Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1949 > Committee of Public Accounts > Interim and Final Report - Appropriation Accounts 1947 - 1948

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Déardaoin, 17ú Samhain, 1949.

Thursday, 17th November, 1949.

The Committee sat at 11 a.m.

Mr. W. E. Wann (An tArd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste), Mr. C. S. Almond, Mr. J. Mooney, and Mr. M. Breathnach (An Roinn Airgeadais) called and examined.

VOTE 6—OFFICE OF THE REVENUE COMMISSIONERS.

Mr. R. P. Rice called and examined.

89. Chairman.—There is a note, number 6, by the Comptroller and Auditor-General as follows:—

“Revenue Account.

A test examination of the Revenue Account has been carried out with satisfactory results.”

Have you anything to add to that, Mr. Wann?—No. As stated, the test has been carried out and is satisfactory.

90. Chairman.—Note number 7 reads:

“Extra-statutory Repayments of Customs and Excise Duties.

Extra-statutory repayments of Customs duties and of Excise duties amounting to £4,208 14s. 5d. and £1,151 18s. 4d., respectively, were made during the year.”

Is there any remark on that, Mr. Wann?—This is an annual paragraph. The payments relate mainly to diplomatic concessions and these are made on a reciprocal basis.

Does this contain anything but these payments to diplomatic persons?—A few items, but the main items are diplomatic concessions.

91. Chairman.—Note number 8 reads:—

“Remissions.

I have been furnished with a schedule of the several cases involving a loss of £50 and upwards in which claims for duty under the Revenue Acts were remitted during the year ended 31st March. 1948, without statutory authority from motives of compassion or equity arising out of particular circumstances in individual cases. The reasons given for remission appear to be satisfactory. The total amount shown in the schedule is £1,991 7s. 6d., as compared with £4,797 5s. 10d. in the previous year. Of the total, £1,354 15s. 4d. has been remitted in respect of Income Tax. £831 16s. 4d. related to eight cases in which the assessed parties died insolvent and recovery was impossible, and £522 19s. 0d. related to three cases in which assessments were raised but subsequent evidence revealed no real liability. The remissions also include sums in respect of interest on Estate, Legacy and Succession duties amounting to £636 12s. 2d.

The above figures do not include amounts passed as irrecoverable for various reasons and amounts written off under composition settlements.”

92. If there is no question on the paragraph, we can turn to the Vote itself. On subhead AA,—Contribution to Cost of Staff in Tax Conjoint Office, Great Britain,—which is more than granted, I suppose there is an explanation for the over-expenditure in this case?

Mr. Rice.—The staff varies. It is not possible to estimate at the beginning of the year precisely how the staff will be made up as between the two countries and when there is a variation in our favour and we supply less we have to pay a little more.

93. Deputy Sheldon.—On subhead D, —Poundage to Distributor of Stamps,—I see there has been a revision of the basis of remuneration to the distributor. Was that done in view of the increased business?—Yes, it was thought that as he was doing the same work—the stamp duties were doubled by the 1947 Act—perhaps it was not right that he should get twice the remuneration. The basis of remuneration was revised so as to give him a little more than he was getting before.

94. Chairman.—On subhead E.—Remuneration to Collectors and Assessors of Taxes—perhaps you could tell the Committee briefly what the conditions of employment are in the case of these collectors?—They are not permanent civil servants. I might describe them rather as analogous to rate collectors. In the old days, they got a certain amount to collect and were paid poundage on what they collected. Then, as time went on, just as in the case of the distributor of stamps, it would not have been possible to pay them so much and the system was altered so that they got so much per item. The normal method is that the collector responsible for a large number of items, rents an office and employs assistants. He gets a certain sum that enables him to pay his rent—we generally supply stationery—and to employ a certain number of clerks to carry on the work. There is a certain remuneration for his own labour. We have 63 collectors. In 1947-48 five got gross remuneration of over £2,000, but that would be reduced by expenses and, I would say, probably £500 or £600 would be the most the collector would have out of that.

Irrespective of the amount of the collection?—If his items increase, he gets a certain amount more money, as he may have to employ an extra clerk. In the extra remuneration he would get, an attempt is made to give him something for a clerk and give him a little for himself, as he would be doing more work and have more responsibility.

Chairman.—We will take the figure of £2,000, roughly, as the gross income of a collector. Of that, you think only £600 would be his net remuneration, roughly? —£600 to £700, or something like that, very roughly.

95. Deputy O’Sullivan.—Was the remuneration based on the number of items as distinct from the value of the items?— Yes, the number of items.

The number of items as distinct from the amount involved?—Yes, because otherwise it would be unfair. In the old days it was based on the amount collected but, like everything else, in modern times they have gone on to a different system.

It is the volume of work that determines the amount paid?—Volume of work, yes.

96. In regard to subhead I—Uniform Clothing—you must be putting extra clothing on somebody, Mr. Rice?—Yes. I think there were two things that happened there. For a period of time there were no renewals and this, in fact, was a year for renewals. Stuff was available at a reasonable price and we had additional uniformed men for the outside service.

97. Deputy Sheldon.—In regard to subhead J—Boat Hire, Cycles and other Conveyances—I notice that you could not get cycles but you could get motor-cars? —Yes. I do not know whether we could get them or not. We did not buy them.

98. Chairman.—In regard to subhead K—Motor-cars for Frontier Patrols— these are the property of the Commissioners, State cars?—Yes, that is so.

Chairman.—There are notes on page 14, if members of the Committee are interested.

99. Deputy Sheldon.—In regard to subhead N—Incidental Expenses—was this business about the Poor Law Ratings for Income-tax purposes done in the preceding year?—No. The trouble about that is that we are rather behindhand in the filling of vacancies in ordinary staff. This is a thing that should happen every five years but we are so short-handed that we put it off from 1947-48 to 1948-49. In fact, I think it was put off until 1949-50. I am not quite sure if we will be able to do it this year. It is just keeping up to date with the ratings.

100. On subhead P.—Compensation,—it is a bit staggering, in the note on page 14, to see that where £3 was awarded in respect of a calf, costs and expenses amounted to more than twice that amount —£6 6s. 6d. Was that a contested case?— In June, 1947, an official car came into collision with a calf. The car came around a bend and the calf emerged from a field. It went on in front of the car. Finally they got attracted to each other and the car hit the calf. The owner claimed £10 damages and he was given a decree for £3 with £4 4s. expenses for the veterinary surgeon and £2 2s. 6d. costs. So, there was £4 4s. 0d. for the veterinary surgeon and £2 2s. 6d. for a solicitor in that.

Chairman.—That puts agriculture in its proper perspective. Was the first item settled by arrangement?—No, the first item was one in which we lost the case. This was a case where a car was being backed in for repairs and there was a lorry in the way. The driver of our vehicle had to get over a pit and was being called on by one of the mechanics in the place. In trying to avoid the lorry he had to do something rather quickly and it is thought that perhaps he put his foot on the accelerator rather than on the brake and pinned the mechanic against the wall. There was an action. He claimed quite a big sum—£2,000. It was heard in the High Court. The plaintiff was awarded £750 damages.

101. You were covered in the usual way of course? No. You are not covered by insurance?—We carry our own insurance.

Chairman.—You have to, I suppose, in the case of motor vehicles.

Deputy Sheldon.—It would be to cover this case that the Supplementary Estimate was brought in?—Yes, because each year there is just a token Estimate for £5.

102. Chairman.—Have the Revenue Commissioners complete discretion or have you made it a rule to contest all these cases? —We would normally take advice. There are often legal considerations and, for that reason, while we might think we knew the merits, we would take advice on these cases. For instance, in the case of the calf the plaintiff wanted £10. If he got £10 I suppose we would have had to pay £15 costs. By contesting it we saved a bit of money.

There is loss of official time in travelling and so on in connection with small items. It seems to me, personally, that it is scarcely worth it very often, but the lawyers might advise otherwise?—If you got into the position that you paid every little claim against you, you would be faced with claims from all over the country.

Deputy Sheldon.—The news would soon get around.

103. Deputy O’Sullivan.—On subhead Q—Losses by Default, Fraud and Accident —is the shortage of 15/- a normal shortage?—It was an abnormal shortage for the reason that in this particular case at the end of the day the man was short £1. He had been at this job for two or three years before. This official never had had a shortage and everything had been all right. It was abnormal in that way. The accounts generally balance and shortages and surpluses are rare. In fact, in this particular case there was a 5/-surplus from earlier times that was put against the £1 and we were quite satisfied it was a shortage.

The reason I asked the question is that if the sum total of shortages or deficits amounted to only 15/- it would seem to me, as one who has a little experience in accounts, that it is a remarkable tribute to efficient working?—I am told that there is very little shortage, so perhaps we deserve the tribute.

Chairman.—Regular checks, I suppose.

104. Deputy Sheldon.—In the note to subhead R, I see fines and forfeitures are still a valuable source of income?—They are, but they are going down a little now.

105. Chairman.—In regard to number 3 of the note on subhead R—there are so many items that I hope I am not taking you at a disadvantage—Clerical services and incidental expenses on account of General Lighthouse Fund realised £250? —Yes.

What is that?—The general position is that in connection with the provision of lighthouses and lights throughout the country, there is a certain charge. In the case of a ship entering harbour, the captain is supposed to pay a small charge. In fact it is not possible for the people in London to collect that money and we collect it through our officers in the ports. As a result of that, we get reimbursed for the work done by our officers in collecting this money and transmitting it to London.

Deputy O’Sullivan.—There is a paper on sale to-day—I will now do a little advertising—entitled The Citizen and if you refer to the front page of that paper you will see a reference to the Lighthouse Fund.

Chairman.—You know a good deal about this matter, Deputy?

Deputy O’Sullivan.—I do.

106. Chairman.—With regard to number 4 which refers to moneys received from merchants etc. for special attendance of officers, the amount realised, £19,848, was greater than the estimate?—That is the result of increased activity at the ports. Merchants ask for these men to come down out of hours to facilitate them and we keep men on in order to do so. If we do that, they have to pay a small fee.

After hours?—Yes, at exceptional times.

Deputy Sheldon.—Or any special attendance?—Yes.

107. Chairman. On number 5—Fines, forfeitures, law costs recovered etc.—there is a big increase, as Deputy Sheldon has pointed out.

108. Deputy Sheldon.—On the question of the rewards given to officers for seizures are you satisfied that these rewards are sufficiently attractive? On the Border—I live near it—smuggling is a highly lucrative trade and it is possible—I do not say it has happened—that people engaged in that trade might attempt to sway officers from their duty. I think the Commissioners ought to see that the rewards are sufficiently high to make the temptation as small as possible.

Deputy Gilbride.—That we outbid them

Mr. Rice.—It would be a matter of their remuneration first. Then the rewards come along and it is our view that they are sufficient.

109. Deputy Sheldon.—Is there a fixed percentage?—It varies with certain amounts. They get so much but the amount of detection in the case of a £20 article is the same as in the case of a 10/- item and we would not in such a case give forty times the amount. It is scaled down on a commonsense basis.

In the notes dealing with extra remuneration I see that the amounts went up in one case to £703 1s. 11d?—That was the highest and it would be made up of overtime and rewards.

Chairman.—I think the Committee would be inclined to agree with Deputy Sheldon that if smuggling, which is obviously very remunerative, is to be combatted successfully, we ought to give the best inducement possible to the officers concerned.

Mr. Rice.—You will understand that most of this is stuff going out. It is smuggling outwards rather than inwards.

Deputy Sheldon.—That varies from time to time, according to the balance of goods on one side or the other-what is attractive and what is not.

Mr. Rice.—This smuggling on the Border is a difficult problem.

110. Deputy Pattison.—Is there any reason to believe that a man’s loyalty in this post is any less than that of a man in any other branch of the service?—Oh, we would not accept that at all.

Deputy Sheldon.—No, but the tempttations are greater. If a man can make a profit of £2,000 on a smuggling transaction it is well worth his while to part with £200.

Mr. Rice.—We do not at all suspect them of that.

Deputy Sheldon.—It is not that I have heard of any case—it was the possibility that struck my mind.

Deputy Pattison.—My view is that if such a person can be bought, it does not matter what you pay him. It does not matter if you pay him a million pounds a year and I do not think that discussing that aspect in respect of any branch of the services will get us very far.

Chairman.—As Deputy Sheldon has pointed out, the smuggler can afford to pay a very high fee. The State ought to be more powerful than the smuggler in the contest because we are all anxious that the State should win this contest and we want to strengthen the hands of our officers as much as possible. It is a matter for the Revenue Commissioners how best that is to be achieved.

111. With regard to number 7—Proceeds of Customs sales—I note that the amount realised exceeded the estimate by nearly £2,000. Are these amounts increasing?—This is the highest year and you will find a decline setting in as from next year. We have relaxed a lot of regulations as regards articles going out.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 21—STATIONERY AND PRINTING.

S. B. Ó Faoilleacháin called and examined.

112. Chairman.—With regard to subhead F.1.—Printing paper and binding for the Houses of the Oireachtas,—according to the note on page 78, accounts which were expected to come in the course of payment during the year were not furnished. There is also a note at the end of the notes on page 80 setting out that this account includes payment for work done under printing and binding contracts at rates which were retrospectively increased to meet higher labour costs because of increased wages and longer holidays in the industries concerned and also that the subheads concerned are F.1., F.2., F.3., F.4., H. and K. First, as regards F.1., some of the accounts were not furnished during the year?—That is so.

Could you give the Committee any further information about that?—Certain groups of printing were done in the financial year, say, in January and February and contractors were unable to furnish their accounts to us before 31st March. Although we try to get these accounts in, the contractors did not seem to be in a position to submit them for payment, probably through economies in staff. With regard to the increases granted, these were largely due to increases in wages which were allowed from time to time over the emergency period. A case had to be made to the Dept. of Finance which approved of the grants. Some of the retrospective payments fell within the terms of the contract which carried a “war clause”—a clause governing increases in wages due to one factor or another.

113. These contracts are not on a cost basis?—No.

They are not on a firm basis because they have this variation?—They were in the past, but these are all terminating now by degrees. It was really a war clause, which altered the position.

And would cover costs of materials or any other additional costs?—Only in the case of binding and envelopes. We supply the paper in the other cases.

These are all coming to an end?—Yes; by degrees these will all run out. They are a nuisance in very many ways. There were four increases in wages, I think, and each meant a separate calculation for our Accounts Branch.

114. If there is a difference of opinion in these cases, how is it settled?—After sometimes prolonged discussion agreement is reached, always in the nature of a compromise. I am not aware that the contractors have ever got what they demanded or that we get accepted what we propose, although in one case we succeeded, after a delay of four five years, in getting the figure which we thought was equitable accepted by the contractors —I would not say with much enthusiasm, but accepted. On the whole, our relations with the Master Printers’ Associations— we try now to deal with the associations —have been very satisfactory. We have found them reasonable and willing to appreciate our points. They have costings experts who can appreciate more impersonally our point of view with regard to costings, and latterly we find that there is very little delay in reaching an agreed figure.

115. In the case of subhead F (2)— Oireachtas Debates—there is an over-expenditure of over £2,000?—There might be several explanations of that. Some people might have been more eloquent than usual during 1947-48. I may say that on one occasion I made an estimate of the cost of the contributions of a particular member of the Oireachtas during the debates, and I found it was approximately £817.

116. Did that include Parliamentary questions?—No.

That was merely printing?—The printing of the particular member’s contributions to the debates.

Chairman.—Without any special bonus for jokes.

Deputy O’Sullivan.—Over what period? —Over a year. The member is not a member of the present Oireachtas.

Deputy Sheldon.—We shall not press for the name anyway.

117. Chairman.—In regard to subhead F (6)—Preparation and Publication of Oireachtas Handbook—is this Oireachtas Handbook likely to be produced?— Not that I am aware. We, of course, merely receive instructions for the production of that.

You could not say what the cost of producing this handbook would be or what it was in the past?—The figure I have in mind was something in the neighbourhood of £300. Of course we did receive some return for advertisements and I could not say what the net cost would be. That would be our expenditure, but then there were the costs of the editor and the compilation of the handbook to be provided for. I have no idea of what the cost would be.

118. Can you say what was the last year for which the handbook was produced? —It was 1945.

119. In regard to subhead H—Printing for Public Departments—the note states that the saving shown is due chiefly to the fact that the printing of a new issue of the general ration book, for which provision was made in the Supplementary Estimate, was not completed within the financial year. Was it completed eventually?—Yes, of course. We did expect to have the job completed within the financial year but we could not get it completed.

120. In regard to subhead I—Paper— I suppose paper costs are not decreasing? —They are. At least, the quotations we have received very recently showed a rather marked decrease.

121. The note on subhead K—Binding —states that the excess is due to better service resulting from an improvement in the supply position. What does this binding cover—the bound volumes of the debates and statutes and Irish publications?—?These would be the lighter jobs of work. This includes heavier binding, for example, in the Land Registry, the Registry of Deeds and the General Registry office. During the war it was impossible to get materials of the nature required but suddenly they came on the market and, of course, these offices very naturally wanted to get their work brought up to date. We had to meet their wishes as far as possible.

There was a big increase in the cost of materials there also. Is there any improvement in the position in regard to quality and price?—Not the same improvement, from our point of view, in price as in the case of paper but there is an improvement.

122. Chairman.—As regards the Appropriations in Aid there seems to be an increase on the Estimate in the amount realised from the sale of Ordnance Survey maps and the sale of Stationery Office publications which is satisfactory?— Advertisements in official publications bring in a substantial proportion.

123. Deputy Sheldon.—I was wondering why the accounts in respect to Iris Oifigiúil are published in the Estimate Book rather than in the Appropriation Accounts?—It is a question of procedure.

It is a funny thing to print the account in the Estimates rather than in the Accounts?—Well, it is partly only an estimated account.

124. Deputy O’Sullivan.—Who selects the publications for the advertisements? —This, of course, is a return from Government publications space sold for advertisements. We have, say, a particular handbook and we put that up for tender for so many pages of available space. The various agencies tender, or excuse themselves from tendering, as the case may be. Only in one or two cases do we canvass ourselves and then for matters for which it is always easy to secure a tender. I take it, Mr. Chairman, that the question was who selects the media in which Government advertisements would be inserted. The advertising Department selects the media.

The advertising department of each Department?—The Department of Industry and Commerce, for instance, would naturally decide which media best suited its purposes. We do not decide that.

Each Department does its own selecting?—Yes, but we control the service. The accounting is done through us but we do not select the media.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 22—VALUATION AND BOUNDARY SURVEY.

Mr. C. C. McElligott called and examined.

125. Chairman.—On subhead B— Travelling Expenses—there is an over expenditure as compared with the grant? —The excess was due to increased rates of subsistence and mileage allowance paid to valuers during the year. The increase allowed was 4/- extra per night, and the increase in the mileage allowance was 1d. per mile.

What would be the present mileage allowance?—7½d.

Irrespective of the type of vehicle?—That is the rate for the ordinary small car used by these valuers. None of them uses a Rolls Royce.

126. In the Appropriations in Aid there seems to be an increase over and above the Estimate?—Yes. These receipts are in respect of fees payable under the Rateable Property Act of 1860 for extracts from the Valuation lists, for copies of maps, etc. The fees are charged on a scale approved by the Department of Finance and the number of cases dealt with under that heading for the year was 1,461.

What did that represent?—Requisitions for extracts from the Valuation lists—the number of requests received.

127. What proportion can you say would represent repayments by local authorities on the annual revision of valuation?—You will observe that we got from local authorities £6,000 approximately and the net cost of the Department is £43,000. You have to add to that cost other expenses of £14,000 approximately, which include £11,000 under Vote 16 for Superannuation and Retired Allowances, so that you might say the net cost of our office in 1947-48 was £43,000 plus this £14,000. If you put £6,000 over £57,000 it is roughly a ninth. Therefore, what we get from local authorities is in the neighbourhood of one-ninth of the actual total cost. We do a lot of other work, however, besides rateable valuations. We do estate duty valuation, which is a very important part of our work, and a number of other duties in addition. Therefore, I would say as a rough guess that we get from local authorities about one-fourth of what we spend on rateable valuations. The demands payable by local authorities were fixed in 1874, so that you can imagine that they must be very much out of date.

128. It can hardly have escaped the attention of the Department of Finance? —Not at all. In the Valuation Bill of 1938, which, as you know, was not proceeded with, there were proposals for increasing the contributions by local authorities, but they fell to the ground with the Bill.

129. Deputy Gilbride.—If a valuer changes the valuation of a man wrongfully what redress has he? I can give you a case in point. A valuer went recently to a place I know of and put a valuation on bog lands. He put a valuation on one man who claimed he had no bog and it was proved afterwards that he had not. Except every member of the community goes in and examines the books there is no way for them to find out, until they are served with a demand note, when it is too late for an appeal. Such a man has no redress.

Chairman.—Does he not get official notification at the time?

Mr. McElligott.—No. In the particular case in question, as I understand the case that was put, here is a man who is put down as an occupier of bog lands which in fact he does not occupy. He gets a rate demand note and his answer to that note is very simple. He merely tells the local authority, “I do not occupy this hereditament and therefore I am not liable for rates,” and that is the end of it. The local authority cannot prosecute for rates a man who was never in occupation of a particular hereditament.

Deputy Gilbride.—He was in possession but he sold the bog?—He had disposed of it. Then the local authority has power to change the name in its books to that of the new occupier.

130. Not for the present year?—The local authority can make three or four changes in a rating year. The local authority can change it as often as the occupier changes. That is outside my bailiwick.

Chairman.—You are not responsible for policy or for the acts of the local authority or of the Minister for Finance?—No, valuation is one thing, rates are another. The two are separate to a certain extent, although intertwined in many respects. The collection of rates is not the business of the Valuation Office.

VOTE 23—ORDNANCE SURVEY.

Mr. C. C. McElligott further examined.

131. Chairman.—Under subhead G— Appropriations in Aid—it seems that the receipts from the sale of maps is increasing substantially?—Yes, there was a substantial increase in 1947-48 as compared with 1946-47. It was £1,200 approximately. In that year we sold 44,914 copies of maps.

Deputy O’Sullivan.—Is the trend still upwards?—No, it is very much downwards this year. It continued upwards in 1948-49, but in the current year, 1949-50, it showed a big drop.

Deputy Sheldon.—That increase was unexpected. I think you estimated for a lower amount than the previous year?— Yes, it was rather unexpected. The increase was due to the very good tourist trade that year.

Chairman.—Some people thought that it was perhaps due to housing?—Of course to a certain extent that also contributed to the increase.

I think the growth of motor traffic and of the tourist trade must have had a great deal to do with it?—Yes.

132. Do you sell to the Stationery Office?—Yes, they sell a large number of our maps at the Government Sales Office beside Trinity College. We have agent throughout the country and in England also. A person can order a map from any bookseller and it will come to him in due course.

Direct from you?—Yes, it will come from us.

Deputy Sheldon.—I think we ought to note in passing that the notes on these Votes are unusually full and very self-explanatory. It is not usual to get notes on a subhead in which each particular item is given separately. We are so often giving kicks to Accounting Officers that we ought to distribute halfpennies where they are deserved. The notes are so full that it is hardly necessary to ask a question.

133. Chairman.—As to note number 2 —Repayment by Stationery Office for Facsimile Reproductions of Ancient Manuscripts——where does the demand or the order originate?—The Stationery Office ask us to do the reproduction of these ancient manuscripts. We do them by what is called the Collotype process, and they pay us on the basis of the cost of material and labour, plus fifty per cent. for overheads.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 9—OFFICE OF PUBLIC WORKS.

Mr. J. Connolly called and examined.

134. Chairman.—On this Vote the Comptroller and Auditor-General has the following note, number 10:—

“Insurance of Workmen.

As stated in a note to the account, sums amounting to £15,611 6s. 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, and also a sum of £6,017 4s. 0d., being portion of the premium paid for the year 1938-39, remain 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 set-off against their claim. A Court Order was granted in July, 1947, to the Liquidator for payment of £5 each by contributories who had not already paid. In reply to a recent inquiry I have been informed that following on the Court Order a form of Notice for service on the contributories has been settled by Counsel and will shortly be issued, and also that the sum to be offered by the underwriters in settlement of the claim against them is still undecided.”

Has any progress been made?—We have been in touch with the Liquidator and his latest information to us is that he has succeeded in collecting a further couple of thousand pounds from some of the contributories, and that brings the amount collected to £12,000. The problem of making a collection from the remainder is being examined to see what is the best and most economical method of pursuing legal action. With regard to the underwriters, negotiations are proving very difficult, mainly because there are so many firms of underwriters involved, but we are assured by the Liquidator that every effort is being made to bring the negotiations to a satisfactory conclusion. That is the latest information we have from the Liquidator. Of course we are entirely in the Liquidator’s hands.

Note 6 on page 23 says: “Pending the settlement of the Commissioners’ claim against the Association, a further sum of £6,017 4s. 0d. remains charged to a Suspense Account on foot of portion of the premium paid for the year 1938-39, and sums amounting to £1,908 18s. 0d., which would otherwise have been payable to the Association under the policies, are retained by the Commissioners as a set-off against their claim. “The total amount seems to be £15,610. What would be the balance remaining?—Actually the total claim we would have would amount to £21,353 7s. 5d. That is the total claim that we have against the Liquidator at the moment. Of course we have no idea yet as to the ultimate result of the liquidation or when it will be available.

135. When do you think the matter will be finally determined?—It is entirely out of our hands. The point was raised here that we might pursue the matter with the Liquidator to see if we could come to some settlement and have done with the matter because it is recurring every year. Although we were satisfied that we had no authority or power to do it, at the request of this Committee we raised this question with the Liquidator. He said that there was no possibility of doing that. He pointed out that he and the legal people were more anxious even than we were to have the matter concluded because they do not get their fees until the liquidation is completed. They are paid on a fee basis and there is nothing extra to be got by delaying.

136. As to subhead E (2), I notice that the amount recoverable as expenses of management of the Local Loans Fund was estimated at £19,000 and the amount realised was £18,239. Is that the total of the expenses of management of the Local Loans Fund?—Yes.

It is recoverable?—Yes.

Deputy Sheldon.—That does not represent the total expenses of managing the Local Loans Fund, as other Departments also contribute?—As far as we are concerned—I can only speak for our Vote.

137. Chairman.—How do the Local Loans Fund payments come in?—We administer the Fund. We issue the loans when sanctioned, and we collect the repayments. Our main responsibility is in connection with the bringing in of the money.

138. Do you act for the Local Government Department also?—I do not know what their function is. They have a certain function in connection with the sanctioning of the loans. I am not to be taken as positive about this, but, as I understand it, we handle the loan from the time the money is issued until it is collected.

139. Deputy Sheldon.—I notice here among the Extra Receipts payable to Exchequer, the following item: “Amounts received from sundry persons as stamp duty and not utilised”. That phrase does not convey anything to me. I am just wondering what precisely it means?—It is some cash that was sent in and the stamp was not necessary.

Should not the money be returned to the unfortunate people who purchased the stamps?—Normally, it would be returned to the persons who sent it in by mistake. The amount is only £1 9s. 0d.

140. Under the same heading there is this note: “Compensation for Loss of Services of officer injured in a motor accident”. It may be unfair to plank this on Mr. Connolly, but that is a note that occurs in several accounts. Does the State claim special damages for its servants or officers if they meet with an accident?—If an officer of the Board was injured and he collected a claim from an insurance company we would expect and, in fact, do get a proportion of what he recovers from that officer for loss of time. He has already been paid.

So that it is recoupment of salary not earned?—Yes, for time lost.

VOTE 10—PUBLIC WORKS AND BUILDINGS.

Mr. J. Connolly further examined.

141. Chairman.—The Comptroller and Auditor-General has the following note, number 11, to this Vote:—

“Subhead A-Purchase of Sites and Buildings.

The charge to this subhead includes £24,675, being the purchase price of a property in County Dublin which was acquired in connection with proposals for the extension of the Broadcasting Service, but I understand that it is not proposed to proceed at present with the scheme. The lands are subject to an annual rent of £103 2s. 0d. and a tithe rent charge of £1 12s. 0d. Receipts from grazing rents during the year amounting to £93 5s. 7d. have been credited to subhead K-Appropriation in Aid.”

What is the position at present?—The position is that the house is still there. A decision has not been taken as to how it is going to be used, and the grazing lands are let.

Where is the house?—The name of it is “Ardmore”, beyond Donnybrook. The house was bought as a headquarters for the Broadcasting Service.

Deputy Sheldon.—I see that the lands are subject to an annual rent. I presume that would include the house?—Yes, the whole property.

What acreage of land is there?—I have not with me a note as to the actual acreage, but, speaking from recollection, it is between ten and fifteen acres.

Is the house occupied?—We have a caretaker in it.

142. Would it be possible to let the house?—If you were going to let it you would have to let it on a long lease. It is not the type of house that anyone would take for 12 months. Until policy has been decided with regard to it we cannot do anything. At the moment it is being used as a store by the Department of Posts and Telegraphs, and to that extent it is serving a purpose.

Chairman.—I take it there is no other use being made of it?—No, other than that it is being used as a store. A caretaker is there to see that it is kept in order.

143. The Comptroller and Auditor-General has the following further Note, number 12, on the Vote:—

“Subhead B—New Works, Alterations and Additions.

No. 186.—Urgent and Unforeseen Works.

Owing to the scarcity during the winter of 1946-47 of solid fuels suitable for consumption in the central heating installations of Government establishmets, approval was obtained for the conversion of plants to oil burning at an estimated expenditure of £45,000. The Commissioners of Public Works had been advised that at ruling prices oil was more economical than solid fuels, and that its use would also possess certain technical advantages. Oil burning equipment was installed in four buildings and contracts were entered into in connection with thirty-two others, but owing to delay in the delivery of equipment by the contractors the change over to oil burning had not been completed by December, 1947, when a shortage of certain classes of fuel oil was reported. It was then ascertained that supplies were likely to be scarce for several years, and it was decided not to proceed further with the work of conversion. As shown in the account, expenditure amounting to £11,054 18s. 6d. was incurred during the year on building work, the supply and installation of oil burning equipment, and the provision and erection of oil storage tanks. In addition, storage tanks valued at £1,137 14s. 0d., which were surplus to the requirements of the Department of Defence, were taken over. Further expenditure will arise in respect of commitments which did not mature for payment during the year. It is understood that arrangements have been made to cancel as far as possible further deliveries of equipment from contractors.”

Would Mr. Connolly say for the information of the Committee, how this matter stands now?—As was explained before, we were ordered to use oil burners. Then the position changed and we had to go back on hard fuel. Actually, the position was that we were able to cancel £7,094 worth of contracts. That meant that the total payments that had to be met amounted to £16,039. These oil burners are, of course, kept in store, and we were hoping that we would be able to use them. We can if we get further supplies of oil. These are good stock. They are not to be looked upon in any way as being a waste or a loss.

How is the value of this equipment in stock, which is not being utilised, determined?

Mr. Wann.—We can only take the cost price.

144. Chairman.—Well, after a certain time, if the equipment is not being utilised, what will happen? Will it be written down gradually, or how will it be dealt with?

Mr. Connolly.—What we are doing at the moment, and what I expect and hope we will continue to do is to keep the plant in first-class order: that is to keep it oiled and greased, and ready for use. Naturally, if it was lying there for a very long period, for, say, 20 or 30 years, there would have to be a big depreciation allowed on it.

In general, with regard to equipment, you have really to look after these matters yourselves. There is nobody to supervise the Board of Works in this matter and they must be their own master?—That is so.

145. Deputy O’Sullivan.—Is there any indication that this equipment will be put to any use in the immediate future? —That depends entirely on the oil position. We are very anxious to use most of these plants for various reasons—one being the smoke nuisance in some places. But if the Department of Industry and Commerce advise us that the prospects of getting oil are not good, and that it is unsafe to change from hard fuel, then naturally we cannot put them in. It all depends, as I say, on the supply position.

I take it that the matter is under review?—It is under constant review. At the commencement of the heating season we get all the plants examined to see what we can do. If, say, the oil position was such last August or September that we could be assured that we would get supplies of oil, then these plants would have gone in.

146. Chairman.—The concluding part of paragraph 12 in the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General reads:—

“Two barges valued at £500, which formed part of dredging plant acquired by the Commissioners, were lost owing to rough weather while being towed from Dundalk to Dublin. As it was not found possible to secure insurance cover for the hazards of the voyage, and no blame was attached to the persons in charge of the vessels, the Department of Finance sanctioned the write-off of the value of the barges.”

Have you any further barges?—We have two of that type.

With regard to harbour equipment, I take it that would all be covered by insurance, normally?—No. We always carry our own insurance.

147. But you have a certain amount of harbour equipment throughout the country?—We have a great deal.

148. Chairman.—The Comptroller and Auditor-General has the following note to the Vote, in paragraph 13:—

“Subhead F-Fuel, Light, Water, Cleaning, etc.

A contract was placed in August, 1947, for the supply of 550 tons of turf at 34s. per ton (plus 11d. per ton for ricking) to a preparatory college. The agreement with the contractor stipulated that the weight of each load should be guaranteed and that test weights might be taken. The contractor disputed one of these test weights, and refused to make further deliveries, having delivered only eight loads. In order to maintain the heating of the college an immediate purchase of 36½ tons of turf was made at a cost of £80, and a second contract was placed in November, 1947, for the supply of turf at a price of 55s. per ton, including ricking. As noted in the account, the additional expenditure falling on public funds through the failure of the original contractor to complete his contract amounted to £495 12s. 6d.”

149. Deputy O’Sullivan.—Was there any action taken against the contractor for breach of contract?—We considered that and had advice about it from the Finance Solicitor. First of all, I should explain that the contractor threatened to take an action against us for the amount of money which we had deducted, or held back from him on this disputed basis of weighing. We made our counter claim. It was quite obvious that he was a man of straw and that we could not possibly collect from him. When he furnished his account to us for the amount that we had deducted for the wrong weights, we ignored his claim and we made our counter claim. It was quite obvious that there would be no purpose in pursuing it. It would only lead to a waste of expenditure. The real explanation of the case is in the price.

Was he a man of straw in the first instance, or was he the type of person who could fulfil a contract at 34/11 per ton?— It is very hard to know that. All sorts of people throughout the country quote prices for turf supplies. Some very good contractors, for instance, will borrow, or hire, lorries and carry out the work quite satisfactorily. When you place a contract for turf in the country you do not know whether you are going to have it carried through or not. It is very much a step in the dark. We have, of course, now quite a number of reputable contractors that we can trust to do the work. There is no loss of State funds in this business because he quoted far too low a price. We could only get it at 55/-. My own guess is that having cut in at that price he hoped to get by on the weights.

Deputy O’Sullivan.—The 55/- was a competitive price.

Deputy Gilbride.—The 11d. per ton for ricking was a very small price?—I am afraid that is not uncommon. They quote a low price and hope to wangle on the weights.

150. Deputy Sheldon.—You cannot put such people under bond?—I would not like to attempt it. Take, for instance, putting a man in Caherciveen under bond for 200 tons of turf. The problem of getting the bond would be more than we would like to tackle.

Chairman.—How do you manage in the case of ordinary contracts? Do you succeed in getting a bond or have you sufficient confidence?—It is a very rare thing for us to get bonds. We find it is unwise. We know most of the good contractors. Our basis of payments on certificate and our retention of money are our best safeguards.

Deputy Gilbride.—Is not this thing of cutting in at low prices very rare?—It is. Turf is a very difficult job to handle through the rural areas.

151. Deputy Sheldon.—It is on a satisfactory basis now? You say you have reputable contractors?—We have, but they are not universally so. Every year we must advertise and invite tenders. Anyone is at liberty to submit a tender. Then our problem starts. A new man comes in and quotes 5/- below everybody else. We do not know who he is or what is his potential force for carrying out the work.

152. Chairman.—The following paragraph number 14 appears in the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General:—

“Subhead K—Appropriations in Aid.

A statement showing the results of tillage operations at the Bourn Vincent Memorial Park during the year has been furnished to me. The greater portion of the produce of the Park, valued at £2,747, was retained for feeding and seeding purposes, the amount credited to this subhead in respect of sales being £195 8s. 3d. No other tillage operations were undertaken by the Commissioners during the year.”

The tillage has not been found so profitable?—The tillage in Muckross is somewhat limited, but if you refer to subhead K you will find that as distinct from tillage we have the sale of farm and garden produce which amounted to £3,768 17s. 6d. We differentiate between tillage and the sale of garden produce. The sporting rights bring in £594 17s. 3d. We keep the tillage separate.

153. How do you deal with the sporting rights?—We advertise them and the highest offer is accepted.

Over a period of years?—In some cases. In one case we have shooting rights let for a period of five years.

The expenditure on wages—£5,155 9s. 2d.—seems to be the biggest item?—Yes.

154. Deputy Mrs. Crowley.—As regards the expenditure for fuel and light, is that for the house itself, Muckross House, or does it include the cottages?—We do not supply the cottages, but we keep an office.

Then it is for the office?—The tenants in the cottages are responsible for the supply of their own fuel and light.

155. Chairman.—The admission receipts seem very small?—They have since disappeared altogether. The decision was arrived at that the tolls should be abolished altogether for Muckross. In future, there will be nothing appearing for them at all.

156. Is it a toll or a charge?—It is an admission charge, but it will no longer exist. It was felt, in view of the fact that when parks such as the Phoenix Park were available to the public free, it was hardly right to charge an admission fee to this park.

I suppose it is a question of policy?— Yes.

157. But you must consider the possibility of danger to the plantations there. Is it not quite possible that people might secure entrance to the place and could do damage and would not an entrance fee have been a slight protection against such undesirable persons?—The rule always was that residents within a radius of 15 miles of Killarney were always admitted free, so that rather offsets the protective measure of the toll.

158. As regards the dairy produce and farm produce consumed and foodstuffs purchased, are these calculated at the retail price or at the cost price?—The calculation would be at the cost price.

On the third page of the estate account we have valuations for the period 1947-48. Livestock seems to be pretty satisfactory—practically £5,000?—The sheep have been very successful there; we have done very well on them.

159. The statement with reference to the Bourn Vincent Memorial Park that has been presented to us could be put in as an appendix. As the Committee took some interest in this matter before my time, it might be as well to have it put in an appendix to the report.*

160. Chairman.—The following further note, number 15, is contained in the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General :—

“Rents Receivable.

Arrears of rents due to the Commissioners on 31st March, 1948, amounted to £2,595 0s. 8d. as compared with £4,097 19s. 11d. on 31st March, 1947. From statements furnished to me with the appropriation account it appears that of these arrears sums amounting to £1,962 0s. 8d. have been recovered subsequent to 31st March, 1948, and £147 was considered bad or doubtful.”

Have you any remarks to make on that, Mr. Connolly?—Acutally, the position on the 31st March last was that of these arrears only £424 was outstanding. It is really the date that caused that arrears figure to appear. Our arrears are very low always.

There is an improvement in the position—a definite improvement?—No. It is just the period at which the accounts had to be closed that caused the arrears to appear. It is always quickly wiped out afterwards.

161. Chairman.—Note number 16 of the Report of Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Haulbowline Dockyard.

Provision was made in the estimate for the expenses of Haulbowline Dockyard which in former years were provided for in a separate Vote. The administration of the dockyard was transferred to the Department of Defence from 1st July, 1947, and expenditure and receipts arising since that date have been included in the account of the Vote for Defence (No. 63). The value of materials and plant transferred was assessed at £100,000.”

Perhaps, Mr. Connolly, you would be able to tell the Committee about the present responsibility of the Office of Public Works in relation to Haulbowline?—We have now no responsibility whatever; it is handed over entirely to Defence. When I say that, we have a certain responsibility in regard to the carrying out of a contract for a jetty which is being built at the moment, but that is purely from the engineering and advisory point of view. It is a contract the same as we carry out for any other Department. We have no responsibility for the activities or the administration of the island.

162. Chairman.—On page 26 there is the following note:—

“A.—Certain properties were purchased for which no provision was included in the Estimate. Certain of the proposals for which provision was made were deferred or abandoned and in other cases the negotiations or legal preliminaries in connection with the acquisition of properties were not completed within the year.”

163. Deputy Sheldon.—On page 27 there is a heading “Buildings Not Appropriated to Public Departments”, and Parteen Villa, Birdhill, County Tipperary, is mentioned. What does that mean?—That has been sold; it has been disposed of very satisfactorily. We got £1,500 for it.

164. Chairman.—What are the circumstances surrounding this building?— When property becomes surplus to any Department, they hand it back to us and it is our function to find out if any other Department could use it. If it is not possible to use it and we are at liberty to sell, we sell. If we do not sell, we try to let under a lease.

165. In subhead B.—New Works, Alterations and Additions—there is a grant of £460,010, and the expenditure was £299,941 6s. 5d. That indicates a sum of £160,068 13s. 7d. less than granted. Would that be due to the circumstances of the time or is it usual?— This subhead is very much of a guess, we are dependent on so many factors. The conditions in the building trade and the condition of supplies and so on have to be considered. Next year you will see a very different picture.

166. Deputy Sheldon.—I notice that for several years subhead B has been repeatedly over-estimated and subhead C repeatedly under-estimated?—That is because we can never be sure of what developments will eventuate. For instance, in the purchase of buildings, we are either ordered to buy or erect building and we have to expend money. Next year you will probably be facing something in the nature of the same amount of excess expenditure under subhead B.

Chairman.—If I might make a suggestion, when dealing with this could we not also take pages 32 to 37, which contain the details of the subhead?

I thought we might have made an effort to deal with this Vote to-day. I have not been at this Committee for a very long time and I do not know to what extent the members of the Committee wish to enter into the details of the items. I have a note here that there is a request from the Clerk of the Dáil asking us to be good enough to release the reporters at 12.45 p.m. because of the fact that the Dáil is sitting this afternoon. We shall, therefore, not be able to make any further progress to-day, since I take it we will accede to the Clerk’s request. If there are particular items upon which the members wish to have information, perhaps they would be good enough to give an indication to our Clerk before our next sitting. We could, if we wanted to, spend three weeks dealing with this Vote, but naturally we are all anxious to get ahead with the work as expeditiously as possible. If the members give that notice to the Clerk he can then notify Mr. Connolly as to the information we require.

The witness withdrew.

The Committee adjourned.

* See Appendix VI.