|
|
|
|
MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA(Minutes of Evidence)Déardaoin, 1 Márta, 1962.Thursday, 1st March, 1962.The Committee sat at 11 a.m.
Mr. E. F. Suttle (Secretary and Director of Audit) and Mr. L. V. O’Neill (Department of Finance) called and examined.ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN.1a. Deputy Carter.—It is customary that the Opposition should fill the position of Chairman and, therefore, I have great pleasure in proposing Deputy Jones. Deputy Desmond.—I second the proposal. Question put and agreed to. DEPUTY JONES took the chair. 2. Chairman.—I am very grateful to the members of the Committee for the honour conferred on me in being appointed Chairman of this very important Committee. I believe this Committee is one of the most important in the House and it is a great honour to serve on it and a still greater honour to be appointed Chairman of it. I hope, with your assistance, during the term we will be operating, that we will do the job that has been entrusted to us by the House—this year in a more restricted period—and that we will complete expeditiously the Appropriation Accounts before us. The function of this Committee is to deal with the accounts for 1960-61 and, with the assistance of the Comptroller and Auditor General, to enquire from the various Accounting Officers how they spent the moneys which Dáil Éireann appropriated for their Departments. Most of the members here have been members of this Committee previously. For the benefit of new members I might mention that the questions which may be addressed to the Accounting Officers are in respect of the moneys given for their Departments. Questions in regard to policy may not be addressed to these officers; they are more appropriately addressed to the Minister in the House. Any Deputy is entitled to ask any question of the Accounting Officers on any relevant matter and, so far as that is concerned, his rights in that respect will be safeguarded by the Chair. GENERAL REPORT.Mr. T. K. Whitaker called and examined.3. Chairman.—We will deal now with the general report. Mr. Whitaker has kindly come here this morning to assist us. Paragraph 1 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General is as follows:— “Outturn of the Year (Adjusted to the nearest £) 1. The audited accounts are summarised on page xxxvii. The amount to be surrendered as shown in the summary is £4,268,634 arrived at as follows:—
This represents 3.2 per cent. of the supply grants as compared with 2.3 per cent. in the previous year. The principal savings were:—
In no case has the provision made by Dáil Éireann been exceeded and no excess vote is, therefore, necessary.” 4. Chairman.—Paragraph 2 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General is as follows:— “Exchequer Extra Receipts. 2. Extra receipts payable to the Exchequer as recorded in the appropriation accounts amounted to £679,267.” 5. Chairman.—Paragraph 3 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General is as follows:— “Surrender of Balances on 1959-60 Votes. 3. The balances due to be surrendered out of votes for the public services for 1959-60 amounted to £2,812,812. I hereby certify that these balances have been duly surrendered. I further certify that the excess of £7,573 on Vote No. 59, External Affairs, referred to in paragraph 2 of my previous report, has been made good by a vote of the Oireachtas for the sum of £6,937, and the application of £636 as an appropriation in aid of the vote.” 6. Chairman.—Paragraph 4 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General is as follows:— “Stock and Store Accounts. 4. The stock and store accounts of the Departments have been examined. The results are satisfactory, with some exceptions which are referred to in the paragraphs relating to the votes of the Departments concerned.” 7. Chairman.—Paragraph 5 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General is as follows:— “National Development Fund (Winding up) Account. 5. As indicated in paragraph 7 of the previous report the balance in the Winding up Account at 31 March, 1960 was £1,219,037 (including £23,977 in the hands of agent Departments). Issues to agent Departments in the year amounted to £271,821, viz:—
The statements appended to the accounts of the relevant votes indicate the expenditure incurred on the various projects during the year under review.” 8. Chairman.—Paragraph 6 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General is as follows:— “6. The expenditure on projects since the establishment of the Fund to 31 March, 1961 was as follows:—
Expenditure on projects carried out by local authorities is examined by Local Government auditors whose certificates are made available to me. In the case of grants issued to the Inland Fisheries Trust, An Bord Iascaigh Mhara and An Óige, I have accepted their auditors’ certificates as evidence of the expenditure incurred therefrom. The balance in the Winding up Account at 31 March, 1961 was £931,819 (including £8,580 in the hands of agent Departments).” 9. Chairman.—Paragraph 7 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General is as follows:— “7.—Statement of Receipts into and Issues out of the Central Fund for the Year ended 31 March, 1961
Chairman.—As there are no questions on these paragraphs we will turn to Vote 1. VOTE 1—PRESIDENT’S ESTABLISHMENT.Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.No question. VOTE 2—HOUSES OF THE OIREACHTAS.Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.10. Deputy Booth.—On subhead B.—Travelling Expenses of Comhaltaí—that only covers the actual travelling expenses to and from the House—is that not right?—Yes. 11. Is there any provision under this Vote for travelling expenses of Deputies and Senators travelling abroad, or is that all covered under External Affairs?—There is a provision, under subhead I. of this Vote, for Inter-Parliamentary activities, that is, where Deputies are travelling in connection with the Inter-Parliamentary Union, but otherwise travelling abroad, if paid for by the State, would be under the heading of External Affairs. Deputy Booth.—I had in mind the expenses of Deputies travelling, as some have done, to Germany, on special deputations which do not come under the heading of Inter-Parliamentary activities and which were not as far as I could see strictly connected either with External Affairs. Perhaps I am wrong in that, but the most recent example was where Deputy Dillon and Deputy Corish were invited out by the German Government and I was wondering whether they were travelling as members of the Houses of the Oireachtas or were they connected with External Affairs? Deputy Kenny.—Would you not think that the German Government, since they invited them, would bear the expenses? Deputy Booth.—I do not know. 12. Deputy Sherwin.—Apparently this covers only those who travel by car or rail. Does it cover Deputies who travel by bus?—I cannot think why it should not in the case of Deputies in the country, but I am not quite sure. Deputy Sherwin.—Allow me to explain, Sir. I was living some distance from the House and I had to travel in and out by bus. I was told I would have to have a car or otherwise I could not make a claim. I do not see the sense in that: that you have to have a car or you have to travel by rail. Why can you not travel by bus? Chairman.—I think that is a question which Mr. Whitaker would not be called on to answer in the ordinary way. He is here to explain the expenditure of the moneys voted by the House. That would be a question more appropriate to the Minister in the House. Deputy Sherwin.—My colleague, Deputy Booth, asked a somewhat similar question and I took advantage of it. Deputy Booth.—Could that question be more properly put to the Accounting Officer as to whether any of the travelling expenses under subhead B. would be in respect of travelling by bus? Chairman.—Can you help us, Mr. Whitaker?—I have not got that at the moment, but I could let you know.* Deputy Carter.—I do not think it would be a matter for the Accounting Officer. I think that Córas Iompair Éireann would interchange the voucher for bus travel?—The regulations on travelling expenses are probably made with the approval of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. Chairman.—You can let us know if such travel is available, Mr. Whitaker, or Deputy Sherwin can deal with the matter in another way. 13. Deputy Booth.—On subhead I.—Inter-Parliamentary Activities (Grant-in-Aid)—could I raise my question again? Does that subhead refer only to expenses incurred in travelling to and from conferences under the auspices of the Inter-Parliamentary Union?—Yes. 14. Deputy Desmond.—On subhead J., what portion of the reduction of £500 has been brought about by increased charges in the restaurant?—I am not sure if I could answer that. All we get from Joint Restaurant Committee is a claim, within the maximum of £2,000, by reference to the actual loss they have incurred during the year. In fact, they have not claimed for a couple of years now the full possible Grant-in-Aid of £2,000. They managed with £1,500, but why I could not say. Would it be possible to get from that Committee any information on that basis?—I am not sure how far I, as the Accounting Officer, can go into the accounts of the Joint Committee. I would have to look into that point. Deputy Desmond.—I do not want to go outside the confines of this, but is it tied up with the question of an insufficiency of staff at certain periods? Chairman.—I think that question could more properly be raised with the Joint Committee. Deputy Desmond.—I do not know. We may not get much information there. However, we will probably get it in the House. Mr. Whitaker.—The Committee are primarily responsible for running the restaurant within the possible grant of £2,000. 15. Deputy Cunningham. — Does the £1,500 expended include the travelling expenses of the Restaurant Committee?—Again I cannot say. I do not know what the details are. Chairman.—A grant is made and Mr. Whitaker can only account for what is handed over to the Committee. Those questions would be more appropriately addressed to the Committee itself. VOTE 3—DEPARTMENT OF THE TAOISEACH.Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.No question. VOTE 4—CENTRAL STATISTICS OFFICE.Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.16. Chairman. — On subhead A.—Salaries, Wages and Allowances—there is a note which says the saving “is due to unfilled vacancies and new appointments being made at lower points on the salary scale.” Could you tell us have the vacancies yet been filled?—I am afraid not all. There has been great difficulty in getting statisticians. Various competitions have been held but for lack of suitable candidates it has not been possible to fill all the positions. There also have been, for periods at a time, vacancies in the clerical grade. I think however the main hampering difficulty is that of getting expert statisticians. As far as ordinary clerical staff are concerned, the office is pretty adequately staffed now. Has the production of any statistical information been delayed because of these vacancies remaining unfilled?—No. I think they have managed to keep pretty well up to schedule in that respect, though with a great deal of difficulty. 17. Deputy Treacy.—Do we advertise these positions regularly and what kind of salary scales do we offer?—The positions of statisticians are advertised pretty often, about once a year, and in the light of experience the terms and conditions have been improved. But, as the members know, there is a tremendous demand in these islands for mathematicians and statisticians and it is very hard to get them for the public service. Could you mention the salary scales?—Yes, £780 to £1,645. That is the salary offered to statisticians. It is the same at the starting point as for administrative entrants to the public service, but runs higher. 18. Chairman.—On subhead E.—Collection of Statistics—the note says “The enumeration of certain areas in connection with the Census of Agriculture, 1960, was completed in less time than anticipated.” Could you amplify that for us, Mr. Whitaker?—In connection with the Census of Agriculture, civilian employees were engaged. When the provision was being made it was made on a rough estimate of what they could be expected to do. In fact, they proved to be much more efficient than was originally expected and they were able to get through the work in less time. That is how the saving arose. Deputy Clinton.—On what type of census were these civilian employees engaged?—The enumeration of livestock, which occurs on 1st June and 1st January in each year. It applies on 1st June to crops and all other forms of production besides livestock and on the 1st January only to livestock. The Gardaí used to do this, as part of their extra work, but, in recent years, they have not been able to do as much non-police duty as before. That is why civilian employees have been engaged. I have not seen any of these civilian employees. It is still the Gardaí in our area?—That may be true, in particular areas. They have not been able to get around to it in all areas with the result that, in some areas, civilian enumerators have had to be engaged. 19. Deputy Treacy.—Might I ask how are these civilian enumerators recruited?—I am sorry I have not got a note of that here. The note I have says that about 1,300 temporary civilian enumerators were engaged for a short period to assist the Gardaí but it does not say how exactly they were recruited. However, I shall let you have a note on it.* VOTE 6—OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR FINANCE.Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.20. Deputy Desmond.—On subhead H.1—Civil Service Arbitration Board—Fees, etc.—is there any information on this question of arbitration? Some branches of the Civil Service seem to have been awaiting arbitration for a long time. I wonder why that is so?—This relates to the year 1960-61, and I really do not know, without making further enquiry, why the Board did not sit as often as anticipated. The progress of the stages of conciliation and arbitration is very hard to predict. If more matters are being settled by conciliation, there is less need to go to arbitration. In view of the fact that a statement was made that some organisations were waiting for so long for arbitration, I thought that might be made clear?—I shall certainly provide a note on it.* * 21. Chairman.—In respect to subhead J.—Commission on Income Taxation—quite a number of reports have been issued. Is the work of this Commission nearing completion now?—I understand it is. They probably will present a final report within the next couple of months. 22. Deputy Booth.—There is reference in the Notes on the Account to expenditure of £1,278 on the salaries and expenses of five Executive Officers who were paid their normal salary rates while undergoing university training. While they are at the university are there substitutes employed to do their work?—This is a scholarship scheme for young executive entrants, chosen from among the first ten or twelve successful candidates in every year. We pick a certain number—two, three or, perhaps, five—to attend the university full-time for courses which are approved by the Department of Finance as being conducive to better and more efficient service by these officers in their several Departments. While they are at the university the scholarships really consist of their being paid their normal pay as Executive Officers and that is why this note appears in the Account. While they are at the university their work in the Department must be done by somebody else so that you have, in fact, a duplicate provision for the work while they are away at the university. That provision is the scholarship given to them at State expense. Deputy Kenny.—What method have you of picking those candidates for the university courses?—The first qualifying test is that the young Executive Officer must be in the first ten or twelve in order of merit at the competitive examination. From those top candidates a limited number are picked by interview and by a general study of their capabilities, and that interview is undertaken by a Board of senior civil servants, including heads of Departments, and members of university academic staffs. Of course, a very close watch is kept by the same board on how the young men are doing at the university. Reports are got from their Professors every year and their performance at the end of term examinations is watched. In fact, we have had to refuse the continuation of a scholarship in one case. What length of time would they be at the university?—They would normally be doing an honours course which would take three years. Then you would have a number of these civil servants at the university—a number for every year, say?—Yes. We sent five the first year and two the second year so that we will have something like three a year there as we go along. At any given time, when the scheme is fully in effect, we will have, perhaps, ten to twelve of these officers at the university. Deputy Clinton.—I assume the reason for this particular procedure is that you would not have, coming out of the universities in the normal way, suitable qualified people to go into the particular branches of the Civil Service. Does this scheme give you any lien on these people after they are qualified?—There is a lien on them, of course, inasmuch as, if they do not continue on in the Civil Service, they must repay the amount of the scholarships they got from public funds while attending the university. That is a very important lien. In connection with the other part of the question, about the suitability of university graduates, undoubtedly there are suitable people coming out of the universities but there are so many other attractive occupations that not enough are coming our way. VOTE 11—STATE LABORATORY.Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.23. Mr. Desmond.—There is mention in the note under subhead C.—Apparatus and Chemical Equipment—of savings due to the fact that certain contractors failed to furnish accounts?—That may not be a saving eventually. 24. Chairman.—Under subhead D.—Appropriations in Aid—I notice the figure under item 1 shows an increased realisation. Does this arise from an additional number of samples being submitted for analysis?—It depends on the number of samples. Really it is surprising the number of samples that come forward. I see that 65,712 samples were received for examination during that particular year. VOTE 12—CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION.VOTE 13—AN CHOMHAIRLE EALAÍON.Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.No question. VOTE 14—SUPERANNUATION AND RETIRED ALLOWANCES.Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.25. Chairman. — In the explanation given of the variation between expenditure and grant—under subheads A. and I.—in this Vote, a figure amounting to £16,500 is mentioned, but on page 190, on Vote 60, expenditure on Civil Service pension increases is given at £24,500. Where does the difference arise as between the two Votes?—The difference is £8,000 and is due to the Post Office pensioners who are carried separately on the Post Office Vote and not in the Vote for Superannuation and Retired Allowances. That explains the discrepancy. 26. Are there many pensioners who retired under Article 10 of the Treaty? There was £35,270 received from the British Government as appropriations in aid?—There could not be very many. I do not see a reference to the number of them. I am afraid I have not got the number here but I shall let you know.* VOTE 15—SECRET SERVICE.VOTE 16—EXPENSES UNDER THE ELECTORAL ACT AND THE JURIES ACT.VOTE 17—SUPPLEMENTARY AGRICULTURAL GRANTS.Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.No question. VOTE 18—LAW CHARGES.Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.No question. VOTE 19—MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES.Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.27. Deputy Clinton.—In respect of subhead B.—Olympic Council of Ireland (Grant-in-Aid)—is that a possible Grant-in-Aid, seeing that there is a saving of £1,000? How is that fixed?—The Grant-in-Aid of £5,000 was intended to meet fifty per cent. of the cost of sending a team of seventy to participate in the Olympic Games in Rome. The expenses of the Olympic Council came to £8,158. They had some funds on hand from private sources, so that brought the Grant-in-Aid down to £4,000. 28. Chairman. — Under subhead C.—Marsh’s Library (Grant-in-Aid)—who is responsible for the running of Marsh’s Library?—I think it is under the control of a board of trustees. The present Trustees are the Archbishop of Dublin, Most Rev. Dr. Simms, Professor McDowell of Trinity College and some others. It is a library which was set up by Archbishop Marsh in the 18th century, just 250 years ago. It has a valuable collection of books. The building itself, which is a fine architectural work, has fallen into disrepair and it is necessary to do something to maintain its fabric. The trustees themselves have collected quite a substantial amount towards this and the State has offered to help them with at least one pound for every pound privately subscribed. The payments this particular year are short of what we were prepared to make because the amount certified by the architect for payment up to the 31st March, 1961, came to £5,130 only. Half of that amount was issued by way of State grant. There has been a re-vote in the current year. We probably will have one for next year, too, in order to complete our undertaking to help this work of reconstruction. Deputy Belton.—Where is Marsh’s Library?—It is very close to St. Patrick’s Cathedral. It is between the Cathedral and Kevin Street Garda Station, in St. Patrick’s Close. Chairman.—Did the State help this Library in previous years?—Under statute, for a long time, a tiny grant has been made to the Under-Librarian. It is now £26 per annum. Deputy Belton.—Subject to tax? Deputy Kenny.—Is it a public library?—It is open to the public. Deputy Booth.—Is this Vote purely in respect of capital expenditure on the maintenance of the building? It does not refer to books?—It is to maintain the fabric of the building. Like most other buildings of its kind, it suffers a lot from dry rot and it has been necessary to replace the roof timbers and most of the Library furniture as well. VOTE 60—INCREASES IN PENSIONS.Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.No question. CONTINGENCY FUND DEPOSIT ACCOUNT.Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.29. Chairman.—Paragraph 93 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows: “93. A vote for Repayments to the Contingency Fund was not necessary as advances from the Fund were made good within the year by votes of the Oireachtas. The Contingency Fund Deposit Account appears at page 191.” Have you anything to say on this, Mr. Suttle? Mr. Suttle.—This is the first year in which the Contingency Fund does not need to be replenished. There was no final charge on the Fund to be made good this year. Deputy Booth.—I have not any idea as to what this Contingency Fund Deposit Account is meant to cover. Could I be given some information as to the sort of payments involved? Mr. Whitaker.—It is intended to meet an unexpected and urgent payment that has to be made, for example, at a time when the Dáil is not sitting and it is not possible to move a Supplementary Estimate. Chairman.—Does that satisfy the Deputy? Deputy Booth.—Yes. The witness withdrew. VOTE 7—OFFICE OF THE REVENUE COMMISSIONERS.Mr. S. Reamonn called and examined.30. Chairman.—Paragraphs 8 and 9 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General read as follows: “Revenue Account 8. A test examination of the Revenue Account has been carried out with satisfactory results. 9. The net yield of revenue for the years 1960-61 and 1959-60, under its main heads, is shown in the following statement:—
£108,434,000 (including £1,038,000 in respect of Special Import Levy) was paid into the Exchequer during the year leaving a balance of £2,017,955 as compared with £3,243,610 at the end of the previous financial year.” Have you anything to add to these notes, Mr. Suttle? Mr. Suttle.—Our examination of the Revenue Accounts is confined to ensuring that regulations exist for the proper control of revenue. It is our main job to see that these regulations are adequate and are carried out. 31. Chairman.—With regard to paragraph 9, I noticed that Customs is down by approximately £4,000,000 and Excise is up by around £6,000,000. Is that due to the operation of the Oil Refinery? Mr. Reamonn.—Yes. The Whitegate Oil Refinery went into production in June, 1959. That meant that, whereas formerly we had been collecting customs duty on refined oils entering at the ports, we have now begun to collect excise duty on refined oils issuing from the Refinery. When I speak of refined oils entering at the ports and issuing from the Refinery, I do not mean to imply that we collected the duty immediately or that we now collect the duty immediately. What happens is that the oil companies put the refined oil into bonded installations. The duty becomes payable only when the refined oil is taken out for home consumption. There was a differential of 2d. per gallon between the customs duty on refined oil coming in and the excise duty on home-refined oil. This excise duty was already in existence because before the advent of Whitegate there was a certain amount of refining carried on although it was on a minor scale. To preserve the flow of revenue when this big shift-over took place from customs to excise, the excise duty had to be increased by 2d. per gallon. That 2d. per gallon took effect from the 17th June, 1959. There was a further change in the law for the following reason. Towards the end of the year, round December, the Whitegate concern was more or less in full production and able to produce the bulk of our requirements. The question of protection arose and an extra 1d. per gallon on the customs duty on refined oil coming from abroad was imposed. This took effect as from 1st January, 1960. This whole operation meant, as you said, Mr. Chairman, that there was a shift of as much as £6,000,000 from customs to excise but it was modified by certain factors. Although there was this loss, it was counter-balanced to some extent. The tobacco duty went up so that the duty element in a packet of 20 cigarettes was increased by 1d. Then the yield of some other duties went up. The yield from spirits went up to some extent as did that from imported clothing so that the actual nett loss, if I might use that expression, in the customs was £4 million. There was this shift of the £6 million to the excise. On the excise side the augmentation was increased to a small extent by reason of the fact that more came in from betting duty and other items. But, on the other hand, the Minister, in his Budget, gave concessions in entertainment duty and table waters. The nett result was that the excise, instead of being increased by over £6 million, was increased by £5.7 million. Deputy Carter.—So that what you lost on one you gained on the other?—Yes. Deputy Booth.—You bet your life they did. 32. Chairman.—Income Tax has been increased by about £3 million. Do you attribute that increase to the introduction of P.A.Y.E.?—Would you permit me very briefly to review the years from 1957-58 onwards? The income tax in 1957-58 gave £23.01 million. In 1958-59, there was a drop to £22.749 million. This was due to the fact that there had been the grant of initial allowances for new plant and machinery by the Finance Act, 1956; there was the industrial buildings allowance granted by the Finance (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1956, while, under the Finance Act, 1957, the standard rates of wear and tear were increased by 25 per cent. There was also exports relief. The relief for investment in Irish companies was liberalised so that, therefore, you had this drop in 1958-59. In 1959-60, there was a further drop to £22.337 million. It was due mainly to the fact that the standard rate of income tax was reduced in that year from 7/6d. to 7/- in the £. As regards 1958-59 and 1959-60 you had a buoyancy of trade profits. This continued—that is why it is relevant to the question—into 1960-61. In 1958-59 and 1959-60 it was offset by these reliefs. In 1960-61 you find an increase of £3.2 million in income tax which was mainly brought about by the introduction of P.A.Y.E., and the continued buoyancy of trade profits. But if you want the picture in a rough way, P.A.Y.E. brought in an extra £2,000,000 and trade profits were responsible for an extra £1,000,000 in 1960-61. 33. Chairman.—Paragraphs 10 and 11 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General are as follows:— “10. I have been furnished with the following statement of outstanding tax assessments:— Note: The bulk of the tax shown in the table is charged in estimated assessments and assessments which are under appeal or inquiry.
Comparative totals of outstanding assessments for the previous year are—Income Tax, £10,267,528; Sur-tax, etc., £2,265,615 and Corporation Profits Tax, £686,683. 11. The Finance (No. 2) Act, 1959 provides for the deduction by employers from the current earnings of employees, with certain exceptions, of income tax on emoluments assessable under Schedule E. The arrangement, known as Pay As You Earn, was introduced with effect from 6 October 1960. I have made a survey of the procedures and accounting arrangements which I found to be working satisfactorily.” 34. Chairman.—Paragraph 12 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General is as follows:— “Extra-statutory Repayments of Customs and Excise Duties and Stamp Duties 12. Extra-statutory repayments of Customs duties, Excise duties and Stamp duties amounting to £6,678 £7,959 and £222, respectively, were made during the year. The Customs duties include £16 in respect of Special Import Levy.” Deputy Cunningham.—As regards motor vehicles crossing the Border, what effect on receipts had the extension from 9 o’clock to midnight in the period free of the two shilling levy?—If I might say so that is a very interesting question because what we thought would happen did not, in fact, happen. There is, as the Deputy pointed out, this two shilling charge for motor vehicles crossing the frontier outside the free hours. In December, 1959, the authorised hours for free attendance were extended from the hours 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. to 7 a.m. to midnight. At the time we thought this would reduce the fees to a figure of about £5,000 for a full year, instead of that receipts amounted to £11,707. It was quite a remarkable result. Chairman.—I think you will probably find it on the Vote itself. Deputy Cunningham.—Yes. Mr. Reamonn.—I think it is subhead S.—Appropriations in Aid. 35. Chairman.—Paragraph 13 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General is as follows:— “Remissions and Amounts Irrecoverable 13. I have been furnished with schedules of the cases involving a loss of £50 or upwards in which claims for duty under the Revenue Acts were remitted without statutory authority or passed as irrecoverable during the year ended 31 March 1961. I have made a test examination of the items included in the schedules with satisfactory results. The total amount, £146,785, remitted or passed as irrecoverable is made up as follows:—
The distribution according to the grounds of remission or write-off is:—
I notice there is a large increase in the number of cases written off for income tax in recent years?—Yes, there is. Do you anticipate a reduction in the number of such cases now that P.A.Y.E. is in operation?—Yes. We are trying to reduce arrears in so far as we can. In the past we had defaulting employees and sometimes we did not catch up with them until a few years later. Then, perhaps, a man had left the country, or had died or had become unemployable or something of that kind and we had to write off the tax. The great benefit of the P.A.Y.E. system is what the Commission on Income Taxation termed its immediacy, in other words when the emoluments arise they are taxed immediately. Therefore, as fas as Schedule E is concerned, we do not anticipate that we will have to write off as irrecoverable so much income tax as in the past. On the other hand, we may have the odd case of a defaulting employer who perhaps has not paid over the tax he deducted. He may become bankrupt or die. We do not however, expect that to be a very important factor. The answer to your question is that so far as Schedule E is concerned we do not expect to write off so much in future years. Deputy Carter.—You may have compassionate grounds of course, if there is such a thing in the Revenue Commissioners. 36. Chairman.—We will now turn to the Vote itself. In regard to subhead AA.—Contribution to Cost of Common Staff in Income Tax Conjoint Office, Great Britain—what are the arrangements regarding the staffing of this office?—This office goes back to the year 1926 when we entered into a reciprocal arrangement with the British for relieving double income tax. It was really one of the first agreements of this kind to be made and it is still unique in that it is completely based on residence which means that a person solely resident in Ireland does not pay British tax on British income and a person solely resident in Britain does not pay Irish tax on Irish income. The double resident, the person who, for the same year, is resident both in Britain and in Ireland, pays tax in both countries but is allowed double taxation relief and both countries share this relief. It was thought at the time that this arrangement for double residents would be somewhat complicated and, therefore, this office was set up in Britain to assist double residents in the computation of their liability and their double taxation relief. The office was at one time in Kingsway, afterwards it was in Llandudno and now it is in Thames Ditton in Surrey. The arrangement is that we have there certain staff, a Principal Officer and one or two others. The British supply staff and in so far as the British staff is greater than ours we share the cost. I should say that this excess British staff is available to both sides. We consider it a satisfactory and economical arrangement that, where the British supply staff in excess of ours and where that staff is available to both sides we split the cost. In general, we also contribute to the cost of accommodation, lighting and fuel and so on. 37. Deputy Carter.—In regard to subhead F.—Carriage of Parcels, Advertisements, etc.—could the Accounting Officer say what was the actual amount expended on the items?—Yes. The provision under this subhead covers the carriage of parcels, for example, payments to Córas Iompair Éireann for the carriage of bulky files and stationery between head office and provincial districts and stations. The subhead also covers the carriage of samples for analysis to the State Laboratory, and advertisements in regard to the assessment of income tax and the sales of seized goods and so on. The break-down that the Deputy requires would be like this. First of all in regard to advertising. The provision which we made for advertising P.A.Y.E. was £5,000 and the actual expenditure was £5,600. In regard to advertising matters other than P.A.Y.E. we spent £740 as against a provision of £500. In regard to the carriage of parcels and samples and so on we estimated we would need £650 and, in fact, we spent £807. You can see we had to spend a little more advertising P.A.Y.E. than we thought and advertising apart from that increased also because there had been a revision of special import levies and miscellaneous customs duties. 38. Chairman.—In regard to subhead M.—Law Charges, Expenses of Prosecutions, Fees, Rewards, etc.—could you tell me how much there was for rewards?—Well, first of all there are rewards for detection of illicit distillation and the provision we made was for £1,200. We actually spent £1,311 so there is an excess of £111. For the other classes of reward we made provision for £1,700 and actually spent £1,904 so that there was an excess of £204. In regard to illicit distillation, members of the Gardaí are rewarded for these services and we make payments quarterly to the Garda authorities on the basis of returns which they furnish to us. Deputy Kenny.—Do the Gardaí pay for information about illicit distilling?—We do not know unless we get details from the Garda authorities. Or is it the Gardaí themselves who get the money?—Yes, they get rewards, as I understand, for detecting illicit distillation and they are paid by their own Department but we make the money available to the Garda authorities. In fact, the amount to be paid to individual Gardaí is decided by the Garda authorities. Deputy Kenny.—What I want to know is do the Gardaí pay for information received under that particular heading? Chairman.—I do not think that is a question that can be asked. Mr. Reamonn is only responsible for the expenditure of the money. Deputy Belton.—This, apparently, is an important industry in the Deputy’s constituency. Mr. Reamonn.—It is said that rural electrification makes this detection more difficult because the smoke was always a very great pointer and where there is no smoke it is very difficult to detect. 39. Chairman.—This is a case where there may not be smoke but some fire. Now we come to Appropriations in Aid. In regard to No. 4, I think that was the point Deputy Cunningham was referring to. There is an increase there from £11,000 to £25,267 for “Fines, forfeitures, law costs recovered, etc.” Could you explain the substantial increase in receipts?—The receipts vary with the number and importance of the cases involved. I think there is probably nothing for forfeiture. Forfeiture in this context simply means the forfeiture of currency and we seldom collect anything in that respect nowadays. There is, therefore, the question of fines and law costs recovered which are the chief items. This really depends on the number of cases taken and on their success or failure. I am sorry I cannot give you a more detailed explanation of that. Chairman.—We will take it from the large increase that you have been successful. The witness withdrew. The Committee adjourned. * denotes projects in respect of which expenditure is also borne on the relative votes. †Break-down over the various years not available. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
