Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees
Thursday, 18 September 2025
Public Accounts Committee
Business of Committee
2:00 am
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Our witnesses are very welcome to today's meeting of the Committee of Public Accounts. Before we proceed, I have a few housekeeping matters to go through as follows. Members are reminded of the provisions within Standing Order 226 that the committee shall refrain from inquiring into the merits of 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. 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.
The agenda for today is to discuss the accounts and statements, correspondence and upcoming meetings. We will begin with the accounts and financial statements. Fifty sets of accounts and financial statements were laid between 15 July 2025 on 12 September 2025 and are due to be considered today. We are joined by Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. Seamus McCarthy, who is a permanent witness to the committee. I ask the Comptroller and Auditor General to introduce these statements before opening the floor to members.
Mr. Seamus McCarthy:
Gabhaim buíochas leis an gCathaoirleach. The first set of financial statements I wish to draw attention to is for the fishery harbour centres for 2023. These were presented by the Department of agriculture. I signed the certificate in that case on 27 November 2024. It was a clear audit opinion, but the accounts are only being presented now, so they are late. In line with previous practice, the committee may wish to follow up with the Department as to why there was such a delay.
Second are the credit union fund accounts for 2024. They received a clear audit opinion. Third are the finance accounts for 2024. They also received a clear audit opinion.
Turning to the education sector, fourth is the residential institutions redress special account for 2024, which received a clear audit opinion. Fifth is the National College of Art and Design account for the period 2023-24, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 6, the financial statements for the Technological University of the Shannon, Midlands, Midwest for 2023-24 also received a clear audit opinion. However, I draw attention to a loss due to supplier bank account redirection fraud to the value of just under €100,000.
No. 7 are the Dundalk Institute of Technology financial statements for 2023-24. These received a clear audit opinion but I drew attention to an impairment charge of €241,000 in relation to the indefinite suspension of a capital project. Effectively, the institute was writing off planning expenses for a project that has been indefinitely suspended.
No. 8 are the accounts for Galway and Roscommon Education and Training Board for 2024, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 9 are the accounts for the Higher Education Authority for 2024, which received a clear audit opinion. No. 10, the Mary Immaculate College, Coláiste Mhuire gan Smál, financial statements for 2023-24, received a clear audit opinion. However, I drew attention to a material level of procurement non-compliance. In that case, the figure was €1.3 million. Some further detail is given in the financial statements.
No. 11 are the financial statements for Laois and Offaly Education and Training Board for 2024. These received a clear audit opinion but, again, I drew attention to a material level of procurement non-compliance. In that case, the sum was €945,000.
No. 12, the financial statements for the Educational Research Centre for 2024, received a clear audit opinion. No. 13, the financial statements for Longford and Westmeath Education and Training Board for 2024, received a clear audit opinion. No. 14, the financial statements for Dún Laoghaire Institute of Art, Design and Technology for 2024, received a clear audit opinion. No. 15, the financial statements for Munster Technological University for 2023-24, received a clear audit opinion. No. 16, the financial statements for Dublin City University for 2023-24, received a clear audit opinion.
No. 17, the financial statements from University College Dublin for 2023-24, received a clear audit opinion. However, I drew attention to a voluntary disclosure to the Revenue Commissioners in relation to an underpayment of VAT between 2018 to 2023 to the value of €695,000 and related interest payment of €236,000, giving a total of €931,000 in the settlement involved. I also drew attention to a material level of procurement non-compliance for UCD. The value in that case was €1.5 million.
Turning to hospitals-----
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Are we going through them all and then coming back to individual ones?
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have a question on either the first or second one, namely the fishery harbour centres and the delay in presenting the accounts. It was an extraordinarily long delay. I do not know if this was dealt with previously. If so, I will not repeat but-----
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I would certainly propose we do that because it is a really extraordinary length of time.
The next question is on Dundalk, which is not in my area but it is of interest. That is a huge amount for an impairment charge in relation to planning. It relates to a planning application and all of the expenses and paperwork involved in getting a project through planning that was then suspended. Is that correct?
Mr. Seamus McCarthy:
I am not sure that it was planning in the sense of local government or planning permission. I think it was more in the planning and design of the project, what it would entail and so on. I do not have the detail immediately to hand as to what makes up the €241,000 but I am sure the institute would be able to provide more detail if the committee wished to have it.
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The final one then is on University College Dublin and the underpayment of VAT. How did that arise? Including interest, the amount is almost €931,000 in total. How does something like that happen? Is it unusual?
Mr. Seamus McCarthy:
From memory, it was a misinterpretation of invoices that were presented from abroad. It probably was an unusual category of transactions and I think the university misinterpreted the application of VAT. It was a voluntary disclosure by the university but because of the delay in making the due payments, there was considerable interest involved. By making a voluntary disclosure, the university avoided penalties, so at least-----
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Go raibh maith agat.
Mr. Seamus McCarthy:
In the health sector, No. 18, the Irish Blood Transfusion Service's financial statements for 2024, received a clear audit opinion.
No. 19, the Mental Health Commission's financial statements for 2024, received a qualified audit opinion. As I have explained previously, accounts for many health bodies are presented and they give a true and fair view except that they account for the costs of retirement benefit entitlements only as they become payable and not as they accrue. It is a standard approach for many bodies in the health service.
No. 20, the financial statements from the hepatitis C and HIV compensation tribunal special account, received a clear audit opinion, and No. 21, the financial statements for the related hepatitis C and HIV compensation tribunal reparation fund for 2024, also received a clear audit opinion.
No. 22 relates to the financial statements for the Health Service Executive for 2024. These received a clear audit opinion. However, I drew attention to a number of matters that were noted in the course of the audit. First, I drew attention to the writing off of €33.8 million of expired personal protective equipment, PPE, and vaccines. I have drawn attention to this matter over a number of years. The amounts involved are substantial. Second, I drew attention to costs of €2.1 million incurred in 2024 for the storage of obsolete PPE. Some of the latter has been in storage for a number of years. I drew attention to delays in submitting patient charge claims to insurers resulting in estimated losses of €4.1 million in 2024. The committee may recall that I drew attention to a similar matter in relation to Children's Health Ireland and I think it may have happened in a number of other hospitals as well. I also drew attention to a continuing material level of procurement non-compliance. It is difficult to get a precise figure as to the level, but it is significant. There is a detailed presentation on it in the statement of internal financial control. I drew attention to unquantified losses due to weak controls over a non-competitively procured supply of equipment at a cost of €15 million from 2020 to 2024, including a duplicate payment of €723,000 which has not yet been recovered. While the overall expenditure was €15 million, the systems in place in the HSE did not allow it to know how much product it actually got for that sum or how much of it was used.
Again, there is more detail in the statement of internal financial control.
I also drew attention to weak controls in respect of clinical services provided through HSE employees' companies, including the non-declaration of interests to the HSE in relation to the matter. Again, this is something the committee has spoken about previously in respect of various hospitals. I drew attention to the fact that less than three quarters of the €7.7 billion in grant funding issued to outside agencies was covered by a completed funding agreement by the end of December 2024. That is a key control whereby there is an agreement between the HSE and the funded body as to what they will deliver for the money they are being provided. The coverage has been slipping and it has been getting later and later in the year of account. Finally, I drew attention to weaknesses in controls over fixed assets, including a write-off of the remaining value of an asset that cost €1.4 million to put in place but that was never used.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
A number of members have indicated. We will take Deputy Farrelly first.
Aidan Farrelly (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am sure I am not the only one in the room who is quite concerned about what our attention has been drawn to. If it were not the case that the HSE was coming before us next month, I would probably be expediting my concerns. In the past, we wrote to that body in advance of its visits to let it know some of the issues that were going to arise in order to ensure that the relevant information would be forthcoming. I propose that we start to compile that list now with regard to the HSE and that the matters which have been outlined will form the basis of the start of that process. I propose that we are given an opportunity to contribute on whether the HSE wants to answer in advance or that we can follow up with it afterwards. I am open to other members thoughts on that. With regard to many off these issues, we need to make sure the HSE can answer detailed questions on the day. I would also include IT procurement and software included, particularly if there are any projects in respect of which questions remain. Really, I want to ensure that we can all make the most use of the HSE's appearance before us next month.
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Our job here is to ensure that the public are getting value for money. In the context of the HSE, the public are not getting value for money. I cannot believe the number of overruns and write-offs relating to the HSE that have been flagged. I want to know if this has happened before with the HSE, what penalties were imposed and what were the actions and results. Who is ultimately responsible? Somebody has to take the hit for this. It cannot go on. This is a complete waste of taxpayers' money. I thank the Comptroller and Auditor General for highlighting everything. I just want to know who is ultimately responsible for all these overruns and write-offs within the HSE. It is a complete waste of taxpayers' money.
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is important that the HSE is coming before us. I look forward to questioning its representatives on some of these issues. Reading through the matters the Comptroller and Auditor General flagged, what I think will be of unbelievable frustration to the public is the low-hanging fruit. Do I understand correctly that there is obsolete PPE which the HSE is paying €2.1 million to store? This is stuff that should be in the bin and the HSE is spending €2.1 million to store it.
Mr. Seamus McCarthy:
That is what the HSE spent in 2024, but some of that equipment has been in storage for a number of years after it has been declared obsolete. One point to bear in mind is that it is not as simple as putting it in the bin. These items have to be disposed of properly. There is a large volume of material. There is a requirement to dispose of it, but keeping it in storage is expensive as well.
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The officials will hopefully give us an explanation for that. The other low-hanging fruit relates to Children's Health Ireland, CHI. There is €4.1 million, presumably from HSE-run hospitals, where they just have not filled out the form and sent it to the private insurer to get the moneys that are owed. That money is just vanishing into thin air because forms have not been filled out.
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Leaving aside the low-hanging fruit, which involves sums of money in the millions and which, presumably, we will cover with the HSE, the Comptroller and Auditor General has highlighted that €7.7 billion has been granted to outside agencies by the HSE in circumstances where there is not a proper funding agreement in place.
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That would be close to €2 billion of grant funds being spent by the HSE to lots of different agencies----
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I would like Mr. McCarthy to remind us about the hepatitis C and HIV money. There have been so many tribunals. I was up to speed on this but that is no longer the case. Where are we with what the Comptroller and Auditor General has outlined? That is one issue.
Then, in the context of the HSE, we have the writing off of €33.8 million worth of expired PPE and vaccines. That is for the accounts for 2024. Is that a carryover? Has there been a figure for every year since Covid?
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
So that is just the figure for 2024.
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Mr. McCarthy might clarify that for us as well. What is the total amount in relation to the write-off relating to PPE?
Mr. McCarthy referred to a key control in respect of grant funding. That is what we really need to zone in on, namely why these key controls are missing when it comes to the HSE or any other entity. When we go out canvassing, we can see that certain entities are struggling. They cannot even get their core funding on time. We know it from a particular angle, and then we see it from this angle in the context of a key control being missing.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the members. I want to come in on a couple of points. On the expired PPE, the figure of €33.8 million is extraordinary. The Comptroller and Auditor General touched on this following the question from Deputy Connolly. This figure is probably only a snapshot. It would be good to get a true figure as to how much has been written off to date and how much storage has cost over those years. I note the figure of €2.1 million. We need to write to the HSE and get those figures. I do not expect the Comptroller and Auditor General to provide them now.
A specific question to Mr. McCarthy would be as to whether, in these accounts, we know there were serious issues in terms of substandard protective equipment being brought into the State. We know the tendering process, in an emergency situation, did cause a lot of difficulties in terms of the standard of equipment but also with equipment not arriving at all. I refer here to respirators and other equipment that was highlighted in the past. In these accounts, is there any line in terms of the recoupment of any of those funds through legal or any other process that the HSE has embarked on?
Mr. Seamus McCarthy:
I did report previously on the ventilators. There were moneys that the HSE was seeking to recover. I am not aware that it has recovered those moneys. That is a matter the committee could pursue with the HSE. A figure has been given for each of the past three or four years in relation to vaccine write-offs.
It may not all be Covid-19 vaccines. There may be other vaccines in that but I think most of it relates to Covid-19 vaccines. As for some of the personal protective equipment, there have been substantial write-offs. The non-disposal of those is resulting in the storage cost.
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Regarding that figure of €33.8 million, is that for one year?
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Would it be similar figures for the previous year?
Mr. Seamus McCarthy:
Yes. Certainly it was similar last year. The year before that it was probably a more substantial figure. I could ask the liaison officer to extract the figures from the last number of year's financial statements and to do a briefing note for the committee on the information that is in the public domain.
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That would be helpful.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I think we should do that. This stuff is only being disposed of once it reaches the expiry date. How much more equipment is in storage that has not reached its expiry date? Are we going to have similar figures next year and over the next number of years? We need to get an inventory of how much equipment is in storage there that, realistically, is not going to be utilised. We should write to the HSE and try to get that information in advance of our engagement with them. Is that agreed by members? Agreed.
Mr. Seamus McCarthy:
In relation to the hepatitis C and HIV compensation, I am sorry but I would prefer to not give any more information on that. I have reported on it and we will find the report. It gives the history of all of that and it brings it up to a current date. I cannot remember when we did it. It was probably 2018 or 2019. That will give members a picture of what the expenditure involved there is. Obviously, it is compensation and reparation for people that were harmed. From memory, that looks like the kind of money that was spent per year for the last number of years.
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I was not questioning the figures, as such. It was more the status of where we are at with those.
Mr. Seamus McCarthy:
I think that is outlined in the previous report I did. I just cannot remember the detail at the moment.
Going back to Deputy Farrelly's comment on ICT and cost overruns, I mentioned in private session the major development of a financial management system. If there was an integrated financial management system that might actually be helpful in avoiding some of these matters. Take, for example, the duplicate payment of €732,000. That should be avoided once an integrated financial management system is in place. That is a key development in the HSE. It maybe something the committee should get an update on from the HSE in advance of its appearance.
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
To come back to my question, I asked who is solely responsible or ultimately responsible. I want to make sure they are coming in with the HSE when they come in to our meeting. I want to make sure they are here.
Mr. Seamus McCarthy:
Ultimately, it is the chief executive of the HSE who is answerable. Obviously, he will bring the appropriate team to give explanations to the committee.
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay. For everything on the list. It is just to ensure that we have somebody here for all the items on the list.
Mr. Seamus McCarthy:
I will continue.
No. 23 is the Health Information and Quality Authority financial statements for 2024. These received a qualified opinion. Again, it is on the basis that the accounts give a true and fair view except that they account for cost of retirement benefit entitlements only as they become payable. No. 24 is the Health Products Regulatory Authority for 2024. Again, it received a qualified opinion. The accounts give a true and fair view, except in relation to retirement benefits. No. 25 is the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Ireland for 2024. Again, this received a qualified audit opinion on the same basis, and only to that extent. No. 26 is the National Haemophilia Council for 2024, which received a clear audit opinion.
Moving on to other State bodies and funds, No. 27, the accounts of Enterprise Ireland for 2024, received a clear audit opinion. No. 28, the Commission for Railway Regulation for 2024 received a clear audit opinion. No. 29, the Environmental Protection Agency for 2024 received a clear audit opinion. No. 30, the National Standards Authority of Ireland for 2024 received a clear audit opinion. No. 31, Rásaíocht Con Éireann for 2024 received a clear audit opinion. The next four items, Abargrove Limited, Greyhound Racing Operations Ireland, Shelbourne Greyhound Stadium Limited, and the Irish Retired Greyhound Trust are all subsidiaries of Rásaíocht Con Éireann. Their financial statements for 2024 all received clear audit opinions.
No. 36, the Industrial Development Agency Ireland, for 2024, received a clear audit opinion. No. 37, An tSeirbhís Oideachais Leanúnaigh agus Scileanna, or SOLAS, for 2024, received a clear audit opinion. No. 38, the Charities Regulatory Authority for 2024 received a clear audit opinion. No. 39 is a fund managed by the Charities Regulatory Authority called the charity funds. Those accounts received a clear audit opinion. No. 40 is the National Transport Authority for 2024. Those received a clear audit opinion. However, I draw attention to the delay and cost overrun of the national train control centre. This was originally due to be commissioned by March 2025. The current estimated commissioning date is March 2028. The original project budget was €148 million. The current estimated outturn cost for the project is €189 million, which is a cost overrun of €41 million, or 28%. The main part of this an ICT-based system that needs to be brought into use.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Before Mr. McCarthy moves on, Deputy Boland and Deputy Farrelly have indicated they want to come in.
Grace Boland (Dublin Fingal West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I reiterate that I want the National Transport Authority, NTA, to come in. As we can see here, this project has been pushed out by several years and the cost overruns are huge. It is something this committee needs to look at, as well as the fact we have the contract with Indra relating to the deployment of a very complex IT project right across a large number of the NTA bodies in terms of next-generation ticketing. It is essential we get the NTA in here to understand why these projects are not being delivered on time and why they keep being pushed out. We need to understand whether we are getting value for money on these projects. It is essential and is something I have been asking for over the last few months. I would really appreciate if we could get the NTA onto the work programme.
Aidan Farrelly (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I fully agree with Deputy Boland's comments and support the idea that the NTA comes before the committee. My concern is how likely is that estimated expenditure to be or is it likely to rise again. That is the assurance we need to seek at this point. Here we go again with ICT. There seems to be a real trend that has been emerging over the last couple of months and, I am sure, years, for these bodies. We potentially need to see the OGCIO in here at some point to see what services are available to bodies when they are conducting such significant projects that are potentially outside the normal wheelhouse of competency within organisations.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We will endeavour. We will get the NTA in. It is certainly something members have expressed an ongoing desire for. We will work on that.
In terms of the ICT, we agreed a course of action from our private session earlier so we will touch on that when we deal with the correspondence.
Mr. Seamus McCarthy:
No. 41 is Teagasc financial statements for 2024. Those received a clear audit opinion.
No. 42 relates to a subsidiary of Teagasc called Moorepark Technology Limited financial statements for 2024. They also received a clear audit opinion.
No. 43 is the Defence Forces canteen board for 2024, which received a clear audit opinion.
No. 44 is the Ombudsman for Children financial statements for 2024, which received a clear audit opinion.
No. 45 is the accounts of the external oversight body of the Defence Forces for 2024. They received a clear audit opinion.
No. 46 relates to Science Foundation Ireland. These are the final accounts for Science Foundation Ireland. It was amalgamated into Taighde Éireann or Research Ireland on 1 August. These financial statements cover the period 1 January to 31 July 2024. They received a clear audit opinion. The accounts were actually signed off by me in February, but they were only presented on 5 September, so they were late in being presented. I did give a clear audit opinion, but I drew attention to a settlement at a net cost of €409,000 with the former director general following the termination of his secondment.
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have a question about that figure of €409,000. I was looking at the note, and it seems that the net total of the actual payment is €275,000 on the note supplied, but then the total cost, which I think relates to all the legal fees minus whatever the insurer paid, is €350,000. Is that the figure comprising the amount that is being provided to them in settlement and also the legal cost in one? Is that what that figure represents?
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It seems like-----
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It seems larger, that is the point, because it says that the net total for the settlement seems to be €275,000.
Mr. Seamus McCarthy:
Yes, their own legal costs; they were able to recover legal costs. The settlement paid to the claimant was €200,000. The claimant's legal fees, which were paid by SFI, were €275,000. That gives a total of €475,000 paid, but they were able to recover €200,000 from their insurance and then their own legal expenses were €367,000 in total but, again, there was a recovery of €292,000 there. Therefore, the net cost was €350,000.
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is in addition then to that figure of the settlement.
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am sorry; just to be clear, and I am sorry to hold the Chair up, is the figure on item 4 of €350,000 different from the €409,000 Mr. McCarthy is highlighting here? Is the €409,000-----
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It was €275,000-----
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
-----and then the net cost of the legals is €350,000, is that right?
Mr. Seamus McCarthy:
No. 47 is Bord Bia for 2024. It received a clear audit opinion. However, I drew attention to the disclosure of a legal settlement at a net cost of €236,000 with an individual to terminate Workplace Relations Commission proceedings. There was also a material level of procurement non-compliance. The amount involved in that case was €2.6 million.
No. 48 is the Digital Hub Development Agency financial statements for 2024, which received a clear audit opinion. However, I drew attention to a continuing vacant site levy amounting to €315,000 in 2024.
No. 49-----
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I wonder could we write to the agency, Chair. If I understand this correctly, this agency is one that is dissolving, is that right?
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There is a site there that could be used for housing but-----
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
However, it may or may not have happened yet, or it is in process or-----
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I was just going to suggest that we write to this agency to identify that.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We can do that and try to get an update. Mr. McCarthy mentioned a continued vacant site levy of €315,000 from the previous-----
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We might in the correspondence to them get an overall figure for however many years, and how much that levy was for each of those years as well.
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
And maybe write to the Land Development Agency, LDA, as well to discover if it is going to take on the site for housing.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We will do that. Is that agreed by members? Agreed.
Mr. Seamus McCarthy:
No. 49 is the financial statements of the Law Reform Commission for 2024, which received a clear audit opinion.
No. 50 is the Pensions Authority financial statements for 2024, which received a clear audit opinion. However, I draw attention to the delay and cost overruns of the integrated pensions system software development project, which was expected to be completed by the end of 2024 with an estimated cost of €2.3 million. The new estimated completion timeline is the first half of 2026, and the revised estimated cost will be €3.9 million, so, again, an ICT project.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Another ICT issue there. We will return to that in correspondence. Is that it, Mr. McCarthy?
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
On the ICT project date, it is very difficult to keep up. Is there any way we can come back in relation to the spending on ICT projects? I do not know; I am just throwing it out because it is really difficult to keep up with it. It seems to be huge. There seems to be very little accountability. I do not know if we have the expertise to see it but certainly, we have the expertise to raise the question about it.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am not sure whether Deputy Connolly was here for the private session when we touched on-----
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I was in earlier and then left and came back.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is agreed that we are going to write to each Department and try to get an inventory of all of the ICT projects, both current and in the past, in terms of overrun and overspend. It seems that in every project that is being implemented, there is an overrun. I listed off a number of them earlier-----
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is okay; I did not realise that.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We will touch on that in correspondence just to agree a course of action. I hear and agree with the Deputy. Unless there are any other issues, can we agree to note the listing of accounts and financial statements? Is that agreed? Agreed. The listing of accounts and financial statements will be published as part of our minutes.
We will move on to correspondence. We will now consider items of correspondence which have been received from Accounting Officers in Government bodies. The items were received between 10 July and 31 August. Items received in September will be on the agenda for the meeting of 25 September.
No. R0210 is correspondence from UCD in response to the committee's queries in relation to ICT expenses. It was agreed to note and publish.
Next is No. R0212, correspondence from the Department of Education and Youth regarding non-compliant procurement. It was agreed to include an engagement with the Department in the work programme and to write to it and get a timeline and costings for an ICT project. Deputy Farrelly flagged this issue in our private session. Does he wish to comment?
Aidan Farrelly (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We discussed this in detail in private session. The project in question is one of a number of projects Deputy Connolly has raised. There seems to be a trend whereby projects do not match at tender what ultimately is needed at production. That leads to a significant cost overrun, sometimes of 50% or 100%, of the initial budget that was put aside. That type of overrun will always have an impact somewhere else in terms of service provision. This particular project is an example of that. We have had other correspondence identifying similar IT projects that have overrun, been delayed or are still not provided. As the Chair said, we need to get an overall perspective on this issue. There is really strong evidence suggesting a trend that raises questions concerning internal competency to write briefs for significant IT projects.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I hear what the Deputy is saying. Is it agreed that we write to the Department seeking further information? Agreed.
No. R0213 is correspondence from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage providing a response to matters raised at our meeting of 19 June 2025. Similar concerns were raised by other members and by me regarding the ICT system for the Residential Tenancies Board involving a huge overrun and the project being two years behind schedule. The initial estimated cost of €3.3 million escalated to €8.5 million, which is a huge overrun. Members have spoken about other State agencies where similar issues have arisen. We heard about the Arts Council, HIQA and RTÉ, and there are other organisations of concern, including in the criminal justice system. It has been agreed that we write to all Departments seeking an inventory of all ICT projects that are in the implementation stage or agreed in terms of tendering, indicating the estimated timeframes for implementation and any cost overruns, both current and historical over recent years. We need to get a true picture as to how extensive the issue is that was raised by Deputy Farrelly and others. It is an issue to which the committee has a duty to give particular focus and one, on foot of writing to all the Departments, to which I expect we will return. At that point, we will agree on witnesses to call. Is it agreed that we write to all Departments regarding agencies? Agreed.
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
May we also write to the Office of Government Procurement, OGP, regarding public procurement? Many of these tenders are coming in at the time of tender and by the time the project is finished, the price has doubled. Some kind of stipulation must be put in such that the price at which a project is tendered and the procurement is won cannot be exceeded. What is happening does not make any sense. Procurement is not working within the State if a price that is procured and agreed at the start of a project goes on to be doubled. That is not working. We need to write to the OGP to ensure that regulation is being implemented.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We certainly can write to the OGP to try to get a note on all the issues the Deputy raised.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We move to No. R0214, correspondence from SOLAS in response to the committee's queries regarding property purchases. It was agreed to note and publish that correspondence.
No. R0215 is from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage in response to matters raised at our meeting of 19 June. It was agreed to note and publish that correspondence.
Next is No. R0217 from HIQA in response to matters raised at our meeting of 17 July. It was agreed to note and publish that correspondence.
No. R0218 is correspondence received from the Minister for Health providing an update to the committee on the relocation of the national maternity hospital to Elm Park. Deputy Farrelly flagged this issue in private session. Does he wish to comment?
Aidan Farrelly (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There was a brief note added to the correspondence from the Minister. I ask that we write to the Department to see whether further forecasting has been done since that correspondence was sent and if a summary of the overall costs has been completed since the initial budget was allocated.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It was agreed that we will write to the Department seeking further information in this regard.
No. R0220 from the Department of Education and Youth provides an update on Whitehall College of Further Education. It was agreed to note and publish that correspondence.
No. R0221 from the Department of the Taoiseach relates to the delaying of the 2024 financial accounts of the National Transport Authority, NTA. It was agreed to note and publish that correspondence.
Next is No. R0222, correspondence received from An Garda Síochána providing a response to matters raised at our meeting of 26 June 2025. A number of members spoke about this correspondence relating to our earlier meeting. I raised two areas on which we need clarification and further information.
The first concerns an issue Deputy McAuliffe raised when the former Commissioner was before the committee relating to the storage of the considerable sum of money the Garda holds as part of its ongoing criminal investigations. A specific question was asked of the Commissioner at the time as to whether he could provide information on whether any investigations are going on or have gone on, by the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, GSOC, or internally within the Garda, in relation to moneys being misappropriated or disappearing from storage. We did not get a direct response to that question. We got a comprehensive reply as to how the cash is stored but not the specific information requested. We need to write to the new Commissioner to get clarity on that.
The second issue stemmed from a question Deputy Bennett raised with the Commissioner regarding aeroplanes flying through Irish airspace carrying munitions of war, particularly to facilitate the genocide being perpetrated in Gaza by the Israeli forces. We got a written reply from the former Commissioner outlining what the procedure is by the Department of Transport and its roles and responsibilities in this regard. Following the attendance of the former Commissioner at the committee, it came to light in information revealed by The Ditch that it had made a number of formal complaints, providing specific flight information, including flight details and numbers, to the Garda Commissioner. That correspondence was acknowledged by the Commissioner's office. I asked that we write to the Commissioner seeking clarity as to what course of action was taken by the Garda on the specific information provided to his office and whether it led to an investigation. We did not get specific information in response. I propose that we write to the new Commissioner asking for a specific response as to what happened to the detailed and comprehensive information that was provided regarding those flight numbers and whether a PULSE number was assigned and a criminal investigation initiated on foot of that information. We should write to the Garda regarding those issues to try to get some accurate responses. Is that agreed? Agreed.
We move on to No. R0223, correspondence from IDA Ireland providing an update on the sale of a building by Louth and Meath Education and Training Board.
It was agreed to note and publish this correspondence.
Regarding No. R0224 from the Department of Transport in relation to the late laying of the 2024 financial statements of Transport Infrastructure Ireland, it was agreed to note and publish that correspondence.
The committee has also agreed to note and publish the following correspondence: No. R0225 from the National Treatment Purchase Fund in response to matters raised at the meeting of 17 July; No. R0231 from the Department of Social Protection in relation to the committee's queries on the auto-enrolment pension scheme; No. R0238 from the Atlantic Technological University in response to the committee's queries regarding non-compliant procurement; and No. R0239 from Technological University Dublin in response to the committee's queries on non-compliant procurement.
No. R0240 is correspondence from the University of Galway in relation to matters raised by the committee at the meeting of 10 July. Following consideration of the university's financial statements, the committee agreed to write to the university and ask that its foundation's financial statements be included with the University of Galway statements. The university has written to the committee and confirmed that results of the Galway University Foundation are included in Galway university's 2024 consolidated financial statements and that these are available on the foundation's website and via the Companies Registration Office, CRO. The committee acknowledges this confirmation and, indeed, welcomes these details.
The committee has also agreed to note and publish the following items-----
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
When the university comes before us, we will see the foundation's accounts.
Mr. Seamus McCarthy:
This arises from a misstatement that I made at the previous committee. I believe the Deputy asked whether the foundation's financial transactions were recorded in the financial statements. I said I could not see them and I did not think they were. In fact, they are fully consolidated. All of the transactions and the value of the assets of the foundation are in the financial statements of the university, which is the precise way it should be. Historically, it was not the case.
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is progress.
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Very good. It is not just Galway. Other universities have-----
Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is progress in terms of openness and accountability.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
No problem.
The committee has also agreed to note and publish the following correspondence: No. R0245, correspondence from Munster Technological University in response to the committee's queries on non-compliant procurement; No. R0246 from the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine in response to the late laying of the 2023 financial statements of four subsidiary companies of Horse Racing Ireland; No. R0247 from the Medical Council of Ireland in response to the committee's queries on non-compliant procurement; No. R0248 from the Department of Climate, Energy and the Environment providing an explanation for the late laying of the 2023 financial statements of Inland Fisheries Ireland; No. R0249 from St. James's Hospital regarding non-compliant procurement disclosed in its 2023 financial statements; No. R0250, from the Department of public expenditure in response to matters raised at the meeting of 10 July 2025; No. R0251 from Cork Education and Training Board in relation to non-compliant procurement disclosed in the 2023 financial statements; No. R0253 from University College Cork in relation to non-compliant procurement disclosed in its 2023 financial statements; No. R0254 from Beaumont Hospital in response to the committee's queries on non-compliant procurement; No. R0255 from Kildare and Wicklow ETB in response to the committee's queries on non-compliant procurement; No. R0256 from Dublin and Dún Laoghaire ETB in response to the committee's queries on non-compliant procurement; No. R0257 from the Department of Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science in relation to the late laying of its 2023 financial statements for Science Foundation Ireland; No. R0258 from the Department of enterprise in relation to the late laying accounts of InterTradeIreland; No. R0259, correspondence providing an explanation for the late laying of the 2023 financial statements of the Arts Council of Ireland; No. R0260, correspondence to the committee in relation to the non-compliant procurement disclosed in the 2023 financial statements of Limerick and Clare Education and Training Board; No. R0262, correspondence providing a copy of the NTPF insourcing assurance review final report; and No. R0263 from the OPW in relation to Westport Coast Guard station.
No. R0264 was correspondence received from the Secretary General of the Department of Transport providing an update to the committee in relation to the search and rescue contract awarded to Bristow Ireland Limited in August 2023. Deputy Byrne flagged this and we discussed it in quite a lot of detail during private session. Does Deputy Byrne wish to comment?
Joanna Byrne (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will be brief. As the Chair alluded to, we discussed this in detail. I want to ensure that the operational capacity of the fleet has the capabilities it needs to serve its purpose. I ask for a comparison of the super-medium and heavy fleet and capacity in terms of range and time, as well as internal capacity within the fleet. I appreciate the support of the committee on that.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is it agreed that we write to the Department and try to get that information on the issues the Deputy has raised? Agreed.
We will move on to No. 7, the work programme. The committee agreed its work programme for 2025 and has scheduled the following meetings. On Thursday, 25 September, we will discuss the 2024 financial statements of the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission. This is an issue that numerous members sought to have high on our agenda and work programme, with a specific focus on the broadcast workers and the major issues they face. The Houses of the Oireachtas Commission will come before the committee next week to discuss that.
On Thursday, 2 October 2025, we will discuss the 2024 financial statements of Tusla - Child and Family Agency. On Thursday, 9 October 2025, the 2024 financial statements of Beaumont Hospital and the National Treatment Purchase Fund will be discussed. On Thursday, 16 October 2025, we will discuss the 2024 financial statements of the Health Service Executive. On Thursday, 23 October 2025, we will discuss the 2024 appropriation accounts of the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration to consider Vote 21 - Prisons and Vote 24 - the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration. On Thursday, 6 November 2025, the 2024 financial statements of Uisce Éireann will be discussed. Members, including Deputy Boland, have flagged a number of other areas that we will endeavour to try to get on our work programme. Does Deputy Boland wish to come in at this point?
Grace Boland (Dublin Fingal West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the Chair. I flagged that I wanted the NTA to come in. We have dealt with that already.
It is important that we invite the DAA in. I know it is a commercial State body, but it is 100% State owned. With everything that has happened there in recent weeks, the committee has a duty to examine the settlement and whether it represents value for money and the code of practice has been applied. A €1 million settlement is setting an extraordinarily high precedent in terms of settlements by State entities. I would have serious concerns about that. We should seek to bring the DAA before the committee to speak to us about this, make sure any governance concerns are addressed and tease out a settlement of this value, which, in an employment law context in Ireland, is not the norm. It is far above the norm. We need to consider whether it is something a State entity should be entering into.
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We discussed this in private session. In a newspaper report, the Peter McVerry Trust indicated that it would now attend the Committee of Public Accounts whereas previously, in correspondence when we asked the trust to come before us, it indicated that it really had nothing to offer. I know our predecessor Committee of Public Accounts made several attempts to get the trust to come before the committee. Now it has explicitly stated in public that it will attend a committee meeting when it publishes its accounts. The trust knows the dates on which it will publish those accounts. I am anxious that we give priority to the Peter McVerry Trust coming before the committee. I ask that we write to the trust asking it to nail its colours to the mast with a date to come before the committee.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We will return to that in a moment. I call Deputy Farrelly.
Aidan Farrelly (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have spoken enough about ICT projects over the course of this morning. I look forward to our future work on that. I know we have provisionally committed to inviting the Department of education in. With regard to procurement, I have growing concerns over the procurement processes involved in the school meals programme and the way it has been rolled out around the country. Is it possible to include that as part of our invitation to the Department of education?
On a second piece we may be able to add at some point, An Coimisiún Pleanála has experienced significant organisational change over recent years. An invitation to the commission at some point in our work programme for the coming six to 12 months would be merited.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We will certainly return to all of those areas, including the DAA and the commission. We have a list of other bodies that members have flagged. We will come back to our work programme over the next number of weeks to ensure we have a continuous arrangement of meetings lined up right into early next year.
On the issue Deputy Geoghegan raised regarding the Peter McVerry Trust, because of the scheduling of the correspondence, we were dealing with correspondence from July up to August. We have not dealt with all of the correspondence. A letter did come in from the Peter McVerry Trust on 8 September. It will be circulated to members for next week's meeting. I am sure we will have a detailed conversation on it at that point. To confirm what the Deputy said and what has been said publicly, I will refer to one paragraph from the letter. It confirms that the Peter McVerry Trust is willing to attend and provide information to the Committee of Public Accounts on an agreed date once it has filed the 2023 audited financial statements with the CRO and all relevant regulatory bodies. It is currently expected to complete this process around the end of September 2025. The follow-on 2024 audit will commence as soon as the 2023 accounts have been finalised. I do not propose to read the full letter now but it concurs with the statements that have been made publicly. Once the letter has been circulated to members, they can read it in full but that is the gist of it. We will endeavour to get the trust in as soon as possible once the work on its end is completed, as it has laid out. Is that okay?
James Geoghegan (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Yes. I thank the Chair.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Do any other members wish to come in on any issues?
Mr. Seamus McCarthy:
May I comment on two items? To go back to Deputy Geoghegan about the settlement with the former director general of Science Foundation Ireland, I mentioned the components of the net cost of the settlement with the former director general. In addition, there was an expenditure of €59,000 paid to Maynooth University, from which he was seconded, in lieu of the notice period. The net €350,000 plus the €59,000 brings you to the €409,000 I referred to in the certificate. I apologise; I had just forgotten that point.
The second thing is that the school meals programme is funded by the Department of Social Protection so, if there are queries in that regard, they should be directed to that Department rather than to the Department of education.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Are members happy to move on? We will move on to aon ghnó eile, any other business. Are there any other items the committee wishes to discuss at this point? No. It would be remiss of me not to acknowledge Deputy Catherine Connolly's presence here. I thank her for taking time out of her busy schedule of campaigning. I wish her well over the next number of weeks, as I also wish well the other two declared candidates who are in the field. I wish Deputy Connolly and the other two candidates - there may be more over the next little while; that remains to be seen - well over the next number of weeks. The meeting is now adjourned until 9.30 a.m. on Thursday, 25 September 2025, when we will meet with the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission to discuss its 2024 financial statements.