Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1967 > Committee of Public Accounts > Report - Appropriation Accounts 1965 - 1966

MIONTUAIRISC NA FIANAISE

(Minutes of Evidence)

Déardaoin 9 Feabhra 1967

Thursday 9th February 1967

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. F. Harman (An Roinn Airgeadais) called and examined.

GENERAL REPORT.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called and examined.

1. Chairman.—We start this morning with the General Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General which is contained in paragraphs 1 to 8. 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

Outturn of the Year. (Adjusted to the nearest £)

1. The audited accounts are summarised on page xxix. The amount to be surrendered as shown in the summary is £4,414,111 arrived at as follows:—

This represents 1.9 per cent. of the supply grants as compared with 2.6 per cent. in the previous year.

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

Mr. Suttle.—I have nothing to add to the information in the general paragraphs.

2. Chairman.—Paragraph 2 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Exchequer Extra Receipts

2. Extra receipts payable to the Exchequer as recorded in the Appropriation Accounts amounted to £1,921,659.”

Mr. Suttle.—I have nothing to add to it.

3. Chairman.—Paragraph 3 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Surrender of Balances on 1964-65 Votes

3. The balances due to be surrendered out of the votes for the public services for 1964-65 amounted to £5,550,484. I hereby certify that these balances have been duly surrendered.”

Mr. Suttle.—I have nothing to add to it.

4. Chairman.—Paragraph 4 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Suspense Accounts

4. Suspense Accounts are normally used for recording payments or receipts which will later be recovered or paid out and will not become charges or credits to an appropriation account. It is also the practice to put temporarily to a suspense account items which need further investigation before a final allocation can be made.

Reference is made in paragraphs 16, 50, 68, 72 and 73 of this report to instances where correct accounting procedures have not been complied with. The various questions raised in these paragraphs emphasise the importance of having suspense accounts subjected to regular and frequent review so that the accounts may reflect the sums actually paid or received during the year and the amount of the unspent balance available for surrender to the Exchequer.”

Mr. Suttle.—This is a general question that has cropped up on a number of accounts this year. I think it would be just as well if the Committee would leave over the reviewing of this position and deal with the separate paragraphs referred to here.

5. Chairman.—Paragraph 5 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Stock and Store Accounts

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

Mr. Suttle.—I have nothing to add to it.

6. Chairman.—Paragraph 6 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“National Development Fund (Winding up) Account

6. As indicated in paragraph 6 of the previous report the balance in the Winding up Account at 31 March, 1965 was £421,630. Issues to agent departments in the year amounted to £53,448, viz.:—

Statements are appended to the accounts of the relevant votes indicating the expenditure incurred on various projects during the year under review. The total expenditure on these projects since the establishment of the Fund to 31 March, 1966 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, 1966 was £368,020.”

Mr. Suttle.—I have nothing to add to that. It should finish this year.

Mr. Whitaker.—The National Development Fund will be wound up on 31st March this year.

7. Chairman.—Paragraph 7 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“7.—Statement of Receipts into and Issues out of The Central Fund for the Year ended 31 March, 1966

Repayments in respect of Issues under the following Acts:—

Money raised by creation of debt:—

Issues under the following Acts:—

Issues for the redemption of public debt:—

Mr. Suttle.—I have nothing to add to it.

8. Chairman.—Paragraph 8 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“8. In addition to the issues shown in the previous paragraph the following advances were made from the Capital Fund:—

Mr. Suttle.—That is information supplementary to the information in Paragraph 7.

9. Chairman.—Now let us turn to the Votes themselves.

VOTE 1—PRESIDENT’S ESTABLISHMENT.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

No question.

VOTE 2—HOUSES OF THE OIREACHTAS.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

No question.

VOTE 3—DEPARTMENT OF THE TAOISEACH.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

No question.

VOTE 4—CENTRAL STATISTICS OFFICE.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

No question.

VOTE 6—OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR FINANCE.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

10. Chairman.—On subhead H.1—Grants to County Development Teams—can you tell us how many county development teams there are?

Mr. Whitaker.—There is a team for each of the counties of the West and the so-called less-developed areas—I think 12 in all.

Are there any results of the operations by these teams yet?—They have been in operation only a short time. I know they have produced reports but they are not published yet. They have been concerned with some development projects.

Do they furnish any interim reports?— They furnish periodic progress reports. Whether or not these will be published, I could not say.

Does each one of these teams work independently?—They work independently, subject to co-ordination which the Department of Finance exercises through a senior officer of the Department being the chairman of the Central Development Committee.

Deputy Kenny.—Is it proposed to abolish these teams when the reports are in?—No. They are intended to have a continuing function. They exist to bring together more effectively the operations of all the Government agencies in a particular county and I think it is envisaged that they will continue for quite a long time to come.

They are permanent, then?—Yes, quasi permanent.

VOTE 10—STATE LABORATORY.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

11. Chairman.—In regard to the Appropriations in Aid, Mr. Whitaker, receipts for various analyses, examinations, tests, etc. show quite a substantial increase?—The explanation is that, although the charges did not go up, the 1965-66 figures include about £700 for work done in the previous year. This has swollen the figure abnormally.

Are the charges based on the full recovery of the actual costs?—Yes; that is the theory of it anyway.

VOTE 11—CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

12. Chairman.—I notice in regard to subhead B.—Travelling and Incidental Expenses —that the excess is due to an unexpected increase in the number of Interview Board sittings. Is there any special significance in that?—The total number of candidates coming forward for examinations showed a very big increase—nearly 3,000 in fact in that year. It was necessary to arrange 282 days of Interview Board sittings as against 250 in the previous year.

VOTE 12—AN CHOMHAIRLE EALAÍON.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

No question.

VOTE 13—SUPERANNUATION AND RETIRED ALLOWANCES.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

13. Chairman.—In regard to subhead E. —Gratuities in respect of unestablished Officers and other non-pensionable persons —the grant was £39,000 and the expenditure was £55,980. Was there any reason for the substantial increase in the payments?— Simply this, that it is very difficult to estimate the number of retirements because these officers can retire at any time between the ages of 60 and 75, and then, of course, deaths in service can vary although over a long time they should be fairly regular statistically.

Were there any new classes brought in? —I do not think there was any substantial addition to the classes.

VOTE 14—SECRET SERVICE.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

14. Deputy Healy.—I would not expect an answer but I assume that there are fewer numbers in the Secret Service since there is less money spent on it.

Chairman.—“No comment” is the traditional way in which the Vote is dealt with.

VOTE 15—AGRICULTURAL GRANTS.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

No question.

VOTE 16—LAW CHARGES.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

No question.

VOTE 17—MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

15. Chairman.—Paragraph 27 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Subhead A.1.—The National Theatre Society, Limited.

Subhead F.—Cork Opera House Company, Limited.

27. Under the Funds of Suitors Act, 1959 a sum of £250,000, the estimated cost of rebuilding the Abbey Theatre, Dublin. was made available through the Capital Fund and under the Funds of Suitors Act, 1963, a sum of £50,000 was similarly made available towards the cost, estimated at £200,000, of rebuilding the Cork Opera House. When it became clear that the Abbey project would cost some £650,000 and the Cork Opera House £235,000 it was decided to allot further sums of £415,000 and £35,000 respectively, from suitors’ funds. Pending enactment of the necessary legislation moneys were provided under the above subheads to enable the works to continue. The amounts paid, £184,647 and £11,515, will, in accordance with section 2 of the Funds of Suitors Act, 1966, be repaid to the Exchequer from the Capital Fund.”

Have you anything to add, Mr. Suttle, to the information contained in that paragraph?

Mr. Suttle.—No. That paragraph is for the information of the Committee. The legislation passed through the Dáil to provide the moneys out of the Funds of Suitors.

16. Chairman.—Mr. Whitaker, it is difficult to understand how works that are initially estimated to cost £250,000, in the case of the Abbey, eventually cost £650,000. Was this estimate first prepared by the National Theatre Society or was the Office of Public Works consulted in the preparation of the estimate?—It was primarily the responsibility of the National Theatre Society but, of course, there was some consultation with the Office of Public Works. I agree that it is very difficult to understand, but it is happening, not only in these outside cases, but even in Office of Public Works cases proper. It is mainly due to escalation of costs but there also seems to me to be a tendency to underestimate originally the ultimate cost of buildings. It is a fairly widespread tendency.

In this case, there is an increase of £400,000 on an estimate of £250,000 originally. You would not have any information as to whether that was due to increased costings?—I would not. I think it would be wrong to attribute it entirely to that. I do not know all the reasons but I know that difficulties on the site were experienced which had not been foreseen— the intrusion of water from the river and so on. These probably caused delay and added to the cost of the building.

Has the final cost been determined at this figure?—Virtually, yes.

17. Deputy Healy.—Was there any fundamental change in the plan or the equipment of the theatre from the time the original cost was estimated and when it was completed?—There was no fundamental change but some improvements were introduced. I would rather answer the question formally by a note, if you wish.

Deputy Healy.—I would very much like to get a note on that because I had some experience of Cork Opera House and the way the cost was raised and the reason for it. It was not at all in proportion to this. As you suggest by your questions, Mr. Chairman, this was rather unusual, to say the least of it—an unusually steep rise on the estimate—and I should like Mr. Whitaker to give us a note on it.*

18. Chairman.—With regard to subhead D—The Irish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (Grant-in-Aid)—I presume the audited accounts are made available to you?—Yes.

19. With regard to subhead E—Commemoration of Easter Rising, 1916—is that the total cost?—No. It is merely part of the cost. The total provision in the Vote for the current year is £118,750, which has to be added to the figure for 1965-66. That means that the total expenditure from this particular subhead for the two years would amount to about £165,000.

VOTE 50—INCREASES IN PENSIONS.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

No question.

VOTE 51—REMUNERATION.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker called.

No question.

Contingency Fund Deposit Account.

Mr. T. K. Whitaker further examined.

20. Chairman.—Paragraph 82 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Contingency Fund

82. A vote for Repayment to the Contingency Fund was not necessary as the advance from the Fund was made good within the year by a vote of the Oireachtas.”

The Contingency Fund is finished with?—No.

No Vote is necessary?—No Vote was necessary for it in 1965-66.

21. The Finance minute on the last Report—when may we expect that?—I was inquiring about it and it will be sent to the Committee before the end of this month.

We would like to have it so that the Committee could deal with it, as we are rising on the 16th March.—We will do our best to have it as soon as possible.

Chairman.—We are much obliged, Mr. Whitaker.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 48—HEALTH.

Mr. P. S. Ó Muireadhaigh called and examined.

22. Chairman.—Paragraph 81 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Subhead OO.—Fluoridation of Public Water Supplies

81. The Health (Fluoridation of Water Supplies) Act, 1960 provides that health authorities should arrange for the fluoridation of piped public water supplies and empowers the Minister for Health to fix dates and make regulations in respect of the treatment of particular supplies. Provision of £30,000 was made by supplementary estimate towards recoupment of half the capital costs incurred by health authorities in implementing the Act, and the charge of £9,129 to the subhead represents recoupment to four authorities.”

Have you any idea how long this fluoridation will take?—By the end of next year practically every major water supply in the country will have been fluoridated. The exceptions will be those in which a new supply is being brought in and it would be wasteful to instal equipment for the existing supply.

23. Will this fluoridation apply to what we call group water schemes?—No, only public piped water supplies.

Even where these would be eventually taken over by the health authority, the county council authority?—I am not familiar with the scope of these schemes but if they were supplying only a small number of households, it would not be economically practicable to fluoridate.

In my own constituency, I can think of one which is pretty large, catering for three schools and a large number of households as well and costing up to a couple of thousand pounds?—When it is taken over, the practicability of introducing the scheme would be considered.

24. Deputy Healy.—Are there any authorities who are not participating or are they all in it?—It is mandatory on the local authority when the Minister makes the order and they are all working on it. Progress has not been as fast as we anticipated because there is delay in getting equipment.

That has to be got outside?—Yes. There are only a few firms which supply it.

25. Chairman.—On subhead G—Grants to Health Authorities—the members have been furnished with an account of the expenditure by the health authorities.* I wonder —we only got this information within the past couple of days—would it be possible that this could be made available to the Committee for study purposes ahead of the date?—Certainly; we will see to that in future.

26. What is the present position with regard to the audit of the health grants?— The position is slightly better than it was when I was last before the Committee eight months ago. There are 27 health authorities and all accounts are audited up to and including 1962-63, and all except one are audited for 1963-64. In respect of 1964-65, all but five have been audited, and of these five, two are with the auditors. Seven accounts in respect of 1965-66 have been audited and three others are with the auditors. In the case of the joint authorities, the joint mental hospital authorities and Western Health Institution Boards, a total of eight, the position is much the same. All accounts are audited up to and including 1962-63 and seven of the eight were audited in respect of 1963-64. Five of the eight are audited in respect of 1964-65 and one is with the auditor. The audit of 1965-66 accounts is completed in respect of four of the eight and one of the remaining four is with the auditor.

27. That is satisfactory. On what basis do you control the issue of grants?—In the year of account, 95 per cent of the estimated expenditure is paid to the health authority. That is based on the figures supplied to us by the health authority, as adjusted where the Department thinks proper. In the following year, by which time the accounts of the previous year will have been prepared but not audited we bring the total grants payment up to 99½ per cent. We hold back the half per cent until the audit is completed. Incidentally, for the year we are dealing with now, the audit has been completed within the current year for two of the 27 health authorities and before the end of the year the full adjustment will have been made— the 4½ per cent plus the balance.

28. I understand the payment is on the basis of 50 per cent of the cost. Does all expenditure by health authorities qualify for this 50 per cent?—All approved net health expenditure—certain items are excluded. Capital items and, up to this, loan charges have not counted for grant. In the current year, the position is somewhat different because different arrangements have been made. These will be the subject of a Supplementary Estimate which will be taken in the next fortnight or so.

29. Deputy Treacy.—Could we have some elaboration as to the capital expenditure not taken into account for grants?—For instance, if a health authority has five ambulances and decides to buy a sixth, the cost of the sixth is not regarded as revenue expenditure. It is regarded as capital. But if a health authority has five ambulances and replaces one, the replacement cost is taken into account as revenue expenditure. If a health authority does a major job on a district hospital and there is a grant from the Hospitals Trust Fund of 50 per cent the health authority has to find the remaining 50 per cent, which it borrows, usually from the Local Loans Fund, and the loan charges on that borrowing are not taken into account for purposes of the health grant.

30. I take it that maintenance, repair and reconstruction are taken into account?— All normal maintenance is; but if, for instance, there is a piece of equipment in a hospital and it is replaced by something costing five or six times the cost of the original, the whole of that cost would not be taken into account as revenue expenditure because the new item would not be regarded as replacement but as new equipment. In general, however, the position is that any replacement, even by a slightly better article, is taken into account.

31. Deputy Hogan.—The figure for the local authorities is fixed at what it was a couple of years ago—any additional expenditure over 1965?—Up to and including 1965-66, there was no question of a freeze on the amount to be met from rates, which is what the Deputy is talking about, but the current year is different because of the special provision.

The current year is frozen?—The amount to be met from rates, apart from debit or credit balances, is frozen at the 1965-66 level.

32. Chairman.—According to this table of net health expenditure, the rehabilitation cost is higher. One of the things I notice is that rehabilitation services, including allowances to disabled persons, are £220,000 in Cork as against £162,000 in Dublin. Generally services in Dublin run at more than twice the Cork level. Is there some explanation for this departure?—I should explain that the lion’s share of the expenditure under this head is for allowances to disabled persons. I am afraid that the only explanation I can offer at the moment is that the Cork Health Authority are far more generous than the Dublin Health Authority.

33. Deputy Healy.—I think it is fair to say that to my mind they are very much more advanced in Cork, where the rehabilitation of disabled mentally and physically handicapped persons is concerned, especially having regard to the ratio of population. There are three organisations in Cork. There is the Cork Polio and After-Care Association and they are building schools and clinics. They have acquired a tremendous amount of property at Montenotte. Then, again, the Spastic Council have a very active branch down there and there is the Rehabilitation Institution. All of these are demanding and getting support from the health authority. From my experience, they contribute at least as much as they get in voluntary effort.

Chairman.—Maybe it would be more satisfactory if the witness would send a note to the Committee, at his convenience? —I shall do that, Mr. Chairman.*

34. I notice, with regard to the general medical services, that the expenditure for Donegal, for instance, is considerably up on that for the previous year. There is an increase of almost 60 per cent on that of the previous year in the expenditure. What is the explanation?—That is attributed, in part, to the general increase in the cost of medicines which was rather higher proportionately in County Donegal than in other counties. The major factor, however. is that Donegal did not pay the arrears of the status award to dispensary doctors until the year we are now dealing with whereas in most other counties, the arrears were paid in the previous year. There were two other health authority areas, Laois and Longford. in which the adjustment was not made until the year with which we are now dealing. The arrears, as the Committee knows, were pretty substantial. They went back over a considerable period.

35. Deputy Briscoe.—You mentioned the cost of drugs being higher in Donegal than in other counties. Is there an explanation for that?—I said the cost of drugs went up proportionately more in Donegal than in other counties.

36. Why would that be?—I am afraid there is no satisfactory explanation of this enormous rise in the cost of drugs all over the country except that of the use of newer and more expensive drugs. The older dispensary doctor tended to keep to the older, less sophisticated and cheaper remedies. But the younger doctors tend to go in for the more sophisticated modern drugs which cost more.

So it is not a case, then, of the same drugs costing more in Donegal: it is just a choice of drugs?—It is the choice which the doctor exercises in relation to the drugs he will use.

Chairman.—It is the expenditure on them rather than the cost of the drugs?—Yes.

Deputy Briscoe.—I see; thank you.

37. Chairman.—With regard to Hospitals and Homes for the Chronic Sick, Mentally Handicapped, etc. again, Cork is very far ahead, I am sure, of the rest of us in that regard. There is an increase there of approximately 75 per cent. The usual rate of increase seems to be about 20 per cent. What is the position?—The Cork Polio and After-care Association has expanded its activities and has opened new homes or extended its existing homes in Cork. A lot of the patients who go into these homes go in on a five-day basis, so they must be Cork people. Other homes take a fair proportion of their patients from areas outside the health authority area in which they are situated. Thus the cost of maintaining patients in the recent extensions to accommodation in Cork tended to be borne practically entirely by the Cork Health Authority and was not spread around among the adjoining counties as well.

38. Deputy Molloy.—Could we be given any idea of the amount of wastage that occurs on drugs purchased but not used? This is something which we, as lay people, often hear about. What type of check is kept on this?—There cannot be a check on it because the doctor has not to keep a record of what he takes out of stocks. Where we have been advised that there has been wastage, and we have investigated it, we have not found that the complaint was substantiated.

39. Deputy Healy.—Was it the local manager of the health authority or a direction from the Department that was the cause of the issuing of a circular in the past 12 months to dispensary doctors about this very matter and about matters of economy?—At our request, most managers have done that and some brought in the doctors and pointed out that, consistent with service to the patient, they should keep down the cost of drugs.

Deputy Healy.—I want to make the point that I agree with Deputy Molloy that it is felt, to say the least of it, that there is a certain amount of wastage, that could be avoided, in drugs being kept unnecessarily. Nobody objects to the best possible care and treatment in drugs and medicines for patients who need them. However, if drugs are kept in a place which is not always suitable and are allowed to remain there sometimes for months or years then obviously there may be unsatisfactory results. That is the conclusion I drew from the circular of the Manager of the Cork Health Authority to the dispensary doctors and compounders in various dispensaries throughout the area. To my mind, that was very necessary.

Deputy Molloy.—Would the fact that a circular was sent out not seem to indicate that the Department themselves were rather anxious about wastage and felt there was a wastage?—We were anxious about the rising cost. We did not attribute it to wastage or anything else. There could be as great a wastage from unnecessary prescribing of expensive drugs as there would be from allowing them to go out of date.

40. Chairman.—Would the auditors have any comment to make on that, in their examination of the accounts?—I have never seen any comment from an auditor. I do not think he would be competent to go into it.

Mr. Suttle.—Does it not appear from the store accounts that drugs have been destroyed or gone past their life?—There is not an account kept in a dispensary of what drugs have been used or how they have been disposed of.

41. Have they not got central stores from which the dispensary is supplied?—In general, they are not supplied from central stores. For the most part they are despatched direct by the contractor to the dispensary doctor on his requisition.

Is it sufficient to meet demand?— Usually sufficient for three months.

42. Deputy Kenny.—What is the procedure for supplying the doctor with drugs? —The doctor fills out a requisition which he sends to the Health Authority. If it is a requisition on the main contract list, that is broadly an item in general use, and if the quantity requisitioned is reasonable, the Health Authority passes the requisition to the contractor. If the item required is of a more specialised nature the requisition is passed to the contractor approved for the supply of the drug concerned. Where it appears that a drug requisitioned is unusually elaborate and where an effective alternative is available the attention of the doctor is drawn to the fact. Usually the doctor would accept the alternative but it might transpire that special circumstances required the use of the drug originally sought. All dispensary doctors have been supplied with a booklet by the Department showing the names of proprietary articles and the names of their therapeutic equivalents—the general names of the therapeutic equivalents—which are normally much cheaper.

43. Deputy Treacy.—Has Mr. Ó Muireadhaigh or his Department given any thought to the idea of bulk buying of these supplies of drugs and medicines for our dispensary services?—The effect of the contract system is bulk buying but delivery in small amounts. A contract is entered into for the supply of the drugs required for the public service for the entire country and then orders are sent to the contractor by dispensary doctors and by hospitals and contractors are paid by the health authority at the contract price. It has the same effect as bulk buying.

44. Deputy Molloy.—From what has been said it does seem to be a fact that a certain percentage of the drugs that are requisitioned by doctors for local authorities are not in fact used for one reason or another, probably in most cases because they have gone out of date. It does seem surprising that no record is kept of the amount of these drugs which are not in fact actually used, which are dumped. Would it not be something that should be looked into, that we should be given some percentage for the amount of drugs not actually used?

45. Deputy Healy.—Arising out of Deputy Molloy’s question, I think it is rather disquieting—without any reflection whatever on the medical profession—that no question is asked as to what medicines or drugs are given to the doctor and neither is there any check on where he keeps them or how they are kept. Is it possible for a local government official, a layman, to have access to these drugs with or without the doctor’s permission or knowledge? I think this is tremendously important. Outside the matter of cost altogether, it is a very important thing. I must say that I have heard rather disquieting rumours about it in public and I would like to know what check, if any, is kept on these things?—It would be quite impracticable to expect a doctor, a busy dispensary doctor, for instance, to keep a record of the amounts issued by him in small quantities from about seventy or eighty different items which he keeps in stock. I do not think you could impose that on him. You have to take a certain amount on trust.

46. Deputy Hogan.—As you are on the question of economy in regard to drugs, have you ever considered the question of the production of a national formulary?— That has been considered on a number of occasions but, as the Deputy would know better than I would, the advantage of having a national formulary depends very much on the cooperation of the individual doctor. Even if we had a national formulary and told doctors that in general they should prescribe in accordance with it, if a doctor decides that the interests of the patient require the use of a proprietary product, even though the Department believed it to be no better therapeutically than the equivalent item in the national formulary, it would be difficult to question the doctor’s judgment in the matter.

Deputy Hogan.—I appreciate that. It is used in other countries and I think it does effect a saving. There are a number of things that would be prescribed from outside without any question arising.

Mr. Suttle.—That difficulty arose in England. They found it practically impossible to get doctors to use the formulary product as against the proprietary.

Deputy Hogan.—Ninety-five per cent of prescriptions were issued by formulary.

47. Deputy Briscoe.—I should like to ask what is the actual bill each year to the Department of Health for drugs.

Mr. Ó Muireadhaigh.—The bill to health authorities was——

Deputy Briscoe.—For drugs and medicines.

Mr. Ó Muireadhaigh.—£1,880,000 in the year that we are dealing with.

Deputy Briscoe.—In other words, when the Department of Health has any query on a particular county sending in a very large bill for drugs, the only people you can query this with is not the hospital but the local health authority and you have to accept their word. Is that the procedure under which you are working?— We have a pharmacist in the Department whom we sometimes send out and we have medical inspectors, unfortunately, the complement is much below strength. When a medical inspector visits a dispensary doctor, he looks at his stocks but he cannot conduct an audit of the stocks because he does not know how much the doctor has used. He knows, from the duplicates of the requisitions kept in the dispensary, how much has been ordered but does not know how much of that has been issued to patients but he will look to see if, at the back of shelves, there is a quantity of some product which is going out of date.

48. Deputy Briscoe.—Is it your impression that because of lack of staff in your Department there is a lot of waste going on which you would be able to control if you had more staff?—There is a possibility that if we could resume regular inspections of dispensaries doctors would be more careful.

49. Deputy Hogan.—Would it not be possible to send a circular to all dispensary doctors who have a small turnover of drugs and who may have antibiotics that are likely to go out of date, saying: “If you have any antibiotics that are likely to go out of date shortly, could you forward these to the local central hospital where there would be a much larger turnover of these drugs and we will replace them by having supplied to you new antibiotics which will not go out of date for some time”?—That has been done on a number of occasions. I remember that, some years ago, we employed the hospital pharmacist in Roscommon to visit dispensaries and to take into hospital stocks anything which was surplus to requirements.

Deputy Hogan.—That is all you can do.

Mr. Ó Muireadhaigh.—My recollection is that the saving which resulted hardly justified the expense of employing and sending out a pharmacist to do it.

50. Deputy Tracey.—To what extent is this rather steep increase in drugs and medicines attributable to granting free drugs and medicines to persons other than those who have medical cards, which has been operating for some two or three years now in respect of people who are deemed to be eligible by health authorities for this facility on the basis of its being a hardship on them to provide drugs and medicines for a member of the family?—The amount involved in that has gone up but it does not account for all of the increase. I should perhaps mention that it is believed that dispensary doctors visiting their private patients who are on the borderline for a medical card will, if an expensive drug is required, issue it from dispensary stocks as if the patient had a medical card. In other words, in such cases the dispensary doctor uses his own discretion as to who would be a hardship case without causing the person to make application to the health authority.

51. Even though the drugs, in this instance, may be purchased from a private chemist, is the cost not borne by the local health authority and should it not be reflected in these figures?—A hardship case does reflect itself. It is included here in General Medical Services.

52. Could the witness place a percentage on the amount involved under the free drugs and medicines scheme?—I am sorry I have not the figure here for the amount reported to us by health authorities as having been given to hardship cases but I can get the figure and pass it on to the Committee.*

53. Deputy Healy.—I do not think the query I raised has been answered about the availability of medicines and drugs to lay people connected with the health authority.

Chairman.—I am inclined to think myself that on the matter of the control of drugs, as such, as against, say, the storing of controlled drugs, we are passing the line with which this Committee could deal: the control as against the store control. The question the Deputy raised is wider. The store control concerns somebody getting at drugs in an unauthorised fashion.

Deputy Healy.—Maybe the Chairman is right. It is a rather borderline case. Has the doctor any assistant in his dispensary who could give drugs or medicines to one of the lay officers of a health authority?

54. Chairman.—I appreciate that it is a very important question. It is a matter that could be raised on the Estimate for the Department of Health. It does not come under the Accounts. We could not expect Mr. Ó Muireadhaigh to deal with it.

Deputy Healy.—I was wondering if it was a matter for local supervision rather than supervision by the Department. I thought it might be a matter for the Department, as in the case of the circular to the managers of health authorities, to send out a warning that this might be happening.

Chairman.—It would be very advisable to raise that matter on the debate on the Estimate for the Department of Health. The attention of the Minister could be drawn to it at that stage.

Deputy Briscoe.—As no real record is kept of the drugs issued, this seems to be wide open for what Deputy Healy suggested could happen where a pharmacist within a hospital or his assistant could quite easily have access to these drugs. It seems to me, anyway, that there may be a lack of control over the purchase of drugs in these hospitals which eventually is costing the taxpayer money.

55. Chairman.—I am not disputing that this may happen but I am saying at this stage that this question is wider than just a question of accounting procedures in so far as the Accounting Officer here is concerned and is something that we members of the Dáil could pursue in the Dáil itself. We are here asking an official, at this stage, to deal with it and to give an answer to a question which is not one of his problems at all.

56. Mr. Suttle.—Is it not the case that the store accounts of medicines are operated in hospitals?

Mr. Ó Muireadhaigh.—I am afraid I could not say offhand whether a store account is kept of issues in hospitals.

Mr. Suttle.—But there is control of the stock of medicines. There would not be control, I agree, of issues to wards but there would be control of the central stock in the hospital purchases and dispensing to wards.

Mr. Ó Muireadhaigh.—I do not think there is the kind of audit which shows that such and such items were purchased, such and such was issued and consequently that there should be so much remaining and that it is checked that these amounts are remaining. I do not think that this would be practicable having regard to the multiplicity of items and of small transactions.

57. Mr. Suttle.—Store accounts of that nature are already in military hospitals. I know for certain in respect of all drugs and medicines purchased for the hospital that while they are maintained in the hospital there are store records. The issues to the wards authorised are recorded and you can check the balance of stock in the central store of the hospital. That definitely takes place in military hospitals.

Mr. Ó Muireadhaigh.—I do not think that this applies to local authority hospitals.

58. Chairman.—I think, if the members would agree on this, that the best thing to do would be, when the members themselves come to deal with the Vote, to refer to the matter at that stage. At the moment, it would be hardly fair to the Accounting Officer to expect him to deal with it.

Mr. Ó Muireadhaigh.—In the Dublin and Limerick health authority areas, the health authority operate a central pharmacy and, in lieu of the dispensary doctor’s or the small hospital’s sending requisitions to the contractor, the central depot in each of these areas places the order with the contractor and then issues supplies from that depot to the individual dispensaries and hospitals. In that way, the pharmacist in the central depot exercises some control on the amount of stock which is held in each dispensary and hospitals.

Deputy Healy.—That is a step in the right direction.

Mr. Ó Muireadhaigh.—A system like that would hardly be feasible in a small county because the cost of maintaining a depot in the county might be considerably higher than the saving which would result. Under regionalisation it could be a different proposition but if there is a choice of doctor and chemist a new situation would arise.

59. Chairman.—Before leaving the table of expenditure of health authorities—again it concerns Cork—the figure for tuberculosis hospitals in Cork shows an increase, though not very large, while there is a decrease in the others. Is there any particular reason for that?—There is an increase of 9.3 per cent for Cork, 27.4 per cent for Kilkenny, 8.8 per cent for Louth, 5.6 per cent for Mayo, 11.2 per cent for Monaghan and 18.9 per cent for Tipperary South. The average all over the country was a decrease of 1.3 per cent compared with an increase of 9.3 per cent in Cork. I am afraid I have not an explanation of that.

Deputy Briscoe.—Would it be asking too much if we were to ask that next year when we get these reports, we could be given also the increase or decrease figures in relation to the previous year? It would help us very much in assessing the level?—We can do that very easily.

60. Chairman.—I am sure the members would appreciate that. Taking now the particulars of expenditure on medicines, with which we have been supplied* Kerry Mental Hospital appears to run at a higher level than others. Dublin and Cork are the only other two counties which are higher, in the main?—The system for the supply of the psychiatric medicines varies as between one health authority area and another. A very high percentage of mental patients are dealt with as outpatients in some areas; in other areas the percentage would be far lower. Then the manner in which psychiatric drugs are issued varies from one health authority area to another. In some cases the psychiatrist who goes to the out-patient clinic gives merely a minimum supply of drugs to the patient and refers him to the dispensary doctor for the remainder of what he needs. In other cases the person conducting the out-patient clinic supplies the drugs from the mental hospital stocks so that in one case the incidence of charge falls on the mental hospital and in the other on the general medical services. It is difficult to make a comparison between one health authority and another.

61. The figure for Waterford institutions other than mental hospitals has increased sharply from 16.8 thousand pounds last year to 29.1 thousand pounds on this occasion?—Drugs and medicines?

Yes—expenditure on medicines as shown on the table supplied last year?—I will look into that and send the Committee a note on it.*

62. Perhaps we could be supplied with the statement on minor receipts in advance next year also?—We will arrange to have it supplied in advance.†

63. Deputy Treacy.—May we take it that any increased expenditure by health authorities over and above the 1965-66 figure will qualify for grants from the Department? Is it completely frozen?—Any increase in the current year over the level of expenditure last year will be met in full from the Exchequer and will not fall on the rates, but that applies to this year, the current year, only.

When you say “the current year”, you mean 1966?—1966-67, the year ending 31st of next month. A Supplementary Estimate will be introduced in the next couple of days to meet the additional liability involved in that.

64. Deputy Hogan.—Will we know what will happen in 1967-68 before we come to deal with the estimates?—A statement was issued last Friday on that and every local authority has been notified of the amount of health grant which will be paid next year. That notification went out on Friday also.

Deputy Healy.—This is to help them frame their estimates, I presume.

65. Deputy Treacy.—Would Mr. Ó Muireadhaigh be free to say if there is any departure from the present arrangement in that circular?—The short answer, Mr. Chairman, is yes.

66. Deputy Briscoe.—On subhead K.— Hospitals Trust Fund (Grant-in-Aid)—this is a grant given to the Hospitals Trust Fund of £400,000?—Yes.

I thought it was the other way around, that the Hospitals Trust Fund gave grants? —This is a grant from the Exchequer to the Trust Fund in consideration of the fact that the Fund is bearing a large proportion of the revenue expenditure of the voluntary hospitals and so keeping down the capitation rates payable by health authorities for Health Act patients.

67. What percentage do the Hospitals Trust Fund give?—To the voluntary hospitals?

Yes?—In respect of revenue expenditure the figure is running at over £2 million a year.

Percentagewise?—I am afraid I have not the accounts here by me.

68. Deputy Andrews.—On subhead L.— Dissemination of Information on Health and Health Services—what form does this expenditure take?—Last year, the figure was made up as follows: Expenses of film shows £5,300. We have a contract with the National Film Institute for the showing of health films, particularly health films appropriate to children in national schools throughout the country. Last year they gave a total of over 1,000 shows. We spent nearly £2,000 on television advertising. All that was in connection with the oral vaccine for polio campaign. I should explain that last year we went over from injections to oral vaccine and, incidentally, the Committee might be interested to know that about 77 per cent of the numbers who were in the eligible group (that is, everyone from six months to 19 years) took the full course; 84 per cent took two feedings and 88 per cent took one feeding. That is regarded as fairly satisfactory having regard to the difficulty in getting people to do anything for themselves. The printing of leaflets cost £347. We have a supply of about eight or ten leaflets on common ailments like measles, whooping cough, diphtheria, smoking, accidents in the home. These are circulated widely to appropriate members of the public.

£347 seems very little in the context that you say these were circulated to the public? —We print large stocks at a time and expenditure in any year varies according to the stocks in hand.

69. How are these disseminated—through dispensaries or otherwise?—They are very largely sent to people in receipt of children’s allowances, in other words, to parents known to have children.

Deputy Healy.—We see them very often in post offices.

Deputy Andrews.—Are they circulated to post offices?—I do not think so but we have in the past circulated posters showing entitlement to health services for display in post offices. The leaflets are available in child welfare clinics and places like that.

70. Deputy Molloy.—Where the Department of Health sell property, where would what they realise from the sale be shown?

Chairman.—Is this distinct from the health authority selling property?

Deputy Molloy.—Take a hospital. Would that be the property of the Department?— No; it would be property of the health authority. If the Deputy is thinking of Merlyn Park, however, the position is that the site was the property of the Minister. Before it was handed over to the Western Health Institution’s Board, some portions were considered to be surplus to the requirements of the Board and these were disposed of by the Minister and the proceeds were credited to the Hospitals Trust Fund because the site was purchased and the place was built entirely at the expense of the Hospitals Trust Fund. The transaction would not appear in the Appropriation Account.

VOTE 49—CENTRAL MENTAL HOSPITAL.

Mr. P. S. Ó Muireadhaigh further examined.

71. Deputy Briscoe.—I would like to know how many patients there are in the Central Mental Hospital?—The average in the year we are talking about is 100. I understand that at the moment there are 106 patients there.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 38—ROINN NA GAELTACHTA.

Mr. L. Tóibín called and examined.

Chairman.—Mr. Tóibín has come here to assist us and I should like to take this opportunity to thank him for presenting us with his Department’s booklet, Roinn na Gaeltachta—Leabhrán Eolais, which was published last October.

72. Deputy Molloy.—Could we get a breakdown of the figures in each county, under subhead D.—Tithe Gaeltachta?—To the nearest £1,000 in each case—Donegal, £66,000; Mayo, £27,000; Galway, £94,000; Kerry, £26,000; Cork, £15,000; and Waterford, £3,000.

73. Deputy Andrews.—Does your Department deal with group water schemes?—Not usually; they are dealt with by the Department of Local Government.

I was thinking of a scheme that never got recognition, in Carraroe, Connemara, Co. Galway. What about that?—There is a local authority scheme for that area. A fairly big extension of the existing scheme was sanctioned quite recently by the Department of Local Government.

Are you referring to the group water scheme in Carraroe?

Deputy Molloy.—South Connemara.

Mr. Tóibín.—We give 25 per cent grant and the Department of Local Government give 60 per cent grant so that the local authority has to find only 15 per cent.

74. Deputy Molloy.—Last year, we expressed the opinion that sufficient use was not being made of the money available for improvement schemes in the Gaeltacht. I see again this year that less than what was granted was spent, to the extent of £80,000. Would Mr. Tóibín be able to give us any further explanation of this?—The principal explanation is that we had a provision of £50,000 in subhead E.—Scéimeanna Feabhsúcháin sa Ghaeltacht—for one scheme of marine works which did not get going at all. We were required to save that money. I think it is a scheme in which Deputy Molloy is particularly interested. We shall have £80,000 in next year’s Estimate for an extended scheme in the same place— Kilronan. On last year’s Vote as a whole we spent a few thousand pounds more than what was available to us because we were expected to save £50,000, and the actual saving was about £47,000.

75. Deputy Kenny.—Generally speaking, are the roads provided for mainly accommodation roads?—That is so but we had some county roads also in that year, particularly in Mayo where we gave grants for three or four, I think.

Only one. I thought that was the one the man went to jail about?—We had no connection whatever with that incident.

76. Chairman.—With regard to glasshouses, does the statement we have been supplied with* not show that the number of houses in Donegal and Connemara has decreased in the past few years?—Perhaps the first point to mention about the statement is that, in the case of Connemara, the houses described as “heated” are, strictly, houses in which heating equipment has been installed. They were not actually heated in that year. This helps to explain the extraordinary picture that the heated houses showed worse returns than the unheated houses. In Connemara they are all unheated. As far as the decline in number of houses used is concerned, a lot of these houses have been there for a long time and their effective life span is nearly ended. In fact, there has since been a further decline because a number of these old houses have recently been damaged by a storm.

77. —The Connemara yield is consistently lower than the Donegal yield. Why is that? —That is the position where heating equipment has been installed. The heated houses are more effective in Donegal.

Deputy Kenny.—Is there none functioning in Mayo?—None at the moment.

78. Chairman.—Tomatoes sold at 1/0½ a pound as against 1/6½ a pound for the Donegal tomatoes. Is there any particular reason for that?—The whole advantage of the heated houses is that the tomatoes can reach the market before the glut comes.

79. Deputy Molloy.—The table indicates that the figures for average net value of tomatoes per grower do not take into account the glasshouse maintenance expenses of growers or the cost of fuel provided by them for the heating system. What is the position?—As I understand it, the Department of Agriculture have compiled these averages from the figures available in their own records. They do not get figures from growers for the cost of fuel or as to how much maintenance of the houses may cost the growers. The cost of plants, fertilisers and other items supplied by the Department are figures which are available to them.

This is a gross figure, not a net figure? —Yes, in the sense that expenses directly incurred by the grower are not allowed for, but it is net in so far as expenses incurred through the Department are deducted.

80. —If the cost of fuel were taken into consideration, the profit would be very small?—That is why the heating is not used in some cases. Of course, where the heating is used effectively, the gross return is much higher.

81. —Is this an economic enterprise?— As in most activities the results range from excellent to poor. Some people get poor results while others in the same area get satisfactory results.

In Connemara, they say that it would cost more to heat the houses than what they would get out of them?—That is what they say.

82. Was it a mistake to put the glasshouses in Connemara?—It is difficult to be certain about that since the heating is not used. The Donegal figures for heated houses are much higher. All the horticultural advice nowadays is in favour of heating.

83. Maybe the size of the glasshouses was too small?—Rather than size, the problem seems to be the cost of turf and the amount of work that has to be put into keeping the fires going.

84. Chairman.—On the provision for agriculture in this subhead, could we have some information on the schemes involved in that?—The breakdown of the expenditure on agricultural schemes reveals that the biggest expense is on farm buildings, that is, approximately £20,000; that is where we give a 50 per cent supplementary grant in addition to the Department of Agriculture grant. The next biggest item is improvement of grassland plots; that is about £12,000. Then we give supplementary grants also under the Land Project and that accounts for almost £10,000. Apart from a few small payments, these schemes account for the whole expenditure. As a matter of interest—taking the schemes in the same order in that year— for the farm buildings, 1,253 supplementary grants were paid by the Department and, in the case of grassland improvement, over 3,000 acres were improved in about 1,100 cases. There were something over 1,000 cases involved under the land project where supplementary grants were paid by the Department.

85. Deputy Kenny.—Do the officers of the Gaeltacht supervise these schemes or the officers of the Department of Agriculture? —The Department of Agriculture. In the case of the supplementary grants, the original grant has been cleared by the Department of Agriculture and they are satisfied with the work at that stage.

86. Deputy Andrews.—With regard to the provision for secondary education, could you break down the figure of £13,590?— Nearly £10,000 was spent on one secondary school in Achill Sound in Co. Mayo.

Deputy Molloy.—Does that figure include transport of students?—No; that comes later under subhead F.3.

Deputy Andrews.—What about educational grants to students?—We are dealing now with subhead E. which provides for capital expenditure on schools.

87. Deputy Kenny.—Is this a new school in Achill Sound?—That is right. About £2,000 was spent on the improvement of the convent in Tourmakeady. There was also a building grant of £2,000 for the Christian Brothers school in Dingle. That accounts for virtually the whole of the expenditure.

88. Chairman.—Now that the Department of Education is contemplating giving grants for the building of secondary schools, will that affect yours?—I do not think so because we give higher grants; there will still be demand for ours. The Department of Education gives up to 60 per cent while we go up to 80 per cent, depending on the number of pupils qualifying for £10 grants.

89. Would you be giving supplementary grants to what Education give?—No, we would not. Where we give a grant, that would be the entire State grant. We would, of course, have close liaison with Education to ascertain their views on applications.

90. Deputy Molloy.—Under the heading “Coláistí Gaeilge”, I notice that £100 was all that was spent. Was this due to lack of applications?—We had a number of applications that did not come to maturity in that year and that £100 was just the residue of a grant to a college in Donegal. That is a problem, of course, with these schemes generally. At this time of year and earlier when framing estimates, we have a number of cases in the pipeline and how many may come to maturity in the next financial year is always a problem.

Chairman.—Do you expect each to be activated in the next year of account?— Yes, the expenditure is much higher this year.

91. In connection with the item, “Buildings and machinery for certain co-operative societies”, personally, I do not recall this scheme?—That is its first time in the Estimate. The scheme is described at page 23 of the booklet. There was just one grant in that year to a co-operative society. It was in Gleann Cholm Cille. It is the first instalment of a grant that we gave for buildings.

92. In connection with the grants-in-aid for various Irish language organisations under subhead G.—Eagrais Áirithe Gaeilge —you paid out the total amount?—Yes. The organisations are nearly all named on page 53 of the booklet. There you will see the names of most of the organisations with £1,900 at the end for “Eagrais eile”. Those not named are the Comhchaidreamh, made up of university groups, who got £500; Glór na nGael, that is, awards made to towns by Cumann na Sagart, also got £500 and the remaining £900 went to Gaedhealachas Teoranta, a group in Munster.

93. Deputy Andrews.—On subhead F.— Scéimeanna Cultúrtha agus Sóisialacha— how do you check? Have you somebody going around to people’s houses asking do they speak Irish?—The check is done by inspectors of the Department of Education Primary Branch, in the schools. They visit the houses occasionally also in case of doubt.

94. Where do they get the information? Is it from the children?—From the children. If one speaks Irish to Gaeltacht children, it is fairly easy to assess whether they are fluent or not. They can be asked questions which will show straightaway whether they have names for household things, whether Irish is used in the household.

How do you know by speaking to a person whether the normal home language is Irish?—In the Gaeltacht it is fairly easy to assess the natural fluency of a young child by asking certain questions. One can ask questions about matters that would arise at home and would not usually arise in the school.

You have wholetime inspectors?—No, the Department of Education inspectors do the check incidentally with their ordinary work.

Is it so much per child or per home?— £10 per child.

95. Deputy Molloy.—On grants to assist Gaeltacht students in attending certain training courses—is there any specific rule as to the type of training course for which they will get assistance from the Department to attend?—This scheme has recently been greatly widened. It is dealt with on page 35 of the booklet. In the past twelve months we have improved it quite a lot, increased the allowances and thrown it open to any type of training course that satisfied us; previously, it was purely for apprenticeships. Now it is also open to girls doing suitable training courses. There has recently been a slight improvement in the applications, not very spectacular. Taking that particular year, I can give you the figures. There were 21 cases in which grants were paid that year and the apprentices were mainly carpenters—16 carpenters, two electricians, one bricklayer and plasterer, one garage mechanic and one gas fitter. These are the types of apprenticeships being served.

96. Deputy Molloy.—Have the application forms for these grants been brought up to date in line with the changes?—Yes.

They mostly apply to students attending vocational schools?—That is true; the publicity is mainly through the vocational schools.

The draft of the application form suits pupils attending vocational schools. I have in mind a case where a boy applied to attend an electronics institute in Cork which did not seem to come under the scheme but the Department agreed to fit him in but the form did not cover the situation?— Previously, the situation was that all applications had to be certified by the vocational committees but the scheme is now wider than that. We can deal with an application ourselves without its going through a vocational committee if we are convinced that that is the right thing to do.

In the case I have in mind, certain confusion was caused by the fact that the CEO had to be contacted and this boy had no contact. He is living on an island?—He could have contacted us or our local stiúrthóir.

Deputy Molloy.—The application form does not meet the situation fully?—It probably does in more than 90 per cent of cases but we can look at it again for the exceptions.

97. Deputy Andrews.—In regard to the grants for periodicals published in Irish, what type of publication would these be? —Again, I would refer to the booklet; the names of all the periodicals are listed at page 43. The year we are dealing with was the first in which Roinn na Gaeltachta paid anything to these periodicals. The grants were previously paid by the Department of Education.

98. An organisation like Sairséal agus Dill do not come under it?—It does not come under our scheme but may come under the Department of Education. We deal with periodicals and newspapers; they deal with books.

99. Deputy Hogan.—As regards the scholarships to assist students spending a holiday period or school term in the Gaeltacht, how are these awarded?—Taking the holiday period first, there are local committees outside the Gaeltacht and they send in lists of names to us. There are full particulars of the scheme in the booklet— page 39. In that year, still dealing with holiday scholarships, there were 8,106 cases in which we paid the £5 grant—it is a £5 scholarship and it is paid through the local committees; there were 266 of those committees. Expenditure in that year would be for the summer of 1965. There has been a substantial growth in that scheme over the years and the number of students has steadily increased up to that figure. It increased to a couple of hundred more than that in 1966 but, of course, the expenditure is in the current year’s accounts. So much for the holiday scholarships. The other scholarship is to assist in spending a school term attending primary school in the Gaeltacht and, of course, the figures are very much lower. The number in that year was 451. There, again, we award the scholarships through any committee we may approve of for that purpose. In fact, there is only one approved committee at the moment, Gael Linn. The main reason for that is that other committees do not look for approval.

100. Deputy Andrews.—You say they do not look for approval. Do they know they are entitled to it?—Yes. There are now 266 committees who operate for the holiday scholarships. They have all been circularised about the other scholarships as well. This school term scholarship is worth £20 per pupil.

101. Deputy Treacy.—I am particularly interested in the grant to the Waterford Gaeltacht. I think you mentioned a figure earlier of £3,000?—Yes, for housing.

It struck me as rather low in comparison to the grants for other Gaeltacht areas. Why is this so? How does it compare with previous years and how is the grant broken down?—Ring is a very much smaller Gaeltacht area than that in any other Gaeltacht county so that, proportionately, I would say the expenditure compares pretty well with that elsewhere. The housing expenditure in that year in Waterford was £2,804. That money was spent in improving seven houses, in putting water and sewerage facilities in four houses, bathrooms in six houses, and improvements in water and sewerage facilities in three houses. Of course, that was work completed within the year; there would be work in progress all the time.

102. Deputy Treacy.—To what extent does the securing of these grants depend on local initiative as distinct from the routine grants given there for water, sewerage, houses, and so on? I am concerned about the improvements to the harbour at Helvic Head?—We have spent some money on that harbour—last year for dredging and previously for other works. We are very anxious to develop local initiative as much as possible and to get any kind of sound proposition from the Gaeltacht itself. We should like, in particular, to develop co-operative societies which could do a whole lot of work of various types. Local initiative is the most vital thing needed in the Gaeltacht.

I take it that any such scheme put to your Department would receive sympathetic consideration?—Absolutely. We go out and almost force the local people to produce sound schemes occasionally.

103. Deputy Molloy.—There is a scheme whereby assistance can be given to people who wish to build hotels in the Gaeltacht.— It was not there in that year but it is in the booklet at page 32.

104. Is there any limit or maximum figure to the scheme?—No, we have no maximum figure specified but I should not like to say that the sky is the limit. We provide grants as a supplement to grants given by Bord Fáilte.

It is 20 per cent of the Bord Fáilte grant? —It could be equivalent to the full Bord Fáilte grant. The normal Bord Fáilte grant is 20 per cent and we can give another 20 per cent in suitable cases.

And there is no limit to the scheme?— There is no specific limit to the scheme, but several factors have to be taken into account.

105. If somebody wishes to build a £1 million hotel in the Gaeltacht, and fully qualified, you pay this or you can refuse?— In every scheme of ours, the final decision is at the discretion of the Minister.

Deputy Kenny.—If he fulfils the regulations, he is eligible?—We will consider the application sympathetically. Of course, there might be some doubt on the question of a £1 million hotel. The whole idea behind this scheme is to improve and develop accommodation for Irish speakers visiting the Gaeltacht. That does not mean that the visitors have to be exclusively Irish speakers in a hotel. The person with a proposition would have to satisfy us as to how it would fit into the general scheme of things. If we thought it would have a detrimental effect on a Gaeltacht area—

Deputy Treacy.—This is quite a possibility.

Mr. Tóibín.—we may not be very sympathetic when we have taken everything into account.

106. Deputy Treacy.—Might I respectfully suggest that it would be a very good idea to have the valuable information contained in the booklet printed in English as well. It would do much to assist towards the attainment of the ideals.

Deputy Molloy.—I hesitate to support that proposal but I should be slightly in favour of it. Some of the Irish that is used is not very clear to me, coming from the West.

Mr. Tóibín.—That is a problem. Every one of us would prefer his own dialect. We cater for every Gaeltacht, so we adopt the official standard—an caighdeán oifigiúil.

107. Deputy Kenny.—Which of the Gaeltachts is the largest?—I should not like to get involved too deeply in that but it is a matter between Galway and Donegal. I can give the committee the figures published by the Central Statistics Office based on the census of 1961. For the Gaeltacht in Donegal, that is the area officially defined as the Gaeltacht, the population was given as 26,357 and the percentage of those who were Irish speakers was given as 88.2. Coming to Galway, the total population of the Gaeltacht, again as defined, was 22,877 and the percentage of Irish speakers in that number was given as 92.5. So that, when you apply the two percentages there is not much difference.

What about Kerry and Mayo?—Taking the latter first, the Mayo total was 16,275 persons and the number of Irish speakers was given as 75.4 per cent. For Kerry, the population of the area was given as 8,736 and the number of Irish speakers was given as 86.7 per cent. Cork, 3,487 persons and 84.9 per cent Irish speakers. Waterford 792 persons and Irish speakers 93.4 per cent. These are all published figures.

It is peculiar, then, as far as I can see, that most publications are in Munster Irish?—I would not say that is so. People in every Gaeltacht we visit complain about the publications being in another dialect: that is quite commonplace.

The witness withdrew.

The Committee adjourned at 1.5 p.m.

*See Appendix IV.

*See Appendix V

*See Appendix VI.

*See Appendix VII.

*See Appendix VIII.

*See Appendix IX.

†See Appendix X.

*See Appendix XI.