Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1962 > Committee of Public Accounts > Report - Appropriation Accounts 1960 - 1961

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Déardaoin, 29 Márta, 1962.

Thursday, 29th March, 1962.

The Committee sat at 11 a.m.

DEPUTY JONES in the chair.

Liam Ó Cadhla (An tArd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste), Mr. J. F. Harman, Mr. P. S. MacGuill and Mr. J. R. Whitty (An Roinn Airgeadais) called and examined.

VOTE 41—NATIONAL GALLERY.

Dr. T. McGreevy called and examined.

280. Deputy Carter.—On subhead A.— Salaries and Wages—the note says that the saving was partly due to a vacancy remaining unfilled. What type of post remains unfilled?—We advertised for an assistant to the Director, an art historian, The applications included none that was wholly satisfactory. Two were likely but at the salary that was offered one would have had to give up £300 a year. The second candidate just then began to make a large income in America. I learned that this candidate would not come even if appointed. Those were the likeliest. There were others but the appointment of any of them would have entailed a longer period of training. In the circumstances, nobody was appointed. The position was again advertised on the 16th March last. A little more money had been authorised and we are trying again to see if we can get somebody.

281. Chairman.—Some of my predecessors have dealt with the matter of cataloguing of pictures. Could you tell us something about the present position regarding this?—I can. It is only too vivid in my mind. When I went to the Gallery it existed for 86 years. 700 odd pictures were catalogued. There were over 1,100 on the registers. There were pictures there for 60 years which had never been registered. They came from Lady Milltown in 1902 and from Nathaniel Hone’s widow in 1919. She left 210 pictures to the Gallery. They had never been either registered or catalogued. I tackled the job of cataloguing the pictures and I have succeeded in identifying almost all of Lady Milltown’s bequest. The various subjects had not always been clearly indicated. The catalogue is with the Stationery Office and I think it is being placed in the hands of the printers. I have since discovered a few more so that I will have about 20 or so items to interpolate when the proofs come along. Over 1,700 pictures are now registered and catalogued.

Deputy Booth.—Is this the first full catalogue the Gallery has ever had?—Up to, I think, 1898, the catalogue was fairly complete. Then Lady Milltown gave the contents of Russborough. It was an enormous gift and very valuable. It even included chandeliers. We use part of the dining-table in our board room but it would not all fit. There was also silver and glass. It was a superb gift and the trouble was that there was not enough room for it. You should put all the pressure you can on the Minister for Finance—he is very good about it, I must say, but a little backing is always a help to the Minister—to impress on him that an extension to our premises is very important.

282. Chairman.—I think previous Committees did refer to this problem. Did you get any gifts this year?—Of money or works of art?

I had in mind works of art?—Nothing, this year. We are not doing too badly, you know. We bought some nice pictures in that year. There was an Irishman, Roderick O’Connor, who painted with the great French painter, Gauguin, in Brittany and we got one of his pictures.

283. I notice that you spent £3,000 in the year?—Yes. Monsignor Shine had a great collection and he died. We had, over the years, got several items from him, including a Cranach and a Bosch, and when he died we got some more.

On subhead D.—Incidental Expenses— why the saving?—We were a good deal below our estimate because our photographer, who was 85 years old, was killed in an accident, and it took us some time to find a suitable person to replace him. Photographing pictures is a special business involving long exposures and so on. We did not find it possible to appoint anybody suitable for several months and so a saving on the subhead arose.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 55—OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL WELFARE.

Mr. W. A. Honohan called and examined.

284. Chairman. — Mr. Honohan has come to assist us. As this is his first appearance before the Committee, I should like to welcome him.

Mr. Honohan.—Thank you very much.

Chairman.—As there is no comment by the Comptroller and Auditor General in relation to this Vote, let us examine the subheads.

Deputy Clinton.—With regard to subhead A.—Salaries, Wages and Allowances —I should like to inquire if there is less work in the Department or has the work of the Department generally suffered as a result of staff vacancies not being filled? There is a considerable saving. The note says that the saving was mainly due to unfilled vacancies?—I think we could not say that the work has suffered very seriously. Certain delays are inevitable in the filling of vacancies which arise through deaths and so on. It takes some time to get replacements.

Would that saving represent many vacancies?—In relation to the total amount spent on administration, it is a relatively small saving—four per cent. I do not think I could give a figure in regard to the number of people concerned. It would change from week to week.

285. Deputy Booth.—On subhead C.— Incidental Expenses—the explanation of the variation seems to me to be a little unusual. It simply says that the saving was due to the fact that the estimate was greater than required, which, I think, we can all more or less safely assume. Was there an unusual reduction in the amount required? Can we have any information on that point?—This subhead comprises a number of items. I think the note was intended to draw attention to the two principal items on which the savings were effected—carriage of parcels and miscellaneous.

According to the note on subhead D., the expenditure on postal expenses was greater than anticipated. In subhead C. the saving was due to the fact that the estimate was greater than required. I was wondering if there was any particular reason for that. Is that just one of those things that happens?—In regard to the carriage of parcels, the saving was largely due to the fact that that particular item was transferred from this subhead to subhead D. in the course of the year.

Deputy Booth.—I see. It is just a matter of a transfer.

286. Deputy Clinton.—Is there any increase in charges reflected in that figure?—In the figure for the carriage of parcels?

For telegrams, telephones, postal expenses, etc?—In subhead D.?

Yes?—Yes, I understand there is an element of increased charges.

287. Deputy Carter.—With regard to subhead H.—Insured Persons’ Medical Certificates—was the excess due to fees or something else?—Yes, the fee per insured person was increased from 3/6 to 5/-. That accounts for the excess.

Chairman.—When did the increase take place?—With effect from 1st October, 1960.

Deputy Clinton. — Who are these medical certifiers? Are they referees?— No, they are the general medical practitioners in the country.

288. Deputy Booth. — Subhead M.— Losses—is a new subhead which was not included in the estimate. Is this a permanent feature now or is it just for this year only?—It is a fairly regular feature. It is not in the original estimates because we should not anticipate this sort of thing.

289. Under that subhead, I note there is a sum of £25 made up of two items but below the explanation of these items there is a reference to a further loss of £58 in respect of an overpayment of salary. Was there any reason why that loss of £58 was not included under subhead M. Is it that this loss does not appear at all if the Department of Finance approve a write-off?—The balance of the salary of £8 was withheld and the net overpayment of £50 written off as irrecoverable. From an accounting point of view, I understand it is not necessary to have this appear in the Losses subhead of the Appropriation Account.

290. At the same time, under subhead M. there is recorded a loss of £5 even though the amount was recovered?—The fact is that in this case the salary is charged on subhead A. It does not appear here. It is a loss under subhead A., which does not have to be accounted for under subhead M. It was paid out under subhead A.

Perhaps there is a misapprehension. I was referring to the explanation under paragraph 2 to the note on subhead M. where it is stated that the loss resulted from the misappropriation by a clerical officer of a sum of £5 and that a balance of salary in excess of £5 was withheld so that the £5 payable, which is recorded as a loss, was, in fact, recovered.

Chairman.—Compare that with the last note in relation to the sum of £50.

Deputy Booth.—According to paragraph 1, there were cash shortages which had to be written off and are duly recorded as having been lost. There is £20 there plus £5 in paragraph 2 even though this £5 was recovered. I suppose it is a matter of accounting. To a layman it seems odd to record as a loss something which had been recovered.

Chairman.—You cannot add any more to the information you have given us on the matter?—I do not think so. This note is for information. The matter has been charged to public funds in subhead A. as a payment of salary.

Deputy Booth.—It is not a very important point. It is more of an accounting matter. It balances out in the end.

291. Deputy Treacy.—With regard to item 3 in the Appropriations in Aid, could I have some idea as to the type of services performed for the British Ministry of Pensions to make up the figure involved?—The Department administers a scheme for general practitioner treatment of British ex-service personnel disabled through war service who are resident here. We are recouped for the administration expenses in carrying out that scheme by the British Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance.

292. Chairman.—With regard to item 4 of the Appropriations in Aid, how do you assess the impressed stamping fees?—We grant permits for use of these machines to certain employers who prefer to have their employees’ contributions paid in that way. We maintain a control over these employers which is quite satisfactory. We receive the appropriate contributions.

Deputy Booth.—This comes in under a different heading from the ordinary receipts from adhesive stamps. Was this a fee in respect of the actual impressing machines?—This is a fee in respect of the use of these machines. It is not the proceeds of the contributions.

Deputy Clinton.—Does it mean that a firm using one of these machines has to pay a licence plus the normal cost of stamping?—Yes.

For the convenience of using a stamper?—Yes. The annual fee is £1 10s. for the use of one or two impressed stamping dies and 15/- for each die in excess of two.

293. Deputy Carter.—In regard to the note relating to subhead K. is the work of the Commission on Workmen’s Compensation still proceeding?—The Commission has now concluded its work.

VOTE 56—SOCIAL INSURANCE.

Mr. W. A. Honohan further examined.

294. Chairman.—Paragraph 91 of the Comptroller and Auditor General states:

“Subhead A.—Payment to the Social Insurance Fund under Section 39 (9) of the Social Welfare Act, 1952.

91. Payments from this subhead to the Social Insurance Fund in the year under review amounted to £4,630,000. These payments are subject to adjustment when the audited accounts of the Fund are available.”

Have you anything to say on this, Mr. Ó Cadhla?

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—The figure for the year of £4,630,000 is subject to adjustment. I think the adjustment in respect of this figure is approximately £320,000.

295. Deputy Kenny.—On subhead B.— Investment Return—could you clarify that? What kind of investments were made?—Broadly, this is a payment by the Exchequer to the Social Insurance Fund to compensate the Fund for the fact that its investment in the building, Áras Mhic Dhiarmada, is not a remunerative one as it would be if it was held in ordinary securities. That is broadly the picture.

Chairman.—Might I ask have you settled with Córas Iompair Éireann in regard to it?—Yes.

VOTE 57—SOCIAL ASSISTANCE.

Mr. W. A. Honohan further examined.

296. Chairman.—Paragraph 92 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General states:

“Overpayments

92. Sums recovered in respect of overpayments charged in prior years’ accounts were:—£14,951 in cash credited to appropriations in aid, and £4,519 withheld from current entitlements. Overpayments amounting to £3,998 were treated as irrecoverable. The total amount of overpayments not disposed of at 31 March 1961 was £49,857 as compared with £45,358 at 31 March 1960. During the year seventy-five individuals were prosecuted for irregularly obtaining or attempting to obtain social assistance and convictions were secured in sixty-nine cases.”

Have you anything further to say on this, Mr. Ó Cadhla?

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—I have nothing further to add to the information contained in the paragraph.

Chairman.—What was the total of overpayments recorded in the year?—£32,114.

297. Deputy Booth.—Was the number of individuals prosecuted and convicted larger or smaller than in the previous year?—I shall have the figure in a moment or two.

Deputy Booth.—I think it was in the Comptroller and Auditor General’s note rather than in the Appropriation Account?—Last year 98 individuals were prosecuted as against 75 in the year we are considering and there were 86 convictions as against 69 in the year of account.

Deputy Booth.—Can the Accounting Officer give us any indication if he feels the number of cases of overpayments is well in hand?

Chairman.—Are people becoming more honest?

Deputy Booth.—Or becoming more frightened?—I do not know.

I do not know if the Accounting Officer has any opinion on that point?—I would think it is just a fluctuation.

298. Chairman.—At what stage do you treat overpayments as irrecoverable?—It depends to some extent on the type of case. It is not finally irrecoverable until we get the sanction of the Department of Finance to treat it as such. These overpayments represent a debt due to the State and we must see that we make every effort to collect it. It depends on the circumstances of the case whether a prosecution can be brought. Some cases may drag on for years; others come to a head quickly. A person may leave the country and it is then obvious there is no point in wasting time with the case. We then submit it to the Department of Finance for sanction to treat it as irrecoverable.

299. Deputy Burke.—Is it in urban areas you have most prosecutions? Have you quite a number in rural areas?—All over. We do not make any distinction in principle.

300. Deputy Booth.—Would I be right in assuming that most recoveries are obtained by withholding payments where the person concerned is entitled to something?—I note that in the year 1960-61 we recovered, in cash, £15,952 as against £5,355 obtained by deduction from weekly payments of assistance.

In the case of the death of the person concerned, is the procedure to try to recover from the next-of-kin?—Yes.

If the next of kin has assets?—Yes, that is the procedure.

Deputy Sherwin.—You try, but you do not press it?—That depends on the particular case.

301. Deputy Treacy.—How do these overpayments arise in the main? What particular social welfare benefit would you say is mostly involved in these overpayments?—Largely old age pensions. Of the £49,500 mentioned in the Comptroller and Auditor General’s note, £25,000 would be outstanding in respect of overpayments of old age pensions, about £12,000 for unemployment assistance; £11,000 for widows’ and orphans’ non-contributory pensions and about £1,000 for children’s allowances.

Chairman.—The Vote itself is on page 182.

302. Deputy Clinton.—On subhead B.— Children’s Allowances, is there a big variation from year to year in the number of eligible children?—I would say, no. I have not the figures for the previous year before me but they are fairly stable from year to year.

I raise that because of the note, referring to the subhead, saying that it is estimated as closely as practicable. Still there is £14,000 odd less than estimated?—I would point out that the amount of the saving is only 0.2 per cent.

303. Chairman.—In regard to subhead D.—Widows’ and Orphans’ Non-contributory Pensions—the note says that the excess resulted from the cost of increased rates and other changes effected by the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1960, partly offset by a saving due to a fall in the weekly value of pensions in operation. How would that come about?—Of course the average amount depends on the means, on whether the payment is the full pension or a lower rate of pension and also on the number of children, so that there could be a variation in the average amount from year to year in the weekly value. Also, there is a tendency for the number of non-contributory widows’ pensions to decrease from year to year. There is a corresponding increase, or an increase at any rate, in the number of contributory pensions but it is a feature of the non-contributory scheme that the numbers have, generally speaking, been falling from year to year.

It is a question of the amount issued weekly and not actually the weekly value of the pension?—It is the weekly amount paid out in pensions that it is intended to refer to in the note. This comprises both the numbers of pensioners and the average weekly value of the pensions.

Deputy Booth.—It is not a question that the rate of pension was reduced but that the entitlement was not as high as previously.

304. Deputy Clinton.—On subhead G.,—Welfare of the Blind—approximately how many people have we in blind institutions?—In respect of which we pay these grants, the number of inmates in the institutions comes to 392.

305. Deputy Sherwin.—On subhead H. —Grants towards the Supply of Fuel— is the saving due to the fact that contributory pensioners get no fuel now? Lots of people were getting fuel and because they got contributory pensions their fuel was stopped?—Largely the saving is due to that. But, the contributory pension scheme was in operation for only three months of the year of account.

Deputy Clinton.—The saving is mainly due to that?—Yes.

306. Deputy Burke.—On subhead I.— Grants towards the Supply of Footwear— I should like to know what areas get these grants?—All local authorities get grants from this subhead in respect of the footwear scheme.

Deputy Clinton.—Does this represent a general tightening up? It refers to a uniformity of treatment by all local authorities but is it a uniform tightening up? It must be if it represents a saving? —I suppose it could be regarded as such There were certain abuses.

Deputy Burke.—I know they get it all over the country. I suppose the urban areas are the biggest.

Deputy Kenny.—What method have you for distributing the money? To whom do you give it?—We give grants to the public assistance authorities.

You leave it to their discretion to use anyway they like?—They issue vouchers to whoever they consider justified in getting them.

307. Deputy Treacy.—Would it be true to say that the saving under this subhead is due to a more rigorous means test in relation to beneficiaries under the scheme and that many approved applicants for free boots now are obliged to pay up to 22/- a pair for so-called free boots?— The Department as such does not impose any means test in the administration of this scheme. The public assistance authority issues the vouchers to certain categories of people, as laid down.

Deputy Treacy.—Is it not the Department which lays down the scheme?

Chairman.—I do not think we can question the Accounting Officer on that. The scheme has been re-organised in a certain way and we can raise it on that.

Deputy Treacy.—I agree that the scheme is administered by the local authorities but it is not the scheme sent down by the Department laying down the scale?

Chairman.—Yes.

Deputy Treacy.—And the kind of means test that shall apply in the different categories in the scheme? Could that question be put?

Chairman.—You could get clarification under the re-organisation of the scheme? —The Department lays down the categories of the recipients in the scheme and the charges and so forth.

308. Deputy Kenny.— Under Appropriations in Aid, note number 2— Recoveries in cash under Section 9 (2) of the Old Age Pensions Act, 1908, etc.— what are the recoveries referred to?— They would be amounts which had been paid in error, say, to an old age pensioner, and which we recovered. It might be that a pension had been wrongly paid in the first instance.

309. Chairman.— Regarding No. 7— Miscellaneous—could you give us any details? There was an Estimate for £10 and £1,035 was realised?—The large amount here refers in the main to refunds in respect of past years, closed years, from local authorities, from grants towards supplying footwear for necessitous children and fuel for necessitous families, amounting to £140 and £895 respectively.

Deputy Booth.—Does that mean that grants made to local authorities are not actually used?—These would be in the nature of refunds from advances we paid on estimates where the money was not subsequently paid or utilised.

So the Department actually issues money to local authorities on foot of an estimate and then the balance if any is accounted for. Is that the way it is done? It is not that the local authority works first and then gets the money?—That would be too slow a way of paying the authorities.

310. Deputy Kenny.—In regard to children’s allowances what amount of pay orders were not cashed? It does happen, does it not, that if the period for payment elapses and if it goes over a certain date, pay orders are not payable?—Yes, up to six months.

Is it six or three months?—Six months for children’s allowances, three months in other cases. I have not got the figure for the amount of orders not cashed.

You will get cases like that where people forget to cash them and then they have to go to a local Deputy to advocate that they be cashed through the Minister, or somebody like that?—I regret to say that the figure is not available but I have the feeling it could not be a very large amount.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 45—ROINN NA GAELTACHTA.

Mr. S. Ó Braonáin called and examined.

311. Chairman.—Paragraphs 37 to 43 of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s report read as follows:—

“Subhead F.—Scéimeanna Feabhsúcháin sa Ghaeltacht.

37. The charge to the subhead comprises:—

38. Under the Roads scheme, local authorities are recouped their expenditure on the improvement of certain county roads. The roads are selected after consultation with the local authorities and the Department of Local Government which acts as agent of Roinn na Gaeltachta in administering the scheme.

39. The Water and Sewerage scheme is also administered through the agency of the Department of Local Government. Grants for minor schemes are paid to local authorities at the rate of 60 per cent. of the expenditure incurred where the work includes water-piping or power-pumping, and 50 per cent. otherwise. Grants for larger schemes are paid at the rate of 25 per cent. of the cost to supplement the contribution towards these schemes provided from the vote for Local Government.

40. The Special Employment Schemes Office is recouped the expenditure on the improvement of selected accommodation roads.

41. Under the Marine Works scheme minor improvement works are carried out on an agency basis by the Office of Public Works. The appropriate local authority is required to undertake responsibility for subsequent maintenance.

42. The expenditure under the Glasshouse scheme was incurred on the installation of heating plant in a number of the unheated glass-houses erected by the Department of Agriculture in Connemara in previous years and on the erection of new heated glass-houses in Connemara and in South Mayo.

43. Grants are paid at the rate of 75 per cent. of the cost, subject to a maximum of £5,000 in any one case, for the building, improvement or extension of secondary schools. In addition, special grants of £200 per annum for three years may be paid towards the running costs of now schools.”

312. Chairman.—Paragraph 44 of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s Report reads as follows:—

“44. Under the Heat and Light scheme assistance is given towards the provision of bottled gas facilities in islands in the Gaeltacht. Payments were made to suppliers for certain basic equipment provided for each household.”

I think this is less than previous years?— That is due to the fact that most of the islands were done in the first year and we decided to continue the scheme to the remaining islands. The islands remaining were those which the Electricity Supply Board eventually decided they would not go into at any time. We decided to go in when they decided not to go in. Some of these would be the smaller islands off the Connemara coast.

Deputy Kenny.—Are all the islands around the coast, irrespective of whether they are in the Gaeltacht or not, supplied with bottled gas?—They are, but that is not really our business. It is being done by the Department of Transport and Power. They decided to go into the English speaking islands after we had done the Irish speaking islands.

313. Chairman.—Paragraphs 45 and 46 of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s Report read as follows:—

“45. To encourage pig breeding a grant of £10 is paid towards the cost of each sow purchased by selected applicants, and seed and fertilisers for the growing of suitable fodder are supplied at reduced prices through the agency of the Department of Agriculture or the County Committee of Agriculture.

46. Under the Recreation Halls scheme, grants not exceeding 80 per cent. of the cost within a maximum of £5,000 in any one case may be paid towards the building, repair and furnishing of halls.”

Chairman.—We turn now to the Vote itself on page 111.

314. Deputy Kenny.—In regard to subhead E.—Gaeltacht Housing—the note says that the saving was on new schemes only, namely hostels and holiday chalots, and that the development of these schemes was slower than anticipated. Why was it slower?—There was not a demand.

There was no demand?—There was a demand but not as much as we had expected. We had a lot of proposals but there were a lot of difficulties particularly in the case of hostels.

315. In regard to subhead F.—Improvement Schemes in the Gaeltacht—it says that there was a saving to the Department. That would mean a corresponding loss to the local authorities on roads?— That would not be exactly right. If you are referring to roads particularly that saving arises because county councils were not able to execute all the works they had budgeted for at the beginning of the year. There was a certain amount of money available for this work and they were not able to spend it all.

Could you give us any idea what local authorities were involved?—I think you could take it that all of them were involved.

316. Could you tell me the position in regard to Mayo?—I have not that information with me but I could supply it to you if you wish. All the counties find themselves in that position. I might mention, to clarify the matter, that it is not a saving in the strict sense. The money is still available to the county councils. The sanction is carried forward to next year.

The same thing applies to water supplies?—Yes, exactly.

Deputy Treacy.—What counties are involved in the scheme?—Donegal, Mayo, Galway, Kerry, Cork, and Waterford.

317. Deputy Clinton. — Does this condition, that the money granted can be carried on to the following year, apply only to the Gaeltacht?—I could not answer for other Departments. That is the way it is with us. It is a very convenient arrangement because it puts the county council in a position to carry on with their works and not have to wait in the new year for renewed approval from us. They have something to go on with while we are approving new schemes.

Deputy Burke.—It is a very good idea.

318. Deputy Treacy.—I should like to have particulars in relation to the schemes available to Waterford in the matter of roads?—It is very small in the case of Waterford because the Gaeltacht is very small. We will supply the information.*

319. Deputy Carter.—Further down the paragraph there is reference to the glasshouses. Have the aluminium frames for glass-houses more merit than the timber? —That was a question for the architects in the Office of Public Works. They decided on the specification. They are being built with aluminium frames.

I wonder are the costs relative?—I do not think they cost much more than the wooden frames. The type of glass-house with aluminium frame now being built costs £1,340, including heating. The heating alone costs £550 therefore the structure costs roughly £800.

320. Deputy Kenny.—The erection of those glass-houses led to a lot of speculation in the Tourmakeady area. Twelve of those were erected. It appears that, owing to some defect, the aluminium frame was not strong enough to support the weight of glass. I think some of them collapsed? —I do not think that was the position. Many of them were seriously damaged by the severe storm two or three months ago. This is not our concern but that of the Office of Public Works who look after the technical side of construction. We know they budgeted for a gale force of something up to 100 miles per hour but the recent gale exceeded that. The aluminium did not stand up to it in some cases.

This was 18 months ago. I come from that particular place. It led to a lot of conjecture, speculation and things of that kind. It appears—and this is what I was told—that the aluminium framework expanded or contracted thus cracking the glass before any storm at all. They had to be taken down and buttressed with some kind of support to hold up the weight of glass?—I would not know anything about that. I would suggest that you might ask the Accounting Officer of the Office of Public Works as they are responsible for the construction work.

The applicants for those glass-houses inquired if any extra cost would be put on them on account of this re-erection of the glass-houses?—I do not think so. I have not seen any reference to that in any of the papers which came to our Department. The glass-houses which were seriously damaged will be repaired. I understand that the matter is under consideration by the Office of Public Works with the contractors.

321. Deputy Treacy.—Apart from the improvement schemes listed, are there any improvement schemes not listed here?—I can give you a full list of them. We have roads, water and sewerage schemes. We have small harbour works.

In regard to harbour works, what about repairs to slipways?—Slipways up to the cost of £4,500. For anything beyond that sum we have to get special approval. We have authority to go to £4,500. Anything of a substantial nature would have to be dealt with by the Fisheries Branch.

322. Deputy Booth.—With regard to subhead G.—Cultural Services—what sort of cultural services do local committees apply for? What comes under the heading of cultural services?—We have féiltí drámaíochta or drama festivals, local festivals. Then we have feiseanna. We also have what are called scoileanna éigse agus seanchais. They are organised in the Gaeltacht areas. The storytellers and others come together. We give a small grant.

What is the function of a local committee? Is it just an informal group?— It is an informal group. It consists mainly of the school inspectors who are interested in the promotion of drama in the schools.

They take the initiative in forming these committees?—Yes.

323. Deputy Clinton.—With regard to subhead L.—Grants to Irish Colleges in the Gaeltacht—what was the improvement work referred to here? One proposal to carry out improvement works was not proceeded with? It is a pretty considerable sum?—Cúl Aodha in County Cork was not proceeded with.

Chairman.—Could you tell me what was the nature of the Deontais do Choláistí Gaeilge sa Ghaeltacht?—They are grants for the construction, repair and extension of colleges.

They are concerned solely with construction and repair? They have nothing to do with the attendance of pupils at those colleges?—No.

Does your Department make any grant in respect of the attendance of pupils at these colleges?—No.

324. On subhead N.—School and Holiday Scholarships in the Gaeltacht (Grants-in-Aid)—this, again, is a grant-in-aid for pupils coming from schools to spend a holiday in the Gaeltacht?—Yes.

Does this apply to Coiste na bPáistí?— It does.

I take it that when these Coiste na bPáistí people come to the Gaeltacht it is to spend their time in the Gaeltacht. Do they spend their time at these colleges?—That would depend upon the committee making the arrangements. We work through local committees. If we feel they are a trustworthy committee we accept them under the scheme. Then we pay them this grant in respect of each child they send to the Gaeltacht.

325. Am I right in saying it is about £4 per head?—It is £4 10s. and £4. That has been increased to £5 and £4 10s. In this particular year it was £4 outside Dublin and £4 10s. for Dublin.

A group of children organised in Coiste na bPáistí and going to the Gaeltacht could obtain this capitation grant of £4? —Yes.

Will it be possible for the same children attending colleges in the Gaeltacht to obtain a further £4 there?—I am afraid I could not answer that. That would be a question for the Department of Education. We send them to the Gaeltacht. What they do in the Gaeltacht I do not know. The committee make the local arrangements in the Gaeltacht. They look after the children while they are in the Gaeltacht.

326. Deputy Booth.—In regard to the Appropriations in Aid, I notice that a Principal Officer received an allowance of £59 as managing director of Gaeltarra Éireann, whereas a Clerical Officer received £390 as manager of one of the factories. It seems rather peculiar that the managing director gets £59 and the manager of one of the factories gets £390. Is that a matter of the different amount of time spent in each case or is this Clerical Officer, who is manager, full-time in the factory?—The explanation of that is this. The managing director was appointed in January, 1961. That means he had only two or three months’ service with the Board to the end of the financial year. The arrangement is that the Principal Officer is seconded to the Board. His salary as a Principal Officer in the Department is paid by the Department but he is sent in as managing director of the Board at the maximum of his scale as Principal Officer. The Board paid, as an allowance, the difference between his salary in the Department and the maximum of the scale. He got the difference in the form of an allowance from the Board. There are only two or three months involved. The Clerical Officer has been with the Board for several years. He was one of the civil servants left with the Board when it was established. He was there for a full year. He is on loan. He is not permanently transferred.

327. Are there still members of the staff of the Department on loan to Gaeltarra Éireann or is Gaeltarra Éireann now standing on its own feet with its own staff?—There are three now. There is the managing director. The general manager, who was recently sent to the Board, is not involved in this year’s account and the Clerical Officer who is the factory manager in Crolly, County Donegal. The case of the factory manager in Crolly will be cleared up this year. He is anxious to come back as a matter of fact.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 42—LANDS.

Mr. T. O’Brien called and examined.

328. Deputy Clinton.—On subhead A.— Salaries, Wages and Allowances—what sort of vacancies were unfilled?—We had about 100 right through the year of which 70 were in the typing and clerical grades. There were very few in the inspector grade, not more than five.

Did this in any way upset the working of the Department?—No; we had made provision for probable vacancies to the extent of £10,000.

329. Chairman.—On subhead C.—Legal Expenses—what other type of costs are you liable for besides costs of resumption? —We would be liable for legal costs in the case of ordinary court actions to which the Land Commission would be a party.

In the Appropriations in Aid I notice that you recovered almost 50 per cent. of your costs?—Included in the legal expenses in subhead C. is an item in respect of fees for warrants issued to county registrars. When we are issuing warrants for collection of annuities which remain unpaid we pay the county registrar a fee according to the size of the debt in the warrant. The fee is based on a scale of 2/6d. on warrants up to £2; 4/- between £2 and £5; 6/- between £5 and £15 and 7/- for debts over £15. When the sheriff moves in to collect the annuity from a defaulter he also recovers the warrant costs and they are remitted to the Land Commission as an appropriation in aid. There would be about £6,000 involved in the outlay and we generally recover the full amount.

330. Deputy Carter.—On subhead E.— Deficiencies from Sales of Land Bonds— how is it that the land bonds market is usually a bit depressed and not as buoyant as, say, current land values. Bonds do not seem to be as attractive?—Under the law we are generally obliged to pay for land in land bonds. The Minister for Finance creates these bonds and in doing so he is obliged to have regard to the prices at which the latest issue of National Loan and the previous issues of land bonds are quoted on the Dublin Stock Exchange; in creating a new series of bonds he is obliged to prescribe a rate of interest which will keep them at or near par for a reasonable time after their creation. Generally, when bonds are created they are at or near par but we have no control over the day-to-day fluctuations on the Stock Exchange. The bonds are, in fact, guaranteed as to interest and ultimate redemption at par but not as to the day-to-day fluctuations.

331. Deputy Kenny.— When the Department buy land what percentage of cash do they give to the owner?—No cash; he is paid entirely in bonds. Under a different subhead—subhead G.—the Land Commission may buy certain lands for cash but in cases where we buy for bonds the entire transaction is completed in bonds even to the extent of solicitor’s and legal costs.

People do not like taking bonds. Suppose the owner wanted ready cash he would have to sell at the market price and I think the price of land bonds now has gone down very considerably. Suppose a man who owns an estate is paid entirely in bonds, if he wishes to get ready cash he has to sell those bonds at stock exchange prices?—Yes, he has to realise the bonds to get cash.

But he loses on that transaction?—The law says he shall accept bonds in full satisfaction of the purchase price, pound for pound. This particular subhead is in ease of the State itself. Where the Revenue Commissioners get an allocation for estate duty or income tax in land bonds they may have to sell the bonds at a discount and the Lands Vote has to make good the deficiency. The Revenue Commissioners, for income tax and estate duty purposes, are keen to get the full pound of flesh.

332. Chairman.—Your appropriation under subhead F.—Deficiency of Income from Untenanted Lands—shows a surplus in fact of £40,000? I think it is all for management?—There has been no loss on the management of lands by the Land Commission for a number of years; we have made a profit. Our outgoings were of the order of £145,000, mainly for rates and herds’ wages. Our income was £156,000 for that particular year and that would be entirely from lettings through auctioneers, grazing lettings and stock managers’ lettings.

333. Deputy Carter.—On subhead G.— Purchase of Interests for Cash—I take it the excess is due to purchase for distribution? How much of that land would be purchased secondhand or roughly what amount would be purchased through an auctioneer?—This is a subhead which enables the Land Commission to buy for cash for the purposes of installing migrants or for rearrangement purposes. We can either compete at a public auction or purchase by private treaty, mainly we have purchased by private treaty. I think I can give the figures—that year we agreed to buy 15 properties, comprising about 1,300 acres, for £81,000.

How would that compare with what you bought for bonds?—Our purchase outlay there was £710,000, nearly ten times as much.

334. Deputy Booth. — There is a difference between the purchase of land and acquisition. Is that the real difference—where you compulsorily acquire land you buy by bonds and in the ordinary way you go into the market with cash?—We also buy voluntarily for bonds but if we go into the open market we buy for cash.

Deputy Burke. — Only when you go into the market you buy for cash? If you acquire compulsorily is it bonds only?— Yes. But we can also voluntarily purchase for land bonds. The purchases for cash are for the very limited objectives laid down in section 27 of the Land Act, 1950. We can proceed by public auction or private treaty in the cash cases; most transactions have been by private treaty.

If I were selling a holding and wanted money and you were going to acquire it could you meet me?—Not in cash, unless we were buying for the specific purposes laid down in section 27.

When you refer to private treaty do you mean direct from the vendor or through an agent?—Direct from the vendor.

335. Deputy Kenny.—What did you pay for Castlemacgarrett outside Claremorris?—That was a compulsory case with a public hearing and I can announce the figure; the figure was £52,600.

It was acquired?—Yes, we published a notice of intention to acquire the lands. The owner objected. The objection was listed for hearing and after negotiation was allowed in respect of 400 acres around the mansion itself and disallowed in respect of 1,300 acres, which then came to the Land Commission. We bought that for £52,600 which included about £10,000 for very valuable sporting rights going with it.

336. Deputy Carter. — What would represent the element for resumption in these calculations? You resume also under subhead G.?—No, we do not resume under subhead G.

Chairman.—Yes, you do.

Deputy Carter.— Compensation payment—that is for resumed holdings under subhead G.?—I am sorry. The compensation there would be in cash for residues of Congested Districts Board estates land. The Land Act of 1923 did not strictly apply to them so that we had no means of paying for them other than cash. The Land Bond Acts did not apply to those old estates. The number of holdings now resumed is very small. The compensation in the past five years has not amounted for the whole lot to more than £25,000.

337. Deputy Carter.—On subhead H.— Gratuities to Ex-Employees—have you many displaced employees, referring to any of the four or five headings, acquisition, resumption, purchase or allotment. How many roughly were displaced?— That year we paid out £3,134 to 21 persons. The amount is based on such factors as length of employment, personal and family circumstances, together with possibility of alternative employment. Some of these displaced employees get land.

Deputy Burke.—These are herds who would be displaced when land is compulsorily acquired?—Yes, mostly herds.

338. Deputy Carter.—They can opt for a gratuity or land?—Yes, for gratuity. The average gratuity over the years since the principle was introduced was £115 per person—the total amount paid was £25,640 to 224 persons.

They get much higher than that in the case of actual allotment?—They would. People qualified to receive land would in fact receive land. A good, active, enterprising herd would undoubtedly receive land from the Land Commission but, in the course of acquisition of some properties, we would find employees of the coachman type who are elderly and would not qualify for land because they could not work land.

339. Deputy Burke.—These would be employees on an estate?—It would be bad policy to give them land and instead we compensate them in cash.

For my own information, take the last man you mentioned, a coachman, who would have been working for 40 years on an estate. I am making a hypothetical case, if you like, but in that regard how would he be treated? You are displacing him in his employment and you are not giving him land where his father, and his father before him, had been?—If he had been 40 years there we would give him, on average a gratuity of £120, although we are going to step that up in light of present day money values. The new figure might be roughly £200. If he were elderly he would qualify for the ordinary social welfare and social assistance benefits and we would give him this gratuity. I do not know that ordinary employers would be expected to provide similar gratuities.

I just wanted to find out what yardstick you had?—Long service is a telling point in favour of giving a man a higher point.

340. Deputy Kenny.—Does the Land Commission give a certain amount of land to employees still living in cottages on estates?—They might; the Land Commission from time to time, as well as paying cash, may also give small plots of accommodation land with an occupied house.

That happened in Cong, did it not?— Yes, there was some accommodation land there or possibly it was a cow-park.

There is another question which I want to ask for my own personal information. On the Galway side, in Cong, on the Ashford estate, certain former employees received plots of about 6 or 7 acres but, on the Mayo side, similar people did not get any allocation yet. I do not know how that is going to work out?—Maybe “yet” is the operative word. I have no details of that at all.

Deputy Kenny.—I know you have not.

Chairman. — Apparently it is the Deputy’s intention to bring it to your notice.

Deputy Kenny.—I understand you are the Secretary. Then I will write in.

341. Deputy Clinton.— Under subhead I.—Improvements of Estates—there is a note in regard to £700 being paid to a migrant in settlement of his claim for dry rot. How long after the house was built was this dry rot discovered and should the builder not be held responsible? Would there be any retention money to hold on in his case?—I think that was an old house; it was not a new house constructed by the Land Commission but a house which had already existed there. I shall be able to give you the details of the item.

It is something which can turn up in a new house through putting in timber with dry rot in it?—It related to a property in County Meath which was acquired by the Land Commission, a two-storey nine-roomed dwellinghouse. It appeared to be in fairly good repair at the time we acquired it around March, 1957 and gave it to a migrant in exchange for land in Galway. The Land Commission carried out certain repairs, mainly in regard to water and sanitation, together with painting and plastering. A complaint was received in March, 1959 that dry rot, wet rot and furniture beetle were in the house and that the infestation was spreading.

If it was an old house it answers my question?—It was an old house.

342. I was also interested to know what sort of improvement works are referred to under this subhead. Does it refer to fencing and new roads?—There are two large elements in it; one is the building of new houses which cost £321,000 and the other general improvements which cost £300,000. They would take the form of roads, drainage, fencing, required for the setting up of new farmsteads and the splitting up of estates.

343. Chairman.—In regard to subhead K.—Losses by Default, Accidents, etc.— the note refers to £250 being paid towards the replacement of a farm building which was destroyed by fire. Was this building insured?—No. It was a lofted outhouse in County Monaghan which was the property of the Land Commission and was destroyed by fire in circumstances which suggested malice. In fact, we took an action for malicious damage against one of the county councils but we did not succeed in obtaining damages. We were neither able to prove malice nor negative the possibility of accident. There was no question of insurance; the State usually carries its own risk in relation to insurance.

344. I see, in the Notes, a reference to materials valued at £372 being transferred on a non-repayment basis to the Office of Public Works. What were these materials? —That was 1,000 feet of 4-inch diameter steel tubing which was surplus to our requirements.

345. Deputy Carter.—The Notes also refer to staff temporarily lent to other Departments. What grade of officer would be on loan—would it be surveyors?—Some surveyors were on loan to the Forestry Division and a few officers to the Fisheries Division; also one clerk-typist was on loan to the special Employment Schemes Office for a short period.

VOTE 43—FORESTRY.

Mr. T. O’Brien further examined.

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

“Subhead C.2.—Forest Development and Management

32. A mobile workshop valued at £4,600 was transferred from the Department of Agriculture in September, 1955 for the purpose of maintaining and servicing the Forestry Division’s mechanical fleet. It does not appear to have been used for this purpose and periodical contracts continue to be made for the inspection and maintenance of the fleet by commercial contractors. I am informed that subsequent to the acquisition of the workshop it was decided not to seek the necessary fitting staff to operate it pending the examination of the whole machinery plan for the Forestry Division by an industrial consultant who is expected to submit his initial recommendations in the near future.”

Have you anything to add to that, Mr. Ó Cadhla?

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—I have nothing to add.

When did this industrial consultant start to examine the machinery aspect of your Department?—About 18 months ago.

347. In regard to the mobile workshop which is mentioned, I take it you planned for that when you took it over?—Yes. This was a machine bought by the Department of Agriculture in 1952 and it was surplus to their requirements on the closing down of part of the Land Project. At the time we were building up field machinery in Forestry and we believed the workshop could be of value to us. In the result, we did not use it after we got it. It has since been used for a period of about eight months when it was put on loan back to the Department of Agriculture and the Agricultural Institute. The industrial consultant whom we have employed to comment on our machinery plan has not presented his final report but we are aware that he will be recommending that our present arrangements for repair and maintenance should continue and that the mobile workshop would find no place in any future repair or maintenance scheme. Generally, at the moment the repair and maintenance work is carried out by the main supplying agents and also by the Central Engineering Workshops of the Office of Public Works. I think it is now definite that the mobile workshop will not find any part in our plans for the future. We have circulated advice to other Departments that the workshop is available for transfer and we have reason to think that the Department of Defence, on the transport side, is interested in getting this workshop.

Could you give any idea to what extent it has depreciated in the six and a half years?—I do not think it has depreciated very much. It was transferred to us at a valuation of £4,600 and we believe its current value is still near to that point.

348. How much does the maintenance and inspection of your machinery cost you annually?—I enquired about that only this morning; it costs £35,000 annually. We have an arrangement with the main agents that they carry out an inspection of our fleet of machinery every three months; we pay them for that service. It is a very heavy type of machinery and it would need firms with experience to handle it properly. We have a variety of very heavy machinery which includes: bulldozers, deep ploughs, wheel tractors, crawler tractors, rock drills, power saws, lorries and rotovators.

Could you give us the approximate value of the machinery you hold?—The value would be £350,000.

349. When do you expect the report from the consultant? Has he supplied an initial report?—He has completed drafting his report.

His final report?—That is in draft. We are aware that he will not be recommending us to retain the workshop.

350. Chairman.—We will turn now to the Vote itself on page 103.

Deputy Kenny.—In regard to subhead A.—Salaries, Wages and Allowances—is it a fact that, in some sawmills, employees get different wages for doing the same work?—The wages in the sawmills would not come in here but, as far as I know, the employees at the State sawmills in Cong and Dundrum do get the same rates of wages; they are catered for by a trade union.

I received a query from a group of employees in Cong who made the point that they are not getting the same rate of wages as those in Dundrum. That would be about a year ago, has it been adjusted since?—Certainly, at the moment they are getting the same rate. There was a difference. You can have different rates of pay depending upon the inter-relation of these rates with some outside sawmills in Munster and Connacht.

There are not many sawmills in Mayo. There could not be any comparison made. I do not think there is one sawmill near Cong?—There is one at Castlemacgarrett near Claremorris which is privately owned.

351. Deputy Clinton.—On subhead C.2. —Forest Development and Management— I thought that the Forestry department’s employees worked irrespective of weather conditions, that the weather did not affect them as it affects the ordinary farmer?—I know that weather interfered very seriously with us that year, particularly in relation to road construction. We constructed 201 miles the previous year and in this year of account we did only 148 miles. We repaired 180 miles the previous year and in the year of account we were only able to do 139 miles.

352. Deputy Clinton.—On subhead D.— Grants for Afforestation Purposes—are these private grants?—Yes.

Chairman.—What is the rate of grant payable now?—The sum is £20 per acre.

I notice that applications for planting grants were not received to the extent hoped for. Are you doing anything further about increasing the grants?—I do not think so. The present figure represents a doubling of the grant that existed up to 1958. We are conducting a vigorous campaign in support of private planting in every county; we have forestry specialists and consultants engaged to go round locality by locality and exhibit pictures and give lectures.

353. Deputy Kenny.—With regard to subhead C.1.—Acquisition of Land (Grant in Aid) have you a fixed sum per acre to pay for land or do you make a bargain with the owner?—Each case is negotiated separately.

It is not a fixed sum?—We do not like to pitch our price too high because we do not want to take in agricultural land. It would, perhaps, give an indication of the type of land we take if I were to tell you that in that particular year we acquired 29,000 acres for which we paid £155,000. That would be roughly £5 10s. an acre. You negotiate the bargain?— Each case is negotiated separately.

354. Chairman.—From the Grant-in-Aid Fund, on page 105, I see that expenditure on acquisition of land for forestry purposes has dropped compared with previous years. Are you finding it difficult to get suitable land?—No. What happened the previous year is that we bought a very substantial property—the Rockingham Estate, which included a big quantity of standing timber. The price of this timber appreciably increased our expenditure for that year.

355. Deputy Clinton.—In the case of standing timber, when you buy it do you not normally sell it before you allot the land?—We do not sell the timber until it has reached maturity or unless it needs thinning in the ordinary way.

356. Deputy Kenny.—I was under the impression that this Rockingham Estate was an agricultural estate and that it would be the Land Commission which would negotiate the purchase?—There was both Land Commission and Forestry land there, totalling 2,200 acres, of which 1,200 acres was Land Commission and the remaining 1,000 was Forestry.

They would be two separate negotiations?—There were two separate negotiations in that case, but they were run concurrently.

357. Deputy P. J. Burke.—You allow £20 per acre in respect of tree planting? —Yes.

358. Deputy Clinton.—What is the smallest parcel of land you would accept from a farmer? Could a farmer ask you to accept half a rood?—We have a minimum standard of one acre, except in the congested districts, where we allow half an acre. The plot must be at least two chains wide—that is 44 yards; if it were less than that in width, it should ordinarily come under the shelter belt schemes operated by the county councils.

359. With regard to subhead E.1.— Forestry Education—there is reference to a deferment of the purchase of vehicles for the transport of students?—We had intended getting two jeeps for the transport of students.

You could not make up your mind?—I think we got land rovers the following year.

360. Chairman.—How many students have you?—We have 90, 30 first year at Kinnitty Castle and 60, comprising second and third year students at Shelton Abbey.

Deputy Kenny.—What methods have you of getting the students? How do they get into the schools for Forestry?—A competition is announced each year from which about 30 are recruited. It is an open competition conducted by the Civil Service Commission.

Would the standard be Leaving Certificate?—The prescription is Intermediate Certificate but, in fact, many of the students who come up have the Leaving Certificate.

361. Deputy Clinton.—In regard to subhead F.—Agency, Advisory and Special Services—are these the consultants we were discussing earlier?—Yes.

Chairman.—You do not expect to have them much longer?—In fact, the contract has expired; we have concluded our arrangements with them except on a short-time basis for a few weeks.

Deputy Carter.—Did you find that their services produced good results?—We are very satisfied with the productivity results attained.

362. Deputy Booth.—In regard to the Appropriations in Aid there is an excess of receipts over the estimate under the heading “Miscellaneous”. How did this excess arise?—The description in the subhead is “Miscellaneous” but it includes receipts from the sale of plants and materials. The main surplus arose from the sale of plants last year. We ourselves have to use about 35 million plants each year and we feel that we should always have some surplus as a precaution against a very bad year. That year was a pretty good year and we had a saleable surplus. We also had a surplus in the previous year which we were able to sell but the proceeds of that sale did not come in until the year, 1960-61. In fact, we got, in respect of those two years, from the sale of surplus plants, £14,000.

They were sent to England?—The sales were in the main to the home nursery trade here and as to £2,600 worth to the British Forestry Commission.

Deputy Clinton.—They are not direct sales?—They would be sold to the nursery trade.

VOTE 44—FISHERIES.

Mr. T. O’Brien further examined.

363. Chairman.—Paragraphs 33 and 34 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General read as follows:—

“Subhead F.5.—Compensation, etc.

33. Under the provisions of section 35 of the Fisheries Act, 1939 £4,320 was paid to the owners of fishing rights as compensation for the restriction of the use of nets in fresh water. Interest amounting to £1,028 and a contribution of £79 towards the cost of proving title to compensation were paid under the provisions of section 3 of the Fresh-water Fisheries (Prohibition of Netting) Act, 1951.

Subhead G.—Grant-in-Aid of Administration and Development of An Bord Iascaigh Mhara

34. With the sanction of the Department of Finance a payment of £38,230 was made to An Bord Iascaigh Mhara in recoupment of expenditure incurred by it on the purchase of fish meal and fish oil factory at Killybegs, County Donegal.”

Have you anything to add, Mr. Ó Cadhla?

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—These paragraphs are for information.

364. With regard to paragraph 33, when do you expect to clear up the cases left?—There are only three cases left; the title has been sought and is being investigated by the Chief State Solicitor. We expect to have them concluded within a year or so. The total amount involved in the three cases is £3,600, and I think that will be the winding-up of the compensation cases.

365. Deputy Kenny.—On paragraph 34, I want to ask a question about the fishmeal factory in Killybegs. There is a pilot plant there and a factory. Was the factory sold recently?—That is the factory mentioned in the note.

Who owns that factory now?—An Bord Iascaigh Mhara bought it.

From whom?—From the liquidator.

There is a pilot plant on the right hand side as you go into Killybegs. I was in both of them?—That is owned by An Bord Iascaigh Mhara also; it is a small plant owned and operated by the Board.

366. What about the bigger factory?— The bigger factory was built with State assistance. It was owned by a firm called Atlantic Fish Industries, Limited, which went into liquidation.

On account of no supplies?—Yes; mainly.

Now it is owned by An Bord Iascaigh Mhara?—Yes, and they have leased it to a Danish firm for three years.

I see?—At a pretty reasonable rent. We are satisfied that it is now operating with a fair measure of success. The local fishermen, happily enough, are doing their part now in providing the raw material.

To this private firm?—Yes.

367. On account of the increased prices they are obtaining for fish they are satisfied? Or would that be a policy question?—They are able to fish longer as the plant will take fish like pilchard which may be caught during the summer. The factory reduces it down to fishmeal. I think the fishermen are reasonably satisfied with the price. It was not functioning properly because the supplies were not there before the Danish firm came along. Now the people who are supplying appear to be satisfied.

It is peculiar that now they can supply and the same supply of fish was always there to be caught?—Maybe it is because that, not only has a better spirit of cooperation been built up with the fishermen at Killybegs, but, we also, have allowed a little injection in the form of permitting the Danish firm to bring two of its boats from Denmark to catch and land fish for the factory.

368. Chairman.—Is the £38,230 mentioned there the full outlay?—That was the full outlay on the purchase by the Board.

You stated there was State expenditure previously on this factory?—Yes.

Was there any question of recovery of this expenditure?—No. The factory was erected with the aid of a State grant of £59,000. The company went into voluntary liquidation in December, 1960, and the factory was put up for auction. An Bord Iascaigh Mhara bought it at the price stated. Of course, the factory is still available for the purpose for which it was originally built.

369. Deputy Kenny.—Around the coast you have agents for An Bord Iascaigh Mhara. They are small agents. What Department or who pays those people? Outside Murrisk and outside Westport there is an agent who buys fish from the local fishermen. What Department is he under?—He would be an employee of An Bord Iascaigh Mhara, who would pay him. The Board gets a grant for administration and development from Fisheries Vote as you will see in the Vote itself.

For the last two seasons Donegal fishermen came into Westport Harbour where they discovered an excellent supply of herring in the summertime?—Yes, for about two months.

Would you draft Bord Iascaigh Mhara agents into Westport to look after the sale of the fish or is that matter outside your functions?—It is; that is an operation of the Board itself.

Chairman.—It is a question of the administration of the Board.

Deputy Kenny.—What I wanted to know is, who is looking after the interests of the fishermen who came there. Was it Bord Iascaigh Mhara?—It was, I take it.

370. Chairman.—Paragraph 35 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General states:

“Exchequer Extra Receipts

35. Reference was made in paragraph 35 of my previous report to expenditure incurred on the provision and equipment of an exploratory fishing vessel. In pursuance of an agreement with the Government of the United States of America the cost of this vessel was recouped from the American Grant Counterpart Special Account. The sum of £59,934 recovered was treated as an Exchequer extra receipt.”

Deputy Carter.—Is the vessel at present engaged on exploration?—It is.

Fully equipped?—Yes.

Chairman.—I take it that the running and maintenance of the vessel will be an annual charge on the Vote?—Yes, and it will cost annually about £14,000. Any fish it would happen to catch are sold and the receipts of the sale come in as an appropriation in aid. However catches would be purely incidental. There is accommodation for two biologists and technicians on board the vessel.

371. Chairman.—Paragraph 36 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General states:

“Salmon Conservancy Fund

36. The income of the Fund is derived from levies on exports of salmon, from excess duty on salmon rod licences, and from contributions from the vote. Payments are made from the Fund to Boards of Conservators of such sums as the Minister may think fit to supplement their incomes and towards expenses incurred in connection with any scheme for the improvement of inland fisheries. An account of the receipts and payments is appended to the appropriation account.”

372. Deputy Carter.—On subhead E.7. —Training Schemes for Fishermen—do you find the scheme is attractive to fishermen? Do you have many applicants for training?—We have not had as good a response as we expected; since commencement the number who have qualified as skippers is about 19. Actually, seven completed the course in 1958-59; six in 1959-60 and seven in 1961-62. Nineteen of these twenty eventually qualified for a certificate of competency under the Merchant Shipping Acts. The course is mainly on navigation and general seamanship. The men are paid, while training, up to £7 a week. It is a pity more of them do not avail of the training.

Chairman.—I think we have had this question before us in respect of a number of previous accounts.

373.—Deputy Booth.—Are the successful students, the men who have qualified, all now engaged in fishing operations?—So far as we know they are.

Is there a follow-up on the subsequent progress of the men who qualify?—I should imagine there is a general interest taken in regard to them because ordinarly they would skipper boats on hire purchase.

Is that more a matter for An Bord Iascaigh Mhara than for the Department?—Yes.

Chairman.—The trained men will get priority, other things being equal if they apply for a boat?—Yes; that is so.

Deputy Kenny.—Would the qualifications they achieve after a course of training be accepted in Britain?—Yes.

It is the same standard?—We believe it is.

374. Has the Department any hold over those trained navigators after they are trained?—No.

Suppose they left, would the Department get any refund of the expenditure incurred in their training?—That question has not so far arisen; they come to train because they are really interested in fishing. We interview them and establish that they want to devote their careers to fishing and that their ambition is to stay at home and skipper boats.

375. Deputy Booth.—On subhead F.2— Artificial Propagation of Fish—was it just bad luck that hatchery production was below expectations in this year, or did something serious go wrong with the hatching operations?—It was largely due to bad weather which resulted in high water conditions.

376. Deputy Kenny.—On subhead F.8 —Pond Fish Culture—how many fish ponds are established in Ireland?—There are four sets of demonstration ponds established by the Department, one in the Glen of Aherlow, one near Enniscorthy, another near Ballymote and still another near Loughrea.

Are they private ponds?—In a sense they are private ponds though we built them on a repayment basis as demonstration units on the lands of local farmers. They are producing rainbow trout as table fish. There is a commercial-scale fish farm in Woodenbridge.

Deputy Kenny.—We have them near Castlebar but it is in the lake. The Inland Fisheries Trust did a very good job. There is a stock of rainbow trout, but mainly for angling purposes. An excellent job was done by Inland Fisheries. There is a sporting element in that but the fish ponds you are concerned with is largely business.

377. Deputy Clinton.—What would be the size of the investment in one of these ponds?—In one case I do happen to know that the all-in cost was £545 which would be for a five-pond unit. There must be a number of ponds so that the fish, as they grow, may be moved from one to the other. Otherwise, as they are liable to cannibalise, the big would eat the small.

Do they move themselves or do you move them?—They have to be sorted out; they are graded and moved.

378. On subhead I.—Appropriations in Aid— item 1, how is that taxation fixed? —That is a survival of a very old endowment grant the history and origin of which I personally find very difficult to follow. I think it commenced about 1900 and it will be disappearing very soon.

Deputy Kenny.—If it is very difficult for you to follow it must be very complicated.

379. Deputy Clinton.—On Item No. 3 in the Appropriations in Aid—Lettings of sporting rights—there is an increase in the amount realised over the estimate. Is that due to increased charges or to greater fishing facilities being available? —That income arises mainly from the letting of fishing rights appurtenant to lands that the Land Commission or the Forestry Division have acquired. I think there is a greater interest in fishing and its value is more appreciated now and we are getting better letting returns.

It is increased charges, in other words? —Yes; we are getting better monetary returns from lettings.

380. Deputy Booth.—The cost of administration of the Salmon Conservancy Fund—£250—as set out in the table on page 110, seems fairly high. What is involved under that heading?—There is an assessment made of the fractions of time devoted by—I think—four officers and it is charged to the fund.

It is purely an approximation? It does not mean half the time of one man? It is bits and pieces?—It is an aggregate of the pieces of time of several officers.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 33—OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION.

Dr. T. Ó Raifeartaigh called and examined.

381. Deputy Kenny.—In regard to subhead C.—Preparation of Irish Vocabularies—how far have you gone towards the completion of the Irish vocabularies? —Actually, in regard to the vocabularies concerned there, we did not need to spend the money on them because they were included in our dictionary which appeared about a year and a half ago. That subhead has been removed from the current year’s Estimates.

382. Chairman.—In regard to subhead D.—Expenses in connection with the Council of Education—last year the Committee was told that the Council’s report on the secondary curriculum was ready. What is the Council engaged on now?— The Council has not been called upon since, but the report should be published or available in about ten days from now, I hope.

383. In regard to subhead E.E.— Travelling and Incidental Expenses, etc. —for the Commission on Higher Education. Is this Commission still in existence? —The Commission is sitting at the moment.

384. Deputy Booth.—In regard to subhead F.—Appropriations in Aid—what items come under the heading “Miscellaneous”?—£43 is accounted for by cancellations of payable orders issued in previous financial years and not cashed before the end of the year in question and the balance is mainly in respect of educational credits. We receive a certain amount of money, mostly from America, for sending certificates to people who have passed the Intermediate Certificate or Leaving Certificate examinations and who require evidence of that fact.

Chairman.—If there are no other questions we can move on to Vote No. 34.

VOTE 34—PRIMARY EDUCATION.

Dr. T. Ó Raifeartaigh further examined.

385. Chairman.—Paragraph 28 of the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows:—

“Subhead A.3.—Preparatory Colleges, etc., including Contributions to Pension Fund.

28. I have been furnished with a statement of the receipts and expenditure in respect of the six preparatory colleges for the school year ended 31 July 1960. The average cost per student for maintenance and tuition for that year was £210 and the average fee paid by the students was £33.”

Have you anything to add to that, Mr. Ó Cadhla?

Mr. Ó Cadhla.—These paragraphs are solely for information.

Am I right in thinking that the system of preparatory colleges is coming to an end now?—Yes.

What is the full fee payable by a student?—The full fee in a preparatory college is £60.

386. Deputy Kenny.—Have you disposed of all the preparatory colleges now?—We have disposed of four of them, Coláiste Einde in Galway, Coláiste Ide in Kerry, Ballyvourney College and the college in Tourmakeady.

Were these purchased or given free to whoever has them now?—They were purchased, but the details are not on the Education Votes. This would be a matter for the Office of Public Works.

Were they sold to the Orders that were running them before?—As it happened, that is so. In the case of the Galway College it was not a religious Order. It was the diocesan clergy in Galway.

It was a religious order in the case of Tourmakeady?—Yes, and in the cases of Ballyvourney and Kerry.

The details come under the Office of Public Works Votes?—Yes.

387. Chairman.—Paragraph 29 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows:—

“29. Accounts in respect of the farms and gardens attached to the colleges have also been submitted. Four of the accounts show losses varying from £76 to £199 and two show profits of £65 and £86. The farms are inspected by technical officers of the Department of Agriculture and their reports are available to me.”

How is the farm produce disposed of when the students are on holidays?—I suppose it was sold. Hay and so on would be sold, except for that used even while the schools are not working. A number of the staff would still be there, not only teachers but also working staff, and cattle would have to be milked. The staff would consume a certain amount of the produce. Sometimes summer courses are held in the colleges and arrangements are made for selling some of the produce to those conducting the course.

388. Deputy Kenny.—What happened the employees of these colleges? They were employees of the Department of Education, is that not right?—They were, indirectly, but under an agreement containing provisions for notice of determination by either side, and of course they received compensation in accordance with the agreement.

389. Chairman.—Paragraph 30 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows:—

“Suspense Account

30. In paragraph 32 of my previous report I referred to the transfer to a suspense account of a sum of £360,000 from which would be made ex-gratia payments in the nature of lump sums to persons who on 1 January 1950 were entitled to pensions as national school teachers or to the widows of such former teachers. Sums totalling £323,798 were issued during the year under review leaving a balance of £36,202 in the account at 31 March 1961. The payments were made in accordance with the terms of an amendment to the National School Teachers’ Superannuation Scheme 1934-58 which has not yet been promulgated.”

Deputy Booth.—Has this amended scheme under the National School Teachers Superannuation Scheme yet been promulgated?—No, it is the practice in superannuation schemes to pay the money without waiting for promulgation. There was a delay in promulgating in this case for the reason that it was found that there were a number of other superannuation schemes which have to be promulgated also and it was thought they should all be dealt with together. Some of them have presented more difficulty than was expected in the beginning. That is what is causing the delay.

Will the balance of £36,202 still standing to credit on this suspense account be disposed of or is that not needed? Have payments been completed so far as you know?—The payments have been completed. The balance arose because, in certain cases, it was necessary to inspect a grant of probate before payment could be made. That particular balance will be returned to the Exchequer.

It will not be required?—No.

390. Chairman.—We turn now to the Vote itself on page 72. In regard to subhead A.—Training Colleges—how many students were catered for?—In the men’s training college there are 201 students and in the ladies’ training college at Carysfort there are 332 lay people and 149 nuns. In the Mary Immaculate College, Limerick, there are 205 lay women and 55 nuns. In the Church of Ireland Training College there are 48 lady students. In the Irish Christian Brothers College, at Marino, there are 77 students, and in the De La Salle and other teaching Orders, there are 37 students. That is the total under training at the moment.

391. On pages 75 to 79 there is a number of notes. Is it necessary to give, each year, the origin and purpose of each of these funds? Could these be combined in one account? Every year we have these various funds listed, giving the origin and purpose of the fund?—I do not know. It might be possible to combine them. I think the idea was to make clear the purpose of each fund. I suppose the original donors always felt that it should be very clear what the purpose of the fund was. It would be possible to combine them. I do not see anything against it.

392. Deputy Booth.—Have we got some responsibility to ensure that the terms of the various donations and bequests are being carried out? For instance, in regard to, on page 75, the Killury or Nelan Fund, which is a fund set up towards the maintenance of Killury national school, in the account we find a balance of £35 carried forward, and to that is added £16 income from investments, but no money was spent on the school at all. I would like to ask if, in this particular year, the school in question did not need any maintenance and that the income from its fund is being accumulated? Is that a proper question for us to ask and if so would that not explain why we have still to get all the details?

Chairman.—Deputy Booth wishes to ask a question relative to the Killury or Nelan Fund. The Fund is used for the maintenance of the school in Killury. Nothing was spent on the school, in this year of account and the balance was brought forward and added to. Can we know why?—That is the point I was making in the beginning. Perhaps the original donors would have liked to have it very clear as to what was happening. Actually, there is now a new school at Killury. A good deal of the money was taken from the Fund and realised. The whole thing came to about £1,171 13s. There is not any way yet of spending this particular money on a new school. It is supposed to be perfect.

Deputy Booth.—The income will be accumulating until such time as it may become necessary to spend money on maintenance?—Yes, but the income could be used for painting, repairs and that sort of thing when it is necessary.

Deputy P. J. Burke.—It is good to have the particulars relating to these funds under separate headings because then one knows where one stands and relevant questions can be asked.

393. Chairman.—There is a note by the Comptroller and Auditor General which reads as follows:—

“Subhead E.—Publication of Irish Text Books.

31. Reference was made in previous reports to the publication under agreements with a publishing company of certain text books urgently needed by schools conducting courses through the medium of Irish. The agreements provide for the issue of repayable grants towards the cost of production, and require the publishers to pay to the Department any grants made available, from the Science and Art vote, through Bord na Leabhar Gaeilge in respect of these books, and to refund the balance by half-yearly payments equal to 20 per cent. of the amount realised on sales. The issues under fourteen agreements entered into for approved books amounted to £9,147 at 31 March 1961, comprising £7,125 in respect of nine completed works and £2,022 advance payments in respect of five books, publication of which is awaited. No issues were made under these agreements during the year under review. But the Grant-in-Aid to Comhdháil Náisiúnta na Gaeilge, charged to the vote for Science and Art, included £2,000 issued to provide for advances to the publishing company towards the cost of production of the five text books not yet published. Repayments to 31 March 1961, including £160 in the year under review, amounted to £5,191 of which £3,600 derived from grants by Bord na Leabhar Gaeilge and £1,591 from sales.”

Have you anything further too add, Mr. Ó Cadhla?

VOTE 35—SECONDARY EDUCATION.

Dr. T. Ó Raifeartaigh further examined.

Mr. Ó Cadhla. — That is merely for information.

394. Chairman.—In regard to the five books awaiting publication, what is now the position?—I can tell you about one of them. It is a Latin text, which has since appeared. I do not know at the moment what the position is in regard to the other four.

In regard to that, there was a Grant-in-Aid to Comhdháil Náisiúnta na Gaeilge of £2,000. Why was it necessary to include that in the grant with reference to these books?—It is difficult to get firms to publish Irish texts. They feel, perhaps, that they would not make sufficient profit sometimes on them. The particular firm concerned had been publishing a good many. They had also been publishing for Comhdháil Náisiúnta na Gaeilge in connection with An Club Leabhar. The idea of giving this money to the Comhdháil was because the Comhdháil are in touch with publishing firms. They run An Club Leabhar. They also conduct Bord na Leabhar Gaeilge for which we give a lot of money, about £10,000 a year. If this money were given to the Comhdháil, it would enable the Comhdháil to expedite the publication of these books and help this firm to do that. Actually, no arrangement was come to in the end. In the end the money was used for the general purposes of the Comhdháil.

395. Chairman.—Now we will turn to the Vote itself on page 80.

Deputy Booth. — On subhead E— Publication of Irish Textbooks — what is the reason for the delay in publication?— The texts concerned are university textbooks. They deal with such things as, for instance, accountancy. I see a Greek textbook among them—Thucydides, Book IV. In the Latin textbooks we have some of the odes of Horace. We hope they will be available from the printers and published before the end of this year. Printed works have a habit of appearing a good while after they are expected. That is really what it comes to.

396. Deputy Carter.—With regard to subhead F.—Courses for Secondary Teachers—I take it these are specialised courses?—They are. One of them was a course in Irish and another was a course in mathematics. There was also a course in science. The money spent would be lecturers’ fees for these courses. There were two lecturers for each course.

397. Chairman.—In connection with the Appropriations in Aid, what were the circumstances which gave rise to a payment of £978 incremental salary to a teacher. I am referring to the note on page 81?—I think that was a question of recognition of certain service given by a teacher in a preparatory college for the purpose of secondary school incremental salary. When it was finally decided upon, then it fell to be paid from as far back as 1941.

398. Deputy Booth.—With regard to the Mac Suibhne Fund on page 83, that account seems to be accumulating money. The fund is for the award of a silver medal for excellence in Greek. The account opened with £17 and earned a credit of £5. Yet only £2 was spent on the award. Is the account going to go on accumulating? Does it not seem unusual that the amount of income should not be spent on the medal? It looks as if there is a bit of cheeseparing there?

Chairman.—I think it was my predecessor in the Chair who said it was not so much the medal as the honour attached to getting the medal?—We will have to think that over.

Deputy Clinton.—Can you not give more than one medal?—No. It has to be one medal only. We may have to consider the question of giving a bigger medal.

Deputy Booth.—I think that would probably be what was in the mind of the donor?—We cannot spend the fund on anything else.

399. With regard to the Erasmus Smith Endowment, is whatever is available as a balance transferred towards the cost of that school? The accounts balance absolutely?—No. The arrangement made was that, after having built the school and all that, there is a sum of £580 transferred for the purpose of promoting agricultural science in that school. The balance is absolutely even because since the Brothers who are conducting the school were obliged to mortgage a loan to meet the balance of the original estimate, which was £46,000, it was decided to pay the Brothers the unexpended balance from the annual income of the endowment towards liquidating that sum.

VOTE 36—TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION.

Dr. T. Ó Raifeartaigh further examined.

400. Deputy Kenny.—What is the meaning of The Church Temporalities Fund?—It arose originally following the Church Disestablishment Act of 1869. The sum of £30,000 was set aside for the purposes of science and agriculture. It is payable, for technical instruction, to the Department of Education. There is a similar sum in respect of secondary teachers’ salaries which came from the same source.

Chairman.—Originally this dealt with teachers pensions. A lot of the income was dealt with in that way?—It is paid over to us from the Department of Lands.

401. Deputy Booth.—With regard to the table regarding the Mary A. Hardiman Bequest, I notice that there is a further amount transferred to the capital account for investment. Is the position simply that suitable outlets did not present themselves for promotion in support of vocational education and rather than leave the money lying idle you decided to invest something to increase the capital?—That was the idea but actually we do try to spend the income every year to send teachers out for lectures in connection with technical education. It works out at about £900 a year. It is very hard to keep absolutely even with that and if you have to arrange that some vocational teacher or officer is to go perhaps to Germany and at the last moment he falls ill, then you are left with an unspent balance and so you may as well invest that balance and get some income on it.

Deputy Clinton.—In those cases you do not pay the full cost of sending a teacher? Is that supplemented by an amount from the local Vocational Education Committee?—Normally we would, but we have only that income. If a Committee was anxious to send somebody to some special course there is nothing to prevent its volunteering to pay half the total cost if the Department agrees to pay the other half. As a rule we pay the entire cost.

VOTE 37—SCIENCE AND ART.

Dr. T. Ó Raifeartaigh further examined.

402. Deputy Kenny.—On subhead A.11. —Accessories, Models and Materials—it would be interesting to know what kind of models you employ?—Live models.

You employ live models for life study by the students?—Yes.

403. Chairman. — On subhead B.1.— Publications in Irish—how are sales going now? We previously had large stocks of books that had to be disposed of?—Fair. Actually those large stocks were small 2d. and 3d. type of books. I think the total value came to about £180. They were small, scrappy ones. I think sales are going fairly well. Cómhdháil Náisiúnta na Gaeilge is helping very much in the sale of books. They have organisers going to schools and other centres selling them.

404. On subhead B.6. — Grants to Colleges—I raised a question here already this morning with Roinn na Gaeltachta. I want to know in regard to the subsidisation of courses at colleges in the Gaeltacht, are these courses subsidised from any other State source or by local authorities?—I do not know of them being subsidised by local authorities except in one case—Coláiste Carmain at Gorey, Co. Wexford—which belongs to the local vocational education committee. I would be surprised if there are any others subsidised by local authorities. I do not think they are subsidised by any other State Authority either.

405. The Accounting Officer for Roinn na Gaeltachta said that Coiste na bPáistí could obtain grants to send groups of children to the Gaeltacht, grants of at least £4 per pupil. When those pupils go into the Gaeltacht and attend a college there they would—it seems—also qualify for the £4 capitation grant from the Department of Education?—No. We pay grants on the basis of teaching per hour to the college authorities for teaching those children but we give no other grant for them.

No capitation grant?—None.

Is there a capitation grant given to colleges in the Gaeltacht?—No capitation grant is given; only teaching grants. We are concerned only with the teaching.

406. Before the establishment of Roinn na Gaeltachta, groups of pupils who organised to go to the Gaeltacht could get those grants if they went to the Gaeltacht and spent their time there? Was it necessary that the students should go to the schools and colleges?—We paid a per capita grant to the college authorities in relation to the teaching, per hour, they provided. We were not concerned with them in any other way. There is a scheme, which has nothing to do directly with our Department, whereby Roinn na Gaeltachta and Gael Linn send children to the Gaeltacht but I think that is for three months at a time and that the pupils attend national schools there during the year. Our Department does not contribute to that. The Committee seems to be thinking in terms of a capitation grant but, as it is at present, the payment is really a tuition fee. While we are thinking of changing the form of that grant it will still be a fee for tuition only.

407. Deputy Kenny.—On subhead B.9— Grant towards Cost of Short Films in Irish—to whom do you pay those grants? —To Gael Linn.

408. Deputy Burke.—On subhead C.5. —Aid to Arts and Crafts Exhibitions— the applicants must be very few? To what classes of applicants do you give these grants?—I think that has been there a long time but we have not used it for a long time. I think that £11 was paid to Córas Iompair Éireann for the cost of collecting and dispatching children’s paintings in connection with an international competition in child art.

Is it possible to extend this grant or to enlarge on it, say, in parishes where children have an aptitude for arts and crafts?—I suppose, yes, if there was an actual exhibition—

409. Would the exhibition have to be held by the school children?—I do not think we have any rigid lines laid down.

It is only for exhibitions?—That is all, but it would have to be paid under a sanction of the Department of Finance.

I know this is not for educational purposes strictly, but could a grant be made towards a particular committee or organisation?—No; it would be towards, or in connection with, the exhibition itself. It would be very difficult to give a grant for a particular exhibition without being invidious.

410. Chairman.—In connection with the Grants-in-Aid, on page 93, and the reference to the Purchase of Specimens for the National Museum, the expenditure on purchases seems to have been low in relation to the amount available from the Grant-in-Aid. Is there a particular reason for that?—The reason is that some years ago we found when we just provided so much a year in the Estimate, something suddenly turned up on the market that the Museum should have. For example, a very fine collection of Irish silver was available at one time and at another a very fine collection of Irish glass. The important thing is to be able to purchase these items before they disappear and we had to rush things very much and have a supplementary estimate passed to buy these two collections. We decided to save up so as to have £2,000 or £3,000 on hand—at any given time— when some other valuable collection would come on the market so that the Department could there and then say to the vendor “We will accept your offer”.

411. Deputy Booth.—In regard to the Murphy Bequest, on page 94, why does the amount of £83 shown as receipts from sales of postcards and publications, come under this heading? Is that not an ordinary receipt from the National Museum?—Some of the Murphy Bequest was spent on producing these postcards and therefore the receipts would come back into it.

It was invested in that and then the money comes back?—Yes.

VOTE 38—REFORMATORY AND INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS.

Dr. T. Ó Raifeartaigh further examined.

412. Deputy Clinton.—On subhead B.— Industrial Schools—does this saving represent an unusual drop in the number of children in industrial schools?—I think there was a rather marked drop in that year in the number who were detained in industrial schools.

Deputy Clinton.—That is a good sign.

413. Deputy Burke.—As regards the grant for each child payable to the industrial schools, for example, in Artane —has it increased according to the cost of living?—It has increased fairly well, I think. I remember in my own time as Assistant Secretary it was only a total of 15/- from both sides. That would be only about ten years ago and it is now 45/- a head, so that it has gone up threefold in about ten years.

VOTE 39—DUBLIN INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED STUDIES.

Dr. T. Ó Raifeartaigh further examined.

414. Deputy Clinton.—On subhead A. —Annual Grants under Section 25(1) of the Institute for Advanced Studies Act, 1940—how are these grants allocated? How are the amounts decided? The expenditure is not the same as the amount granted?—The Institute authorities send us an estimate of their needs, for payments to staff and all that. We then discuss it with them and try to work out as close an estimate as we can.

It is based on actual expenditure?— Yes, very much so.

VOTE 40—UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES.

Dr. T. Ó Raifeartaigh further examined.

415. Deputy Booth.—In regard to subhead B.—University College, Dublin— are these amounts not normally treated as Grants-in-Aid and if so, how was it that University College, Dublin and University College, Cork, did not draw the amount estimated while all the other colleges drew precisely the amount that had been granted?—I think the difference arises in connection with grants for capital purposes. Most of the grant is for current expenditure but, in regard to capital purposes, if a project had not been completed by the end of the financial year or at least if it had been finished and the payments and vouchers and so on not completed then it would be carried to the next year. That would be in regard to Dublin. In the case of Cork the grant we had was, I think, close to £10,000 but in the end actual expenditure only came to slightly less than that. It would arise only in connection with capital grants.

Are those amounts surrendered for the year under review?—They are not paid out.

Do they have to be voted again or included in the Vote for the following year?—They would be included in the Vote for the following year, if needed. In that particular case it was not needed. Strictly speaking the university grants are not Grants-in-Aid.

They are detailed in respect of certain specified objects in each case, are they? —They are grants in accordance with the University Acts.

416. Chairman.—Subheads E., F., and G., are actually Grants-in-Aid?—Yes, they are, but the others are not. Some of them are grants by instruments. These would be small ones. I see University College, Galway with a grant by Statutory Instrument No. 35 of 1929. While that particular grant is by instrument, the rest is a normal grant.

The witness withdrew.

The Committee adjourned.

* See Appendix XX.