Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1955 > Committee of Public Accounts > Report - Appropriation Accounts 1953 - 1954

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Déardaoin, 24 Samhain, 1955.

Thursday, 24th November, 1955.

The Committee sat at 10.30 a.m.

DEPUTY CARTER in the chair.

Liam Ó Cadhla (An tArd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste), Mr. P. M. Clarke, Mr. J. Mooney, and Mr. J. E. Twamley (An Roinn Airgeadais) called and examined.

VOTE 65—DUNDRUM ASYLUM.

Dr. W. J. Coyne called and examined.

752. Chairman.—On subhead A.— Salaries, Wages and Allowances — you make provision in the Estimate for a staff of 80, including 37 male attendants and 14 female attendants, and you maintain an average of 94 patients. Is this a high proportion?—It is a very high proportion. The point is that basically when you are running a mental hospital, you must have a fair nucleus of staff for, say, 50 or 100 patients. As you go up from that, your proportion of staff to patients becomes infinitely less. To have ten criminal lunatics, you might have 20 of a staff, but to have 100 criminal lunatics, you might only have a proportion of 25. It is your basic number of patients you must have and as our number in Dundrum is always small, our proportion seems unusually high. We could take another 40 or 50 patients with perhaps one or two more staff only, maybe none at all.

753. Deputy Sheldon. — In fact, you have cut the number of male attendants from the previous year. You provided for more, I think, in 1952-53, 42 male attendants, and then it dropped to 37? —Maybe it was because four of them were promoted. New posts were created of deputy charge attendant which we did not have before. They were still with us, but were under a different nomenclature.

754. Chairman.—How many female patients are included in the 94? — Fourteen.

755. On subhead B. — Victualling Patients and Rations for Staff — I see that attendants pay for rations. Do they do so in all cases?—They do not all take rations but all who wish to take them do. Some of them feed themselves.

756. Do they pay the full cost?—We calculate the estimated cost of the food to be supplied to the staff. We work out so much for milk, tea, sugar, mutton, bacon, eggs, butter, potatoes and vegetables. It is the actual cost.

757. On subhead F.—Farm and Garden —you expended £1,741 on the farm and garden but your receipts were only £866. I presume there is an explanation for this?—We have been modernising our farm. It was very old fashioned and we are getting in new equipment. For instance, this year, we had a tractor replacing two horses. In the year under consideration, we had to purchase a potato washing machine through the Office of Public Works at a cost of £42. Acting on the advice of the farm foreman and technical officers of the Department of Agriculture, it was considered necessary to purchase greater quantities than usual of fertilisers in order to restore and repair the deficiencies in the farm, arising out of the constant tillage. In addition, there was an increase of about 1/- per ton in the contractor’s price for the supply of farmyard manure. Also this year contracts were placed earlier than usual for the supply of spring seeds and manure and consequently earlier delivery was effected. Accounts were thus received earlier and payments fell to be made accordingly. In previous years, the payment for a proportion of the spring sowings fell to be made in the succeeding financial year, but that is not the position this year.

758. Deputy A. Barry.—I take it the farm work is part of the treatment?— Yes, it is occupational therapy. They are used to it and it is better for them than anything else. Unfortunately the younger patients do not tend to go on the land; it is mostly the older patients.

Deputy Sheldon.—That is the general experience.

759. Chairman.—What area of ground is under cultivation?—We have 33 acres altogether, 14 under cultivation and 19 under buildings.

760. Do you keep any livestock?—Pigs.

761. How much of the £866 realised represents the value of the produce used in the Asylum property?—£350 roughly.

Deputy A. Barry.—I think the whole Vote is very neatly arranged and very well set out.

762. Deputy Sheldon.—With regard to Subhead G. —Appropriations in Aid— what happened about the leather work, the rug and mat-making. You had anticipated higher receipts than the year before and in the event, you did not get them. You actually got less than the year before?—It depends entirely on the number of patients who will work on them. It varies from year to year, but it is going on satisfactorily. We may not be making a profit on it—we found a little bit of trouble selling these bags. People do not want to take them from us, I imagine on account of trade union business or something like that. We just sell them to anyone who will take them privately. There is not much of a market for them in the city.

763. There is a machine for making chain link fencing. In Donegal, they have a machine in a mental hospital and the county council buys most of the products. It is very simple and very suitable for the patients? — I did not know about that. That is interesting.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 54—POSTS AND TELEGRAPHS.

Leon Ó Broin called and examined.

764. Chairman.—Paragraph 89 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General is as follows:—

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

The losses borne on the vote for the year ended 31st March, 1954, amounted to £4,597. A classified schedule of these losses is set out at page 164. At page 167 particulars are given of 25 cases in which cash shortages or misappropriations amounting to £905 and $693.25 were discovered; the sums in question were made good and no charge to public funds was necessary.”

765. Deputy Sheldon.—On the general question of default with regard to the Post Office Savings Bank deposits, I always understood that the chief difficulty was through depositors themselves breaking the rules by leaving their books in sub post-offices and being rather careless about them, but I have reasons to believe that that is not the only way it happens. It can arise that people quite properly keep their book and that fraud can take place. I am wondering just how effective the check is or whether it would be unduly expensive to elaborate the check. I know of a case where amounts deposited should have been receipted from Dublin and were not receipted from Dublin and, of course, the money had not been lodged properly at all; there was fraud. How are depositors made aware that these receipts should come where the amounts are large?—Of course, it is actually on the book itself. It stands out clearly in black and white what they are expected to do and, as the Deputy has said, the principal trouble arises from the fact that depositors do not do what they are asked to do. They do not make sure, first of all, in the case of large deposits, that they receive an acknowledgment from the Department and, apart from that, they do not take care to see that the book is returned once a year for examination. All we can do on our side is to try to keep a watch on offices where we are afraid things are not being done as well as they might be and, on top of that, we do call in regularly and methodically every year a certain number of books, but, of course, the total number of books is tremendous —630,000—and if we were to try to get, as Deputy Sheldon so rightly suggests, 100 per cent. security, the cost would be disproportionate to the value. Actually, the more we look into this, the more we are satisfied that what we are doing is quite sufficient, having regard to the limited amount of defalcations that are occurring. They are still limited.

766. Deputy A. Barry.—There is a reduction on last year?—In the year we are dealing with, defalcations amounted to £1,496 — 18 cases — compared with £3,000 the previous year. Looking over a period of 11 years, £1,496 is not very great. There have been three years in which the figure was higher, but even in the highest year in that period nothing at all to cause alarm emerged.

767. Deputy Sheldon.—I take it that in the event of anyone inquiring at head office about a deposit where they had not got an acknowledgment, there would generally be an immediate inquiry?— Most certainly, and if the Accountant’s Branch had any reason whatever to expect fraud, they would bring in our Investigation Branch right away.

768. Chairman.—Paragraph 90 of the Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Stores.

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

Reference was made in paragraph 87 of the previous report to a loss of £24,415 resulting from the destruction of poles in a fire which occurred at a storage depot. Included in Appendix No. 11 to the account (statement of receipts and issues of engineering stores) is a sum of £3,465 being adjustment in respect of the loss of poles arising from a second outbreak of fire at the same depot. The Department of Finance has now sanctioned the write-off of the losses involved, amounting to £27,880.

In addition to the engineering stores shown in Appendix No. 11 as valued at £2,598,756 on 31 March, 1954, engineering stores to the value of £1,628 were held on behalf of other Government Departments. Stores other than engineering stores were valued at £754,403, including £179,716 in respect of stores held for other Government Departments.”

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—I have nothing to add to that paragraph, Mr. Chairman.

769. I presume you have made arrangements to prevent as far as possible future outbreaks?

Mr. Ó Broin.—Yes, Mr. Chairman. I said something about these two fires last year. The trouble arose, you may remember, in a place to which the public had access and, although we had considerable fire-watching precautions, these two fires occurred. We have now such stores as we have in Dublin in a place where there is no contact at all with the public and we are satisfied that the precautions, such as they are, rule out almost completely the possibility of an accidental outbreak.

770. Deputy A. Barry.—Is the hydrant position you were worried about last year safe?—I gather that the situation at the moment is that, having regard to the way in which the poles are stacked and watched, there is little or no possibility now of an accidental outbreak. We have some reason to believe that the former outbreaks occurred through the intervention of some member of the public. We are satisfied ourselves that they did not occur accidentally. Now we have the poles in a place outside the city to which the public has no access and we are satisfied that, by and large, the precautions we are taking rule out, as completely as we can envisage, the possibility of an accidental outbreak.

771. Chairman.—What type of stores are held for other Government Departments?—We do purchase, as you know, a tremendous amount of stuff for the whole Government service and the main classes of stores which we purchase cover a very extensive list here. There is a good deal of what we call common stores, that is, stores common to all Government Departments, such as cloth and so on for manufacture into uniforms for the Gardaí, the Army and our own Post Office men. Then we make miscellaneous purchases for particular Departments.

772. Do these stores include reserve stocks?—You are talking now of these emergency reserve stocks?

Yes?—Actually, apart from the Post Office items we did purchase a limited amount of these common stores in 1950 at the time we were making emergency purchases, but they really did not amount to much and no portion of these reserves is now held. We do, however, carry all the time certain emergency reserves for the Department of Defence.

773. Chairman.—Paragraph 91 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Revenue.

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

The net yield of revenue for the years 1952-53 and 1953-54 is shown in the following statement:—

£6,200,000 was paid into the Exchequer during the year, leaving a balance of £390,673 at 31 March, 1954, as compared with a balance of £397,411 at the end of the previous financial year.

Sums due for telephone services amounting to £1,607 were written off during the year as irrecoverable.”

Does the £1,607 written off represent amounts due by telephone subscribers?—Yes.

Bad debts? — Yes. The amount represents about one-sixth of a penny per £ of revenue.

Deputy A. Barry.—It is very small.

774. Chairman. — Do you incur any bad debts on the postal and the telegraph services?—Offhand, I do not think we incur any bad debts on the postal side, but where telegrams are sent by phone, you might have a bad debt so incurred included in the telephone accounts.

775. Do you look for deposits in cases where telephones are installed?—We do.

776. Chairman.—Paragraph 92 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Post Office Savings Bank Accounts.

The accounts of the Post Office Savings Bank for the year ended 31 December, 1953, were submitted to a test examination with satisfactory results. The balance due to depositors, inclusive of interest, amounted to £71,056,613 on 31 December, 1953, as compared with £65,583,712 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 £2,429,763. Of this sum, £1,695,691 was paid and credited to depositors in respect of interest, management expenses amounted to £167,750 and £566,322 was set aside towards provision against depreciation in the value of securities.”

With regard to the figure of £566,322 set aside towards provision against depreciation in the value of securities, is that a statutory provision?—Yes.

777. What amount has accumulated by way of reserves? — Actually the Post Office Savings Bank accounts are submitted by the Minister for Finance pursuant to a statute. We find under Statement No. 3 incorporated in the accounts a list of liabilities to depositors amounting to £71,000,000 and alongside it, a detailed account of the nature and amount of the securities held against the balance and an explanation is given of the present cost and market value of the assets. The figure for deposits is £71,000,000 and it is completely balanced by the securities held.

778. Deputy Sheldon. — Does the account also show the total amount in reserve against depreciation? — It shows the amount set aside every year against depreciation and the amount set aside remains part of the investment.

779. Chairman. — What is the total roughly? This shows that liabilities were £71,000,000, but the list of securities is not totalled, but they do set out the cost value of the securities at £74,553,000 and the market value of the securities at £68,500,000. The accumulated figure for reserves is not shown.

Mr. Ó Cadhla. — I think it is very roughly about £3,000,000; at least, it was at the end of last year.

780. Chairman.—Paragraph 93 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Post Office Factory.

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

Including works in progress on 31 March, 1954, the expenditure on manufacturing jobs during the year amounted to £55,047, expenditure on repair work (other than repairs to mechanical transport) to £38,712, and expenditure on mechanical transport repairs to £11,692.”

781. What, roughly speaking, is the nature of the manufacture and repair work done in the Post Office factory?— I have a very long list here of 70 items and articles which we are authorised to manufacture and assemble. Some of the things we manufacture are mail bags, switch boards, leather sets, badges, bunting, flags and buttons. We repair all sorts of things for ourselves such as telephone equipment, switch boards, telephone instruments, coin boxes and switches. We do a great lot of mechanical transport repairs as well.

782. Is any of this work done by contract? — A certain amount is done, but the contracts must be obtained in open competition.

783. Do you do all your own mechanical transport repairs?—Nearly all. There are certain things we cannot do ourselves.

784. Deputy Sheldon.—With regard to the mechanical transport repairs, do you make use of the Public Works engineering workshop?—No.

Deputy A. Barry.—The Deputy would like it if you made use of these expensive lathes in the engineering workshop.

785. Chairman.—Under subhead AA. of the Vote—Payment to other Administrations in respect of Services rendered by the Agency—what is the nature of these services?—These are payments we make to other administrations mainly for the work of cashing money orders and postal orders.

786. Under subhead C. — Rent, Office Fittings, etc.—how did the excess expenditure on new premises arise?—Of that sum, £3,500 relates to new premises at Hammam Building, St. Andrew Street, and St. John’s Road, about which we did not have information available at the Estimate stage so that it was not possible then to make a closer estimate.

787. Under subhead D. — Purchase of Sites, etc. (Postal and Telegraph Services only)—the note indicates that the acquisition of sites did not materialise. Does that mean a postponement?—Yes.

788. Deputy Bartley.—On the question of the acquisition of sites, I should like to know what is the policy of the Department in a case where suitable sites offer for Post Office premises. I have in mind particularly cases where extensions of Post Office premises are desirable and suitable sites become available. Do the Post Office authorities refrain from going into competition with private interests where such sites become available and if they do, what is the reason for this attitude?—If we very badly need a site, we will not refrain from going into such competition. But circumstances alter cases and I should like to know what particular case is in the Deputy’s mind.

I think it would be undesirable to mention any specific case?—The answer I have given is correct. If we really badly need a site, we will not be prevented from going after it because other people are in the field.

Deputy M. P. Murphy.—I take it you have to ascertain whether these other people are genuine or not. Some of this competition may be of a bogus nature.

Deputy Bartley.—That is all right, but we all know if you have an important office in an important place, any land convenient to it is valuable, possibly more valuable to a speculator than to anybody else, so that the machinations of a speculator may be anticipated, human nature being what it is.

789. Chairman. — Does the Office of Public Works purchase sites for the Department of Posts and Telegraphs?— No. As far as the Department is concerned, we purchase our own sites. The Office of Public Works has secured sites for Radio Éireann as distinct from the Department, but we formally purchase our own sites. The Office of Public Works then steps in to put up the building or make any structural alterations that may be necessary.

790. Deputy Sheldon. — On subhead E.2—Conveyance of Mails by Road—the note on this refers to an unanticipated change in the incidence of payments for the Dublin City Mail Service and the figure given is £650. Would Mr. Ó Broin amplify that?—I think this is a case where we introduced some streamlining into our accounting, with the result that in that particular year we had to pay an extra month’s bills. That indicates improved reorganisation.

791. Chairman.—Under subhead E.3, what are the packet services at home?— These are the services between the mainland and the islands off the coast.

792. Deputy Bartley. — Perhaps the information which I require may be available. What proportion of the cost of the conveyance of these mails is in respect of conveyance by contract? — I have not got that figure with me, but I could get it.*

793. Deputy M. P. Murphy. — Is it deemed to be an economic proposition to farm out the conveyance of the mails?— We look at these things very critically and judge for ourselves. If the contractor can do it better than ourselves and cheaper, we give it in contract. If not, we do it ourselves.

794. Chairman. — On subhead G.1— Stores—and G.2—Uniform Clothing—the notes refer to the use of reserve stocks for current requirements. Do you normally maintain a minimum reserve?—We retain what we call a normal stock, but whether you can describe it as a reserve or not is another matter. When we start to eat into a particular commodity, we always have regard to the question of replenishment or the length of time that the stock will last.

Deputy A. Barry.—Yes; you see if it bears a proper relation to the rate of consumption.

795. Chairman.—How did the change in the incidence of accounts arise (£11,500) as referred to in the note to subhead G.1?—I understand that delivery of stocks for which provision was not included in the Estimate was received earlier than expected and goods which it was expected would be paid for in the previous year did not come in course of payment until 1953-54, although they were delivered in 1952.

796. Deputy Sheldon.—There is a reference in the note on subhead G.1 to the reduction in the prices of new vehicles —what type of vehicles came down in price?—Small cars came down in price, whereas the prices of the larger cars— the V.8’s—went up. Competition by certain manufacturers of cars brought prices down in the Irish market.

797. Chairman. — On subhead H.1— Law Charges—how does the expansion of the telephone service give rise to increased expenditure on law charges?— I suppose with the popularisation of the telephone, we are getting down to a stratum where there are more bad payers and that leads to increased law charges.

Deputy Bartley.—That is a very good reason.

Deputy Sheldon. — The bigger your business, the bigger your risks.

798. Chairman. — On subhead H.3— Incidental Expenses—do you do all your advertising and printing through the Stationery Office? — Yes, we always use the Stationery Office.

799. Deputy Sheldon.—On the I. subheads, on the question of telephone capital and its effect — how is it determined what will be borne on the Vote and what will come from capital? I see in two subheads you did not get the relief from capital you had expected?— What subheads had you in mind?

Subhead I.1 — Salaries, Wages and Allowances—and I.2 — Travelling Expenses. The relief from the Telephone Capital Fund was less than anticipated? —The trouble, of course, is to estimate accurately a good deal in advance. These Estimates have to be prepared in the month of September or thereabouts, in advance of the financial year. It is very difficult to anticipate in the Estimate with even reasonable accuracy how much of your work will be of a capital character and how much of a maintenance character. Very often we run into difficulties, such as, for instance, in cabling jobs where certain difficulties arise which change the character of the work from the accounting point of view. Later on, when the accounts branch gets on the job, they have to make these adjustments all the time and it does upset the original picture. It is very largely a bookkeeping matter of keeping a balance between the Vote and the Telephone Capital Account.

800. Chairman. — On subhead L.5— Incidental Expenses—is £5 the maximum award for suggestions by the engineering staff?—Under our delegated powers, we can give up to £5 ourselves for appropriate suggestions, but, of course, that does not prevent us from going beyond £5 with special Finance sanction in suitable cases. At the moment, I understand we have a case before Finance where we are asking for £50 for a man who has produced something unusual. If we got anything revolutionary, we would ask for still more.

801. Deputy Bartley. — How does the payment of this award affect patent rights, if any?

Deputy A. Barry.—Do you obtain any right by paying the award? — I think you can take it the awards are very largely in the nature of encouragement. I think there is nothing very spectacular about any of these things; they are really awards to mark our appreciation of the interest the men take in improving techniques and tools and so on. If at any stage it was necessary to do anything to bring us into the sphere of patents, we would have to go rather warily. I do not think we have had anything like that. I do not remember any case coming to my notice where we had to worry about breach of patent.

802. Chairman. — On subhead L.4— Rates on Wires—what are these?—I understand that our Department is generally exempt from rates on property but under certain old statutes, we have to pay rates on wires taken over by our predecessors from the Telegraph Company and from the National Telephone Company. They probably do not amount to very much.

803. On subhead M.—Telephone Capital Repayments—how was this figure arrived at? — The Minister for Finance every year sets up an annuity in respect of the advances for telephone capital in that period. The figure set out here is for the repayment of these annuities. The £724,495 represents what we are now paying annually to clear the capital and interest since the very beginning.

804. Deputy Bartley. — What is the total capital sum?—The unredeemed sum is £10,500,000.

805. Chairman.—On subhead N.3— Agency Payments and the appropriate receipt in Appropriations in Aid — you got back £33,000—I suppose there is a time lag or do you charge anything for your services?—You are quite right, the two amounts are in respect of different sets of four quarters.

806. Deputy Bartley.—On subheads Q.1 to Q.3, with regard to the provisions and installation of wireless communications with the islands, has the programme been completed for all the islands?—I should say first of all that the expenditure will not come under this group of subheads, but under some of the engineering subheads. As regards the second part of the Deputy’s question, I have not got the exact details here, but I doubt if we have finished the job.

807. Arising from that, I wonder is the Department satisfied with the efficiency of the new system of wireless telephony? I mention the matter because on a few occasions in my own experience the message had to be relayed from a point on the mainland to its destination and the reply had to be similarly relayed. Also the system frequently breaks down. I was wondering whether this new type of communication was satisfactorily tested out before it was installed. I do know that the Department was observing its operation in other places and they were apparently satisfied with its success, but I wonder could the Accounting Officer give us a short account of the Department’s experience of its operation under their own supervision?—Frankly, I could not, without notice.

I have no wish to delay on it but I would like if the Committee could be given some information about its operation by way of letter?—Certainly, that can be done. I should say in general that we regard the present means of communication as a great improvement on what was there before. The technique represents the best that is known to us. Whether in actual use the thing could have given us better service is a matter I will discuss in the letter which I will be glad to send you.*

808. Deputy M. P. Murphy.—This particular service was improved in some cases in West Cork recently and the improved service, according to my information, supplied to the people in the island of Sharkey was found much worse than that which was there previously. I wonder would that be included in the statement for Deputy Bartley?

Deputy Bartley.—I take it that we will get an account covering the entire service?—Yes, certainly.

809. In any event, as a matter of policy, cables have been abandoned, I think?—Yes.

810. Deputy Sheldon.—With regard to item No. 10 in the details to the Appropriations in Aid — Receipts from British Government for excess parcels traffic — the balance of parcels traffic seems to fluctuate very slightly. In the previous year it was estimated at £10,000 and £5,500 was received; then the estimate was dropped to £1,000 and £12,000 was obtained.

Deputy Bartley.—That represents the increased traffic in tinned salmon. We have seen a lot in the papers about that recently.

Mr. O Broin.—It is not due to the salmon, which was something that only occurred recently. You will see the effect of that in the next accounting year. It is true that, due to the improved food situation in Britain, there occurred a sharp fall in the number of parcels sent from here. The figure of 1,700,000 in 1952 fell to 1,200,000 in 1953; then in the accounting period 1953-54 we got more parcels than we dispatched to Britain, hence the balance of payments was in our favour to an unexpected extent.

811. Deputy Sheldon.—Has the balance ever been on the other side?—Yes.

812. Then it would appear as voted money, would it?—Yes, that is right. We would pay out more under the appropriate subhead.

813. Last year I think the note was not quite accurate—perhaps, it would not be fair to take it up now—because there actually was a receipt from Britain of £5,342 and the note said that the excess of outward over inward was greater than anticipated, so there had not been an excess?—The note to the appropriation account?

Yes.—I see.

814. Chairman.—With regard to item No. 8 in the details of the Appropriations in Aid—what is the cause of the increase over the previous year—£119,000 odd as against £46,000 in receipts from Social Insurance Fund?—I understand that was due to the new legislation setting up some new payments altogether.

815. In regard to item No. 9, what agency services are these?—These represent a wide variety of payments we make on behalf of British departments: the Post Office, the War Office, the Admiralty, the Ministry of Pensions and so on.

816. With regard to item No. 14 (c) in the Appropriations in Aid, how does commission on the repurchase of stamps arise?—I think this is largely related to newspaper competitions. Stamps are sent in to the newspaper offices and then are brought to us; we take them over at a discount.

817. Deputy A. Barry.—You charge the newspapers for the use of the stamps?—Yes.

818. Deputy Sheldon.—In the previous year, there was a large item for the sale of engineering stores; I take it that in this particular year there were no such sales?—Our controller sells such accumulations as are in the stores in accordance with market possibilities.

819. Deputy M. P. Murphy. — What percentage commission do you charge on the repurchase of stamps?—Seven and a half per cent.

820. Deputy Sheldon.—There is a note at the top of page 168 of the Appropriation Accounts stating: “The total value of engineering stores handled during the year was £1,653,325.” That represents a very big drop on the previous year when the figure was £2,310,448. Is the drop reflected in the amount of stores charged to the Suspense Account?—I do not think so. I have no information available just at the moment about that. In fact, I have not even got the previous year’s figure.

It was more than £750,000 above the figure in the year under review. The previous figure was £2,310,448?—Frankly. I do not know at the moment the answer to that question. If you like, I will send you a note later explaining the position.*

821. Chairman.—In regard to item No. 10 in the notes at the end of the Vote, what is the present position? Has there been any improvement? — These are thefts from kiosks. My information is that there has been no alarming rise in thefts from kiosks, despite the fact that there are more kiosks in operation. As regards preventing these thefts, we have to rely very largely on the Gardaí. But I would say we have no reason to feel any more uneasiness about this particular form of interference than any other body concerned with public property or with property used by the public.

822. Deputy Sheldon.—With regard to note 8, concerning British Admiralty navigational warnings broadcast by Valentia and Malin Head coast stations, I take it the amount mentioned here is just a bookkeeping item. There was not any real loss? It seems odd that information was dispatched after it was decided not to continue the service?— Again, I have no information about that at the moment. I would like to pursue it later by letter.**

823. Chairman. — In Appendix II — Statement showing Receipts and Issues of Engineering Stores for the Year Ended 31st March, 1954 — there is an item: “Loss on Rate Book prices”—what is this?—For the purposes of setting up a charge in respect of any particular job we do, we have to refer to the cost of the materials employed. We have a rate book which sets out the prices of materials based upon our most recent experience, and we import the relevant figure or figures into the estimate of charge for the particular job. It works out now and again—it is purely a bookkeeping matter—that we have to make some sort of adjustment in our accounts subsequently as between the accounting price of the materials issued and their actual purchase price.

824. Deputy Sheldon.—On Appendices I and Ia—Abstracts of Engineering Expenditure—I notice it was estimated there would be an expenditure of £32,950 on telegraph services. In fact, what happened was a credit for £1,995. I do not understand that. How do you get a credit on the construction side of telegraph services? — I am told that the answer to that is that we reduced our apparatus instead of adding to it. That is probably indicative of the change that is taking place in the position of telegraphs in the country.

I do not understand it any better? —Would you like me to give some information about that?

I am sure it is a matter of accountancy? —If you like, I will explore the matter further and send a note.†

825. Deputy M. P. Murphy. — In the notes to subhead H.2—Losses by Default, Accident, etc.—there is an item: Due to the loss of a registered letter in transit to Glengarriff sub-office, Bantry, £50. Could the witness explain that further?— The letter contained £100 in bank notes and bore a registration fee of 11d., which covered compensation up to the value of the contents. It was confirmed that the letter was duly posted, but there was no record of its being delivered and the addressee denied the receipt. The letter, with other registered letters, was advised in bulk in course of transit and was due to be sorted in three post offices in England and two in Ireland before reaching Glengarriff. Detailed inquiry, both in this country and in Great Britain, failed to establish the point at which the loss occurred. In accordance with the usual practice in such circumstances, and with the authority of the Minister for Finance, it was agreed with the British Post Office that the sender should be compensated and the loss borne on an equal sharing basis between the two administrations. The sum of £50 was therefore charged to this Vote.

826. Deputy Bartley.—What steps does the Department take to discourage the public from sending cash through the post? It seems to me a very undesirable practice, remembering there are such convenient alternatives? — Whenever it comes to our notice, of course, we draw the attention of the public to it and I think you will probably find in Eolaí an Phoist and other publications of that sort, a warning against this particular practice. The attention of the public is drawn to the alternative methods.

827. I think it would be well justified expenditure if the Department were to put a special notice up in post offices in relation to this. Very few read Eolaí an Phoist.

Deputy A. Barry.—People do not read notices in the post office, either.

828. Deputy Bartley.—I think if you had a notice such as that for dog licences and wireless licences, you would find that some people, at any rate, would take notice of it and if the local postmaster or postmistress became aware that a customer was sending money in cash and pointed out to the sender that it was an undesirable practice, I think that would help to reduce the number of such transmissions?—Yes; on the other hand, we have to be rather careful about giving publicity to anything that might undermine the confidence of the public in the Post Office itself and we have always been rather chary about advertising.

829. As against that, one incident of pilfering does more to damage public confidence than would any interference on the part of those in charge?—I do not altogether agree with that. I think people are inclined to judge by their own personal experience and, the general experience is so good that they are not deterred to any great extent by individual cases of loss.

Deputy Sheldon.—The fact that, if the proper methods are used, the sender is compensated, is surely sufficient notice. I think there is a limit beyond which the public cannot be protected against their own foolishness.

Chairman.—Absolutely!

830. Deputy M. P. Murphy.—When the allegation is made that money has been lost in transit in a registered packet and, after a full investigation, this allegation is found to be false, is it usual or unusual for the Department, having spent a good deal of money in investigating, to take steps against the person who made the allegation?—I cannot think of a case at the moment which would enable me to answer that question.

Deputy M. P. Murphy.—I know of a case in West Cork where a person alleged that he posted a registered packet of £3. On arrival, the £3 was not in the packet. That was the nature of the allegation. The Department informed him in letters that they were satisfied there was no foundation for the allegation. I assumed that some expenditure was involved in investigating this allegation in regard to the missing £3. If the Department was satisfied that they were correct and that this man had no grounds for the complaint he made, it was rather surprising that no further action was taken.

Deputy Bartley.—I do not see what action anybody could take. How could you establish a public mischief?

Chairman.—I should like Deputies to speak to the Accounting Officer. I am sorry, but I cannot permit Deputies to indulge in cross-talk.

Deputy Bartley.—It is because of the difficulty in doing what Deputy Murphy suggests that I made the remarks previously. Unless the person who put the £3 in the letter made a charge that could be brought home to some public official, nobody could take a personal action. On the grounds of a public mischief, what can the court do if the person swore he put the £3 in the registered letter?

Deputy M. P. Murphy.—Would he not be entitled to the same treatment as the person who sent the registered packet containing £100 to Glengarriff?

Deputy Bartley.—Here is a case where the packet was sorted five times. Nobody could put his finger on the point where the loss took place. It is arising from that that I made my remarks. That type of thing can happen and the Post Office authorities cannot be blamed for not finding out where the loss occurred. If the public were dissuaded from using a method that is so open to abuse, it seems to me that it would be action worthwhile.

Deputy Sheldon. — Both cases were registered packets.

Deputy M. P. Murphy. — Both cases were the same. This man felt very annoyed about the decision of the Department. I thought that, when the Department satisfied themselves he was wrong, to substantiate that belief, they should bring a charge of creating a public mischief or pay the man compensation as was done in the Glengarriff case. It was a most unsatisfactory arrangement to leave the matter as it was left.

VOTE 55—WIRELESS BROADCASTING

Leon Ó Broin further examined.

831. Chairman.—Paragraphs 94 and 95 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General read as follows:—

“Pursuant to a decision of the Government on the reorganisation of the broadcasting service, the form of the estimate for wireless broadcasting was modified and expenditure in the year under review is, accordingly, shown under two subheads only, viz.— A—Expenses of Broadcasting, and B— Equipment, inclusive of Labour. Licence fees continue to be brought to account as extra receipts payable to the Exchequer, and other receipts, including those from advertisements, are appropriated in aid of the vote.

Subhead A.—Expenses of Broadcasting.

As part of the reorganisation referred to in the previous paragraph, Comhairle Radio Éireann, consisting of a chairman and four members, was established on 1st January, 1953, to advise and assist the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs on the conduct of the broadcasting service and to be responsible, under the Minister, for the general control and supervision of the service. It was also arranged that subject to certain reservations, mainly concerning staffing arrangements, the sum provided each year for the expenses of broadcasting might be expended on the authority of the Minister without reference to the Minister for Finance.”

832. With regard to the note to subhead B.—Equipment, inclusive of Labour —in what circumstances was customs duty not charged on new transmitters? Was it just a Revenue concession?—I understand that the customs duty on wireless telegraphy apparatus was formerly a revenue duty, but it is now mainly a protective duty. The result is that licences can be obtained on the recommendation of the Department of Industry and Commerce for the importation free of duty of most articles of a type not manufactured in Ireland. The contract for the new transmitters was with Brown-Boveri (Ireland) Ltd. and the price quoted by the firm was exclusive of customs duty. The firm actually cleared the transmitters through the customs and obtained licences for their importation free of duty. Radio Éireann has to provide for the payment of customs duty in these cases, as it is not known in advance whether or not a free import licence will be obtained.

833. What about item No. 1 in Appropriations in Aid—in regard to receipts from advertisements?—These are gross receipts.

834. There is also the item in respect of Licence Fees in extra receipts payable to the Exchequer. I notice that there is a big increase compared with the previous year. There is a sum of £331,000 odd against a sum of £263,000 odd. Were more licences issued or was the increase due to the increase of the licence from 12/6 to 17/6?—It was due to both causes.

835. What is the position regarding television sets?—The position with regard to television is that the Oireachtas has never envisaged it. There is no mention of television in any of our statutes. We have no responsibility for it and we cannot collect a special licence fee, even if we wanted to.

836. Deputy Bartley.—The words radio telegraphy are used?—Wireless telegraphy.

837. Could not one by some stretch of the imagination include television within the ambit of that term?—I think the matter has been looked at rather closely and the answer is no.

838. Deputy Sheldon.—It must be remembered that a television set broadcasts sound as well as providing pictures.— My advice is that we have no power to exact a special licence fee for television.

839. Deputy Bartley.—What will the position be if somebody sets up a television apparatus before the Oireachtas wakens up to the situation? Would we be able to make retrospective legislation?— Are you talking about transmitters or receivers? The position is that the transmission side is controlled. For instance, the B.B.C. is broadcasting a television show from Dublin this week and they have to take out a licence to do so. We control transmission but not reception.

Deputy Bartley.—The individual who sets up a receiving apparatus cannot now be required to pay a licence fee?

Deputy Sheldon.—I am sure a motion to change the law would be popular.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 56—DEFENCE.

Lieut. General P. MacMahon called and examined.

840. Chairman.—Paragraph 96 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Subhead K.—Provisions and Allowances in 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 £71 10s. 7d. and £72 0s. 9d. per head, respectively, as compared with £69 17s. 2d. and £67 14s. 10d. in the previous year, while the average production of beef per head was 693 lbs. and 699 lbs., respectively, as compared with 699 lbs. and 673 lbs.”

Have you anything to add, Mr. Ó Cadhla?

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—No. This paragraph is for information.

841. Chairman.—The bread ration for a soldier is, I suppose, a quarter of a loaf?

Lieut. General MacMahon.—Yes, Mr. Chairman.

842. Is there any civilian labour employed in the Curragh bakery?—No. The bakery is staffed by serving soldiers.

843. Have you any idea how the production costs compare with the commercial bakeries?—They are very much the same as outside.

844. With regard to meat, what method do you adopt in the purchase of cattle? —The cattle are purchased by an agent appointed by the Minister.

845. Is the Curragh abattoir supplied from the Dublin market?—No. The agent purchases locally.

846. What weight of beast do you find good?—About 11 cwt.

847. Do you supply out-stations from these abattoirs? — We only supply the Curragh and Dublin. We supply the other units by contract.

848. Chairman.—Paragraph 97 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Subhead S.—Barrack Maintenance and Minor Works.

A Board of officers was appointed in 1950 to survey the position arising from the shortage of houses available for married soldiers and to make recommendations with a view to the provision of additional accommodation. As a preliminary step towards implementing the findings of the Board a scheme for the erection of 88 houses on a site owned by the Department adjacent to a military barracks in Dublin was commenced in the year under review. The work is being carried out by direct labour under the supervision of the Corps of Engineers as the Office of Public Works could not give the project the required priority. It is estimated that the cost of the scheme will be £150,000 and, as the estimate contained no provision for major capital works, I have inquired as to the amount expended in the year to 31 March, 1954.”

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—The Accounting Officer has informed me that the expenditure incurred on this building scheme to 31st March 1954, was just over £2,000.

849. Chairman.—This is a very big work. Is this the first time the Army undertook a work of this size?

Lieut.-General MacMahon. — Yes, the first time.

850. In view of the amount of expenditure involved, was not the sanction of the Dáil considered necessary?—We got the sanction of the Minister for Finance and it was regarded as coming within the ambit of the Vote.

851. Since the building of the houses must have been under consideration for some time, you surely had adequate time to introduce a supplementary estimate to show the amount? I think this arose before the Committee on a previous occasion. One would think it desirable that a major capital work of construction would be shown as a separate item and not included with maintenance and other works?—Very little expenditure was incurred in the particular year and the Dáil had already agreed to the provision in the Office of Public Works Vote for the erection of houses in Dublin. It was merely transferring the work from one Vote to another.

852. Deputy Sheldon.—May I point out also that the name of the subhead has been changed? In the year of account, it was called Barrack Maintenance and Minor Works. Currently, it is called Barrack Maintenance and New Works. I take it that is an indication that work other than minor is being undertaken.

Chairman. — At the same time, is it correct procedure to provide work of this magnitude under a maintenance subhead?—Very little was spent in that particular year and provision was made in the following year.

853. Did you receive Finance approval? —Oh, yes. That Department did not consider it necessary to have a Supplementary Estimate introduced.

854. Has the Department of Finance any views on the procedure?

Mr. P. M. Clarke.—Perhaps I should say that even during the Emergency certain large works were carried out by the Corps of Engineers other than minor works, but during the Emergency years the Army Estimate was changed so that it contained only two subheads—one composite subhead repeating the ambit of the Vote and an Appropriations-in-Aid subhead. Consequently, the title of subhead S was not shown in detail. At the end of the Emergency, the title of this subhead should really have been changed to what it is at present, Barrack Maintenance and New Works, because it had been the practice from Emergency times for the Corps of Engineers to carry out works which would not properly be described as minor works. There was really a delay in changing the title of the subhead; but since it was not customary to show the details of the works in Part III of the Estimate, so long as the total provision for new works was adequate, and so long as the expenditure was within the ambit, it was not considered necessary to introduce a Supplementary Estimate.

Chairman.—I would express the view that capital expenditure of this nature should be shown separately in the Estimate, that it should be provided for separately.

855. Deputy A. Barry.—Could you get an indication as to whether the precedent is one that is likely to be followed very largely by the Defence Department? Is this housing of soldiers going to be recurring in a large way?

Lieut.-General MacMahon.—Yes, Mr. Chairman, it is.

856. Deputy Bartley.—Are preparations being made to give soldiers the benefit of this development in areas outside Dublin?—Yes; we propose to build houses at the Curragh and Athlone. We have provision in the current Estimate for building there and later on we hope to build houses in Cork and Limerick.

Deputy Bartley. — That is what I wanted to find out.

857. Chairman.—Paragraph 98 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Subhead T.—Military Lands.

The charge to this subhead includes £46,070 being the cost, including legal expenses, of 423 acres of land acquired for the purpose of providing hard-surface runways at a military aerodrome. This property includes a residence and other buildings which it was necessary to acquire owing to the refusal of the owner to sell separately the portion of his land required for the runways. Arrangements have been made for the purchase of a further area of 51 acres in connection with the project. The area required to provide the runways is 187 acres and I have been informed that the question of the disposal of the surplus property is under consideration.”

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—I have no further information regarding the disposal of the 287 acres of surplus land.

Lieut.-General MacMahon.—The position is that a question of policy is involved. It really hinges round whether we will retain this house that is on the property, Castlebaggot House, for Army purposes or not. Until that question is decided we cannot dispose of the surplus land, but meantime the land is let and is bringing in a very decent revenue.

858. Chairman.—Here again you have capital expenditure of a large amount and it is grouped in with rents and other things in Part III of the Estimate. I comment again that I do not think it is right that large capital expenditure of this amount should be hidden away in this form in the Estimate?—We have provision there for acquisition of sites; we thought it came within the ambit of the Vote and the Department of Finance agreed with us.

859. What is the position regarding the disposal of the surplus property? — As soon as this question of the house is decided, we propose to sell the surplus property, but meantime the land is let and is bringing in a very good revenue.

860. Chairman.—Paragraph 99 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“Subhead X.2—Hospital Treatment of Soldiers’ Dependants.

Expenses amounting to £58 were incurred on the treatment and maintenance in a civil hospital of the child of a N.C.O. injured in an accident for which a third party, who had paid compensation to the parent, was responsible. The question of liability for hospital expenses was referred to the law officers who advised that under the relevant Defence Force regulations these expenses fell to be borne by the State and that there was no remedy against the third party. I am informed that the regulations are being amended to provide that the cost of hospitalisation of soldiers’ dependants shall not be met from public funds where the disability necessitating such treatment is caused in circumstances where compensation is payable by a third party.”

Lieut.-General MacMahon.—The regulation has now been signed.

Mr. Ó Cadhla. — There were three further cases, the Accounting Officer informed me.

Lieut.-General MacMahon. — That is correct.

861. Chairman. — Presumably you will have got Finance approval?

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—Finance approval has been obtained.

862. Chairman. — Are Defence Force Regulations examined from the legal aspect before promulgation?—They are examined by a special staff and then, of course, they are examined in the Department of Finance, too. We do not send them to the Attorney-General for examination, except in very special cases. Regulations, except in certain cases, have not to be placed on the Table of the House.

863. Is there much involved in the other three cases?—Relatively little; they are small amounts.

Mr. Ó Cadhla. — Very few payments have been made in these cases.

864. Chairman.—Paragraph 100 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General 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 £280 and £5,945.

The deficiency of £17,076 noted at item 5 of the Statement of Losses includes £15,161 representing the assessed value of clothing and equipment un-recovered from members of An Fórsa Cosanta Áitiúil and An Sluagh Muirí who became non-effective in the years 1946 to 1951 or were discharged in the years 1946 to 1952.”

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—I have no further comment to make.

865. Chairman.—I notice the loss on clothing and equipment is the assessed value. What does assessed value mean? —It means that this clothing in many cases has been in use for a considerable time. When it comes to equipment like web equipment—equipment that we ourselves may have bought secondhand 20 or 30 years ago—we could not assess it at the original cost. We assess it at its value at the time it was lost.

866. I am sure you have endeavoured to improve the position as far as possible in regard to losses?—We have been trying for years, but we would never be able completely to safeguard ourselves against them.

867. In regard to subhead A.—Pay of Officers, Cadets, N.C.O.s and Men — the average strength provided for is over 10,000. What was the average strength during the year? — In this particular year, we budgeted for an average strength of 8,000 N.C.O.s and men, but we will not have that number over the year.

868. Had you any recruiting drive?— We have one on at the moment, but it is not very successful, I am sorry to say.

869. On the average, have you many retirements? — We have men going out when their time expires. We have some deserters, too.

870. Deputy A. Barry.—But the wastage is greater than the intake?—Yes.

871. Chairman. — On subhead A.1— Military Educational Courses abroad— are these courses all for officers? — Yes. Actually we send members of the Naval Service other than officers on courses and sometimes we send technical N.C.O.s and men to some of the aircraft factories to learn the latest technique there, but the bulk of the courses are for officers.

872. Where are they mostly held?— They are held in various parts of England, but mostly at the staff college at Camberley.

873. On subhead A.2 — Expenses of Equitation Teams at Horse Shows — I think the committee could congratulate you on the recent successes of the team. There is a relatively large saving on the subhead. Were teams not entered for some shows or were there fewer invitations in this year?—We had more invitations than we could accept, but two of our best riders retired before that year, the late Captain Tubridy and Captain O’Shea. Therefore, while we had suitable horses, we had not suitable riders and we had to refuse invitations to all the European shows. We took part only in the shows on the American Continent, the White City and of course, Ballsbridge.

874. Deputy Sheldon.—On subhead C. —Pay of Civilians attached to Units — I notice the note refers to a considerable increase in the number of civilians. Could Lieut.-General MacMahon tell us why the increase was necessary?—Because at that particular time the Government were anxious to give as much employment as possible. Schemes we had put up in earlier years and were not sanctioned were sanctioned in that year and it was necessary to take on additional civilians to help in the schemes.

875. Chairman. — On subhead M. — Clothing and Equipment—do you effect all your own purchases or do you utilise the services of the Post Office? — We utilise the services of the Post Office.

876. Are your reserve stocks kept to a definite minimum? — The policy is to maintain a reserve stock of material that could be made into uniforms because in an emergency it might be impossible to get it. We had great difficulty in the beginning of the last emergency in getting uniforms, with the result that many of the recruits had to use their own clothing for a while and we wanted to take precautions against a recurrence of that.

877. Do you carry, say, a year’s supply? —Not quite, about six months’ supply.

878. On subhead N. — Animals and Forage—do you find difficulty in obtaining the type of horse you think suitable or require?—We have a committee dealing with it and we have not found any difficulty recently. As a matter of fact, we have purchased all the horses we require for the present.

879. On subhead O.—General Stores— in your note you refer to capital expenditure for the Air Corps. What capital is provided under this head?—Mainly purchase of aircraft and very often we have to pay a percentage of the cost when we order the aeroplane, a percentage when it is half-built and the balance when we take delivery.

Chairman. — I would like the Committee to note what I mentioned previously about the desirability of having it as a separate item.

880. On subhead P.—Defensive Equipment—your expenditure here is considerable. Do you purchase the latest type of weapons?—Yes, with the exception of rifles. We have purchased some rifles recently which are not the latest type because the latest type is not available and will not be available for many years.

881. What happens to guns that become obsolete?—We have actually sold some of them.

882. On subhead P.1—Civil Defence— the expenditure here is much below what was in the Estimate. Are you working on a definite programme in defence?— In this case, the matter was not entirely in our own hands. We were looking for equipment from the other side which was not available when we hoped it would be, but we are trying to work to a programme.

883. I see that grants to local authorities were saved to the extent of £10,000. Do you get full co-operation from the local authorities?—Yes, I must say they are very good on the whole.

884. Deputy Sheldon.—On subhead P.2 —Naval Service—I notice that there was a saving because of the average strength of other ranks being below what was provided for and then there was excess expenditure “on the pay and additional pay of officers and cadets as the strength was slightly increased during the year.” It seems rather odd to me that, where the strength of other ranks was below what was estimated, at the same time, there should be an increase in regard to officers and cadets?—It takes a long time to train cadets and as far as they are concerned, we get the number we require; we know the numbers we do require. As far as petty officers and men are concerned, we may be lucky and get them and we may not. In any case, it is necessary to have a certain number of trained officers. It takes a considerable time to train them and you can train a petty officer or a seaman in a relatively short period. It is essential to have the officers and to train them and we can provide for that. As far as other ranks are concerned, we may or may not get them.

885. I notice that, in the Estimate for that year, you had anticipated a drop in the number of cadets from 11 to 4. Do I take it then that was not followed out, that, on the contrary, extra cadets were taken on?—No, we have a policy as far as cadets are concerned and we stick to it.

886. The Estimate for 1953/54 discloses that four cadets were required and in the previous year there had been 11 and because of that the Estimate shows an anticipated drop in strength in regard to cadets. In the event, that did not happen at all and extra cadets were, in fact, taken on?—I do not think it is so much a question of cadets. We appointed some engineer officers to the Naval Service. A further point is that when we took in 11 cadets one year, they were still cadets when we took in four additional cadets the following year. It takes a number of years to train a cadet.

887. Chairman.—On subhead T.—Military Lands—I see that the lands at Gormanston, previously held on a year to year tenancy, were purchased for £6,000 odd. Again I note that there was no distinct provision for this expenditure?— In that particular case, it would be impossible to provide an estimate for it. The arrangement regarding the purchase of that land extended over years. The Chief State Solicitor had a headache over it because the owner would agree to one thing to-day, an agreement would be drawn up and the next week he would change his mind about it. We had arrived at a stage when we had doubts if we would ever purchase the land, but eventually it was purchased. There was a further point that if you came to the Dáil for a specific sum the owner would certainly see that his land did not go for less than that amount.

888. In regard to subhead U, I am glad to see that motor accidents were less than anticipated?—There again you may be free for six months and then you may run into a crop of accidents.

889. The expenditure, of course, represents compensation paid in respect of damage to F.C.A. premises also?—Yes.

890. Is this damage a frequent occurrence?—No. There is very little, in fact. If it is not fair wear and tear, we recover from the unit funds.

891. In regard to subhead X. — Incidental Expenses — I presume that you, like other Departments, utilise the services of the Stationery Office for advertising? — In connection with ordinary advertising, yes, but, in connection with recruiting advertisements, no. We get a contract for that and we do not do it through the Stationery Office.

892. In regard to subhead Y.2 — The Reserve — the excess on this subhead is mainly due to the number of Reservists, second line, reporting for training?— Yes.

893. Normally, I take it, you would be able to estimate more closely or was there any particular reason for the excess this year?—The conditions were improved somewhat and more came up as a result. We were glad of that. A bigger percentage turned up.

894. You have no particular reasons that you could adduce that would account for that?—Yes. We paid marriage allowance to married men who came up. That was a special inducement and, as a result of that, a bigger percentage came up.

895. In regard to subhead Y.4— Bureau of Military History: Salaries, Wages and Allowances—how is the work of the Bureau progressing?—Very well. The Minister for Finance stated that it must close next August, but whether it will or not, I cannot say at the moment.

896. With regard to item No. 3 in the Appropriations in Aid—Rents from Canteen Lettings—how does this arise? I think you run all your own canteens?— The Canteen Board runs the canteens. There is a Board that runs them for the Army—a Canteen Board.

897. Item No. 10 is sale of supplies on repayment. Do you confine sales to military personnel?—On repayment, yes, to military personnel. Of course, they can purchase in certain cases for their wives and families, but it is the soldier we sell to and it is the soldier from whom we recover the cost.

898. With regard to item No. 8 in the Losses Statement, how did that arise?— The aircraft accidents?

Yes? — Sometimes they occur when a pilot may not have quite sufficient experience. It is very difficult to explain. Sometimes there is an error of judgment on the part of the pilot. Now and again there is a slight accident when they are taxiing out to the take-off, but most of them are errors of judgment on the part of the pilot.

VOTE 57—ARMY PENSIONS.

Lieut.-General P. MacMahon further examined.

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

“Subhead O. — Special Allowances to Persons who served in Easter Week, to Persons awarded Medals and to Persons granted Pensions under the Connaught Rangers (Pensions) Acts.

Section 7 of the Army Pensions Act, 1943, as amended by the Army Pensions Acts, 1946 and 1949, authorises the grant of special allowances to persons who were members of an organisation to which Part II of the Army Pensions Act, 1932, applies, and who were granted medals in respect of such membership, provided the Minister for Defence is satisfied that such medals had been duly awarded. Payments of special allowance amounting to £376 were made for the period 1 November, 1948, to 28 February, 1954, to a person who had been awarded a medal, although it appeared from the particulars furnished by the claimant in support of his application for the medal that the required conditions for the award had not been fulfilled. Of the total amount paid £84 is charged in the year under review and the balance in previous years.

The charge to the subhead also includes payments amounting to £89 in respect of a special allowance granted to a person who had been awarded a medal, but subsequent investigations disclosed that he had made incorrect representations regarding his age, and that he was not, in fact, entitled to the award. The total amount paid in this case was £242 in respect of the period 6 June, 1951, to 31 May, 1954.

Payment of the allowance has been suspended in each case and the sanction of the Department of Finance has been sought to allow the amounts paid to remain as a charge against the Vote. I have inquired whether this sanction has been obtained.”

Mr. Ó Cadhla. — In the first case referred to, the applicant in his application form did not claim service for the critical period of three months prior to 11th July, 1921. He was, therefore, automatically debarred from the award of a medal.

Lieut.-General MacMahon.—He stated that for that particular period he was in the U.S.A. He did not say he had not served. I just want to make that explanation, if you do not mind.

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—In the second case, the applicant in his application form represented himself as being ten years older than he was. The year of his birth was 1913. I do not know whether the Department of Finance has approved of the Accounting Officer’s proposal.

Lieut.-General MacMahon.—No, they have not.

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—The Committee in its last report dealt with somewhat similar cases.

Lieut.-General MacMahon. — The first case is somewhat different from the second and from the cases we had under discussion at the last meeting. In that case, three officers with pensionable service certified that this man had in fact service during the critical period, that is, the three months prior to the Truce. It is true that the applicant when applying stated that during that particular three months he was in America. The people who dealt with this particular application, with one exception, are either dead or have left the service and it is difficult now to know what was in their minds at the time. There is, however, the possibility that they may have assumed that this man might have been sent to America. There were cases of that type and they were, at that particular time anyhow, entitled to assume that if there was any mistake about it the verifying officers would pick out that mistake. In other words, if he had not service, if he had not been sent to America, the verifying officers would say that he had not service. The verifying officers had pensionable service and all three certified that he had service for these three months. The remaining member of the staff who dealt with this cannot at this stage explain why this was done or why it was not referred to higher authority. Had it been referred to higher authority, certainly, we would have made much more minute inquiries before granting the special allowance. In connection with the second case, it is one of about 48 cases and the matter is being dealt with. The Minister for Defence made a statement in the Dáil recently on the subject. He promised that legislation will be introduced that will, we hope, put an end to bogus applications.

900. Chairman.—That would be satisfactory, if it turns out as we hope. With regard to subhead A. in the Vote—Army Pensions Board, Salaries, Wages and Allowances—is the Board of a permanent nature?—Yes, and very fully occupied, too.

901. Subhead C. deals with the Referee and Advisory Committee. I take it that it will be some time yet before this Committee has completed its work?—It will, unless the scheme the Minister for Defence has in mind is passed by the Dáil. If it is passed, the Referee, as such, will disappear, but if not, and if he has to continue dealing with the number of applications before him, he will be there for years.

902. Under subhead E. — Wound and Disability Pensions and Gratuities, etc.— I notice there is a gradual decrease in the numbers from year to year?—There are still many receiving temporary pensions. About 25 per cent. of the total are on temporary pensions.

903. Is there any hope we would reach a final basis?—Not until many of them are dead.

904. On subhead F. — Allowances and Gratuities to Dependents, etc.—I note that you mention arrears amounting to £2,800. How did arrears of dependants’ allowance arise?—Because the allowance dated back to the time of the passing of the Act.

905. With regard to the note at the end of the Vote dealing with refund of an overpayment, how do such overpayments occur? — Very often a man in receipt of special allowance gets additional benefits—he might inherit something or get benefits in some other way —and forgets to tell us about it. He is bound to do so and when we discover it, we have to recover the amount thus overpaid.

906. Is the case of overpayment mentioned in the note at the end of the Vote the only case that occurred during the year?—No; it is not the only one. There are others still under consideration, but I suppose the Comptroller and Auditor General was waiting until they were finally disposed of before bringing them forward.

The witness withdrew.

The Committee adjourned.

* Note by witness: Out of the provision of £2,250 under this subhead £1,717 (about three-quarters of the total) is for conveyance under contract.

* See Appendix XII.

* See Appendix XIII.

* See Appendix XIV.

† See Appendix XV.