|
|
|
|
MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA(Minutes of Evidence)Déardaoin, 1ú Iúil, 1948.Thursday, 1st July, 1948.The Committee sat at 11 a.m.
DEPUTY MacENTEE in the chair. Mr. J. Maher (An tArd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste) called and examined.VOTE 1—PRESIDENT’S ESTABLISHMENT.Mr. J. J. McElligott called.No question. VOTE 2—HOUSES OF THE OIREACHTAS.Mr. J. J. McElligott called and examined.646. Deputy Sheldon.—With reference to subhead J, has the restaurant at last managed to show a profit?—No demand came from the restaurant for any payment in that year so we assume they made a profit or, at any rate, that they did not incur a loss. 647. Is this the first time that no demand has been made?—It is the first time in recent years that no demand has been made. 648. Chairman.—To what is that attributable; is it to an increase in prices or a reduction in value? 649. Deputy Briscoe.—I think the Department of Finance must have seen that they put up their prices somewhat? —The prices were raised, I understand. Perhaps, as the Chairman suggests, the quality was slightly reduced—or the quantity. 650. The bar is included?—The bar is part of the restaurant and the proceeds go into the general earnings of the restaurant. The receipts from the bar are taken into account before the estimate of profit and loss is arrived at. VOTE 3—DEPARTMENT OF THE TAOISEACH.Mr. J. J. McElligott called.No question. VOTE 5—OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR FINANCE.Mr. J. J. McElligott further examined.651. Chairman.—As regards the Appropriations in Aid, these are derived mainly from Government sources?—Yes, commission charged to sundry departmental funds on purchases of securities by the Government Stockbroker. There is a miscellaneous item which consists mainly of stockbrokers’ fees and a credit for an old bicycle returned from the Department of Posts and Telegraphs, for which we received £4 4s. 9d. 652. Was that disposed of by auction or by private tender?—We did not pursue its fate any further. 653. Deputy Briscoe.—As regards the Notes, is it the usual practice for one Department to loan staff to another Department without debiting that particular Department with the cost of these officials?—The position is that the Department to which the officer is on loan bears the cost of his total remuneration unless it is understood that the period of the loan will not exceed six months, in which case the existing practice is that the parent Department bears the officer’s substantive salary without recovery, and any balance that arises from his secondment to another Department is met by the borrowing Department. 654. Would that mean that supposing you gave an officer for six months or under and he went back again after a month, the Department could have him practically for the year without being charged? —One could easily see through a subterfuge of that kind. 655. I did not mean it as a subterfuge. The point is that you may put an officer in for a particular purpose—for instance, some one may be ill—and he may go back again after a short period. Does the practice carry on in the same way?—Yes, it carries on in the same way. There is always a note put in the appropriation account for the various Departments showing the actual amount of salary paid to officers on loan from other Departments and the amounts borne on the particular Vote for officers on loan to other Departments. 656. There seems to be a substantial amount in the case of your Department in relation to these two items: it is approximately £14,000?—These are mainly people recruited in connection with our foreign exchange work from the Revenue Commissioners and the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. A certain amount of the foreign exchange work is connected with the importation or exportation of currency through the post and otherwise, and for that reason we called on the Revenue Commissioners and the Department of Posts and Telegraphs to supply us with clerical assistance, which they did. That accounts for the large sum in respect of officers on loan to the Department. 657. Deputy Briscoe.—Could the Comptroller and Auditor-General say, if this position arose very frequently as regards other Departments apart from this Department, that he would make reference to it? Mr. Maher.—If the Deputy is referring to an officer going to loan for six months and returning after one month, we never came across a case of that kind. If it did happen we would question the Accounting Officer as to whether the loan of the officer in the first instance could not have been anticipated for the full period. 658. Chairman.—I assume the Department of Finance would have a strong objection to anything of that sort, merely on establishment grounds?—We have a strong objection to a practice of that kind being resorted to. VOTE 8—MANAGEMENT OF GOVERNMENT STOCKS.Mr. J. J. McElligott further examined.659. Deputy Briscoe.—Is the figure in this Vote an agreed figure or is it based on actual commission or brokerage?—It is an agreed figure. The banks are paid for this service at the rate of £300 for each £1,000,000 of stock outstanding at the close of the last financial year but one. This rate was fixed by the Bank Act of 1892, and has not since been varied. 660. Chairman.—As regards the remuneration of banks, is this sum shared by all the joint stock banks?—No, it goes mainly to the Bank of Ireland, but also to the National City Bank and to the National City Bank in New York in respect of the external portion of the Second National Loan. 661. Deputy Briscoe.—When you mention the National City Bank, you refer to the National City Bank in Dublin?—Yes. 662. Is not that bank associated with the Bank of Ireland?—It is owned entirely by the Bank of Ireland. It manages the registered Land Bonds and the 3½ per cent. Compensation Stock, the Land Bonds being the biggest single issue we have. 663. It would be one bank, the Bank of Ireland?—Yes. 664. Chairman.—Is that arrangement the most economical one that could be devised—the arrangement for the remuneration of the banks?—I think it is. The rate has not changed since 1892 and we all know that the expenses of banks have gone up very considerably in the meantime. The amount of the grant in the year in question, 1946-47, was £22,400; in 1947-48, the amount was £22,260, and in the current year 1948-49, it will be £22,250. Even in these last couple of years the expenses of banks have gone up very considerably and we are satisfied that there is no other system in which the registers of Government securities could be so economically managed. There is another point. By keeping the registers in the Bank of Ireland and the National City Bank they are contiguous to the Stock Exchange—it is between the two— so it enables transfers to be made rapidly and facilitates dealings in Government securities. 665. It is desirable from the point of view of the Central Fund that dealings in Government securities should be facilitated?—That is very desirable. VOTE 12—STATE LABORATORY.Mr. J. J. McElligott further examined.666. Deputy Sheldon.—As regards the extra receipts payable to the Exchequer, there is one item covering a recovery from the Road Fund. That represents portion of the salary of an officer engaged on an analysis of road-making materials. How does it happen that the amount realised was less than the estimated amount—was the officer changed?—He was kept for a shorter period than was estimated. 667. Chairman.—I suppose that applies also to the recovery from Bord na Móna? —Yes, but that was a very fractional difference. VOTE 13—CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION.Mr. J. J. McElligott further examined.668. Deputy Sheldon.—Was there a very considerable drop in the number of candidates for Civil Service examinations? 669. Chairman.—That is in relation to the saving on subhead A.2? 670. Deputy Sheldon.—Yes. Was that saving effected through fewer examinations being held, fewer posts being advertised or fewer people going forward for examination?—In the main, it was due to fewer candidates going forward for examination. That accounts for fewer centres being provided and a smaller number of examiners. 671. May one hope that this is the beginning of a smaller Civil Service?— In 1946-47, the year under review, the number of candidates at written examinations held by the Civil Service Commission or the Local Appointments Commission was 4,729 as compared with 6,098 in 1945-46, 5,492 in 1944-45, and 6,965 in 1943-44; but the number went up sharply in 1947-48 to 8,274. 672. An increase was expected under that subhead, but it did not materialise? —That is so. 673. Deputy Briscoe.—In the case of subhead A.2, the expenditure is down because of a smaller number of candidates. So far as the examinations are concerned the expenditure is up, notwithstanding the smaller number of candidates. There is no explanation of subhead E—Appropriations in Aid—but I take it these represent the fees paid by the candidates who sit for the examinations, and that amount is up also?—The Appropriations in Aid cover receipts from county and county borough councils in connection with the operations of the Local Appointments Commission and these receipts are recovered in arrear and they have no special relation to the particular year in question. 674. But the examinations, notwithstanding the smaller number of candidates, show an increase in expenditure? —The point there is that the fees to examiners and the superintendents of examinations were slightly increased, as were also the payments to attendants employed at the examination rooms. The fees for the hiring of halls also increased. That led to additional expense for fewer examinations. 675. Deputy Sheldon.—You mentioned payments made to examiners under Subhead C. There are no payments to examiners surely there?—Subhead A.2 contains payments to examiners, Subhead C. contains the expenses for printing examination papers, advertising examinations, and the provision of accommodation for examinations. 676. Chairman.—The Vote not only covers the expenses of the Civil Service Commission, but also those of the Local Appointments Commission?—Yes. 677. And the greater part of the Appropriations in Aid are receipts from the county and county borough councils? —All the Appropriations in Aid, in fact, are receipts from county and county borough councils. The receipts we get by way of stamp charges made to candidates are mentioned in the Estimate itself, but they do not seem to be mentioned in the Appropriation Account. 678. They do, in fact, come from the county councils and county borough councils?—Yes. 679. Deputy Sheldon.—May I take it that the position was that the number of examinations held was abnormal, that the number of posts was, perhaps, slightly up, but that the number of candidates coming forward for examinations went down or was below expectations?—Yes. The main factor was the lower number of candidates. 680. Deputy Briscoe.—Where is the Appropriation in Aid in connection with the fees from the stamp duties paid by candidates sitting for examinations?—It is not mentioned in the account, but it is mentioned on the face of the Estimate itself. It appears that for the year 1946-47 the fee stamps payable by candidates sitting for examinations conducted by the Civil Service Commission were estimated at £5,630, and the fee stamps payable by candidates for Local Appointments Commission examinations were estimated at £2,160. That is a total of £7,790 between the two. 681. Chairman.—So that, in fact, the net cost of these two Commissions is much less than is shown on the face of the account?—That is so, if you do not take into account the allied services rendered to the two Commissions. In 1946-47 the total grant for the Commission was £25,700, but if you take the allied services into account the total estimated expenditure was £36,252. Against that, the total estimated receipts were £14,790. 682. Deputy Briscoe.—Mr. McElligott gave us the estimated figures of the stamp fees. Could he give us what the amounts realised were?—If I had Finance Accounts for the year 1946-47 I could. 683. Chairman.—They are not available yet?—They would be available in the Finance Accounts, but I have not got the volume here. 684. Deputy Briscoe.—Is there any reason why it should not be noted in this particular Vote? The money accruing to the revenue arises from the fact of these candidates having to sit for examinations. I think there should be a note saying to what extent revenue had eventuated from that. 685. Chairman.—That is not a matter for the Accounting Officer. It is a matter to be discussed between the Comptroller and Auditor-General and the Committee. VOTE 14—IRISH TOURIST BOARD.Mr. J. J. McElligott further examined.686. Chairman.—The Comptroller and Auditor-General has no comment to make on Vote 14 on the accounts as presented. It may, however, interest the Committee to know, first of all, that “expenditure out of this grant-in-aid will not be accounted for in detail to the Comptroller and Auditor-General, nor will any unexpended balance of the sums issued be surrendered at the end of the financial year. The accounts of the Irish Tourist Board will be audited by duly qualified auditors in accordance with Section 10 of the Tourist Traffic Act, 1939, and copies of the accounts and of the auditor’s report thereon will be laid before each House of the Oireachtas.” Perhaps the Comptroller and Auditor-General will tell us whether the position is, in fact, that the accounts of the Irish Tourist Board have been audited by him. Mr. Maher.—That is so. By arrangement with the Department of Finance, we audit the detailed accounts of the Tourist Board. These are, in due course, laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas. 687. Deputy Sheldon.—I assume that the surplus represents non-issued grants. Anything that is issued is not returned as a surplus?—Yes. The surplus falls into the Exchequer but so far as anything that has been issued is concerned, we have no further interest in the matter except, of course, that we satisfy ourselves, before we make any issues, that the expenses of the board are reasonable and that its administration has been conducted on reasonably economic lines. 688. Then your Department does not just accept the recommendation from Industry and Commerce. You make a separate examination?—We usually accept the recommendation of the Department of Industry and Commerce. That recommendation is arrived at by discussion between the two Departments. 689. Chairman.—And prolonged discussion?—Sometimes prolonged. 690. Deputy Briscoe.—I see a note from the Comptroller and Auditor-General certifying that the account has been examined under his direction and is correct. The Comptroller and Auditor-General does exercise that power? Mr. Maher.—It is an abbreviated certificate and shows that the account is examined in full. 691. Deputy Briscoe.—Notwithstanding the note in the Estimate. Mr. Maher.—That is as regards the payment of the Grant-in-Aid to the Tourist Board. That is a lump sum payment—the Grant-in-Aid itself. 692. Chairman.—But once the issues are made the Comptroller and Auditor-General has no statutory authority to examine these accounts? Mr. Maher.—That is so. It would be within the competence of the Department of Finance and the Department of Industry and Commerce to appoint outside auditors. VOTE 15—COMMISSIONS AND SPECIAL INQUIRIES.Mr. J. J. McElligott further examined.693. Chairman.—On this Vote paragraph 13 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General states:— “As noted in the account, sums totalling £307, approximately, were charged in the accounts of this Vote for the year 1934-35, 1935-36 and 1936-37 in respect of transcription and editorial fees incurred by the Irish Manuscripts Commission in connection with a work, the publication of which the commission subsequently decided to abandon on account of editorial complexities. The expenditure on printing and type rent amounted to £461 8s. 10d. as noted in the account of the Vote for Stationery and Printing (No. 21).” Has the Comptroller and Auditor-General anything to add? Mr. Maher.—The purpose of the paragraph is to bring under one heading the total expenditure incurred on the service. As the work has been abandoned, at least for the present, the expenditure may be regarded as nugatory. 694. Chairman.—That expenditure was really incurred in the years 1934-37? Mr. Maher.—The expenditure, as spread over the years 1935 to 1946, amounted to £768 8s. 10d. I mentioned that sums totalling £307 were charged in the account for the years 1934 to 1937. 695. Chairman.—Was the total of the payments which you described as nugatory £768 8s. 10d.? Mr. Maher.—Yes. 696. Chairman.—Would it be fair to ask the Accounting Officer if he could describe the nature of the work which has been abandoned?—I shall have to go back a little in history to do that. It started in April, 1934, when the Department of Finance sanctioned the inclusion of Volumes I and II of the “Depositions Concerning the Rebellion 1641-1660” as part of the programme of work of the Irish Manuscripts Commission for 1934-35. Then in November, 1934, when the Department was being approached in connection with the editorial fees for the work, we learned for the first time that it was the intention of the Commission to publish the Depositions in toto and that such publication would run to 33 volumes, each containing approximately 120,000 words. On that proposal we commented that this constituted a totally different proposition to that previously contemplated and we suggested to the Commission that, instead of publishing the work in extenso, only a selection should be published and that the money involved might more profitably be expended on the publication of other manuscript material. The Commission, in reply, stated that, in view of the widespread controversy regarding these documents, they regarded them as manuscripts of the highest historical importance and considered that their publication was very desirable in order that the public might be in a position to judge for themselves as to their veracity and that the three volumes being edited (a third volume had been included in the programme of work for 1935-36), constituted a representative section in themselves of the complete work and that, when they had been issued, the Commission would be willing to consider in conjunction with the Department of Finance, the question of the continuance of the publication of the Depositions. The work went on on these three volumes. By the outbreak of war in 1939 two volumes had been set up in print and transcription and editorial work had been done on the third but at this stage the original documents, which are the property of Trinity College, had to be put in safe keeping and it was impossible to continue with the work on the three volumes in question. The matter so lay until January, 1946, when the Department of Finance was approached by the Irish Manuscripts Commission to write off the printing and type rent costs on Volumes I and II as the Commission had altered its policy in regard to the Depositions owing to the editorial complexities involved in the proof checking of the work and the getting of revised proofs. They now wished to alter the form in which the Depositions would appear from what was virtually a facsimile reproduction to a calendar form, i.e., the contents would be calendared and summarised wherever this could be done with certainty, suppressing all redundancies and presenting the whole in chronological order It was the intention of the Commission that this new basis should apply to all 33 volumes and so would include the three volumes on which work had already been done on the original basis. The Department of Finance were not satisfied that doing Volumes I to III in calendar form would be cheaper than finishing them in the way originally intended and on which a considerable amount of money had been spent, namely, more or less facsimile publication. At this point, however the Commission, while adhering to the principle that Volumes I to III should be done in calendar form, intimated that work on the Depositions would have to be abandoned as they saw no prospect of their being able to obtain the experienced workers necessary for the task and recommended that the type of the portion of the work already set up be dispersed. The Department of Finance, accordingly, authorised the Stationery Office to have the type dispersed and to write off the printing and type rent costs which were approximately £461. The other costs involved, namely, editorial and transcription fees, were approximately £307. The editorial complexities referred to, which were the chief reasons given for abandoning the work, apparently only came to light when proofs of Volumes I and II came to hand and were in the nature of typographical difficulties connected with ill-spelt and ill-drafted originals. I have a specimen here of one of the page proofs which the Chairman, perhaps, would like to see, showing the volume of corrections which would be involved. 697. Chairman.—There are some very touching passages here: “Cousen Owen, as you tender your own good, and my loue fail not to be with mee, at my house in the County of Monnoghan; on the 20th or the 21st of this Instant. . . .” 698. Do I take it that as a result of this expenditure of £800, all that now remains are the transcripts which were made and the rough proofs?—That is so. 699. Were the rough proofs kept?— Yes, the rough proofs were kept, but they were not suitable for publication or even for exhibition in a library. I think that an additional reason for discontinuing the Depositions was that they were not all that it was expected they might be. 700. I am sure that they were grossly inaccurate in many respects, but they represented the minds of the men that made them. However that is not our concern, that is simply a question of policy. We must consider the question of whether it was an economic decision to abandon work already begun at so much expense? —You can imagine, when they expended £800 just to get the first three volumes to that stage, the cost if it were continued on the original basis of 33 volumes. 701. Chairman.—As the expenditure on printing and type rent amounted to £461 8s. 10d., it looks to me as if the cost of editing and the preliminary editorial work were moderate?—Yes, they were moderate. In a work of that kind printing costs are the chief item. 702. Deputy Briscoe.—Am I correct in saying that owing to the outbreak of war an amount of printing type had been set and that this £400 odd was, in fact, rental charge on type that had been set up for keeping it set?—Yes, type rent, out of a total of £461 8s. 10d., accounted for £267 11s. 4d. 703. Chairman.—That is entirely abnormal expenditure and might not be anticipated in future?—Judging by the delays that checking and editorial work generally involved, I think that over 33 volumes there would be a fairly substantial amount for type rent, and even apart from type rent, I think the expenditure would be considerable. In any case, I think Sir, that the motive which led the Irish Manuscripts Commission to abandon this project was not pressure from the Department of Finance but disappointment with the contents of the Depositions. Of course we regard the Commission as being practically autonomous. 704. Chairman.—The item regarding rental brought out the point that it was not due to the “dead hand” of the Department of Finance—as it is sometimes unflatteringly called. 705. Deputy Briscoe.—I notice at the end of the note an item showing that the total cost of the Irish Manuscripts Commission was £28,801 5s. 5d. As far as this item is concerned, the total cost is £800?—Yes. 706. Chairman.—As the Accounting Officer pointed out, the Irish Manuscripts Commission is practically an autonomous body and the questions which we have been asking here are not directed as a criticism of the Department of Finance in respect of this particular matter which is obviously a matter for the Commission itself. VOTE 16—SUPERANNUATION AND RETIRED ALLOWANCES.Mr. J. J. McElligott further examined.707. Chairman.—The Superannuation and Retired Allowances charged against this Vote are mainly Civil Service?—Yes, it is practically all Civil Service except subheads J and K which concern the pensions of retired and dismissed Royal Irish Constabulary and pensions of the Civic Guards including members of the late Dublin Metropolitan Police Force. 708. Are Post Office pensions charged against this Vote?—No, they are given separately in the Post Office Vote. 709. What about Army pensions?— Army pensions are charged separately in the Army Pensions Vote. The total pensions between the Civil Service, the Army and the Police are extremely heavy. 710. With regard to subhead D— Agency Payments in Respect of Compensation Allowances, would you tell the Committee how agency payments arise?— These are payments given by us on behalf of the British Government over a period dating from the 27th June, 1929, interpreting and supplementing Article 10 of the Treaty of 1921. There are certain additional payments made to pensions which we refused to make, in respect of which the British Government undertook 100 per cent. liability. We therefore pay these additional allowances in the first instance and recover 100 per cent. from the British Government. 711. That recoupment is in fact set out in Item 1 of subhead M?—Appropriations in Aid are brought in in full and the amount estimated for Appropriations in Aid is £23,955. These additional payments are made to pensioners as a result of the decision in the Wigg-Cochrane case which was a case for compensation under Article 10 of the Treaty. 712. Deputy Sheldon.—Would Mr. McElligott amplify the extra Exchequer receipts in respect to officers on loan?-These are civil servants on loan to State companies or semi-State bodies and the amount in respect of pension liability has to be paid by these companies or bodies to the Exchequer and they are brought in as extra receipts. 713. How did it arise that very much less was realised?—These Estimates, for 1946-47 for instance, were prepared in the last quarter of 1945 and one has to make a guess as to how many men would be on loan, for that period, what would be their salaries and what, accordingly, would be their pension liability, so there are a number of imponderables, or variables rather, which have been taken into account. The payments and refunds of teachers’ contributions relate to payments from teachers who have given up the teaching profession but who have been trained in preparatory colleges or training colleges. If such people give up their profession they are expected to refund the cost of their training. 714. What is “extra remuneration in individual cases”? In these cases should not the individual case be mentioned? We have here “As remuneration for services rendered, four pensioners received from public funds sums ranging from £512 to £887”. Surely where extra remuneration of over £30 is given, each item is mentioned?—It would be possible to do that if the Committee so desired. It was not done in order not to make the note too long. 715. Chairman.—If it were done in respect of one Department it would have to be done in respect of every other Department?—I think the Comptroller and Auditor-General has been satisfied up to the present with this rather summary way of dealing with the matter, but if the Committee so wish, we can expand the note. Mr. Maher.—That is so. If you take some of the larger establishments where a great number of officers would be concerned, for instance, if you look at page 15, the Vote for the Revenue Department, you will see 125 officers of Customs and Excise and a number of officers of various other grades. The note would be very unwieldy if you had to give full details of all these. In the course of the audit we examine them and we are satisfied that the amounts shown in the Appropriation Accounts are in order. 716. Deputy Sheldon.—These are pensioners who were re-employed? 717. Chairman.—It does not necessarily mean that they have been re-employed in the State service. 718. Mr. McElligott.—The excess remuneration would be only what was given in respect of public funds. The first part of the note about extra remuneration refers to pensions additional to those issued out of this Vote which were paid during the year from public funds. We give these cases. As I say, the remuneration was for service rendered. Various other pensioners get different sums. 719. Chairman.—The definition of public funds in that context limits it to the Central Fund?—Yes, it is limited. 720. I have experience of retired civil servants being employed by local authorities for a short term?—Yes. In this case it is confined to the Civil Service. VOTE 17—RATES ON GOVERNMENT PROPERTYMr. J. J. McElligott further examined.721. Chairman.—The rates and contributions in lieu of rates represent in fact the rates that normally would be payable by a private individual if he occupied the property?—Yes, the full equivalent of the rate which would be paid by a private individual. 722. Deputy Briscoe.—You had not any difficulty about local authorities appealing for a revaluation of some of these properties?—We would not like it. We think that we are already paying sufficient rates. 723. Deputy Briscoe.—The local authority does not think so. Chairman.—Perhaps they would like to apply for a general revaluation. I am sure the Minister for Finance would not oppose that. VOTE 18—SECRET SERVICE.Mr. J. J. McElligott called.No question. VOTE 19—EXPENSES UNDER THE ELECTORAL ACT AND THE JURIES ACT.Mr. J. J. McElligott called.No question. VOTE 20—MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES.Mr. J. J. McElligott called.No question. VOTE 24—SUPPLEMENTARY AGRICULTURAL GRANTS.Mr. J. J. McElligott further examined.724. Chairman.—These grants are all statutory now?—Yes, and all increasing. For that year they were £2,311,366; the following year they were £2,581,000; and in the current year they are £3,121,000. 725. Deputy Sheldon.—It is only subhead D. which can increase. The others are fixed?—Yes. It is capable of unlimited expansion. 726. Deputy Briscoe.—How is this applied? How do you explain the increasing amount?—It is applied to relief of rates on agricultural land and is given in the form of a primary allowance, a supplementary allowance and an employment allowance. The present scale of allowances is: The primary allowance rate on land valuations up to £20 and on the first £20 of higher valuations is three-fifths of the general rate struck in the rating area concerned. Then there is the supplementary allowance on the part of the valuation above £20 and that amounts to one-fifth of the general rate. In addition to the supplementary relief on valuations above £20 there is an employment allowance of 10/- in the £ on the excess of the valuation over £20 where men are employed full-time on the holding, subject to the limitation that the allowance shall not in any case exceed £6 10s. 0d. for each man at work on the holding throughout the preceding calendar year or the balance of the rates on the valuation over £20, whichever is the less. 727. Chairman.—In fact the Exchequer has no control over this expenditure?— No. 728. If the local rates go up, the Exchequer contribution must increase pro rata?—Yes. 729. Deputy Briscoe.—Is there no check by the Department of Finance on individual local authorities?—Not beyond what is exercised through the Department of Local Government which looks after the administration of the agricultural grants and sees that the local authorities keep in line with the statutory requirements. 730. The local authorities have to submit these?—Yes, their rating lists to the Department of Local Government. 731. And they approve?—Yes. 732. Deputy Sheldon.—In fact the county councils are spending departments and determine the amount of money which the Dáil must make available?— Yes, unless the existing legislation is modified. 733. Chairman.—In fact the Department of Local Government have no control over the expenditure except to see that it is incurred according to the statutes. The Department of Local Government cannot step in and say that the expenditure of the county council is too high, provided the local authority is empowered by statute to undertake that expenditure?—If the local authority has power to increase the expenditure independently, the burden on the Exchequer automatically increases. Of course, in many cases local authorities act on suggestions from, say, the Department of Local Government, the Department of Health, or the Department of Social Welfare. 734. Chairman.—I regret to say that they are very prone not to act. VOTE 25—LAW CHARGES.Mr. J. J. McElligott further examined.735. Deputy Sheldon.—The note refers to a payment on foot of costs awarded against the State made to a solicitor who had failed to obtain a stamped certificate in compliance with the provisions of the Stamp Act. How did the error occur?— This was a case where proceedings were taken and the State lost the case and costs were awarded against the State. The solicitor for the defendant had failed to take out his solicitor’s certificate and we refused to pay in the first instance. Finally we agreed to pay a portion of the costs awarded. I feel it necessary to draw the attention of the Committee to the fact that we paid those costs even though we were not legally liable for them in view of the fact that the solicitor had failed to comply with the regulations in the matter of having his certificate stamped. 736. It is really an ex gratia payment? —Yes. VOTE 26—UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES.Mr. J. J. McElligott further examined.737. Chairman.—The amount of this Vote has been considerably increased?— Yes, in 1946-47 it was £235,130. In 1947-48 it was £333,274; in 1948-49 it is £327,574. 738. Deputy Sheldon.—I suppose subhead B. accounts for the annual increase? —B. and B.B. the annual grants have been increased under the Irish Universities Act 1908, the Agriculture and Dairy Science Acts and the University College (Galway) Act. VOTE 69—DAMAGE TO PROPERTY (NEUTRALITY) COMPENSATION.Mr. J. J. McElligott further examined.739. Deputy Sheldon.—Can you say what was the total amount of compensation paid?—It came to £430,000 in round figures. Against external Governments we claimed a sum of just over £500,000. That covered administrative expenses by the various Departments, including the Department of Finance and the Board of Works which had a lot of detailed investigation to make into damage to property. We recovered in all only £22,443. 740. Chairman.—Less than 5 per cent.? —Yes. We recovered in full from the British and American Governments but our main claim was, of course against the German Government. We lodged our claim early in 1945 but since then we have heard nothing about it. We had earlier recovered from that Government a sum of £12,000 in respect of bombing at Campile. That sum was only recovered by collecting moneys from people here who owed debts to German nationals. We exhausted that source of recoupment and the claims we made subsequently against the German Government were not, therefore, met up to the time of the German collapse. Since then no opportunity the claims. 741. Deputy Sheldon.—You would need to watch what sort of marks you are paid. The successor German Government have not, I understand, replied?—We got no reply. 742. Deputy Briscoe.—But have all the claims not been met by the State?— Practically all of them. The Vote still goes on. It was £14,500 in 1947-48 and £11,050 in the current year. It is diminishing. 743. Are all the claims in?—Yes, and offers have been made in all cases where we thought an offer was in order. 744. In other words you give them the choice of taking your figure or of going to the German Government?—They need not take our offer. They can go to the courts. We accept the primary liability in all cases. Nobody with legitimate claims will suffer because we cannot recover from the German Government. 745. There is very little outstanding now?—Not more than £10,000 altogether, I should think. VOTE 70—PERSONAL INJURIES (CIVILIANS) COMPENSATION.Mr. J. J. McElligott further examined.746. Deputy Briscoe.—This Vote arises from such claims against the Government as would arise from a motor accident with a State car?—It is the counterpart of the other. It relates to personal injuries. 747. Chairman.—They arise out of the war?—During the war 39 persons were killed and 131 received injuries as a result of bombing incidents or incidents arising out of mine explosions. One hundred and ninety-six claims were made by persons who were injured and by and on behalf of persons. who claimed to be dependent on people who were killed. All these claims have been dealt with and, in fact, in all cases an admission of liability is made. At the present time we are paying compensation weekly in respect of 48 cases. Here again we made claims against the various Governments concerned. In respect of the Campile incident, the overall claim was £15,000 which included £4,893 in respect of personal injuries. The claim was admitted to a total of £12,000 —£4,000 of which was in respect of personal injuries. Our claim in respect of the North Strand bombing incident was £476,000, of which £101,500 was for personal injuries. So far no money has been recovered. In respect of the bombing at Arklow, there was a claim for £600, including £500 for personal injuries, against the German Government. No money has so far been received. The British Government accepted responsibility for damage caused by mines which exploded on various parts of the coast. So far one claim covering both property £7,739—and personal injuries—£2,561— has been made. The full amount of the claim has been paid by the British Government. VOTE 72—ALLEVIATION OF DISTRESS.Mr. J. J. McElligott further examined.748. Chairman.—There is a note from the Comptroller and Auditor-General in respect of this Vote which reads as follows:— “95. The expenditure incurred on the purchase of relief supplies of foodstuffs, live stock and other commodities, including freight and other miscellaneous charges, totalled £1,718,451 0s. 5d. Of this amount, £1,414,826 13s. 6d. was expended by the Department of Industry and Commerce on sugar, bacon, canned meat, dried and condensed milk, baby foods, cheese, surplus army and air-raid precautions stores, surplus textile materials, raw wool and knitting yarn, and £303,624 6s. 11d. was disbursed by the Department of Agriculture on cattle, beef and hides. The greater part of the expenditure related to relief supplies shipped to the Joint Relief Commission of the International Red Cross and to its successor, the International Centre for Relief to Civilian Populations, for distribution in central, eastern and south-eastern Europe, but supplies were also sent direct to France, Italy, Poland and the American Zone of Germany, and through the agency of the British Ministry of Food to Austria, Hungary and the British Zone of Germany. A quantity of bacon was also supplied to the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration for distribution in Poland, Austria and the Ukraine. Payments amounting to £91,644 5s. 7d. were made to the Italian Government and to the Joint Relief Commission of the International Red Cross in respect of transport charges and other expenses incurred by them in connection with the distribution of relief supplies, and the remainder of the expenditure charged to the vote, £5,418 18s. 5d., represents recoupment to the Irish Red Cross Society of the balance of the expenditure by the Society on the purchase and shipment of relief supplies for Europe, in respect of which a payment of £38,000 was made in the year 1945-46.” As will be seen from the account, the Exchequer extra receipts include £215,826 8s. 1d. received from the Government of Belgium in respect of goods supplied. The amount lodged in Brussels was the equivalent of £216,087 3s. 10d., representing the expenditure on the purchase and despatch of the goods referred to, but the subsequent transfer to this country involved a loss on exchange of £152 16s. 5d., and bank commission amounted to £107 19s. 4d. The expenditure incurred by the Department of Industry and Commerce included sums amounting to £35,104 15s. 2d. disbursed on the purchase of approximately 160 tons of bacon which was subsequently sold on the home market. I inquired regarding the circumstances in which these payments were charged to the vote for Alleviation of Distress and was informed that it was not until after the close of the financial year that it was decided that, owing to the supply position at home, the bacon referred to should not be exported, but that, as it was purchased within the year of account with a view to export to Europe under the scheme for the alleviation of distress, its cost was charged against the vote for that service.” 749. Deputy Briscoe.—The extra receipts payable to the Exchequer total £216,183 16s. 7d. Is that deducted from the amount spent or does it come after the amount of expenditure?—It is shown independently. The expenditure is shown in gross. This is a separate item. 750. Is that the actual net expenditure? —It would be diminished by the amount of the receipt. VOTE 73—TRANSITION DEVELOPMENT FUND.Mr. J. J. McElligott further examined.751. Deputy Briscoe.—“Expenditure” here, Mr. Chairman, I would suggest, is not a proper title. Has this been transferred?—Into a special account. 752. It has not been spent yet?—There is a considerable sum lying to the credit of the account but it is practically all earmarked for expenditure. 753. Deputy Briscoe.—The heading would give the impression that it has been spent. 754. Chairman.—Yes, by the Exchequer but not otherwise?—Yes, the Exchequer has put up £5,000,000 to put into the Fund. 755. Deputy Briscoe.—In the normal way would you not be permitted to have access to see what amount of this is expended?—The accounts of the Fund are prepared annually and audited by the Comptroller and Auditor-General and submitted to the Oireachtas. I have before me the account of the Fund for the year ended 31st March, 1948. It showed that there was a balance in the Fund of £4.513.538. That means that just under £500,000 had been spent out of the fund up to that date. All the rest of the fund has been earmarked in one way or another. 756. Chairman.—So the balance is represented by the commitments?—Yes. 757. It will materialise in due course?— Yes. VOTE 76—CIVIL SERVICE REMUNERATION.Mr. J. J. McElligott called.758. Chairman.—Details of the expenditure are set out in the accounts. VOTE 77—REPAYMENTS TO CONTINGENCY FUND.Mr. J. J. McElligott further examined.759. Chairman.—The amount in relation to this fund is now £912—expenditure £911 9s. 9d., or 10/3 less than granted—the assumption, I presume, being that the Vote was introduced at the end of the financial year?—We know the exact amount of the expenses to be charged against the Vote. 760. Chairman.—An account of the Receipts and Payments in the year ended 31st March, 1947, in connection with the Contingency Fund is set out on page 273. 761. Deputy Briscoe.—To what does the 12/- extra receipts payable to the Exchequer refer? I do not see it in the balance sheet.—It was a refund of an overcharge in respect of documents stamped for public Departments. The witness withdrew. The Committee adjourned. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
