Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1926 > Committee of Public Accounts > Final Report - Appropriation Accounts 1925 - 1926

FINAL REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS FOR THE YEAR 1925-26.

PART I.—INTRODUCTORY REMARKS.

1. In introducing the Final Report on the Appropriation Accounts for the year 1923-24, it is a source of satisfaction to the Committee to be in a position to give an assurance that financial administration in the various Departments of State continued to display the steady improvement which was noted in the later period of the preceding year. The staffs settled down to the new duties arising from the change of Government and a greater accuracy in accounting and vouching was attained. In the Accounts in question, notably in the case of the Army Account, some traces of the disturbed state of the country during the previous year are still noticeable, but, in general, it may be said that the prevailing aspect of the various services is one indicating settled conditions and ordinary problems of the kind arising in times of peace.

2. It is noteworthy that the balances to be surrendered to the Exchequer amounted, in total, to £12,163,206. The gross estimate was £46,286,302. In the circumstances, it is the wish of the Committee to draw special attention to the criticisms of last year’s Committee on the subject of over-estimating.

3. The Committee has held 50 meetings in all and has taken evidence from a great number of witnesses. The Minutes of Evidence, together with other records of the Committee, are herewith laid before the Dáil.

PART II.—GENERAL OBSERVATIONS.

Minute of the Minister for Finance.

4. Before taking up consideration of matters arising on the Accounts of the year 1923-24, it is desirable to refer to the receipt by the Committee of the above-mentioned Minute. A similar document is annually presented, and it contains the Minister’s remarks on the Reports issued by the previous year’s Committee. The Minute is included in the records accompanying the present Report. This Committee wishes to make the following comments on it.

5. The Minute states, in dealing with paragraph 27 of the Second Interim Report, that the departmental officer in question has left the country. In view of this, the Committee agrees that no further useful steps can be taken in connection with the matter.

6. In connection with paragraph 29, the Committee is pleased to note the assurance given by the Minister that the purchase of furniture and equipment, both in the case of the Army and of other public services, is now under effective control.

7. Arising on paragraph 31, the Committee observes that the Minister is of opinion that the present arrangement should continue. It appears to the Committee that the Exchequer and Audit Department only controls the Establishment section of the office in question, and that the Accounting Officer is responsible to this Committee for everything which might increase expenditure, whereas he knows nothing of the functions which are the raison d’être of the office, and which, necessarily, react on the Establishment expenses. These other functions are carried on divorced from financial responsibility. In view of these considerations but having regard to the observations of the Minister, the Committee prefers to await the result of further experience before forming a final judgment on this question.

8. On paragraph 33, the Committee notes the results of action taken, but is of opinion that the claims made are equitable as based on undoubted services rendered to the Government of Northern Ireland, and does not favour their abandonment.

9. The comment of the Minister on paragraph 6 of the Final Report has given satisfaction to the Committee. It is hoped that further information to the effect that the title deeds, etc., have been restored to the Government of Saorstát Eireann will, before long, be conveyed to the Committee.

10. The Committee has considered the Minister’s statement on paragraph 7. The matter of the purchase and custody of, and the accounting for, Army stores, dealt with last year, has come up again for notice on the Accounts for 1923-24, and it is hoped that finality in method will be achieved as a result of views at present being interchanged.

11. In connection with the Minister’s comment on paragraph 8, viz., that all available information had been fully stated to the Committee in the course of evidence, and that there was no reason to suppose that further investigations would result in any material addition to that information, it is necessary to state that the Committee has since been made aware, from an examination of the official file, of the existence of important information relating to the accounts in question, which information was available on the date of the Minister’s Minute. Further investigations have in consequence proved necessary; the results of these are stated at a later stage in this Report.

Control of the Dáil in Financial Matters.

12. The extent of parliamentary control over supply grants is affected, firstly, by the method in which they are made and, secondly, by the efficiency of the system under which they are accounted for. The latter is of more importance than the former in the sense that the strictness of granting would be rendered nugatory by laxity or deficiency in accounting. The strictly conditional manner in which provision is made by the Oireachtas constitutes one of the cardinal principles of the financial system. The money which the Dáil votes must be spent exclusively upon the services for which it is granted, and the amounts provided for in the Votes cannot be exceeded without the sanction of the Dáil. The Committee, however, in the course of examination of the details of the Votes, found that the amounts spent under some sub-heads exceeded the actual provision in the Estimates, and also that new sub-heads had been opened for expenditure admittedly not provided for in the Estimates. The result of these operations was that expenditure, incurred under Part 2 of several of the Estimates, was not in strict accordance with the grants, although the totals of the Votes were not exceeded. The system of providing for excesses on certain sub-heads by using savings on other sub-heads is one which has been in use for many years. These transfers cannot be made without the sanction of the Minister for Finance. The Public Accounts Committee, in seeing that the authority of the Dáil was not unduly entrenched upon, naturally required some assurance that the continuance of this system was desirable and, in the course of its examination, it invited the observations of the Secretary of the Department of Finance on the present practice. He made out a substantial case for the exercise of discretionary power by the Minister for Finance in applying savings on sub-heads to meet excesses on other sub-heads and to new classes of expenditure within the ambit of the Vote. It has been shown to the satisfaction of the Committee that real economy is effected by the exercise of this power and that swollen Estimates are avoided; furthermore, that an endeavour to restrict the Department of Finance in this respect would be achieved at great cost to the efficiency and smooth working of the present financial system. If a service is of a novel character, or even remote from anything shown in the original Estimate, or if a considerable sum is involved, it has been agreed that a Supplementary Estimate must be introduced. The Committee of Public Accounts will strictly examine all special sub-heads and excesses on sub-heads coming to its notice, with a view to ensuring that administrative activity, resulting in extended lines of expenditure, does not encroach unduly upon the sphere of those deputed to grant supplies and control the expenditure of them.

PART III.—PARTICULAR ACCOUNTS.

Executive Council.

(a) Visit to Bobbio.

13. Under sub-head B (Travelling Expenses) there have been charged against this Vote the expenses of a delegation travelling to Bobbio, in Italy. The occasion was, doubtless, one of historic interest to Irishmen, being a celebration in connection with St. Columbanus. While the Committee is prepared to sanction this item, it feels that the expenditure of State money for the purpose was not justified, and that the Dáil, in fact, when making provision for the working of this Department, merely contemplated that expenses in connection with the ordinary business of the Council, including international events of a diplomatic character, would be met out of it. An abnormal item of this kind ought to have been included in the Supplementary Estimate in connection with this Vote and to have been explained to the Dáil at the time. It should be said that the decision to charge this expenditure against the Vote was not that of the Accounting Officer but was ministerial. The Committee is of opinion that such items as this, when foreseen, should be indicated on the face of Estimates and, when not foreseen, should be brought to the notice of the Dáil on the first available opportunity.

(b) Motor-car Allowance.

14. The attention of the Committee was directed by the Comptroller and Auditor-General to a heavy expenditure for petrol and maintenance in connection with a motor car at the disposal of the Executive Council. The car was one used almost entirely by the President. Much of the extra expense was due to the fact that the engine was defective. The arrangement whereby an official motor car was provided for the President was undesirable, as it involved a check by the Accounting Officer of the Vote on the use of the car, a duty which presented difficulties in practice. Having regard to all the circumstances, the arrangement in question has been altered. The President, in future, will supply whatever cars he may require. It is intended that, from public funds, he will be given an allowance, fixed in amount and calculated to cover all necessary running expenses. The services of two chauffeurs are included in this arrangement. In noting these facts, the Committee wishes to point out that the case of the President must, because of the character of his office, be held to be different from that of any other public official, and that the provision made in this matter should not rule other cases. Allowances to other officials using their own cars in the public service should be carefully worked out on the basis of actual costs.

Superannuation and Retired Allowances.

(a) Prison Officers.

15. A difference of opinion as to the construction of the Superannuation (Prison Officers) Act, 1919, in conjunction with the Government of Ireland Act, 1920 and Article X of the Treaty, has arisen between the Comptroller and Auditor-General and the Department of Finance. This Department was fortified by the advice of the Civil Service Committee, but had not consulted the Attorney-General as no doubt was felt on the matter until the Comptroller and Auditor-General raised his query. The question before the Committee is to decide whether the Department of Finance exercised a liberality that was too generous in the case. Before dealing with this, it is necessary to dispose of the legal question involved. The opinion of the Attorney-General should therefore be sought as to whether, on the construction of these statutes, a prison officer proposing to retire under Article X of the Treaty is entitled to have the additional years provided for under the Government of Ireland Act, 1920 doubled, in consequence of the Superannuation (Prison Officers) Act, 1919.

(b) Extra Statutory Pension.

16. Attention was drawn by the Comptroller and Auditor-General to the case of an officer who retired, and whose pension was assessed by the British Government as from 1st April, 1922. It was subsequently decided by the Provisional Government to concede to him the benefits of Article X of the Treaty. In consequence of this arrangement provision must be made annually for the extra amount required. The matter has been under discussion before the Committee, and it is understood that the Department of Finance is enquiring into the question with a view to avoiding the necessity of annually bringing forward the case in the Dáil.

County Court Officers.

17. Certain nugatory payments were made in connection with the preparation of jurors’ lists, instructions in connection with which were issued by different officers to different local authorities. The circumstances have been enquired into by the Committee, whence it appears that the error was excusable in the circumstances of the transition period. The Committee, consequently, is of opinion that the charge may be allowed.

Secret Service.

18. A misunderstanding on the part of the Army authorities as to the correct procedure in disposing of money out of the Secret Service Vote is responsible for an important query on the part of the Comptroller and Auditor-General. The Army Authorities advanced a sum of £21,836, taken from moneys comprised in the Army Vote, for purposes appropriate to Secret Service, without first obtaining the sanction of the Minister for Finance. The Committee confirms the view that it was irregular for the Army Authorities, firstly, to commit another Vote to heavy expenditure without previously obtaining sanction, and, secondly, to advance the money required from a Vote which was not intended to cover the purpose in question. It may be well to state that the rule which has been laid down with regard to Secret Service charges is that no sanction will be given for them without the approval of at least two members of the Executive Council, one of whom is the Minister for Finance.

Property Losses Compensation.

19. The attention of the Committee has been directed to the fact that the Consulting Engineer was paid the sum of £5,250 during the year 1923-24. Furthermore, it appears that this was not a final payment for the services rendered by him, but was described as being a payment on account. In the opinion of the Committee, this is a very large sum to be paid to a single individual in any one year, even for professional services, and the greatest care should be exercised before such payments are held to be justified. It must be noted, also, that no provision for it was made in the Estimates. The payment was one which, from its size alone, ought to have been brought before the Dáil. The question of the disbursement to one man of a sum greater than that paid to any other State officer, executive, judicial, or administrative, is an aspect of the case which would have merited discussion by the representatives of the people. Furthermore, it remains to mention that the sum in question is divided into two parts, one of which, £3,830, is charged against this Vote, and the other, £1,420, against the Vote for the Army. This method of charging was probably essential. It makes it difficult, however, to trace the total payments made.

Public Works and Buildings.

20. Comment was made by the Comptroller and Auditor-General on the question of charging Civic Guard furniture against the respective Votes for Public Works and Buildings and the Civic Guard. Evidence given before the Committee indicated that principles have not yet been definitely settled. It would also appear that the principle upon which furniture charges are dealt with in the case of the Civic Guard differs from that obtaining in the case of the Army. The Committee deprecates too much diversity in matters that ought, apparently, to be treated similarly. Comparison of costs from year to year is a valuable aid to criticism of public expenditure, and, with a view to facilitating this, as much similarity and simplicity of statement and treatment as possible should be achieved. If there be reasons for treating the Civic Guard differently from the Army in this respect, they should be brought to the notice of this Committee.

Civic Guard.

21. In connection with a scheme for the purchase of cycles for issue to the Guards on a repayment basis, a sum of £663 was stated to be outstanding on the 31st March, 1924. This loss was made up of a number of items which required individual examination, but the facts in connection with them had not been made ready for audit. The Committee has ascertained that the Accounting Officer is now in a position to submit the necessary details to the Comptroller and Auditor-General.

Ministry of Local Government.

22. On this Account the query was raised that three paying orders amounting to £992 15s. 0d., issued by the Army Finance Office in favour of the head of this Ministry, had not been credited to any account rendered to the Exchequer and Audit Department. It was further mentioned that an officer of a departmental section, through which the orders passed, had been requested to forward the accounts, but had not done so. The matters there referred to were the subject of close and lengthy investigation by the Committee. Dealing only with these points, in a complicated case, it transpired that they involved a conflict of view between the Accounting Officer of the Ministry and the sub-accounting officer in question as to status and responsibilities, a certain amount of independence of action being claimed on behalf of his section by the latter, which was naturally resisted by the former.The matter has now been definitely settled, the sub-accounting officer. accepting his proper position of subordination in the Department. Furthermore, the accounts of the section, including those of the paying orders in question, have been duly furnished for audit.

Public Education.

23. A sum of over £40 was charged to this Account in respect of taxicab journeys between a Minister’s private residence and Government Buildings. The Comptroller and Auditor-General queried the item on the grounds that it was the duty of the Minister to attend at his office from day to day, and that he was not entitled to locomotion expenses. The period, during which these charges accrued, was one of disturbance, and the case for payment is that the conditions of the time rendered it necessary for the Minister to use a taxicab. The view of the Committee is that such charges are not properly met out of public funds. It is not intended, however, to disallow the item, but the Committee thinks that the repetition of such cases ought to be avoided.

Ministry of External Affairs.

24. On the Account of this Ministry, a query was raised, in the ordinary course of audit, to the effect that a journey had been made to Dublin during the period from 19th December to 10th January by a representative from Paris, and asking for a copy of the authority for paying the expenses of the journey. The Accounting Officer replied that he had no special authority from the Department of Finance, but that general authority existed by reason of the sub-head for Travelling and Subsistence. The Comptroller and Auditor-General then requested that covering sanction be sought from the Department of Finance. It transpired that the Accounting Officer remained unconvinced of the necessity for this and did not comply with the request. The matter was, in consequence, reported to the Dáil.There are two questions involved : (1) the merits of the particular query, and (2) the general question whether a requisition by the Comptroller and Auditor-General that covering sanction is required in a particular case must be held to compel the Accounting Officer to apply to the Department of Finance accordingly. It is not denied by the Comptroller and Auditor-General that a general authority exists under the sub-head. In dealing with these two questions, it is necessary to say that the particular query as to the propriety of the expenditure in the circumstances is not one for this Committee, being referable, in the first instance, when it arises, to the Department of Finance. On the second point, a larger question of principle is involved. It is true that existing regulations permit Departments to incur expenditure in connection with their work, within the scope of the sub-heads set out in the Estimates. In the ordinary course no constraints are applied in so doing. It must, nevertheless, be. borne in mind that all expenditure is subject to audit by the Comptroller and Auditor-General. It is certainly his function to test whether authority exists for every item of expenditure. Even though authority exists, it is again his function to test whether any item of expenditure was wisely and necessarily incurred. On these grounds it must be held that any matter, for which a general sanction exists but in connection with which the Comptroller and Auditor-General is of opinion that abnormal features arise requiring examination, is necessarily one for which he is entitled to require that special sanction from the Department, of Finance will be obtained. It is apparent that this power must be conceded to him, as expenditure could easily be swollen unnecessarily and unwisely, even though the general authority of sub-heads could be quoted. For these reasons the Committee thinks that the contentions of the Accounting Officer cannot be sustained, and supports the view that covering sanction be sought from the Department of Finance.

25. A further question was raised as to the absence of sufficient vouchers for a sum of £40 spent on taxicabs in London. The Committee recognises a difficulty in supplying vouchers where taxicabs are hired in the streets, and in other similar matters, and suggests that, whereas existing regulations require their production as in the case under review, it is desirable that regulations should be made by the Department of Finance in respect to expenditure of this nature, as to the form of certificate which might be accepted where vouchers cannot be obtained. In the case in question the Department of Finance should deal with the question of giving authority for the expenditure mentioned.

League of Nations.

26. Commenting on this Account, the Comptroller and Auditor-General states that certain overpayments were made in connection with the expenses of a delegation to a meeting of the League of Nations in 1923. As a considerable proportion of the money overpaid has been recovered and the amount outstanding is small, no direction by the Committee is called for, the steps taken to secure recovery having been noted.

27. On the same Account, it was observed that a sum of £35 was paid to a special courier to cover the cost of conveying to Genoa the lost luggage of one of the delegates. This expenditure must be held to have been irregularly incurred, to have been excessive in amount and improperly admitted against the Vote. In dealing with the case the Committee is reluctantly of opinion that, in view of the unusual circumstances in which it was incurred, the item must be passed.

Post Office.

28. With reference to the comment made by the Comptroller and Auditor-General that he found the stock of cycles in hand to be greatly in excess of current requirements, it was stated that in fact the number amounted to three or four years’ supply. It is only fair to the Post Office to point out that this excessive stock was not accumulated by them of their own initiative but was the result of a contract, entered into on behalf of the Army, for machines which on delivery proved, in new circumstances, to be superfluous. The Department of Finance instructed the Post Office to take them over. This arrangement arose out of decisions of the Contracts Committee. The opinion of the Committee of Public Accounts is that where transfers are thus made to a Department they should be charged at current prices, and any losses due to a fall in market value, etc. should be charged against the purchasing department.

Ministry of Fisheries.

29. The criticisms brought by the Comptroller and Auditor-General against this Account for the year 1923-4 are extensive and serious. On their face the defects criticised appear to involve the assertion of freedom from control in financial matters, contrary to recognised constitutional practice. In general, he complains that departmental schemes were promoted with regard to fisheries and rural industries, resulting in loss to the Exchequer, without previously seeking sanction from the Department of Finance, a sanction not yet given in some of the cases reviewed, and refused in at least one instance. It is not necessary to enter into the details of these episodes. They are set out in the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General and in the discussions before the Committee. The view taken by the Committee of this subject, on the whole, is that the defects noticed are traceable to the autonomous position of the Congested Districts Board for Ireland, in which Department all the cases under criticism originated. The Board administered moneys received as Grants-in-Aid, and it was, consequently, free from the usual financial control. During the financial year under review the Board ceased to exist, under the terms of the Land Law (Commission) Act, 1923, and its jurisdiction and property passed to the Land Commission which continued to administer its powers on an agency basis pending their permanent allocation to some other Department. This occurred in July, 1923. The Land Commission endeavoured, on the whole satisfactorily, to merge the two financial systems, but did not interfere in matters of policy already determined. The Department of Fisheries finally took over the outstanding part of the functions of the Board, in the middle of February, 1924, but was unable to effect anything substantial before the close of the financial year. Thus it will be seen that the peculiar system of the Congested Districts Board maintained its influence throughout the year under review. For the future the Department of Fisheries will of course work to sub-heads, and sanction must exist for all its activities, including those taken over from the Board.

30. The Comptroller and Auditor-General criticised the renewal of the appointment of a lace teacher and the payment of subsistence rates to her, on a scale higher than that allowed to the superior ranks of the public service, without seeking authority from the Department of Finance. He objected likewise to the alteration of this lady’s headquarters, as resulting in additional charges on public funds. The Committee investigated the circumstances, both on this Account and on that of the Land Commission, and is of opinion that the action taken was a severe departure from settled rule. It feels reluctant to pass the item, but does so having regard to the facts stated in the last preceding paragraph.

31. The system of keeping the Accounts of the fishery stores has not met with the approval of the Comptroller and Auditor-General. The Departments concerned should consult with a view to satisfying the requirements of the Audit Department.

Land Commission.

32. The Committee took into consideration the representations made by the Exchequer and Audit Department that the Land Commission were bound by the terms of the Land Act, 1923, to make reasonable deductions from amounts collected under the Act, in respect of compounded arrears of rent and payments in lieu of rent, to recoup the Department for the cost of collecting these monies. In the view of the Committee it is clearly prescribed that such deductions should be made. The directions given by the Department of Finance in the matter of payments in lieu of rent have been noted. Acting on these directions the Land Commission, with the approval of the Minister for Lands and Agriculture, have made deductions of one-half per cent., as from the first Gale Day of 1924, and are awaiting the decision of the Minister for Finance as to the disposal of a sum of £2,578, being interest on sums collected and put on deposit receipt.

33. In the case of the collection of compounded arrears of. rent it does not appear that any corresponding deductions have been made by the Land Commission. This aspect of the case should be taken into consideration, and the views of the Minister for Finance, with a statement as to the ultimate settlement made in the matter, should be conveyed to the Committee.

Congested Districts Board.

34. The Comptroller and Auditor-General in his Report commented on the transfer of certain machinery, furniture, etc., by the Board to various bodies, on whose premises and under whose auspices classes were conducted for which the machinery and furniture were used. The transfers were made in view of the probable dissolution of the Board under the terms of the Land Law (Commission) Act, 1923, which was at the time passing through its stages as a Bill. The Bill contained a section which stated that, immediately on the passing of the Act, all the property and assets of the Board were to vest in the Irish Land Commission. In view of this provision in the Bill, the more correct procedure on the part of the Board would have been to suspend the alienation of its property, which may have been one of the abnormal powers possessed by that autonomous body. The value of the property so dealt with was £670. The attention of the Committee was called to the fact that any alternative method of dealing with the machinery and furniture in question would have resulted in depreciation in value and other losses, and also to the fact that the property may still be available for further use by similar classes.

Army.

(a) Store Accounting.

35. The system of stock-taking and store-accounting in the Army has again been noted as unsatisfactory by the Comptroller and Auditor-General. The difficulties in the way of the evolution of a satisfactory system have, however, to a great extent been removed. The Army Finance Officer is in consultation with the Department of Finance with a view to producing a system which will satisfy the Comptroller and Auditor-General.

(b) Lodging Allowance.

36. Under this sub-head a query was raised that no proper statements were supplied in support of a charge of £678 for the expenses of 28 officers who visited London, in February and March, 1923, for the purpose of purchasing Army supplies. The charges in connection with the hire of taxicabs and local railway travelling were stated to be such as required explanation. The reply of the Army Finance Officer stated that, at the period in question, regulations governing subsistence allowances were being prepared but had not been issued; that the railway expenditure was necessary, as visits had to be made to manufacturing centres in the Midlands of England; and that it was considered necessary to use taxicabs for different reasons, e.g., because the officers were unfamiliar with London. The transaction must be considered as unsatisfactory from the point of view of national economy, and is admitted to be so by the Army Finance Officer who states that, at the present time, the ordinary exercise of his office would suffice to supply all required checks on extravagance of this nature, and that, therefore, such a complaint as this could not arise again. As the Committee feels assured that this statement represents the actual situation, it is of opinion that the matter need not be pressed further.

(c) Mechanical Transport.

37. Claims arising out of the commandeering of motor vehicles were, at first, dealt with by an inter-departmental committee composed of representatives from the Departments of Finance and Defence. This was dissolved by the Minister for Defence, and the duties were carried on by the staff of the Army Finance Office. In this way expedition that was very desirable was attained, though recommendations made by the superseded Committee, to the effect that compensation in a number of cases should be borne from the Vote for Property Losses Compensation, were being overlooked. It is necessary to state, however, that where an inter-departmental committee is set up for any purpose, it is a bad precedent that this arrangement should be cancelled by either Department without reference to the other. A situation of the sort described is aggravated when, as in this case, the Department which was not consulted was the one most vitally interested.

(d) Provisions and Allowances in lieu.

38. There has been charged against this sub-head a sum paid for food supplied to destitute civilian population in Limerick during July, 1922. The charge was not one for which the Army Vote was liable, the Vote and sub-head being intended for soldiers, not civilians. The Department of Finance directed, notwithstanding, that the charge should be borne on the Army Vote. The matter has been reported to the Dáil by the Comptroller and Auditor-General, as appeared necessary. The incident was one which arose out of civil strife, and the expenditure appears to have been necessary and justifiable in the circumstances in which it occurred. The Committee must approve of the direction given by the Department of Finance. The item may, therefore, be passed.

39. On the same sub-head, the Comptroller and Auditor-General reported that Army Hospital treatment was being given to ex-soldiers in receipt of pensions or gratuities. No statutory authority exists for this, nor has any Supplementary Estimate been introduced for the amount. The Army Finance Officer stated to the Committee that legislation, covering this matter, was in contemplation. but has not yet appeared. Meantime this expenditure has been incurred without any authority and should be regularised without delay.

40. On this sub-head the attention of the Committee was drawn to the duplicate issue of a cheque to a trader whose account was, in part, queried. He retained both cheques as a set-off against his total claim, without waiting for any adjudication on queried items. He was asked for a refund of the second cheque but refused, returning only a sum of £21 9s. 0d. the extent of the over-payment beyond the total of his claim. Even this last-named sum he retained for nine months, till the whole question was taken up with him. The trader in question was written to by the Committee and asked to furnish a statement on the matter but did not reply.

(e) Railway Maintenance Corps.

41. The failure to keep satisfactory accounts, leaving a considerable sum uncleared, has been reported by the Comptroller and Auditor-General. As the matter has since become the subject of an inter-departmental enquiry and will be brought before the Committee of Public Accounts at a subsequent date, no further reference need be made at this stage. Other matters arising out of this sub-head include (1) an unduly high expenditure on taxicabs used by the Commanding Officer of the Corps, and (2) unwarranted expenditure on fruit, tobacco and confectionery in connection with the Officers’ Mess. As regards the taxicab expenditure, it was explained by the Army, Finance Officer that active service conditions prevailed; that the Corps was extraneous to the regular Army organisation; that no regulations as to transport had been made in those early days, whereas the work of the Corps was urgent; and that the expenditure occurred without having previously been referred to him for sanction. The outlay referred to under the heading of (2) was also the subject of explanation. This was to the effect that no regulations existed at the time as to what was appropriate for an Officers’ Mess; that no system of central purchasing by contract existed; that war conditions justified the raising of the standard of living; and that the cost of the mess of this Corps would be found, on examination, to be reasonable; and that, in this case, too, the officers themselves ordered these extra luxuries without reference to the central authority.

42. The occasion seems to the Committee a suitable one to stress the general fact with regard to expenditure in the Army, namely, that responsibility rests on the Army Finance Officer of accounting to the Dáil for all such expenditure, by whomever the same is undertaken. Commitments and accounting, in every department of the Army, should be dealt with, having in view the satisfactory discharge of this responsibility which is a serious and personal one.

(f) Mícheál Barracks.

43. The reconstruction of the military barracks in Cork has given rise to questions analogous to those discussed in paragraph 12 above. A proposal to expend £164,000 on military works and buildings was not sanctioned by the Department of Finance, on the grounds that the state of the public finances would not permit such a heavy capital outlay, objection being also taken to it on the grounds that it would involve a Supplementary Estimate. One item in the scheme was the reconstruction of the Cork barracks, for which the sum of £41,000 was required. It was agreed that this part of the scheme might be proceeded with on the grounds of urgency. The natural Vote to bear the charge was that for Public Works and Buildings. The appropriate sub-head on that Vote, however, provided for only £25,000, and it was recognised that if the cost of this reconstruction work were added, an excess would be produced on the Vote. It was then determined to transfer the charge to the Army Vote, on the grounds that sub-head T thereof provided for Works and Buildings. A condition was, at the same time, made that savings on other branches of the Army Vote would be available to meet expenditure as it occurred. The Committee would like to point out that the provision made in sub-head T was intended to cover only minor works of repair and maintenance such as might be undertaken by the Corps of Engineers attached to the Army, and that the Dáil passed the respective Votes construing the Estimates to the effect that big capital works of this kind involving special contracts and architectural experience were to be met out of the Vote for Public Works and Buildings. Apart from this consideration, the sum of £41,000 is a very considerable sum and comes within the categories set out in Paragraph 12 above as necessitating a Supplementary Estimate. Another objectionable feature of the case remains to be noted. Although the sum of £41,000 was sanctioned, only an amount of £7,652 was spent in the year under review, the balance being charged on the subsequent year’s Estimates but against the Vote for Public Works and Buildings. Thus the cost of the work in question is distributed between different Votes. This is not a proper procedure and it could have been avoided had a Supplementary Estimate been originally introduced. The entire episode seems to the Committee to indicate the necessity for caution and restraint in the application of savings on some sub-heads to meet excesses on others or on new expenditure.

44. On the question of the amount, viz., £41,000, the Committee agrees to the proposition offered by the Department of Finance, as follows :—“Every proposal for a building where it involves a sum in excess of £5,000 ought to be laid before the Dáil as a specific proposal before being undertaken.” This, accordingly, may be accepted as a working rule.

(g) Imprest Accounts. Chief Accounts Office.

45. Under this heading in his Report, the Comptroller and Auditor-General reported that a number of serious overpayments and irregularities had occurred, in connection with which several criminal prosecutions were instituted. The Minister for Finance has given a conditional sanction to write off these overpayments; but it has been held by the Exchequer and Audit Department that this is insufficient, and that evidence must be produced that the Army Finance Officer has used all means at his disposal to secure recovery of the sums overpaid. A Departmental Committee is engaged in an examination of the very large number of cases involved. Until the report of this inquiry is made available for the Committee of Public Accounts, it is not advantageous to pronounce on the matter.

(h) Miscellaneous Expenses.

1. An t-Oglach.

46. In giving sanction to a write-off of £52, the Department of Finance stipulated that steps should be taken by the Army Finance Office to secure a refund of a sum of £482, paid to the Stationery Office in connection with the proceeds of advertisements appearing in the above-named Journal during the period when it was being published at the expense of the State. The cost of publication was, subsequently, borne privately by the officers thereafter running it. The advertisers paid the sum of £482 to these new promoters after the paper had become an unofficial one, and the money was, by them, used up in the development of the paper, so as not to be available for refund to the Army Finance Officer. The judgment of the Committee on the matter is that the authority of the Dáil should be obtained in order to pass the item.

2. Life Insurance Premium of an Officer.

47. In paragraph 63 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General, reference was made to the payment from public funds of the annual premium on a policy of insurance on the life of an officer, and to the fact that the consent of the Department of Finance had not been obtained for this charge. It would appear, however, that the payment of this premium was a condition of the officer’s appointment and was embodied in the agreement made with him. In the circumstances, it was held that there was no option but to pay the premium from the Army Vote. While the Committee feels that it would not be justified in recommending the charge for disallowance, and reluctantly agrees to pass the item in the special circumstances, it desires to place on record the view that payments for this purpose should not form a charge against the public.

3. Army Athletic Association.

48. With a view to promoting sports within the Army, a sum of £5,000 was paid from the Army Vote for the purposes of an Athletic Association. No provision was made for this in the Estimate. In order to account for the expenditure, proposals were made to charge the amount as between three separate sub-heads. This was a method which the Committee could not approve. Eventually, however, the amount was charged as a single item against Miscellaneous Expenses. Although the remainder of this sub-head came up for audit in the usual manner, it was proposed that this sum of £5,000, bracketted as it was with items subject to Audit, should be treated as a Grant-in-Aid. The Department of Finance gave a very reluctant covering sanction, and the matter has been reported to the Dáil by the Comptroller and Auditor-General. The Committee must take the view that this considerable outlay, never having been sanctioned by the Dáil, is inadmissible until Parliamentary authority has been obtained for it. Disregarding this aspect of the matter for the moment, and dealing only with the method of charging the item, it is furthermore the opinion of the Committee that, in order to bring the item clearly to the notice of the Dáil, the proper procedure was to require sanction from the Department of Finance to open a special sub-head with respect to it.

(i) Animals and Forage.

49. A purchase of 149 horses by a Staff Commandant, whose authority to enter upon the contract was questionable, was reported on by the Comptroller and Auditor-General. Some of the animals proved to be unfit for military purposes and were sold for a small sum. On the facts as presented to the Committee it must be stated that the matter was not regular in more than one respect, and the view must be upheld that schemes of this sort may not be promoted by individual officers without proper authority. The deal was carried through in May, 1923, and the circumstances of the time are put forward as some excuse for the irregularity in method. While this cannot be accepted as satisfactory, the Committee in reviewing the general results of the transaction recognises that the average price paid for the animals was not in excess of that paid for Army horses in Great Britain, so far as information is available. In the circumstances the settlement of the claim does not seem to be unsatisfactory and the item may be passed.

(j) Warlike Stores.

50.—(i) In his Report, the Comptroller and Auditor-General states (par. 59) that a sum of £8,305 paid over to the Ministry of Finance has been charged to the Army Account under sub-head 9, Warlike Stores, but no vouchers or other documents having been produced to support the payment, he had no means of verifying the admissibility of the sum.

(ii) The reference is to payments of two sums, viz., £4,045 in October, 1923, and £3,260 in February, 1924, both being paid to the credit of Mr. F. W. Fitzgerald, London, in respect of transactions in chemicals and arms.

(iii) These matters were the subject of enquiry before the Committee of Public Accounts last year, and were referred to in the Committee’s Final Report on the Appropriation Accounts for the year 1922-23. In concluding that Report, the Committee expressed the opinion that a closer investigation that it had been able to give to this Account was required, and than all the facts relating to the case should be presented to the Committee of Public Accounts.

(iv) To assist its inquiry the Committee requested the Comptroller and Auditor-General to examine the paper and prepare a memorandum for the Committee in respect of the matter This memorandum will be found in the records accompanying this Report.

(v) The Committee also called for the production of the Departmental files relating to the transactions in question, and appointed a sub-committee consisting of Deputies McCullough, Esmonde and Connor Hogan, together with the Chairman, to examine them. The result of their examination is contained in a Report to the full Committee, with also accompanies this Report. The attention of the Dáil is directed to these documents and to paragraphs 8, etc., under the heading, Purchase of Chemicals and Arms, of the Final Report of the Committee on the 1922-23 Accounts, submitted to the Dáil last year.

(v) The Committee is not satisfied that there was any liability to pay the sum of £8,125 for, 2,500 revolvers or to accept delivery of them, two and a half years after the proposal to purchase them was made; the Committee, further, is not satisfied is not satisfied that there was any liability for the sum of £2,250 advanced on account of a projected purchase of 10,000 rifles; nor is the Committee satisfied that there was any liability to pay £2,260 for chemicals said to be stored in London from September 1st, 1923, to December, 1924 (part)), and April, 1925 (part). Consequently the Committee recommends to the Dáil that the sum (viz., £8,305) referred to by the Comptroller and Auditor-General should be disallowed.

(vii) Every item in this Account and almost every incident in connection with the transactions calls for adverse comment. The original payment of £10,000, made out of Army funds to enable purchases to be made, was itself irregular but might have been excusable by the circumstances of the time (June, 1922), if that irregularity had stood alone. The absence of records of the orders given, as to price or description. might also, possibly, be passed over as was done in respect of other accounts examined last year, in view of the stress of circumstances prevailing at the time the transactions were entered upon. But the failure to take cognizance of facts brought to the notes of the Army Authorities respecting the prices being paid by the merchant who supplied the goods and the profits being made on the transfer to the Army; the acceptance of liability for goods not delivered; the payments months after the stress of war conditions had passed, of £5,000 “on account,” when the sanction given by the Finance Department was for payment of such a sum “in settlement” of a doubtful a disputed claim; the ignoring of the authority of the Accounting Officer (Army Finance Officer); the payment of the monies by the Department of Finance and the subsequent imperative direction from the Department to the Army Finance Officer to repay the amount out of the Army Vote; the failure to make satisfactory arrangements to obtain deliver of the goods for which the £5,000 was a payment; and, in the final stage the acceptance of goods, for which payments had already been made, of a quality different from and inferior to those invoiced—all these considerations render it impossible for the same leniency to be extended as was done in respect of other transactions having their origin about the same period.

(viii) It may appear that other considerations than would legitimately come into the purview of the Accounting Officers concerned or of this Committee are held to warrant payment of the sums in question. If such be the case, it becomes a matter for the Dáil to decide, after the Minister has submitted his case to the Dáil.

THOMAS JOHNSON,

Chairman.

March 31st, 1926.