Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1947 > Committee of Public Accounts > Report - Appropriation Accounts 1945 - 1946

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Dé Céadaoin, 11adh Meitheamh, 1947.

Wednesday, 11th June, 1947

The Committee sat at 11 a.m.

DEPUTY COSGRAVE in the chair.

Mr. J. Maher (An tArd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste), called and examined.

VOTE 55—INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE.

Mr. J. Leydon called and examined.

283. Chairman.—There is a note by the Comptroller and Auditor-General on page xxi as follows:

“The Minerals Company Act, 1945. provided for the dissolution of Comhlucht Gual-Láthrach Shliabh Ardachadh, Teoranta, and the transfer of its undertaking to Comhlucht Lorgtha agus Forbartha Mianraí, Teoranta, as from a date to be appointed by the Minister for Industry and Commerce, afterwards determined to be 1st June, 1945. Section 14 of the Act provided that the name of the continuing company was to be Mianraí, Teoranta. The charge of £47,169 8s. 4d. to Subhead K.1. represents an advance of £5,000 to Comhlucht Lorgtha agus Forbartha Mianraí, Tearanta, an advance of £2,000 to ComhLucht Gual-Láthrach Shliabh Ardachadh, Teoranta, and advances totalling

£40,169 8s. 4d. to Mianraí, Teoranta.

In exercise of the powers conferred by Sections 11 (2) and 12 (3) of the Minerals Exploration and Development Company Act, 1941, and Section 8 (2) of the Minerals Company Act, 1945, the Minister for Industry and Commerce has, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, agreed to the postponement to 1st January, 1947, of the payment by the company of interest on advances and of the repayment of instalments of advances which fell due on 1st July, 1945, and 1st January, 1946. In accordance with Sections 11 (3) and 12 (4) of the Minerals Exploration and Development Company Act, 1941, and Section 8 (2) of the Minerals Company Act, 1945, the company became liable for interest on the deferred payments and the Minister for Finance has directed that this interest should also be paid on 1st January, 1947.

The payments of compensation in respect of mineral rights acquired by the State, amounting to £4,554 17s.. 0d., are also to be treated as advances made to the company. Including this sum, the total of advances to the company up to 31st March, 1946, was £312,374 12s. 4d.”

Mr. Maher.—This is an informative paragraph on the usual lines, modified in the light of the amending legislation. As will be seen, the companies were unable to pay the interest due on the advances or the instalments of the repayments and the Minister, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, has agreed to postpone it.

284. Is there any likelihood, Mr. Leydon, that the companies will be able to make repayment?—I do not feel justified in holding out any prospect that the company will be able to make repayment. We have agreed to postponement to the 1st July, 1947.

285. Can you say, from any information at your disposal at the moment, whether the company’s position has improved or not?—I am afraid it has not improved. The total amount due at 31st March last, including accrued interest, is £413,800 approximately. To the extent that the liability to the Exchequer is increasing, the position of the company may be said to be worsening.

286. Has the output from the mines under the control of the company improved?—It improved up to a certain point. The figures for 1946 were down by comparison with the figures for the previous year. The coal output was 14,500 tons in 1946 and 17,153 in 1945; the phosphate output was 12,000 tons in 1946 and 19,777 in 1945; the pyrites output was 500 tons in 1946 and 3,300 tons in 1945.

287.Can you assign any reason for the drop?—In 1946 I think it may be due, in part at any rate, to the fact that the supplies of phosphates and coal from outside had slightly improved by comparison with the previous year. The low phosphate content of the Clare phosphate makes it very uneconomic. The phosphates were not of a very satisfactory quality.

288. Deputy O’Sullivan.—Are the Clare mines in operation at present?—No, the company decided to cease operations on the deposits in Clare.

289. Deputy Lydon.—May I ask how the Clare phosphates compared with the North African inferior rock. There are two qualities of North African rock?—The Clare quality is very much inferior to either of them.

290. Chairman.—The note by the Comptroller and Auditor-General continues:

“The sums charged to this subhead, opened under the authority of the Department of Finance, are in respect of the loss incurred in repatriation of an unused balance of French francs which had been placed to the credit of the members of the Irish delegation to the International Labour Conference in Paris in October-November, 1945. The French franc dropped in value from 200 to 480 to the £ sterling on 1st January, 1946, and through various causes it had not been found possible to recall the unused balance before that date.”

Mr. Maher.—I understand the loss occurred through trying to obtain information as to the amount in individual cases in the Bank of France?—The delay was due to that difficulty.

291. Chairman.—Was the loss attributable to any individual?—I do not think the loss could be attributed to default on the part of any individual.

292. Deputy Sheldon.—On Subhead C. (2) of the Vote, regarding the difficulty in obtaining the supplies of maps, how does it arise that payment is made for maps? I understood that the Ordnance Survey supplied maps free of charge to other Government Departments. Did the Department of Industry and Commerce pay the Ordnance Survey for the maps or were those maps obtained from some other source?—Where special maps are prepared the Department must pay the Ordnance Survey Department but no payment is made for blank ordnance sheets.

Deputy Sheldon.—On the Appropriation Accounts for the Ordnance Survey, they mentioned that they supplied £3,607 worth of maps free to other Government Departments. That is why I wonder at the Department of Industry and Commerce buying the maps.

293. Deputy O’Sullivan.—On Subhead J., what was the machinery behind this scheme? How was the expenditure incurred?—The Department paid for the services of doctors and nurses examining the passengers who were about to embark.

294. Deputy Coogan.—Where are they examined?—In Dublin.

295. Deputy O’Sullivan.—That was the point I wanted to raise. Has the local authority to incur a particular expense on that, or do you recoup the local authority in the city here for the expenses they incur?—We recoup the local authority.

296. Deputy Sheldon.—Then the claims under J are those which were not all in? Those are claims by doctors and nurses for their services?—Mostly they would be claims from the local authority.

297. Chairman.—Who decides what categories of people embarking will be medically examined?—They were people proceeding to employment and they were classified by the Department of Industry and Commerce, in consultation with the Department of Local Government and Public Health.

298. Deputy Sheldon.—On Subhead K.1, this says that the erection of certain plant was not proceeded with. Was that due to a change in opinion as to whether the plant was necessary, or due to supplies not being available?—I should have to look that up.

299. It would be more a matter for the mining company?—Yes.

300. Deputy Coogan.—Could you say what were the total advances made to the Slieveardagh Mining Company? I do not mean in a particular year, I mean the total amount up to the time it was decided to dispose of the company?—It was £92.855 16s. 11d., including accrued interest. That is the total up to the 31st May, 1945.

301. How much of that has been repaid?—None of it.

302. How much is likely to be repaid? —None.

303. How do you account for the fact that the concern appears to have made no profit since the time it began to produce coal?—There were several reasons. I could not undertake to give them all. There is a good deal of development expenditure inevitably incurred in connection with an enterprise of this kind. Another consideration is that it is difficult to produce coal, in the case of the seam the company is working, on an economic basis.

304. Is it a commercial proposition?— That would raise a difficult question, as to what is a commercial proposition. It is not a commercial proposition in the sense that it is not paying its way.

305. There must be some extraordinary reasons why it is not paying its way. I would like to know what the reasons are, having regard to the abnormal price of coal and the fact that other mining companies are showing huge profits?—They are probably much longer established.

306. Undoubtedly so. How long is this company established?—Since 1941.

307. Deputy Coogan.—That is six years —and apparently it is a total loss.

308. Deputy Dockrell.—Would it be that it had very high initial expenses?—I have just mentioned that there is a good deal of development expenditure in an enterprise of this kind.

309. Deputy Dockrell.—I think that is the usual case, that in the first few years there is very large expenditure.

310. Deputy Coogan.—Is it proposed to offer this for sale on the open market, or has the concern been sold?—No, it has been offered for sale, but not sold.

311. Is it likely that the same thing will happen in Slieveardagh as happened in the case of the slate quarries in Carrick-on-Suir?—I hope the Committee will not ask me to make a prophecy on that matter.

Deputy Coogan.—I hope the Department will see to it that it does not happen.

312. Chairman.—You exercise no direct control over the working?—We do not interfere with the actual working.

Deputy Coogan.—Is it not a fact that the slate quarries in Carrick-on-Suir, which were heavily financed by the State, were bought back to the people who had worked the quarries?

Chairman.—That question is slightly off the line.

313. Deputy Coogan.—It is a dangerous precedent, and I want to know if there is a bona fide intention to sell Slieveardagh in the open market?—There is a bona fide intention to sell it if we can get an attractive offer.

314. Deputy Sheldon.—With regard to Subhead L.4.—Special Investigations—are investigations still proceeding on the efficiency of turf-burning appliances?—Yes.

315. Chairman.—What students are granted research grants under Subhead L.6?—There are mostly post-graduate students. If the Committee wishes, I should like to put in a memorandum explaining how it works.*

316. Deputy Coogan.—Are the grants based on competitive examination?—Not on competitive examination but on the result of recommendations made by the council.

Chairman.—We should be glad to have the memorandum.

317. Deputy Sheldon.—What is the distinction between research workers in L.5 and research students in L.6?

Deputy Dockrell.—They are all working in the pursuit of knowledge.

318. Deputy Sheldon.—No money was spent on research workers. In the miscellaneous receipts under appropriations-in-aid, there is reference in a note to recovery of portion of the cost of the research into the problems of the linen and cotton textile industry. From whom are these recoveries made??—From the linen and cotton textile industry.

VOTE 56—TRANSPORT AND METEOROLOGICAL SERVICES.

Mr. J. Leydon further examined.

319. Chairman.—There is a note by the Comptroller and Auditor General as follows:—

“Subhead B.5.—Constructional Works including Maintenance and Furnishing of Buildings.

“Expenditure on constructional works, maintenance and furnishing of buildings at civil airports was, in previous years, borne on the vote for Public Works and Buildings. The expenditure in the year under review includes £143,752 13s. 2d. in respect of Shannon Airport (Rineanna), £39,003 17s. 4d. in respect of Shannon Airport (Foynes) and £7,437 14s. 6d. in respect of Dublin Airport, making the total expenditure to 31st March, 1946, on works (exclusive of the cost of acquisition of land) £869,684 13s. 4d., £118,359 5s. 0d. and £367,183 6s. 1d., respectively.

Reference was made in paragraph 9 of my previous report to a contract placed on a cost plus profit basis for an extension of the terminal building at Rineanna, the estimated cost of which was £52,000. Payments from this subhead on foot of that contract amounted to £32,295 15s. 9d., making the total expenditure to 31st March, 1946, £71,179 5s. 6d. Further contracts were placed during the year with the same contractor and on a similar basis for other works in connection with the terminal building, the estimated cost being £35,000 and the expenditure to 31st March, 1946, £27,807 9s. 5d.

The construction of extensions to the concrete runways, to which reference was also made in paragraph 9 of my previous report, was continued during the year, and payments amounting to £9,453 6s. 1d. were made from this subhead bringing the total expenditure to 31st March, 1946, to £74,447 9s. 1d.

Tenders for the construction of a concrete culvert were invited from four firms only as it was considered advisable, in view of the urgency of the work, to limit competition to firms familiar with the conditions at Rineanna and with the plant necessary to carry out the work. The lowest tender, which was accepted, was for £5,826 14s. 9d. and the expenditure to 31st March, 1946, was £5,587 12s. 2d. For similar reasons competition was limited to the same four firms in connection with the placing of a contract for the construction of a road. The amount of the successful tender was £12,434 9s. 1d. and payments made in the year under review amounted to £3,190 15s. 11d.”

Mr. Maher.—The first part of the paragraph is for information only. In the second part, attention is drawn to certain contracts placed on a cost plus profit basis as in the case of a contract brought under notice last year. Such procedure was a departure from the settled practice of open competitive tendering at firm prices. The last part of the paragraph deals with two further cases in which it was observed that contracts had been placed after limited competition.

320. Chairman.—I notice that there are a number of contracts involved here in which the normal procedure was departed from and a cost plus profit basis was the basis on which tenders were accepted. Can you say on what basis is the profit allowed—on the cost or the work actually completed?—It is on a percentage which varies. There is one percentage taken on the cost of labour, another on materials, another on sub-contracts and prime costs and another on materials supplied by the Minister. There are four elements in it.

321. Deputy Dockrell.—What was the reason for the big increase on the terminal buildings, the estimated cost of which was £52,000 and the actual total expenditure £71,000? Was that due to an increase in wages and materials or to any change of plans?—It was partly due to increased cost of materials, partly to increased cost of labour, partly to unanticipated transport charges and partly to a change of plans.

322. Deputy Sheldon.—How does the Department decide which contract to take when payment is to be on a cost plus profit basis? Surely contracting and payment on that basis are, so to speak, mutually exclusive?—Up to a certain point, that is true. What we did in this particular case was to select four of the best contractors, the biggest and most satisfactory contractors, and invite them to submit proposals for carrying out the work on a cost plus profit basis and to indicate the percentages they would charge under these various heads. These proposals, which, in a sense, could be called tenders, were submitted. They were examined by the officers of the Commissioners of Public Works and the Department of Industry and Commerce and the contractor who was selected was certainly the one who submitted the most satisfactory tender of the four.

323. Chairman.—Did any of these contractors or the contractor selected subcontract for any of the work?—Any of them would sub-contract for some of the work.

324. What supervision in the event of sub-contracting do you exercise?—The Department exercised at least as much supervision as it would in the case of an ordinary lump sum contract. We had our architects, clerks of works and so on.

325. Deputy Sheldon.—In the last part of the paragraph, I notice a distinction made—I do not know whether it is deliberate—between the culvert work and the road work. In the case of the culvert work, it was the lowest tender, and, in the case of the road work, the successful tender. Is there an implication that the successful tender was not the lowest?

Mr. Maher.—There is no implication. That was a quotation from the actual conditions.

326. Deputy Sheldon.—Was the successful tender in fact the lowest?

Mr. Maher.—Mr. Leydon would probably be able to answer that. I have not got the rejected tenders with me.

Mr. Leydon.—I am afraid I have not got them with me, either.

327. Deputy Sheldon.—It struck me that it was a careful distinction in terms.

Mr. Maher.—I took the quotation from the accounts as furnished.

328. Chairman.—Are the arrangements between the contractor and a sub-contractor solely a matter for the contractor himself?—Yes.

329. Deputy Sheldon.—The point might better arise on the appropriate subhead, but, as we are talking about Subhead B.5., I see from the notes that there was an ex gratia payment of £338 to a contractor to cover increased prices for glass, hardware and paints. Could you say what the original amount of the contract was in that case?—I am afraid I cannot answer that question.

Deputy Sheldon.—I was wondering what the proportionate relationship was between the amount of the ex gratia payment and the amount of the contract.

330. Chairman.—Paragraph 54 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General reads:—

“Subhead B.9.—Catering Service— Shannon Airport.

“The amount estimated to be required to meet the deficit on the catering services at the Shannon Airport was provided in this subhead, but, as explained in the account, the sum paid does not represent the full extent of the deficit as rent and electricity charges had not been determined before the close of the year. I have inquired as to the present position concerning the charges in question.”

Mr. Maher.—I have since been informed that the charge for rent and electricity debited against the catering comptroller was provisional and pending full agreement and Department of Finance approval, these figures will not be available for some time.

331. Chairman.—Have the figures been agreed upon yet?—No, not yet.

332. Is the restaurant being run at a profit or a loss?—It is being run at a loss on the basis of the accounting at present adopted, but there are acute differences of opinion about items such as the rent charged to the catering comptroller and items like transport services and the charge for electricity.

333. Are electricity charges charged directly by the Electricity Supply Board or by the Department?—By the Department to the catering comptroller.

334. Deputy Dockrell.—Is it maintaining its usual high standard?—I hope so. For the last half year for which I have accounts the rental figure is £2,500 approximately; loss on transport services —that is for transport of staff—£2,272; and electricity, £4,011. These are very heavy charges. The rental charge in particular is a heavy one. In some cases it runs up, I think, to 7/6 per square foot. The bigger part of the rent is charged on that basis.

335. Chairman.—That is only in respect of the restaurant portion and the kitchen?—It includes more than the restaurant. I have not exact particulars as to what is included, but it covers much more than the restaurant.

336. The transport service is for transporting members of the staff from Limerick or Ennis?—Yes.

Deputy O’Sullivan.—These are unavoidable?—They are unavoidable. That is part of the reason why it is so expensive.

337. Chairman.—Electricity is £4,011? —Yes. That is the charge for six months. The whole question of electricity charges is under consideration between the Department and the Electricity Supply Board. We feel in the Department that the charge by the Electricity Supply Board is too high. That is under discussion with the Electricity Supply Board at present and has been for some time.

338. Chairman.—Is the cooking done by electricity?—Yes.

339. Deputy Loughman.—Would that be solely for cooking and lighting the restaurant?—It is for the restaurant and the restaurant area.

340. Deputy Sheldon.—These matters are a sort of book-keeping business. I presume there is no outside landlord?— No, it is a rental charged by the Department to the catering service for the purpose of getting accounts to show whether the catering service is being run at a loss or a profit.

341. How does the Department come to be profiteering to the extent of 7/6 per square foot?—Actually it is not profiteering. It is very expensive to provide the accommodation. It is very expensive to construct. The fact that it is isolated and so far away from any big town is in itself an important element in the cost of construction.

342. Chairman.—Is the catering run by one of the air companies?—It is run by the Department. There is a catering comptroller or manager appointed by the Department and it is really run by him under the Department.

343. Chairman.—Paragraph 55, Comptroller and Auditor-General’s Report reads:—

“Subhead B.10.—Compensation.

This subhead was opened with the authority of the Department of Finance to provide for an ex gratia payment to a contractor of out-of-pocket expenses incurred by him in connection with a proposed contract, which was subsequently abandoned, for dredging the Shannon at Rineanna. I understand that the charge to the subhead does not represent the total amount of such expenses and that a payment has been made in 1946-47. I have inquired whether any further expenditure on this project is included in the charge to other subheads of the vote in the year under review.”

Mr. Maher.—The Accounting Officer has since replied that no such expenditure was incurred.

344. Chairman.—Paragraph 56, Comptroller and Auditor-General’s Report is as follows:

“Subhead C.—Subsidy in respect of Air Services.

“The charge to this subhead represents payments to Aer Rianta, Teoranta, under the Subsidy (Aer Rianta, Teoranta) (No. 2) Order, 1945 (Statutory Rules and Orders, No. 101 of 1945), to meet the estimated losses of the company and the subsidiary company, Aer Lingus, Teoranta, on the operation of air services. The accounts of the companies showed that Aer Rianta, Teoranta, had incurred a loss of £1,957 19s. 10½d., while Aer Lingus, Teoranta, had made a profit of £9,797 9s. 2d. which has been brought forward in the accounts of that company. The Minister for Finance and the Minister for Industry and Commerce have, for the purposes of the Subsidy Order, determined the actual loss of the company and the subsidiary company to be £1,957 19s. 10½d. As the amount charged to the subhead in respect of the estimated loss exceeds the actual loss, as determined in accordance with the Subsidiary Order, by £8,042 0s. 1½d. this latter sum is repayable by the company and will be brought to account as an exchequer extra receipt in the year 1946-47.”

Mr. Maher.—This paragraph is for information only. It shows the amount paid in respect of the estimated loss and the amount due for repayment consequent on the determination of the actual loss.

345. Deputy Sheldon.—Does the company pay interest on this sum?

Mr. Leydon.—No.

346. How long did they have the use of this £8,000? It is peculiar that they should be paid for an estimated loss and that it should then turn out that they got £8,000 too much and had the use of that £8,000 for some unknown time. Should they not pay interest on that?—If the company paid interest on it the interest would have to be made good by a subsidy in the following year. The reason for the discrepancy is that the payment is made in the course of the financial year and the company’s accounts for the financial year would not be available in time to get the exact figure.

347. Have they in fact made a loss since?—Aer Lingus made a profit in this particular year, as you will see from this paragraph. They made a loss since, if that is the point.

348. You mentioned that they would have to get a subsidy against the interest. It struck me that if they continued to make a profit that would not be necessary? —If they continued to make a profit they would not want a subsidy at all.

349. Chairman.—When Aer Lingus makes a profit, is that taken into account when determining the subsidy from Aer Rianta?—It is in so far as Aer Rianta has not to make any payment to Aer Lingus. The machinery of the subsidy is that it is payable to Aer Rianta which, in turn, makes a payment to its subsidiary, Aer Lingus.

350. Is Aer Rianta purely a nominal company?—It is a holding company in the sense that it holds the shares. It has two subsidiaries now Aer Lingus and Aer Linte. Aer Rianta manages the Dublin Airport and will operate a charter service. It is beginning to do that now.

351. Deputy Sheldon.—If I got a loan, I wish the Department of Finance would not charge any interest if I made a profit? —I think it is as broad as it is long. It comes to the same thing in the end.

352. Chairman.—It is only a question of a slight overlapping?—That is all.

353. Chairman.—The next paragraph is as follows:—

“Subhead E.6.—Expenses in connection with International Organisations.

“A supplementary estimate provided a sum of £1,500 under this subhead to defray certain expenses in connection with a meeting in Dublin of the North Atlantic Route Service Conference of the Interim Council of the Provisional International Civil Aviation Organisation. The amount of such expenses which fell to be charged in this account was £96 0s. 9d., the saving being explained by the fact that claims were still under examination at the close of the account. Other expenditure in connection with the Conference was borne on Vote No. 10, Public Works and Buildings, Vote No. 21, Stationery and Printing, Vote No. 23, Ordnance Survey, and Vote No. 61, Posts and Telegraphs.”

Mr. Maher.—We have no information as to the amount of the expenditure borne on other Votes, but I understand that a sum of £3,500 has been paid from the Transport and Meteorological Service Vote in the year 1946-47.

354. Chairman.—Can you say what was the total cost of the conference?

Mr. Leydon.—The total cost, including the expenditure from other Votes was, according to my information, £7,711 7s. 9d. The total expenditure from the Transport and Meteorological Services Vote was £4,553 9s. 5d., and from other Votes; £3,157 18s. 4d. There may be an element of approximation about some of the figures from other Departments, but I think that is reasonably accurate.

355. That conference lasted for a considerable time?—It lasted from three weeks to a month. A good deal of the expenditure was incurred in connection with preparations for the conference.

356. Did the visiting delegations bear their own expenses?—Yes. So far as the Department is concerned, a great deal of the Department’s expenditure was on overtime and staff payment. Of the £4,550 odd which was borne by the Department, £2,348 was for overtime and payment of staff, etc.

Paragraph 58—Comptroller and Auditor-General’s Report:

“Receipts in respect of landing and accommodation fees, etc., at airports.

The amount brought to account in respect of these fees in the year under review was £11,476 1s. 11d. against an estimated figure of £10,000. I observed that the collection of fees was considerably in arrear and I am in communication with the accounting officer on the matter.”

357. Deputy Dockrell.—What are these fees?—Every time an aircraft lands on the airport it has to pay a landing fee. It also has to pay what is known as a picketing fee-it might be described as a parking fee.

358. Somewhat similar to harbour dues in the case of a ship?—Somewhat the same.

359. These would be paid by all companies, Aer Lingus or any other company? It is a charge made by the State?—By the airport authority; in this case the State. It is a charge levied in every airport in the world.

360. Chairman.—Is it a universal charge?—It is not a uniform charge. In fact, we have a good number of complaints that our charges at Shannon Airport are the highest in the world.

Mr. Maher.—The Accounting Officer has informed me that the situation has now improved; that the issue of the accounts has been brought up-to-date and that steps are being taken to ensure that the accounts are issued promptly in future.

361. Chairman.—Can you say how much was received up to 31st March, 1946, in respect of fees?

362. Mr. Leydon.—I am afraid I have not the information in that form. You will see, for instance, that the amounts paid by operating companies from 1st October. 1945, to 31st March, 1946, was £9,036 0s. 6d. To look at it in another way, more recent figures show that the total for November, 1946, was £3,982 approximately. I am afraid I have not the complete figures up-to-date, but I can send you a note on them.*

363. Chairman.—Paragraph 59 reads as follows:

“Extra Receipts payable to Exchequer.

The receipts under this head include a sum of £415 7s. 4d. received from the underwriters in respect of expenses incurred on the repair of a launch on loan to the Department of Industry and Commerce and in use at the Shannon Airport (Foynes). The amount claimed by the Department, £816 12s. 1d., included £307 1s. 11d. in respect of the cost of escort of the launch to Dublin, but this and some other items of the claim were not admitted. The settlement was accepted with the approval of the Department of Finance.”

Mr. Maher.—That paragraph is for information only for the purpose of bringing to notice that it was a compromise.

364. Chairman.—The next paragraph, 60, reads:

“Permanent records of lands, buildings, etc., and rentals of property.

I observed that in some cases there has been delay in completing agreements and collecting rents in connection with the letting of property at the Shannon Airport. I am in communication with the accounting officer on this matter, and also regarding the completion of the register of lands and buildings under the control of the Department of Industry and Commerce.”

Mr. Maher.—So far as I am aware, the accounting officer has not yet been in a position to furnish us with a reply.

Mr. Leydon.—I think it went to you yesterday. Mr. Maher.—I had not received it up to this morning.

365.—Deputy Dockrell.—How did the delay in collecting rents arise? What sort of rents would these be?—Rents for office accommodation. The delay arose partly because the agreements were subject to scrutiny by the lawyers on both sides and the operating companies raised quite a number of points about them. They did not want to pay rents until the agreements were settled.

366. Chairman.—How many companies are operating at the Shannon Airport?— There are about seven altogether.

367. Deputy Sheldon.—As regards Subhead A.2.—Maintenance of Canal Barges —how many canal barges are owned by the Department and what is their capital value?—I have not that information available just now, but I shall send it to you.*

368. Deputy Dockrell.—On Subhead A.3.—Grants to Harbour Authorities— what were these grants?—Maintenance grants.

369. Maintenance of what?—Maintenance of harbours, mostly harbours hit by the emergency, by the fact that their shipping became scarce, that their trade dwindled and that their dues dwindled and they were not able to carry on ordinary maintenance work.

370. Deputy Sheldon.—With reference to Subhead B.3—Acquisition of Land. Buildings, etc.—has that matter been settled since? There is a note about that subhead and it says that there were legal difficulties in the matter of acquisition?— I do not think it has been finally settled. A good deal of progress has been made, but we have had great difficulty in reaching a final settlement in some of these cases.

371. On Subhead B.8.—Shannon Airport Road Services—I think the Chairman has already asked what the full amount would be. The amount received was £11,057, but the note says that there is still a number of claims outstanding. I wonder what the full amount expected by the Department would be. As regards Subhead E. I.—Salaries, Wages and Allowances—has the Department been able to improve the staffing of the Meteorological Services? Have you been able to improve the position? At this time there were a fair number of staff vacancies. Has the position improved?—It has improved, but it is not yet entirely satisfactory.

372. On Subhead F.—Appropriations in Aid—I was wondering why the contribution towards the cost of Transatlantic Air Services had not been estimated for. I asked that question last year and Mr. Leydon said the British Government gave the £6,000. I was wondering why the Department has not estimated for it. Is it an annual grant?—It has been an annual payment up to the present.

373. Deputy Sheldon.—You do not like to expect it in case it would not come.

VOTE 57—CHILDREN’S ALLOWANCES.

Mr. J. Leydon further examined.

374. Chairman.—Paragraph 61 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General says:—

“As stated in notes appended to the accounts for this and the previous year, children’s allowances to the extent of £688 7s. 6d. were found to have been overpaid up to the 31st March, 1946. Of this amount, £341 7s. 6d. has been recovered by deduction from allowances to which the persons concerned subsequently became entitled, £78 has been recovered in cash and, steps are being taken to effect recovery of the balances outstanding.

In paragraph 82 of my last report, I referred to cases which had come under notice in which awards were made although the statutory conditions had not been fulfilled; in some instances claims had not been signed by the claimants, in others the claims had not been received before the commencement of the appropriate payment period. I have since been informed by the Acounting Officer that, in determining the claims which it was subsequently found had not been signed by the claimants, the Deciding Officers had no reason to doubt the genuineness of the signatures, that, in consequence, it was held that the awards were valid, and that if at any subsequent date it was discovered that the applications had been signed on behalf of the claimants the awards are not thereby invalidated. With regard to the claims which had not been received within the statutory period, the Accounting Officer stated that in admitting them for examination the evidence available indicated that they had been duly made in accordance with the relevant regulation, but that, to enable the Deciding Officers to decide them it was necessary to have fresh claim forms issued to the claimants.”

I understand, Mr. Leydon, that a number of the difficulties in administering the Children’s Allowances Act was remedied by the amending Act, but apparently in this particular case some difference of opinion as to the actual interpretation of the Act arose. Have you considered getting legal opinion on the matter?—The Comptroller and Auditor General raised the question of getting legal advice. The Department took the view that the action taken was within the terms of the Statute. I must confess quite frankly that if there is a doubt about it, or if the Comptroller and Auditor General or you feel it would be advisable to get legal opinion, I shall have no hesitation about giving an undertaking to get legal advice as to the interpretation of these provisions.

Mr. Maher.—It seemed to me there was a difference as to the interpretation of the Statute and, while we would hesitate to say that the view of the Department was incorrect, there is an element of doubt there and I think it is the general practice where an element of doubt exists that both the Audit Department and the administering Department should obtain the advice of the law advisers as to the correct interpretation. That is really the point at issue here.

375. Mr. Leydon.—I have no quarrel with what Mr. Maher says. I shall be quite happy to get legal advice.*

Chairman.—It would be advisable.

VOTE 58—MARINE SERVICE.

Mr. J. Leydon further examined.

376. Deputy Sheldon.—With reference to Subhead F.—Services in connection with Wreck and Salvage—actually the Department makes a profit on this wreck business because the receipts exceed the expenditure?—It is quite ephemeral, I am afraid—it will not last.

377. Under the Appropriations-in-Aid, there is a note to the effect that no emigrant ships were inspected. I was wondering what was meant by emigrant ships—I thought that belonged to a past generation?—Emigrant ship is a definition taken from Section 268 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894. It is legal terminology.

378. Deputy Dockrell.—There is a note on Subhead I (1) which says that no ships were lost during the year as a result of belligerent action. Are there any outstanding claims on behalf of ships to this country because of loss due to belligerent action?—There are no claims now; we are not aware of any.

379. They have all been paid up or written off?—We are not aware of any outstanding claims from ships or crews.

VOTE 59—UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE AND UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE.

Mr J. Leydon further examined.

380. Chairman.—Paragraph 62 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General states:—

“The position set out in paragraph 53 of my last report remains unchanged. The Department is seeking to collect contributions in accordance with the legal opinion that where the rateable value of Electricity Supply Board hereditaments is greater than the amount on which, under the Electricity (Supply) (Amendment) Act, 1930, the rates payable are calculated, the higher figure was correctly included in the certificates furnished by the Commissioner of Valuation in accordance with Section 5 (1) of the Act of 1940. Two local authorities, however, continue to base their payments on the lower figure and the total amount so withheld up to 31st March, 1946, was over £4,650.”

Mr. Maher.—I understand this matter is still in abeyance.

Mr. Leydon.—Yes, that is the position.

381. Deputy Sheldon.—Is not that a matter for legal opinion, or has legal opinion been got?—Yes, legal opinion has been secured on that.

382. And presumably the local authorities also have got a contrary legal opinion?—I think that is the position. The Department of Local Government has been asked to make recovery from the local taxation account.

383. Chairman.—I think this scheme of compiling a, special register of agricultural and turf workers, provided for under Subhead J.2 was never utilised to the extent anticipated?—That is correct.

VOTE 60—INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTY REGISTRATION OFFICE.

Mr. J. Leydon called.

No questions.

VOTE 68—SUPPLIES.

Mr. J. Leydon further examined.

384. Chairman.—Paragraph 92 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General states:—

“In accordance with the terms of the Minister for Supplies (Transfer of Functions) Act, 1945, and of an Order made thereunder (Statutory Rules and Orders, No. 171 of 1945), the powers, duties and functions formerly vested in the Minister for Supplies were transferred to and vested in the Minister for Industry and Commerce as from the 1st August, 1945, and the Office of the Minister for Supplies was abolished as from that date. Provision was made in the Act for the continuation to the end of the financial year 1945-46 of the services covered by Vote 68, and, accordingly, expenditure incurred, both in the periods 1st April, 1945, to 31st July, 1945, and 1st August, 1945, to 31st March, 1946, is charged in this account.”

Mr. Maher.—That is only for the information of the Committee.

385. Chairman.—Paragraph 93 of the report states:—

“Subhead F.—Food Subsidies.

“The charge to this subhead relates mainly to expenditure incurred on subsidising the price of flour. The profits of the milling industry were limited to a percentage of an agreed figure representing capital employed but the cost of any capital employed in excess of the agreed figure was allowed to qualify for subsidy. As in previous years, imported wheat was allocated to flour millers by Grain Importers (Eire), Limited, at prices estimated to enable the industry to earn the agreed remuneration, and any adjustments necessary were made after examination of the millers’ accounts by officers of the Department. Under these arrangements. sums totalling £2,964,251 10s. 0d. became payable to Grain Importers (Eire), Limited, in discharge of claims for recoupment of losses on the sale of imported wheat allocated to millers in the period 4th March, 1945, to 23rd February, 1946, together with a further sum of £16,671 on account, due to the milling industry for the cereal year 1943-44, in respect of which a payment of £300,000 on account was made in the financial year 1944-45. The subsidy payable to Grain Importers (Eire), Limited, amounted, therefore, to £2,980,922 10s. 0d., but a sum of £10,981 16s. 5d. made available towards subsidy from the funds of the company reduced the charge to the Vote to £2,969,940 13s. 7d.”

386. Chairman.—Can you say why it was necessary to pay such a large sum in respect of the cereal year 1944-45?—It was extremely difficult to forecast what allocation price would be necessary to enable the millers to earn the agreed remuneration. There are various factors to be taken into consideration—labour costs, fuel costs, the cost of wheat, and so on. All these may vary considerably from time to time. There is also the moisture content of the wheat and the allowance to be made for that and its effect on what is described by the millers as over-weight.

387. Of course none of these costs can be arrived at finally until the end of the year?—They cannot be arrived at until the millers’ accounts are in, which is, on the average, six months after the conclusion of their financial year.

388. Chairman.—The paragraph continues:—

“Subsidy on wheaten meal was paid at varying rates representing the difference between the cost of production, together with a profit of 2/- per sack, and the controlled selling price. The subsidy was ordinarily paid on the total quantity of meal manufactured and sold by individual millers, but proportionate reductions in the quantities were made in cases where wheat was milled in excess of specified quotas. The payments to wheaten meal millers totalled £21,245 11s. 2d., but the charge to the Vote was reduced to £18,772 18s. 0d. by the receipt from Grain Importers (Eire), Limited, of £2,472 13s. 2d., being the net profit arising from adjustments in prices of imported wheat allocated to certain wheaten meal millers by the company.”

Can you say why the price of this imported wheat was adjusted in the case of certain millers and not in the case of others?— This refers only to wheaten meal millers. Some wheaten meal millers, who supply wheaten meal to bakers, are given a certain amount of imported wheat, which in this particular year was very much cheaper than native wheat, but the price at which it was sold to them was adjusted. Therefore there was a profit made on the sale of the imported wheat to these wheaten meal millers.

389. Chairman.—The paragraph continues:—

“Subsidy at the rate of ½d. per 4 lb. loaf continued to be paid in respect of batch bread baked and sold by bakers licensed under the Emergency Powers (Bakers) Order, 1941 (Statutory Rules and Orders, No. 453 of 1941), and the disbursements under this heading amounted to £162,385 0s. 8d.

Payments on account, totalling £25,000, made to Tea Importers (Eire), Limited, in recoupment of estimated trading losses incurred during the year under review, account for the balance of the charge to this subhead. Including £175,000 advanced in previous years, the total of advances made to the company to 31st March, 1946, amounted to £200,000.”

390. Chairman.—Paragraph 94 states:

“The arrangement with Fuel Importers (Eire), Limited, under which losses incurred by the company in the marketing of turf and timber fuel were borne by the company, and issues were made from voted moneys in recoupment thereof, continued in operation throughout the year, and the vote provision was again utilised in full. The payments to the company, which were on account, amounted, at 31st March, 1946, to £3,443,000, including £1,433,000 advanced in the year under review.”

391. Chairman.—Paragraph 95 reads:

“Issues during the year to the Turf Development Board, Limited, made from Grants in Aid with the consent of the Minister for Finance, comprised £424,000 for the production of turf for use in non-turf areas (Subhead K.1.), £29,030 for administrative expenses (Subhead K.2.), £3,500 to meet expenditure on publicity (Subhead K.3.) and £25,245 for the preliminary development of certain bogs (Subhead K.4.). Receipts in respect of sales of turf produced under the turf camps scheme totalling £269,936 13s. 6d. were remitted by the board and are included in the Exchequer extra receipts.

Sums amounting to £42,890 17s. 10d. were repaid by the board in respect of advances made for the development of bogs and are also included in the Exchequer extra receipts. At 31st March, 1946, the amounts outstanding, including interest, in respect of the advances referred to were:—

392. Chairman.—Paragraph 96 reads:

“Plant for the production of turf charcoal, of the estimated value of £10,213, was transferred free of charge from the Emergency Scientific Research Bureau to the Turf Development Board, Limited, as from 1st December, 1943. Early in 1945, it was decided to cease production of charcoal and close down the plant, and Department of Finance approval was given for its disposal by the board to the best advantage and for the crediting of the net proceeds to Exchequer extra receipts. A sum of £3,583 14s. 3d. was received from the board, comprising £1,792 12s. 3d. in respect of buildings and plant, and £1,791 2s. 0d. from sales of charcoal. As the receipts did not apparently cover all the plant and charcoal on hands, I have inquired whether the balance has since been disposed of, and whether any further sums remain to be brought to credit.”

Mr. Maher.—I have since been informed that a further sum of £573 has been received from Bord na Móna and that represents the total value of the remaining assets.

393. Chairman.—The paragraph continues:—

“As will be seen from the account, licence and other fees payable under Section 8 of the Emergency Powers Act, 1939, amounted to £2,667 17s. 5d. The principal items were Duplicate Ration Books £813 10s. 11d., Fabrics (Import Licences) £601 5s. 0d., and Textiles (Manufacturers’ Licences and Permits) £223 10s. 0d.”

394. Arising out of Subhead G of the Vote itself, can you say up to what date the accounts of Fuel Importers, Limited, have been audited?

Mr. Maher.—Perhaps Mr. Leydon has not got the information at hand. We have audited the accounts up to the 31st December, 1945. We carried out a provisional audit up to the 31st December, 1946, but the final figures are not yet available.

395. Deputy B. Brady.—I observe that the explanatory note to Subhead K (4)— Preliminary Development of Certain Bogs —states:—“Owing to local labour shortage, it was not possible to carry out the full programme envisaged.” Where would that labour shortage be?—This subhead covers various bogs—in or about 14 —and the labour shortage was not confined to any one of them. It was spread over quite a number. I am afraid I could not give you particulars, without making an inquiry on the subject, but it certainly was not confined to any one area.

396. There are 70,000 unemployed, according to the official figures?—Yes, but they might be in the wrong place.

397. Chairman.—We have the names of the bogs here in respect of which the issues were made—Barna, £10,945; Littleton, £8,000; Derraghan, £6,900; Derryaroge, £3,300; Mountdillon and Derrycashel, £21,650; Derryounce, £11,350; Derrylea, £1,000; Attymon, £3,700; Carrigcannon, £2,000; Coolnagun, £1,300, making a total of £70,145.

VOTE 69—FOOD ALLOWANCES.

Mr. J. Leydon further examined.

398. Deputy Sheldon.—Is the number of food vouchers over-issued an increasing number. In the note on page 251, it is not very clear as to whether the 5,756 includes the various figures for the years from 1941-42 to 1944-45. Or, is the 5,756 the total for 1945-46? It appears to be a continually increasing number?—Yes, the number is increasing, according to these figures.

399. Could you say if the 5,756 is the total and that it includes those other figures or is that the figure for the year 1945-46?—This is the number that came to hand in this particular year.

400. It includes these previous figures then?—It does, yes.

The Witness withdrew.

VOTE 9—OFFICE OF PUBLIC WORKS.

Mr. J. Connolly called and examined.

401. Chairman.—On this Vote there is a note by the Comptroller and Auditor-General on page v:—

“Insurance of Workmen.

“8. As stated in a note to the account, sums amounting to £15,380 4s. 10d. expended in prior years on compensation, etc., in respect of claims arising out of accident risks which had been covered by policies of insurance with the Irish Employers’ Mutual Insurance Association, Limited, now in liquidation, remain charged to suspense. In addition, a sum of £6,017 4s. 0d., being portion of the premium paid for the year 1938-39, also remains charged to a suspense account pending settlement of the Commissioners’ claim against the liquidator. Sums amounting to £1,908 18s. 0d., which would otherwise have been payable to the Association under the policies have been retained by the Commissioners as a setoff against their claim. In reply to a recent inquiry as to the present position in this matter, I was informed that, subsequent to the 31st March. 1946, the Commissioners had incurred further expenditure amounting to £231 2s. 0d. and that, since the date of my last report, further progress had been made in the liquidation proceedings.”

Mr. Maher.—I have nothing further to add to what is in the Report. The Account Officer has informed us that the liquidator has been successful in recovering approximately £10,000 from the members of the Association.

402. Chairman.—Has there been any further development?

Mr. Connolly.—The latest information we have is that the liquidator is now applying to the court for an order authorising him to execute judgment against all the contributors who have not discharged their liabilities, and it is understood that the application will be in court within the next few days.

VOTE 10—PUBLIC WORKS AND BUILDINGS.

Mr. J. Connolly further examined.

403. Chairman.—There is a note by the Comptroller and Auditor-General as follows:—

“9. On the 1st April, 1945, the services hitherto rendered by the Office of Public Works in connection with the construction and maintenance of civil airports were transferred to the Department of Industry and Commerce. The Office of Public Works completed contract work in progress on the 31st March, 1945, the charges maturing for payment after that date being met out of a suspense account in the first instance and subsequently recouped from Vote No. 56, Transport and Meteorological Services. As noted in the account, materials and plant valued at approximately £13,000 were transferred to the Department of Industry and Commerce.”

Mr. Maher.—That paragraph is for information only. The Department of Industry and Commerce now undertake the maintenance work.

404. Chairman.—Paragraph 10 of the Report by the Comptroller and Auditor-General is as follows:—

“Subhead C.—Maintenance and Supplies.

“A departmental inquiry held during the year into the administration of one of the architectural districts disclosed that irregularities existed in connection with the employment and attendance of certain workmen, and that some items of equipment were unaccounted for. I have been informed that the loss to public funds occasioned by improper employment of the workmen amounted to £59, and that the value of the property unaccounted for amounted to £19 8s. 0d. The authority of the Department of Finance is being sought for the admission as a charge to the vote of the wages irregularly paid and for the writeoff of the value of the equipment.

It was observed in the course of audit that a quantity of timber which had been purchased as a reserve in previous years was rendered useless owing to dry rot. It appears that the precaution had not been taken of having this timber stacked with suitable ventilation spaces, but I am informed that it could not be assumed that the loss was wholly attributable to this cause. The cost price of the timber was £60 and, as noted in the account, the authority of the Department of Finance has been obtained to write off this amount.”

405. Deputy Sheldon.—In regard to the first part of the paragraph, has the Department of Finance given the permission in respect of the wages irregularly paid and for the write-off of the value of the equipment?—Not yet. There are one or two points which we have yet to deal with.

406. Chairman.—What were the circumstances relating to these irregularities?—The position was that we had a carpenter-in-charge, a man who had been in our service from 1933. It was discovered that he was misusing the men’s time, in other words, he was using a couple of men to do work which was not Board’s work and this was only detected when a new clerk of works was put on the job and an investigation held. It was found that he had misused the time of the Board’s employees in doing this work.

407. Chairman.—Had it been going on for long?—I would not say so but it would be very difficult to say how long it had gone on. We made a very generous estimate of the time involved and we reckoned £59. We had a close investigation into it and examined all the witnesses.

408. Who was responsible for the supervision of the carpenter in question?—His immediate superior would be the clerk-of-works, and over him again would be the assistant architect of the district.

409. Deputy Sheldon.—You say a new clerk-of-works was brought in. Was that accidental or deliberate?—In April, 1945, we got a suspicion that time-keeping required to be checked up. We changed the clerk-of-works and then on his close examination of things we discovered these other matters.

410. Was any action taken against the previous clerk-of-works?—Yes. The previous clerk-of-works was at the time a man of 63. He had been over 20 years in the Board’s service. He was severely reprimanded and was retired at 65 whereas normally he would have been continued in the Service until he was 70.

411. Chairman.—Was the carpenter dismissed?—Oh yes, immediately.

412. Deputy Sheldon.—Is there any immediate prospect of the outstanding points in regard to which the Department of Finance have still to be satisfied being cleared up?—Yes. We only got the letter a couple of days ago and we will deal with it immediately.

413. Chairman.—Paragraph 11 of the Report by the Comptroller and Auditor-General is as follows:—

“Subhead C.—Maintenance and Supplies

“Subhead E.—Rents, Rates, etc.

“A School of Housewifery was closed, as an emergency economy measure, on the 13th July, 1940. The premises were held by the Commissioners on a 20 years’ lease from 1st May, 1932, with provision for breaks in their favour every five years, at a rent of £80 per annum plus rates and maintenance. The break in the lease which occurred in 1942 could not be availed of as the Department of Education then contemplated re-opening the school at a subsequent date; but in August, 1945, the Department informed the Commissioners that it had no further use for the premises and negotiations were then opened with the landlord for their early surrender. The premises were surrendered on 24th November, 1945, and, as noted in the account, the landlord, in consideration of acceptance of the surrender before a date specified under the lease, was paid £40 in respect of a half year’s rent up to the 1st May, 1946, and a sum of £55 in settlement of his claim for works of reinstatement.”

414. Had you to wait for a decision from the Department of Education before these premises were surrendered?—We had, Mr. Chairman.

415. You paid rent and rates while waiting for the decision?—Yes, we had to.

416. Chairman.—Paragraph 12 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General is as follows:—

“Subhead L.—Appropriations in Aid.

“Statements showing the results of tillage operations at the Phoenix Park and the Bourn Vincent Memorial Park have been furnished to me. The full yields of the cereal and root crops in the Phoenix Park during the 1945 season were sold and the proceeds, amounting to £1,307 13s. 3d., have been credited to this subhead. The greater portion of the produce of the Bourn Vincent Memorial Park, estimated at £2,495, was retained for feeding and seeding purposes, the amount credited to this subhead in respect of sales being £150 5s. 1d.

In my last report I stated that I was in communication with the Accounting Officer regarding receipts from grazing lettings. It appears that irregularities came to light in connection with these receipts involving misappropriations of rents for the 1944 season amounting to £48 4s. 9d., and of rents and miscellaneous revenues in the year under review amounting to £22 19s. 11d. The total amount involved was £79 4s. 8d., including £8 relating to the irregular encashment of payable orders. A storekeeper employed by the Commissioners was prosecuted and convicted of certain of these irregularities and dismissed the service. Authority has been sought from the Department of Finance to write off the amount of the loss.”

Has the authority been received yet?—It has not yet been received.

417. How was it that a storekeeper was in charge of cash?—In the Phoenix Park we have various lettings, such as grazing lettings. A number of the lessees live in the vicinity and they handed him the money. They found it more convenient. He simply did not transmit the money to the superintendent. He was convicted and sentenced to nine months’ imprisonment. The sentence was suspended.

418. Chairman.—Paragraph 13 is as follows:—

“Rents Receivable.

“Arrears of rents due to the Commissioners on 31st March, 1946, amounted to £4,154 compared with £4,331 19s. 7d. on 31st March, 1945. From statements furnished to me with the Appropriation Account it appears that of these arrears sums amounting to £3,023 have been recovered subsequent to 31st March, 1946. and £84 was considered bad or doubtful.”

419. Chairman.—Paragraph 14 is as follows:—

“Suspense Account.

“Expenditure amounting to £1,399 16s. 8d., which has been charged to a suspense account, was incurred during the year on the provision of accommodation, furniture and equipment in the Custom House, Dublin, for the staff engaged on work arising out of the establishment of regional sanatoria. It is understood that this expenditure ,together with the appropriate agency fee, will be recovered from the Hospitals Trust Fund in accordance with the provisions of section 5 of the Tuberculosis (Establishment of Sanatoria) Act, 1945.”

Mr. Maher.—I understand that the agency fee was recently recovered?—It was.

420. Chairman.—What particular type of work were these people engaged on?— Our charges are for furniture and equipment in the Custom House for a branch of the Public Health Department and the administration by that Department is for Hospitals Trust.

421. None of your staff is actually engaged on the work?—Our charge is for the work done—adaptation work and furniture supplied. I take it it is paragraph 14 you are referring to, sir?

Chairman.—Yes.

422. Deputy Sheldon.—I see on page 27 of the Appropriation Accounts a note with reference to a proposal to erect new Customs residences and garage at Lifford, Co. Donegal: “the plans for which have since been abandoned.” An amount was provided for that in this year’s Estimate. Is there a new plan now?—New plans will be prepared for them. The original plans were scrapped.

423. The Electricity Supply Board came in and did something with the site?—I think so.

424. On subhead E.E.—Compensation on Resumption of Leased Premises—can you tell us something about the background? —This subhead was opened with the sanction of the Minister for Finance to meet payment of compensation and legal costs on resumption of certain leased premises, i.e., to leaseholders who had surrendered their interest to the Department of Defence at the military barracks, Clonmel. This particular amount covered payments made on behalf of the Department of Defence which required these premises back and the money was paid in compensation to extinguish the leaseholders’ interest in them.

425. With regard to subhead J.7— Arterial Drainage Surveys—can you tell us if the increase in the number of areas being surveyed for arterial drainage is continuing?—Yes, in so far as staff allows.

426. On Subhead L.—Appropriations in Aid—the note on the first item mentions a fine on leasing of surplus Government property of £1. Can you give us any further information on this matter?—The fine was actually to have been £5 but the client has paid only £1. That is as far as we have got. It is a trifling item.

VOTE 11—HAULBOWLINE DOCKYARD.

Mr. J. Connolly called.

No questions.

* See Appendix IX.

* See Appendix X.

* See Appendix XI.

* See Appendix XII.