Results 2,941-2,960 of 15,555 for speaker:Eoghan Murphy
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: As Mr. McGuire stated, there are two ends of the prizes here. This newsagent who, in the particular example given to me, is a 65 year old, gave €50 to Rehab, the newsagent takes a commission additional to that and then the remaining money is used by the newsagent to pay out the individuals who come to them who have one prizes at the low-end of the market. Anything under €20,...
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: That is how, when we look at something like €4 million in sales, we see only €10,000 in profit, after we have taken into account the costs of running the scheme. It is not really €4 million in sales by Rehab, is it? Rehab's sales are sales directly to the newsagents because 70% of that money is being managed by the newsagents who are making the sales and paying out the...
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: Rehab's true sales figure is the money it gets back from the newsagents.
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: Why is Rehab recording it as €4 million in sales to the Department?
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: Bills to the public are all made by the newsagents and 70% of the money used in the scheme, through sales, is administered by the newsagents in terms of the payouts to the low-end winners. Only 30% is coming back to Rehab. Let us consider it from a commercial point of view. If I supplied to a sports company T-shirts for €1 apiece and it sold them for €10 apiece, I would not...
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: When someone buys a scratch card in a newsagent, he is not giving any money to Rehab at all.
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: It is tiny, a fraction of a fraction.
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: Is there anything on the scratch card that states the destination of the money?
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: The purpose of the scheme, as far as Rehab is concerned, is not to make money because it does not make money from it. The purpose of the scheme, as it sees it, is to get money from the Government.
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: What if the cap is not lifted?
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: I do not want to get into the dispute Mr. McGuire is having with the Department on the cap and its lifting. Would it be fair to say that if the cap is not lifted, Rehab will not be able to continue to run the scratch card scheme?
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: Under the scheme as it operates, it is in Mr. McGuire’s interest to have a high volume of sales because that would increase the amount of funding received from the Department.
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: To a limit, obviously, in terms of the fund that is available.
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: The money received from the Department of Justice and Equality goes into the total Rehab pot and is not designated for a particular front-line service.
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: What service is that?
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: Being applied to administrative costs?
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: Mr. McGuire will have seen the audit from 2012 by the Department. It claimed that money was-----
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: Did it never occur to Mr. McGuire that IT costs might be administration costs?
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: It is all an administrative cost. Is it good enough to say the Department did not define administration and that Rehab did not know what it was?
- Public Accounts Committee: Payments to Section 39 Companies: Discussion (27 Feb 2014)
Eoghan Murphy: Mr. McGuire had a problem that was carried out by the Department in 2012. He does not accept it.