Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1965 > Committee of Public Accounts > Report - Appropriation Accounts 1963 - 1964

MIONTUAIRISC NA FIANAISE

(Minutes of Evidence)

Déardaoin, 15 Iúil, 1965.

Thursday, 15th July, 1965.

The Committee sat at 11 a.m.

DEPUTY JONES in the chair.

Mr. E. F. Suttle (An tArd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste), and Miss Maire Bhreathnach, and Mr. J. R. Whitty (An Roinn Airgeadais) called and examined.

GENERAL REPORT.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called and examined.

5. Chairman.—We start this morning with the General Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General which is contained in paragraphs 1 to 7. I shall go through the paragraphs and if any member wishes to ask any questions, it is open to him to do so. Paragraph 1 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General is as follows:

“general

1. In this my first report on the Appropriation Accounts I desire to record that the administration of public expenditure has been maintained at a high standard. From the various Departments I have received all the information and explanations that I have required together with their full co-operation in all matters relating to my audit. I look forward to the continuance of this relationship in future years.

I wish to make clear that I have followed generally the practice heretofore observed of regarding the accounts, with the notes thereon, as self explanatory and I have confined the observations in this report to the small number of cases which appear to call for notice or investigation, or in which I have considered it desirable to elaborate or amplify the information given.

6. Chairman.—Paragraph 2 of the Report is as follows:

“Outturn of the Year

(Adjusted to the nearest £)

2. The audited accounts are summarised on page xxxvii. The amount to be surrendered as shown in the summary is £4,684,253 arrived at as follows:—

This represents 2.7 per cent. of the supply grants as compared with 2.6 per cent. in the previous year. The principal savings were:

In no case has the provision made by Dáil Éireann been exceeded and no excess vote is, therefore, necessary.”

Have you anything to add to that paragraph, Mr. Suttle?

Mr. Suttle.—The general saving on the gross estimate worked out at 2.7 per cent. and these were the main Votes which provided savings but they varied considerably from, in the case of the Industry and Commerce Vote 42, a saving of 11.5 per cent. gross vote to, in the case of Vote 51—Social Assistance—1.1 per cent.

7. Chairman.—Paragraph 3 of the Report is as follows:

“Exchequer Extra Receipts

3. Extra receipts poyable to the Exchequer as recorded in the appropriation accounts amounted to £1,595,430.”

8. Chairman; Paragraph 4 of the Report is as follows:

“Surrender of Balances on 1962-63 Votes

4. The balances due to be surrendered out of the votes for the public services for 1962-63 amounted to £4,156,147. I hereby certify that these balances have been duly surrendered.”

9. Chairman; Paragraph 5 of the Report is as follows:

“Postponed Payments

5. In paragraphs 24, 34 and 35 of this report attention is drawn to cases where I have communicated with Accounting Officers because fully matured liabilities were not paid in the year. I deem it necessary therefore to restate the fundamental principle, which stems from section 24 of the Exchequer and Audit Departments Act, 1866, that Departments are bound to pay within the year all fully matured liabilities even though payment may necessitate an Excess Vote. I have accordingly qualified my certificates to the relevant appropriation accounts.”

Do you wish to add anything to that information, Mr. Suttle?

Mr. Suttle.—The system of Government accountancy in this country is based on a Budget which provides for the making of cash available from the revenues received in the year for the payments which should be made in that year. Thus, accounting officers are charged with the responsibility of ensuring that they make provision in their annual estimates for all expenditure that will mature for payment during the year. Any payments that are postponed to the following year, clearly, upset this system of control, distort the ultimate outturn of the Budget and, if persisted in, could have serious effects on forward financial planning. For these reasons, I have deemed it advisable to stress the import. ance of rigid adherence to fundamental accountancy principles. The Committee will be dealing with the particular cases in question when it comes to discuss the relevent votes.

10. Chairman.—Paragraph 6 of the Report is as follows:

“Stock and Store Accounts

6. The stock and store accounts of the Departments have been examined with generally satisfactory results.”

11. Chairman.—Paragraph 7 of the Report is as follows:

“National Development Fund (Winding up) Account

7. As indicated in paragraph 6 of the previous report the balance in the Winding up Account at 31 March, 1963, was £707,648 (including £8,378 in the hands of agent Departments). Issues to agent Departments in the year amounted to £117,935, viz:—

Statements are appended to the accountof the relevant votes indicating the expenditure incurred on the various projects during the year under review. The total expenditure on these projects since the establishment of the Fund to 31 March, 1964, was as follows:—

Expenditure on projects carried out by local authorities is examined by Local Government auditors whose reports are made available to me.

The balance in the Winding up Account at 31 March, 1964, was £593,443 (including £12,108 in the hands of agent Departments).”

I notice that you have changed the form of this statement, Mr. Suttle. Have you any reason for that?

Mr. Suttle.—This Fund has been in operation since 1954 and a lot of works on which this money was expended had been completed. I thought it unnecessary to be repeating the total figures year after year. So, I have left out all the completed works, giving one final figure of £5,847,354 for them, and have detailed only those items on which expenditure was incurred in the year under review.

12. Chairman.—Paragraph 8 of the Report is as follows:

“8. Statement of Receipts into and Isssues out of the Central Fund for the Year ended 31 March 1964

13. Chairman.—In regard to the interest on advances from the Central Fund, Mr. Whitaker, who pays that interest?—Are you referring, Mr. Chairman, to the public debt services item of the Central Fund services?

Under “Receipts”—Interest on Advances from the Central Fund?

Mr. Whitaker.—That would represent interest paid by bodies like the Electricity Supply Board and also by the Local Loans Fund on advances made from the Exchequer to these bodies or to the Fund.

14. Are there any arrears outstanding at 31st March?—This is merely an account of what was actually received. There are undoubtedly cases where interest is not paid on advances from the Central Fund, but it is not necessary to specify what those cases are.

15. Deputy Healy.—I take it that this would be the total amount received? Have you any idea of the total amount that might be still due over and above what has been received?—Where amounts are due and not received it is necessary to get Dáil approval for waiving the repayment. For example, the case will be coming before the Dáil of Dundalk Engineering Works where advances have been made to the Company through the Industrial Credit Company, but neither interest nor repayment has been met. This will have to be rectified by having a vote which will write off the amounts irrecoverable in respect of interest and principal.

16. That is a case where it is written off. Is there any interest due to us that we may still recover, that is not irrevocably lost?— There is not, apart from those cases where there has to be a regularisation of the nonrecovery of interest. We are not pursuing claims and finding ourselves unable to recover money.

Chairman.—That was the case in Gaeltarra Éireann? Was it not regularised?—Where the situation arises in which we cannot get the interest it must be regularised by vote or by statutory write-off.

17. Deputy Healy.—There is something over £9,000,000 interest received. What is the amount we might have got if everybody had paid up? In other words how much do we lose? Is it £2,000,000, £3,000,000 or £10,000,000? Is it an appreciable sum at all? —General information of that kind has been provided in reply to parliamentary questions when the question was: What was the average amount of interest received from the advances made by the State and the share capital investments made by it? In fact, the amount received is lower than the cost of the borrowing to the State. The average rate of return received may be, say, three per cent. as against the six per cent. rate of interest which has now to be paid on State borrowings. The position could be analysed by looking at what we call the State Debt Balance Sheet which appears as one of the Finance Accounts. This shows the total of the investments of the State in the way of advances and shares, and there is also an account of revenue derived from these investments, thus enabling one to say which investments are not paying a return, which are paying an inadequate return and which are paying a full return. Those that are paying a full return are in a minority; the E.S.B. and Bord na Móna are two of them.

18. Deputy Treacy.—In regard to the turnover tax revenue of £3,697,000, could we have any information as to whether there might be an appreciable amount of that still outstanding?

Mr. Suttle.—That would be a matter for Revenue accounts rather than Finance.

Mr. Whitaker.—Strictly speaking, yes. I do not know offhand what is outstanding. My impression is that it was not a very significant amount. The general experience has been that these payments are made on the due dates.

Chairman.—When we reach the Vote for the Revenue Commission, the Deputy will be able to seek information on this point.

VOTE 1—PRESIDENT’S ESTABLISHMENT.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

19. Chairman.—On the Note, the sum charged to the Vote for Remuneration is in addition to what was charged under subhead A—Salaries, Wages and Allowances. I assume that would be a common feature for the year under review?—Yes. It appears in many of these votes. I rather expected you would ask why it is in some cases that, although there appears to be sufficient money in the original salaries subhead, payments were made from the general vote for remuneration. The answer is that the general vote for remuneration was taken to fill in the global deficiency expected for the year because of the ninth round payments. The transfers were intended to be made from the Vote for Remuneration where there was no adequate saving on the original Vote as a whole and not just on the salaries subhead. The transfers had to be made a few weeks before the end of the year on estimates of the savings on the Votes. In some cases these estimates proved not to be quite accurate and, of course, for safety sake the transfer was made, even though, as things turned out, in some cases there might have been enough saving on the Vote as a whole. The transfer had to occur by reference to the expected saving. I think that is a general explanation of why you find this discrepancy throughout the Votes.

VOTE 2—HOUSES OF THE OIREACHTAS.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

20. Chairman.—With regard to subhead F.1.—Postal Expenses of Comhaltaí and Seanadóirí (No. 32 of 1962)—estimation was amazingly accurate there?—Yes, in spite of the absence of any experience of what it would cost.

21. In regard to subhead F.3.—Incidental Expenses and Travelling of Officers and Staff of the Houses of the Oireachtas—there is a refund to a Senior Clerk of the admission fee of £100 to a course for qualification as Barrister-at-Law. Is this a normal procedure?—I think it is done in Departments like Revenue, for example, where the possession of a legal qualification in, say, the Estate Duty Branch is regarded as enhancing the qualifications of the officer.

Would there be any question of the refund of that fee should the officer leave the Service?—I do not know whether these express conditions are made. It is assumed that the officer will remain in the Service and give to the Service the benefit of the extra qualification he has attained.

Deputy Crowley.—I think this is a very good thing. It is a good idea to give this money to people to provide them with an incentive to make themselves better qualified, thereby elevating the whole standard of the Department.

Mr. Whitaker.—It is a common practice in cases in which we send people on courses because we expect to get a good deal of the benefit of those courses.

22. Chairman.—In regard to subhead H.— Expenses of the Restaurant (Grant-in-Aid)— have you made any progress with regard to the provision of a staff pension scheme?—I am afraid I am not up to date on that, but I could let you know by note.*

VOTE 3—DEPARTMENT OF THE TAOISEACH.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

No question.

VOTE 4—CENTRAL STATISTICS OFFICE.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

23. Chairman.—On subhead A.—Salaries, Wages and Allowances—I notice you still have some unfilled vacancies. Was the postponement of the Household Budget Inquiry the reason for that?—The Household Budget Inquiry had to be postponed because the office were short of statisticians. Because of the acute shortage of technical staff, the vacancies existed and some inquiries have had to be delayed. The Household Budget Inquiry is expected to begin this Autumn.

Have you succeeded in recruiting staff then?—I think the barest minimum necessary has been secured.

24. Deputy Healy.—There is a saving of £17,000 on this subhead. Is that because of the fact that you did not get the number of staff anticipated or provided for?

Chairman.—Is the saving there because of staff not being available to you?—Yes, though it is not all due to that. In fact, as mentioned in the explanation, there were unforeseen reductions in the staff employed on the Census of Population. I understand that was because staff requirements had been assessed on the basis of previous experience, but a new type of statistical machine, which the office acquired, enabled them to cut down on clerical work and do with less staff.

25. Deputy Crowley.—On subhead C.— Collection of Statistics—what kind of returns were you looking for in respect of Cattle Marts?—It is part of the general information the office tries to get for the Quarterly Bulletin about the conditions and prices at markets throughout the country. They had been collecting it for fairs and had, of course, to extend their inquiries to cattle marts.

26. Deputy Crowley.—The second item of the Appropriations in Aid refers to refund of salary of officer on loan. Would you explain that?—The practice in the Civil Service is that, if an officer is lent from one Department to another for purely short-term periods, less than six months, the lending Department bears the salary; but, if the loan extends beyond six months, the charge has to be taken over by the borrowing Department. This would be a case where an officer had been lent to some other Department and a refund was claimed. Perhaps it was only for part of the year; it is a rather small amount.

I was interested in the general practice?—The general practice is what I have described.

VOTE 6—OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR FINANCE.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

27. Chairman.—In regard to the note on Extra Remuneration that a principal officer received a gratuity of £500 for exceptional duties and extra attendance over a two and a half year period, what were the duties and the extra attendance?—In this particular case the exceptional duties and extra attendance arose out of work in connection with our application to enter the E.E.C. This officer had charge of a lot of preparatory work, such as the preparation of white papers and the assembly of a great deal of information, all of which took an enormous amount of his time beyond normal office hours. He was extremely capable and competent in doing it. In fact the nature of his duties was such that if they had continued he might have been promoted to a higher level. As compensation for all he had done over two and a half years we thought this was quite a reasonable amount.

You were not afraid of creating any precedent for principal officers in other Departments?—We are always afraid of that but we thought we had a stonewall case here. In fact, in other Departments people doing comparable work would be promoted to a higher rank.

28. Deputy Treacy.—Might I ask if the person concerned did in fact carry out these duties during his ordinary working day and was obliged to carry on by way of overtime, or did he carry out this work on overtime alone?—There is no question but that he did far beyond the ordinary day’s work. He had some duties apart from the one I mentioned, the work on the E.E.C., because he was dealing with trade matters generally and during this period, because of the pressure of E.E.C. work, he had to do a very great amount of overtime.

Would you say he was engaged on E.E.C. work during his normal working hours?— Yes, that was his main work during his ordinary working day and his overtime.

29. Deputy Molloy.—How did you arrive at a figure of £500? How do you determine the size of the gratuity?—It is approached from several angles. One is to measure the amount of overtime and the rate appropriate to the time of an officer of that rank. Sometimes that becomes too big for comfort. Another way is to look at what in fact we would have paid if he had been promoted to higher work and by a kind of scissors movement we arrive at what seems a reasonable figure. We also have regard to what is paid to people of similar rank who, for example, act as secretaries of commissions and for that reason have to do quite a lot of extra work of higher responsibility.

VOTE 11.—STATE LABORATORY.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

30. Deputy Healy.—I see that on subhead A.—Salaries, Wages and Allowances—the expenditure was £4,001 less than granted. Is that because we have not got the full complement of workers or personnel in the Laboratory? Is there some other reason?

Deputy Crowley.—It is in the explanation. It is due to unfilled vacancies.

31. Chairman.—In regard to subhead C.— Apparatus and Chemical Equipment—and the delay in the delivery of new appliances, I think that last year we had a saving due to the fact that accounts were not presented before the end of the year. Would one not think that one of these items would have balanced out the other?—It would, yes.

It seems we were saved again by some fortuitous circumstance?—The explanation is delay in delivery of new apparatus this year.

Deputy Healy.—It will catch up with us.

Chairman.—It will, undoubtedly. These things always do.

VOTE 12—CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

32. Chairman.—In regard to subhead C.— Examinations—I notice in looking at the previous year’s account that the expenditure this year is about twice as great. Were there any more examinations, or were some held on behalf of county or county borough councils-Perhaps rather than delay over it, I shall send you a note, if you do not mind.*

33. Deputy Healy.—Might I ask as a matter of procedure whether, when we do supply services, there is some refund from these councils?

Chairman.—I think there is some little receipt. There is a levy on the local authority for the net cost. You get them in the Appropriations-in-Aid. The receipts were only a little more than last year. The examiners may be paid more.

Mr. Whitaker.—That is probably the explanation.

VOTE 13—AN COMHAIRLE EALAÍON.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

No question.

VOTE 14—SUPERANNUATION AND RETIRED ALLOWANCES.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

34. Chairman.—In regard to subheads A. —Superannuation Allowances, Compensation Allowances, Pensions and certain Children’s Allowances—and B.—Additional Allowances and Gratuities in respect of Established Officers—the explanation on page 33 refers to a trend towards higher expenditure which was abated in the final quarter. This rather intrigues me. Perhaps you can expand on that explanation?—I think I gave an element of the explanation last year when I said the difficulty of predicting retirements is increased when there are periodic substantial increases in salaries. A man who had reached 60 and was contemplating retirement on the 1st January, 1964, but expected that there would be a 12 per cent. increase in February, 1964, would naturally reconsider his decision and perhaps decide to stay on and earn a higher pension as well as a higher salary. This is the sort of thing that interferes with the trend unexpectedly.

35. Deputy Treacy.—Is there not a fixed age-limit for retirement?—There is. Sixty-five is the maximum but at any time from the age of 60 on you are free to retire, but you get your full pension only if you have completed 40 years’ service.

Chairman.—Does that apply to the Civil Service as a whole?—Yes, throughout the Service.

36. Deputy Treacy.—I take it there are no extenuating circumstances under which they would be permitted to continue over 65 years of age?—There are circumstances in which people are allowed to continue, mainly connected with hardship. This would be the principal reason. Another reason would be that it was impossible to replace them for some reason or other but that operates very seldom. It is rare for pensionable officers to be kept on, but some non-pensionable officers are retained beyond 65 years of age because of the hardship they might otherwise suffer.

Deputy Treacy.—I appreciate that.

37. Deputy Molloy.—Are county managers pensionable?—Oh yes.

Are there any occasions where county managers are kept on beyond the retiring age. You mentioned that it was mostly non-pensionable people?—In fact, Deputy, this Vote deals only with civil servants. County managers are covered by local government superannuation schemes and I am not really acquainted with them.

38. Deputy Healy.—On subhead F.— Injury Grants—what does that cover?— Where death or serious injuries are incurred during service, there is provision for making a payment of a gratuity.

Death or injuries?—Death is covered in most cases by the provisions of the superannuation scheme. There is a death gratuity but there may not be schemes, for example, covering non-pensionable officers. So, gratuities have to be made to them if they are killed in the course of their service or seriously injured.

Deputy Healy.—I want to establish the fact that £33,000 for injuries alone would seem to be a rather large sum, but if it covers gratuity in the case of a non-pensionable officer whose death occurs in the course of service, I could understand it.

Chairman.—Deputy Healy’s point, apparently, is that subhead F refers to “Injury Grants”. He would like to know whether that also includes gratuities to non-pensionable staff whose death occurs during service. Is that covered under subhead F?—Subhead E would seem to be the one?—Yes. Subhead F mainly covers grants under the Workmen’s Compensation Acts, and in addition grants under warrants under the Superannuation Act. A grant under warrant would arise where, for example, an officer was killed while travelling by aeroplane in the course of his duty. That would be very rare.

Deputy Healy.—I should hope so.

39. Deputy Treacy.—Would it be possible to have a breakdown of the figure?

Chairman.—If the Deputy will look at the Estimates for the year in question he will find set out under subhead F:

“1. Grants under the warrants made under the Superannuation Act, 1887 (sec. 1) —£2,500.

2. Grants under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1906, and the Workmen’s Compensation Acts, 1934 to 1955— £32,500.”

The main amount is covered under the Workmen’s Compensation Act.

Mr. Whitaker.—When I was answering first I thought the question was about subhead H. I was trying to identify what particular kinds of death or personal injuries expenses might be covered by subhead H rather than subhead F. Again, that is shown in detail in the Estimates. It is for payments for death or injury sustained by members of Air Raid Precautions Services—these cases arose also, I think, under the Emergency— and payments for medical and surgical treatment.

40. Deputy Molloy.—In regard to subhead I.—Pensions to Resigned and Dismissed Royal Irish Constabulary, including Widows —could the witness explain that?—These were men who were dismissed because of their loyalty to the Irish Republican cause.

Chairman.—In the 1920’s.

Deputy Treacy.—The number is becoming fewer.

Deputy Healy.—The amount expended is more than granted. It would seem that the pensions were increased.

Chairman.—I think the pensions were increased?—It extends to widows as well as to the men.

VOTE 15—SECRET SERVICE.

VOTE 16—EXPENSES UNDER THE ELECTORAL ACT AND THE JURIES ACT.

VOTE 17—AGRICULTURAL GRANTS.

VOTE 18—LAW CHARGES.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

No question.

VOTE 19—MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

41. Deputy Molloy.—On subhead D.— Marsh’s Library (Grant-in-Aid)—where is this library?—It is in what is called St. Patrick’s Close between St. Patrick’s Cathedral and Kevin Street Gárda Station. This is an old building, about 250 years old, which has had to be extensively repaired to keep the fabric in being.

Deputy Healy.—It is still used as a library? —Yes.

42. On subhead E.—The Irish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (Grant-in-Aid)—is this the only grant they get? I understood that subventions from the State went to £5,000?—This was the first one they got by way of supplementary estimate when the Irish Society was formed as distinct from the general society which dealt with these islands. The 1964-65 provision was £3,500 so it was virtually doubled in the following year.

VOTE 54—INCREASES IN PENSIONS.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

43. Deputy Molloy.—There is a very large estimate for the Connaught Rangers, Local Authorities, etc., and expenditure was only £45. Could we have an explanation?—The explanation is that while we have to make the provision, the actual draw depends on local authorities being ready with their payments. Our experience is that this takes quite a while. Nevertheless we felt we had to make some provision for it in this year. Expenditure catches up with us in the end, appearing in the following year.

44. Deputy Healy.—When expenditure is only £45 out of an estimate of £5,000, does that mean the balance has to be sought again?—These are special funds for increases in pensions. What would happen in the year after is that the extra expenditure would be absorbed in the ordinary vote for superannuation and provision would have to be made in that vote for the actual draw by local authorities.

It would not be estimated in the way this is?—It would be estimated but perhaps be closer to the out-turn.

With more certainty?—Yes.

VOTE 55—REPAYMENTS TO CONTINGENCY FUND.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

45. Deputy Crowley.—This includes expenses in connection with the funeral of former Seanascal.

Chairman.—That was the late Domhnall Ó Buachalla. He replaced the Governor-General. He was given a State funeral, and in these cases the State takes over the ordinary funeral expenses.

VOTE 56—REMUNERATION.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

No question.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 45—DEFENCE.

Mr. S. Ó Cearnaigh called and examined.

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

“Vote 45.—Defence

Subhead G.—Civil Defence

85. It was noted in the course of audit that civil defence training equipment worth approximately £150,000 was held in a central transit store while awaiting issue, some items for considerable periods. I inquired whether any stocktaking had been carried out in the store and was informed that because of staff shortages, etc., it had not yet been found possible to carry out a complete stocktaking; test checks had been applied in 1960 and 1962 and it is proposed to carry out a complete stocktaking during the current year.”

Have you anything to add to that, Mr. Suttle?

Mr. Suttle.—Of the thousands of items on charge only 56 items were test-checked in February, 1960, and 74 in April, 1962. These checks disclosed certain discrepancies, mainly surpluses resulting from the practice of not taking new equipment on charge until it had been inspected and accepted by the responsible technical officers. Almost all the discrepancies have since been accounted for.

47. Chairman.—Could you tell us if a complete stocktaking has now been completed?

Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.—A complete stocktaking has been completed and the results indicate deficiencies of approximately £400 and surpluses of roughly £350 so that they very nearly balance, but the reconciliation of these discrepancies is proceeding at present.

48. What type of equipment do you generally use here?—It is miscellaneous equipment, such as radiac instruments for measuring radiation. Then there is clothing, uniforms for civil defence volunteers, rescue outfits, which would consist of various items such as shovels, spades, stretchers, and there might be some ambulances passing through. It is a transit store. Some ambulances and fire engines pass through it from time to time.

49. A rather large amount of equipment accumulates in that transit store, does it?— At the time the audit query was raised there was about £150,000 worth in the store which was substantially reduced subsequently. It stands at about £100,000 now and distribution of the stores is taking place all the time. They are issued to local authorities according as they require them and have accommodation for them.

50. Do you think disposal will be completed shortly?—I do not think there will ever be a full disposal because some stocks, such as clothing, have to be maintained to meet day-to-day demands. Also, there is constantly material coming in from suppliers and it has to be checked and tested there before issue. I expect there will always be certain stock on hands there.

51. Deputy Healy.—What would be regarded as the required amount in stock? I can understand it being disposed of throughout the country and the necessity for keeping a certain amount in headquarters. What would be the value of the amount at headquarters? Would it always be necessary to keep £100,000, or more, in headquarters and would the inflow always be regarded as necessary to justify a fairly heavy expenditure on it, even though you are disposing of it throughout the country? My question is based on the fact that it is generally accepted that the civil defence is not catching on as well as we would like it to do. In the last few months £50,000 was disposed of and you have £100,000 on hands, and we are getting more into headquarters. Will we have another £100,000 worth? Where will it go? Is there any limit to what we get in?

Chairman.—What do you consider is the minimum amount that should be stored at headquarters? You have at the moment upwards of £100,000 worth and you are still taking in more. What do you consider the minimum required to be held?—It is rather difficult to answer that question, but I do not think stocks will be coming in at that rate in future. There will probably be a decrease in purchases. One thing we would need to hold permanently would be quantities of clothing to meet demands. It might come to, perhaps, £20,000 for clothing.

52. Deputy Healy.—Of the £100,000 worth now in store would there be £20,000 worth of that in clothing, or is there any breakdown of the figure of £100,000?—At the moment there is about £8,000 worth of clothing in store, but I understand clothing stocks became rather depleted recently and will have to be built up somewhat.

53. If that is so there must be £90,000 worth of other material in the store?—Yes.

Is that regarded as adequate or will that also have to be added to?—The bulk of the remaining material in the store consists of radiac instruments, and whether or not these will be added to in future depends on the state of development of civil defence.

54. Chairman.—Paragraph 86 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows:

“Subhead J.—Mechanical Transport

86. As noted in the account additional expenditure amounting to £11,149 was incurred in providing army transport for the conveyance of civilian passengers in Dublin, Cork and Galway during the transport strike in April and May, 1963. The expenditure was assessed as follows:—

The net charge to the vote because of traffic accidents during the operation of the service was £293. Further payments fall due to be made under this head.”

Have you anything to add to that, Mr. Suttle?

Mr. Suttle.—The further payments referred to in the paragraph because of accidents were, I understand, numerous and trivial and amounted in all to less than £700.

These have been met now?—They have been met now.

Deputy Molloy.—This arose because of accidents?

Mr. Suttle.—This was during the bus strike when Army lorries were on the roads. There were numerous trivial accidents.

55. Chairman.—I suppose a charge to the passengers carried was never contemplated?

Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.—The Government decided on a free service.

Would it have made any difficulty if a charge had been made?—I do not think the point was ever considered really. It did not actually arise.

56. With regard to special allowances to army personnel of £4,769, I take it the army personnel were still receiving their normal salaries and wages during this period?—Yes.

On what basis were the allowances made up?—The special allowances consisted of 52/6 a week for drivers and conductors on the lorries. Other personnel in barracks who had to work long hours got 5/- per day or 35/- per week.

That is for non-commissioned personnel?— Yes. Ultimately officers got an ex-gratia payment of 5/- per day. That was in retrospect.

Deputy Crowley.—This is one of the cases in which we did not take status into consideration.

57. Chairman.—Paragraph 87 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows:

“Subhead K.—Provisions

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

The average price of cattle purchased for both the Dublin and Curragh areas was £74 per head the same as in the previous year, while the average production of beef per head was 688 lbs. and 655 lbs., respectively, as compared with 715 lbs. and 689 lbs.”

58. I am rather interested to observe that the cost of production of bread actually fell. What might have caused the cost of production to fall?

Deputy Crowley.—Modern machinery, I suppose.

Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.—It was mainly labour. It would be hard to define precisely how the cost of labour fell. Possibly it was due to changes in personnel—a single man replacing a married man, or something like that.

Deputy Healy.—A private as a baker, I suppose, instead of a corporal.

59. Chairman.—With regard to meat, you say you buy smaller cattle. Is that deliberate policy or is it just coincidence?—The cattle are bought by an agent. I could not say whether it was deliberate or accidental, but I do not think the margin is very great.

Deputy Crowley.—I should think it is just availability of stocks.

60. Chairman.—Paragraph 88 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows:—

“Subhead 0.2.—Helicopters

88. Following a decision of the Government that the Minister for Defence should undertake the establishment of a helicopter service for sea and air rescue work and for other emergencies, contracts were placed for the purchase of three Alouette III helicopters together with associated equipment and essential spares. Two of the helicopters were delivered in November 1963 and the third in May 1964. Advance payments of £104,821 were made under the contracts in the year under review and £14,596 was paid for training courses and visits abroad.”

Mr. Suttle.—The total estimated cost of three helicopters with essential spares and tools was £216,720.

61. Chairman.—Are these machines in full service now?

Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.—Yes.

Have they been called out on many occasions?—I have not the exact figure but they have been out on several occasions on rescue or mercy missions.

Do they do ordinary army transport as well?—They may do it occasionally, but not to any great extent.

62. Have they ever been made available for private or commercial purposes?—On a few occasions, yes, they have been hired out.

Have you had many inquiries in that regard?—On eight occasions.

63. I take it there is a fixed scale of charges? —Yes, there is. The scale at that time was £65 per hour. I think it has been increased later to £67.

64. Deputy Healy.—Is such a service a departure recommended by the Department of Finance? Is it generally known that a person could apply and hire the helicopter if available?—I am not quite sure whether it has been widely publicised or not but certainly there has been a number of occasions when we have hired them out but the charge is probably such as would not encourage it.

My reason for asking is because I feel that a helicopter if lying idle for a lengthy period might deteriorate; it might be better for everybody if it was in use. That may be the reason.

Chairman.—The only thing is that, as Mr. Ó Cearnaigh has said, the £67 charge may be prohibitive.

Deputy Crowley.—It is not that prohibitive.

Deputy Molloy.—I assume the charge is to cover the period while it is absent from base? —Yes.

65. Deputy Crowley.—There is just one item to which I wish to refer, the £14,596 for training purposes and visits abroad referred to in the paragraph. That seems very high.

Chairman.—Are you asking for an explanation or expressing an opinion? Deputies on this Committee are not allowed to express opinions.

Deputy Crowley.—I am asking a question. How many personnel were involved in this training?—I have not a figure for the number of personnel, but there were several visits and courses and one of the basic helicopter training courses on the Alouette machine cost about £12,000.

A course?—Yes. I presume we have been paying for the use of machine as well as the time of the instructors.

Of course if you are getting £67 an hour?— That is the other side of the coin. Of course, it was a completely new service, and had to be thoroughly prepared for.

66. Deputy Molloy.—I see that advance payments of £104,821 were made under the contracts and that the total cost was £216,720. There is still money outstanding? These helicopters are not paid for?—They have been paid for by now. All the money was not paid in that particular financial year but payment was completed in the following year.

67. Chairman.—Paragraph 89 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General states:—

“Subhead BB.—Compensation

68. Regarding the compensation for damage or injury, amounting to £12,165, were there any very large items in that figure?

Mr. Suttle.—Nothing very large. The largest item was £2,400; the next was £2,075; the third was £1,750. After that they were all less than £1,000 and some were quite small.

69. Deputy Molloy.—I should like to ask if all these accidents took place when Army personnel were in Ireland, or were there any which may have occurred with troops overseas?

Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.—All at home.

70. Chairman: Paragraph 90 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General state:

“Subhead Z.--Appropriations in Aid

Residential courses for training boys as fishermen commenced at Naval Service Headquarters, Haulbowline, in March 1964, under a scheme sponsored by the Fisheries Division of the Department of Lands. Expenditure of £823 on renovations and the provision of equipment was repaid from the Fisheries Vote and was credited to this subhead; recurring expenditure which would not have been incurred but for the establishment of the scheme will be similarly repaid.”

71. What do boys study while down at Haulbowline?—Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.—As far as the Naval Service is concerned they are taught seamanship and navigation but that is only one aspect of the course. The Fisheries Division of the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries arrange for the fishery aspects to be taught. I think there is an arrangement with the local Vocational Education Committee.

Is this theory training in the main, or is there training time on board the Department’s vessels?—Theory and practice.

72. How many boys are there on each course and how long do the courses last?—The course lasts 10 weeks. There have been three courses already. On the first course there were 22; it finished with 19. On the second course there were 14 and there is a third course in progress at present. I am not sure how many are on it. There would be accommodation for up to 25 on the courses.

73. Deputy Healy.—You would not know if there is anything like a full number wishing to do these courses?—I do not think the number has been filled, not constantly anyhow. On the first course there were 22 against a possible 25 and on the next course there were 14.

74. Deputy Molloy; Could you explain what kind of practical experience these boys get on craft belonging to the Department of Defence. Surely we would not have boats suitable for training young fishermen?—We have a number of small boats around the harbour, passenger service vessels and various small craft that could be used, but I am not in a position to give any detailed account of the precise nature of the vessels or the type of practical training the boys get.

75. Chairman.—In regard to subhead C— Permanent Defence Force: Allowances—do you recover any portion of this expenditure which appertains to the Forces in Cyprus from the United Nations?—The allowances for overseas services are not provided for in that subhead. They are charged to a suspense account, and the suspense account is cleared when recovery is effected from the United Nations.

76. Have claims for the Congo operation been met?—Yes, they have been met, but the Cyprus operations were not there in that year.

77. Who provides for the food and accommodation of our troops in Cyprus?—The United Nations arrange that.

Deputy Molloy.—Do they pay for it?—They provide it at their own expense—they provide the accommodation and rations.

78. Deputy Crowley.—On subhead G— Civil Defence—how come the very big discrepancy between the grant and expenditure under that subhead?—A number of schemes did not mature that we had hoped at the time would be paid for in that year. There were certain premises suitable for civil defence control centres in the counties. Their preparation, however, had not advanced to a point where any expenditure was incurred on them. Some stores that had been ordered were not delivered in time. In the case of other stores that were ordered, it was found possible to purchase them at lower prices than had been anticipated. We introduced overcoats for civil defence volunteers about that time. We had hoped they would be paid for in that year but they had not been delivered in time to get them paid for. The local authorities were to prepare maps of their areas, but they had not progressed to the point where a substantial payment would be called for.

79. Chairman.—In regard to subhead H— Defensive Equipment—and the explanatory note on page 139, I seem to remember that this was the French advanced type of equipment. Were the armoured cars specially ordered for Cyprus?—There was a programme for the purchase of some armoured cars about that time. It might have been two a year or so. The requirements for Cyprus accelerated the programme. I think the intention was to spread the purchase over a number of years, but the cars were urgently needed for the Cyprus operation. So they had to be bought together at that time.

80. How many did you purchase, and what did they cost?—We purchased eight at that time at, I think, about £200,000 for the eight.

81. Is there any question of a United Nations contribution towards this cost?—No. The equipment forms part of the permanent equipment of the Defence Forces now, and they are a necessary equipment.

82. Deputy Molloy.—Could we not claim any depreciation of these cars while on active service in Cyprus from the United Nations?— We certainly could claim for damage and possibly for any serious depreciation.

83. How long will they be in Cyprus, and how long have they been there?—We have 16 armoured cars in Cyprus. There was a second lot bought for a further unit and up to this there have been 16 armoured cars in Cyprus with the full contingent. A unit is just returning now and will not be replaced, and their eight armoured cars will be brought home presently and from then on eight will remain with the 42nd Battalion.

84. Has any of them been damaged out there?—There has been one or two accidents with them but how serious the damage was I do not know. It will be assessed later. We would expect to be compensated for damage of that type, of course, as we were compensated in the case of the Congo.

85. Deputy Crowley.—On subhead M— Clothing and Equipment—I should like to ask for an explanation again of the big difference between grant and expenditure—£221,000?— As to £100,000, it was mentioned in the Budget as a saving that would be made in the Defence Estimate, and the Government directed that £100,000 be not spent out of that subhead as part of a budgetary arrangement.

86. Chairman.—In regard to subhead N— Animals, Forage, etc.—how is it that the sum which was provided for the purchase of horses was not spent in full?—It depends on whether suitable animals are on offer and whether we can get them. It is not often the right type of animal comes on the market. The horses that would suit the equitation requirements are fairly rare.

87. Deputy Healy.—Are the horses used in the Equitation School the only horses used in the Army now?—

We have a few horses in different barracks used for light draught purposes.

They would be a small number now?—Very small.

88. Deputy Molloy.—On subhead O.1.— General Stores—does that include most purchases by the Army, apart from equipment and such things? There was a question raised in the House about the question of army saddles being purchased from abroad instead of being bought in this country. Does that come within the scope of this Committee?

Chairman.—The accounting officer is not asked to make a statement in regard to questions of policy. That is a matter for the House. The Deputy can always get the information by way of parliamentary question or otherwise. The accounting officer is accountable only for the expenditure of sums given to him.

In regard to this subhead, the Note says that it was not found possible to order certain items for which provision was made. Could you say why it was not found possible to do so?—One of the big items involved was radiac equipment for military purposes. Investigations were proceeding as to the most suitable type to buy. It took longer than was expected with the result that it was not possible to place the orders.

89. Deputy Crowley.—On subhead O.2.— Helicopters—there was a grant of £273,000 made. The cost of the helicopters came to £216,000 and training came to £14,000. Could you give any explanation as to how the rest of the money was spent?—I think it had to do with the terms of the contract for the helicopters, the terms of the basis of payment.

The cost of the three helicopters was £216,000 and the cost of training was £14,000. What were the other items that were budgeted for in the £273,000?—Primarily the helicopters themselves and helicopter spares, tools and fuel.

Spares, tools and fuel would be included in that grant?—Yes.

90. Deputy Molloy.—What then is included in subhead L.—Petrol, Fuel Oils, etc.?

Chairman.—That is for mechanical transport?—That is general aviation spirit for aircraft and petrol for mechanical transport generally. The aviation spirit for the helicopters goes to the helicopter subhead.

The Deputy will find at page 260 of the Book of Estimates: purchase of helicopters £250,000; aviation spirit, £3,000; training courses, £20,000. That makes up the £273,000.

Deputy Crowley.—But the total cost of the three helicopters was only £216,000.

Chairman.—They were cheaper than the estimate.

91. On subhead CC.—Lands—the Note says that the saving is due to the fact that the purchase of certain sites was not proceeded with. For what purpose do you seek these sites?—Some were for FCA halls. Other sites that were in view for An Cór Breathnadóirí were not purchased.

92. Are you disposing of surplus property or has the position become stable?—Occasionally there are disposals.

I take it there is a regular review of these properties in order to ensure that none are held surplus to requirements?—Yes, that is so.

93. Deputy Healy.—In pursuance of that, was there any property sold since last year, the year under review?

Mr. Suttle.—On page 140, item No. 2 of the Appropriations in Aid refers to the sale of surplus land.

Deputy Crowley.—What was the estimated value of the surplus land and what was realised?

Chairman.—The Deputy will see that at the end of the Appropriations in Aid there is a note in relation to items 1-4, 6-7, 9-14: “It was not possible to forecast with a greater degree of accuracy the receipts under these headings.”

94. Deputy Healy.—If the revenue from land and premises at item 1 of the Appropriations is estimated at £19,000 and £23,000 is realised, then you go to sell land and the estimate is £3,000 but you get only £800, would it not be better to keep it and do as well as we did in item 1?—I think the explanation is that all the payments for land sold were not received in the year or, in respect of some of it, we got only deposits.

Deputy Crowley.—Your realisation could be over what is estimated?—It could possibly be, yes.

95. Deputy Healy.—But have we any firm figures as to any balance owing to us?

Mr. Suttle.—That will come in next year.

Deputy Healy.—I think it should go in so that we might have a proper picture. I should certainly like to know that there was £700 paid by way of instalment and that there was another £2,000 due and recoverable.

Mr. Suttle.—It is a basic system of accounting that you deal purely with cash receipts and payments. You do not work on the basis of outstanding commitments or outstanding debts. It is left to me to ensure that any money that is due is collected.

Deputy Crowley.—Could we have from the Department an explanation of what is outstanding?—Yes.

Chairman.—Perhaps it would facilitate Deputy Healy and the Committee if you were to send a note*?—Yes, certainly.

Deputy Healy.—Just to give us an idea of the situation because, while I can quite understand that we do not spend all we get, it does come into the budget next year, and we pay it, but what is owing to us is not so easily understood. I should certainly like to know what we have realised on sales of stores or any other equipment we may have.

96. Chairman.—We come now to the Appropriations in Aid. We have dealt with some of them already. With regard to item 5.—Sale of supplies on repayment—how are the charges calculated? Do you cover handling costs?—That would be mainly foodstuffs issued on repayment and charged at cost price to us and an overhead of 5 per cent.

It has nothing to do with the canteens, has it?—No. These would be issues from army stores as such.

Who are the customers in that case?— Messes mainly and I think in some instances issues are permitted on repayment to personnel.

97. Deputy Crowley.—With regard to item 7.—Receipts on discharge by purchase—does the same explanation prevail there as prevails in regard to the sale of surplus land in No. 2?—It is impossible to forecast how many will apply for discharge by purchase. It varies quite a lot from year to year.

98. Chairman.—In regard to item 8.— Refunds in respect of treatment and maintenance of patients in military hospitals—I think you have reached agreement now with local authorities in that matter?—Yes. Agreements have been reached and final arrangements are being made to adjust the accounts.

99. Deputy Molloy.—With regard to item No. 14.—Repayments of sums advanced to officers for purchase of motor cars—advances are given to officers for the purchase of motor cars?—Yes. Officers who require cars for the performance of their duties are facilitated by being given advances to enable them to purchase cars.

Are these interest free?—They are.

Chairman.—Is this tendancy on the increase? Are new classes of officers being catered for?—Yes, officers of the FCA and Slua Muirí whose duties take them around quite a lot. There are also other officers engaged in civil defence duties who require cars for the performance of their duties.

Deputy Molloy.—I take it they are paid an allowance in respect of expenses incurred in running these cars?—Yes. They are paid travelling allowances.

100. I should like an explanation of “Clothing, equipment, etc., issued from stores, £93,819,” covered by item 15—Miscellaneous. —That is for the outfitting of troops before they go on foreign service. They have to get uniforms and special issues of various kinds.

Do they pay for these?—The cost is recovered from the United Nations.

101. Chairman.—The Losses Statement appears on pages 141 and 142.

102. Under “Extra Remuneration” on page 142 it is stated in the third note:—“This Account includes the sum of £817 in respect of pay and allowances of two military officers seconded to Dublin Corporation on a grant-aided basis”. What duties do they perform?—They are helping the Corporation in civil defence. They are seconded to the local authority and they are working under the Dublin civil defence officer, assisting him.

103. Have you any estimate of the amount expended on the operations the army carried out during the blizzard of 1963?—I have not that figure.

104. On page 143, the fourth note from the bottom of the page says: “The account includes expenditure of £886 arising out of the inclusion of a civilian rider with the Army Equitation team which competed in the North American International Horse Shows.” Was it because there was not a suitable officer available?—Yes, we had committed ourselves to take part in these North American Shows, and when the time came we had not a suitable full military team to send, and consequently by arrangement with the National Equestrian Federation a civilian member was attached to the team.

105. Deputy Crowley.—The fifth last note on page 143 refers to an amount of £45 paid to a farmer in respect of the loss of two bullocks which took fright when a military jet plane passed over his land. That would not seem to be the value of the two bullocks? It seems a very small valuation?—I have not any details.

106. Chairman.—In regard to the Vote as a whole I notice that you are surrendering £823,997, which was nearly 9 per cent. of the Vote, and the average over the rest of the Votes is about 2½ per cent. Is there any particular reason for this?—As part of the budgetary arrangements we were required to save £350,000. The rest of it consists of various savings on subheads for a variety of reasons that could not have been foreseen when the estimate was being prepared.

The only thing that struck me about it is that it is much higher in comparison with the general surrender on the other Votes.

VOTE 46—ARMY PENSIONS.

Mr. S. Ó Cearnaigh further examined.

107. Chairman.—On subhead N. Special Compensation—United Nations Force in the Congo—about how many people are affected? —About six.

And the dependants of the Congo personnel, are they entitled to pensions at the normal rate?—Yes, but as well as that they get special gratuities.

108. I notice in the note at the end of the page dealing with the subhead it states, that the balance will be the subject of a further claim on the United Nations. Has that actually been received?—Yes.

Do the United Nations recoup the pensions paid as a result of death or disability in the Congo?—Yes.

109. Deputy Molloy.—Could I go back to the note on subhead J.—Connaught Rangers (Pensions) Acts, 1936 to 1962—which says: “Two pensioners are not being paid owing to their addresses not being known.” Could we have the names of those two pensioners?—I have not the names.

Chairman; I think the Deputy might ask the Minister. If there are no other questions that concludes those two Votes. We are very much obliged to you, Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.

The witness withdrew.

The Committee adjourned.

* See Appendix IV.

* See Appendix V.

* See Appendix VI.