Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1952 > Committee of Public Accounts > Report - Appropriation Accounts 1950 - 1951

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Dé hAoine, 27ú Meitheamh, 1952

Friday, 27th June, 1952.

The Committee sat at 11 a.m.

Mr. W. E. Wann (An tArd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste), Mr. P. M. Clarke and Mr. J. E. Twamley (An Roinn Airgeadais) called and examined.

VOTE 54—POSTS AND TELEGRAPHS.

Leon Ó Broin called and examined.

97. Chairman.—Paragraph 72 of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s Report which is for information reads:—

“Subhead H.2.—Losses by Default, Accident, etc.

The losses borne on the Vote for the year ended 31st March, 1951, amounted to £2,973 2s. 2d. A classified schedule of these losses is set out at page 169. At page 172 particulars are given of 35 cases in which cash shortages or misappropriations amounting to £1,684 0s. 9d. and $563 were discovered; the sums in question were made good and no charge to public funds was necessary.”

98. Chairman.—Paragraph 73 of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s Report states:—

“Subhead T.—Appropriations in Aid.

The control of the wireless stations at Malin Head and Valentia, which had hitherto been operated and maintained on an agency basis by the Department of Posts and Telegraphs, was transferred from the British to the Irish Administration as from the 1st January, 1950. A sum of £50,532 19s. 7d. was received during the year under review from the British Post Office in discharge of claims outstanding at the date of transfer, of which £49,023 14s. 10d. has been credited to this subhead, £66 11s. 1d. to revenue and £1,442 13s. 8d. to a suspense account to which certain expenditure in connection with the stations had been charged.”

Can you give us any idea, Mr. O Broin, as to what revenue will be got from these wireless stations and what the expense of running them will be?—The net revenue from the stations is about £10,000 a year. The actual cost of running the stations, I am afraid, is something like £17,000 a year, something more than £10,000 at any rate. You can take it that there will be a loss on the running of these stations.

99. Deputy Dockrell.—Why did we take them over then?—The Government regarded these stations as our property. We were so advised by our legal advisers and it became necessary, I assume, for national reasons to take them over.

100. Chairman.—You did get revenue during the year of account?—Yes.

101. Chairman.—Paragraph 74 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows:—

“Stores.

A test examination of the store accounts was carried out with satisfactory results.

In addition to the engineering stores shown in Appendix II as valued at £1,074,179 on the 31st March, 1951, engineering stores to the value of £1,847 were held on behalf of other Government Departments. Stores other than engineering stores were valued at £408,466, including £87,725 in respect of stores held for other Government Departments.”

Has your stores’ position improved; have you been able to get stores more readily?—We have, of course, in recent years been buying a good deal of stores and delivery has never been as good as we would like. We expect that the special stores which we set out to buy two or three years ago will all be delivered by the end of the current year.

102. The amount of stores that you have did show an upper trend during the last few years?—Very definitely.

103. Chairman.—Paragraph 75 of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s Report states:—

“Revenue.

A test examination of the accounts of the Postal, Telegraph and Telephone services was carried out with satisfactory results.

Sums due for telephone services amounting in all to £437 8s. 5d. were written off during the year as irrecoverable.”

I expect that amount fluctuates?—Not

very much. As you can see, the figure is almost negligible. It represents less than l½d. per £100.

104. Deputy S. Collins.—In what way does that loss arise mainly?—It arises in cases where we find it quite impossible to recover and they are very rare cases.

105. Chairman.—Paragraph 76 of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s Report which is for information reads as follows:—

“Post Office Savings Bank Accounts.

The accounts of the Post Office Savings Bank for the year ended 31st December, 1950, were submitted to a test examination with satisfactory results. The balance due to depositors, inclusive of interest, amounted to £55,241,056 8s. 7d. on 31st December, 1950, as compared with £50,463,470 18s. 10d. at the close of the previous year. Interest accrued during the year on securities standing to the credit of the Post Office Savings Bank Fund amounted to £1,731,223 13s. 6d. Of this sum, £1,319,502 was paid and credited to depositors in respect of interest, management expenses amounted to £121,845 7s. 10d. and £289,876 5s. 8d. was set aside towards provision against depreciation in the value of securities.”

106. Chairman.—Paragraph 77 of the Report states:—

“Post Office Factory.

A test examination was applied to the accounts of the Post Office factory with satisfactory results.

Including works in progress on 31st March, 1951, the expenditure on manufacturing jobs during the year amounted to £37,857, expenditure on repair work (other than repairs to mechanical transport) amounted to £25,439, and expenditure on mechanical transport repairs to £7,873.”

107. Deputy S. Collins.—Has any progress been made towards making yourself a sufficient unit so far as mechanical transport repairs are concerned?—We do most of our own repairs.

108. There is a considerable portion still done outside?—Yes.

109. Deputy McGrath.—You do not do any big job in Cork?—We probably move the cars into the Post Office factory and do it there. I understand that in some cases where we find it more economical to have the repairs carried out locally we do that.

110. You give out contracts to other firms in Cork?—That is the point I am making. In certain cases where we find it pays us to have the job done locally we have it done locally, but we are in a position generally to carry out the repairs ourselves.

Deputy McGrath.—I think you get as much done locally as you can.

111. Deputy S. Collins.—You have not considered the possibility of a sub-depot in Cork?

Mr. Ó Broin.—That matter has not arisen.

112. Deputy McGrath.—I think you have a couple of mechanics employed in Cork?—No doubt we have as we have a transport fleet in Cork.

113. Chairman.—Do you do much for other Government Departments?—We do jobs for the Revenue Commissioners in connection with their Border fleet, etc.

114. Deputy Davin.—What is the proportion of traffic handled by mechanical as against horse transport?—I could not answer offhand, but the tendency nowadays is to mechanise more and more, as you are no doubt aware.

115. Chairman.—Deputy Dockrell will probably want to know what you do with the old horses.

Deputy Dockrell.—Exactly.

Mr. Ó Broin.—You are thinking of the vans which are still drawn by horses in Dublin?

Deputy McGrath.—I understood that they were all given out on contract.

116. Deputy Davin.—Is there a tendency to get rid of horse transport in favour of mechanical transport?

Mr. Ó Broin.—I think it is a general tendency. The only unit of any importance still drawn by horses is that in Dublin. That job is done for us by Córas Iompair Éireann under an old contract, and we find it more economical to continue to take advantage of the Córas Iompair Éireann arrangement.

117. Chairman.—Do you use these electrically operated vans? They seem very satisfactory for short delivery work. You have not got any of them?—I do not think we have, but you can take it that our people are alive to all the possibilities of economies.

118. The bread companies seem to use them a good deal for their short delivery work?—That is so.

119. Deputy S. Collins.—Has a positive decision been taken to eliminate horse transport?—I do not think so. We are interested in the most expeditious and the most economical method of working.

120. I am led to believe that a positive decision has been taken to abandon horse transport?—I do not think a decision has been taken in that form.

121. Deputy Davin.—Is any encouragement being given from the top to proceed along that line?—We are interested in two things—expedition and economy.

122. Is it not possible, even in the existing chaotic transport conditions in the city for horse-drawn transport to get around more easily and quickly than mechanical transport because mechanical transport is precluded from going into certain streets?—I can well imagine a representative of the Department of Justice or of the Dublin Corporation arguing that our horses hold up the traffic.

Deputy Dockrell.—It is vehicular traffic which is prohibited and no distinction is made between mechanically-propelled and horse traffic.

Deputy S. Collins.—No. In some streets, only horse transport is permitted.

123. Deputy McGrath.—Was this work not always carried out for the Post Office by contract and is that not the position in Dublin still? I take it that you wish to work in the most economical way, and if the contractors thought that was the most economical way, why should it not be allowed to continue?

Mr. Ó Broin.—I linked two things— economy and expedition.

Deputy Davin.—Public policy is taken into consideration and when you eliminate horse transport you affect the harness-maker and other such people.

Chairman.—That brings us into matters of public policy.

Deputy Davin.—I agree, but I do not mind saying that I suspect that Mr. O Broin would have considerable influence in matters of this kind.

124. Chairman.—I notice that, on the salary group of subheads, there is an excess of about £13,000 and you presumably have used virement to make good that sum, but it does not seem to me to be a subhead which is quite relevant. You did bring in a Supplementary Estimate in the last month of the financial year. Would you not have considered that it would have been proper to have corrected this excess on the salaries subheads at the time rather than use virement when there was no really analogous subhead?

Mr. Ó Broin.—In the matter of the exercise of virement, we have to get the authority of the Department of Finance. That is a Finance power. I assume that at the appropriate time we did communicate to the Department the exact position so far as we could see it in relation to each of these subheads, and that. in shaping the Supplementary Estimate in its final form, they decided for themselves to what extent virement should be used and to what extent we should look for new money.

125. Chairman.—Perhaps the representative of Finance would care to say something on this point?

Mr. Twamley.—I am afraid that I have not got any information about that point, but I assume that the position is as Mr. O Broin has stated.

126. Chairman.—All I want to establish is that this Committee is very jealous of the use of virement. The Public Accounts Committee has always been anxious to restrict its use to exchanges between strictly relevant subheads. In this case, it does not appear to have worked that way, and when you take into account that a Supplementary Estimate was introduced in the last month of the year under review; it adds point to the matter.

Mr. Twamley.—I could have the point looked up. I have not got the facts at the moment. *

127. Chairman.—With regard to subhead B.B.—International and other Conferences and Conventions—I am not very clear as to what happened under this subhead. Were some expenses carried over from the previous year?—No. The provision was not sufficient to meet the expenditure arising in that particular year to the extent shown.

128. How many international conferences would be involved?—Offhand, I could not say, but our principal conferences are those convened by the Universal Postal Union or the International Telecommunications Union. In recent years, there has been quite a plethora of conferences called by the International Telecommunications Union to deal with various radio problems, not merely in relation to broadcasting but in a general sense. We have been represented at these meetings and the tendency is for these conferences to be rather prolonged because of the discussion of problems arising out of the international political situation. They now last longer than ever before in our experience, and it is quite impossible to forecast the cost.

129. Deputy S. Collins.—Is there any net value in them to you?—There is a national position which we have to hold. We have to be at these conferences for national reasons, and there is a positive advantage to us in that we are quite often concerned in such matters as the allocation of frequencies to various services which are very important to us.

130. Chairman.—In any event, the Dáil approved of your taking part in them?—Yes.

131. Deputy S. Collins.—I know, but in view of continued complaints about interference with frequencies, I was wondering if there was any net improvement in the situation as a result of our attending these conferences?—The situation would be much worse if we were not there and if we had not got the influence we have.

132. Deputy Davin.—Subhead D.—Purchase of Sites, etc.—is mainly a Finance Department responsibility?—We purchase sites with, of course, the approval of the Department of Finance in each particular case.

133. Chairman.— On subhead G.1.— Stores—there seems to have been some trouble over the delivery of mechanical transport stores which apparently you did not anticipate at the time of the Supplementary Estimate. I take it that although the Supplementary Estimate was introduced in March its preparation would have been considerably in advance of that?—Yes, somewhat in advance.

134. You did seek an extra £47,000 and yet you used £40,000 less than was granted. Did any special circumstance arise which rendered nugatory the amount yon asked for?—We did in fact divert mechanical transport which would have been charged on the Vote to the telephone service and carried the charge on capital. We found at the time that transport was more urgently needed for telephone construction. That relieved us to the extent of £10,000.

135. Deputy S. Collins.—The difficulty was one of delivery?—There was a delay in delivery and that affected the position, We had great need in that year as always for transport for telephone construction.

136. Chairman.—On subhead G.2.— Uniform Clothing—the saving is actually 50 per cent. greater than the amount provided in the Supplementary Estimate. I notice that one of the reasons is that you supplied more clothing to Government Departments than you had anticipated. On the general principle of the way your Estimate is framed regarding that type of subhead where you do work for other Departments I wonder is it more convenient to make a deduction from each subhead rather than to bring in an Appropriation in Aid?—What we ordinarily do is to raise a charge against a suspense account and clear the suspense account as goods are delivered and paid for by Government Departments. That system has worked well.

137. Then something happens in excess and that saves your subhead. In the ordinary way all amounts coming to a Department are brought in as Appropriations in Aid and are quite clear to see? —We have found this system quite satisfactory. We are always prepared to give information to anybody who really wants it, but having regard to the nature and size of the services we provide it is necessary to have this suspense method.

The fact that you have to operate it by way of suspense account makes it easier to deal with it subhead by subhead.

138. Deputy Davin.—You have made the point I had in mind regarding the over-estimation which is a very high percentage. It has been partly explained, but could the Accounting Officer say whether there was any hold up by contractors. for the purpose of securing higher prices? That is inferred to some extent. It is explained that the saving was offset by the cost of delays and that the cost was greater than anticipated by £1,700?—No, there is nothing in that. We suffered from delays as everybody has been suffering from them. There is no reason to think that any individual contractor or group of contractors did anything of the sort the Deputy suggests.

139. Contractors are obliged to deliver as soon as they can at the contract price. and if that is so what is the explanation of that section?—I would need to know what contracts are actually involved, the terms of the contracts and the prices ruling at the time of delivery. At the same time where delays were not anticipated we just have to pay.

140. Deputy s. Collins.—Do your contracts allow for a variation clause where certain prices may have increased between the date of signing the contract and the date of completion?—Not generally.

141. I thought that might be the explanation?— We have such a large range of contracts that I just could not pontificate on the thing in a general way. The general principle which has applied to normal contracts in recent years may apply, that is, a certain lack of rigidity where the contractors could prove a certain type of increase over which they had no control since the time of the tender.

142. Deputy McGrath.—Is there any opportunity for small manufacturers to tender for, say, part of the country? Would it be possible to carry out these contracts on a regional basis so that you could get tenders for, say, Munster and Connacht? If small manufacturers had this opportunity they could perhaps compete with large contractors who are contracting for the whole country?—Again, I find it very hard to answer that question. We are first of all a business concern. We are expected to conduct our affairs on a businesslike basis and do good for ourselves. What might be good for the country or for other Departments is in a sense a secondary thing. You can take it, however, that at the same time we have these factors to which the Deputy refers in our minds. If we felt that we could do something along those lines consistent with maintaining our own position we would do it, and I am sure that in many cases we in fact do something like that.

143. Do you agree that it might be possible to get a lower price for part of the contract from manufacturers who would not be able to supply the whole thing?—That might be so, but without knowing the particular contract and almost without advance notice of the particular line, I could not answer. If you like, I would be very glad to look into that matter.

144. Deputy S. Collins.—What the Lord Mayor of Cork is really interested in is that if there were this type of decentralisation small firms in the Cork or Munster area could tender for portion of the contract rather than have one big firm supplying the country generally?— I sec the Deputy’s point.

145. Chairman.—On subhead H.3.— Incidental Expenses—there appears to me to be a contradiction between the note on page 166 and the note on item 5 on the Appropriation in Aids which is on page 168. The note on page 166 says that the excess was mainly due to the provision of savings publicity proving inadequate. but the note on 5 says that the expenditure on savings publicity was less than anticipated by £3,000?—The note on the subhead, Note 5, states: “Staff costs and administrative expenses of the Savings Bank and expenditure on savings publicity, which are recovered from Savings Bank funds and credited to this heading, were less than anticipated by £6,700 and £3,000 respectively.” They are all bulked together but the amount which was recovered from the Savings Bank Fund was less than anticipated. We are not singling out the actual Savings Bank publicity.

146. Are the amounts not segregated in the statement that they were less than anticipated by £6,700 and £3,000 respectively?—The position appears to be that an increase of £7,000 for publicity was foreseen at the Supplementary Estimate stage and the Department of Finance decided to provide the amount by virement from other subheads on which there were savings.

147. Would it be true to say that all the expenses which are incurred in publicity are not charged to the Savings Bank Fund?—Yes, they all are.

148. How do they come to be paid under H.3.? Is it again a sort of suspense account?—No. The money was found by virement on other subheads. The figure under T.5 consists of the H.3 figure plus the virement figure.

149. If you say that the expenditure on publicity on the Savings Bank is all recovered from the Savings Bank Fund, why do you need to get any by virement? —The money had to be provided at a particular period and it was recovered later.

150. In other words, as I have already said, you put it into a suspense account and then recovered it later from these funds?—The amounts when recovered were brought into subhead T.

151. Deputy S. Collins.—The amounts you paid under subhead H.3 you had to recover from the savings on the general account?—Yes.

152. Chairman.—I am afraid I do not quite follow. I can see that you paid out a certain amount under H.3. You explain that you paid out more than anticipated and that you recovered less than anticipated I still think that these two things contradict each other.

Deputy S. Collins.—I think it warrants a fuller explanation.

Chairman.—Perhaps you would look into it?—I shall send you a note.*

153. Deputy Davin.—With regard to subhead K.—Engineering Materials—is there any fine or a surcharge of any kind imposed in the case of contractors who do not deliver within a reasonable time or inside the period provided for in the contract?—That was quite a common thing in ancient times, but I am afraid that in modern times it is very hard to get contractors to accept such a position.

154. Deputy S. Collins.—Did any unusual circumstance arise in the case of this particular type of stores that would cause this seemingly unwarranted delay? —No, except that we have been buying very large quantities of stores in competition with other keen competitors. In the general world situation to-day, there has been a very noticeable delay everywhere in deliveries and we have suffered from that.

Deputy Davin.—The reason I raise the point is that in view of the rapid rise in prices and of the fact that these rises take place so often inside a year, I think the public should be safeguarded against a hold-up which is often for the purpose of extracting an unfair price.

155. Chairman.—Was this one of the savings that was taken into account in the Supplementary Estimate?—I think so. I am looking at the Supplementary Estimate now. We take credit in it for a saving of the substantial sum of £75,000.

156. As we are on the point can you tell us how the amount of £107,050 was made up? What subheads were the savings on? —There was a small sum under I.— Travelling expenses, a matter of £1,200; under E.1.—Conveyance of Mails by Rail —£10,285; under 1.2, £5,500; K.— Engineering materials—£75,000; L.3.— Contract work—£8,550; L.4.—Rent, rates, etc.—£1,800; N.3, £500; Q.1, £3,930; Q.2, £15,000; Q. 3, £350.

Deputy S. Collins.—The position seems to be generally with regard to stores, not only in this Department but in all Departments, that contractors seem to be able to hold up deliveries for a considerable time. What is worrying me is whether there has been any appreciable increase in cost by reason of this hold-up.

Chairman.—In 1950-51 everyone in business experienced delays in delivery.

Deputy S. Collins.—In our capacity as the Public Accounts Committee we would be anxious to safeguard the public against increased costs that might arise as a result of delays in deliveries by contractors.

157. Chairman.—Perhaps the Department of Finance might have something to say in regard to that matter. Do you watch such matters to ensure that contractors, where there is a delay, have a genuine case?

Mr. Twamley.—No, Sir, the Department of Finance would not come into it directly. I think that each individual Department would deal with it. There is a general form of contract for certain items and that would be a matter we would look to. There is a Government Contracts Committee, of course, which deals generally with these matters.

158. Chairman.—There is the Contracts Committee, of course?

Mr. Twamley.—There is. I think. although I am not sure, that all these proposals have to go before that Committee—at any rate proposals for certain expenditure.

Deputy S. Collins.—My only anxiety was that it could involve a considerable amount of money.

Deputy Dockrell.—From what I know. of commercial practice, in connection with contracts such as these, I think that the contractor has to make a case to the Department concerned as to why there were delays and why there were increases in costs. Very often, he has to show his invoices so as to prove that, in fact, he had to pay more for the stuff himself.

159. Deputy Davin.—I raised this on subhead G.2 because I am aware, as everybody is aware who knows the position in the City of Dublin, that there is a surplus of clothing on the hands of manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers. I would like to hear the case made for delay where there is a surplus.

Mr. Ó Broin.—There is a shortage of supply in regard to a wide variety of materials for telephone construction, for example. They are in tremendous short supply all over the world. The same applies to metals.

Deputy Davin.—I am not challenging that?—As regards general stores, the Committee may take it that our system is as tight as it would be possible to devise. It is watched with extremely great care by a competent staff. Then we have the Government Contracts Committee which keeps a close eye on all these things. I would be surprised to know that any worth while number of people had succeeded in holding up stuff against us.

160. Deputy S. Collins.—I am raising this matter from the point of view as to whether or not there has been a considerable surcharge on public funds by reason son of this kind of hold-up?—It has never been brought to my notice during the five or six years that I have been in the Post Office that anything of the kind had arisen. If anyone detected that anything of the kind had occurred, it would have been brought to my notice.

Deputy Davin.—Everyone knows that the so-called recession in trade applies particularly to the clothing trade. That is why I cannot understand it.

Chairman.—I think you are confusing the present with the past. I do not think that, in the year of account, there was the recession that you speak of.

Deputy Davin.—There was plenty of stuff and no shortage anyway.

Deputy S. Collins.—It was not apropos of a recession in trade that I raised this at all. I referred to the issue that might arise and was anxious to get a clarification of that. I appreciate that the situation has improved in the last 12 months.

Deputy Dockrell.—We are now dealing with a period of two years ago.

Deputy Davin.—Yes, when there was no shortage of supplies in regard to raw materials or anything else.

161. Chairman.—On subhead L.4.— Rent, Rates on Wires, Water, Light, etc. —your Department must have been the only one which expected that rates were going to be lower than they actually were?

Mr. Ó Broin.—I think that the item of rates in this subhead was a relatively small one. Under the general law, our Department is exempt from rates.

162. Deputy Mrs. Crowley.—On subhead L.1—Cross-Channel Cable Maintenance—is there any reason why so much had to be spent on maintenance this year?—The cost of the maintenance of Cross-Channel telegraph and telephone cables is borne in equal shares between ourselves and the British Post Office. The work is done by the British Post Office because we have not the requisite equipment. The maintenance work is done at regular intervals. To cover anything that has to be done which cannot be foreseen in the year in which the Estimate is prepared, we usually provide at least £500. It so happened that, in this year of account, we had to pay up for a few jobs which had to be done when it was convenient for the British cable ship to do them.

163. Deputy Collins.—I would imagine that these jobs occur in cycles, and that a number of years might elapse before you would have such a charge as this again?—That is so.

164. On subhead Q.1, the note says: “Expenditure on engineering staff and labour force was less than anticipated owing to non-delivery of apparatus and to postponement of works.” Can you say what was the reason for the non-delivery of the apparatus?—I have not the particulars, but it was apparatus, presumably, in connection with civil aviation. New devices are being constantly developed so that we are constantly buying apparatus. There is also an element of replacement in this.

165. Has the delivery position improved?—I think there is an improvement taking place.

What was worrying me was the dislocation in the matter of employment.

166. Chairman.—On subhead T.— Appropriations in Aid-item 14 deals with miscellaneous receipts. There seems to have been a very considerable difference in effect from what you anticipated on the Supplementary Estimate?—Yes. The big item there is the sale of non-engineering stores.

167. How would it arise on an item like that? At the time the Supplementary Estimate was submitted, you anticipated a decrease in the Appropriations in Aid, but you actually got £10,000 more than you thought you would get?—The sum of £10,000 on a large subhead is not very much.

168. It is an increase of £10,000 on £15,000?—The general subhead is for a sum of £314,000. On a subhead like that, you must be ready for fluctuations.

I appreciate that, but still at the time of the Supplementary Estimate, your forecast was that you would get £2,000 less than your original Estimate. In spite of that, you got £10,000 more than your original Estimate, and the Supplementary Estimate was brought in very late in the year. I would like to have the point cleared up as to how the information went wrong at the time of the Supplementary Estimate*

Deputy Davin.—On note (14) (a) regarding subhead T, page 168, may I ask whether the Department is free to dispose of these non-engineering stores in a competitive market?

169. Chairman.—We might settle some of the other points first. Where you are selling surplus non-engineering stores, do you sell them by auction? It struck me that what might have happened was that an auction was held a bit earlier than was anticipated?

Mr. Ó Broin.—I understand that we sell by auction.

170. Deputy S. Collins.—Do you dispose of everything by auction or is it true that there are certain laid down avenues of disposal of types of stores through certain people?—What have you in mind, Deputy?

There are certain types of stores disposed of to a certain range of firms as distinct from auction?—I personally am not aware of the precise procedure here and would like an opportunity of looking into it. I understand that we proceed mainly by auction.

171. I have information, whether accurate or not, that there are certain types of stores which if they become available for disposal are disposed of directly to certain people as distinct from auction. I was wondering if you could give any further information on that particular point?—I cannot tell at the moment. If we do that we do it with due approval, but I cannot see circumstances in which we would do so.

172. Deputy Davin.—Is there any policy instruction, for instance, to sell scrap steel to a certain firm or firms?—I would be very glad to supply the Committee with particulars of this matter if they wish to have them.

173. Deputy Davin.—I am concerned, in the question I asked, with scrap being sold in a competetive market because nowadays you get a far higher price than if it has to be sold by order to one particular firm for policy reasons?—I would be very glad to look into those two points and to inform the Committee.†

Chairman.—I think Deputy Davin might make his point on the Estimate and endeavour to get from the Minister information as to policy on this matter.

Deputy Davin.—I intended to do that, even if I were not here to-day.

174. Chairman.—There are details of the Losses by Default given on pages 169 to 171.

Deputy S. Collins.—They are very small.

Chairman.—I notice that the first three of these happened in the Navan Head Office and two of them were due to shortage in official remittances. That is surely unusual in a head office. Was Navan just unlucky that year?

Mr. Ó Broin.—The second case, the only one I have particulars about, might be of interest. A £3 telegraph money order of British origin was transmitted correctly as far as Navan, but on further transmission by telephone from there to Kilmainhamwood it was received at the latter office as £33, with the result that there was an overpayment of £30. The payee was in poor circumstances. He undertook to make good the amount at the rate of £1 a week, but after paying two instalments he went to England and nothing more could be recovered. It proved impossible to fix responsibility for the error and the Department had to bear responsibility for the payment.

175. Deputy S. Collins.—That seems rather extraordinary. Surely it must be possible in the circumstances to trace the person who transmitted the information from the Navan Head Office to Kilmainhamwood?—Errors occur, sir, and this was one of them. We just could not determine the responsibility. There might have been some defect.

Even when the amount is small it seems extraordinary.

176. Chairman.—Though the amounts are small, I am more interested in the other two items?—I have not details of all these cases, but I would be very glad, if you are interested, to write you a note answering your inquiry. It is possibly just a coincidence that we got the three cases from Navan. I do not think it implies any slackness in staff. As a matter of fact, that is a well-run office.*

177. There is an item on page 170 referring to the misappropriation of postal orders by two postmen. The note says that the offenders were dismissed. Was there no prosecution?—A prosecution was considered inadvisable there owing to certain legal difficulties. The only direct proof of culpability of the postmen rested on the testimony of an accomplice, a convicted criminal whose evidence would not carry weight in a court of law. As well as the testimony being open to question, there was the added difficulty that he had left the jurisdiction.

178. I notice in several cases that while the amount is not big there seems to be a very small amount recovered towards making good the loss. How do you arrive at this? Is there some sort of composition settlement?—Most frequently we recover all the money and the cases that are set out here of the type you mention are cases where we were not able to get any more.

179. Deputy S. Collins.—There is an extraordinary case here: “Due to shortage in the accounts at Portumna Sub-Office, Ballinasloe, the Sub-Postmistress left the service—2s.” Is there any explanation of that?—As a matter of fact, we think there is a slight editorial point here. The word “had” should have appeared before “left the service.” The audit of the accounts by the Accounting Officer resulted in a net shortage of 2s. coming to light after her resignation as Sub-Postmistress.

That explains it all right, but it does not read so well in the present circumstances.

180. Deputy McGrath.—Item (l) on page 169, refers to a sum received for premium on lease of premises at Roche’s Point, Cork. Would that be in connection with the meteorological service?—I understand that the property concerned in this transaction ceased to be used by the Post Office and was leased to Miss Roche for 21 years from 1928 at £12 a year. The lease expired and Miss Roche was anxious to buy the property, but we were debarred by the State Land Act, 1924, from selling or giving a lease for more than 99 years. We renewed the lease for that term at a shilling a year, plus rates and insurance, on payment of a fine of £200.

181. Why did the lease terminate there? Was it for the purpose of making a meteorological survey that the Post Office had it?—I do not think so.

182. There was talk of a survey at Roche’s Point in connection with an airport for Cork?—I do not think that has anything to do with it.

183. Deputy S. Collins.—Before we leave the general situation, the position with regard to default in the Post Office is that they are microscopic?—Absolutely. I think that in the year of account the defaults on H.2 only amounted to £353.

Deputy Dockrell.—Everything else was recovered—that is very good.

Deputy S. Collins.—Looking at the Department generally, it is amazing the small amount they can get away with.

184. Chairman.—The Deputy would be satisfied if you watched the contractors as well?

Mr. Ó Broin.—I think it is a fair inference that we do watch the contractors quite well.

185. Chairman.—On page 174, note 9 refers to three voice recording machines? —That note is for the sake of information. It is a requirement of the International Civil Aviation Organisation that radio communications between aircraft control centres and aircraft should be recorded.

186. The Department of Industry and Commerce had these machines?—Yes.

187. Have you any idea why they bought them?—They bought them for this purpose and when they had no further use for them they handed them over to us. We may be able to make use of them sometime.

188. On page 180 we have a table dealing with the telephonic system. Is the item of £8,351,858 the total capital invested in the telephone service?—Yes.

189. From what date would that apply; does it include the expenditure by the British Government?—It goes back to the date of the change of Government in 1922.

190. Have you any figure for the total capital value?—Our commercial account will give you that figure. I have not got it here.

191. Deputy S. Collins.—Is some of it redeemed from time to time?—We raise annuities on the Vote and we pay back the Department of Finance.

192. Chairman.—Would it be convenient to let us have a note showing what is the general position with regard to what this capital value and redemption have been over the period?—We will give you that.*

VOTE 55—WIRELESS BROADCASTING.

Leon Ó Broin further examined.

193. Deputy S. Collins—As to the note on subhead B.—Cost of Daily Programmes, including Public Concerts— which states that expenditure on telephone lines used for broadcasting purposes, and payments to composers and arrangers of Irish music were less than anticipated—is that because of a reduction in the Irish music content in the programmes or the impossibility of making these arrangements?—A sum of £700 was provided which we anticipated we should spend in the course of the year by getting individuals to compose and arrange Irish music, but we were only able to expend £191. It is not easy to get these composers and when we do get them their output can be rather small and slow.

194. The fault is on their side, not yours?—We provided the money and applied a certain stimulation, but the results were not what we wished.

195. Deputy Dockrell.—As to the extra receipts payable to Exchequer, is the campaign for catching people who defaulted on wireless licence fees still proceeding apace?—You can take it that the campaign is always on. We never really cease, but occasionally we make an extra spurt as we did recently with very remarkable success.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 56—DEFENCE.

Lieutenant-General P. MacMahon called and examined.

196. Chairman.—Paragraph 78 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Subead A.—Pay of Officers, Cadets, N.C.O.s and Men.

Consolidated rates of pay were authorised by regulation for officers of the Forces with effect from 1st April, 1950, and include the equivalent of lodging, fuel and light allowance and ration allowance which were formerly issuable as separate allowances. Arising out of the introduction of these consolidated rates, officers accommodated in official quarters became liable to deductions from their pay in respect of accommodation and for fuel, gas and electricity supplied to married quarters. The regulations enable the Minister, with the concurrence of the Minister for Finance, to determine the annual sum to be deducted from the pay of officers in occupation of married quarters by relation to the ranks of such officers and the location of the quarters, without identification of particular officers or particular quarters. In the case of single officers the regulations prescribe a deduction at the rate of 2/9 per day for accommodation. Deductions from officers’ pay amounting to £21,773 13s. 11d. in respect of occupation of official quarters are included in the Appropriations in Aid.”

Where this indicates that the deductions are related to the ranks and locations of the quarters, I take it you have an ascending scale according to rank?— Junior officer and senior officer. There is a rate for lieutenant and captain and a rate for commandant and higher ranks.

197. Deputy S. Collins..—And a man in occupation of quarters as a captain, on promotion to the rank of commandant and still in occupation of the same quarters, gets a tremedous increase in his rent?—That is correct, but on the other hand, he gets an increase in his pay. When pay was consolidated, there was included a rent allowance of 10/- for a junior officer and 12/- for a senior officer, so that he gets the extra 2/- a day which more than compensates him for the increase in the rent.

198. Chairman.—Where it varies according to location, how is that worked out?—A house would be more expensive in Dublin than in Cork and more expensive in Cork than on Spike Island.

199. Deputy S. Collins.—Would it not also vary to the extent that the type of quarters are different? Some of the quarters occupied by officers are hutments and others are large houses of former commanding officers on the Curragh?— They have to pay the same nevertheless. In the Eastern Command area except Baldonnel senior officers, commandants and higher, pay £115 10s. per annum and officers below the rank of commandant £84 per annum.

200. Irrespective of the type of house? —Irrespective of the type of house.

201. So that a senior officer in occupation of Pearse House in the Curragh would pay the same amount as a senior officer occupying a wooden house in Pearse Park?—It seems unfair, but an officer may be in a very good house at one period and in an inferior house at another. In Baldonnel, a senior officer pays £105 per annum and a junior officer £73 10s. In the Southern Command area, except Cork City, a senior officer pays £105 per annum and a junior £73 10s. In Cork City the senior officer pays £115 10s. and a junior officer £84. In the Western Command area the rates are £115 10s. and £73 10s. and in the Curragh Training Camp area, £105 and £63. With regard to the point which Deputy Collins has made, it is unfortunate that we have no way of getting over it. There are some very fine houses on the Curragh, and if a senior officer is lucky and has one of them, he pays £105 per annum, the same as his colleague, a senior officer, occupying a wooden hut or a corrugated hut.

202. Chairman.—You do not maintain the same differential as between senior and junior officers in each place? In Cork City and in the Western Command area, the senior officer pays the same, whereas the junior officer pays ten guineas less in the Western Command area than in Cork City?—We were guided by the Valuation Office. We are not experts on this matter and had the benefit of their advice.

203. I take it that this system effects a considerable administrative saving?—It does, and it means that the officers have to pay income-tax on the houses which they had not to do previously.

204. Deputy S. Collins.—Are you seriously suggesting that the Valuation Office arrived at the conclusion that there was some parity between Ceannt House or Pearse House on the Curragh and a wooden hut?—No, they did not, they suggested rents for these houses. That was a Ministerial decision. If Deputy Collins thinks it over, he will find it very difficult to work out a better plan. We gave it a lot of thought.

205. Deputy McGrath.—It seems very unfair to the man in the wooden hut?— He may be in the wooden house for a year and may go to a better house the following year.

Deputy S. Collins.—I am thinking of a case which is very close to me of people who have been in a wooden hut for about seven years and are likely to be there indefinitely.

206. Chairman.—I think that generally the Committee would agree with the system because it does save a good deal of administration. If you had to deal with each individual case, the administrative costs would be very high?

General MacMahon.—Yes, and there is the further point that before we introduced this scheme the same thing operated. A senior officer might be lucky enough to have a very fine house, and, on the other hand, might be unlucky enough to have a house which was not quite so good. If it was unfair before, it is still unfair.

Deputy McGrath.—It should scarcely be a question of luck.

207. Deputy S. Collins.—The reason I am stressing this is that I have been pressing the Minister recently on the question of what new type of accommodation, if any, he proposes to provide for senior officers, and the position so far as the Curragh is concerned appears to be that there is no programme at all. These wooden houses which were condemned to my knowledge 15 years ago are now alive again and likely to be a permanent feature?

General MacMahon.—Were it not for the fact that accommodation is so scarce these houses would have been demolished long ago. They will soon be demolished, I hope.

Deputy S. Collins.—They will be well paid for at £115 a year before they are demolished.

208. Chairman.—Paragraph 79 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Subhead K.—Provisions and Allowances is lieu.

Statements have been furnished to me showing the cost of production of bread at the Curragh Bakery, and of meat at the Dublin and Curragh Abattoirs. The unit costs are as follows:—

The average price of cattle purchased for the Dublin and Curragh areas was £56 19s. and £56 18s. 6d. per head, respectively, as compared with £55 6s. 11d. and £54 16s. 9d. in the previous year, while the average production of beef per head was 696 lbs. and 702 lbs., respectively, as compared with 690 lbs. and 679 lbs.”

209. Deputy S. Collins.—Does your assessment of the price of bread include the subsidy?—No. That is the actual cost to the Department.

210. Were the Department not buying flour at the subsidised price?—We worked it out on the cost of the flour and so on.

That is what I am asking. Did the cost of the flour include the subsidy?— Definitely, yes.

211. Chairman.—The costs of both bread and meat went up compared with the previous year?—Yes.

212. Chairman.—Paragraph 80 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General states:—

“Subhead P.—Warlike Stores.

Orders were placed in February, 1949, and March, 1950, for the supply of equipment, the relevant contracts providing for advances amounting to 40 per cent, of their value. Including amounts of £15,975 4s. and £17,400 4s. paid in 1948-49 and 1949-50, respectively, and £1,425 paid in the year under review, the total advances made under the contracts amounted at 31st March, 1951, to £34,800 8s. As the contractor was unable to obtain the necessary export licence, none of the equipment has so far been delivered. I have been informed that, owing to the military importance of this equipment. the Minister for Defence was reluctant to cancel the contracts and obtain a refund of the advances made, as he feared that such action would interfere with any priority which the payments had established and might, in fact, prejudice the prospects of ultimate delivery.”

Have you anything to add, Mr. Wann?

Mr. Wann.—I understand that there is no likelihood of this equipment being released in the current financial year and very little in the year after.

General MacMahon.—We have asked the contractors to refund the money plus interest. They are in touch with the Department of Supplies in England and pressing for permission to deliver the material. If they do not get permission to make delivery soon they will return the sum advanced with, I hope, interest.

213. Chairman.—If it is returned how will it be shown in the accounts, as an Exchequer receipt or an Appropriation in Aid?

General MacMahon.—As an Exchequer receipt.

214. Chairman.—Paragraph 81 of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s Report reads:—

“Subhead T.—Military Lands.

A dwelling-house with approximately 2½ acres of land was purchased in 1948 for the sum of £4,400, and was occupied by an officer from October, 1948, to November, 1949, when it was vacated owing to its bad state of repair. The cost of rendering the building suitable for re-occupation was estimated at £3,000, and the work was not proceeded with. I have been informed that at the time of purchase the house was considered suitable for use as officer’s married quarters, but that the property was acquired primarily for the value of the site which adjoined a military barracks and would be used for the erection of married quarters for non-commissioned officers and men when money for this purpose is made available.”

Have you anything to add, Mr. Wann?

Mr. Wann.—The Accounting Officer has informed me that a condition report was not received from the Director of Engineering prior to the purchase which, however, was made in furtherance of representations by the military authorities. The opinion of the Chief Valuer of the Valuation Office was that having regard to the location in relation to the barracks and to the impossibility of obtaining a building site in the town of Athlone, the price was reasonable. I understand that, in such circumstances, a report by the Director of Engineering was not deemed necessary.

Deputy S. Collins.—In the ultimate analysis it looks as if it were a very expensive site.

215. Chairman.—I take it that it was purchased more as a site than as a building?

General MacMahon.—That is so. At that time we were under the impression that we would get money to build married quarters at all permanent centres. We got instructions from the Minister to examine sites, and if sites were not available the property of the Department to try to acquire sites. This property in Athlone came on the market, and as there is a great scarcity of building sites in Athlone we purchased it. The engineers had it laid out to build 30 houses on it. My personal opinion is that this house would have to disappear in any event because it would interfere with the building programme.

Deputy McGrath.—Before I knew that it was in Athlone I thought that this site must be somewhere near Heaven when you had to pay £4,400 for 2½ acres.

Chairman.—You would have to pay that in the Gaeltacht.

Deputy McGrath.—You would not. I know what local authorities have to pay.

216. Deputy S. Collins.—It seems an exorbitant price?

General MacMahon.—Considering the circumstances it was reasonable.

217. It is serving no purpose at all but still stands as a derelict site for further development?—It was occupied for one year by a married officer and it now houses the records of the Western Command while the ground is used for battle training.

Deputy McGrath.—It is only the site which we are discussing. Apparently the building would have to be knocked down, and I think it is an exorbitant price.

218. Deputy S. Collins.—If you put up 30 wooden huts you would get a fine rent from senior officers?

General MacMahon.—I have only one regret in connection with St. Jude’s, and that is that we did not get money to build the houses.

219. Chairman.—Paragraph 82 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows:—

“Subhead Y.2.—The Reserve.

Negotiations for the acquisition of premises for the accommodation of a local unit of An Fórsa Cosanta Áitiúil were opened in September, 1946, but, owing mainly to delay connected with the investigation of title, the purchase was not completed until May, 1950, when a sum of £950, included in the charge to this subhead, was paid. The premises were reported to be structurally sound when examined in September, 1946, but in October, 1948, the local authority complained that the walls at one side had sagged, and subsequent engineering reports confirmed the existence of this structural defect. In April, 1950, when it was estimated that repairs to permit of a limited use of the premises would cost £1,400. it was decided to dispose of them and I understand that an offer of £400 has been accepted.”

Have you anything to add, Mr. Wann?

Mr. Wann.—I understand that in fact these premises were occupied with the owner’s permission by the local F.C.A. unit early in 1947 pending completion of the purchase formalities. The delay in this connection was such that in September, 1948, the Department contemplated the institution of proceedings to enforce completion of sale. At the same time the F.C.A. area officer reported on the bad condition of the premises, and in October, 1948, the local authority went so far as to complain that the property constituted a public danger. A technical report furnished in April of 1950 recommended that if possible the purchase should not be completed or if it were that the premises should be sold as early as possible. The Accounting Officer has informed me that the Department regarded itself as committed to the purchase of the premises and that, therefore, the question of investigating the discrepancies between the original and subsequent engineering reports before the conclusion of formalities in regard to titles was not considered.

220. Chairman.—You did in fact make the inspection in September, 1946?

General MacMahon.—It was made by an officer of the Department and an Army engineer. As far as this transaction is concerned I will not attempt to make any excuse. It is very bad. I would like to assure the Chairman and the Committee that in the event of any future purchase we will ask the Office of Public Works to loan us an architect who will accompany the engineer to inspect the building.

221. You remember we had a similar case last year. Of course, I appreciate that this happened before last year, so that what we said last year could not be taken into account in this case. You are willing to admit you are wrong in this case?—I would not attempt to justify it.

222. You rather disarm us, I am afraid. Have you succeeded in selling it?—Yes, for £400.

223. Was it sold to a private individual?—Yes, not a native of Tipperary.

224. Deputy S. Collins.—He has not got 2½ acres of land with it by any chance?—No.

This just seems to be one of the unfortunate things that occur and the best thing we can do is to note our disapproval. As the Chairman said, your frank admission that you are not going to try to justify it disarms us completely.

225. Chairman.—Paragraph 83 of the Report reads:—

“Statement of Losses.

Losses written off during the year are detailed in a statement appended to the account. The total is made up of:—

The corresponding figures of losses in the previous year were £371 4s. 7d. and £12,225 4s. 1d.”

I take it that the downward trend is purely accidental and that there is no real trend up or down in these figures?— There really is not.

226. Chairman.—Paragraph 84 of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s Report reads as follows:—

“Suspense Account.

Expenditure amounting to £1,297 7s. 3d., arising out of the participation of units of An Fórsa Cosanta Áitiúil in the ceremonies connected with the celebration of the inauguration of the Republic of Ireland on Easter Monday, 1949, remains charged to a suspense account. I have recently been informed that the total expenditure incurred by the Department of Defence on the celebration has not yet been fully ascertained but that the necessary inquiries in the matter have been almost completed, and the covering sanction of the Minister for Finance will be sought when final figures are available.”

Mr. Wann.—The expenditure of £1,297 7s. 3d. mentioned in the paragraph included £1,046 17s. 3d. for transport and £250 10s. for messing allowances. Of the total, £196 2s. 6d. was paid in 1949-50 and the balance £1,101 4s. 9d. in the year under review. I cannot say whether final figures have yet been ascertained.

General MacMahon.—They have been ascertained. The total amount of the expenses was £3,981 12s. 8d. made up as follows: Illumination of corvettes— £266 6s. 7d.; loud speaker equipment— £14 9s.; other expenses (parades, stands, transport, fuel, etc.)—£3,700 17s. 1d.

The matter has recently been put to the Department of Finance asking for authority to charge it to the Vote.

227. Chairman.—Does that include all the expenditure by the regular Army?

General MacMahon.—It does not include pay.

228. How did it take so long to have this matter cleared up?—It was very difficult, especially where the F.C.A. was concerned to get particulars in regard to travelling and subsistence allowances, and it was doubtful in regard to some items whether they should be included in this service.

229. Deputy S. Collins.—In regard to subhead D.—Pay of Chaplains and Officiating Clergymen—are you reducing the establishment for chaplains in the Army?—We have one less than last year.

230. But the establishment remains the same?—We really have not an establishment for chaplains. It was not worthwhile having regard to the number concerned.

231. In regard to subhead G.—Subsistence and other Allowances—I think I raised this question before.—is there an inordinate delay in the filling of appointments?—No.

232. Because I see the explanation is “mainly due to the fact that certain appointments provided for were not filled during the year”?—They were really officers who were detailed to work with the F.C.A. There is no financial hold-up so far as filling appointments is concerned.

233. Deputy Davin.—In regard to subheads O. and P.—General Stores and Warlike Stores—has the quantity of stuff contracted for inside that period been since delivered?—Under O., yes; under P., no.

234. Deputy S. Collins.—You have already referred to it indirectly by saying that in the event of non-delivery certain moneys will be repayable?—Yes.

235. The situation in regard to warlike stores has disimproved recently?—It has except in regard to the materials which we got from the Continent.

236. Deputy Davin.—Has the position worsened so far as Great Britain is concerned, since the rearmament scheme has come into operation there?—It has very much worsened.

237. I should like to be assured that the warlike stores that have been purchased, not those that are being delivered currently but those that are being purchased nowadays, are in accordance with Army requirements?—Oh, definitely. We are not purchasing anything that is not.

238. Deputy S. Collins.—You are still in the position that you have got to accept what is regarded as obsolescent material in regard to many items?—No. So far as the items we purchased recently are concerned, they are absolutely up to date. We are not purchasing obsolescent material.

239. It is stuff which in the main is either surplus to other Army stores, or stuff from Armies which are changing over to a new type of equipment?—In connection with materials we purchased recently, they are being manufactured for us. They are not being purchased from stock.

240. You mentioned the modern type of machine-gun recently purchased. Have you been able to ameliorate the position in regard to the supply of ammunition for them?—No.

241. When you have trained your N.C.O.s on them, there will not be very much ammunition left?—We can purchase more ammunition at any time.

242. Chairman.—Ammunition does deteriorate and it would be foolish to get in a big stock?—It would last four or five years. The .303 the British produce is often good for 20 years.

Deputy S. Collins.—We were firing some of that 20-year-old stuff.

243. Deputy Davin.—Might I ask what is meant by the statement in paragraph 80 of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s Report that a contractor was unable to obtain the necessary export licence? I thought there was an international arrangement between Governments in regard to whatever was purchased for Army purposes?—No. A contractor in England always insists on the proviso that delivery depends on the material and an export licence being available.

244. I cannot understand a refusal to give an export licence in the case of Army material?—Unfortunately, we have had that experience.

245. Deputy S. Collins.—When you state that a particular contractor is making a further representation in regard to the export licence, that means that if he does not get it he is going to refund the money?—That is correct.

246. On subhead W.—Insurance—what type of insurance was this?—That is national health and unemployment insurance.

247. On subhead Y.4.—Bureau of Military History: Salaries, Wages and Allowances—would you describe this as a normal variation?—We transferred an additional officer to the Bureau.

248. On subhead B.B.—Medals, etc.— were these medals for the emergency services?—Yes, and the Red Cross.

249. I understand that the difficulty that existed about a dyeing cast for the medals has been obviated?—Yes.

250. Deputy Davin.—Has the delay in the supply of medals to applicants been removed?—Yes.

251. Deputy S. Collins.—I take it that the issue of medals should be nearly completed by now?—There are about 5,000 more to be issued.

252. Deputy Davin.—On subhead Z— Appropriations in Aid—Item No. 1 refers to the revenue from lands and premises. I should like to know whether the lands referred to are in all cases let by public auction?—Yes, or by tender.

253. Deputy S. Collins.—Are there none let on lease?—Where there are exceptional circumstances we ask for tenders through the Press, which is practically equivalent to an auction.

254. Are you satisfied that the system of tendering is as good as the system of public auction in present circumstances? —In some cases, I think it is better.

Generally speaking, I would say that the letting of land by public auction proves infinitely dearer in the case of the people taking the land than it does under the other method of tendering.

Deputy Davin.—I think that every member of the tax-paying public is entitled to the opportunity of taking State lands when they are to be let. The only way of doing that is by having a public auction.

255. Deputy S. Collins.—You said that some lands were let by public auction and others by tender. I think that, generally speaking, where State property of this nature is concerned, you would be likely to realise a higher rental if the land were let by public auction?

General MacMahon.—The other cases are very rare, and there is usually some reason for it.

256. My recollection is that Gormanston was let by tender?—No. Gormanston is let by public auction with the exception of a field that we acquired from Mr. Shuttleworth. When making the agreement with him for purchase there was provision that he would get that particular land for grazing at an annual sum.

That is what I was thinking of.

257. Deputy Davin.—Is there any letting by public auction, or by tender, without the previous authority of the Department of Finance?—Yes. In certain cases we have authority to have an auction without sanction of the Department of Finance. Take, for example, Army clothing which is cut up into rags. We need not go to the Department of Finance for sanction for an auction of that kind. Of course, if there was anything worth while involved we would have to get sanction.

258. Chairman.—I notice that item 15 of the Appropriations in Aid shows a marked reduction as compared with the Estimate?—That is a case of overestimation. This occurred about the time pay was consolidated when we thought we would get more than we actually did get. We made a mistake there.

259. You did not become aware of that to make the correction at the time of the Supplementary Estimate?—No, we were just late for that.

260. Deputy S. Collins.—This was the first year of the consolidated pay experiment?—Yes.

261. It is not likely to be a recurring element in estimation?—No. We know where we stand now.

262. Chairman.—Details in regard to losses are given on page 190. You must have had your heart in your mouth in the last couple of weeks of March when your net surplus went down to £350 on a Vote of £4,250,000. In relation to that, the only worry I had was about the Suspense Account that the Comptroller and Auditor General referred to, in paragraph 84. You would not have been influenced by the way the sands were running out?—I assure you we were not. There were two different sections dealing with it, and we did not take it into consideration at all.

Your estimation was very close and very satisfactory.

VOTE 57—ARMY PENSIONS.

Lieutenant-General P. Mac Mahon further examined.

263. Chairman.—Paragraph 85 of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s Report reads as follows:—

“Subhead J.—Defence Forces (Pensions) Schemes, 1937 to 1949.

Gratuities totalling £1,700 were paid to four married officers who retired subsequent to the introduction of consolidated rates of pay for officers, to which reference is made in paragraph 78. As the gratuities are not covered by the existing Defence Forces (Pensions) Scheme, which provides that married officers shall either be in occupation of married quarters or in receipt of lodging, fuel and light allowance at the married rate during the two years ending on the date of their retirement, they were paid on an ex-gratia basis with the sanction of the Department of Finance. I am informed that the amendment of the scheme necessary to bring the conditions for the grant of married officers’ gratuities up to date. having regard to the introduction of consolidated rates of pay, is under discussion with the Department of Finance.”

Does the Comptroller and Auditor General wish to say anything further on this?

Mr. Wann.—No, except that Department of Finance sanction for the payment of these gratuities was given on the strict understanding that they were in lieu of any award or gratuity to which officers might become eligible under the terms of the new amending scheme. I do not know whether any scheme has yet been promulgated.

General MacMahon.—The Army personnel got an increase in pay, but we have not yet provided for an increase in retired pay. We are awaiting an opportunity to introduce an amendment and will introduce it at the earliest possible moment.

264. Deputy S. Collins.—This is really a carry over from one position to another and is not likely to recur?—That is true.

265. Deputy Davin.—On subhead E.— Wound and Disability Pensions and Gratuities, etc.—what is the cause of the rather unusual delay between the issue of the findings and the payment of amounts granted?—There is no delay between the findings and the payment.

266. Deputy S. Collins.—The delay is in getting the claim decided?—Yes. The grants are sometimes delayed in the case of Special Allowances because the local pensions officer has to ascertain the financial position of the applicant. In the case of wound and disability pensions there is not more than ten days’ delay.

267. Deputy Davin.—Is there an Army rule or regulation which precludes your Department from reviewing a case where there is information to prove that the investigation officer did not compute correctly?—The Act provides that cases can only be reviewed annually and we are tied to that. It is not in any regulation.

268. There is no way out?—Unless you get the Dáil to remove that section.

Deputy S. Collins.—This is a tremendous hardship on a lot of people.

Deputy Davin.—You are aware that in the case of a review of an old age pension claim the period is not as long.

Chairman.—Six months.

Deputy S. Collins.—That is a matter for a change in legislation.

Deputy Davin.—I am satisfied, in view of the answer of the Accounting Officer.

269. Deputy McGrath.—Can you do anything to speed up the investigation by the Department of Social Welfare Office in ascertaining the means especially in the case of a re-award? As you know, the re-award is only made for a period, generally twelve months. Why could not the means be reviewed at least a month or more before the date on which the award ceases? Very often when a new award is being made, the recipient of the allowance is waiting two months, and that is a considerable hardship. He has possibly to go for home assistance in the interval?

General MacMahon.—We realise that and we are trying to improve the position.

You know the point I mean?—Yes.

Deputy Davin.—I have one bad case of that kind.

Deputy S. Collins.—I have more than one, unfortunately. I am sure the Lord Mayor of Cork, Deputy McGrath, has more than one.

General MacMahon.—Can Deputy Davin give the name of that case?

Deputy Davin.—Yes, I can give the file.

270. Deputy McGrath.—I find that most cases are held up, not in your Department but in Social Welfare?

General MacMahon.—I think they try to take it in their stride, in an area, in dealing with old age pensions work. They deal with a whole area at a time.

Deputy McGrath.—It is a terrible hardship.

271. Deputy S. Collins.—Could you make arrangements some time with the Department of Social Welfare to second officers to you for the purpose of getting your own claims through? Apropos what Deputy McGrath says, there is definite hardship.

Deputy Davin.—Has the Department or the Minister any effective control over the investigating officer in these cases?

General MacMahon.—The Minister can make representations to the Minister for Social Welfare.

Deputy Davin.—I am not blaming the Department of Defence.

Deputy S. Collins.—Inter-Departmental representations can be very long drawn out.

Deputy McGrath.—Why should a poor man have to go to a local T.D. to get him to speed this up?

Deputy Davin.—It is a bad state of affairs when, as Deputy McGrath says, these individuals are just barely carrying on on home assistance. There is no justification for the delay.

Deputy McGrath.—They have also to refund the amount of home assistance.

Chairman.—I know this is of great interest, but it is not the right place for it.

Deputy Davin.—I wanted to acquit the Department of Defence of responsibility. That was the purpose of my question.

272. Deputy S. Collins.—On subhead I. —Military Service Pensions—this sum is a very considerable one. The note says that “the number of cases falling for payment was less than anticipated.” How did this arise? Is it a fact that you had anticipated a number of new pensions becoming due and that the Board of Referees have not been doing their work as expeditiously as one might have anticipated?

General MacMahon.—When Judge Art O’Connor was appointed he went into the matter very carefully and studied what his predecessors did. I think that no pension was paid for about six months.

273. Has the situation improved from that point of view?—Yes. In the first six months no cases had been heard. We anticipated they would be heard right from the start.

274. Depuy McGrath.—Would an increased number of deaths have any effect on this, due to the age of most of the people?—I do not think so.

Deputy Davin.—It is a peculiar thing that the number of deaths nearly balances the number of new grants to applicants.

275. Deputy S. Collins.—I was anxious to inquire if there is any further explanation the Accounting Officer would like to add. It seems a rather large sum. We were wondering if there was any undue delay in investigation?

General MacMahon.—No awards were issued in the first six months, and Judge O’Connor died in the year under discussion.

Deputy McGrath.—I would not say it is too large an amount.

Deputy S. Collins.—It is not so much the size of the amount. I was thinking that if there was not some explanation the £17,000 might be far better off in the I.R.A. men’s pockets.

Chairman.—It is 75 per cent. of the surplus to be surrendered.

276. Deputy McGrath.—On subhead M.—Connaught Rangers (Pensions) Acts, 1936 and 1948—how do you account for the £136 not being spent?

General MacMahon.—I think one of the Connaught Rangers died. It was due to death.

Deputy S. Collins.—This is a continually diminishing charge.

277. Chairman.—On page 193, what are the extra receipts there?

General MacMahon.—Principally refunds of over-payments, where we did not discover all the facts in connection with a pension and sums had to be recovered.

The witness withdrew.

The Committee adjourned.

* See Appendix VI.

* See Appendix VII.

* See Appendix VIII.

† See Appendix IX.

* See Appendix X.

* See Appendix XI.