Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1969 > Committee of Public Accounts > Report - Appropriation Accounts 1967 - 1968

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Déardaoin 6 Márta 1969

Thursday 6th March 1969

The Committee met at 11 a.m.

Mr. E. F. Suttle (An tÁrd-Reachtaire Cúntas agus Ciste) and Mr. P. S. Mac Guill and Mr. J. R. Whitty (An Roinn Airgeadais) called and examined.

VOTE 20—OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE.

Mr. P. Berry called and examined.

664. Deputy Gilhawley.—Under subhead B—Travelling and Incidental Expenses— there is a reduction. Could we have comparative figures for last year because the amount appears to be big?

Mr. Berry.—Comparative figures for Incidental Expenses?

Yes?—I am afraid I have not got a breakdown of small amounts like this. I can send you a note.

Chairman.—The comparative figures are £6,957 and £5,600.

665. Deputy Gilhawley.—What was the reason for the increase under subhead E —Commissions and Special Inquiries?—The excess is due to the appointment of the O’Mahony Tribunal, the judicial inquiry into the death of a man in Cork.

666. Chairman.—On subhead F—Legal Aid—how is this matter administered?— Legal aid was provided for in the Criminal Justice (Legal Aid) Act, No. 12 of 1962. It is granted on the certificate of the courts in necessitous cases where the circumstances are serious and exceptional. It was introduced as a limited and restricted scheme but as a first step in the extension of the principle of social welfare into legal matters. Owing to the experimental nature of the scheme and the limited funds available it was necessary for the Minister to retain control of expenditure and he made the Criminal Justice (Legal Aid) Regulations, 1965 which prescribed the conditions under which aid may be granted. As I mentioned, the cost depends on the courts, how many certificates are granted. It has fallen well short of the provision in each of the years so far. When the Minister was promoting the Bill he mentioned that the scheme was experimental and that he would revise the system within two or three years. That revision is going on at present and there has been an announcement to that effect already. As distinct from the size of the fees themselves it is the intention to extend the class of cases that may qualify. Legal aid may be extended into hearings in the High Court and the Supreme Court, in certiorari, mandamus and habeas corpus proceedings, where there are points of law of exceptional importance involved. While, as you will see we expended only £8,536 out of £20,000 in the Vote in the 1967-68 period we do not think we will be able to keep down the expenditure to anything like that sum in the forthcoming years.

667. Deputy P. J. Burke.—I am sure you have a number of applications for free legal aid. How do you deal with them now?—It is the court which determines this. The Minister has made regulations prescribing that on a court certificate the free legal aid is given.

668. Has the number of applications for free legal aid increased?—No, they have not. They may increase under the Minister’s revision. The Minister, in conjunction with the Minister for Finance, is engaged in a revision, not alone with regard to the class of cases that qualify but with regard to the size of the fees. The fees for the defence which are prescribed in the regulations are less than prosecuting counsel get. The Bar Council and the Incorporated Law Society have been making representations again and again to have the fees raised. They are well below what counsel could get on the prosecution side. There is a revision of the fees and also a revision of the nature of cases going on at present.

669. Chairman.—Is there a panel of legal men?—Yes.

Is it an open panel?—Yes. Each person who is prepared to take this kind of case must submit his name to the Minister for Justice and he is put on a register.

670. The Notes to the Account refer to various committees and commissions of which the O’Mahony Tribunal is one. Are the others still sitting?—Yes. The Committee on Court Practice and Procedure has already issued eight reports which have been printed and published. Their recommendations in some cases have been implemented and in other cases are the subject of the preparation of legislation or awaiting Government consideration. That committee is a perpetual committee. We think it will be there in five or ten years’ time. It is continuing. The Committee on Law of Bankruptcy is expected to make its report by 1970. The Landlord and Tenant Commission also is engaged on an omnibus task and we do not expect their final report before 1970 or 1971.

671. Have the Landlord and Tenant Commission issued no report to date?—They have issued several reports to date on different facets of the subject. They are now engaged on a major review. The O’Mahony Tribunal was concluded in the following year and, of course, of the total expenditure, the £2,268 is only a portion. The overall cost, given with the publication of the report, was around £13,000.

Deputy Briscoe.—A terrible waste of money.

Deputy P. J. Burke.—It cleared up public opinion, anyway.

Deputy Briscoe.—This is mainly caused by certain people trying to get cheap publicity for themselves.

VOTE 21—GARDA SÍOCHÁNA.

Mr. P. Berry further examined.

672. Chairman.—Paragraphs 25 and 26 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General read as follows:

“25. I referred in the second paragraph of my previous report to the failure of the Accounting Officer of Votes accounted for by the Office of the Minister for Justice to make available certain files which I deemed necessary for the completion of my audit. These files have not yet been submitted to me.

26. In the year under review seven other files which I had asked for were not produced for audit inspection and I have, therefore, been unable to append my usual full certificate to the Appropriation Account.

Most of the files which were refused in the year under review appeared to relate to the purchase of goods or services. My examination of such transactions is not limited to a check of authority and arithmetical accuracy but extends to correctness of demands, purchasing procedures, disposal of obsolete stocks, etc. and in all cases to ensure that adequate value is obtained from the expenditure of public moneys.”

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

Mr. Suttle.—As the Committee are aware, the Minister for Finance has issued directions to Accounting Officers on the question of access to documents. Following the issue of the directions, all the files mentioned in these paragraphs have been made available to me. With two exceptions, which I will mention in a moment, the files submitted contained nothing that was not of a routine nature and, having now obtained all the information I required. I have no further observations to offer on them. I referred in paragraph 2 of my report on the 1966-67 Accounts to an Organisation and Methods Report on the payment of witnesses’ expenses in certain court cases. The procedure in operation was in my opinion inefficient. The Departments of Finance, Justice, Local Government, the Garda and local court officers were all involved and the cumbersome procedures caused delays in the settlement of claims and also in accounting. The O and M Report, prepared by the Department of Finance in 1956, had suggested improved procedures whereby expenses generally would be paid direct by the Garda Síochána. From 1956 until 1967 this report was under consideration in the Department of Justice. The major difficulty in introducing the improvements appeared to be the lack of adequate staff in the Accounts Branch. In April, 1968, the Department of Finance sanctioned the extra staff and the improved procedures were subsequently brought into force.

674. Chairman.—Have you been able to append your full certificate?

Mr. Suttle.—I have obtained all the information I required and that clears the accounts.

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

“27. £1,750 was paid to a bank for lodgment to the account of the Garda Síochána Medical Aid Society and was charged to subhead E—Station Services. I have been furnished with Department of Finance authority for this payment but my request for the relevant file was refused and the payment has not been accounted for in detail to me. As I am required to audit all accounts of moneys administered by or under the authority of the Oireachtas, the principal exception being those cases in which Dáil Éireann expressly stipulates that expenditure of sums issued out of a grant-in-aid is not to be accounted for in detail to me, I have asked the Accounting Officer for an explanation.”

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

Mr. Suttle.—Under a long-standing arrangement, dating back to the time of the Dublin Metropolitan Police, members of the Force attached to the D.M.P. area were entitled to free drugs and medicine. These were supplied by a firm of Dublin chemists but it appeared that competitive tenders had not been sought and in 1956 my office issued a formal query regarding the lack of competition. Following this, the Department of Finance directed in 1960 that standard Government contracts procedure should be adhered to by the Department of Justice. From the file which I have now seen, it is clear that no positive action in this matter was taken until 1967. Then the Department of Justice proposed a new arrangement for an annual fixed payment of £3,500 to the Garda Medical Aid Fund instead of the old scheme. One half year’s payment of £1,750 was made in the year under review. As the grant to this society was not designated a grant-in-aid, its expenditure should be accounted for in detail to me. I have been informed by the Accounting Officer that it would not be possible to vouch this expenditure in detail because the Garda Síochána Medical Aid Fund is administered by a friendly society and the grant forms part of its funds. The society’s expenditure is subject to audit under the Friendly Societies Acts. The Accounting Officer also explained that the payment had been made with the approval of the Department of Finance. That Department now agrees that the payment should have been treated as a grant-in-aid in the first instance and this will be rectified in the current and future years. It was not possible to rectify the position as far as the 1967-68 accounts are concerned but the Minister for Finance has expressed the hope that the Committee of Public Accounts would allow the payment for that year to stand in the light of the action being taken to provide for a grant-in-aid in future. In all the circumstances, I have no objection to this course.

677. Chairman.—Paragraph 28 reads:

“28. In November, 1966, a file relating to the embezzlement of public moneys by a member of the Garda Síochána was requisitioned but was refused on the grounds that it dealt with administrative matters only and that there were no accounting matters involved. In February, 1967, information was sought as to the amount and description of the public moneys involved, the circumstances in which the embezzlement occurred and if there was any loss to public funds. As there appeared to be excessive delay in replying to that communication a formal letter was issued to the Accounting Officer in June, 1968 asking that all the papers relating to the matter be made available. The departmental file that came into existence as a result of my query of February, 1967, was then furnished to me together with an explanation of the delay. It appears from the Accounting Officer’s explanation that it was only as a result of my initial inquiry that he became aware that there had been a loss of public moneys. The amount involved, £40, was small and has recently been recovered.”

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

Mr. Suttle.—This paragraph is to draw the attention of the committee to a case of misappropriation of public money which should have been noted in the Appropriation Account of the Vote.

Deputy P. J. Burke.—The amount involved was only £40. It was small and has been recovered.

679. Deputy Healy.—On subhead A— Salaries, Wages and Allowances—has there been any difficulty in recruiting members to the Garda?

Mr. Berry.—Our strength is fixed at 6,560. We cannot always provide that we will have exactly that number because every year there is an estimated wastage of about 300. However, whenever there are claims in for increases in pay, Guards may postpone their retirement. Under existing regulations a Guard has a space of years in which he may retire and if he feels there is more money coming he does not retire. When there are pay claims looming up, instead of having 300 retirements we might have only 250. In that event we do not get our full complement of recruits. Then, of course, there is always a time lag of maybe three to six months between the holding of the Civil Service examination for recruits and getting them.

680. Deputy Healy.—I take it there is no difficulty in getting recruits?—We have two or three to one. For every 400 recruits we have 900 applicants.

Deputy P. J. Burke.—I must say the explanation is very good.

681. Chairman.—On subhead B—Travelling and Incidental Expenses—there is one point about this, the increase in travelling expenditure. Looking over the Appropriation Accounts I see in 1965-66 under this item the expenditure was £248,000 and this year, two years later, it is £348,000, that is £100,000 of an increase. That seems to be a very big increase in two years?—This was due to the incidence of foot and mouth disease when we had to move several hundred gardaí to Border stations for several months.

Deputy Burke.—At that time there were hundreds of gardaí who were transferred to Border stations to try to cope with that problem.

682. Chairman.—That is possibly an explanation but at the same time—I am anticipating this — there is an estimated expenditure in the coming Estimate of £322,000 and that is still very much higher than two years ago?—During that year also there were increases in allowances. In addition to pay increases there is a continual change upwards in allowances, separation allowances, travelling allowances, subsistence allowances and that was one of the years in which this took place.

683. Deputy Briscoe.—Would you say some of the increased costs are due to an increase in the number of demonstrations which are taking place in Dublin where you have to bring up gardaí?—Once there is any agitation in a particular place like Dublin, Limerick or Cork we have to concentrate a large number of gardaí there. In Dublin we had to bring as many as 500 from other parts of the country.

684. Would it be possible to give an approximate figure for what it would cost the taxpayer to bring 500 gardaí to Dublin to maintain the peace?—One could not say offhand because they might be brought from Templemore, Mayo or Cork. The distance varies according to the time of the year. During the tourist season we have to move gardaí from internal stations. During the winter time there is very little duty in the tourist resorts and we move them again.

685. Chairman.—Could you tell me how many cars have the State got at the disposal of the Gardaí?—We have 486 altogether of which we have 250 motor cars, 219 cycles and 17 miscellaneous machines. We run those cars to a very high mileage as we have an extensive repair shop in the Depot. We run them to a minimum of 70-75,000 miles. Some of our present fleet are well up to 100,000 miles and require extensive repair work and replacement of approximately 70 every year.

686. Deputy P. J. Burke.—A mileage of 100,000 is very large?—I think that of the fleet we have at the moment, we have up to 40 cars with well over 100,000 miles. It is uneconomic to run them over 70,000 but we find great difficulty in getting money for replacements.

687. Deputy Gilhawley.—Are disturbance allowances covered in this subhead?—Yes. This is a separation allowance. When a guard is sent to do temporary duty he is given a separation allowance. He is allowed to go back to see his family once or twice a month.

688. When an officer is transferred does he get a separation allowance?—Yes. He is entitled to leave his family behind for a period of 12 months while he is looking for housing.

689. If he does not take his family with him?—He is knocked after a reasonable period.

Deputy P. J. Burke.—Notwithstanding that he might have extenuating circumstances?—The norm is that he gets 12 months but that is not fixed. It is flexible. Each case is considered on its merits.

690. Chairman.—Subhead C—Post Office Services—whose estimate is involved? Is it prepared by the Post Office for you?—Yes.

691. Deputy Crowley.—On subhead D— Clothing and Equipment—if we can get all the recruits we require how is it that we have a reduction in the Estimate?—Due to a number of considerations. There have been contracts placed during the year which have not been completed. We have an intake of 270 men and we estimated the figure at 350. There were only 294 retirements as against the 350 estimated for and, as I have said, the intake was only 270.

692. Deputy Gilhawley.—What is the meaning of “Station Services”—subhead E? What does it entail?—It relates to fuel, light, supplies of turf, coal, furniture. The saving here is due to the fact that replacements were estimated but were not carried out to the extent estimated. It was offset to a degree by increases in the cost of fuel and light.

693. Chairman.—What is the distinction between subhead F—Transport—and B— Travelling and Incidental Expenses?—Subhead F relates to the cars. There are 486 vehicles and the saving was due mainly to maintenance and running expenses. There was also the fact that petrol accounts for the year were not received by the end of the year. Also, an amount set out for new transport was not expended because we were not able to get the cars we ordered within the year.

694. Deputy Gilhawley.—There was an allowance of £112,000 for the purchase of vehicles in 1967-68. That appears to be a big figure in view of what you said about running cars for long mileages?—During the years we have been trying to increase transport facilities and radio equipment and to reduce manpower. In 18 years we have reduced the strength of the Force from around 7,400 to around 6,500 and to compensate we have had to provide more mechanical equipment. As well, the cost of cars is going up. A car which could be bought for £650 a few years ago now costs £1,100.

695. Out of a total of 486 vehicles there would be a replacement of about one-third, roughly, in the year?—Even though we would want to replace one-third, we would not get them supplied until, perhaps, April of the following year. That happens quite frequently.

696. Chairman.—Under item 1 of the Appropriations in Aid, there are two sources of income here, receipts from the Road Fund and from fines. Could we have a breakdown as between the two?—Pursuant to the provisions of sections 8 and 9 of the Road Traffic Act, 1961, the Minister for Finance approved of the determination of the expenses incurred by the Commissioner in respect of each of the financial years 1960-61 to 1967-68, inclusive, at a sum (1) equivalent to the amount collected in respect of fines and penalties including on-the-spot fines; and (2), one and a half per cent of the remaining income of the Road Fund from motor taxation, after deduction of the amount of fines and penalties. It was further directed that the sums so determined under (1) and (2) should be paid to the Department of Justice for Appropriation in Aid of the Garda Síochána Vote. For the year 1968-69, the provision in the Estimates has been modified to cover the following: estimated cost of pay and equipment of traffic wardens, £48,000; estimated amount of fines and penalties, including on-the-spot fines, £250,000; and 2½ per cent of probable Road Fund receipts, less (1) and (2) above, £242,550. This makes a total of £540,000. In the financial year 1967-68, the sum received was £351,962. Fines-on-the-spot have operated as from April, 1963. They were introduced initially in the Dublin area and the fine-on-the-spot was 10s. It was increased to £1 on 1st August, 1964 and the scheme has been extended to the cities of Cork, Limerick, Waterford and Galway and to Bray. The following is a breakdown of the figures for fines-on-the-spot during the past three years: 1965-66, £54,296 10s; 1966-67, £63,682; 1967-68, £72,074. I have a breakdown of ordinary fines and fines-on-the-spot for the three years if they are required.

Chairman.—Perhaps you could circulate them.*

697. Deputy P. J. Burke.—You are collecting a lot of fines at the moment, in this city anyway?—I might interject that the purpose of the scheme is not to collect fines but to provide for law enforcement. Quite a lot of the traffic wardens we have do not get us a penny because we have them in streets in which there is limited parking permitted. The warden goes around with his book but if he sees a car parked he does not book it immediately. Having noted the parking he goes away and comes back in an hour and the car may have gone. Generally, the purpose is law enforcement.

Deputy Gilhawley.—It appears that the mortality of gardaí is increasing, according to the figures given for widows. In 1966-67, the number of widows was 1,522 and in 1967-68, it is 1,604.

698. Chairman.—Item 2 of the Appropriation Accounts includes returns from sales of old stores and cast uniforms. There is a figure of £25,000. Is much of that unclaimed property?—A fairly considerable amount, mainly bicycles, and some of them magnificent machines, is left unclaimed.

699. Deputy Burke.—That is going a long way back over the years. What happens those bicycles?—They are auctioned.

700. Chairman.—As regards fees for accident reports you have got £22,000. For whom are those reports prepared? Is it for insurance companies?—Receipts under this head cover fees charged to solicitors, local authorities and others in respect of abstracts from police reports in connection with street accidents or arising out of claims for compensation for malicious injuries. A fee of 10s. is charged for every copy of a statement of a witness supplied in connection with road accidents. This fee is payable in addition to the charge of £1 for an abstract of an accident report. Secondly, in regard to an application for statements of witnesses in claims for compensation for malicious injury a fee of £1 is charged for a copy of every statement supplied to the solicitor of a local authority or to an applicant for compensation. The amount received under this head is £22,000.

701. There are no reports made to insurance companies as such, is that correct? There would be agents of insurance companies?—That is so.

702. There is an item of £6,350 charged for the collection of insurance premiums. Could you explain that?—We charge 2½ per cent on premiums on policies collected for insurance companies from members of the Force.

703. There were 266 involving Garda vehicles. That is out of a total of 255 cars and is approximately one accident per car per year. That seems high?—Each car travels a huge mileage. I mentioned the mileage travelled by those cars is far more than that of ordinary cars. Again, they may travel at high speeds on police duties, increasing the danger of accidents.

704. Deputy Healy.—There are 216 accidents involving gardaí which are not attributed to the Garda personnel. On those we only got paid in 12 cases sums totalling £413 and in 25 others we got sums totalling £279. That makes only 37 out of 216 accidents on which we recovered anything. Why was there not something recovered from the balance when the Garda were not responsible? Was there no insurance?—In every case we referred the liability to the Chief State Solicitor to determine. We are entirely in the hands of the Law Officer to determine the liability in each of those cases.

I am not questioning that. I am taking it for granted that this gentleman decided in those 216 cases that the gardaí were not responsible for the accidents. In the 50 cases mentioned earlier they got damages amounting to £1,269, £215 and £90 but when the gardaí were not responsible in those other cases they did not get anything.

705. Chairman.—Who negotiates the financial agreement about the legal aspect? —The Chief State Solicitor negotiates in all those cases. When we get the bill we pass it to him and he negotiates with the party concerned. In speaking of the number of accidents in which the damage is not attributable to the Garda personnel, some of this is caused by their using vehicles at the very high mileage mentioned. Accidents may result from worn-out parts. It may be defective steerage but you cannot attribute the blame to the gardaí there. One of the difficulties is that we simply cannot get sufficient money from the Department of Finance for replacements. We are running cars at 100,000 miles which simply should not be done.

Deputy Healy.—There are a large number of cases here where they did not get a penny where the gardaí were blameless.

Deputy P. J. Burke.—According to the Accounting Officer’s explanation it is because of the cars.

Chairman.—The same pattern apparently obtained in the previous year according to the report. You had the same explanation that it was the Chief State Solicitor who was handling this.

706. Who carries insurance for Garda cars?—The State does not insure its cars at all.

Does the “knock for knock” arrangement obtain?—Yes, and the halving agreement.

VOTE 22—PRISONS.

Mr. P. Berry further examined.

707. Chairman.—On Extra Remuneration, out of 300 officers would the figure of 54 officers receiving overtime be inordinately high in this type of service?—It is high in that year, the explanation being that mental nurses, who are in an analogous form of employment, successfully negotiated on a reduction of hours and we, through our conciliation machinery, went through the same procedures and in June the same reduction in the number of hours of work, from 90 to 85 per fortnight, was negotiated. We were not able to get the extra personnel until the end of October, with the result that we had to pay overtime.

708. In the Abstract Statement of the Manufacturing Accounts of the Prisons your sales are shown at £31,503. How does that compare with previous years?—It is about the same.

709. Deputy Healy.—Have you any great difficulty in selling your stock?—No, because we only manufacture items for which we have a ready demand. I can give a list of the items.

When I saw the word “stock” I was afraid you could not get rid of some of the goods you were manufacturing?—There is no difficulty. Our stocks are composed of such things as firewood, materials for making uniforms, mail bags and so on.

VOTE 23—COURTS.

Mr. P. Berry further examined.

710. Chairman.—Subhead A — Salaries, Wages and Allowances—does not cover judges’ salaries?—No. Under this subhead, there is great difficulty in the replacement of clerical officers, clerk typists and so on in circuit court offices throughout the country.

711. Under this Vote, I understand there is a substantial contribution from Public Works and Buildings, something like £400,000. Am I right in saying that county councils, as such, have to service their district and circuit courts without any contribution from either the Department of Justice or the Office of Public Works?— There is a provision in the 1935 Courthouses Act that the liability for maintenance of courthouses lies on the local authorities. There are a huge number of courthouses throughout the country which have fallen into a very bad state of repair. The Minister for Justice has authority in law to require repairs to be done but, in practice, his powers to get local authorities to provide or repair courthouses are not being exercised to the full. It has been quite impossible to get local authorities to provide courthouses, buildings which may in fact be used very infrequently. For instance, the High Court on Circuit may visit Tralee only twice a year and the Circuit Court may sit there only six times a year. It is very hard to expect local authorities to provide elaborate buildings which may cost anything in the region of £200,000 each. We have the same position in Louth, in Donegal and in Howth, County Dublin, as that which I mentioned in Tralee. All those buildings have fallen into disrepair, through process of time, not just today or yesterday. The Government have been asked by county councils on several occasions to relieve the local authorities of the burden with the result that some time ago an inter-departmental committee was established by the Minister for Finance to evaluate where the liability should lie, what the overall problem is, and whether it would be feasible to work out an arrangement for a proportion to be paid by the Government and a proportion by the local authorities. The same argument applies to the provision of pounds, a small matter by comparision. In the matter of courthouses, there is a huge capital expenditure involved.

712. Deputy Healy.—The local authorities could provide buildings and use them for their own purposes when the courts are not sitting. Then, when the courts come along they could vacate the part of the building necessary for the court work while the court is in session. Such buildings could be used as local government centres?

Deputy P. J. Burke.—When it is only a matter of a small courthouse that would not be feasible because the local government officials, when the court sits, would have to leave altogether?—That happens in some instances where it is possible.

713. Chairman.—May a local authority shut down a small district court?—A local authority may not but the Minister for Justice may. He has the authority. In fact in the majority of district court areas, the business is very small and now with the improved transport facilities it is easier to get to the courts. However, the idea has been to bring the courts to the people, not the people to the courts. As I have said, the amount of business at some district courts in the country is extremely limited— there might not be more than half an hour’s business per month.

714. Under Appropriations in Aid, there has been a big increase in fines and fees. Is there a special explanation?—The amount received in fines showed an increase over the period. There was an unexpected increase in receipts from county registrars. Fines estimated at £28,000, realised £40,000. There were several other increases of a similar nature. That was the year of the NFA demonstrations.

715. Deputy Healy.—It is an ill-wind which does not bring good to someone?— The recent returns of fines were 1963-64, £30,000, 1964-65, £15,900, 1965-66, £21,000, 1966-67, £38,100 and 1967-68, £40,303. There is also the point that justices nowadays seem more prone to impose fines than prison sentences and also to impose heftier fines.

Deputy P. J. Burke.—I must say this is a Department to which I should like to pay tribute for the work they have been doing recently.

VOTE 24—LAND REGISTRY AND REGISTRY OF DEEDS.

Mr. P. Berry further examined.

716. Chairman.—On subhead A—Salaries, Wages and Allowances—is there any reason for the falling off in staff?—We have very great difficulty in filling some posts in the mapping section and also clerical assistants in the Land Registry.

Deputy Gilhawley.—It is a pity because there is a long delay in getting anything from them?—There is a very high turnover here.

Deputy P. J. Burke.—It has improved somewhat?—Yes.

717. Deputy Gilhawley.—What is the reason for the difficulty in recruiting staff? Is it a question of finding suitable staff?— It is not so much suitability because the standard is not that high. There is a restlessness which seems to be common to the Civil Service as a whole at the present time. There is continual change in my own office with girls going out to nursing and other posts sometimes even for less pay.

Deputy Healy.—It seems they think they will get more variety in those other occupations.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 27—OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION.

Mr. S. MacGearailt called and examined.

Deputy Andrews.—I would like to apologise to the Committee for arriving late. I was speaking in the House and I did not get an opportunity to be here for the Department of Justice.

718. Chairman.—Paragraph 30 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Free Post-Primary Education Scheme

30. In November 1966 the Government approved the introduction of a free post-primary education scheme and in the year under review provision was made in the Votes for Primary, Secondary and Vocational Education for grants to replace tuition fees, to provide free school books and accessories for necessitous pupils, and for free transport services. Payments in the year were mainly on account.”

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

Mr. Suttle.—Pupils attending secondary schools, secondary tops of primary schools and vocational schools come within the ambit of the free education scheme which commenced in September, 1967, and expenditure on the scheme was therefore incurred from Votes 28, 29 and 30. To avoid repetition I departed somewhat from custom and reported on the scheme in a number of general paragraphs with references to the subheads in the different Votes to which expenditure was charged. I would emphasise that the payments made were mainly on account and are subject to adjustment. I cannot comment on the expenditure under the various heads of the scheme until I have had an opportunity of examining a full year’s activities. The scheme was spread over three Votes. I have dealt with the scheme as a whole in paragraphs 30 to 35.

720. Chairman.—Paragraph 31 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General is as follows:

“31. Subject to the condition that they would discontinue charging fees, grants in lieu thereof are paid to secondary schools (Subhead A.2. Vote 29) and are based on the fees charged to day pupils in the 1966-67 school year with a minimum of £15 and a maximum of £25. Because of the circumstances of Protestant schools corresponding grants were channelled through a central representative agency which distributed the money to the individual schools.

The scheme also provides for the payment of grants in respect of boarding pupils in Diocesan Colleges, Juniorates and Protestant schools to cover the tuition element of school fees, subject to a maximum of £25. Pupils living in areas where there are no post-primary education facilities and which are outside the range of the school transport service may, in addition to the tuition grant, be assisted by maintenance grants at the rate of £50 a year but in necessitous cases the Minister can pay up to £95 a year.”

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

Mr. Suttle.—Under the arrangements made for payment of the grants, the payments made in the year of account consisted of instalments of approximately one-third of the estimated grants payable in respect of the 1967-68 school year.

722. I understand the grant may be something between £15 and £25?—The position is that the grants were based on what the schools were charging during the school year 1966-67, subject to a minimum of £15 and a maximum of £25.

723. Will all grants eventually be raised to £25?—In the subsequent year they were raised to a minimum of £20 and in the third year the figure will be £25.

724. What is the position in regard to residential schools?—These are mainly the diocesan colleges to which students for the priesthood go.

725. Can you give us any idea of the total of maintenance grants?—The question of maintenance grants comes into play only where you have pupils who are not within transport distance of a post-primary school. They are confined to a figure of £50, in addition to the fee and in exceptional cases they may go to £95 which, with the £25 tuition fee, makes a total of £120. In the initial year, the figure budgeted for was £6,000.

It is very small?—It is. The transport usually covers a radius of 10 miles to 14 miles and the number of students who would not be within the transport distance is very small. It relates mainly to people living on islands off the coast.

726. Paragraph 32 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“32. In secondary tops of primary schools, fees for pupils receiving post-primary education were discontinued from the beginning of the 1967-68 school year and, in lieu, these schools receive grants at the rate of £4 per recognised pupil (Subhead C.8. Vote 28).”

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

Mr. Suttle.—Fees in secondary tops have always been low and it was estimated that grants at the rate of £4 per pupil would enable the schools to discontinue charging fees without loss.

728. Chairman.—Have you any breakdown of the cost to the State per pupil as between non-residential, residential and vocational schools?

Mr. MacGearailt.—From the point of view of secondary schools, there are two elements as far as the State is concerned. There is the element of the fee, which may range from £15 to £25 and the capitation grant which may range from £15 to £19. The cost of pupils in vocational schools is an exercise which we had to give up because there are so many part-time students some of whom attend for three hours, some for 15 hours a week. It has therefore been found impossible to work it out accurately. The vocational education committees do not break-down their expenditure in relation to day students and part-time students.

729. Can you give any comparison as between residential secondary schools and non-residential schools?—Apart from the few cases mentioned, we do not make any contributions other than grants to residential schools.

Therefore, the cost per pupil to the State is the same?—Yes.

730. Paragraph 33 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“33. Fees were also discontinued from the beginning of the 1967-68 school year for students in vocational schools following whole-time day courses in continuation or technical education up to and including Leaving Certificate level. The abolition of the fees is reflected in increased grants to Vocational Education Committees (Subhead A. Vote 30).”

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

Mr. Suttle.—The receipts from fees by the vocational education committees have been reduced due to the discontinuance of the charging of fees to students following wholetime day courses. The grants from subhead A of the Vote for Vocational Education show an increase to meet the reduced income of the vocational education committees. Again, I cannot comment on this expenditure until I have an opportunity of examining a full year’s operations.

732. Paragraph 34 reads:

“34. Grants paid in the year towards the cost of providing free school books and accessories for necessitous pupils amounted to £15,436 for secondary tops of National Schools (Subhead C.7. Vote 28); £97,443 for Secondary Schools (Subhead L. Vote 29) and £57,586 for Vocational Schools (Subhead A. Vote 30). Provisional allocations were made to the schools, and principals and headmasters were allowed a wide discretion in the distribution of the amounts allotted.”

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

Mr. Suttle.—These grants are intended for children of parents or guardians in the lower income group as defined for purposes of the Health Acts. It was estimated that this group would not exceed 25 per cent of the school-going population. I will be in a better position next year to comment on this scheme.

734. Deputy Andrews.—How do the Department assess necessitous pupils?

Mr. MacGearailt.—We give wide discretion to the principals of the schools. It would be an impossible task for the Department to inquire into all the circumstances of every pupil and we realise that the principals of the schools know the whole circumstances. We expected as the figures quoted by the Comptroller and Auditor General show that the number of pupils affected would be about 25 per cent in primary schools. In fact, it is working out at that figure. Generally speaking, the discretion we have given to the principals of the schools has been exercised wisely.

735. Deputy Gilhawley.—It is working out satisfactorily. There were some principals who at the beginning adopted the attitude of asking the children if their parents had medical cards?—At the initial stage, a number of principals were rather too zealous. In the country areas the principals know the whole home circumstances.

736. Chairman.—Are these books given on loan and are they returned?—No, but if there is a question of passing them on to another member of the family the principals see to it.

737. Paragraph 35 reads:

“35. Free school transport has been provided from 1 April 1967 for pupils who live more than three miles from the nearest suitable post-primary school. The organisation and operation of the service was entrusted to Córas Iompair Éireann and Chief Executive Officers of Vocational Education Committees were appointed as transport liaison officers between educational authorities and the company. For economy of operation some primary school children travelled with pupils attending secondary and vocational schools. The charge (Subhead M. Vote 29) comprised transport costs and allowances paid to the transport liaison officers. Because detailed arrangements regarding financial control and procedures had not been finalised with Córas Iompair Éireann before 31 March, 1968 payments in the year under review were provisional.”

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

Mr. Suttle.—The paragraph is for information. Pending agreement with CIE regarding some details about the basis of charge and arrangements for certification of accounts, payments to the company were made on account subject to adjustment on final agreement.

739. Deputy Andrews.—In suburban areas, Dún Laoghaire for instance, I know of a number of cases where pupils of necessitous parents travel to school from Sallynoggin to the centre of the city. What assistance are they entitled to by virtue of the fact that the parents are not well-off?—They are not entitled to any assistance if they live within three miles of the nearest suitable post-primary school. In the case of Sallynoggin, there is a large vocational school there which would be regarded as a suitable school. The position is that anybody who lives within three miles of a suitable post-primary school is not entitled to free transport.

740. Take for instance a person living 3½ miles from Scoil Lorcáin, which is out on its own and is a first class school, should this person not be allowed free travelling facilities? How is the three miles assessed? Is it as the crow flies or is it according to the bus route?—Actually in relation to that matter, Scoil Lorcáin is a primary school and there is no provision for the payment of transport to primary schools of that nature. If it were a Class A secondary school, like that in Eccles Street, then transport would be paid for because students attending there who wished to do all their courses through Irish could not be expected to attend another school which did not provide those courses.

Deputy Andrews.—I know a case where the husband died recently and his widow is in poor circumstances. She has two children at Scoil Lorcáin, which is outside the three mile limit. I thought in those circumstances there would be some allowance made.

741. Deputy Gilhawley.—I think this scheme, like almost every other new scheme, has a lot of teething troubles. I think as time goes on a little bit of commonsense will prevail. Where no extra expenditure is involved, and where there is a place on a bus, I think every case should be dealt with on its merits. I know one child who has been in hospital and he is attending a post-primary school at Ballymote and lives about 300 yards over the pickup point. He is prepared to walk back that distance but the regulations do not allow it. There is also the case of children who have to travel to college in Sligo and they are an hour late when they travel on the normal transport. The school bus has plenty of places for them. They offered to go as paying passengers but they were not allowed to do so?—The one thing which has got to be borne in mind in connection with this transport generally is that very often where you have buses going to post-primary schools from an area five or six miles away there may be some vacant seats in them and pupils who are attending the national school in that town may look for places. If we were to allow that we would denude our rural schools. One thing we seriously wish to avoid is the position where children from rural areas would be brought to primary schools in urban areas. Sometimes that may appear to be unreasonable but we are insistent on the fact that post primary buses are not to be used in such circumstances to carry primary pupils.

742. Chairman.—Where that situation does not arise, are post-primary school buses allowed to carry children to primary schools? Are they two entirely different transport services?—Oh, no. There is co-ordination as far as possble. For instance, where we close a small school and the pupils are entitled to transport we endeavour with our local transport liaison officer and CIE to co-ordinate the two so that if there are vacant places in the post-primary bus it will be used for the purpose of carrying those primary pupils.

743. What are the charges and how are they determined?—There are no charges. There may be an individual case which the Deputy has in mind, where somebody is not eligible to be carried on the school transport but opts to be carried on it and pays for it.

What are those charges?—They are the normal children’s fares charged by CIE.

Deputy Gilhawley.—The Department of Education do not recoup any money at all? —No.

744. Chairman.—Perhaps the Accounting Officer could give us some breakdown of the number of schools that are in the educational scheme now?—I think it would be more realistic to relate it to the total number of pupils involved rather than the number of schools. I can tell you that 92 per cent odd of the secondary school pupils are participating in this scheme. Of course all the pupils in the vocational schools and in the comprehensive schools and secondary tops are participating. That is the position.

745. Are there many schools outside the scheme?—From memory I would say about 20 to 25 now.

746. Deputy Andrews.—In the whole country?—Outside the cities of Dublin, Cork and Limerick all other schools are in the scheme with the exception of some boarding schools who have no day pupils at all. I was thinking in terms of day pupils when I mentioned that number. I am speaking from memory but I can verify the fact that the number of day schools not participating would be 25 or a little over it.

747. Chairman.—Are there any residential schools?—The purely residential schools are not participating at all except, of course, and there may be a reference to it later on, the case of the Protestant schools where a bulk sum is given based on the £25 per pupil. All the colleges which are partly day schools and all the day schools are, with the exception of about 25, in fact participating in the scheme.

748. Deputy Gilhawley.—Is it being contemplated that people in the training colleges will do an extra year and get a degree?— The general intention is that the training college course will be extended by one year and the question then of establishing a university link is something that will have to be dealt with by the Department at one end and the university at the other.

749. Chairman.—Paragraph 36 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Subhead F.2.—Fittings, Materials, etc.

36. The charge to the subhead includes £5,849 for the supply of display cases, carpeting and other items and for professional fees in connection with the Rosc Exhibition in the National Museum. I was informed that orders for the supplies had been placed by a firm of architects on behalf of the committee in charge of the Exhibition, that tenders had been sought for the display cases which cost £2,330 but that time did not allow the adoption of such procedure for the other items.”

750. We turn now to the Vote itself. On subhead A. 4—Expenses in connection with the Commission on Higher Education— have the Commission on Higher Education concluded their work?—That sum of expenditure relates simply to staff engaged in the preparation of the final report.

751. Deputy Andrews.—On subhead B. 4 —Educational Research—why the difference between the amount granted and the amount spent?—The position is that the Department have been given a sum of £10,000 annually by the Department of Finance and the Department can commission the research. They commission research only when it appears to them that the project is worth undertaking. The number of projects that were worth undertaking and that could be undertaken in that year were covered by that figure.

752. Chairman.—Who undertakes the research?—The universities do it, for instance. The research units in the training colleges do it and occasionally we commission an expert in a certain field to carry out research on a particular project.

753. Deputy Andrews.—On subhead B. 5 —Language Research—what does it include? —It is virtually all associated with Gormanston. The saving shown there is not a real one. It just happened that the item did not accrue for payment until after the end of the financial year.

754. Chairman.—What is the explanation of subhead C. 2—Scientific Research Grants to Students?—These grants are awarded by the Department. There is a joint committee representative of the universities and the Department, and the students apply at the end of the year in which they do their degrees. If they get first class or good second class honours they may be eligible for grants.

755. Subhead D. 1—Publications in Irish —includes Buntús Cainte?—Yes. It was in fact the best-seller ever in this country. We sold a quarter of a million copies in that year.

756. Deputy Andrews.—It was really a first class publication, most helpful. You are backing it up with Buntús in Úsáid?— Yes. Because we did not wish any time to elapse for the preparation of courses, we put it out in stencil form. I can let the Deputy have a stencil copy if he is interested.

757. I should appreciate the courtesy. Will this form be available to the public generally?—It will be put into booklet form eventually. Our other reason for producing the stencil copy was in order to keep the television programme going and we also gave it for publication to the newspapers.

758. Deputy Gilhawley.—On subhead H. 6 —Adult Education Courses—have you got many such courses?—This figure of £4,000 relates to two specific grants of £2,000 each. The other adult education courses are covered elsewhere. These figures were in respect of grants to the College of Industrial Relations and to the Dublin Institute of Catholic Sociology.

759. Deputy P. J. Burke.—Is the grant referred to in subhead H. 7—Royal Zoological Society of Ireland—an agreed sum? —It does not go up or down. It is an agreed grant which we give towards the expenses of the Zoological Gardens.

760. Deputy Andrews.—On subhead H. 9 —Overseas Club—what are those monies utilised for?—The Legion of Mary run a club for overseas students at Harcourt Street. This is simply a Grant-in-Aid towards the running expenses of it.

Deputy Gilhawley.—It is a very essential work.

761. Deputy P. J. Burke.—They are doing a good job. On subhead H. 10—Muintir na Tíre—is this a grant to the different branches?—No. This is a grant which is given to the central organisation of Muintir na Tíre. They disburse it.

762. Deputy Gilhawley.—On note C. 3 of the Explanations, one scholarship was not taken up. What happened? Was it offered to another person?—These are student exchange scholarships. What happened in fact there was that £700 was provided for two scholarships to Italian students and only one of them was taken up. These are foreign students coming in here. We really give them a grant towards “digs” when they are here in Ireland. In turn they give a number of scholarships to our people going abroad. We awarded two scholarships to Italian students and only one of them was taken up.

763. Deputy P. J. Burke.—Do you find this exchange student scheme going very well?—Yes, excellently.

764. Deputy Gilhawley.—On the Accounts of Non-Voted Funds administered by the Department I notice the Carlisle and Blake Fund. Is that still in existence?—Actually, instead of the old arrangement of which the Deputy will no doubt be aware, of awarding a premium to individual teachers, what is happening now is that the income from the fund is given to the pupil in each of the training colleges who gets the first place in the final.

VOTE 28—PRIMARY EDUCATION.

Mr. S. MacGearailt further examined.

765. Chairman.—Paragraph 37 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Subhead A.1.—Training Colleges

37. Reference was made in previous reports to the construction of new premises and the conversion of existing buildings at St. Patrick’s Training College, Dublin at an estimated cost of £1,500,000, all of which is being financed from voted moneys. Expenditure incurred by the College authorities up to 31 March 1968 amounted to £1,504,308 including £116,032 for professional fees. The charge to the subhead includes £131,000 for direct grants and £62,635 in respect of principal and interest due in the year on the bank loan of £750,000 obtained by the College authorities. The total amounts issued to date are £707,000 for direct grants and £272,721 (principal £128,580; interest £144,141) for loan repayment charges.”

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

Mr. Suttle.—I understand that although the building is finished some payments remain to be made.

767. Chairman.—Paragraph 38 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“38. The Church of Ireland Training College premises at Kildare Place, Dublin, were sold and a site acquired at Rathmines for the erection of new premises. After the disposal of the old property and the purchase of the new site the Governing Body of the college had £150,000 available towards building costs. The total cost of the new building, including furniture and professional fees, was estimated at £685,000 which left a balance of approximately £535,000 to be found from public moneys. £355,981 charged to the above subhead comprised £347,760 as direct grants and £8,221 for loan charges accrued in the year on a loan of £200,000 obtained by the college authorities from the Representative Body of the Church of Ireland.

I am in communication with the Accounting Officer regarding the controls exercised to ensure that the work was carried out in accordance with the plans approved by the Office of Public Works and also regarding the legal agreement entered into between the college authorities and the Minister governing the future use of the new premises.”

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

Mr. Suttle.—I have now received a reply from the Accounting Officer stating that it has been confirmed that at all stages of the work the advice and approval of the Office of Public Works was sought and also that agreements were signed by the Minister for Education and the Authorities of the Church of Ireland Training College regarding the future use of the new premises. I have not yet completed my examination of the expenditure on these premises.

769. Chairman.—In general if a university degree becomes universal for primary and secondary teachers what will happen to those colleges?—They will still be used as training centres.

770. On subhead A. 1—Training Colleges —is that complete?—It will be completed in the current year.

771. On subhead A. 2—Repayable Advances of Training College Fees to Students —what type of students get those advances? —In the ordinary training college the fee is £105 for men and £100 for women. If a parent represents that he is not in a position to meet the fee then we have an inquiry made in relation to his means and depending on his means we make an advance of all or part of the fee. It is repayable by the students when qualified as teachers over a period of normally five years.

Deputy P. J. Burke.—Is it by way of deduction?—Yes.

772. Chairman.—Is there any arrangement in regard to universities?—The arrangement there is the grants.

773. Deputy P. J. Burke.—On subhead A. 4—Special Courses for Teachers of Physically and Mentally Handicapped Children— do you have enough teachers coming forward to do the special higher course for handicapped children?—Yes. In fact, the problem is to cater for all those coming forward. We have also to relate the numbers who will do those courses to our requirements.

You are not short of teachers?—No, we are not.

774. Deputy Andrews.—Will there be more money available for this type of course? How many teachers will be involved in the expenditure of £8,188?—The number of teachers that you can take in any given year because of the nature of the course is usually between 20 and 30. In that particular year there were 23 teachers in Saint Patricks. There is also a special arrangement with UCD in relation to teachers of the deaf. They are covered here too. In that particular year there were four teachers of the deaf attending courses in UCD.

775. Is it proposed to increase this grant in future to give it to more teachers?— It is not so much a question of increasing the grants. It is a question of training in relation to our requirements. Money is not the problem.

Deputy P. J. Burke.—There is also a demand from the various hospitals and health authorities.

776. Deputy Gilhawley.—Would it not depend to a great extent on the number of schools established?—Yes. There are in fact 70 schools.

777. How are the teachers selected?— Those are all trained teachers already. They do this special course for the teaching of handicapped children. They are specially selected because of an interest and aptitude they have shown for that particular type of work. They take up posts in these special schools. There are in all 70 schools.

778. Deputy P. J. Burke.—How many pupils will entitle a teacher to full salary in one of those schools?—Depending on the nature of the school for the handicapped children we go as low as 15 pupils per teacher.

Deputy P. J. Burke.—I am thinking of small places in the Dublin Health Authority who may not have that number. However, you are doing very well.

779. Deputy Gilhawley.—On subhead C 2—Model Schools—Miscellaneous Expenses —how many of those model schools have we got?—There are five in the whole group at Marlborough Street, there are two in Cork, one in Limerick and others all over the country. There are 14 altogether.

780. What is the distinction between those and other schools?

Deputy P. J. Burke.—Why are they called model schools?—It is a survival of the time when these schools were used in connection with the training colleges for the training of teachers. The model schools were established by the old Board of Education and managed by them.

781. Deputy Gilhawley.—The expenditure under subhead C. 6—Grants towards the cost of Heating, Cleaning and Painting of Schools—is not up to the amount estimated? —There is a small saving, purely a matter of over-estimation. The grants there have been increased since that year.

782. Some excellent work is being done. Is there an increase in the number of schools looking for free books provided under subhead C. 7? Have you had that experience over the years?—A comparison would be unrealistic. The amount we gave previously was insignificant, something like £5,000. It is only now that we are extending to the primary sector what happened previously in the post-primary sector. The figures do not indicate anything.

VOTE 29—SECONDARY EDUCATION.

Mr. S. MacGearailt further examined.

783. Chairman.—Paragraph 39 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General, is as follows:

“39. £81,649 was paid in the year under the scheme for the payment of grants to secondary school authorities in respect of 70 per cent of the annual charges on loans raised for the building of new schools or for major extensions to existing ones. Because of the difficulty experienced by school authorities in obtaining loans, the scheme has been extended to enable the Department to issue the necessary funds in such cases as are considered to merit priority and which comply with approved conditions. 70 per cent of the approved cost of the buildings was to be a free grant and the remainder a loan repayable over a period of 15 years and bearing interest at the rate charged for advances from the Local Loans Fund. Free grants totalling £1,682,691 were issued in the year under this arrangement.”

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

Mr. Suttle.—The original scheme of secondary building grants provided for the payment of 70 per cent of charges on loans raised by schools for building purposes. The sum of £81,649 represents 70 per cent of charges on loans raised by eight schools. The grants of £1,682,691 under the extended scheme were paid to 107 schools.

785. Deputy P. J. Burke.—I am sure the Accounting Officer is up against it with school authorities asking for increased grants?—That is in different territory—it would obtain in the primary schools sector. Here the amount is fixed. We make 100 per cent grant, 70 per cent outright and 30 per cent recoverable over 15 years.

786. Chairman.—Paragraph 40 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“40. The scheme of building grants for secondary schools was sanctioned by the Department of Finance on condition that the capitation grants payable to any school participating in the scheme should be abated. In the course of audit it was observed that capitation grants had been paid in full to a number of schools which had benefited under the scheme and I have communicated with the Accounting Officer.”

787. Paragraph 41 reads.

“41. Reference was made in previous reports to contracts for the erection of comprehensive schools at Cootehill, Carraroe and Shannon Airport and to the purchase of a site for a further school at Glenties, Co. Donegal, the contract for which was placed during the year. Expenditure on the building of the four schools to 31 March 1968 totalled £832,730 including £92,782 for professional fees, £18,900 has been spent on furniture and equipment. The charge to the subhead includes £94,320 for salaries, wages and miscellaneous expenses arising out of the running of the schools. From the beginning of the 1967-68 school year fees are not charged at these schools.”

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

Mr. Suttle.—This paragraph is for the information of the Committee in relation to comprehensive schools.

789. How many are there?

Mr. MacGearailt.—Four have been erected and there are others in various stages of erection. There are four more in the pipeline as it were.

790. Will they provide adult education and evening classes?—There is no reason why they should not.

791. On subhead M—Transport Services —I am going outside secondary education here but are you in a position to give any kind of firm estimate as to what the free transport will cost us for the whole country for primary and secondary education? I was told a figure of £3 million. What is your estimate?—A figure which we recently had was £2.8 million-odd. The ultimate expenditure will probably be about £3.7 million.

VOTE 30—VOCATIONAL EDUCATION.

Mr. S. MacGearailt further examined.

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

“Subhead D.3—Regional Technical Colleges

42. The charge of £42,600 to this subhead is in respect of professional fees paid to a consortium of architects, engineers and quantity surveyors on account of work done on the planning of Regional Technical Colleges at Waterford, Sligo, Galway and Dundalk. The consortium was appointed at a fee of 9 per cent. (exclusive of incidental expenses) to cover the services normally rendered by the several professions involved. The Vocational Education Committees had already appointed architects for four other colleges to be built at Cork, Limerick, Carlow and Athlone and the consortium was subsequently appointed to act as consultant in these cases. It has been decided to provide a further college in County Donegal. The capital cost of the nine colleges will be financed from State funds.”

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

Mr. Suttle.—The nine per cent rate mentioned in the paragraph was agreed with the consortium on the basis that the buildings to be erected were large works and to a certain extent repetitive in type. No charge arose in the year of account in respect of fees payable to the architects et cetera employed by the vocational education committees.

794. Deputy Gilhawley.—Was it this consortium of architects and engineers who planned those colleges?

Mr. MacGearailt.—They planned them directly themselves or in consultation with architects who had already been appointed by the local vocational committee. In fact it might be of interest to the Committee to know that that was the most useful exercise we ever carried out. The original estimate in connection with Waterford was £790,000 and the actual tender was £540,000, Dundalk, £790,000, actual tender £532,000, and Carlow, £790,000, actual tender £548,000. They are all of that order. This was because of the concentration by this consortium in joint planning where they were all involved and were able to achieve reductions in relation to the overall cost, as compared with the employment of individual architects, quantity surveyors and structural engineers. It has from our point of view proved to be an extraordinarily worthwhile exercise.

795. That was the reason why I asked the question. Has there been a decision on the personnel of the college councils yet?— Revised proposals are being formulated at the moment which will be acceptable to everyone including the Vocational Education Committees.

796. Chairman.—On subhead A—Annual Grants to Vocational Education Committees what is the local county council’s contribution?—It varies. The point is that the maximum they are empowered to raise on the rates is 24 pence, that is 2s in the £. In the case of county committees it is on a pound for pound basis. In the case of boroughs it is £2 from the State and £1 from the rates and in the case of small urban areas, where the amount from the rates is small, it is £4 from the State and £1 from the rates. In fact, even with that ratio it has been necessary to pay very substantial additional grants in order to keep the committees solvent.

797. Deputy P. J. Burke.—That is the urban areas?—There is no committee in fact at the moment which is not getting solvency grants in addition to the grants worked out on the basis I mention. The amount of 24 pence on the rates has not been increased for a considerable time.

The demand is increasing all the time?— Yes.

798. Chairman.—You mentioned pound for pound for the county educational committees. What smaller ones are there?—All the counties are pound for pound. The county boroughs of Dublin and Cork are £2 to a £1. The smaller urban areas like Tralee, Drogheda and Sligo where the income from the rates is comparatively small contribute £1 and the State contributes £4. That is the position.

VOTE 31—REFORMATORY AND INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS.

Mr. S. MacGearailt further examined.

No questions.

VOTE 32—UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES AND DUBLIN INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED STUDIES.

Mr. S. MacGearailt further examined.

799. Chairman.—Paragraph 43 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows:

“Subhead I.—Cork Hospital Board (New Dental Hospital)

43. The grant of £10,600 was paid to the Cork Hospital Board towards site costs, etc., incurred on a project for a new dental hospital and school at Cork.”

800. Deputy P. J. Burke.—Subhead E of the Vote itself deals with Maynooth College. Is the grant a standing one?—It can vary in accordance with the number of pupils doing ordinary degree courses in Arts and Science.

They make returns to you of all these things?—Yes.

The witness withdrew.

The Committee adjourned at 1.40 p.m.

* See Appendix 25.