Geraldine Feeney (Fianna Fail)

I would like the Minister for Finance to outline the recent policy changes regarding the taxation of expenses for members of boards of governors of the institutes of technology and the VECs who sit on interview panels. I also ask the Minister to treat the issue with consideration and flexibility. For years it has been accepted practice that members of bodies receive their expenses at agreed rates on a tax-free basis. All employees in the country, including officials from the Department of Finance, are entitled to receive expense allowances on an unvouched basis from their employers for travel and subsistence when away from the office or place of work when on business.

I understand the change in attitude came about because the place of work, as in this case, is an institute of education which has asked members of its board to attend an interview away from that institution. These members do not have offices at these institutions and will travel from their homes or, depending on the time of day, from their places of work to the place where the interviews are being held. In my opinion this is a unique employment situation and I believe it should be treated by the Revenue Commissioners as such and should not be covered by the general rules applying to the payment of expenses by employers.

It is in the country's best interest to get people of such high calibre to serve on boards. I go so far as to say that it is essentially a voluntary contribution. It is advantageous to have an input on interview panels from laypeople who are not full-time academics or officials. We must do all in our power to encourage participation by local representatives and laypeople in these activities. Dare I say that none of them is getting too rich or is ever likely to get rich on the small expenses paid. These people are not looking for an increase in expenses. They are just asking that the status quo should remain.

The Department should encourage the Revenue Commissioners to take the view that this is a unique activity and should not be compared with the generality of the employment rule. We are all aware of the replacement of the health boards with the HSE. We do not yet have local representatives sitting on the HSE, which is causing uproar in many counties as no feedback is coming back. When local issues need to be addressed nobody knows where to go. If we do not do something about this change in taxation we will not have local and lay representation sitting on boards, which would be a shame. While the Revenue Commissioners may have a legal basis for their interpretation I ask them to tread carefully as we do not know where this will stop and we could end up with no lay or local representation on these very valuable boards, which play a very important role and give outstanding services to us.