that they have done previously.

We would not benefit from a piecemeal approach. On proper updates, I am comfortable with what they are proposing here in terms of that particular Department's role in this because it is a serious review. If it was coming from Revenue, that would be the view we would take as well.

I completely understand the frustrations in relation to how RTÉ is handling the situation. That is a separate issue.

Photo of Imelda MunsterImelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will not go through it all again. I propose that the committee write to both RTÉ and the Department of Social Protection to ask has RTÉ appealed every case that went against it or is it only a handful of cases where there are technical issues or whatever. It would be interesting to know from both because the Department's response might be related to the fact that RTÉ is appealing and prolonging shamefully the issue for the workers. It would be no harm writing to both to find that out.

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

I suggest, with the committee's agreement, that we ask RTÉ to clarify whether each of the cases of all those who were employed on a contract basis was examined in terms of whether it had the correct status as being self-employed contractors or were they more rightfully employed as employees. I suggest that we seek that clarification as to whether the case of each person who is employed by RTÉ on a contract basis was examined.

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

I have no difficulty with this but I would have presumed that it is not up to RTÉ to make that decision and that Scope section will come in and determine what it will look at rather than be given a sample.

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

It is a different question. I am asking whether each case of a worker who works for RTÉ on a self-employed or contract basis, not a certain section of them but each and every one of them, examined to see if it was correctly categorised.

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

Okay.

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

We note and publish that.

The next item of correspondence is No. 1200 B from Ms Clíodhna Guy, interim chief executive officer of the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board, dated 14 April 2022 responding to the committee’s request to clarify the timeframe for the installation of CCTV cameras at racecourses. The proposed action is to note and publish this. It is flagged by Deputy Imelda Munster.

Photo of Imelda MunsterImelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is another one that you pull the hair out of your head with. First, I find the position of the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board, IHRB, on this matter utterly lacking in substance of explanation. They told us in December that they would be ready to start installing the CCTVs in January, the beginning of the new season, and that was New Year's Day.

It was stated that it would take six weeks. Now we are informed that it could take almost six months. That is another four or five months. That beggars belief, particularly when we think of the benefits that CCTV monitoring would have for the industry and, more importantly, those tasked with regulating it. We cannot help but wonder why there is delay after delay. It raises more questions than answers. It is very frustrating that each time we ask for an update, we are told it is happening. It is being kicked further and further down the road, however. I ask that we request a further update by June. I hope I am proved wrong, but I suspect the board will kick this further down the road for reasons best known to itself at this stage.

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

It states that it is progressing to installation stage.

Photo of Imelda MunsterImelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It has been saying that-----

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

The project is planned to be completed by mid-autumn.

Photo of Imelda MunsterImelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It was to be started in January and completed in a matter of weeks.

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

Okay.

Photo of Imelda MunsterImelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The board told us that in December.

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

It has been pushed further out again. It is very frustrating. The Deputy is suggesting that at the half-year point - at the end of June - we look for an update.

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

Okay.

Photo of Imelda MunsterImelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would prefer sooner, but I do not there is any point-----

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

Yes.

Photo of Imelda MunsterImelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----in looking for it sooner. We would imagine that for something that would protect the integrity of the sport there would be a certain amount of expediency, but this has clearly not happened to date.

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

This has gone on for a long time. We will keep an eye on the matter because this is the first time I have seen a projected completion time, which is mid-autumn. We will watch this carefully. I thank the Deputy.

The next category is correspondence from private individuals and any other correspondence. No. 1155C is correspondence, dated 29 March 2022, from an individual requesting that the committee to make inquiries regarding the new national maternity hospital. Deputy Catherine Murphy has flagged this for consideration.

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

Obviously, all of the money has not been spent yet but some money has been spent to date. It is probably this aspect we can deal with. Approximately €50 million has been spent on a pharmacy and other ancillary services. There may well be a car park. Can we ask the Department of Health what has been expended to date, including on the design? We have been waiting since 2018. There was the Mulvey report. There are very serious concerns about ownership and control of the national maternity hospital. The amount spent to date is probably the most useful thing we can look for given that we know there are projected costs but there is still a decision to be made on this.

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

Contracts to the value of just over €54 million have been signed.

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

Yes.

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

There is the car park and the pharmacy extension. We will seek answers on this.

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

Has other money in spent on the site in advance of a decision being made-----

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

As to who will control it.

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

The money that has been spent.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The decision has not yet been finalised, as I understand it. The final deal is not in place.

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

No.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The query is what expenditure has already been incurred for things such as enabling works or ancillary works for the maternity hospital.

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

Yes.

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

And the decision being the outstanding matter with regard to the land and the lease.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

And the terms under which the services will be provided.

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

Yes, and there is the ethics committee, the ethics of the hospital and all of that .

No. 1188C is correspondence from Deputy Catherine Murphy, dated 12 April 2022. It is a request to the committee to request further information from An Garda Síochána arising from the committee's meeting with An Garda Síochána on 31 March 2022. It is proposed to proceed as requested. Does the Deputy wish to address this item?

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

This has been raised on a couple of occasions. I raised it with the Garda Commissioner, and I raised it again this morning with regard to the memorandum of understanding. Can we ask it for an update on whether the memorandum of understanding has been signed? There is an impediment to the establishment of the new corporate enforcement agency as a consequence of not having this. It has been given extra powers but Garda resources are critical. This was one of the fault lines when we were debating the legislation. Can we get an update on this?

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

Okay. I thank the Deputy.

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

We were told it was imminent when the Garda Commissioner was last before the committee. The definition of terminology is-----

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

I thank the Deputy.

No. 1211C is correspondence from me requesting the committee to write to the Department of Health in relation to the now abandoned secondment or redeployment, whichever it is, of the Chief Medical Officer to Trinity College Dublin. In the letter I set out that the committee would write to the Department of Health to request further information on the proposed appointment or secondment of Dr. Tony Holohan to Trinity College and that the information would include how the decision was made, who made the decision, who was involved in the decision-making, what was the expected salary and expenses and what were the total expenses in terms of offices and any secretarial backup or anything else. It would also include the total cost involved for the Department over the period of five years and what official processes and guidelines the Department has transfers and secondments. Since the matter became one of public interest, the issue of processes and guidelines to which the Department operates is crucial. I am not clear about it and I do not know whether anybody else on the committee is clear about it. It is important that we do this. If the committee agrees we will request it from the Department of Health. Is that agreed? Agreed. The Department will come before the committee in the near future and that will also provide an opportunity.

No other items of correspondence have been flagged for consideration.

With regard to our work programme, the following engagements are confirmed for May. We will have the Department of Finance on 5 May, University of Limerick on 12 May, the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform on 19 May and, as I mentioned, the Department of Health on 26 May. I will set out some proposals for June and then open the floor to members. As 2 June falls in a non-sitting week, the next available date is 9 June. I propose that we schedule a meeting with the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth on that date. Is that agreed? Agreed.

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

Can we flag that we will return to the Aramark contract with it on that occasion?

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

Procurement generally will need to be discussed with it at the meeting. It is on the work programme and responsibility for direct provision now resides with that Department.

I also propose that we schedule an engagement with the National Pediatric Hospital Development Board in June, with representatives from the Department of Health. The board was last before the committee in July last year when we examined its 2019 financial statements. Is it agreed that we schedule this engagement? Agreed. It is very frustrating that we are denied the information we need.

Before Easter, we agreed to examine local government oversight and accountability. I suggest that we also look at this in June. With the agreement of members we will consider how we might approach this when we meet next. Is that agreed? Agreed. We have had some discussion about who we want to come before the committee. There are a number of parties.

Other bodies on the work programme include the Department of Education regarding the special report on education and training boards. There is also the Central Bank and Revenue Commissioners on the outstanding chapter on assessment and collection of insurance compensation fund levies. There is also Horse Racing Ireland and the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board.

If there are any other matters members wish to raise, they can put them forward now or at the next meeting. As usual, we will run it through like that. Members can let the clerk know. If there are any specific issues regarding any of the groups coming in over the next month, members can let the clerk know so we can put them on the agenda and notify the guests of them.

That concludes consideration of the work programme for today. The last item on the public agenda for today is any other business. Does any member wish to raise anything?

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

On 31 January, the committee wrote to the Secretary General of the Department of Health seeking clarification regarding the exact period of time for which he waived remuneration for his current post. We did not receive any response. We wrote again on 8 April and that question was put again. I propose that we write again requesting that information. I remind the committee that this information related to the waiving of the substantial increase in salary allocated to the post. A public statement was made by the Secretary General on his appointment to the role on a permanent basis that he was waiving that portion of his salary. The public and this committee have a right to know for how long that took place, bearing in mind that whatever portion he did not take was available to the Department for other purposes. I propose that, following the meeting, we write again and continue to seek that information.

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

The committee requested this information when the Secretary General was in.

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

Yes, that was in December last year.

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

We had a discussion around that with the Secretary General and we are not clear. If it is agreed by the committee, we will request that.

We have to go into private session for a few minutes before adjourning until next Thursday, 5 May, when we will examine the Department of Finance's 2020 appropriation accounts and two chapters of the Comptroller and Auditor General's Report on the Accounts of the Public Services 2020.

The committee went into private session at 3.42 p.m. and adjourned at 3.47 p.m. until 9.30 a.m. on Thursday, 5 May 2022.