Results 241-260 of 2,211 for speaker:Paul Connaughton
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: By the way, I imagine the board met Professor Bairbre Redmond at this stage and told her from its process that it did not believe there was a significant issue. She would have thought at the start that the work she would be doing would not involve a huge amount.
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: Did Professor Redmond say the institute would get a report by September of that year?
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: The fee was €1,500 per day and the report was due in several weeks. However, this inquiry quickly turned into a runaway train. Was there a breakdown or a justification given for such a fee of €1,500? What people are zoning in on is the fee of €1,500 per day. It is an extortionate amount of money. As I have no expertise in this area, will the institute explain in...
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: How would one categorise that type of work? This is an unusual case. Does the HEA or the Department have any examples over the past ten years of where such a case would have cropped up?
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: GMIT is making a decision with no advice from the HEA or the Department and arrives at a fee of €1,500 per day. Professor Redmond then brings Mr. Ed Madden, who is on the same deal, into the process. Was there any measure put into the terms of reference to ensure they would report in four to six weeks?
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: Did anyone insist on a report or an update in six weeks or two months?
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: They start to do their important work which has to do with the independence of the institution and that it maintains its excellent reputation. Who from the college maintained contact with them to ensure weekly, monthly or bimonthly updates?
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: How often did they report?
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: From where was this concern coming? Was it at board or president level? When was this discussed? Are there minutes of meetings where it was discussed?
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: What was the conclusion of that? Did someone say the institute needed to have a word with Professor Redmond and Mr. Ed Madden and ask why was it taking so long?
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: Number 12 of the terms of reference states the investigation team will furnish the report as soon as practicable with an expected timeframe of four weeks after the investigation team confirms the investigative stage of the process has concluded. They held all the cards on that one.
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: The institute set up this investigation but the two people carrying it out were able to say they will take as long as it takes.
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: While there is nothing wrong with this, we get to the end of the process. From the institute’s notes, an argument takes place between the two investigators. What was the reason for this argument?
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: Obviously, this slows the whole process down. For how long was this argument going on when no work was being carried out?
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: Were they still getting paid at this time?
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: I am trying to get to the nub of this. At this stage, a significant amount of money has been spent. The institute does not have a report. It has taken several years and €1,500 is spent a day on this investigation. The two investigators then fall out.
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: The first report is from Mr. Ed Madden. Professor Bairbre Redmond is gone at this stage after their argument. Where did Mr. Madden's report fall down in relation to the terms of reference? Can Mr. Fennell point out to me where in any of the 12 of terms of reference? What was the reason? Which one could we pick to show that this is why Mr. Madden's report does not add up? At this stage,...
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: Is Mr. Fennell saying GMIT went back then to Mr. Madden and asked him if he could fix this problem for us?
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: To what do these queries relate?
- Public Accounts Committee: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology: Financial Statements 2013 (24 Sep 2015)
Paul Connaughton: Mr. Madden has not reported back on some of the queries. Did he ever come back to stand over his report?