John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish members a good morning. We are joined by the Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. Seamus McCarthy, who is a permanent witness to the committee. Before we proceed, I have a few housekeeping matters to go through, as follows. I remind members of the constitutional requirement that in order to participate in public meetings they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex. Members of the committee attending remotely must do so from within the precincts of Leinster House. Before we proceed with the rest of the meeting, members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice and ruling of the Cathaoirleach to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

The public business before us is as follows: accounts and financial statements, and correspondence. We will then go into private session to discuss committee business. Seven sets of accounts and financial statements were laid between 26 May and 6 June 2025 and are due to be considered today. I ask the Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. Seamus McCarthy, to introduce these before I open the floor to Members.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

First we have the financial statement for Maynooth University for the year of account 2023–24. It received a clear audit opinion.

No. 2 is the financial statement of the Irish Aviation Authority for the year of account 2024. It received a clear audit opinion.

No. 3 is the financial statement of Trinity College Dublin for the year 2023–24. It received a clear audit opinion.

No. 4 is the financial statement of Home Building Finance Ireland for 2024. It received a clear audit opinion.

No. 5 is the financial statement of a subsidiary of Home Building Finance Ireland called Home Building Finance Ireland (Lending) Designated Activity Company. For 2024, that received a clear audit opinion.

No. 6 is the financial statement of the local loans fund for 2024. That received a clear audit opinion but that is more or less a dormant account at this stage.

No. 7, the land bond winding-up account for 2024, received a clear audit opinion. Again, it is more or less finished. There was a small balance remaining in the fund of €137,000 at the end of December 2024.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Mr. McCarthy. Do members wish to comment on any of those?

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

Could I clarify whether it is at this stage that we comment on whether we would like representatives of bodies to appear before us?

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy may raise questions.

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

Representatives of Home Building Finance Ireland were before the committee previously and there were issues over delivery and access to funding from parties that perhaps were not the primary reason the body was established. I wonder whether the issues have been addressed or whether it would be worth asking the representatives to appear before the committee again.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

It is always open to the committee to call them. I do not have detail at the moment on how the funding is being used. The turnover in the year is not a full indication of the scale of lending. I think that would be more in the region of €300 million, but obviously there may be questions of interest to the committee around who the body is lending to and whether it is sufficient for housing support at this stage.

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

On the basis that housing is such an important issue and that the committee has previously addressed this, it would be worth having representatives before our committee as part of our work plan.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I agree with that. We will have officials from the Department of housing at our next meeting. We can look at scheduling again after the summer recess, if that is agreeable?

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Department of housing provide the funding?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I cannot remember what the funding line is. I will have a look and come back to the Deputy if she gives me a minute.

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Maybe the representatives could come in with the officials of the Department of housing, under the same remit.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is probably short notice at this point. We have also invited representatives of Peter McVerry Trust to the meeting. Maybe will get clarity from the Comptroller and Auditor General on the matter. Have other members comments to make?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

If the members leave it with me, I will come back to them on it.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We will get clarity from the Comptroller and Auditor General on the matter raised. While awaiting clarification from the Comptroller and Auditor General, can we agree to note the listing of accounts and financial statements? Agreed. The listing of accounts and financial statements will be published as part of our minutes.

We will move on to correspondence. Correspondence issued between 28 May and 4 June was issued to committee members in advance and we will discuss items that have been flagged by members.

No. R0113 is correspondence from Children’s Health Ireland, CHI. That was issued by the CEO of CHI in response to references made at last week's PAC meeting, on 29 May 2025. I flagged this item and want to make some comments on it. At the meeting on 29 May, I confirmed that the committee had agreed to invite officials from CHI to appear before it again. I had strong views on the possibility of the committee being misled with regard to information given to it. In light of my previous queries to CHI as to whether there were any ongoing reviews, the CEO's response was that there were none. The subsequent media reports, published the weekend after the meeting, related to a report produced by CHI relating to the National Treatment Purchase Fund. I also highlighted additional items that remained to be examined by the committee, including reports of several resignations of board members. I concluded that, in consideration of these items and to provide clarity on the matter, the committee had agreed unanimously to invite the officials from CHI back at the earliest opportunity. The CEO of CHI, in her letter, clarified that the context of her response to my queries was in relation to the orthopaedic service. She also provided further information regarding what she described as inaccurate media reports relating to the National Treatment Purchase Fund and reiterated that she is open to discussing any further queries with the committee. The CHI, as we are aware, has agreed to attend a meeting with the committee on 3 July. It is vital that the report the CEO referred to be furnished to the committee prior to the meeting. I am aware that members have compiled a series of questions, which with we will deal later on, that will also be sent to CHI so answers can be given prior to our meeting on 3 July. Do any members wish to comment on this item of correspondence?

James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not want to get into it but, to put it mildly, the CEO took great umbrage at the comments the Cathaoirleach made. He has given the context. When the CEO comes back before the committee and she and the Cathaoirleach are both in the room, it will be a matter for the Cathaoirleach but ultimately, she has given a factual outline in relation to that.

Before positive assertions are made like that, witnesses should be given the opportunity to have all the facts before them before we make bald assertions. Maybe that was not the Cathaoirleach's intention. Ultimately, he just wants the same level of transparency that everybody here wants to have. In fairness, the clarification that he has given makes that clear. Clearly, she took great offence to the assertion made against her arising from the statement that was made. That is unfortunate. Hopefully going forward, when she comes before the committee, and in reply to all of the questions that are given, we can get a better understanding and bring greater transparency to the issues that are outlined.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is fair enough. There may have been a misunderstanding relating to the specific question. The CEO has outlined her position, which is fair. I acknowledge and appreciate it. Clarity has been given. I reiterate what I said. The report she refers to is critically important to our work on 3 July. I repeat that request. I am sure that I will be joined by other members in saying that it is imperative that we get a copy of that report prior to that engagement. Are members happy to note, publish and move on? Agreed.

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

Will we be agreeing the questionnaire to CHI, which we will put to its representatives, in advance later in private session?

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We will deal with that later.

We will now consider category C, correspondence that has been issued by non-government bodies. No. R0109 is from Senator Chris Andrews relating to Greyhound Racing Ireland, GRI. The Senator highlights concerns regarding the use of funding for greyhound care homes. He has also issued an additional email with a link to a recent article in the Irish Examiner, which reports on issues regarding greyhound prize money. I have flagged this. I am aware that GRI has been before the committee in the past. Animal welfare is an issue of interest to all members. At a future meeting, we can look at bringing in the Department of agriculture and GHI to have a look at this issue and the concern has been raised.

James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I apologise for interrupting the Chair. On the agenda we are looking at, that letter is significantly down the list below many other letters. I do not know what document he is working off.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As Cathaoirleach, I flagged that. No other items of correspondence further down the list have been flagged by members. I will touch on them as we move down the list. That was the first item on-----

James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Many of us are working off the members' brief. There is category, items of B correspondence. The Chair read the first one, which was from CHI. The second one seems to be from the Department of Children, Disability and Equality. I believe that is what the Chair is looking at as well.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not sure whether that one was actually flagged by members. I will get clarity from the clerk to the committee.

No. R00117 is correspondence from the Secretary General of the Department of children and disability in response to the committee's request for further details regarding the request from the Department not to publish a listing of non-compliance contracts. That correspondence was not flagged by any members for discussion. It has been the agreed practice here that unless correspondence has been flagged by members, it is agreed to note, publish and move on.

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

Why does it appear in the members' brief?

James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are just confused. We want to all be working off the same list. I do not know what document the Chair is looking at. Is there a different document that the Chair has?

Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have the brief here. It is in it, but it is not flagged.

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

Why is it in it?

James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The next one flagged is one from Deputy McAuliffe according to my brief.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

To clarify that, all correspondence is referenced in the members' brief. That is to provide full information for members. It is then up to members to identify of correspondence that they wish to flag with the clerk to the committee and the secretariat. It is only those items that will be up for discussion then at our subsequent meeting. We have agreed that principle.

James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is one from Deputy McAuliffe that is flagged ahead of the one that Chair has just read out.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes. We will be dealing with that one next. I apologise to the Deputy.

James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are actually two. I have one that I definitely asked to be flagged that is not listed.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I apologise to the Deputy. There may be some issues that we can talk about in private. The correspondence is categorised under A, B, C and so on. It is just the way that they have been categorised and the way they appear for discussion. Deputy McAuliffe is up next.

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

We will follow the Chair's lead.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Absolutely. We will move on. On the correspondence from Senator Andrews, we will agree to look at that in the context of the work programme after the summer recess.

No. R0098 is correspondence from an individual relating to spending by the Department of integration. This has been flagged by Deputy McAuliffe.

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

My only request is that we would write to the Department to seek clarification on the details that have been provided to us.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

No. R0100 is correspondence from an individual relating to auto-enrolment pensions. That was flagged by Deputy Connolly who is not present. She has given her apologies. She will be here shortly. We will defer that until she is here because she has flagged it for discussion.

No. R0103 is correspondence from an individual in respect of the Peter McVerry Trust. That particular individual works for a contractor impacted by issues relating to the Peter McVerry Trust. Deputy McAuliffe has flagged this.

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

I only flagged this because of the proximity of the meeting with the Peter McVerry Trust. It relates to a contractor who has not been paid. There may be valid reasons for that or there may not. I ask that we make that the Peter McVerry Trust be made aware of it in advance of its representatives attending so that they can answer questions on it if it raised.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

No. R0094 from Deputy Kenny and No. R0118 from Deputy Geoghegan have been received. They relate to recent issues regarding HIQA and nursing homes regulatory oversight. I will open the floor to Deputy Kenny first and then to Deputy Geoghegan.

Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Since the "RTÉ Investigates" programme relating to the treatment and care of our older people within nursing homes, it has come to light that it is extremely bad. It has been eight years since HIQA appeared before the committee. It is about time that it does again. It is a failure of the State that our older people are being treated in this way when they should be given the dignity and respect they deserve as they age. It is quite concerning. It was quite upsetting to watch that programme. If people across the country had an older member of their family in a nursing home, they would have been struck by the fact that inspectors from HIQA visited a number of those nursing homes and found no fault. That has to be questioned.

Since it was set up as a State body, HIQA has failed. It is about time for it to come before the Committee of Public Accounts to be scrutinised. Basics like incontinence pads and hand wipes were not being made available by private companies. In most cases, it is foreign private companies that are running nursing homes. The biggest shareholder in Emeis is the French state. The company went into liquidation in France. Various European countries are benefiting from older people in private nursing homes. That is completely wrong. The privatisation of nursing homes is wrong. It is a failure of the State that older people are being treated in this way. The majority of older people in difficult circumstances are put in nursing homes by family members under the pretence that they will be looked after correctly. What is happening is deeply upsetting, frustrating and embarrassing. It is about time HIQA provided answers. We all share the same opinion on that, including the Chair. We might discuss including that in our work programme and decide on a date for HIQA to come before us.

James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I echo what Deputy Kenny said. What the “RTÉ Investigates" programme identified was traumatising. That is the only way to describe it. People who had worked all their lives were subjected to trauma. Sometimes it was the older people and in other cases it was their children or their partners who looked after their future life planning, and who put them into a nursing home that had been given a clean bill of health by the State watchdog, HIQA. These people have been utterly failed by nursing home providers in the first instance. I would love to hear from the nursing home providers. Perhaps the Comptroller and Auditor General could advise us on that. I would love to invite them to appear before this committee, but, ultimately, I suspect that the only people we can probably get in here will be those from HIQA. The bottom line is that there are lots of questions for HIQA that have not been answered. We should do it in the full glare of the public eye. HIQA should be invited in here at the earliest opportunity to discuss these issues.

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

I was particularly concerned about the RTÉ programme because one of the nursing homes, Beneavin Manor, is in my constituency. I live five minutes' walk from that home. It is part of a campus comprising three nursing homes that are operated separately by Emeis. I took many calls this week from people who are genuinely concerned about the welfare of their relatives in the home. They are genuinely concerned about nursing home care in general, but in particular about the small number of people shown in the programme whose basic care was neglected, which had a big impact on them. There must be accountability – individual accountability for staff and corporate accountability on the part of the company. We should not allow any investigation we carry out to absolve those people over what happened. There was a basic lack of compassion.

We must also look at the structural issues. TDs in our area received a briefing from HIQA. Over two days, there were three teams of two people in each of the three nursing homes on the Beneavin campus.

We can ask HIQA questions about the methodology when its representatives come before use, but the funding of the nursing homes support scheme, the fair deal, must also be examined. My understanding is that far in excess of €6 million was paid to the Beneavin campus, which is a significant amount of money. If people do not have basic hygiene products to hand, is that a matter for HIQA or the company that is running the place? We must get to the bottom of it. I ask that the accountable officer for the nursing homes support scheme would be with us, if that is possible, when we have the meeting.

Aidan Farrelly (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I support what my colleagues said. I do not wish to reiterate points that have already been made. Given that we have a gap in the work programme on 17 July, is there scope to propose that we issue the invitation to HIQA and the other organisations suggested by Deputy McAuliffe to appear before us on that date?

Given that, more often than not, there public beds in these private institutions, is there scope to bring them before us also in the context of governance and practice? They are not solely private institutions when they are availing of public funding via the HSE. That is a question for the committee to consider.

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

My views coincide with those of everybody else. Who funds HIQA, which is paid to carry out the oversight but it is not doing the job?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

HIQA is funded by the Department of Health.

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Whenever HIQA comes in, can we ask that the Department of Health would be called in also? It is supposed to have oversight of funding it pays out but that is not happening because HIQA is not doing its job to the correct standard. Perhaps the Department could come in at the same time as HIQA.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Could the Comptroller and Auditor General provide clarity on the point Deputy Farrelly made about some of these providers and whether there is scope to invite them in? I am sure we can invite them but there is probably no obligation on them to come.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Funding for the nursing homes support scheme comes through the HSE, so it would be the HSE that would be answerable on its oversight of the payments it makes.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If other members wish to comment, they may do so.

I agree with all the views expressed by members. The television programme in question was very harrowing and distressing. I am conscious that some of the images we saw were probably the tip of the iceberg. I am informed that some footage was not shown because it was so distressing. Behind all of this, there are families and loved ones and they are our primary concern.

Given the seriousness of the situation and how timely the programme was, and taking on board what Deputy Farrelly said about our work programme, the 17 July is a potential date for a meeting. When we discuss the work programme later in the session members can give serious consideration to that date. We can also look at which witnesses to call in. I take on board some of the proposals made by members. Is it agreed that members are happy to proceed on that basis? Agreed.

I will move on to No. R0129, which is correspondence from Deputy Geoghegan.

James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It was stated in The Sunday Times that the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General was assessing the minutes of Children’s Health Ireland, CHI, meetings in the context of the as-yet-unpublished report on the National Treatment Purchase Fund, NTPF. I want to get clarity from the Comptroller and Auditor General in respect of that matter/ Does he have any new information that has not yet been disclosed by CHI to this committee?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

The report is not quite correct. Somebody from my office was in the offices of CHI, but she was examining the report, not the minutes. We already had the minutes. She has examined that. Based on her briefing to me, it is a report we should have had previously but did not have.

I cannot really make any comment on it until we complete the audit for 2024. We will look at the report in the context of that audit. I have not formed a view yet as to the significance of the issues highlighted in the report.

James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We made a decision to invite the current CEO, the former CEO and the former chair of CHI. Has that happened? Have we had confirmation from CHI that the former CEO and former chair will attend on that date, as well as confirmation from the NTPF that its representatives will attend?

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

CHI has accepted the invitation but has not yet come back to us on who will be in attendance. We can follow up on that and try to get confirmation as to exactly who will attend. Our invitation included a specific request for the attendance of the people the Deputy mentioned.

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

The C and AG said he believes the CHI report on the NTPF should have been available to him previously. Will he expand on why he is of that view, including the grounds on which it should have been made available and when he should have had it?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I believe it should have been made available to me as part of the papers we examined for the 2021 audit of CHI, which we carried out in 2022. The reason I believe it should have been made available is that a number of the issues dealt with in the report touch on controls and financial matters. While there were other matters highlighted of a clinical or HR nature, I believe the matters I mentioned should have been brought to our attention.

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

Is that because of a financial risk?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Yes, because of a financial risk or potential financial implications.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

To clarify, did Mr. McCarthy say his office is doing a report on that?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

No, we are examining it in the context of the audit of the 2024 financial statements.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When will that be completed?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

It will be later in the year. I expect it will be October or November.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Are members happy to move on? Yes.

We deferred No. R0100 in regard to automatic enrolment pensions. This correspondence has been flagged by Deputy Connolly.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Cathaoirleach and apologise for being late as I was caught up with something else. I am looking for guidance on this issue, on which I am no expert. The correspondent has written to and been in contact with a lot of TDs regarding automatic enrolment. He did his best to explain the issue to us and we raised it in the Dáil and did our best to have it addressed. I do not know where we go now with this. This man has raised serious issues. I realise we are in trouble from proactively looking into the matter. I am looking for guidance on this. The figures he has outlined are extraordinary. He is a former president of the Society of Actuaries in Ireland and has nothing personally to gain from this. I take what he is saying seriously. It merits looking at in some way but I do not know how. I have tried as best I can as a TD. I will be guided by the Cathaoirleach and the Comptroller and Auditor General.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I suggest that we might engage with the Department on some of the serious issues highlighted in the correspondence and try to get clarification on them.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There has been engagement and we were told the information is sensitive and cannot be made available. I am looking for more guidance than that.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The clerk will follow up on this with the Department and will get back to us next week.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is great. I would appreciate a comment from the Comptroller and Auditor General more generally on matters such as this. I am not sure whether he has read the correspondence.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I have read it. Obviously, the gentleman who wrote it is making reasonable points about issues that need to be considered. However, while I am the auditor of the authority that will oversee the management of the fund in question, the placing of contracts and so on, I will not really be in a position to form a view and report to the committee until after the first set of financial statements are presented. That is some way off as the authority has not yet been established.

While matters are progressing on an administrative basis, any expenses associated with the preparation of a tender and so on are, as I understand it, being handled by the Department of Social Protection. Therefore, this is a matter the Deputy might raise with that Department when those expenses are in. I do not believe any funding was incurred in 2023 because there was not a subhead for it. In 2024, which I will report on in September, there may have been expenditure that comes within the committee's remit. It is a huge endeavour to put this system in place and it probably is legitimate for the Deputy to be asking about how the State's interests are to be protected and value for money achieved in this regard.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to go through the correspondence again and come back at the meeting next week with a proposed course of action. We will look at a number of options and have further discussion on the matter to see what is the best route to navigate.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Cathaoirleach. The accounts route is a good route and will have a parallel in terms of follow-up.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Absolutely. Do any other members wish to comment on this correspondence? As no members are indicating, we will move on. Do members agree to the proposed actions on the other items of correspondence? Agreed.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Deputy Bennett raised a question as to the source of funding for Home Building Finance Ireland. It is a borrowing from the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund by way of a funding facility that was made available to HBFI. It has drawn down approximately €305 million. That is what was outstanding at the end of 2024. The shareholder in Home Building Finance Ireland is the Minister for Finance rather than the Minister for housing.

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does that mean there is oversight by the Department of Finance?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Yes.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is Deputy Bennett happy with that response?

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes.

James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have a quick question for the Comptroller and Auditor General. Now he has seen the CHI report on the NTPF, if he had received that report at the time he was compiling the accounts, would he have approved the accounts at that time or would he have withheld approval arising from what was contained in the report?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

I do not want to prejudge before a proper consideration of the issues set out in the report and the financial or control implications arising. If the Deputy will allow, I would prefer not to make a definitive comment in this regard. However, because it is a document that is related to financial statements that were presented, it should be perfectly feasible for the committee to make inquiries about the CHI report.

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

On that basis, I ask that the committee make a request that a copy of the document, or the relevant details, be made available to us.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes, I think that is already agreed. It will be critical to our work on the issue. Are members agreed on that? Agreed.

Our next public meeting will be next Thursday, 19 June, when we will meet with representatives from the Department of housing and the Peter McVerry Trust. We will now go into private session to discuss further committee business.