Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Targaím:

Go n-ainmníonn Dáil Éireann Séamus Mac Cárthaigh lena cheapadh ag an Uachtarán mar Ard-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste.

I move:

That Dáil Éireann nominates Séamus McCarthy for appointment by the President to be the Comptroller and Auditor General.

As Deputies know, the Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. John Buckley, retired in February. While this motion is about his replacement, it is appropriate that I begin by expressing my appreciation of the services rendered by Mr. Buckley in his period as Comptroller and Auditor General. Mr. Buckley was in this important position for almost four years and in that time he carried out his functions in a highly professional and effective manner. As Members know, the role of the Comptroller and Auditor General is a constitutional one and is extremely important in terms of public accountability and the performance of the public service. While the essential functions of the office remain as set out in the Constitution, its operation has evolved significantly during the period of Mr. Buckley's tenure in line with developments in the general practice of audit in recent years and with various changes to strengthen accountability in Departments and other State agencies.

The Office of Comptroller and Auditor General was originally provided for under the Exchequer and Audit Departments Act 1866. Article 33 of the Constitution sets down the responsibilities of the Comptroller and Auditor General, in terms of his or her role as comptroller in controlling, on behalf of the State, all disbursements of moneys administered by or under the authority of the Oireachtas, and in terms of his or her role as auditor in auditing the accounts of Departments and State bodies for regularity and accuracy. In accordance with the Constitution, the Comptroller and Auditor General is appointed by the President on the nomination of Dáil Éireann and reports to Dáil Éireann at stated periods as determined by law. The Constitution also provides that the Comptroller and Auditor General shall not be removed from office except for stated misbehaviour or incapacity and then only upon resolutions passed by the Dáil and Seanad calling for such removal. This underlines the independent status of this important office.

The terms and conditions of the Office of Comptroller and Auditor General are determined by law and the role of the Comptroller and Auditor General must be seen in the context of the significant developments in the public sector since Mr. Buckley's appointment in May 2008. The Comptroller and Auditor General (Amendment) Act 1993 enhanced the nature of the audit process by giving the Comptroller and Auditor General a new statutory role in respect of economy, efficiency and effectiveness, that is, value for money. This value for money function was an important new power given to the Comptroller and Auditor General, providing him or her with the discretion to examine and report on the economy and efficiency of Departments and bodies, which are expected to have in place the necessary systems to evaluate the effectiveness of their operations. It is these systems that are subject to examination by the Comptroller and Auditor General. It is worth mentioning, however, that section 11 of the 1993 Act prohibits the Comptroller and Auditor General from questioning or expressing an opinion on the merits of policies or of policy objectives. The Act applies the same prohibition to Accounting Officers in the performance of their statutory duties. Both of these restrictions are reflected in the terms of reference of the Committee of Public Accounts. All of this is in accordance with the long-standing tradition that in policy matters Ministers are answerable to this House. This also reflects the position in many other countries that the national auditor should not become involved in policy, which is the prerogative of the Government with accountability to Parliament.

While there has been significant enhancement of governance arrangements over the past few years, new arrangements have been made to progress the reform agenda. The key driver in the reform process is the Cabinet Committee on Public Service Reform, which provides political direction and accountability for reform. The Cabinet committee, chaired by the Taoiseach and convened by the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, meets regularly to consider priority issues and ensure that overall progress is being achieved. In addition, an advisory group of Secretaries General has been established and meets quarterly to provide support and advice on strategic issues to the Cabinet committee. A reform delivery board, primarily comprising assistant secretaries responsible for leading reform in each Department and major office, meets regularly to oversee and monitor the delivery of public service reform at organisational and sectoral level and to provide assurance to the reform and delivery office and Cabinet committee that public service reform is being successfully delivered.

The three key elements of the public expenditure reform measures were set out in the CER which has informed our approach to reforms to the Estimates, budgeting and value for money. The three main elements, all of which are important in the context of this appointment are multi-annual expenditure framework, new value for money code and performance-based budgeting.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is it agreed that the Minister be allowed to finish his speech? Agreed.

Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Mr. McCarthy takes over the post of Comptroller and Auditor General at a time of substantial change and reform within the public service. Public service reform requires a commitment from the whole of Government to become more transparent, accountable and efficient. One of the key deliverables in this regard is the radical streamlining of State bodies. The Government's public service reform plan, which was published last November, provides for the critical review of a range of State bodies, including the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General and the Local Government Audit Service. The plan indicates that there is a possibility of merging the Local Government Audit Service with the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor Genreal, subject to the outcome of the review. This review will include representatives from those two bodies, the Departments of the Environment, Community and Local Government, Finance, and Public Expenditure and Reform and local authority management expertise. The critical review of the merger of Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General and the Local Government Audit Service will inform the future development of external audit at local and central government level. While there are challenges to the integration of the central and local government external audit process, there are benefits to be explored from the synergies of agency rationalisation, greater scrutiny of public money, common audit standards and enhanced accountability. Any integration must, of course, take account of the respective positions of local and central government and the local government reform agenda which, among other things, will seek to strengthen the role of elected Members in relation to oversight of local authority performance.

Developments in external audit under the reform agenda will also take account of a range of issues relating to the mandate of the Comptroller and Auditor General. The overall objective is to provide for enhanced scrutiny of public expenditure, including the delivery of value for money. The Government recognises that VFM is more important in the current climate than it has been at any time since its inception.

As I stated earlier, the Constitution provides that the Comptroller and Auditor General shall be appointed by the President on the nomination of Dáil Éireann. Members of the House, in particular those who served on the Committee of Public Accounts, will be very aware of the responsibilities of the post. Having fully considered the matter and following consultation with the leaders of the Opposition parties, including the Technical Group, the Government recommends the nomination of Mr. Seamus McCarthy to succeed Mr. Buckley. Mr. McCarthy is currently a Director of Audit within the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General, with responsibility for a number of issues, including exchequer control, Comptroller and Auditor General reporting and Committee of Public Accounts liaison. He has many years service in the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General. Prior to joining that office, he worked in the Department of Finance, where he was involved in policy analysis, including the development of appraisal and management guidelines for public sector capital projects. Mr. McCarthy holds a BA in economics and political science and an MSc in public sector analysis. The new Comptroller and Auditor General will take up his appointment in a period in which increasing attention is being paid to public sector reform and the value for money obtained from public funds. Value for money in all sectors of the economy is key to ensuring economic growth into the future. The Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General has a key role to play in this respect.

I am satisfied that Mr. McCarthy will make an excellent Comptroller and Auditor General. I recommend his nomination to Dáil Éireann.

John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I join with the Minister is supporting this motion and the appointment of Mr. Seamus McCarthy as the new Comptroller and Auditor General. The Minister has outlined the various qualifications which Mr. McCarthy holds, with whom since the retirement of Mr. John Buckley I have, as Chairman of the Committee of Public Accounts, worked and found to be professional, diligent and effective. I wish him well in terms of his work as Comptroller and Auditor General and look forward to working with him and members of the committee in the course of this term.

I take this opportunity to pay tribute to former Comptrollers and Auditors General, Mr. John Purcell, whom I worked with as a member of the Committee of Public Accounts in 2007, at which time the Minister was Chairman of that committee and Mr. John Buckley, both of whom did their job in an exceptional manner without fear or favour. They did the State a great deal of service in terms of ensuring value for money, which we need to ensure now more than ever in terms of the smooth running of this country, greater efficiencies and savings to the taxpayer. Being a watchdog on behalf of the taxpayer is a central role for Committee of Public Accounts members.

In the course of his speech, the Minister referred to 1993 and the value for money addition made to the work of the Comptroller and Auditor General. The Comptroller and Auditor General (Amendment) Bill 2012 which I recently introduced in this House was defeated. I believe that Bill contained some very good suggestions in terms of how we might improve the power and resources of the Comptroller and Auditor General and Committee of Public Accounts. In light of the review now being undertaken, which I understand will be completed by end June, I ask that the Minister consider incorporating into that review some consideration of the views and opinions set out in that Bill, which I believe would enhance the work of the Comptroller and Auditor General and Committee of Public Accounts.

It is in my opinion shocking and worrying that €5 billion of taxpayers' money, which goes through the local government spend throughout this country, is not audited by the Comptroller and Auditor General. The recent discovery in respect of payments at Tallaght Hospital is also shocking. Some €2.6 billion of taxpayers' money goes to the voluntary sector. While we can inspect and audit the books of St. James's Hospital and bring the relevant people in this regard before the Committee of Public Accounts, we cannot do so in regard to Tallaght Hospital. In my opinion, the reforms that are necessary in this area are achievable. Were the Minister and Government to put their minds to it, I have no doubt the Local Government Audit Service and Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General could be amalgamated, resulting in our having one body responsible for the complete audit of every cent of taxpayers' money spent in this country.

As regards the review, which is due to be completed by 30 June, I am disappointed that the Committee of Public Accounts has not been consulted or engaged with in terms of the reform which it sees as necessary. We see at first-hand where the spend is taking place, where the anomalies arise and where the taxpayer is simply not getting value for money. I believe that any country interested in reform will start with the Committee of Public Accounts and the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General, which has been since the 1800s responsible for scrutiny of Government spending. We need the review brought to a conclusion and to bring into sharp focus the need for reform of the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General and Committee of Public Accounts. I have one last point, which I have raised with the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin, and anybody possible, in regard to Government and its attitude towards the Committee of Public Accounts. It has to do with resources. I know this is a tight time and will be so for some while.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is time, Deputy.

John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I shared my time with the Minister, Deputy Noonan, so the Ceann Comhairle might allow me some latitude.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I gave you full time.

John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will finish now. We should ensure that whatever resources are needed by the Comptroller and Auditor General and the Committee of Public Accounts should be agreed to, within reason, because we are under a lot of pressure to get out reports, deal with Accounting Officers, and so on. Resources are needed. There is also a need to ensure that Accounting Officers, right across the board, reply in a timely fashion to the Committee of Public Accounts in terms of the information required of them. These are all steps that can be achieved and are simple reforms that would make an enormous difference to our work.

Mary Lou McDonald (Dublin Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I support this motion. First, I pay tribute to the outgoing Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. John Buckley. Working on the Committee of Public Accounts, I saw at first hand Mr. Buckley's hard work and professional courtesy in dealing with all of us parliamentarians so I wish to acknowledge that and pay tribute to him. I look forward to working with his successor, Mr. Seamus McCarthy, whose nomination is before the House. Like his predecessor, he will have his work cut out for him.

The Minister has set out the central constitutional role of the Comptroller and Auditor General and the intense and, I imagine, growing public scrutiny there will be of the work of that office and of the Committee of Public Accounts, in turn. Never before have concepts such as value for money, accountability and traceability of public moneys been more sharply in focus in the political and the public mind.

I fully endorse the comments made by Deputy McGuinness in respect of an extension of the powers of the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General and, indeed, of the Committee of Public Accounts. It is almost inexplicable that such large volumes of public moneys are not audited and overseen, in turn, by the committee of the Oireachtas. It would be incredibly disappointing, if the review envisaged did not address that net point and remedy it; I very much hope it will.

The Committee of Public Accounts, working with the Comptroller and Auditor General's office, considers, scrutinises and makes findings in respect of public moneys spent. In welcoming Mr. McCarthy to his new position, I wish to put on the record that those findings must be taken seriously by the system and be acted upon and where flaws, failures or failings have been discovered they must be remedied. It is not sufficient for us to have an exercise in accountability that does not have any follow-up nor, most crucially, any delivery. The only way to get to a full system of value for money is not merely by tracing the moneys and finding where things went wrong, but, very emphatically, by putting things to rights. There is, therefore, an obvious responsibility, for the Accounting Officers in particular, but also for the entire civil and public service to step up to the plate and respond to that challenge.

I have absolutely no doubt that Mr. McCarthy is the best man for the job. On this, the Minister and I are ad idem; we agree; "yes, yes, yes".

I wish to raise a matter and ask the Ceann Comhairle to indulge me although it is more for future reference than for today. I would like to know how many women applied for the job, or if any did. I notice that just over 25% of the senior staff in the Comptroller and Auditor General's Office are women, which is slightly out of kilter when one looks at women's participation rates in the work force. I raise the issue of women in senior positions in the civil and public sector. It is a cause for concern and I hope it is something on which the Government has an eye. I would also be curious to know, in respect of the shortlist for this position, whether there were any applications or applicants from outside the fold of the civil and public service. I raise these points, not in any way to take away from the appointment proposed today. I very much welcome Mr. McCarthy into his role and look forward to working with him as effectively as was the case with Mr. Buckley. They are important considerations, however, in respect of gender on the one hand and, on the other, to Government commitment to diversity and to opening up the senior ranks of the civil and public service to people from the outside. I wish Mr. McCarthy well and I support the motion.

Shane Ross (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Like every other speaker, I have absolutely no reason to question the competence of the selected candidate, partly because I do not know enough about what happened, or about the other candidates, and because I was not involved in the competition. I wish Mr. McCarthy well in the position he is about to take up.

I have serious reservations, however, about the procedure adopted to appoint top public servants. I cannot understand why, in this particular case, the Government did not decide to hold interviews that would have included Members of the Oireachtas. Why, for instance, were Deputies not included on this particular panel? Why were members of the Committee of Public Accounts not asked to sit on this panel to interview the candidates in question or, at least, the chosen candidate? Why was this not taken as the great opportunity, about which we heard so much last year, to ask those who are put into these top positions to answer questions in pulbic about their plans and their competencies, before Oireachtas committees? This was an ideal opportunity to do that but it was not taken up. The problem is it is all done completely and utterly behind closed doors.

I am told - correctly, I believe, because I was told by the Department which has been very helpful about it - there were 15 applications for this particular job. Six were asked to come for preliminary interviews and three people came to the last interview, all three of whom were public or civil servants. They were insiders. The last Comptroller and Auditor General was an insider, as was his immediate predecessor. A pattern is developing here whereby insiders are always appointed in a behind closed doors situation with the nomination being brought to the Dáil for rubber-stamping by all the parties. This is a flawed procedure and one which I believe should be broken and departed from in all areas of the public service in order to give the public confidence that those who are being selected are being selected in a way in which they can have confidence. The interview boards are also stuffed with insiders. That is a dangerous situation in which the Department finds itself.

According to a letter written to Deputy McGuinness on 26 March 2012, the interview board consisted of a former Secretary General, of the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport I believe, although it is not stated; the Governor of the Central Bank, the former Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. John Buckley, the Comptroller and Auditor General of Northern Ireland, two Top Level Appointments Committee, TLAC, nominees, one private sector representative and one from the public sector. My reading of that is that there is only one person there with any private sector experience or knowledge, which seems to me to indicate that the result of this particular interview was almost preordained. It was going to be someone from inside the Comptroller and Auditor General's Office, if such a person applied. What I cannot understand is why the interview board is full of insiders. It has a majority of career public servants. I think there is one person from the private sector on it. Why do we not have public hearings that would give an opportunity to the candidates in question, or the candidate who is selected, to come before Members of the Dáil and the Seanad to answer questions? That would allow the public to have confidence in appointments of this nature. That would be a great innovation. It would have been a great departure on this occasion. I have no reason to believe there would have been a different result. It would have enabled us to see how the procedure worked. We might even have seen someone from the private sector making an application. I regret that did not happen. I ask the Minister to consider the possibility of making sure it happens in future.

I am a little alarmed about the apparent lack of a scoring procedure when the interviews happened. The usual pretty meaningless criteria for evaluating someone's ability - their CVs and management expertise etc. - were used. At the end of the day, we got the situation we were likely to get in the first place, in light of the fact that the process took place in such secrecy and with so little openness. Given that insiders were interviewing insiders, it is not surprising that an insider was chosen. That is what happened on the last three occasions. I do not know if it happened prior to that because I am not familiar with the history of the appointments to the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General.

Before I conclude, I would like to mention one further thing about which I am worried. I do not know whether the Minister will reply at the end of this debate.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes, he will.

Shane Ross (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He might say whether there is a complaints procedure. What happens if a Comptroller and Auditor General does something about which members of the public, Deputies or Senators are dissatisfied? I am aware that a Comptroller and Auditor General cannot be removed other than by means of a motion that is passed with a majority in the Dáil and the Seanad. That seems pretty inadequate, particularly in the absence of a complaints procedure. The Minister will recall the difficulties regarding a judge that arose not so long ago. The matter never came to the Dáil or the Seanad because it was so difficult to make progress with it. There is a problem about remedying false or wrong actions or mistakes that are made by a Comptroller and Auditor General. There does not appear to be a complaints procedure or a realistic way of removing such a person.