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

The public business before the committee this afternoon is as follows: minutes, accounts and financial statements, correspondence, work programme and any other business. The minutes of the meeting of 2 March have been circulated. Do any members wish to raise anything in that regard? No. Are the minutes agreed? Agreed. As usual, they will be published on the committee's web page.

We will move onto accounts and financial statements. We have six sets of accounts and financial statements, which were laid before the Houses between 27 February and 3 March. I will ask the Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. McCarthy, to come in on those.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The first set relates to the Criminal Assets Bureau. The accounting period is 2021 and it received a clear audit opinion. The second set relates to the Royal Irish Academy for 2021 and also received a clear audit opinion. However, in that case, I draw the attention to the assumptions underpinning the recognition of a deferred pension funding asset, which is a standard matter I call out in respect of bodies with substantial non-State income such as the universities. The third set relates to the Insolvency Service of Ireland for 2021 and received a clear audit opinion.

The fourth relates to the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board for 2021. These accounts received a clear audit opinion but I will draw attention to two matters. The first matter is the board's non-compliance with the requirement to disclose chief executive officer and staff salary band information for 2021, information the Department directed it to disclose. The second matter I will draw attention to is the former chief executive officer's early retirement payment in 2021, which was significantly in excess of the terms of the board's early retirement scheme conditions.

The fifth set relates to the Commission for Railway Regulation for 2021 and received a clear audit opinion. The sixth set of accounts, which relates to the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Ireland for 2021, received a qualified audit opinion. The reason for this is that, in my view, the accounts give a true and fair view excepting that they account for the cost of the retirement benefit entitlements of staff only as they become payable. That is standard for many health bodies and is done at the direction of the Minister.

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

May I ask about No. 4, the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board? In the Comptroller and Auditor General's report, he says:

The CEO subsequently applied for, and was granted, early retirement. A formal agreement was concluded on 11 June 2021 providing for the termination of his employment with effect from 30 September 2021. The terms of the agreement included a termination payment of €384,870. This was €141,880 (58%) more than the amount payable if the scheme conditions had been applied as stated. Accordingly, the terms agreed with the former CEO were, to a significant extent, an exception to the provisions of the Board's early retirement scheme.

Apart from that, was there anything else unusual about that early retirement scheme?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

No. The early retirement scheme was available generally to staff of the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board, IHRB. Similar conditions were available to personnel in Horse Racing Ireland. The scheme was relatively standard in itself. The difficulty I had is that this was represented as an early retirement but the settlement was significantly in excess of what was provided for in the scheme.

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

Have we notified the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine of that? We should notify the Department and ask for its opinion.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The Department is certainly aware of this because it presented the financial statements. The protocol is that the IHRB submits its accounts to the Department and the Department lays them. The Department is therefore aware of the amount involved in this case.

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

On the same issue, this was a very large amount of money made up of two elements. I always understood that the word "redundancy" meant that the job was redundant. If people are replaced, it is not a case of redundancy. It is not down to the person. That raises a question for me with regard to the use of the fund.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The scheme was an early retirement or redundancy scheme. In the case of certain personnel who availed of it, there may have been an element of redundancy but the chief executive took early retirement. The terms are relatively similar but the reasons are different. There is only a single element in this. The total amount paid by the IHRB was €384,870.

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

In 2021, there was a charge for €746,563 in respect of employees admitted to the scheme so this payment would have been a big element of that sum. At the time, we were trying to figure out whether the figure related to one person or a multiplicity of people. This €384,870 accounts for about half of that figure, or is it more?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

It is about half.

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

The Turf Club and Irish National Hunt Steeplechase Committee then contributed top-up payments to the exit package, apparently in recognition of the CEO's work. The 2021 accounts show that those two bodies owe the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board €175,000 and €34,000. Does that add to their deficit? Were they were already indebted to the IHRB and then gave these top-up payments or does the amount they owe account for those payments?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The Turf Club is what is described as a related party to the IHRB. The IHRB is a statutory body.

Obviously, the directors are nominated by the Turf Club and by the Irish National Hunt Steeplechase Committee. The building the IHRB occupies is owned by the Turf Club and rented by the IHRB, so there are a number of transactions going either way. The difficulty I had with the amount that was owed by the Turf Club to the IHRB was that there is no documentary evidence as to what that figure is for.

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

Yes. It could be this.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The money was received - I am not sure of the exact figure - so we knew that it was coming to the IHRB and, therefore, we were happy enough to see the Turf Club recognised as a debtor in the financial statements, but there is no documentary evidence indicating what that figure is for.

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

That is a governance failure.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I consider that a transaction, particularly with an external or a related party, should always be properly documented.

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

Are these amounts in the right year's statements? Could they relate to part of the money that was transferred to the IHRB?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The explanation we were provided with, the representation that was made to us, was that they were related to the earlier retirement settlement, but we do not have any documentary evidence for that.

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

As you said, Mr. McCarthy, the Department is aware of the matter.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The Department is aware of the matter. The committee might ask it for its view on it if the committee were so minded.

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

I think we should do that and ask the Department what measures or steps it has taken to ensure that this type of situation does not arise again. There are clear criteria, judging from the way you have set out the matter here, Mr. McCarthy, and they were obviously put to one side-----

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Yes. Prior to the 2021 financial statements, the Department did not require disclosure of the chief executive's remuneration or the salary band information, but for 2021 and onward it has directed the IHRB to present that information. In these financial statements the IHRB has indicated that it is discussing that with the Department.

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

This comes up not necessarily just in respect of this case but also where something is found to be way outside of, say, a scheme or the rules and does not fall within the criminal code. We have seen that happen in other instances. Where is the sanction? Does the Comptroller and Auditor General keep an eye on the sanctions? Obviously, consequences change behaviour. Is it a question of just calling this out? Is that where the accountability is, or does the Comptroller and Auditor General follow up with the Department and ask how this worked out and whether it made a difference? Whose responsibility is that?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The only thing I can do is point out the issue. I do not have any power of sanction or whatever. Obviously, I have drawn this to the attention of the committee because I considered that it required public accountability. Where there are non-standard payments like this, we generally encourage the entity itself to disclose it, but the IHRB was not minded to do that. There was again, I understand, a non-disclosure agreement as part of the settlement. All I can do is report the matter. After that, it is for the Department or the entity itself to follow up on it.

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

We will ask the Department for its response and ask it what steps are being taken to ensure safeguarding and insist that they be taken.

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

I wish to raise just one other thing.

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

Briefly, please.

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

Non-disclosure agreements are an issue in their own right. How can we have transparency if bodies like this are putting in non-disclosure agreements? We may well ask the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform about non-disclosure agreements because they have no place in this.

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

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Where settlements involve lower level staff, there may be, depending on the circumstances, a merit in keeping matters confidential because they are employee issues. However, where there is a significant settlement with the most senior person departing an organisation, that requires a different level of transparency, I think.

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

Is it agreed that we will note the listing of accounts and financial statements? Agreed. As usual, the listing of accounts and financial statements will be published as part of our minutes.

Moving on to correspondence, and as previously agreed, correspondence items that were not flagged for discussion for this meeting will continue to be dealt with in accordance with the proposed actions circulated by the secretariat, and decisions taken by the committee in respect of correspondence are recorded in the minutes of the committee's meetings and published on our webpage.

The first category of correspondence under which Members have flagged items for discussion is B, correspondence from Accounting Officers and-or Ministers and follow-up to committee meetings. The following two items are held over from previous meetings. They are both related to Benefacts, so we will take them together.

The first is No. R1726B and is from Ms Mary Hurley, Secretary General of the Department of Rural and Community Development. It is dated 7 February 2023 and provides an update on the scoping exercise for a system to replace the Benefacts database, the proposed centralised grantee database and national funding platform. The committee has since written to the Department to request a copy of the business case for the project and details of the scope of Pobal's proposed role in the project. A response is awaited.

The second item is from Mr. David Moloney, Secretary General of the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. It is dated 21 February 2023 and provides further information on Benefacts requested by the committee. It is proposed that we note and publish this correspondence. Is that agreed? Agreed. We have held this over for a few weeks for Deputy Catherine Murphy.

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

Thank you for holding this correspondence over, a Chathaoirligh. I will start with the correspondence from Mr. Moloney. The second paragraph of it states that the Department can confirm that the pay and pensions division, as it was then, of the Department sought data sets and other relevant information from Benefacts, which were used in the compilation of an internal report estimating the potential cost implications arising from a claim for pension provision for community employment supervisors and assistant supervisors. What I am trying to establish is that there was a value and that Departments themselves used this. I am very determined not to let this go. This is the report that was done from that data set. The Department did not then end up having to employ expensive consultants because that information was available to it from a source.

The second document relates to the Department of the Minister of State, Deputy Joe O'Brien, and what was expected in respect of the replacement for Benefacts. The correspondence states of the project background that the high-level purpose of the exercise is to explore options for a funding platform that would reduce the administrative burden on grantees and funders as well as providing a single source of truth and source of analysis on State-funded community and voluntary grantees and the investment being made in those organisations. We already had that. The last paragraph states that any decision to move forward would also involve a significant ICT development project and would require a whole-of-government approach as well as being subject to Government approval and to the conditions set out in the public spending code. The Indecon report into this whole issue recommended that we not dispense with one database in advance of the other being created. It gave us a figure as to what it costs to set up and maintain such a database. Essentially, now we have dispensed with one and are replacing it with something else. The last paragraph refers to any decision to move forward; it does not actually state that the Department will move forward. If we are talking about value-for-money issues, this one stands up in lights in that a decision was made to dispense with something that had demonstrated value for money when there was going to be a very significant cost to replacing it.

I think those items of correspondence pretty much underline that. I suppose we are going to get more information that builds up a picture. It may well be that, at the end of the year, we capture that so as to get an overview of exactly what will happen, what led up to it and what happened in terms of dispensing with Benefacts. Cataloguing that alone would be an example of bad decision-making. The Indecon report stated that having the information I refer to is essential to good governance. We are now going to be missing a piece of critical information. The people who made this decision really should be asking why it was made. We need to have the answers in relation to the business case.

Jerry Buttimer (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When did Benefacts finish?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Last March.

Jerry Buttimer (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There has been no similar service available since. From reading the letter, it is clear to me that the can was being kicked a long way down the road again and that there is nothing left within this. We are dealing with two Departments but it seems that the Department of Rural and Community Development has been landed with the task of development. In so far as I can read it, Pobal will possibly be providing something of an alternative service, but we do not know. Is that not correct?

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

Yes.

Jerry Buttimer (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is nothing there-----

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

A partial replacement.

Jerry Buttimer (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A partial replacement. It is working out at about €900,000, or less than €1 million, per year. The work on this stops with the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. We are going back to it on one point but we need to tell it we have been without the information since the time in question. It will say everyone is relying on the CSO or something. I do not know. I presume that is what will be said, but that is a different thing.

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

The CSO was relying on Benefacts.

Jerry Buttimer (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Absolutely. It is very specific concerning grant aid and funding, particularly for the community and voluntary sector. What are the sources of information since the time in question? The reply we received back from the Department of Rural and Community Development is inadequate. The Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform is in control of what happens and will therefore have the final say. It must inform the committee what it will do to create a project that will deliver something comparable to what Benefacts was doing and also give the timeline for establishment. Reading the letter, I believe it could go on until eternity. The Deputy and I will be long gone by the time it is sorted.

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

We must gather the information we got since we started looking at this issue. We got a reply from the CSO. That was more in relation to EUROSTAT. If I remember correctly, the CSO stated the information could be used for a year or two but then would go out of date. I think that was the interpretation of it. However, there are others who would have used the facility. It is a question of going back to the Indecon report and determining what was proposed, looking at the outworkings and the issue of not having a replacement. We need to gather that information. Maybe the clerk could gather what we have got so far and give an overview of what additional information we need to source to fill the gaps and get a picture.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

May I make a point as well? While Benefacts ceased functioning in March last year, as I recall it, the database was already nearly two years out of date because it was anticipating the lack of funding. Therefore, we are getting very close to the position the CSO indicated – that is, that it will need to find an alternative.

Jerry Buttimer (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The scoping exercise has been completed and is only being considered by the Department. There is no business case yet. That has not been prepared, according to the second letter, namely that of 7 February. If we allow the secretariat to gather the information we have and synopsise it, we can then see where we stand. There has been a game of tennis going on. We have been going back and forward, getting bits of information. The Deputy is right that we need to assess what we have, but we need to be very firm about this. The absence of the information and anything that compares with what Benefacts was providing are of concern. We will make a judgment on it.

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

Grand.

Jerry Buttimer (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Maybe we will consider it after the next business meeting. I thank the Deputy for that.

No. 1761B, from Ms Dee Forbes, director general of RTÉ, provides information requested by the committee regarding Toy Show – the Musical. It is proposed to note and publish this item of correspondence. Is that agreed? Agreed. Deputy Catherine Murphy flagged this.

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

I really only want to get the information as to what would make the show break even. I have no problem with innovation. It would be great if there were additional sources of funding. I do not want to labour the point but must ask how many tickets would need to be sold to break even. That is fairly basic information. Maybe we could ask how the costs would be covered.

Jerry Buttimer (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We should ask whether there was a business case that included that and other information. RTÉ will argue that people have been raising, including at meetings of this committee, the need for RTÉ to broaden out and bring in more commercial revenue. We have raised this with it. Obviously, with commercial activity of this type, and particularly with shows, there is a risk involved. We accept that but we should ask whether there was a business case for the project and, if so, whether we could have a copy of it. We should ascertain whether it includes the number of tickets that would need to be sold to break even. There was a significant number of cancellations, and the number of scheduled shows was reduced from 34 to 27. We will request the information from RTÉ.

No. 1764B, dated 27 February, is from Mr. John Hogan, Secretary General of the Department of Finance. Mr. Hogan is providing information we requested arising from the meeting on 17 November. It is proposed to note and publish the correspondence. Is that agreed? Agreed. It was flagged by Deputy Munster. She is not here, so I propose to hold it over if members are happy with that.

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

I am happy to hold it over.

Jerry Buttimer (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will deal with it in two weeks' time.

No. 1766B is from Mr. David Gunning, chief officer of the National Paediatric Hospital Development Board. He has provided further information requested by the committee regarding a completion date for the national children's hospital and the dispute-management process. It is proposed to note and publish this item of correspondence. Is that agreed? Agreed. Deputy Catherine Murphy flagged this item.

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

There are a few aspects to it. The first paragraph states fit-out is also at an advanced stage in all parts of the hospital and that orders have been placed for all specialist material or medical equipment that is to be integrated into the building. One reason this matter is important is that we need to know whether there are delays or logistics issues. The March 2024 opening will very much depend on this and other factors. It may be that we can ask for clarification.

The next paragraph states the main contractor is expected to submit an updated programme for substantial completion to the employer's representative in accordance with the public works contract. It adds that, once received, this programme will be reviewed and evaluated by the employer's representative. It would be useful for us to understand the completion procedure.

The delay at a time of high inflation has added to costs. It would be useful for us to keep an eye on this completion date and if they could give us the protocols around the completion and what are they working to. Does that make sense? For instance, what still has to be done? I refer to the high-level stuff. I am not looking at the granular detail, but how they are working through that to make sure they get to the March 2024 target.

Finally, and this is at the bottom of the page, "The Contractor has referred a high value delay related dispute to conciliation and the Contractor has referred two disputes to adjudication." I am looking at the table on page 3 of the letter. There are some very large, but quite global, figures. I presume that those cases would be included in those figures. I cannot see how they would not be.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

That would be my understanding of it. These are the stages of processing of the cases rather than the nature of the cases. There is some splitting by type out there, but excluding inflation.

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

When you look at the claims to be determined by the employer's representative, of which there are 1,323, there is a value of €509 million on them-----

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

Yes, and the one above.

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

-----and the employer's representative determined amount amending the sum to €11 million, the variation in these that we have seen is striking. Obviously, you could look at it and say that you look for enough, go in begging and hope that you can come the best out of it. It would appear that there is some of that in it.

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

That second column relates to the first.

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

The Deputy will be aware that we have them on the work programme.

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

All right. Maybe that is the time to use this.

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

We should revisit that at that point because that is one of the big unknowns with this project.

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

You can have a figure there and it is very large, but then you can have, for instance, that third one down, which is the one the Cathaoirleach referenced. It is hard to make sense of what the figure on the first line is and how that relates to the second, and the subsequent figures. This will be quite useful to us when we meet them.

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

I wish to confirm with the Comptroller and Auditor General that the total amount in claims is that €646 million. Is that correct?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

That would be my interpretation of it.

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

Then does the Comptroller and Auditor General see the ones determined by the employer's representative?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Actually, if you take the first figure there of 1,875, that is the total number of claims as notified by the contractor. The second line would seem to be where the basis for making the claim has been stood up and the value has been put on it. That would be a total value of €650 million. The third line then, and this is the first stage of the process for resolving the claims, would be the number of claims that are determined by the employer's representative, who is acting in an independent capacity. The value of those claims would be €509 million. As I understand it, the employer's representative determined the amount amending the contract sum. In other words, this is what was awarded.

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

The board?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

No, this is what was awarded by the employer's representative, ER. That would be €11.3 million.

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

That is the figure. I have seen this throughout with these claims. As a percentage, it is small.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The employer's representative effectively is saying that he or she does not accept that there is a basis for these substantial claims. Obviously, then the contractor may not be happy with that and will bring the claims forward to the next stage of the process, which is either project board and conciliation or the other resolution process, and you can see that significant sums have gone forward into that kind of process.

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

I note 1,081 claims have gone into that now, amounting to €336 million.

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

Is it those represented by the figure on the second line of the table, the "Substantiated Claims Issued for Determination", that are in conciliation and arbitration or is it the ones below that?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

As I understand it, that is the total value the contractor has put on the claims and given evidence for. There are another 300 claims that a value has not yet been put on. Of the €650 million, approximately €509 million has gone through the employer's representative and he - or she, I think it is - has made a determination one way or the other.

If you go over to the column there, "Contractor Claimed Amount Referred to Dispute", and if go down that, you can see the first value there is €336 million. Of the €509 million that has been determined by the ER, €336 million of it is in "Contractor only, ER Determined Claims that are disputed and referred to Project Board and Conciliation". There is €336 million at that stage of the process. You have €45 million "disputed and referred to the High Court".

It is quite difficult to follow through this information but the total amount of it that is in dispute is €512 million. I cannot even understand how €512 million can be in dispute when the ER determined is €509 million. That has defeated me, I am afraid.

Then there are other categories as well there.

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

When they are before the committee in the near future, we can go through it with them. The claims are an area that show the potential. They are significant in number and in the amount being claimed. The awards of them, relative to the claims, have been fairly low to date. That has been the pattern.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

In terms of the first item that the Deputy referred to, the current programme stating that the building will be substantially complete in March 2024, I am not clear whether the updated programme for substantial completion would be for the same date or a different date. The contract envisages that there would be what is called a "compliant programme for completion", in other words, a programme that is put forward by the contractor that is accepted by the board. What they say is:

The current programme from the Main Contractor [it does not say that it is a compliant programme] states that the building will be substantially complete in March 2024, [and then handed over for] commissioning. By the end of February 2023, the Main Contractor is expected to submit an updated programme ... .

That could be suggesting a different date. There is still a lot of information required by the committee in relation to that.

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

That is critically important-----

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

Absolutely.

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

-----because time is money.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The commissioning period, obviously, then will be added as well.

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

It is six months or something, is it not?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Six to nine months.

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

Six to nine months, I heard them say on one occasion here.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

You can add that on to whatever the substantial completion date is.

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

It will be early 2025.

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

They are telling us here that the contractor told them, but that is not agreed.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

They do not use the term "compliant programme", which is what the contract requires.

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

Okay. The last correspondence item is No. R1767. This is from Ms Carol Boate, Regulator of the National Lottery, dated 28 February 2023.

It provides information on the National Lottery Act 2013 and the national lottery licence. It is proposed to note and publish this item of correspondence. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Deputy Munster flagged this and I suggest that we deal with. The correspondence outlines the natures of the breaches. There are eight fairly substantial breaches. Self-excluded players have been readmitted to their online accounts before the end of their one-month or six-month self-exclusion period through the customer centre. There has been misleading advertisements depicting winning as an alternative to work and showing those aged under 18 in non-incidental roles. The jackpot notification email was sent to players who had opted out of receiving such emails. This was due to human error and we would accept this but the others are of note. A press release depicted winning as a way out of financial difficulties.

The top prize was omitted from three scratch card games due to errors made on spreadsheets. This was also an error but there are more significant breaches on the next page of the document. The operator failed to apply control to ensure all scratch card games matched the approved prize structure. The operator only applied it to the first print run and relied on spreadsheets thereafter. There was also a time lag in the system that allowed marketing communications to be sent to players who had self-excluded up to 36 hours after they decided to exclude.

We have these issues, and the impact of the breaches with regard to outcomes, but I do not see a penalty or sanction of any kind. We should write back to the regulator to ask whether any sanction has been applied regarding these issues that were breaches of the licence and, if not, why not. I do not know what other committee members think but we have regulatory bodies and, perhaps it is the fault of the Oireachtas that does not give them enough powers. They do not even have false teeth; they have no teeth at all. They seem to be without any powers to sanction where there are breaches in regulations. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I will now move on to our work programme. At our next meeting on 23 March, we will engage with Enterprise Ireland on its financial statements 2021 with funding for local enterprise offices as a specific issue.

On 30 March, we will engage with the Department of Rural and Community Development on its Appropriation Accounts 2021 and chapter 6 of the Report on the Accounts of the Public Services 2021 on central government funding of local authorities.

On 20 April, we will resume our meeting with the Central Bank, the Department of Finance and Revenue on the insurance compensation fund and the Comptroller and Auditor General's section 2 report on unauthorised release of funds from the Central Fund. The Governor of the Central Bank and the Secretary General of the Department of Finance have confirmed their attendance. I am sure committee members are pleased to note this.

We will engage with An Bord Pleanála on 27 April on its 2021 financial statements.

The Comptroller and Auditor General's special report on the emergency procurement of ventilators by the HSE was published on Tuesday. Last week it was agreed to add consideration of this report to our work programme. I propose that we schedule a meeting on this report with the HSE and invite representatives from the Department of Health and the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I have a suggestion to make to committee members on this. The HSE is a big beast. It has new CEO. I understand that Bernard Gloster took up the position this week. Should we bring him in to discuss the ventilators alone? The report is fairly clear and there are a little over a handful of very specific issues in it. There are conclusions and recommendations. I am open to hearing the views of members on this. I do not think we should pack the meeting but perhaps we can deal with this and one other item on the same day.

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

There is the issue of dividing up the HSE into regional areas. Will there be a cost issue to this? As a result, how will tight control be kept on it? When we amalgamated all of the health boards into the HSE there was a huge cost factor. I am concerned that now we are doing the exact opposite and we will have another huge cost factor.

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

I would hope that there will be cost savings.

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

The Chair knows that when anything is restructured there are costs. I was speaking to someone recently about the reconfiguration of the bands that HSE employees are in. Some people have gone up by two bands. This means their salaries have increased and rightly so. The people who have not move bands are feeling very aggrieved as a result. I am concerned that given what happened previously with the amalgamation of the health boards and the reconfiguration that occurred we will have the same process reversed and a huge cost added. I am a bit concerned about it.

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

We need to get back to the work programme and picking out a particular item. This is probably a policy area.

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

Perhaps it is.

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

It is part of Sláintecare and it is to improve accountability whereby it is not so centralised. Part of the problem with the HSE is that it has been so centralised. The HSE could come before the committee every week. We have to select carefully. I agree with the Chair that there should be something in addition.

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

Could I make a suggestion? There is a lot in the report and I thank the Comptroller and Auditor General and the staff in the office for putting it together. It is very clear and very easy to read and work with. I am finding it a great aid in trying to get my head around the issues from that period.

There is a plan in place to deal with waiting list issues that has funding of approximately €360 million. The National Treatment Purchase Fund and the cross-border healthcare directive will all come into it. We know that waiting lists are now a life and death issue. There is pent-up demand because of Covid. Many people have been on waiting lists for a long time. There is a value for money issue. What way will the €360 million be deployed? By the time the HSE comes before us it will be off the starting blocks. It would be a useful exercise to find out the progress of previous cash injections to deal with waiting lists and what lessons were learned and are being implemented in this.

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

I presume this is captured in the accounts where we were buying in services.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I will have to check that.

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

It seems like reasonably good issue to deal with. Perhaps we need to discuss it a little bit.

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

I also think it is a good one to deal with.

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

It is life and death.

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

We have a problem in the sense that people can go abroad and get treatment and look for reimbursement from the State but if people want to go through the National Treatment Purchase Fund they must wait for someone else to decide whether they can do so. I am not sure we are getting value for money on this. It is worth looking at it to see whether we are getting value for money and could it be done in a better way.

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

This obviously has merit. We cannot stray into issues that are more properly matters for the health committee with regard to how something is structured.

There is probably enough information in some of the accounts to look at this, in order to consider the evidence and see what happened.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

There are certainly charges on the HSE's accounts for treatment abroad but the National Treatment Purchase Fund, NTPF, is a separate account.

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

The problem with the NTPF is someone other than the patient decides what is happening whereas with treatment abroad, the patient decides, in real terms, when he or she gets treatment.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The point is you might need people additional to the HSE in the room in order to address that comprehensively.

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

There is a NTPF unit-----

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Yes.

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

-----or office. I do not know what it is called. Cross-Border treatment comes under the fund for foreign travel. Many go to Spain but the cross-Border unit is the same. It fits under that same umbrella.

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

The difference is the patient can decide whether he or she wants to go abroad but the patient has no say in respect of the NTPF.

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

That is correct.

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

That is the difference. We now have a scenario where people are going abroad who, if we had been operating the NTPF in a correct way, would not be. That is what I am saying. I am now convinced we are not getting value for money because of the fact there are facilities here in the South. People are going to Northern Ireland for a whole lot of treatment. I have no problem with that but people are going to the UK, France, Spain and Portugal, and a lot of the treatment they are getting is readily available in Ireland. The structure of the NTPF and the decision-making process-----

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

Treatment is given here in private hospitals under the NTPF but patients have to wait in the queue. Point taken. We need to watch it. The lesson from different occasions when the HSE was in, and probably in the first year or two of this Dáil term, is we tried to deal with many issues-----

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

In general.

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

-----and it is a big beast. It is multifaceted and you can go all over the place and find yourself in all kinds of places. We need to be specific. If waiting lists, the NTPF and the cross-Border aspect are the one piece, we should deal with them as one piece, in addition to the ventilators issue, on the same day and nothing else. How does that sound?

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

That is grand.

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

This is not about current issues. It is the evidence from the accounts.

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

Yes. There has now been an announcement of a new fund. With the creative points members all have, they will know how to deal with the issue and what lessons have been learned. We can deal with that in the context of the new fund.

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

If we are finished with the list, I will ask about a matter relating to our work plan that is not on it. I do not know when the issue of Inland Fisheries Ireland, IFI, will be go on the work plan. We had difficulties regarding it signing off on accounts because there was a problem with people resigning from the board and there was no quorum. Is there an update on when that might be possible? I think there have been some changes. Indeed, I got a reply to a question regarding the amount expended on legal services. A newspaper article stated a lot of money had been spent on protected disclosures. In fact, when you look for those, I cannot find that information on the IIF website. In 2020, its annual report stated there were zero protected disclosures, and there were zero protected disclosures in 2021, yet I have a list of IIF's legal costs. One company got €378,000, and almost €1 million was spent between 2020 and 2022. It is supposed some of that relates to protected disclosures. I am getting more and more concerned about this. I am sure Mr. McCarthy is more concerned than I am but-----

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

As I understand it, the appointed administrators - I am not sure what the term is - who were taking over the role of the board are engaged in meetings with the management of IFI. We do not yet have an indication of a date when we will have final financial statements we can finally certify. I am not yet in a position to tell the Deputy when that process might be completed.

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

My understanding is the accounts are prepared.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Yes.

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

It is just about signing off on them. It will then come down to the Office of the Controller and Auditor General to audit them.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

We have finished looking at the financial figures and we are happy enough with the numbers. The difficulty is around the statement on internal control, which has to accompany the financial statements. There were a number of issues the audit felt needed to be better articulated, and articulated in more detail in the statement on internal control, SIC. Of all these issues that have arisen and are of concern, at least a number of them will certainly need to be discussed and disclosed in the SIC. That is the challenge for those coming in who will have to sign off on that document. They have to be satisfied they understand what it is they are reporting and that it is sufficient and appropriate.

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

We will have to keep that one under review for when we are likely to see it.

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

I will make a suggestion. We have An Bord Pleanála on our list, whose representatives will be in on 27 April. The schedule is done up to then. The week before that, Central Bank representatives will appear. We have flagged a number of other matters. Do members wish to try to get in the Department of Health issues? When we come back after St. Patrick's Day, it would be great if we had about six weeks' notice. It is also good for the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General because if issues come up relating to a particular body or Department coming in that it wants to put on the agenda, it will have the opportunity to do so. In terms of the pecking order, do we want the Department of Health for the first slot in early May? There is also the University of Limerick, UL, report we requested and the matter of the children's hospital, for which we do not have a date. There is also the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board and Irish Water. Which is the most important? We are waiting for Irish Water's accounts to be-----

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

On Irish Water, 2023 is the first year of account I will be auditing and, therefore, it will be next year before the committee will deal with them.

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

Unfortunately.

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

That is a very sizeable amount of money. In many ways, this morning's meeting was a reminder that we need to consider where the meat is in terms of what needs to be gone after. I did not think there was an awful lot in this morning's meeting, for example, in comparison with last week, which concerned large amounts of money and a lot to be interrogated. We will probably have a better overview of the SEAI in one or two years' time.

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

The question is whether we want to deal with the Department of Health and HSE regarding ventilators, waiting lists and the NTPF on 4 May. Is that the next most important issue? It is about having an indicative timeframe so the secretariat can start working on it. When we come back, 4 May will be less than six weeks away.

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

Okay.

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

Is Enterprise Ireland in the week after next?

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

Yes, it is. We then have the UL report. Do members want to cover that in May as well?

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

Yes, definitely.

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

We will say UL for 4 May. Is it okay if we leave out the children's hospital issue for a while?

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

There are important things there-----

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

Matters relating to agriculture and forestry have been requested by two members, Deputies Hourigan and Carthy, as far as I remember.

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

Does that relate to Coillte or is it-----

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

It is Coillte and there could be a grant scheme relating to something else. We will also say May for that. What about the greyhounds issue?

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

I definitely want that one in.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

It is the parent Department of the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board as well, if the committee wishes to seek a view in that regard.

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

There are a few other things we may also wish to raise.

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

On our agenda for May we have the HSE, UL and the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. We will deal with the issue relating to ventilators at the meeting with the HSE and the Department.

The committee requested certain information arising from meetings this year. Following the meeting on 19 January, the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage was to come back to us with a substantial amount of information but that has not been received. The HSE gave us a commitment regarding nursing homes and additional charges for items that were available under the medical card schemes. The HSE and the Department were to come back to us regarding that being written into the contract. That query is outstanding since 31 January. The Department of Health was asked to reply to a number of questions. Those are outstanding since 2 February. As far as I know, we have not received a reply to any of those requests. I ask the secretariat to follow up on those requests, including to the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage and the Housing Agency, as well as to the HSE and the Department of Health regarding nursing homes and the charges for items available under the medical card scheme.

Mr. Kevin McCarthy of the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth appeared before the committee on 16 February. He was to come back to us with a table detailing the number of refugees being afforded international protection in each of the EU states in the context of the Ukraine situation. That information would allow us to make a comparison with the figures for Ireland. Mr. McCarthy told the committee that Ireland was on a red list in Europe. He clarified that there is a colour-coding system and Ireland is on the highest alert, in that it has taken in a substantial number of refugees. I have no problem with that. Ireland has taken in more refugees than many other countries that may have a bigger population and greater capacity have accommodated. Mr. McCarthy was to come back to us with that information. There are four requests that have not come back within the timeframe set out. A follow-up note should be sent on those queries.

If there are items of interest, I ask members to flag them with the secretariat. That concludes our consideration of the work programme. The last item on our agenda is any other business. Do members wish to raise any other matters? No. We will move briefly into private session before adjourning until 9.30 a.m. on Thursday, 23 March 2023.