|
|
|
|
MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA(Minutes of Evidence)Déardaoin, 9ú Feabhra, 1950.Thursday, 9th February, 1950.The Committee sat at 11 a.m.
Mr. W. E. Wann (An tArd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste), Mr. P. Kelly and Mr. M. Breathnach (An Roinn Airgeadais), called and examined.VOTE 7—OLD AGE PENSIONS.Mr. D. J. O’Donovan called and examined.911. Chairman.—The Comptroller and Auditor-General has the following paragraph No. 9, in regard to subhead C.— Grants towards the provision of Additional Cash Allowances. It reads as follows:— “As stated in the account, the charge to this subhead includes a sum of £3,438 0s. 3d., being the proportion estimated to be proper to this vote of certain payments on foot of allowances paid in prior years by public assistance authorities. The allowances had been paid to certain old age pensioners, blind pensioners, and recipients of National Health disablement benefit; and exact apportionment of the expenditure between the two Votes concerned —Vote 7, Old Age Pensions and Vote 44, National Health Insurance— would have involved considerable expense. With the concurrence of the Department of Finance the amount appropriate to each of these Votes was estimated, and in the circumstances I have admitted the charges.” Members of the Committee will see, on page 17, subhead C. There is, also, a note on page 18. Perhaps Mr. O’Donovan would explain briefly to the Committee how this matter has arisen and has been disposed of. Mr. O’Donovan.—Prior to 1947-48, the service was borne on subhead J.5. of Vote 41—Local Government and Public Health. The grants were calculated on a basis of 75 per cent, of approved expenditure by public assistance authorities in providing additional cash allowances to (a) old age pensioners, blind pensioners and dependent children of the latter and (b) certain recipients of National Health disablement benefit and their dependent children. Payments on account were made to each public assistance authority from time to time and the final payment in respect of a financial year was made on receipt of a Local Government auditor’s certificate of actual expenditure in that year. As all charges in respect of the grants were made to a single subhead these certificates did not give separate figures for each of the two classes concerned. 912. Where would one get the accounts of each local authority?—As audited. Under each heading?—It would show it under each subhead. 913. In the Estimates this subhead C. would appear also under the appropriate Vote and subhead for that Vote. Is that in the other Vote, because this question arises on your Vote, generally, Mr. O’Donovan?—It was not shown separately in the Local Government and. Public Health Vote, Vote 41, prior to the establishment of the Department of Social Welfare. When the Department of Social Welfare was established our Vote was subdivided under the various heads, old age pensions and so forth, and this grant was divided as between the separate Votes. Whereas it was bulked by the Department of Local Government and Public Health it was subdivided in our case. I should say, perhaps, that it was difficult to arrive at the exact proportions in dividing as between the Old Age Pensions Vote and National Health Insurance so as to attribute to each of the classes the correct amount due. It was found that if we were to ask the auditors to make this division very precisely it would involve a great deal of work. It was considered that the expense and labour of doing this would hardly be justified. Finally, it was agreed that we would estimate the number of the beneficiaries in each of the two classes. We estimated, for the year prior to this year with which we are dealing, old age and blind pensioners at 41,940 and the recipients of disablement benefit at 2,916 In a communication to the Department of Finance we proposed that we would adopt an apportionment basis on these figures for the year and accordingly to charge £3,438 0s. 3d. to the Old Age Pensions Vote and £239 0s. 9d., the balance of the sum involved, to the National Health Insurance Vote. The Minister for Finance gave his sanction to that arrangement. 914. Deputy O’Sullivan.—Would there have been a considerable amount of work involved to ascertain the exact amounts? —Yes. It would have meant a re-audit. Audits which were already closed in respect of the local authorities concerned would have had to take place again. 915. Chairman.—These cash supplements, paid by the different local authorities, appear in their accounts but there is no place in which they are brought together jointly. Could one elicit that information in the Dáil, for example? It is scarcely within the province of the Minister to give an account of the expenditure by a local authority. Are these amounts brought together, Mr. O’Donovan?—The trouble is that they were all together in the accounts. Our difficulty was to segregate them as between National Health Insurance recipients and Old Age Pensions recipients. I suppose if you were interested in a particular authority it would not be too difficult a matter to find out from their records what the figures are. We assumed that this basis of apportionment, which has been approved of by the Department of Finance, was reasonably accurate. For the two classes?—Yes, but including blind pensioners, too. Mr. Wann.—I have nothing to add to that. I think it was the best that could be done in the circumstances. 916. Chairman.—This matter arises again on the other Vote. Turning to the Vote proper on page 17, on subhead A.— Pensions and Supplements—there is an excess payment which is explained in the note. Was there any particular reason for the excess?—It was due to the replacement of food vouchers by cash supplements and the coming into force from the 4th July, 1947, of the Social Welfare Schemes (Cash Supplements) Order under which food vouchers ceased to be issued. The excess would have been greater but for the fact that the average number of pensioners was approximately 2,000 less than was anticipated. The estimate was based on an average of 150,000 pensioners. The excess was met by savings on subhead B.—Allowances in kind. 917. From the 4th of July you saved on subhead B. and you were able to meet the excess expenditure on subhead A.?—Yes. You had something over in fact?—Yes. 918. Subhead C. refers to—“Grants towards the provision of Additional Cash Allowances.” What did these additional cash allowances cover?—These were allowances administered by the Public Assistance authorities and the grants were calculated on the basis of seventy-five per cent of their approved expenditure in providing additional cash allowances to old age pensioners, blind pensioners and their dependent children and to certain recipients of National Health disablement benefit and their dependent children. This is the same question as that which we discussed at the commencement—the difficulty of dividing the accounts as between two classes of recipients. Subhead C. has now disappeared?—Yes, it has gone. 919. Will there be any difficulty about apportionment in these cases in future? You will have the same trouble, I presume?—The difficulty, which originally arose about apportionment, was due to the fact that the Department of Local Government was responsible at the time. All these items were under the one Vote and there was little need to apportion them as between one class and another. We however, with our different Votes, found it necessary to do so. I think it now appears that the auditors have ensured that the local authorities will keep the accounts in such a manner as to throw up the different classes separately. I do not think the question will arise again. I am not positive, but I think that that is the position. 920. The explanation on subhead D.— Appropriations in Aid—states that the realisations under this subhead depend upon the actual amounts recovered in cash during the year under section 9 (2) of the Old Age Pensions Act, 1908. Receipts fluctuate considerably from year to year. Could you give the Committee any figures as to the proportion of the payments you recover in cases in which you are satisfied that overpayment or wrong payment was made?—It is difficult to give the actual proportion of the cases. Of the total sum repayable, £3,265 14s., recovery was waived in cases involving a total sum of £1,008 5s. 6d. because we were satisfied that there was no fraud or concealment. In cases involving a total of £2,078 18s. 6d., in which there was fraud or concealment, complete recovery was impracticable, and the amounts were either finally written off owing to the death of the pensioners or the failure of legal proceedings or provisionally written off by reason of extreme poverty. A total of £179 was written off in other cases of overpayments. As against that, a total of £4,676 2s. 10d. was realised. 921. Deputy O’Sullivan.—What is the general policy of the Department in regard to these overpayments? Do you pursue these people ruthlessly?—No, every case is dealt with on its merits. We had a case in this particular year, to which I have devoted a special note, that of an old lady who obtained a sum of £179 which was, strictly speaking, recoverable but she was 89 years of age and bed-ridden. In that particular case we waived the claim because of the trouble of bringing her into Court to recover it from her. That, of course, is an extreme case but other cases are dealt with like that. You exercise a wise discretion?—Yes. Chairman.—Have you to get sanction from Finance in each particular case to waive action?—In every case we have to get sanction. VOTE 27—WIDOWS’ AND ORPHANS’ PENSION.Mr. D. J. O’Donovan further examined.922. Chairman.—The note on subhead B. of this Vote—Payment to Widows’ and Orphans’ Pensions Fund— says that the expenditure was estimated as closely as possible. Is this a continuing item in your accounts and does it appear in succeeding years? It appears to be a refund of the supplementary allowances and the cash payments you have made?—It is the estimated amount of the Exchequer grants based on the experience of previous years. Will it tend to grow or remain more or less at the same figure?—These payments have gone as a result of the abolition, as from the 1st October, 1948, of cash supplements in the case of contributory widows’ and orphans’ pensions and as from the 7th January, 1949, in the case of non-contributory widows’ and orphans’ pensions. 923. Then it will show a decline in respect of these two items?—It will cease altogether. 924. Subhead C.—Allowances in Kind— has also disappeared?—Yes. VOTE 44—NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE.Mr. D. J. O’Donovan further examined.925. Chairman.—On the Vote there are paragraphs Nos. 39 and 40 by the Comptroller and Auditor-General which read:— “Subhead E.—Grants towards the provision of Additional Cash Allowances. As stated in the account, the charge to this subhead includes a sum of £239 0s. 9d., being the proportion estimated to be proper to this Vote of certain final payments on foot of allowances paid in prior years by public assistance authorities. In paragraph 9 of this report I have stated the circumstances in which I have admitted the charge. Subhead F.—Substitutive Allowances. Owing to the suspension of payment of benefits under the National Health Insurance Acts during the period 17th January, 1948, to 7th March, 1948, by Cumann an Árachais Náisiúnta ar Shláinte the Social Welfare (Substitutive Allowances) Order, 1948, (Statutory Instrument No. 8 of 1948) was made by the Government on the 17th January, 1948. Under the provisions of this Order public assistance authorities were empowered to make payments to persons entitled to sickness or disablement benefit and to persons entitled to cash supplements. The Order also authorised the payment to each public assistance authority, out of moneys provided by the Oireachtas, of the amount certified by the Minister for Social Welfare, as having been expended by that authority. Sums amounting to £53,415 0s. 3d. paid provisionally to public assistance authorities on statements submitted by County Managers have been charged to the Vote with the consent of the Minister for Finance, and any necessary adjustments will be made when the amounts expended have been certified by the Minister for Social Welfare.” Have you anything to add, Mr. Wann? Mr. Wann.—That paragraph indicates that the amount charged to the Vote is subject to any adjustments necessitated on receipt of duly certified figures. 926. Chairman.—Is there any change in the position? Mr. O’Donovan.—When the Supplementary Estimate was being prepared, it was not known what the total expenditure by the assistance authorities would be. We made provision in the sum of £90,010 to meet the cost of the allowances and their administration up to the 31st March. As there was a saving in the Estimate—the necessary Estimate was a token one of £10 only. After the strike and just before the end of the year with which we are dealing, 1947-48, the local assistance authorities furnished detailed statements certified by the County Managers of their expenditure on these allowances. The Department, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, paid to each local authority the amount certified as having been spent by them. We had to wait, however, until the audits of the local authorities’ accounts took place, to check on those figures. The payments amounted to £53,415 in all. 927. Chairman.—The position is that the Committee would like to know whether you have the audited accounts of the authorities?—We have not got all of them. Some of them have reached us. Do you think you would have them in the near future?—We should. We are in the hands of the auditors to a great extent—we do not control the auditors— but I think that within the next six months, or at the most the next year, all the reports for 1947-48 should be before us. Is the majority outstanding still, or is there only a small number of accounts outstanding?—There are very few outstanding. There is very little indication, from the audited reports which have already reached the Department, that the adjustments would be considerable. They would be very slight. 928. Were there any losses on these? Do we know, Mr. Wann? Mr. Wann.—No losses that I am aware of. 929. Chairman.—On subhead A.—what is the meaning of that subhead—Medical Benefits (Grants-in-Aid)? What is the method of making the payments? Mr. O’Donovan.—Shall I give the history of it? 930. No. Why are there Grants-in-Aid and to whom are they payable?—In the application to Ireland of the Principal Act, that is, the 1911 Insurance Act, there was a provision embodied in section 81 (10) of the Act, which provided that the rates of contributions in Ireland should be 5½d. for a man and 4½d. for a woman instead of the rates of 7d. and 6d.. respectively, for men and women in Great Britain. The excess portion of the contribution, that is 1½., was to cover the cost of medical benefits. Of this cost, the State bore two-ninths, which went into the benefit funds of the societies and was available for other benefits. Therefore, as compared with Great Britain, the gross contribution left with the societies in Ireland to meet the cost of benefits and administration was less than that left with the British societies. In so far as the ordinary employed and voluntary contributors were concerned, the deficiency was made good to the Irish societies under the provision of this section 81 (10) of the 1911 Act. The difference between the rates applicable to Ireland and to Great Britain was 1½d. per contribution. The National Health Insurance Act of 1920 increased the difference of 2d. and section 16 (2) of the Social Welfare Act, 1948, provided that, for the purpose of the State grant payable under section 81 of the Principal Act, the difference should be deemed to be 2d. Accordingly, the State grant on contributions now amounts to two-ninths of 2d., which is four-ninths of a penny per contribution. That is the provision which is provided for under this subhead. 931. Chairman.—The British stamp had a value of 2d. over and above the Irish stamp and the State made up two-ninths of the 2d. to the fund? Where are the those monies paid into?—Into the National Health Insurance Society’s Fund. A particular fund?—The National Health Insurance Fund, from which it is fed to the Society. 932. Does the Society keep a particular fund for each particular type of benefit or are all the benefits paid from a common fund?—It is a common fund, with separate accounts. 933. On subhead B.—Benefits, Expenses of Administration and Supplements (Grants-in-Aid)—there was a saving? What proportion of the saving would you say was due to the strike?—There was the £53,000 which was mentioned a little earlier and two-ninths of that would figure in this saving. We can only guess that the greater part of this sum is due to the strike. Until you have completed your accounts, there does not seem to be any question that we can put satisfactorily on this matter. 934. On subhead F.—what does the phrase “Substitutive Allowances” cover? —That was coined to cover the payments made by the public assistance authorities, during the strike to which reference has been made, in substitution for sickness and disablement benefit. 935. Deputy O’Sullivan.—On subhead G.—Sums Irrecoverable—how does the amount of £16 compare with previous years? It strikes one as rather low, having regard to the amount of money involved?—It never amounted to very much in any year of which I have recollection. I would say that it is more or less the same as in other years. Would that be a tribute to the work of the Department?—I suppose so, to some extent. 936. Chairman.—I suppose there is a great number of payments which must be made in a scheme of this huge extent. Do you have a number of prosecutions?—The Society’s benefit payments total about 26,000 a week. 937. How are these checked—solely by office checking, or is there an outdoor inspection?—There is an office check, of course, and the usual care and controls are exercised within the office; but then there is an audit also by the Comptroller and Auditor-General. 938. But in the individual cases, how do you check up on the payments? Have you an inspection?—Yes, that is to check whether or not a person is genuinely ill or entitled to benefit. There are Sickness Visitors and Inspectors, and the local agents of the Society also exercise supervision. 939. Were there any prosecutions during this year, or is that in your province?— Yes, we are responsible for prosecutions. There certainly were prosecutions during the year. I have not got the figures with me. I think they would run to about 100 or 150 in the year on the National Health Insurance side. If you wish to add anything to what you have said, you can send it along later?— I will give particulars of prosecutions later.* VOTE 57—CHILDREN’S ALLOWANCES.Mr. D. J. O’Donovan further examined.940. Chairman.—There is just one subhead. Is the whole of this amount paid out in allowances or is any portion of it attributable to administration?—All is paid out in allowances. Administration comes under Vote 66—Office of the Minister. 941. The increase in the number of claimants was smaller than anticipated. You are still in the early years. How long has the scheme been in operation?— Since 1944. I think each year showed an increase in the number of about 1,000 to 2,000, on the average, since the commencement of the scheme. There has been a steady increase. 942. What is the total number of children?—There are 139,000 families receiving allowances; the number of children is 610,000. 943. At the present time?—That was 1948. It is a little higher now. VOTE 59—UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE AND UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE.Mr. D. J. O’Donovan further examined.944. Chairman.—There is a paragraph number 64 on this Vote on page xxix of the Comptroller and Auditor-General’s Report which reads:— “Subhead H.—Appropriations in Aid. Contributions from County Borough and Urban Area Councils under section 26 of the Unemployment Assistance Act, 1933 as amended by the Unemployment Assistance (Amendment) Acts, 1938 and 1940. In paragraph 66 of my last report I stated that the Department was seeking to collect contributions in accordance with the legal opinion that where the rateable value of Electricity Supply Board hereditaments is greater than the amount on which under the Electricity (Supply) (Amendment) Act, 1930, the rates payable are calculated, the higher figure was correctly included in the certificates furnished by the Commissioner of Valuation in accordance with section 5 (1) of the Act of 1940. Two local authorities still continue to base their payments on the lower figure, the total amount withheld up to 31st March, 1948, exceeding £5,550.” Mr. Wann.—I understand that the two Corporations concerned have now paid the amounts. 945. Chairman.—What is the issue here, Mr. Wann? Mr. Wann.—Under the Statutes, the contribution was to be based on the rateable valuation. In some cases, under the Electricity (Supply) (Amendment) Act, 1930, the rates payable are calculated on a lower figure than the valuation and some of the local bodies maintained that they should pay their contributions on this lower figure. Legal advice was obtained and it was to the effect that that was not so but only two Corporations held out and I understand that they have now paid the arrears. Chairman.—It will only affect these particular hereditaments? Mr. Wann.—That is all. Chairman.—The Electricity Supply Board. 946. Deputy O’Sullivan.—Mr. Wann, in fact was it amicably settled as between the legal Department of the Government and the Corporations concerned or was the decision an arbitrary one on this side? Mr. Wann.—The legal advice obtained by the Department was to the effect that contributions should be based on full valuation. A number of local bodies had maintained that the other basis was correct. Deputy O’Sullivan.—In fact, the Dublin Corporation had made the necessary adjustments on foot of that? Mr. Wann.—Exactly, but subsequent to the obtaining of legal opinion, most of the Corporations accepted the position. 947. Deputy O’Sullivan.—In other words, under duress. Mr. O’Donovan.—I think not. I am not very sure. I think they were advised by their own legal advisers that our advice was correct and that it would have to be paid. 948. Deputy O’Sullivan.—It was never tested in Court?—Never in Court, but they did submit it to their own counsel and I think ultimately were advised to pay. Are not the local authorities paying on the gross valuation in respect of the ordinances under this Act?—Yes. 949. On the gross valuation—which is manifestly unfair because, of course, Government Departments are not paying, as you know, Mr. Chairman, the full rates at all. Chairman.—The Electricity Supply Board it not a Government Department. Deputy O’Sullivan.—Even outside the question of the Electricity Supply Board, I suppose it is not a matter for discussion here, but members of local authorities felt at the time this Act was introduced and was implemented, that it was grossly unfair. I do not think that the last has been heard of it yet. Deputy Fitzpatrick.—Do you mean that the Act was unfair or the interpretation of the Act? 950. Deputy O’Sullivan.—It may be the interpretation. I want to know from Mr. Wann if, in fact, the legal authorities of the Dublin Corporation agreed or assented? Mr. Wann.—Mr. O’Donovan would be in a better position to say that. Mr. O’Donovan.—I would like to check on that later, but I think they were actually advised by their own legal advisers to pay on the basis on which we had put forward our demand on the advice of the Attorney-General. 951. Deputy Coburn.—There is much the same position in respect to county demands in urban areas—gross valuation versus net valuation. It is a legal point on the interpretation of the Act of Parliament?—It is a legal question. 952. Chairman.—It is a very interesting point. Is there any question on subhead A.—Payments to the Unemployment Fund? The usual notes are on page 210. 953. Deputy Coburn.—In regard to subhead B.—Payments to Associations— who would the Associations be?—They are usually trade unions, most of them small trade unions. I have in fact got a list here if you would be interested. Deputy Coburn.—That is all right. 954. Chairman.—There is a very considerable saving on subhead D. due to the decrease in the number of persons entitled to Unemployment Assistance. 955. Subhead F. concerns a Special Register of Agricultural and Turf Workers?—That register was discontinued during the currency of the year —on 31st December, 1947. 956. Chairman.—Is subhead G.— Transfer of Harvest Workers—still in operation?—No, Sir, that also was discontinued. In May, 1948, it was dropped altogether. 957. Deputy Mrs. Crowley.—In regard to subhead C.—Advances to Work People for Fares—who would qualify for fares? What does it mean exactly?—This goes back to the first Act. The managers of employment exchanges are authorised to assist persons to reach employment in areas other than their home area or exchange area and they can make advances to them. We have been using it in recent years fairly extensively to get people from, we will say, the North to the turf camps in Kildare. Bord na Móna repay the travelling expenses afterwards. The power is not exercised very widely, apart from that case of Bord na Móna, although it has existed since 1920. The worker is entitled to assistance to reach employment elsewhere than in his own locality. Deputy O’Sullivan.—They do not all know that?—Many of them, I should think, do not know it. They are meant to repay, of course, or the employer is meant to repay. 958. Chairman.—Bord na Móna refunds any payments you make in that particular case?—They refunded the payments which we made to enable men to reach their camps. In the normal case, they would not be refunded?—Yes. We would look for a refund either from the worker or from the employer. Deputy Coburn.—It is refunded all right. Sometimes the unions make advances on their own. 959. Chairman.—With regard to subhead H.—Appropriations in Aid—Item (1) varies with the contribution income of the Unemployment Fund, according to the note on page 210. Is there a substantial variation?—It can vary very considerably. There is quite a big variation as between this year and last year, for example. It depends on the sales of Unemployment Insurance stamps. There is considerable variation from year to year. VOTE 66—OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL WELFARE.Mr. D. J. O’Donovan further examined.960. Chairman.—Are the salaries, wages and allowances relating to all these Votes carried on the Minister’s Vote?— Yes. VOTE 67—MISCELLANEOUS SOCIAL WELFARE SERVICES.Mr. D. J. O’Donovan further examined.961. Chairman.—Paragraph 88 of the report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General reads:— “Extra Receipts payable to Exchequer. A sum of £84 13s. 0d. which had been overpaid to a public assistance authority was refunded and brought to account under this heading. The overpayment arose through a misconception of the conditions under which public assistance authorities would be recouped to an extent not exceeding 50 per cent. of expenditure on the supply of footwear to necessitous persons not otherwise in receipt of home assistance. Footwear had been issued to certain people in this category and the expenditure incurred had been included in the claim for recoupment although no contributions had been obtained from the recipients as provided for in the approved scheme. When the matter came to light each public assistance authority was communicated with and refunds were obtained where necessary. In addition to the £84 13s. 0d. referred to above, sums amounting to £549 2s. 8d. in respect of similar overpayments were received from four public assistance authorities by the Department of Local Government and are brought to account as Exchequer extra receipts under the Vote for that Department.” Mr. Wann.—Up to 31st March, 1947. these grants were provided for in the Vote for Local Government and Public Health. After that date, the necessary financial provision was made in the Vote for Miscellaneous Social Welfare Services. The purpose of the paragraph is to bring under notice the fact that overpayments recovered are brought to account under the two Votes mentioned, Votes 41 and 67. 962. Chairman.—With regard to subhead A.—Grants under the Education (Provision of Meals) Acts, 1914 to 1930— this applies to urban authorities? Mr. O’Donovan.—Yes. 963. How is the money provided under subhead C.—Welfare of the Blind—expended?—The payments are, in the main, grants made to institutions, workshops. hostels and homes devoted to blind welfare. In the case of workshop employees, the rate payable is £20 in the year with which you are dealing. It has gone up since to £40. The figure for the worker who is maintained in a hostel, such as St. Joseph’s in Drumcondra, was £5, which has since gone up to £20. For the inmate of a home, a person who is merely maintained as an afflicted person and cared for, it was £13 in the year with which you are dealing and has now gone up to £20. For the pupil in a school residence, such as St. Mary’s Mount Merrion, or, again, St. Joseph’s, Drumcondra, it was £20, which has now gone up to £40. That is the main expenditure dealt with in this item. We sometimes make special grants also for other purposes—for example, the training of a suitable boy or girl as a telephonist. Various little things of that kind which can be done to assist the blind can be paid for from this Vote. 964. I take it the Department of Health has a responsibility also?—I do not think they have any responsibility for matters of that kind. They do not admit any responsibility for the training of blind persons. For maintenance?—No, I do not think so. 965. This is the only provision for maintenance?—The only provision for the maintenance of persons who are blind only. The Department of Health would, through the ordinary hospital services, deal with the blind person who has some ophthalmic trouble and who goes in as an ordinary patient, but for the merely blind the Department of Social Welfare is the sole State agency existing. Except for Blind Pensions?—Which are also dealt with by the Department of Social Welfare. 966. If local authorities have blind people in the county homes—one of the items you mention—do they make provision for such cases?—They make a grant rather similar to the grant made by the Department from this Vote in respect of person from their own locality to approved institutions. 967. What would be the amount of the State grant as compared with the local authority grant in the case of a blind person in a local institution?—The local authority grant would, generally speaking, be about £40 and the State grant is now £40 in respect of two classes, the workshop employee and the pupil in a resident school. It is only half that for a worker maintained in a hospital or an inmate of a home, so that generally the State pays very nearly as much as the local authority. 968. If the person is beyond the stage of being able to contribute to his own maintenance, what happens?—The local authority would no doubt make a payment to the institution which is looking after the blind person. The State would make these grants which I have already mentioned and, of course, there is the question of whether the blind person. qualified for a pension in addition to these assistances. 969. Can he get a pension and work in one of these institutions at the same time?—He can. There is a means test, of course, but it is a very generous mean test. 970. Subhead D. provides for grants towards the supply of fuel for necessitous families. Is that still in operation?—It is. 971. Does subhead E.—Grants towards the supply of Footwear for Necessitous Children—tend to increase or is it still appearing?—It is still appearing 972. Has it a tendency to increase?—It is fairly stationary. The costs under the scheme are inclined to go up, the cost of boots, and the probability is that less footwear was provided in the last year or two because of the increase in cost. The grant, however, remains stationary 973. Have you any figures as to the number of children who would have been provided with footwear in this year?—I do not think I have them with me, but I could provide them.* 974. Do you supply the footwear gratis or is there a contribution from the recipient?—It varies according to the means of the person. The public assistance authority administers the scheme and they should levy a portion of the cost of the boots or shoes, where the means of the recipient permit. 975. Subhead F.—Grants towards the provision of Assistance in kind to recipients of Home Assistance—that has disappeared?—Yes, except as regards the provision of footwear. 976. With regard to the extra receipts, the item dealing with emergency cooked food centres has disappeared?—It has gone. It figures only as an item of equipment purchased at the time of the emergency and not disposed of until 1947/48. The witness withdrew. VOTE 4—COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR-GENERAL.Mr. W. E. Wann called and examined.977. Chairman.—There is a saving due to changes in personnel and vacancies remaining unfilled. I do not think this Vote is really discussed in the Dáil, but if there is any matter with regard to staffing, accommodation or otherwise, as you are an Officer of the Dáil and as we are examining these accounts, we should take a special interest in the office you control. I notice that there is a considerable saving in the amount provided for salaries, wages and allowances. I take it that the work of the Comptroller and Auditor-General is not decreasing as the years go on?—No, it certainly is not, but the position was that we simply could not get staff. 978. Are you very short of staff at present or how do you stand?—There is still a shortage but some of the vacancies have been filled recently. 979. Is it a question of the actual difficulty or is it as often happens in the case of Government Departments that when you look for technical officers the remuneration offered is generally not sufficiently attractive?—No, I think the difficulty extends all through the Service. Some of the saving on subhead A. arose from changes in personnel. 980. With regard to subhead D., you have to undertake a complete audit of the National Insurance accounts?—Yes, in my former post as Secretary I was also auditor of the unified Society. 981. Deputy Fitzpatrick.—What does incidental expenses in subhead C. cover? —They are set out in detail in the Estimate: Telephones, £72; Carriage, £5; Uniform, £5—we have only one messenger and that is for his uniform— Newspapers and Miscellaneous, £17. 982. Chairman.—Are all documents. papers and accounts sent to you or have you to travel where they are available? —Audits are mostly carried out in the Departments. Only about one-third of the audit staff is working at headquarters at any particular time. 983. How do Appropriations in Aid arise?—Entirely from audit fees, fees for carrying out certain statutory audits such as the Post Office Savings Bank, the Road Fund, the Local Loans Fund, the Church Temporalities Fund and certain other audits undertaken by arrangement with the Department of Finance. 984. Is the accommodation with which you are supplied satisfactory for the work which I think is increasing?—Yes. At the moment we are housed in the College of Science, but we have been asked to vacate it and I do not know where we will find refuge. The Committee will, I am sure be interested to know how you succeed, if you are evicted from your present quarters, in getting suitable accommodation elsewhere. The witness withdrew. The Committee adjourned. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
