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

We have received apologies from Deputy O'Connor. We are joined by the Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. Seamus McCarthy, who is a permanent witness to the committee.

Members are reminded of the provisions of Standing Order 218 that a committee shall refrain from inquiring into the merits of a policy or policies of the Government or a Minister of the Government, or the merits of the objectives of such policies. Members are also reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

This morning we were due to engage with Inland Fisheries Ireland on its financial statements for 2022. However we have been informed that the CEO of IFI is unavoidably absent due to illness. As the CEO is the accountable person and this function cannot be delegated, it has been decided to defer the engagement until such time as the committee can examine the financial statements with the accountable person present. We look forward to engaging with IFI at the earliest possible opportunity.

The previous engagement we had with IFI was very unsatisfactory. The secretariat is endeavouring to get IFI before the committee as soon as possible. The next possible available date is 25 April. This is the best that can be done. It is disappointing. We had a very unsatisfactory meeting with the organisation last year and it needs to be in here as soon as possible. The secretariat will endeavour to bring that meeting forward.

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

To say the last meeting was unsatisfactory is a gross understatement. It went under the wire when the RTÉ issue exploded. It is essential that we have a full team, including the Accounting Officer, before the committee and that we have clarity on this organisation. There were very serious issues that we were concerned about at the previous meeting. We have to be sure they are resolved at this stage.

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

Deputy Murphy has expressed my feelings and the feelings of other members.

Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree with Deputy Murphy. What is also concerning is the timing of key decisions, as they seem to be made immediately prior to meetings of the Committee of Public Accounts, which are well scheduled and flagged. That is not satisfactory. I hope that on the next occasion we do not have significant changes at the very last minute again. The committee has been left in no position.

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

We discovered this on Tuesday. This is the situation we are in for now. We will have to contact the Department, the Minister and the Secretary General if there is a problem with getting engagement with IFI. Engagement has to happen and we will endeavour to have the organisation here as soon as possible.

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

This is unsatisfactory, especially the short notice. It is important that we send a clear message that we will not go away from this issue and there must be accountability. We need to have IFI before us at the earliest possible date.

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

The committee is unanimous on this. We will endeavour to do so as quickly as possible.

The public business before us this morning is as follows: minutes, accounts and financial statements, correspondence, work programme and any other business.

The first item of business is the minutes of our meetings of 27 and 29 February 2024, 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.

Five sets of accounts and financial statements were laid before the Houses between 26 February 2024 and 1 March 2024. I will ask the Comptroller and Auditor General to address them before opening the discussion to the floor.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

No. 1 relates to Beaumont Hospital board for the year of account 2022. I issued a clear audit opinion. However I draw attention to three matters. Section 9.1 of the statement on internal control is an extensive disclosure about the Beaumont Hospital information system. The system will be inoperable beyond 31 December 2025. It must be replaced by a functioning system before this date. Due to delays experienced so far, the timeline to implement its replacement poses a significant risk to effective operation of the hospital. As I have said, the report on this matter is very extensive. I also draw attention to significant non-compliant procurement at the hospital. This is at an estimated value of €26.4 million. I also draw attention to payroll overpayments of €288,513 in the year due to breaches of payroll controls and cumulative outstanding overpayments at the year end of €640,071.

No. 2 relates to the Ireland-United States Commission for Educational Exchange for the academic year 2022-23. It received a clear audit opinion.

No. 3 is the Legal Services Regulatory Authority for 2022, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 4 is the Institute of Technology Carlow; these are cessation accounts, the final accounts of the Institute of Technology and they relate to the eight-month period 1 September 2021 to 30 April 2022. These received a clear audit opinion. Finally, Waterford Institute of Technology; again, these are cessation accounts covering a 20-month period from 1 September 2020 to 30 April 2022 and they received a clear audit opinion. However, I drew attention to an impairment loss recognised, totalling €623,000 in respect of student campus recreational facilities which was mainly due to changing consumer demand.

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

Do any members wish to come in on those?

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

On the Beaumont one, there are two significant issues here, one of which is the controls over overpayments. However, the first issue I would like to draw attention to in terms of the risk is what kind of timeline do they require to have that fully implemented. Obviously it has been identified as a risk. How would that risk manifest itself in terms of that interface with patients? I want to get a clear understanding on this.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

As I said there is extensive detail in the disclosure about it but certainly if they do not have the system replaced by the end of December 2025 there will be a very significant operational impact on the hospital. The reason that I am drawing attention to it now is that it has become absolutely critical and the timeline has nearly backed up to the end of December 2025. It has become a very serious operational risk for the hospital and that is what they are signalling in the statement on internal control.

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

It is not to do with money; it is actually project work. Is that correct?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

It is project work now that has to be completed. I think I was signing at the end of December 2023 so they have two years and they need it all at the moment. There is extensive gearing up at the hospital with additional recruitment and additional project management.

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

Obviously this is a Dublin hospital but it is a national centre as well so it is critically important.

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

On the non-compliant procurement it is about 11% of the total non-pay spending. That is very high. Non-pay expenditure is €225 million. Non-compliant procurement is €26.4 million. What is the status of Beaumont hospital? Is it a voluntary hospital? Where is it in the hospital system?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

It is a voluntary hospital, a section 38 hospital. It is unusual in that it is one that I audit. I audit about five of the section 38 hospitals. It is because of the structure of the hospital and the way that it was established.

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

Of those five, if we accept that in a hospital there will be some procurement that will not be tendered because of specialties or the special nature of the goods or services that they are getting, or timelines etc., would that 11% non-compliance be excessive?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

It is certainly on the high side.

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

What would it normally be?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

It is in or around the level of non-compliant procurement that you would see in the HSE but I think it is higher than some of the other hospitals.

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

It is there or thereabouts, around 11% of non-pay.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

It has been consistently high in Beaumont.

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

We should follow up on that. Not to take away from the fact that in a hospital, by its nature, there will be a significant portion of goods that will not go through the normal procurement, but we should follow up with that. Do any other members wish to come in on the accounts and financial statements?

Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Could the Comptroller and Auditor General talk about the payroll overpayments and highlight whether, with breaches of payroll controls of an organisation of that size, he believes the numbers he has highlighted, €288,000 and €640,000, are something we should be concerned about as a committee?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I am drawing attention to it because I think it was a significant lapse in controls; these were overpayments that continued for a very long period. Very often you can have payroll breaches because maybe for a period of two weeks the messaging from HR is out of sync with the payroll system and people get paid even though they may have left employment and so on. That is understandable. It is a kind of frictional level issue, but in this case the overpayments went on for a much lengthier period.

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

Do we know how many people, how many staff-----

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I think it was five. That is from memory but I can check that. It does not actually say but it was a small number of people over an extended period.

Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A small number of people over an extended period. Is it likely, given the numbers involved, that they would be people at a very senior level?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

As I understand it, yes.

Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is a matter we should examine further.

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

How many people does Mr. McCarthy think-----

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I do not have that level of detail but the committee could follow up with the hospital on the number of people.

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

Could I make a suggestion? It seems Mr. McCarthy is saying is that from memory there are five individuals at senior level in the hospital involved in the overpayments. So, to draw this together-----

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

There may be a blend. There may be smaller overpayments mixed in but there were significant overpayments to a small number of people.

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

I suggest we write to Beaumont requesting detail on how many individuals were involved over what period of time exactly, what grade of staff they are and what amount was paid to each position. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is that information or detail that Mr. McCarthy already has?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I cannot say what level of detail I have. We have looked at this in detail but the-----

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

We should write to the hospital in any event.

Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I support the proposal but the fact that there is €288,000 in overpayments means we also need to know how much has been retrieved. That is crucial information.

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

We will seek information on the period during which this went on; the number of individuals involved; their grade; how much was paid for each post; and how much has been retrieved.

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

It would be worth asking if there is a plan in place to recoup the rest. If we are writing to Beaumont on this, we should also express our concern about the first item on the risk and ask it to outline the measures it is taking, the project timeline and how it expects to work to that. That has a potential impact on patients and the functioning of the hospital. It is important to flag how seriously concerned we are about it.

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

Financial management also has implications for the overall running of the hospital.

We can include that, the issue of the non-compliant procurement of roughly 11% of the non-pay expenditure and a breakdown of what kind of services and goods were procured, how much and who was invoiced for it. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I wish to note that Deputy Colm Burke is attending this meeting remotely and that Deputies Marc Ó Cathasaigh, Verona Murphy and Cormac Devlin are also in attendance.

Are the accounts and financial statements agreed? They are agreed. As usual, the list of accounts and financial statements will be published as part of the minutes of this committee.

The next business is correspondence. As previously agreed, items that that were not flagged for discussion will be dealt with in accordance with the proposed actions that have been circulated. Decisions taken by the committee on correspondence are recorded in the minutes of the committee's meetings and will be published on its web page.

The first category is category A. No. 2433A is from Inland Fisheries Ireland and is dated 1 March. It provides briefing material for engagement with the Department, which has now been deferred to a future date. I propose that we defer consideration of this item until the rescheduled meeting with Inland Fisheries Ireland. We have said our piece on what we want on this matter and the committee is clear on that. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Category B is correspondence from Accounting Officers and Ministers, follow-up material from previous meetings of the committee and other items for publication. No. 2427B is correspondence from the Department of Transport and is dated 26 February. It provides requested information on the removal of the PFAS chemical at Dublin Airport. The correspondence states that the committee's request for a briefing has been forwarded to the Dublin Airport Authority, DAA, for further response. It is proposed to note and publish this item. Is that agreed? Agreed. Deputy Paul McAuliffe has an interest in this matter.

Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. A constituent, Mr. Patrick Fagan, brought this matter to my attention. He was involved in some of the consultative reforms with the DAA and to be fair, he has been raising this issue for many years. As a member of the Committee of Public Accounts, my concern is around the potential liability, or risk, that may arise from this. After Mr. Fagan raised these concerns with me, I was particularly concerned when I saw media coverage on the removal of soil from Dublin Airport. Obviously, that was a decision made by the DAA in consultation with the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, and Fingal County Council. The response from the Department outlines that this is an operational matter for the DAA but it does not address the concern and remit of this committee around the potential liability in terms of a breach of environmental standards and the cost that may accrue on this. While I accept that there is an element of difference between the Department's and the DAA's accountability to this committee, given that there is a public health element to this, including the impact on the water table and so on, I do not believe the Department's response is sufficient. We probably need to get more details from the DAA. That would be useful. The main focus of my concerns is around the element of financial risk to the Department. I suggest that we follow its advice with the DAA and, pending the content of that, we reserve the right to come back to the Department to follow up on the financial elements of that.

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

I first heard of the issue around PFAS when it came before the committee a number of weeks ago. It is used for firefighting foam and, obviously, it is a requirement at the airport. However, in the letter it states that the European Environment Agency outlines that PFAS are used across a variety of consumer products. As the Deputy mentioned, the EPA and Fingal County Council are the relevant bodies; Fingal County Council has an environmental responsibility and the EPA overarches that. It is interesting that the soil removed included the affected soil. The affected soil is being treated in an overseas facility which must be very specialised. As the DAA is a commercial semi-State company, will it have to carry the cost of this?

Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. The question is around whether there is a potential liability to the taxpayer. The Cathaoirleach is right; PFAS are mostly used for firefighting foam and that is an historical issue. Will the DAA take up the responsibility or will there be an impact for the Department? That is the focus of my concern and I do not think that was answered, but maybe we did not put that across strongly enough to the Department.

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

While there is some information in the letter, if the Deputy is proposing that, then I think that is the direction to go.

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

Obviously, the EPA and Fingal County Council come into play here. Fingal County Council is not under the remit of the Committee of Public Accounts. My experience with the EPA is that there is a lot of paper-based compliance rather than hands-on compliance. Often, people feel that with the local authority, there is a bit of passing of the buck going on. In my experience, that happens quite a bit. I am not saying the work of the EPA is unimportant in gathering data, but it tends to be desk-based. Maybe we should write to it as well, given that it is under the remit of the committee.

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

What is the question the Deputy proposes to put to the EPA?

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

We should satisfy ourselves on what its role is on this matter and to draw attention to the issues at hand. It is important that we actually see what they are. There may be a gap in governance and it would be useful to address the issue of the passing of the buck to each other.

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

Okay, there are two proposals. One, that the committee write to the Department with the questions-----

Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To the DAA.

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

Sorry, the DAA. We will write to the DAA with the question that Deputy McAuliffe proposed. However, I think that is a question that must go to the Department as well. That is who I had in mind. We can put it to the DAA and to the Department. Second, there is a proposal from Deputy Catherine Murphy that the committee write to the EPA around its oversight, role and involvement on this matter. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish to say one thing. Obviously, Dublin Airport has used PFAS historically. However, there are other airports on this island and there is a broader question around how widespread this issue, and therefore what the cumulative impact, is.

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

It is probably a necessary evil.

Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Absolutely, yes.

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

I remember reading the correspondence on it. It is on one of the aprons at Dublin Airport, as well. There must be a concentration of this contamination.

Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

For public confidence, the DAA notes that it has had a PFAS-free alternative since 2013. I think that puts it in context.

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

Okay, I thank the Deputy. On that point, from the Deputy's research, has that PFAS-free alternative been in use since 2013?

Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My understanding is that PFAS have not been used since 2013. This is a legacy issue.

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

That is good that another way has been found.

I will now move on to category C correspondence, which is correspondence from private individuals and any other correspondence. No. 2431 is from the Moore Street Preservation Trust and is dated 28 February. It is in response to correspondence the committee received from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage on the national monument in Moore Street, which the committee agreed to forward to the group. Is it agreed to note and publish this correspondence? Agreed. I flag this because the issue of Moore Street and the national monument is going around the Houses.

While some information came back via the letter, the Moore Street Preservation Trust has raised the fact that there was no response in respect of issues raised in the Dáil. There were queries concerning the purchases of Nos. 14 to 17 Moore Street. There was also no response forthcoming regarding the sanctioned payments to traders who will be discommoded by developments in the area. The State owns Nos. 14 to 17 Moore Street. The trust wishes the whole terrace to be purchased but at this point it is the properties from Nos. 14 to 17 Moore Street that are in the ownership of the State. I went over twice to look at these buildings in recent years and it is awful the way they have been left in a state of derelict condition. I think we should ask the Department what is being done now to at least maintain these buildings, which were the last headquarters of the provisional Government at the end of Easter week 1916. I suggest that we also ask the Department to respond to the points raised by the trust in its letter.

The trust has been very diligent in this matter. The whole terrace could have been demolished at one stage but for the vigilance of some people who took an interest in it. I propose that the committee seek a response from the Department to the points raised by the Moore Street Preservation Trust. Equally, though, I propose that we inquire regarding what plans are in place to undertake work to at least secure and maintain the buildings at Nos. 14 to 17 Moore Street, that is, those in the ownership of the State. Does any other member of the committee wish to contribute on this point? This is a national monument and it is important that we would try to retain and develop it.

No. 2439 is from Deputy Catherine Murphy, dated 4 March, and is a proposal to add a meeting with the National Paediatric Hospital Development Board, NPHDB, to the work programme. It is proposed that we would add the NPHDB to the work programme and discuss matters in this regard further under a work programme agenda item. We have mentioned a few times recently that it was time to consider bringing in the members of this board again.

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

This would be to ask specifically about the additional amount of expenditure in this regard. A significant additional amount has been allocated and we need to keep a close eye on this aspect.

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

The issue that came up a few weeks ago would cause us to renew our interest in this matter, would it not?

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

Yes.

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

It is concerning-----

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

It is about keeping control over claims.

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

This is a matter that the committee needs to be on top of. Is that agreed? Agreed.

That concludes our consideration of our correspondence. We will move on to our work programme. Members have been circulated with a draft work programme. This is a discussion document and it is displayed on the members' screens. As the Dáil is in recess next week, we will not have a meeting. The next meeting, therefore, will be on 21 March. We will be meeting representatives of An Garda Síochána in relation to the 2022 appropriation account for Vote 20 - An Garda Síochána. Representatives from the Department of Justice also have been invited to attend.

There will then be a two-week recess for Easter, which falls early this year. Our first meeting after that recess will be on 11 April and will be with representatives of the University of Limerick, UL, in respect of its 2020 financial statements, governance and associated due diligence at the university, the university's purchase of a site in Limerick city in 2019, namely, the former Dunnes Stores site and the purchase of 20 houses in Rhebogue by the university for student accommodation. These have been flagged as areas of interest. If members wish to raise any other potential areas of interest, I ask them to flag them up at an early opportunity with the secretariat to ensure they can be added to the agenda and discussed with the representatives of the university when they come in.

On 18 April, we will meet officials from the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth in relation to the 2022 appropriation account for Vote 40 - Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth. International protection accommodation has been flagged as an area of interest. Again, I ask members to let the secretariat know if other items of interest may need to be added. I think, however, that the accommodation aspect is the main focus of the committee now. If members do have a proposal to raise something else, I ask them to feel free to do so.

On 25 April, it is proposed we reschedule our engagement with Inland Fisheries Ireland, IFI, in relation to its 2022 financial statements. We are awaiting confirmation of this meeting. As soon as the secretariat has that confirmation, the information will be circulated.

It is then proposed to meet with the National Transport Authority on 2 May in relation to its financial statements for 2022. BusConnects, the purchase of buses for companies providing public transport and the provision of bus shelters and bus stops have been flagged as areas of interest.

On 9 May, it is proposed that we invite the Office of Public Works to appear before the committee in respect of Vote 13 - Office of Public Works. Again, members will have issues in this regard. A great deal comes under the remit of this organisation, including flood defence schemes, along with the usual historical matters the organisation would have had.

On 23 May, it is proposed to meet the Department of Defence regarding chapter 12 of the Comptroller and Auditor General's annual report in relation to stock management in the Defence Forces. During this mandate, we have never had representatives of the Department of Defence before us and there have been significant changes in the Defence Forces and more significant changes are to come. It is timely, therefore, that we have a meeting scheduled with the Department.

I apologise because I skipped over a date. On 16 May, it is proposed to schedule a meeting with the Department of Education on Vote 26 - Education. For that meeting, I propose we examine issues around the transfer of properties from the religious orders, school building programmes and any other issues the members might have. A few issues have already been flagged in this regard.

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

There was supposed to be legislation in this context. I think it could even have been considered during the last Dáil and Committee of Public Accounts. There was supposed to be legislation dealing with the wind-up of an organisation.

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

The matter concerned compensation in respect of Caranua.

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

Yes. That proposed legislation, however, never materialised.

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

Referring back to an earlier draft programme I have here, we expressed particular interest in the running costs and demand management of schools, school transport and the disposal of assets of the religious orders and Caranua. It is there, so we will ensure this is included in the agenda for the meeting.

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

During the term of the last Committee of Public Accounts, what was referred to in relation to the assets to be transferred as a consequence, as part compensation, this would certainly have been on the low end compared with the State's obligation or the amount the State undertook to pay. We routinely had this item on the agenda. Some of this context went back to 2000, but the title on some of the assets had still not been cleared. It might be no harm, therefore, to ask that we be given a statement in advance of the meeting or to include it in the briefing note beforehand. I refer to the Department providing a full overview of what exactly is outstanding at this stage.

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

Okay. A compensation scheme was agreed way back when Michael Woods was the Minister with responsibility for victims' compensation. There was to be some----

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

It was in 2002 or 2003. I did a special report on the schemes and the recovery of assets or cash. I think that was for the previous committee, so it was about five or six years ago. The Department was updating the committee regularly, but I think this has not happened for some time now. It may, therefore, be timely to get a further update now.

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

A second scheme came about as a consequence of the Ryan report.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Yes.

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

The scheme was not nailed down, though, from the perspective of the State. We were shocked, however, regarding some of the older ones and the length of time it had taken for progress to be made.

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

More than €300 million was spent on the scheme. Then more than €100 million came from the religious orders.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The total expenditure was more of the order of €1.5 billion, I think.

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

Yes, but I remember there was a figure for one part of it, which worked out at approximately one or two thirds.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The two schemes together were to contribute something in the order of €375 million but there was even delay in recovering that.

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

There was row back on the second one because of the way it was agreed. It was not as enforceable. A degree of trust was taken that when offers were made those offers would materialise, but some of them did not.

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

We will look for that in the briefing material.

Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On the Department of Education and where we have school transport on the list, that Department will say it does not look after school transport. Is it possible to invite the Department of Transport in, or whatever Department is over school transport?

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

We can ask for a representative from that Department.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

School transport is a matter for the Department of Education. The expenditure goes through the Vote for education-----

Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

-----but obviously a contract is in place with CIÉ.

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

It is a Bus Éireann contract.

Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is correct. The primary issue is that a policy is still in place that is ageist, whereby a driver aged over 70 is not allowed to drive a school bus, but the same driver can rock up with a private contractor, take on the same number of students and bring them off to Spain or somewhere for a week. It is causing untold hardship in every area. We need an explanation for why that policy is still in place.

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

Okay. We will put that through. School transport is itemised as a proposal for the agenda. We will make sure it is on it. The meeting with the Department of Education will be on 16 May. It is proposed to meet the Department of Defence on 23 May.

It is proposed to schedule a meeting with the National Paediatric Hospital Development Board before the summer recess. We already considered the 2020-21 financial statements of the children's hospital development board in October 2023. Not to go back over that ground again, but the 2022 financial statements have not yet been laid. It is expected that they will be laid before the recess. I will ask Mr. McCarthy to give his take on it. Are we likely to have those financial statements in the next two or three months or so, before the summer break?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Absolutely. There is no reason the committee would not have them in that period. They have not been signed yet. I am awaiting final information from the board. The accounts were cleared in December. Two items were outstanding in relation to commitments and claims. There are still just some items outstanding. I expect we will be in a position to ask the board to produce the financial statements next week. There would be plenty of time for it to have submitted the statements by the end of May.

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

I propose that we bring in the National Paediatric Hospital Development Board for the first hearing after 23 May. That will be the earliest opportunity. According to what Mr. McCarthy said, the statements should be in by that time. Deputy McAuliffe has been summoned for a vote. That brings us up to the end of May. That concludes consideration of our work programme for today.

The last item on the public agenda is any other business. Does anyone wish to comment?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I will go back to the earlier discussion about overpayments at Beaumont Hospital. I was just able to check. The small number of large payments were overpayments that were incurred in the period 2019 to 2021. I drew attention to those previously in the 2020 audit certification. Our concern in 2022 was that there was again a significant jump in the amount of overpayments. The notes I have indicate there were 135 overpayments in 2022 to a total of €288,000. That is approximately €2,300 per case. The four large cases I mentioned were in an earlier period. The hospital will certainly be able to give further detail in relation to that.

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

To go back to education and compensation with religious orders, this is going back nearly 20 years. I think the figures in my head came from some reporting in the media at the time that the religious orders were supposed to pay something in excess of €300 million. Is that Deputy Murphy's memory of it?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

No, Deputy. There were two schemes. There was a contractual scheme, which was the one the Cathaoirleach referred to, that was entered into in 2002-03. There was then a voluntary additional contribution, which was not legally enforceable, around 2010-11, once the report was produced. I did a special report on that, which can be circulated to Deputies after the meeting. It will give them the position as of 2018. The only thing likely to have changed since then was the transfer, and finalisation of transfer, of property assets.

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

Okay. I thank Mr. McCarthy for that. If we can get those meetings lined up, it will bring us up to the end of May. We will move into private session.