Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1945 > Committee of Public Accounts > Interim and Final Report - Appropriation Accounts 1942 - 1943

APPENDIX II.

MINUTE OF THE MINISTER FOR FINANCE ON THE REPORT DATED 24th FEBRUARY, 1944, OF THE COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS.

Paragraphs 1, 2 and 12.

These paragraphs do not appear to require comment on the part of the Minister.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH

Paragraph 3.—Grants for home assistance in certain cases—Payments not strictly in accordance with Part III of the Estimate.

The explanatory details in Part III of the Estimate for 1944/45 were suitably amended. The Minister’s views on the general question involved in the Committee’s observations on this matter are set out below in his comments on paragraph 7 of the Report.

GARDA SIOCHANA

Paragraph 4.—Fees for Verification and Stamping of Taximeters.

The Minister is informed that the necessary testing equipment is available but that it has not yet been possible to obtain the user of the stretch of road on which the standard of distance for the Dublin area will be determined. The Department of Justice have been approached with a view to the implementation at the earliest possible date of the Taximeter (Fees on Verification and Stamping by Special Inspectors) Regulations, 1938, and the Committee will be notified as soon as it is found possible to enforce the Regulations.

COMMISSIONS AND SPECIAL INQUIRIES

Paragraph 5.—Loss on historical work prepared by the Irish Manuscripts Commission.

The attention of the Irish Manuscripts Commission has been drawn to the comments of the Committee. The Minister in this connection had already impressed on the Commission the need for protecting public funds against any similar occurrence.

SPECIAL EMERGENCY SCHEMES

Paragraph 6.—Loans to Muintir na Tire guilds for the production of turf.

The views of the Committee, with which the Minister for Finance concurs have been noted.

COMPENSATION BOUNTIES

Paragraph 7.—Explanatory details in Part III of Estimate.

The terms of the explanation in Part III of the Estimate for Compensation Bounties (Subhead A), viz., “to compensate for the difference between the duty-free price of home-produced and imported sugar” did not constitute a basis of calculation but were designed to indicate the purpose of the grant which was, as theretofore, to relieve exporters of sugar-composite goods from any disability, vis à vis their competitors in foreign markets, arising from the use of home-produced sugar. This was the purpose of the bounty both when a fixed rate was payable under Section 5 (2) of the Finance (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1935, and when, under the new arrangements, the rate of bounty was determined by the Minister for Finance under Emergency Powers (No. 60) Order, 1940, to which reference was duly made in Part III of the Estimate.

Apart from the foregoing consideration, the Minister finds himself unable to accept the view expressed by the Committee that, in the circumstances of this case, a Supplementary Estimate might have been introduced. The payments made in the year of account were within both the ambit of the Vote and the scope of Subhead A in Part II of the Estimate, did not involve any additional expenditure and were paid under the authority of and in full compliance with the Order mentioned in the informative statement in Part III which was enacted for the express purpose of securing a reduction on this service. To seek a Supplementary Estimate in these circumstances would have involved a departure from the well-established understandings that the explanations and information given in Part III of an Estimate do not constitute binding conditions in point of detail on which the Dáil votes money, and that only where it is found necessary during the year to incur expenditure within the amount of the grant but of a novel character or remote from anything embraced by the words of explanation in the Estimate, does it become the duty of the Minister for Finance to ensure that the Dáil will be approached again for additional authority. In the case under notice previous practice and understandings would not have required the introduction of a Supplementary Estimate.

At the same time the Minister considers that whenever the explanation of a service given in Part III of an Estimate is found not to cover fully or accurately the service as in fact operated, the explanation should, in the next Estimate, be brought into conformity with the facts; but he would deprecate the reopening of the understandings with the Committee, which have proved satisfactory for two decades, regarding the categories of cases requiring to be covered by Supplementary Estimates.

SUPPLIES

Paragraph 8.—Temporary overpayment of Flour Subsidy.

The Minister understands that the amount of subsidy for the flour milling industry as a whole cannot finally be determined until the profits earned for each complete cereal year are ascertained from the financial accounts of the individual millers, and, accordingly, the subsidy payment for each monthly period must necessarily be on a provisional basis. Apart altogether from the difficulties in determining the precise allocation price of imported wheat the problem is rendered still more complex by the need for having regard to the cost of production and distribution which varies as between mills and is influenced by a number of factors. In estimating this cost in advance for the industry as a whole, regard can only be had to an average figure for all mills for the preceding year as disclosed by the financial accounts of the millers. In present circumstances this average cost is liable to vary from year to year.

While, therefore, the Minister agrees generally with the views of the Committee that even a temporary overpayment of Subsidy should be avoided, he is of opinion that the possibility of such overpayment cannot wholly be eliminated in the light of the considerations mentioned above.

ARMY

Paragraph 9.—Medical Stores.

The further submission referred to in paragraph (9) of Appendix XV to the Committee’s Report was duly made by the Department of Defence. Only one other rejected voucher, in respect of medicines and dressings to the value of £1,186 2s. 7d., was involved and on the assurance by the Minister for Defence that the medicines and dressings in question had been expended in the Public Service the Minister for Finance accorded his sanction for the writing off of their value.

Paragraph 10.—Deficiencies in Barrack Service Stores.

This matter, which was discussed further at the meeting of the Committee held on the 1st February, 1945, has not yet been brought to a conclusion.

Paragraph 11.—Physical checking of Army Stores.

The Minister is satisfied that the regulations and instructions in force relating to, inter alia, the physical checking of Army stores are, in general, satisfactory. Certain unforeseeable defects in regulations and instructions do, however, come to light from time to time as a result of particular incidents and such defects are immediately rectified. The Minister is assured by the Department of Defence that all steps which are reasonably practicable are taken to ensure that the regulations and instructions are implemented.

The Minister notes the Committee’s observation in the second sentence of this paragraph and would point out that the use of constructed vouchers has always been deprecated by both the Department of Defence and the Department of Finance.

Paragraph 13.—Disposal of Kits of men proceeding on indefinite leave.

The Minister concurs in the views of the Committee.

Paragraph 14.—Construction of air-raid shelters.

The Minister concurs in the views of the Committee.

Paragraph 15.—Supply of Mine Casings.

The Minister is informed by the Department of Defence that, as a result of a change in military policy, all of the 100 mine casings, of which the 44 casings referred to by the Committee form part, were not put to the use for which they were intended when the purchase was made. The question of their disposal will be determined at a later date. As the actual amount of the constructive loss incurred cannot be ascertained until the question of disposal is determined, the Minister agrees with the view of the Minister for Defence that the reporting of the constructive loss and the disciplinary action to be taken against the officer concerned should be deferred until a decision as to disposal is taken.

Paragraph 16.—Contract for huts.

The Minister agrees with the views of the Committee. The circumstances in connection with this contract were exceptional and as the Minister was assured that the cost of the extra works was fair and reasonable his covering sanction was accorded for the expenditure involved.

Paragraph 17.—Purchase of Soldiers’ Boxes.

The Minister concurs in the view of the Committee as to the desirability of securing competition from the widest possible field for commodities required for the Public Service. Ordinarily, however, where articles manufactured in this country are required the field of effective competition is well known to the purchasing Departments and is, the Minister believes, adequately explored by the Departments when seeking tenders. Recourse to public advertisement in such cases is in general unnecessary and is in the Minister’s view called for only when, as say in the case of commodities such as wooden articles, there is reason to believe that effective competition might be forthcoming from suppliers not listed in the Departments.