Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1956 > Committee of Public Accounts > Report - Appropriation Accounts 1954 - 1955

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Dé Céadaoin, 17ú Deireadh Fómhair, 1956.

Wednesday, 17th October, 1956.

The Committee sat at 2 p.m.

DEPUTY CARTER in the chair.

Mr. C. O’Neill (Secretary and Director of Audit) and Mr. M. Breathnach (An Roinn Airgeadais) called and examined.

VOTE 64—DUNDRUM ASYLUM.

Dr. W. J. Coyne called and examined.

564. Deputy Sheldon.—Subhead F. relates to Farm and Garden. Have pigs continued to be as profitable as formerly? —Definitely. As the Committee is aware, we discontinued having sows last year, as we explained. We now buy them in the market, fatten them up and sell them. They are very satisfactory. Under Appropriations in Aid, you will see that the receipts from farm and garden (including value of produce used in the Asylum) were greater than estimated.

565. Chairman. — That was the reason why they were greater than you anticipated. How did it occur that greater quantities of farm produce were available for sale in this particular period?—There has been a move to modernise the farm. We have a new farm foreman who is highly satisfactory. We are getting more both from our farm produce and the sale of pigs under the new system.

566. I notice that the receipts from leather-work, rug and mat-making are down again this year. Are you accumulating stocks?—We had fewer people working at them. We cannot force them. It is just when they take the whim or the notion. We had two men who did a great deal of leather work but they were discharged.

Deputy Sheldon.—I do not think it is easy to get a sale for these things?—No. It has to be done semi-privately. The shops or industrial concerns will not touch us. We sell them to anybody who will buy them. We might be encroaching on labour preserves by operating in any other way.

567. Chairman.—How did you have surplus farm equipment? I see that you realised £112 from its sale?—We bought a motor tractor and a plough. Through an auctioneer, we sold off the surplus equipment. We have practically a completely new modernised outfit.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 27—AGRICULTURE.

Mr. J. Dempsey called and examined.

568. Chairman.—Paragraphs 27 and 28 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General read as follows:—

“Subhead G.3—Improvement of Poultry and Egg Production.

27. The control of imports of eggs, poultry and rabbits by the British authorities rendered it necessary to establish a body to regulate exports of these commodities from Ireland. Accordingly, Eggsports, Limited, a non-profit earning company without share capital and limited by guarantee, was incorporated in 1941 to act as a central agency for this purpose. It regulated shipments and arranged for the sale of eggs, poultry and rabbits on behalf of Irish exporters, the funds required to carry on the business being provided by means of levies on the goods exported. Export licences issued by the Minister for Agriculture provided that licensees should employ the company as their agent.

28. Following the decontrol of the trade the company went into voluntary liquidation on 7 October, 1953. It was arranged that the liquidator of the company should continue the business of exporting eggs up to 31 December, 1953, and then realise the assets and discharge the liabilities. It was decided that any deficit on the completion of the winding up should be met from voted moneys, and provision was made accordingly under this subhead. Certified copies of the accounts of the company to 7 October, 1953, and of the liquidator’s final account have been furnished to me and I have accepted them in support of the charge to the Vote. The deficit at 7 October, 1953, amounted to £317,041. The expenses of winding up the company included £6,081 for compensation to employees and £6,188 for liquidator’s fees and expenses. A sum of £25,248 was realised from the sale of sundry assets the written down value of which was shown in the books of the company at approximately the same figure. The liquidator’s accounts to 22 June, 1955, showed that the final deficit was £286,263. Payment of £286,000 was made in the year under review and £263 in 1955-56.”

Mr. O’Neill. — The losses occurred mainly in 1952 and 1953 and were due to a fall in prices on the British market. We have accepted the certified accounts of the company and of the liquidator in support of the charge.

569. Deputy Sheldon. — Eggsports, Limited lived up to its non-profit-earning, did it not? I presume it was not arranged, when the company was set up, as to what would happen about any deficit?

Mr. Dempsey.—No.

570. Did that arise only at the winding up?—The setting up of the company arose because of conditions prevailing in Great Britain. The Ministry of Food insisted upon a central organisation. They were the buyers and distributors on their side. They insisted on a body being set up here so that all poultry products would be canalised through that body.

Therefore, it was not a point for consideration at all, at the time, that there might be a loss?—It was just a piece of machinery that had to be set up.

571. Could we learn the deficit that did finally occur? How exactly did it arise and did it vary very much from year to year or was there a sort of steady drain? —They had fairly satisfactory trading conditions up to 1952. They had rather an unusually bad year that year. It arose mainly through the turkey market. The price to the home producers was fixed in advance at 3/6 per lb. As the market turned out, the over-all realisation was less than 3/3 a lb. Therefore, there was a big deficit on the account. In that same season, there were heavy losses on poultry also. These losses arose through a partial collapse of the market for poultry and poultry products in 1952-53 on the British market. Up to that, Eggsports were maintaining business without any loss. In fact, coming into the year 1952, they had substantial reserves. They were up against the difficulty of determining in advance the price to home producers without any precise information as to what price would be realised eventually because the sale of the products in Great Britain was not under the control of Eggsports.

572. Mr. O’Neill. — We have accepted the certified accounts.

573. Deputy Bartley.—By whom were they certified?

Mr. O’Neill.—The accounts of the company were certified by a public auditor.

574. Chairman. — How is it that the deficit on the 7th October, 1953, was reduced by roughly £30,000 in the course of winding up the business?

Mr. Dempsey.—Part of that would be due to transactions between themselves and the corresponding body under the Ministry of Food. There would be a lag in the payments. They could not possibly be up to date.

575. On what basis was the compensation paid to employees calculated?—In the case of junior employees, it was based on a week’s pay for each year of service. In the case of the managing director, it was arrived at after consultation with the Department of Finance, bearing all the considerations in mind.

576. Does the £6,000 odd, mentioned as liquidator’s fees and expenses, cover the liquidation period only?—That would be all. It was a fairly long period because accounts were coming in for settlement all during that time. It was a question of carrying on the organisation for several months after it was decided that it should be wound up.

577. Is there any indication of what would be fees and expenses?—We have not got the split of the liquidator’s fees and expenses.

I presume they are calculated at the normal scales that apply?—I think so.

578. Mr. O’Neill.—I have a figure here of £7,500.

Deputy Sheldon.—A sum of £6,188 is given as liquidator’s fees and expenses.

Chairman.—To cover the period only.

Mr. O’Neill.—The £7,500 includes a period prior to liquidation.

579. Chairman.—Paragraphs 29 and 30 relating to subhead L.2, Bryce Bequest, can be taken together. They read as follows:—

“29. Provision was made under this subhead for the maintenance of property, including Garnish Island, Glengariff, Co. Cork, bequeathed to the Taoiseach in trust for the State under the will of the late Roland L. Bryce who died on 4 December, 1953. Expenditure amounting to £2,147 was incurred in the period ended 31 March, 1955, from which date responsibility for the management of the property was transferred to the Office of Public Works.

30. Receipts, consisting mainly of fees paid by visitors to the island, totalled £1,652 and this amount is included in the Appropriations in Aid. I inquired regarding the control exercised over the receipt of fees and was informed that periodical visits to the island were made by an inspector of the Department and that arrangements for the issue to visitors of receipts for landing fees were in train at the time it was decided that the Office of Public Works should undertake responsibility for the property.”

Mr. O’Neill. — The control over the receipts has now been tightened up and we are quite satisfied.

580. Chairman.—Why was it decided to transfer the property to the Office of Public Works?

Mr. Dempsey.—It was handed over in the first instance to the Department of Agriculture as a matter of convenience. Possibly at that time it was visualised that it might be an adjunct to the Botanic Gardens. Later, I expect, it was probably decided to transfer it to the Office of Public Works on the grounds that that body had property not so far away at Muckross and that, generally, they look after public parks. The future of Garnish was taken into consideration. It is being maintained, I think, in the nature of a public park rather than an experimental station.

581. I presume other property, apart from Garnish Island proper, was included?—There is a small area on the mainland. I think it is rocky ground just as most of the land adjacent to the island is. I do not think it is very valuable.

582. Is it intended to keep on the charge? I understand the charge was dropped some years ago in the case of the Bourn Vincent Park at Killarney?— I do not know. It has been in existence for a long time. It is a source of income. It is a costly operation to maintain the island.

583. Deputy Sheldon.—Had fees been charged by the former owner?—Yes.

584. It seems rather odd that the arrangement for the issue to visitors of receipts for landing fees were only in train at the time it was decided that the Office of Public Works should undertake responsibility for the property. Surely it would be a simple matter to arrange immediately for receipts?—There is a kind of a close season there. There would be practically no visitors to the island in the winter. The Department of Agriculture took it over in the month of January.

585. How long was it under the control of the Department?—From January until March in the following year.

That is not a very long period?—No. It is only in the summer period that there are any worthwhile receipts.

586. Chairman.—Paragraph 31 of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s Report reads as follows:—

“Subhead M.5—Loans for the Purchase of Cattle and Sheep, Agricultural Implements, Milking Machines, Fertilisers and Ground Limestone, Fodder and Fuel, and Advances to the Co-operative Fruit Growers’ Society, Limited, Dungarvan.

31. Advances totalling £115,000 were made in 1951 and 1953 by the Agricultural Credit Corporation, Limited, to the Co-operative Fruit Growers’ Society, Limited, Dungarvan. The repayment of these advances was guaranteed as to capital and interest by the Minister for Agriculture with the sanction of the Minister for Finance.

In view of the financial position of the Society, the Department of Agriculture undertook responsibility for payment to the Corporation of amounts of interest due by the Society for the period from 2 May, 1953, to 1 May, 1959. This undertaking was given on the understanding that if in the meantime the Society’s financial position permitted it would be called upon to resume the payments. In accordance with this arrangement interest due by the Society totalling £8,141 was paid to the Corporation from this subhead.

The Department also undertook to pay the instalments of principal due in any year up to 1 May, 1957, if the Society was unable to pay such instalments, on the understanding that any instalment so paid would be refunded after that date. Instalments of principal due by the Society totalling £4,937 were also paid to the Corporation from this subhead and an agreement covering the terms of repayment is to be concluded between the Department and the Society.”

Have you anything to add, Mr. O’Neill?

Mr. O’Neill.—We do not know yet whether the terms in regard to the repayment of the principal have been settled.

587. How did the financial position deteriorate so rapidly?

Mr. Dempsey.—It was not so much a question of deterioration. The Co-operative Society was set up only in 1951 and have not yet had an opportunity of establishing themselves on a satisfactory basis. There was a considerable amount of planting to be done in that area which would normally take some years to do.

588. Is progress being made?—From the storage and marketing point of view, it is quite satisfactory. The apples have acquired a good reputation. The Society have gone in for the storage of apples by gas treatment and, as a result, the apples can be held until May. That could not be done under ordinary storage. It is possible to maintain a supply of home grown apples over the greater part of the season. There is a definite system of marketing on grade and payment on grade. That particular disstrict is the largest and most important apple-growing district in the country.

589. Deputy Bartley.—Do the activities of the Society cover a very wide area?—You mean on a geographical basis?

Yes?—They deal with the Kilkenny apple-growing area, the Waterford area and the Cork area adjoining Ballyduff. They also deal with the South Tipperary-Cahir-Clonmel district. They are rather well placed in the centre of a very big apple-producing area.

590. Does this Society look after the interests of all the places you mentioned? —Yes. They handle 700 tons or 800 tons of apples a year.

The question arises in my mind because of the size of the sum advanced. It seems it would be a very large sum to advance to a Society which would be operating in a small area?—They have the gas chambers, etc., which are costly. In passing, I should say they engage in other activities besides apples. They are engaged on producing blackberry juice which they have been exporting during the past year. They hope to expand that trade.

Generally speaking, this Society is succeeding?—Yes.

591. Chairman. — Has agreement regarding the terms of the repayment of the principal advanced from this subhead yet been reached?—Agreement has not been completed yet. It is with the legal people. The Society has agreed to implement it on their side.

592. Paragraph 32 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows:—

“Subhead M.8—Farm Buildings Scheme and Water Supplies.

32. The expenditure charged to this subhead is made up as follows:—

The scope of the several schemes and the conditions attaching to the payment of the grants are set out in previous reports.”

593. There is a steep increase in the grants under this subhead. I presume it is due to the popularity of the scheme?— Yes. It is a very popular scheme.

594. You have arrears of applications I suppose?—We have.

595. Paragraphs 33, 34 and 35 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General read as follows:—

“Subhead M.9—Land Reclamation Scheme.

33. The expenditure on this service is made up as follows:—

34. The Land Reclamation Act, 1949, authorises the Minister for Agriculture to carry out land reclamation, field drainage and other works and provides for the payment by the occupiers of the lands of a contribution towards the cost, the contribution being payable either in full or, if the occupier so elects, by means of an annuity, when the Minister certifies that the work has been completed. Under the arrangements made for the operation of the project an occupier might have approved work carried out by the Department on agreeing to pay two-fifths of the estimated cost plus the cost of lime and fertilisers required, subject to a maximum of £12 per statute acre and to the condition that work would not be undertaken which was estimated to involve a charge on public funds in excess of £30 per acre. The conditions were amended as from February, 1955, to provide that work estimated to involve higher expenditure might be undertaken where the agricultural potential of the land warranted, provided the occupiers agreed to contribute 50 per cent. of the excess. The scheme also provided that an occupier might carry out the work himself and, where this was done to the satisfaction of the Department, he was entitled to a grant amounting to two-thirds of the estimated cost subject to a maximum of £30 per acre.

35. Reference was made in paragraph 28 of the previous report to a decision taken in November, 1952, that the work carried out by the Department should, except in certain areas, be entrusted to contractors, and that the machinery which had been purchased for the project should be sold to these contractors to such extent as the Minister might consider desirable. Machinery valued by departmental assessors at £199,871 was sold by competitive tender, the sum realised, including £22,866 received in the year under review, being £186,388. Miscellaneous stores realised £2,982 and the total transfers to other Departments were valued at £128,107.

The surrender of premises rented for storage purposes is proceeding.”

Have you anything to add to that, Mr. O’Neill?

Mr. O’Neill.—Paragraph 33 sets out the expenditure. Direct labour costs are down by a couple of hundred thousand pounds and the grants to contractors are increased by an almost equivalent amount. This, I think, is due to the decision to dispose of the machinery and farm the work out to contractors. Paragraph 34 goes on to set out the scope of the scheme. There is a change from last year in that work carried out by the Department may now be undertaken although the cost is estimated to exceed £42 per acre. Paragraph 35 deals with the disposal of the machinery. The amounts realised are fairly in line.

596. Deputy Sheldon. — Are there figures showing the cost and how much the normal depreciation is? There is a figure for real loss?

Mr. O’Neill.—We have not got the figure.

Deputy Sheldon. — Could we have a figure for the real loss in regard to this transfer, if there was a real loss?

Mr. Dempsey.—Our estimate is that the price realised was approximately 67 per cent. of the original cost of these machines.

597. Does that allow for depreciation? —Yes.

598. Is it all disposed of?—There are units in Donegal, Mayo and Cavan which it was decided to hold.

That was because contractors were difficult to get I presume?—Yes.

Deputy Bartley.—This is in connection with direct labour?

Chairman.—Yes.

599. Deputy Bartley.—In which counties have we direct labour? Donegal, Cavan and Mayo were mentioned, and I take it that Galway is also included?— Galway has a special scheme of its own —a modified scheme.

That is in addition to the original scheme?—Yes.

600. Chairman.—Could you say whether the raising of the upper limit, as indicated in the paragraph, led to an increase in the number of applications? —Yes. If landholders are prepared to contribute 50 per cent. of the additional cost they can come in under the scheme.

601. What would the maximum cost work out at after development?—You mean an overall average? There are wide variations. In some cases only the removal of scrub is involved. On the other hand, there are very big underground drainage schemes.

602. Deputy Sheldon.—Where machinery is needed and a contractor is necessary, does the Department assist the farmers to find a contractor or is he left to find the contractor himself?—There are intimate contacts between the Department and the contractors. Every District Officer is in close contact with the position and can tell the farmer right away what contractors are likely to be free and available.

603. With reference to paragraph 34 in connection with the maximum of £12 per statute acre and “the condition that work would not be undertaken which was estimated to involve a charge on public funds in excess of £30 per acre,” I take it that that £30 was the net figure after counting the farmers’ contribution or would it be the gross figure?—That would be the net figure. The gross figure would be £42.

It could cost £42 per acre?—Yes.

604. Deputy Bartley.—Is there not an overriding maximum beyond which reclamation work will not be approved at all?—There is in practice dealing with individual cases. If the repayment is by way of an annuity, there is a limit to what will be accepted. The Land Commission are interested in that from the point of view of security. There has to be some limit having regard to what the land will bear.

605. There is no amount of money stated as the limit?—No.

You do not say that if the overall cost of the reclamation in a particular case is £65 an acre you will not approve of any expenditure? You have no figure?—There is nothing laid down. Generally speaking, we are loathe to give approval in excess of £60 an acre.

606. Chairman.—I noticed there were no grants in connection with bog reclamation?—Not in that year. There were grants in the subsequent years. A grant was paid in 1955-56.

607. Paragraphs 36 to 39 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General read as follows:—

“Subhead M.13.—Bovine Tuberculosis Eradication Scheme.

36. The Bovine Tuberculosis Eradication Scheme was brought into operation on 1 September, 1954, to assist farmers generally in the eradication of tuberculosis in their cattle herds and to provide special measures for the eradication of the disease in three selected areas, namely, County Clare, County Sligo and the Bansha area. Herd-owners throughout the country are entitled under the scheme to free tuberculin testing of their herds and veterinary advice on the control of tuberculosis. In addition, herd-owners in the three areas mentioned may have animals which fail to pass the test disposed of by the Department for slaughter. Compensation at rates equivalent to prevailing market values is payable to the owners.

37. It had been intended that the intensive measures in County Clare, and the general measures elsewhere, should be financed out of moneys standing to the credit of the American Grant Counterpart Special Account. As the agreement between the governments of Ireland and of the United States of America regarding the use of counterpart funds for this purpose was not concluded until 31 March, 1955, provision for the expenditure was made by supplementary estimate. The expenditure borne on the subhead amounted to £69,061 and included £22,819 for compensation to herd-owners in County Clare for 609 cattle which failed to pass the tuberculin test and were disposed of for slaughter, £36,877 for fees to private veterinary surgeons who carried out the tuberculin tests and £9,365 for miscellaneous expenses. The amount realised for the cattle slaughtered was £12,197 of which £643 was received in the year under review and is included in the Appropriations in Aid. The balance was brought to account in 1955-56.

38. The intensive measures carried out in County Sligo and the Bansha area were financed by issues from the National Development Fund. Expenditure in these areas amounted to £35,259, and included £20,993 for compensation to herd-owners for 632 cattle which failed to pass the tuberculin test and were disposed of by the Department for slaughter, £12,051 for fees to private veterinary surgeons who carried out the tuberculin tests and £2,215 for miscellaneous expenses including travelling, cost of tuberculin, etc. The amount realised for the cattle disposed of was £17,064 of which £5,667 was received in the year under review, the balance being brought to account in 1955-56. The net expenditure defrayed out of moneys provided from the National Development Fund amounted therefore to £29,592. An account of the receipts and payments is appended to the appropriation account.

39. The scale of fees payable to private veterinary practitioners who carry out tests under the scheme is £1 to cover the two visits involved in a tuberculin test, plus 5/- each for the first ten animals tested and 4/- for each animal in excess of that number. The total amount of fees paid up to 31 March, 1955, was £48,928.”

Have you anything to add Mr. O’Neill?

Mr. O’Neill.—This is the first year of the operation of the Bovine Tuberculosis Eradication Scheme and the scope of the scheme is set out in the report. Compensation amounting to £43,800 in all was paid in respect of 1,240 animals slaughtered and salvage realised £29,200, giving a net loss of £14,600, or an average overall loss of about £11 14s. per animal. There were, however, variations in the average loss in the three special areas.

608. Chairman. — How was that accounted for? There was a variation as between Clare, Bansha and Sligo?

Mr. Dempsey.—It is difficult to explain it. In Sligo the incidence of the disease is very slight. Apparently the cows that are diseased are probably badly diseased. In Bansha there is a very high percentage of diseased animals so that a high percentage of the goodish cows go into the rejected class.

609. Could you give a rough estimate of the percentage of cattle which have been tested in these areas?—Up to the present, about 700,000 animals have been tested all over the country.

610. Deputy Brennan. — Under what conditions are the animals slaughtered by the Department’s approval when they fail to pass the test?—They are sent to the factories directly by the Department. If they are classified as reactors under this scheme they are directed to the canneries, where they are subjected to inspection by the Departmental veterinary surgeons.

611. Is there anything to prevent farmers selling reactors if they wish?— In the intensive areas there is, but in the general area they are not compensated for the reactors.

612. Where the scheme is voluntary, the farmer may do what he wishes?—Yes. Except in the intensive areas of Sligo, Bansha and Clare.

613. Deputy Sheldon.—Was the agreement made in regard to Grant Counterpart Funds retrospective?—No. It was payable only from the date of the agreement.

614. Chairman. — With regard to veterinarians’ fees under the scheme, how do they work out? Are the practitioners giving full co-operation?—The profession is giving very considerable co-operation. The scale of fees was worked out in discussions between the veterinary surgeons and the Department’s officials. The co-operation given by the profession is first class.

615. Paragraph 40 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“40. The Grain Storage (Loans) Act, 1951, empowers the Minister for Agriculture to grant loans for the provision and equipment of storage for grain. Loans may be granted upon such terms and conditions as to time and manner of repayment, rate of interest, security, etc., as the Minister, with the approval of the Minister for Finance, may consider proper, the total of loans under the Act being limited to £2,500,000.

The approved terms provide for loans up to 75 per cent. of the cost of the storage and equipment, to be repaid over a period of 20 years, or 15 years in the case of loans for equipment only, with interest at the rate current for Exchequer advances. The loans are secured by mortgage, but provision is made for partial advances on the security of promissory notes during the progress of the work. Thirteen loans totalling £291,200 were made in the year 1954-55.”

Mr. O’Neill.—This is the first issue of these loans. There is a small repayment of £468 included in Appropriations in Aid.

616. Chairman.—It is stated in the paragraph that £2,500,000 may be issued. That would rather suggest there are considerable numbers of applications still left to be dealt with?—That was the amount provided when the Act was passed, but of course a number of drying outfits have been erected independent of these loans. A good deal depends on the demand for them. In seasons like this and 1954 there was tremendous demand but the demand in 1955 was comparatively little.

617. What rate of interest was charged on the loans for the period?—It varied between 4¾ per cent. and 5 per cent.

618. Are the repayments on an annuity basis?—Yes, spread over twenty years, or fifteen, in the case of machinery.

619. Paragraph 41 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows:—

“41. Following a reduction in the retail price of creamery butter from 4s. 2d. to 3s. 9d. per lb. from 23 August, 1954 an allowance at the rate of 46s. 8d. per cwt. was paid to butter wholesalers and the Butter Marketing Committee on stocks of creamery butter held at the close of business on 22 August, 1954, and to creameries on sales of creamery butter after that date. Payments in 1954-55 in respect of these allowances, totalling £1,053,676, are charged to this subhead. The remainder of the charge comprises £105,476 paid to creameries in connection with the Department’s scheme for the cold storage of creamery butter and £124,230 paid to the Butter Marketing Committee. The latter sum includes £44,230 in recoupment of the balance of a deficit of £107,230 in the Committee’s trading account for the year ended 31 March, 1954, arising mainly from expenditure on the cold storage of butter for winter consumption. A sum of £80,000 was paid to the Committee, in addition to £50,000 paid from the Dairy Produce (Price Stabilisation) Fund (see paragraph 46), to meet an anticipated deficit in the trading account for 1954-55.”

Mr. O’Neill. — The main expenditure here arises from the reduction in the retail price of creamery butter which occurred in August, 1954. The other items are the usual payments for cold storage.

620. Chairman. — Regarding this subsidy, 5d. in the lb. represents the subsidy. Is the 3/- per cwt. production allowance in addition to that 5d. a lb.?

Mr. Dempsey.—Yes.

621. Why are some of the allowances paid from the subhead and some from the fund?—In practice, the fund is used as far as possible and when exhausted we must go to the Vote.

622. Is the deficit of the Butter Marketing Committee for the period charged to the Vote or to the Fund?—If the Fund is able to meet it it is paid from it.

623. Paragraph 42 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“42. Legislative authority for expenditure, by way of grants-in-aid, on the alleviation of distress caused by flooding in the Shannon and Dublin areas in December, 1954, was obtained by token supplementary estimates for this Vote and for Vote 38—Local Government, respectively, (see paragraph 54). When the financial commitments had been assessed the necessary funds were provided by further supplementary estimates for £20,000 and £109,990, respectively.

The issues of £8,677 from the grant-in-aid include a sum of £3,866 paid to a special committee appointed by the Minister for Agriculture to administer relief. In addition, £2,522 was paid to the Department of Defence and £2,289 to the Irish Red Cross Society in recoupment of expenditure incurred.

Mr. O’Neill.—The Dublin flooding was covered in the Vote for Local Government. This item relates to Shannon only. We have been furnished with certificates covering the expenditure.

624. Chairman. — Could you say were the conditions under which relief was administered similar in the case of the two areas?

Mr. Dempsey. — I could not tell you because I have no intimate information about the Dublin scheme of relief. The general procedure in Shannon was that a committee was set up including the County Manager, the Chief Agricultural Officer and representatives of the Departments of Defence and Agriculture.

625. Chairman.—Paragraph 43 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:—

“43. Reference was made in previous reports to the arrangement whereby Comhlucht Siúicre Éireann, Teoranta, undertook the importation and distribution of superphosphate. Repayable advances totalling £922,717 were made to the company in 1952-53 from voted moneys to finance the scheme. It was provided that these advances should be repaid by periodical remission to the Department of Agriculture of the proceeds of sale less expenses. The amount repaid by the company to 31 March, 1955, including £50,000 received in the year under review, amounted to £437,000, leaving a balance of £485,717 outstanding at that date.”

Mr. O’Neill.—I think all the stocks have been disposed of. A loss of approximately £470,000 was incurred. This was due mainly to falls in prices and to storage costs. I think there was also an element of depreciation of stocks.

626. Deputy Brennan.—I understand there is a duty on imported superphosphates. Why was an arrangement made here for the importation and distribution of foreign produced superphosphates?

Mr. Dempsey.—There is a duty of 20 per cent. on imported phosphates. However, duty free licences are given within certain limits to fill the needs of Irish compounders. Normally, the home manufacturers of the fertiliser are not able to provide the full amount and one-fourth or one-fifth must be imported.

627. Chairman.—What is the present position regarding this transaction?—I understand that there is a substantial insurance claim at issue which may take some time to settle. That is the only outstanding item because otherwise the stocks have been cleared.

628. Could you say what was the extent of the deterioration?—It was mainly due to deterioration which normally arises in storage—burst sacks and so on. The material, as such, does not deteriorate to any extent but when stored in bags there would be a proportion of sack breakages. Rehandling the stuff would also add to its cost.

629. Deputy Sheldon.—Does it add to costs if material hardens in bags which have not burst?—When that happens the material would have to be sold at reduced prices.

630. Deputy Bartley.—Do these figures take account of the prices paid by farmers under the scheme?—These figures are those after payments have been made by purchasers.

631. Chairman.—Paragraphs 44, 45 and 46 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General read:—

“44. The income of the Fund, £17,547, consisted of levies on home sales of creamery butter. Paragraph 34 of the last report referred to the payment from the Fund of allowances, totalling £56,087, in connection with the provision of additional profit margins of 2s. 4d. per cwt. for retailers and 8d. per cwt. for wholesalers on sales of creamery butter after 1 October, 1953. Further payments amounting to £116,266 were made in the year under review.

45. Consequent on a stoppage in January and February, 1953 of milk supplies by producers who supplied milk to the Dublin and Cork areas it was decided to make available supplies of liquid milk reconstituted from milk powder. It was arranged that the Dairy Disposal Company, Limited, should act as a central purchasing and distributing body for milk powder and should also undertake the importation and distribution of condensed milk. In the Dublin area milk powder was supplied by the company to wholesale distributors possessing the necessary equipment to reconstitute milk from powder, at a price calculated to ensure that the distributors incurred no loss on the basis of normal trading. In the Cork area supplies of reconstituted milk were made available by the company to the Cork Corporation at a price calculated to recoup the Corporation any loss on the distribution of the milk. The loss incurred by the Dairy Disposal Company in carrying out these arrangements, including £3,848 on the importation of condensed milk, amounted to £17,285. This amount was paid to the the company from the Fund.

46. £58,237 was paid to the Butter Marketing Committee, £8,237 being in respect of administrative expenses and £50,000, in addition to the sum of £80,000 mentioned in paragraph 41, to meet an anticipated deficit in the Committee’s trading account for 1954-55.”

Mr. O’Neill.—Paragraph 44 deals with the charge on the Fund arising out of the provision of additional profit margins. Paragraph 45 deals with an emergency operation arising from the stoppage of milk supplies by producers for Dublin and Cork. Six distributors in Dublin were supplied with milk powder at rates calculated to ensure they would incur no loss on the basis of normal trading. The rates varied from 12d. per lb. to 13.9d. per lb. and the distributors furnished audited accounts for the period of the stoppage. In Cork the scheme was operated by the Corporation.

632. Chairman.—The balance in the Fund is down to £4,000. I take it we will be able to pay the butter allowance of 3/- per cwt. for the remainder of the period?

Mr. Dempsey.—It will be drawn from the Vote.

633. The Dairy Disposals Company Ltd. had stocks of milk powder when the strike ended. Were they able to get a reasonable price for these stocks or were they sold at a loss?—The Dairy Disposals Company Ltd. produce milk powder themselves. It is part of their stock in trade. Additional quantities had to be imported to meet the emergency.

634. What was the reason for the variation in price as between the different distributors of the milk powder?—A difference in costs. Some of the stocks had to be imported from Holland and elsewhere. There were variations in prices and in distribution costs. We had to make arrangements at short notice and make the best bargains we could.

635. Deputy Brennan.—May we deal with the balance sheet of the Dairy Disposals Board? * I should like to find out something about the intangible asset of goodwill which is included in the account. I do not understand it.

Deputy Sheldon.—Nobody understands the Dairy Disposals Board?—The item goodwill is included in the assets in the same way as in any business concern. The Dairy Disposals Company Ltd. are engaged in various branches of trade. They have an export trade.

636. Chairman.—We shall now turn to the Vote itself. Does subhead A.— Salaries, Wages and Allowances—represent the salaries of the various officers of the Department?—That is so.

637. Could you say generally what classes of officers it covers?—Mainly Headquarters staff.

638. I presume subhead B—Travelling Expenses—covers travelling expenses of that staff?—That is so.

639. Deputy Brennan—.On subhead D. —Telegrams and Telephones — I notice there is a saving on telegrams and telephones. That must be the first time such a saving occurred.

640. Chairman.—On subhead E.1 — Seed Testing and Propagation—I presume the testing and development of seed takes place in Ballinacurra?—There is a seed testing station here also in the Science Buildings.

641. Do they mainly confine their activities to propagating new strains?— That happens in Ballinacurra. There are various tests and propagations of seed to bring them up to a bulk stock stage.

642. The £3,000 mentioned in subhead E.1 under the Pedigree Wheat Scheme is for the purpose of seed development?— Yes. There is in operation a certification scheme. Selected merchants get a certain amount of first-class wheat and arrange to have it grown under contract with the growers. The seed is sold in sealed bags as pedigree seed wheat.

643. Has the work of reconstruction at Abbotstown been completed?—The reconstruction of the main building has been completed but there is some additional work to be done yet.

644. Could you give an indication of the cost of the entire plan?—Not at the moment because there are farmyard additions and other works which must be done in order to make the place into a suitable research station. The transfer from Thorndale has not yet taken place.

645. On F.2—Grants to Private Agricultural Schools, etc.—do you lay down a course of teaching for these private schools which are paid grants?—There is a pretty well defined programme. The schools are subject to supervision and the pupils are examined periodically.

646. Deputy Sheldon.—On subhead F.8 —Educational Tours for Instructors in Agriculture—I notice that the note refers to the fact that it had been decided to charge a number of tours to subhead Q. Was the idea in that that it would be recoupable and that there would be an Appropriation in Aid?—Yes, it would be recoupable but the agreement has not yet been completed.

It has not been completed?—No.

You do not know whether it will be retrospective?—It will not be retrospective.

647. Chairman.— Could you give me any indication, Mr. Dempsey, of the number, or a rough figure for the number of students who go into the service of the Department as against the number who would return to their own homes or farms?—You mean boys attending agricultural schools?

Yes?—It is not possible, I am afraid, to give precise figures. A number of the boys pass into other farming operations not on their own farms. They become stewards or foremen or enter into agricultural businesses. I think the proportion that actually go back to the farms is small.

648. Deputy Dockrell.—On subhead F.4 —Scholarships in Agriculture, etc.—I note that the scholarships were not availed of to the full extent. What is the reason for that?—A certain number of scholarships are offered in the University and then, through some reason or other, illness or failure to pass an examination, a scholarship may lapse. These scholarships are tenable for four years and it sometimes happens that a student has to drop out so that there would be a saving for that particular year to that extent.

649. Deputy Sheldon.—Where a course is interrupted like that, is each case dealt with on the merits or is there any general policy with regard to recoupment of the portion already used?—Each case is treated on the merits. Sometimes boys who fail to secure an examination pass at the end of the year do get another chance. Sometimes they have to follow the course at their own expense and resume the scholarship later.

Deputy Bartley.—It is the Department and not the University authorities who decide this question?—The University authorities decide whether they will accept the student for final examination or not and it is the Department’s function to decide whether they will pay for the course. If a man fails to pass the examination the University may refuse to allow him to continue.

But the point I would like to have made clear is—if there is a difference of opinion about the desirability of continuing a scholarship in respect of a particular student, it is the Department who finally decides the issue and not the University authorities?—The position is that the Department relies on the University for information regarding the student—whether he is up to the standard, whether he is attending the course, and whether he has passed the requisite examinations. The question of payment or renewal of a scholarship is a departmental matter.

Yes, but the decision to renew or not to renew would be based on the views received?—Yes.

650. Deputy Sheldon.—On subhead G.1 —Improvement of Milk Production—I presume it is the one organisation we have for buying dairy bulls, beef bulls and also bulls under subhead I?—Yes. It is the same staff. They are livestock officers of the Department.

651. The difficulty that arose in that year with regard to dairy bulls—it is a bit difficult to understand why the full number of animals was not available. How did the difficulty arise?—The position there is that the Department’s officials go to the best sales and the best breeders and endeavour to get first-class animals. Sometimes all the animals on offer are not up to the standard they have fixed. Sometimes they are not able to compete or have not the authority to compete on the price levels at which bulls are sold.

652. They are restricted to sales in this country? — No. In fact the greater number is bought outside the country, but very often it is impossible to get animals up to the standard visualised. It is difficult to estimate in advance for the purchase of livestock which are to be sold by public auction or private treaty. You have no idea what prices they may fetch.

653. The saving was very high in relation to the amount of the original grant, almost one-third. It is astonishing to find that the Department could not secure £15,000 worth of dairy bulls?—If the bulls on offer are not up to the standard laid down purchases are not made.

654. Deputy Brennan.—On subhead G.3 —Improvement of Poultry and Egg Production—there was a saving of £11,704 in connection with the poultry scheme. Was this money payable or paid through county committees of agriculture or was it administered directly by the Department?—Well, the staffs of the committees were used to implement the scheme, with the consent of the county committees of agriculture.

655. Those grants were supplemented by the committees, by grants from the rates?—Yes.

656. Deputy Sheldon.—On subhead G.1 again, there is a reference to a reduction in the number of cow-testing associations. Has the position improved or is it continuing to deteriorate?—Unfortunately it is. The number is still no better.

Chairman.—It is very poor. It is a pity, at this stage.

657. Deputy Brennan.—On subhead H —Grants to County Committees of Agriculture—I see an unexpended balance but it is trivial. There is a supplementary grant of £8,000. I thought the experience of most committees was that they had overspent the amount available to them? Some committees must have had considerable underspending? — I will try to explain that. The amount paid by the Department to the county committees is related to the rates struck and when framing the estimates the rates are not struck. Some of the committees may be in receipt of a contribution from the rates not so high as that anticipated.

658. Deputy Sheldon.—If I may go back to subhead G.4—it is the wording of the heading, “Temporary Scheme for the growing of Horticultural Crops in the Athlone area” that I am questioning. How long has this temporary scheme been in operation?—It has been in operation for some years.

It would be nearly time to drop the word “temporary.” When does a scheme become permanent?

Deputy Bartley. — When it is labelled temporary, you have no grouse when it is stopped.

659. Chairman.—On subhead I—Special Agricultural, etc., Schemes — I see you have 111 agents?—Yes.

Where are they located? Are they distributed fairly evenly?—In the congested districts, in Cork, Kerry, Clare, Galway, Mayo, Donegal, Leitrim and Sligo.

660. Deputy Brennan.—Why was it not possible to carry out further experiments with regard to heating of glasshouses?— As a matter of fact, the experiments have been suspended and arrangements have been made in the meantime for the installation of heating plants at a limited number of Donegal houses.

661. It was not due to any decision to await installation of E.S.B. supplies?— No, they did try a couple of plants and did not find them effective. It was a question of waiting for a new design or a new type of equipment.

662. Deputy Bartley. — Has it been decided that heating by electricity is uneconomic in these glasshouses? It seems to me that I have seen a reference somewhere recently to the fact that the Department was of the opinion at least, that heating would not pay?—The plants that are being installed in the Donegal houses are not electric.

663. Deputy Brennan.—They are not using the Mona Jet burner?—No. They are ordinary boiler heating units. I am not familiar with the pattern of them.

I wonder has the Mona Jet system yet been tried?—This matter has been investigated by the Department’s officers and engineers of the Board of Works and engineers of Bord na Móna and the E.S.B. They have gone into it very fully. They are looking for a plant which can use turf or coal or other fuel as likely to be the most effective for glasshouses distributed over a fairly wide area.

One would think that if the Mona Jet system could be proved to be even as good—and I am told it is better—it would cut out a lot of unnecessary importation.

664. Deputy Bartley.—In any event, I wonder would Mr. Dempsey be able to say whether a proposal to use artificial heat in these glasshouses is for the purpose of producing other crops in them and for extending the period of production?— It is primarily for the purpose of extending the period of production early in the season. At present tomatoes are not admitted into this country for a certain period, from about the 20th July to 20th October. It would be a great advantage if we could have home-grown tomatoes a month earlier, as the cold-house tomatoes—to which, I think, the Deputy was referring—do not come on to the market in quantity until August. If the season could be extended by a month at the beginning, it would be a great advantage. If the glasshouses were heated they could be used for the propagation of other plants also, lettuces and so on.

665. It seems to me that the experiments that have been going on are on the technical side to find out what exactly is the best source of heat and the best way to apply it. But is it not desirable that if the heating is for the purpose of improving the produce of the crops that are now grown there, an examination should be made into the cost of improving the production by the application of artificial heat as compared with the returns on the system as it is now operated? It is possible that if the artificial heat is to be used in the main for these crops, the return from tomatoes might not be as good as it is now. It is a possibility. It might not be as good as what the producers get without artificial heat. I do not know if that is so, but it is an aspect of the question that requires attention. It is quite a simple matter for the Department to extend or to restrict the period in any given year, but I would say that in this particular matter the interests of the growers are more important than the interest of the public?—That is the kernel of the problem, as the Deputy has put it. The heating equipment has to be efficient and economic. We want units which will lead to greater net return to the producers and the producers have to be satisfied, of course, that it is worth while to instal these heating units because they have to pay their share of the cost of installation.

I think that is fair enough. I take it that not merely the matter of technical efficiency but the result economically to the producers is also being borne in mind?—Yes. It is all important.

666. Deputy Brennan. — On subhead K.1—Agricultural Societies and Shows, etc., the grants to agricultural societies and shows, I take it, refer only to the R.D.S.? There are some other grants to other shows which are made through the county committees, and, of course, are recouped by 50 per cent. That is not included in this subhead?—No, but there are a number of others such as the Munster Agricultural Society Show, the Connemara Pony Breeding Society Show, the Bee Keepers’ Association and the Department’s exhibits at the R.D.S. Show.

I did not know that the Bee Keepers’ Association got a grant?—Yes.

667. Deputy Sheldon. — On subhead M.2.—Fees for Reports on Agricultural Conditions — who gives the reports on agricultural conditions? — Mainly the officers of committees of agriculture. The committees permit their officers to report periodically.

Are there other people?—The Central Statistics Office collect reports from various sources. They have official reporters.

668. Is it from this information that the sort of thing that appears in the Press now and again is derived, the Department’s report on agricultural conditions? —Yes, largely. The monthly report is based principally on these reports.

669. Somebody must have gone very far astray in County Donegal this year? The Report on harvest conditions in the beginning of September—that was of August, I presume—was not even 5 per cent. right, practically, in respect of any part of the amount of wheat cut, the amount of oats lodged, and so on. Have you any comment in that regard?—The time lag is a factor there. A report is prepared at a certain time but when it is published is another matter.

I was coming round to that. It is very misleading to the public when a date is not attached in a case like that. It is particularly so with regard to harvest conditions. It can create a lot of ill-feeling. Farmers who have 50 to 60 acres of oats lodged, and who then read in the paper that the Department are satisfied there is no lodging, feel they have a grievance, do they not?—I quite agree. However, there are press reports over which the Department would have no control. The Department is responsible only for the report which they furnish to the press.

670. I am thinking of newspaper items which read: “The Department reports …” With regard to the note on subhead M.1—Miscellaneous Works— there is a reference to the effect that it was not found practicable to arrange for exhibits of agricultural products at as many centres in Great Britain as anticipated. Has any particular difficulty arisen? I thought that this was a matter in which every effort would be made?— Every effort is made. It is a question of accommodation and whether or not space is available. Sometimes the space is booked so long in advance that it is not possible for a newcomer to be catered for. Furthermore, some of the exhibits are such that it is doubtful whether they are worth the expenditure. Some are and others are not.

671. The note on subhead M.9—Land Reclamation Scheme — is very extensive and part of it appears to be contradictory. The note says:—

“The principal savings were £187,075 and £24,315 on payments to contractors and on lime and fertilisers, respectively, due mainly to the restriction of land project operations by adverse weather conditions during the year.”

Later on, in the same note, we read that there was an excess. The note says:—

“An increase in the wages of labourers and the need for a more extensive employment of direct labour than estimated caused an excess of £6,315 on salaries, wages and allowances…”

If the weather was so bad that one part of the work was restricted, I cannot understand how that did not affect the other part? — There are some types of reclamation, for example, where heavy machines are required, which could not be carried out when the land is very wet whereas manual labour could operate.

672. Fair enough. In the note in regard to subhead M.13—Bovine Tuberculosis Eradication Scheme—there is a reference to the effect that most of the provision of £3,500 for salaries, wages and allowances was saved. Considering that the actual expenditure was in the region of 75 per cent., how did it arise that so high a saving on salaries, wages and allowances could be made? How, generally, did so much money get spent on a subhead where practically nothing was spent on salaries and allowances? In other words, who operated the scheme if people being paid to operate it were not there?— Salaries of headquarters staff engaged on the scheme are charged to subhead A. Besides there are claims still to be met in respect of that period from the private veterinary surgeons who are operating all the time.

673. Chairman. — With regard to subhead O.5—Agricultural Produce Cereals Acts, 1933 to 1939, and Wheat Order, 1953, etc.—I see from the note that the principal saving was £25,806 on the provision of £30,000 made for the Fertiliser Credits (Wheat) Scheme. I presume this scheme is almost finished now or is coming to a close?—I do not know. There are still a considerable number of outstanding vouchers. Claims are coming in very slowly.

I suppose that some never turn up?

Deputy Sheldon.—I am still looking for mine. I put them in a file but I cannot find them.

674. Chairman. — Details of Extra Receipts payable to Exchequer will be found at the bottom of page 65 and at the top of page 66. The third item at the top of page 66 is “Refunds of overpayments” amounting to £6,929. How did that arise?—That is in connection with the Food and Agriculture Organisation. Apparently the Government’s contribution was charged at a higher rate than it might have been. That organisation has been changing the basis of contribution for various countries and, in this respect, it was favourable to this country. It has been reduced and hence the refund of the overpayment for the previous year.

675. Have your officers attended many meetings of that organisation during the period in question?—General Meetings are held once every two years, at which representatives of the Department attend. One was held last year. Special committee meetings are held at various times to deal with various problems.

676. Deputy Brennan. — Have we a permanent representative in Rome in respect of the Food and Agriculture Organisation? — No. The Minister in Rome and his staff sit at special meetings.

677. Chairman.—On the question of international committees, has O.E.E.C. made any further recommendations regarding the liberalisation of trade in a recent period?—I think they are reasonably satisfied with the position in this country with respect to the liberalisation programme.

678. Deputy Brennan.—On page 76 there is a statement of Loans, Securities and Amounts repayable to the Department under Agreements, etc., on 31st March, 1955. The fourth item refers to an amount of £73 for the erection of fencing in congested districts. Might I ask the Accounting Officer under what conditions does anybody in a congested district qualify for a loan in respect of fencing?—No applications for loans for a fencing scheme have been received at all in recent years. Fencing material is supplied but on a payment basis. There have not been any applications for loans.

Deputy Brennan. — I would submit that that is due to lack of knowledge of the scheme.

Deputy Bartley. — I understood that this scheme had been dropped. I know that a good deal of fencing was done under it in Connemara years ago. However, to my knowledge, I do not think any of it has been done for a number of years. I know that fencing of some kind has been put up by fairly comfortable landholders at their own expense. It would be news to me if this scheme is still available to landholders in the congested districts.

Deputy Brennan. — Deputy Bartley may be thinking of a grant scheme for fencing.

Deputy Bartley.—No. I am thinking of a scheme whereby iron stakes, and say, four strands of wire, were erected at certain intervals and the stakes were fixed in concrete beds. That is the type of fencing I have in mind, not sod or wall fencing.

Deputy O’Hara. — I think Deputy Bartley is confusing that with the scheme that was in operation with the land project. It was discontinued because, I think, it was clashing with another scheme operated by the Department of Agriculture, the Farm Buildings Improvement Scheme.

Deputy Bartley. — These are recent things. I am talking about something that was common away back, say, in the first world war.

Deputy Brennan. — I have frequently advised farmers that no such loans were available.

Deputy Bartley.—This is no proof that it is available. Maybe it is a hang-over.

Mr. Dempsey.—Fencing materials are supplied on a cash payment basis. There have been a number of these going on but there have not been applications to the Department for loans for some years.

Deputy Brennan.—Probably it would be more economic to do it the direct way.

679. Deputy Sheldon.—The last note on page 74 says that a sum of £15 representing the amount by which the value of one of this Department’s motor vans depreciated as a result of a traffic accident in which the van was involved was written off with the sanction of the Minister for Finance. I wonder if the word “depreciated” is really the right word to use there and does it in fact really mean depreciation. I would not have expected the Department to keep a sort of trading account in respect of its motor vans which would show depreciation?—I expect that would be arrived at by the age of the van.

Deputy Brennan. — It would be written down each year in the assets.

Deputy Sheldon.—Does the Department actually keep an account which shows the value of vans, and so forth?

Chairman.—From year to year.

Mr. Dempsey.—I think Deputy Sheldon is quite correct in saying that the word is used in an unusual sense there—it refers to the depreciation of the value of the van as a result of an accident. It was really the damage to the van.

Deputy Sheldon. — In other words, a deduction was made for repairs.

680. Deputy H. P. Dockrell.—I see on page 75 that fines amounting to £2,645,780 incurred by holders of milling licences under Section 10 of the Agricultural Produce (Cereals) Act, 1935, for failure to meet the technical requirements of the Act to take into store specified monthly quantities of home-grown wheat were remitted. Is there any information on that?—Under the Cereals Act, millers are required to take in certain quantities of wheat monthly. The purpose is to enable the entire wheat crop to be taken up. It is not possible to forecast in advance when the harvest will come in or when the crop will be ripe. In years such as the present year, one could be very badly out in fixing a quota for August.

681. Deputy Sheldon. — Would the Department consider an amending Act rather than putting in this paragraph? —It could be done in that way but some quota has to be fixed in advance. The whole difficulty is to know what quantity of wheat will be available for offer to the millers in any particular month.

Is it not true that the provisions of the Act just do not operate with regard to this matter? — They do operate in the sense that the miller is under an obligation to take up the wheat under this system.

Deputy Sheldon.—He knows well that, if he does not comply, the fine will be remitted.

Deputy Bartley.—Because of weather. Suppose, however, you remove the obligation, what then?

Deputy Sheldon.—Has a fine ever been imposed which was not remitted?—I do not think so; not in recent years.

Mr. O’Hara. — I think that, on the whole, the home-grown wheat is taken up.

Mr. Dempsey.—The millers have done their part. This is to guard against contingencies. This provision was made lest the wheat might not be taken in.

VOTE 28—FISHERIES.

Mr. J. Dempsey further examined.

682. Chairman.—Paragraphs 47 and 48 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General relate to subhead H of the Vote, i.e., Appropriations in Aid. They read as follows:—

“47. The Sea Fisheries Association was dissolved on 24 April, 1952, under the Sea Fisheries Act, 1952, which provided for the transfer of all the liabilities of the Association at the date of dissolution to An Bord Iascaigh Mhara.

48. The advances for boats and gear made to the Association to 24 April, 1952, amounted to £408,500 and the half-yearly instalments of annuities set up to repay these advances amounted to £281,878 at 31 March, 1955. Sums transferred to the Department in payment of the instalments amounted to £209,672, including £13,222 credited to the subhead. The repayments were, therefore, in arrear on 31 March, 1955, to the extent of £72,206 as compared with £59,198 on 31 March, 1954.”

Mr. O’Neill. — The question of these arrears was discussed, I think, by previous Committees. It was also considered by the Department of Finance and the matter is still under consideration. The arrears are increasing.

Chairman.—Can you say, Mr. Dempsey, if there is any change in the position in recent times?—The position has not changed very much. The whole question is under consideration in the Department of Finance as regards some of the accounts.

683. Chairman. — Let us now turn to the Vote itself on page 80. With regard to subhead F.5 — Compensation, etc. — are there many more compensation claims awaiting payment?—There are only four claims outstanding at the moment.

684. Deputy Brennan.—With regard to subhead F.1—Grants to Boards of Conservators and Local Authorities, etc.—is the excess expenditure of £5,000 odd due to additional grants being made available for Boards of Conservators? — Yes, primarily. It is also associated with the striking of the rate and the rate collection.

Was there any adjustment arising out of the discontinuance of the Salmon Conservancy Fund? Has it brought about in any way the increase under that subhead?—Not in that season.

685. Chairman.—With regard to the note on page 83 in connection with the recovery of a sum of £153, was that made owing to incorrect information being furnished? Is there a check on information supplied in support of these claims?—Yes. We endeavour to check so far as possible.

Could you say how the fact of incorrect information having been given came to your notice in this case?—You mean how did it reach the Department? Inquiries made directly by the Department elicited that there was some misinformation.

686. Deputy Sheldon.—Where is the fish farm established? — On a small river adjacent to Roscrea.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 63—HEALTH.

Mr. P. Ó Cinnéide called and examined.

687. Chairman.—Paragraph 113 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows:—

“Subhead H.—Grants to Health Authorities.

113. Issues in respect of grants under Section 4 of the Health Services (Financial Provisions) Act, 1947, are made from time to time to the several health authorities on an estimated basis pending audit of the accounts by Local Government Auditors whose certificates are furnished to me. Any necessary adjustment is effected in the grants for subsequent years. As the grants paid to certain health authorities for the year 1948-49 and later years have not been finally adjusted I have inquired regarding the availability of auditors’ certificates in these cases.”

Have you anything to add, Mr. O’Neill?

Mr. O’Neill.—With one or two exceptions, the auditors’ certificates have now been furnished up to 1952-53 or later, so that the arrears are being overtaken.

Mr. Ó Cinnéide. — We have some of them up to 1954-55 as well. The position has improved a good deal.

688. Chairman. — Is the audit carried out concurrently?—No. The audit always starts after the end of the year.

689. When do you issue the balance?— We hold back 5 per cent. until the following year. The 95 per cent. is issued in instalments during the year. There is a grant of 25 per cent. in June, 25 per cent. in September, 25 per cent. in December, and 20 per cent. in March. The remaining 5 per cent. is held over until the following year and if the audit has not been completed by the end of the following financial year, 90 per cent. of the 5 per cent. may be issued and the balance is held over until the audit is finally completed.

690. Deputy Brennan.—With regard to subhead A.—Salaries, Wages and Allowances—have all these vacancies since been filled?—These particular vacancies have been filled. There is always a number of vacancies and I do not believe that at any time has a Department a full staff having regard to retirements and so on.

691. Deputy Bartley.—Are the salaries of local health inspectors included in this sum? — No. They are paid by the local health authority but rank for recoupment as part of the Health Grant.

To the extent of 50 per cent.?—Yes.

692. Deputy Brennan.—With regard to subhead F.3—Dissemination of Information and Advice on Health — does that mainly refer to the published pamphlets that are issued?—It falls under three or four heads. The heaviest item of expenditure is in connection with the exhibition of health films in the schools. That took £5,254 of the total expenditure in that year. These films are shown by the National Film Institute by arrangement with the Department. We pay them their expenses under contract. They operate three units throughout the country. There is also included an item which represents the final instalment of the cost of the last film the Department made. It dealt with accidents in the home. Then there is an item covering the cost of printing and paper for the health pamphlets dealing with children’s ailments issued through the machinery of the Department of Social Welfare in connection with children’s allowances. There was a small miscellaneous item for odds and ends, about £25 all together.

693. Chairman.—With regard to the expenditure under subhead I. — Contributions to Local Authorities for the Improvement of County Homes, etc.—I take it that that represents a contribution towards loan charges?—Fifty per cent. of the loan charges. In that year only three health authorities had their schemes ready for approval. They are coming in much more rapidly now, but it is a very slow business.

694. Deputy Sheldon.—With regard to subhead K. — Hospitals Trust Fund (Grant-in-Aid)—would not this very big saving which was largely responsible for the net surplus being so high affect only the capital budget?—That is so.

695. Chairman.—Roughly on what basis do you make issues from this Grant-in-Aid?—The Grant-in-Aid is paid into the Hospitals Trust Fund and issues are made from that fund. According as the Fund runs low, we ask the Department of Finance for an instalment of the Grant-in-Aid. There is no settled time. It depends on the rate of expenditure in connection with the various projects paid for out of the Hospital Trust Fund.

696. With regard to Item 8 in the Appropriations in Aid, I presume the increase in receipts was due to increased charges? — Yes. The charges were increased shortly before the year 1954-55. There was a fairly substantial increase. Some of the charges had been in operation for 30 or 40 years.

697. Deputy Brennan. — At the same time, there is a cheaper form of certificate made available?—That is so.

One would think that that should offset the position to some extent?—There is not such a very big demand for the short certificate. There is also a cheap certificate in connection with Social Welfare legislation such as the Unemployment Assistance Acts, the Widows’ and Orphans’ Pensions Acts, the Children’s Allowances Acts and so on. That has been in operation for quite a while.

698. Deputy Bartley.—Has the price of that been increased? It used to be 6d.?— It has been increased.

699. Deputy Brennan.—The short certificate is accepted in the case of examinations in most sections of the Department of Education and also in regard to old age pensions. Would there be a possibility that there was more of a demand for certificates as well as a result of the various schemes?—Yes, that tends to keep the demand up. Also the more people travel abroad, the more demand there is for certificates. They require them in connection with passports and so on.

The witness withdrew.

The Committee adjourned.

* See Appendix XVI.