Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1970 > Committee of Public Accounts > Interim and Final Report - Appropriation Accounts 1967 - 1968

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Déardaoin, 19 Feabhra, 1970

Thursday, 19th February, 1970

The Committee met at 11 a.m.

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

VOTE 43—DEFENCE.

Mr. S. Ó Cearnaigh called and examined.

255. Chairman.—Paragraph 84 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General states:

“Subhead K.—Provisions.

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

The average price of cattle purchased for both the Dublin and Curragh areas was £99 as compared with £92 and £94 per head, respectively, in the previous year, while the average production of beef per head was 676 lbs. and 655 lbs., respectively, as compared with 683 lbs. and 680 lbs.”

256. Deputy E. Collins.—I should like to get an explanation regarding the price of meat. “Meat”, of course, is a rather wide word. Why is beef costing 4s per lb.?

Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.—An agent buys the cattle on behalf of the Department. Then, in the case of the Curragh, they are slaughtered and processed there. In Dublin the cattle are slaughtered in the abattoir and then army butchers take over.

Deputy E. Collins.—I know something about the meat trade; I consider that 4s per 1b. is too much. You could buy beef wholesale at much less than that.

Deputy P. Lenihan.—Than 4s a lb.?

Deputy Tunney.—I should be interested to hear about it. Obviously, then, butchers who are selling it at 8s per lb. are doing well.

Deputy P. Lenihan.—Making a packet.

Deputy E. Collins.—I am interested in wholesale supplies which are different from retailing.

257. Chairman.—One small point is the question of the differential in price between Dublin and the Curragh. Looking back on previous years, in 1966-7, the price for Dublin was 47/2 and for the Curragh 44/1. Since then, the position has been reversed?

—One gets that kind of change from time to time. Sometimes, production of beef at the Curragh is somewhat less than in Dublin. Sometimes it is somewhat more. There might be changes in staff wages and this could cause variations of this kind. Also, the volume of production could influence the cost.

258. We used to have one army buyer on an agency basis. Is that still the position?

—Yes. An agent buys for the Army.

259. Paragraph 85 reads:

“Subhead CC.—Compensation.

85. The charge to this subhead comprises:—

260. The figure for compensation appears to have gone up. It was £7,000 last year. This year it is £17,000. I presume there were more accidents?

—There was one biggish case which cost £6,000 and that is the principal element in the increase. It is impossible to forecast from year to year what we will run into by way of compensation.

261. Deputy E. Collins.—There is no insurance?

—No insurance. The State does not effect insurance on its vehicles.

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

“Subhead Z.—Appropriations in Aid

86. The charges for use of army transport on repayment are based on costings made in 1961. I enquired if consideration had been given to the question of revising these rates more frequently and I was informed that revised costings had been prepared and arrangements were being made to review them at intervals of two to three years.”

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

Mr. Suttle.—I understand that the new costings have been used since October, 1969.

Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.—Yes, that is correct.

264. Chairman.—Who uses this service?

—It may be used for the transport of bands to fulfil private engagements; when transport is used by Army welfare boards, and in other circumstances of that kind.

265. Chairman.—On film work?

—Yes and also in the case of troops being transported on behalf of the United Nations.

266. Deputy E. Collins.—That would not be a big sum?

—It could be quite considerable. It would include the cost of assembling the troops prior to going overseas and also of returning them to their different stations on repatriation.

267. Chairman.—There was a considerable delay in revising the charges. Since 1961 is a long time without adjusting the charges?

—There has not been any definite pattern of intervals for costing—ten years, four years, seven years and six years. There were six years between the last two costings. From now on, we shall have costings at definite two-to three-yearly intervals. These costings are a difficult and time-consuming task.

268. Paragraph 87 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows:

“87. Included in the receipts is a sum of £1,165, balance of the purchase money plus interest, of a plot of ground at a military barracks which had been sold for £1,300 in 1960. The sale necessitated the re-siting of a rifle range, the erection of a new boundary wall and the removal to a new site of some 350 tons of turf stacked on the plot. As the charge to departmental funds as a result of the sale appeared to have been in excess of the amount for which the plot was sold. I have requested the observations of the Accounting Officer.”

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

Mr. Suttle.—The Accounting Officer has now informed me that the new turf shed and miniature rifle range costing £749 are of substantial construction and are of much greater value than the old structures. A further sum of £611 was expended on fencing-off a strip, ceded by the company free of cost, from the remainder of the plot sold. The Accounting Officer also stated that the granting of the company’s application to purchase the plot was deemed to be in the national interest and in the interests of employment and economic development locally.

270. Paragraph 88 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows:

“Stores

88. Spare parts valued at £70,000 approximately, for Panhard armoured cars, packed in the supplier’s containers were stored in galvanised huts. The huts bore evidence of substantial deterioration and heavy rain had caused flooding which penetrated the containers with possible damage to the spare parts. The matter was raised by my officers in the course of a local inspection and I have been informed that a contract has been placed for the erection of three concrete huts and that it is intended to replace four more huts and thereby provide adequate storage facilities for Panhard and other cavalry spares.”

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

Mr. Suttle.—Three huts have now been erected and the Panhard spares are stored in them.

272. Deputy E. Collins.—What is the average age of the Panhards armoured cars?

Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.—The first of the Panhard armoured cars was purchased in 1964.

273. Chairman.—Was there any damage?

—No damage to the spare parts.

274. Deputy E. Collins.—Subhead E.— Chaplains and Officiating Clergymen: Pay and Allowances—how many chaplains and officiating clergymen are involved?

—Thirteen full-time chaplains and, in addition, there is a number of part-time officiating clergymen.

275. Deputy Nolan.—The figure of £1,124,280 in respect of subhead F.— Civilians attached to Units: Pay, etc.—seems to be very high. I presume they are attached to barracks?

—The number itself has been fairly stable for quite a number of years at about 1,500. The majority of them are employed with the Corps of Engineers as tradesmen, labourers, storemen and so on. There are also tradesmen and storemen attached to other units, wardsmaids in hospitals, and a variety of other classes of employees.

276. Deputy E. Collins.—Is it not possible to recruit this staff from within the armed services?

—It would mean taking soldiers away from essentially military duties and putting them into these civilian-type occupations. Civilians are more productive in this kind of work. Soldiers would have routine military duties to perform which would take up a good deal of their time.

277. Would you think that store-keeping would be within an Army private’s profession?

Deputy Nolan.—It is, actually.

—Mainly these civilian employees are employed in base stores. The store-keeping in units would be done by the military.

278. Deputy Nolan.—Normally there are no civilians, I assume, attached to the battalions or squadrons?

—They are exclusively military.

279. Deputy E. Collins.—Would the Comptroller and Auditor General think of examining the whole situation?

Mr. Suttle.—Shortly after the war it was the policy of the Department to transfer to civilian employees work of that nature and actually quite a number of ex-Army personnel were re-employed as civilians as they were from every point of view excellent because they knew the work. That policy has been maintained and apart from anything else, there are so few Army personnel these days to carry out military duties that it would be difficult to assign men permanently to this type of work. Another aspect is that it has been traditional in the case of the engineers to employ civilians. This goes away back to the British days at The Curragh. There was a big group of civilian employees attached to the Corps of Engineers.

Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.—The strength of the civilian employees has been frequently looked at. There have been several investigations into it and it is always kept under review.

280. Deputy Nolan.—In regard to the Apprentice School in Naas. do you pay the vocational teachers employed in the school?

—They are paid initially by the Kildare Vocational Education Committee and we recoup the Committee.

281. Chairman.—On subhead G.—Civil Defence—what proportion of these expenses do local authorities pay?

—30 per cent of the cost of their own schemes. The full cost of training equipment is borne on the Vote for Defence and as regards local activities they get a grant-in-aid of 70 per cent which means they pay 30 per cent.

282. Deputy Treacy.—Is the reduction in regard to equipment due to a lessening of activity in civil defence? Is there a falling off of interest?

—No. The activity continues on the same scale as hitherto in the different counties.

283. Is it done throughout the country? —Yes, it is organised in every county but some counties are better organised than others.

284. Deputy E. Collins.—On subhead I. —Medicines and Instruments—are these purchased on a tender basis from a wholesale firm?

—Yes.

285. Chairman.—You do not use the combined purchasing?

—We have not used it very much in the past but we may use it in the future to some extent.

286. Deputy E. Collins.—Why the slow delivery?

—Very often because orders are not completed in the financial year in which they are placed and there is a carry-over to the next financial year.

Chairman.—But if they want something urgently?

—There is no difficulty at all about that.

287. On subhead J.—Mechanical Transport—who gets the repayable advances for the purchase of motor cars?

—A large number of officers, especially those employed on duties with the FCA, require cars for the purpose of their duties and they are facilitated by means of repayable advances.

288. Deputy FitzGerald.—On subhead M. —Clothing and Equipment—under a number of these headings items have not been delivered or delivery has been slower than expected. Is this a persistent feature from year to year, that you continually make provision for goods and they are delivered more slowly than expected; then the previous year’s goods have not been delivered and they come into the following year, or is this a peculiar feature of this year?

—To a considerable extent there is a carry-over from one year to the next. By and large, they should balance out but in some years for one reason or another things do not go so well. You could have strikes that slow down deliveries or you could have difficulty with the execution of a contract. Clothing is a particularly difficult item because there are not very many firms engaged in this trade and if you run into a problem, let us say, with an unsatisfactory cloth, it could take a long time to rectify it. You could also have a situation where a delivery would be made just at the beginning of the new financial year that you had hoped would be made in March. These things are unpredictable.

289. Chairman.—I find here that the Reserve constitutes one-third of the personnel. According to the Book of Estimates, the figure for the permanent forces was £170,000, and for the reserve, which is only one-third of the number, was £109,000. Perhaps, the Accounting Officer could explain the apparent discrepancy?

—It is mainly, I should think, due to the large number of FCA who have to be clothed, roughly 20,000 FCA as compared with about 7,000-odd permanent Defence Force personnel. There is also the First Line Reserve.

290. Deputy FitzGerald.—Returning to the question I had asked, I was not quite happy that I had got to the bottom of that. I find that there are seven headings under which equipment was not delivered or there was slow delivery and this accounts for savings. Was this, in fact, an abnormal year in this respect? If it was not, why were not these compensated by equivalent carry-overs from the previous year?

—Every year has its own peculiarities and its own problems. In that year there were strikes, for instance, the maintenance men’s strike, which would have some effect; a strike in Fords of Cork, which delayed delivery of vehicles; a strike in Britain which delayed other things.

291. Deputy FitzGerald.—If you go back to the previous year—I have been hastily looking through it since I raised the issue— this is quite general through them: the same was said of G the previous year, of J, of M, of O.1, of O.2. Under all those headings there was a problem of slow delivery. There are other headings in which expenditure was less than anticipated but under these things were not delivered. That is five headings. One would have thought, prima facie, that these goods not delivered the previous year would have come into this year and would have compensated for the fact that this year there were seven headings under which goods were delivered more slowly than was anticipated. It seems that the two years are comparable and that this is a recurring phenomenon. It seems to me it would account for this shortfall.

Deputy P. Lenihan.—It could be slow orderings as well as slow delivery.

—As I said, every year brings its own problems and it is impossible to get a single simple explanation of all these because they cover an enormous number of transactions. There are thousands of these contracts and it is impossible to get firm delivery dates. We do the best we can.

292. Deputy FitzGerald.—To put it this way—when you are preparing the estimates for the year ahead, do you at that stage know that goods due in the previous year are not going to be delivered up to time and do you then make provision the following year for these goods because you expect them not to be delivered? I take it you make your estimate some months in advance?

—Several months.

293. I am puzzled as to whether you would in fact have that knowledge at the point you make the estimate. If you do not know they are not going to be delivered you cannot be adding a provision for that in the following year’s estimates. Therefore, they should come into the following year as things to be paid for in excess of the amount provided in the following year and that should compensate for the slow delivery in that year?

—Sometimes under the terms of the contract you know specifically that items will not be delivered till a particular year and you can then make provision accordingly, but at the time the estimates are prepared there are very many items which you cannot say for certain will be delivered in a particular financial year, and you have to make the best judgment you can. As a matter of fact, a few days delay in delivery could alter the incidence of the charge as between one year and the next.

294. That is precisely my point. It seemed to me, and you have confirmed it, that for the bulk of these items it is impossible at the time you are drawing up the estimates for the year ahead to know that goods ordered for delivery in the current year would not be delivered. Therefore, you must face each year a significant bill for goods expected to have been delivered and paid for in the previous year and for which there is no provision in the new year’s estimates. Why does not that compensate for the slow delivery of goods at the end of that new year?

—It does compensate to some extent, of course, but each year has its own peculiarities and it is impossible to foretell to what extent they will balance off.

295. Perhaps, to put the question this way—could you tell us, or could we get subsequently, a figure for the amount of goods ordered in the previous year, 1967/68 and not delivered in that year for which no provision was made in 1968/69 but which were delivered and had to be paid for—how much of a compensating factor is involved?

—We could try to do that.

296. You appreciate the amounts involved are quite substantial if we look at 1967/68 under these headings. Under three headings it is £120,000. Assuming you were not aware when the estimates were drawn up for 1968/69 that these were not going to be delivered, in 1967/68 you would have to find that sum. That means that when you find there is a shortfall under seven headings in this year that shortfall is shown here as only the net of the gross shortfall in this year offset by the carry over the previous year and this would suggest that the gross shortfall of deliveries in the year we are now reviewing must be greater by, say, £120,000 than the sum shown. These are very large sums and I should like some picture of the flow of carry-overs and the degree to which they are anticipated. If we take the seven items here, the net non-delivery figure we have would be £250,000. On three items in the previous year there were goods not delivered which would have to be paid for in this year and, therefore, if your net reduction for non-delivery is £250,000 in 1968/69 there must have been a gross non-delivery of, say, at least £370,000 offset by £120,000 paid in 1968/69 in respect of goods not delivered in 1967/68. The accounts are not showing the extent of this phenomenon, which is on a very large scale and it would be useful to have figures for this?

—Yes. We will endeavour to get figures to cover that aspect.

297. Even the order of magnitude would be useful. One does not wish to add unnecessarily to the burden of work?

—There could be hundreds and even thousands of contracts and orders involved in this. There would be a lot of work involved.

298. There must be some administrative procedure by which, for example, if items accrue for payment in a new financial year for which no provision exists in that year and which should have been paid the previous year—there must be some record kept of this phenomenon from an accountancy point of view. Presumably, figures would be thrown up automatically?

—Yes; there would be a carry-over and that would be a definite amount.

299. If one could know what the carry-over was, it would be useful?

—There would be a year’s transactions to be analysed to discover the full picture of what happened during the course of the year.

300. Deputy FitzGerald.—Surely not. If we could know the amount of the carry-over into the new year which had to be paid for and for which no money had been set aside and which is paid for out of the sums left over from the non-delivery of items at the end of the financial year, there must be a figure for that in your accounts without wishing to go into the details.

Deputy Tunney.—Suppose one could know that figure, how useful would it be?

Deputy FitzGerald.—We ought to have some idea of the magnitude. We are getting net figures which are not disclosing the true position. We are getting a net amount. We should be getting a net amount that has no ambiguity, which is, the figure after sums have been used out of the current year’s Vote to pay for items not expected to be paid for in that year but carried over from the previous year. I would have thought this would be thrown up in the accounts.

Deputy Tunney.—Is there not a compensation in every Vote? If we are to think specifically in terms of what we assume will be delivered in a particular year, I think it might inhibit the ordering of certain goods and materials. Surely you must set off on the premise that a certain item is needed and you will do your best to have that provided as quickly as possible. You must prove this would be a worthwhile exercise, bearing in mind the cost. It would require considerable additional staff to get these figures, this accountancy.

301. Deputy FitzGerald.—I stressed I did not want to involve the officers in any additional work to get these figures. Presumably a figure exists for 1968-9 and presumably the accountancy would throw up that figure?

Mr. Suttle.—From the point of view of the Department, 31st March is only an arbitrary date. It is the same as any other date. The thing is done on a day-to-day basis. Bills are paid as received. You would not say: “This bill is for something ordered last year.” It is just part of current business and is dealt with in that way. The 31st March is not any different from 1st April.

302. There is an estimate for the year That is the basis for it. Some of this may turn out not to be needed?

Mr. Suttle.—There is a normal carry-over in every Vote for non-delivery and for various other reasons. There can also be a genuine saving. Provision is made in the Vote for something and we decide we do not need that particular stuff.

303. Perhaps I have misconceived the system. I conceived it as being a system involving budgetary control, something uniform at the end of the year and where there would be a check to see if the budget figures had been achieved. Perhaps I am wrong in conceiving it as being a matter of budgetary control?

Mr. Suttle.—Your estimate is your guide as to what you propose to acquire and what you will require. During the year your requirements change from day to day. At the same time, your bills are coming in in a more or less regular flow from contractors. Some contractors are fast in sending them in, others are slow. You could have goods on hand on 31st March and still owe for them because the contractors have not sent in accounts. All sorts of factors affect the subheads.

304. I assume that when you draw up an estimate for the year ahead and you have £100,000 for stores, that would be broken down setting out the required amount under the various headings. I had assumed somebody would check back to see how in fact payments compared with that estimation. I appear to be wrong in thinking there is a budgetary control system?

Mr. Suttle.—Payments are made automatically and there is no control of the type suggested. There is, of course, stock control. For instance, if ammunition were needed, when the man in charge of ordnance finds he is short of ammunition he will rush and get it.

305. So there is no check against the original estimate.

Mr. Suttle.—It is done only on the basis of subheads.

306. I was making assumptions from the footnotes—that A is offset by B. I do not know how you arrive at your footnotes unless there is budgetary control. The footnotes seem to presume budgetary control?

Mr. Suttle.—There is to the extent that it is known which orders have not been completed at the end of the year. The staff know which orders have been issued and which have been completed and from that point of view there can be a link-up of savings on subheads. It is a general trend without actual control of the individual items. It is control of subheads as a whole.

307. Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—Does the Deputy suggest that if a sum of money is earmarked for guns and they are not delivered and the money is spent on food that this should be indicated to us?

Deputy FitzGerald.—Not necessarily. I seem to have misconceived the system.

308. Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—What we might do is suggest that such a system might be looked at for the future but that we do not proceed by going back now.

Mr. Suttle.—It would be a very cumbersome and expensive system. Public accounting is done on a very simple, cheap basis. It has worked efficiently up to this and I do not see how detailed budgetary control on the basis suggested could result in any great saving. In fact it would be costly because you would have to increase staff, particularly store staff, by a tremendous amount purely to explain matters for which you have a general explanation already. The cost would far outweigh the benefit.

309. Deputy FitzGerald.—Budgetary control would produce better results. I would have thought there would be an analogy here between the private and the public sectors?

Mr. Suttle.—Defence is one of the most efficient Departments from the angles of adaptability and control. They produce tremendous results at the end of the year. They build their estimates on sound figures from the smallest unit right up to the Quartermaster General’s section which reckons all it will require to the end of the year. Stock control is the controlling item. If there is minimum stock maintained throughout the year, everything they require is there, that is their full requirement. If something is short, the minimum stock will not have been maintained and somebody will query it immediately and say: “We are running low on this particular item.”

310. It is a control of stock but it is not a control of expenditure?

Mr. Suttle.—If you maintain your minimum stock and do not exceed your maximum stock, then you have maximum control. There is a minimum and a maximum.

311. Deputy P. Lenihan.—Your stock is the physical reflection of your expenditure?

Mr. Suttle.—So long as the minimum stock is maintained throughout the year and the maximum stock is not exceeded, there is nothing to worry about. So long as your maximum stock is not exceeded, that is, that you are not buying too much, then you confine yourself to your actual requirements.

312. Deputy FitzGerald.—But this does not control consumption?

Mr. Suttle.—It does, automatically. No soldier can get two overcoats in two years. He can get only one jacket, one trousers. That is absolutely controlled rigidly. Everything in the Army is fully controlled in that way by regulation.

313. Deputy FitzGerald.—You have a very tight, rigid control by regulation which has disadvantages to it because you have not a budgetary control system. If you have only stock control then you have to have tight control of issue by regulation, without flexibility?

Mr. Suttle.—The consumption side of it is very easily controlled.

314. Deputy FitzGerald.—Inflexibly controlled?

Mr. Suttle.—Controlled but not inflexibly.

315. Deputy FitzGerald.—It seems so inflexible that if a man ends up with too much ammunition he throws it away?

316. Deputy Tunney.—I think, with respect, that we have gone far too academically into this point. Unless we can assume that the Accounting Officer at the moment, and his staff, is not fully employed, it must pre-suppose the employment of additional staff to produce figures for us?

317. Deputy FitzGerald.—On the contrary. One has to learn the system as one goes along. What I have been thinking of, in the terms of the system of budgetary control, would involve less staff. I thought the system existed in entries through the Book of Estimates and more detail in the Department. It appears that that is not the way the thing works. While the point I am raising is, perhaps, of general interest, perhaps it is inappropriate to press it any further now.

318. Deputy Treacy.—Subhead N deals with Animals, Forage, etc. There is an expenditure more than granted of £15,185. I understand that the excess is due mainly to the purchase of horses for the Equitation Team. I welcome that very much. We hope, therefore, for better things from our Jumping Team in the years ahead. May we expect them to regain some of the old glory on the international jumping scene?

Mr. P. Lenihan.—That is for the jockey.

Deputy Treacy.—What kinds of animals have we got and how many?

Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.—I would like to be able to forecast a very successful year. We are doing our best to bring that about. As this subhead shows we have invested pretty heavily in horses. I think we have some pretty good horses and we have paid good prices. In the present accounting year, we were fairly successful. We certainly hope to have a successful team for the future.

319. Is it the intention to participate in most countries’ events? How soon can we do so, in fact?

—Last year, we attended quite a number of European shows. We attended Ludwigsburg, Wiesbaden, Vienna, London, Dublin, Ostend, Rotterdam, Brussels, Amsterdam and Geneva. In all of these, except London and Dublin, it was an exclusively military team. In the cases of London and Dublin, it was a mixed military and civilian team. The Army riders won five first prizes, six seconds and about thirteen third prizes. The total value of prize money was £1,245. It is not the money, I think, that is important but the placings.

320. Deputy E. Collins.—Who determines the Army-civilian team? The composition is determined at what level?

—It is determined by the National Equestrian Federation of Ireland who represent the International Equestrian Federation—in other words, the Royal Dublin Society. One of the Society’s functions is to act for that federation.

321. Deputy Tunney.—Do your officers have any negotiations with the National Stud in the matter of the possibility of producing a horse that might be suitable for this purpose?

—No. A different sort of animal is usually employed for show-jumping. It is a half-bred. The National Stud go in for thoroughbreds.

322. Deputy Treacy.—How many of the horses were purchased in Ireland as distinct from abroad? Are they all of Irish bloodstock?

—All our horses are purchased in Ireland.

323. Deputy E. Collins.—If the Royal Dublin Society determined the composition of the international teams, what say have the Department in it? After all, we are providing a fairly substantial amount of capital for the horses?

—We can assume that the Royal Dublin Society as the National Equestrian Federation of Ireland will nominate the best horses and riders to make up the teams Obviously, they will try to get the very best results.

Deputy Treacy.—I hope we have a few like “Dundrum”.

324. Deputy E. Collins.—Is it a satisfactory arrangement for the Army to have the international teams determined by people outside the Department of Defence?

—It is a national team and the Minister for Defence is but one owner of show-jumpers. There are others.

Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—I suggest it is a good check on the Army. If the Royal Dublin Society do not select Army horses they are not up to standard. It is a good idea.

325. Chairman.—Subhead O.1. refers to General Stores. Is our aircraft, in any reasonable degree, up-to-date?

—What we have are in good, serviceable condition but they are not modern.

326. Deputy Nolan.—There was a note in some magazine or paper recently that you were considering buying more Provost aircraft for trainees?

—I think we were to acquire an aircraft on behalf of the Department of Transport and Power for testing aerodrome installations. I am not sure if we got it. That may have been a Dove aircraft——

327. But the trainers, the Provost trainees?

—We have no immediate proposals to buy aircraft.

328. Deputy FitzGerald.—What is the most modern aircraft?

Deputy Nolan.—About eighteen years old.

—The Provost trainer, I think—that is, apart from the helicopters.

329. Deputy FitzGerald.—Military aircraft?

—The Vampire would be probably the only combat aircraft.

330. Are there any proposals to have something a little more up-to-date than that?

—Not that I knew of at the moment.

331. Chairman.—Are there any pilots being trained for Aer Lingus?

—Aer Lingus have not sent us any pilots to be trained for a few years past and I do not know if the scheme will be resumed later.

332. Where do they get their training now?

—I think they have sufficient pilots for the time being.

333. They have been trained elsewhere?

—Some of them were trained in Scotland and possibly in the United States also.

334. On subhead O.2—Helicopters—do we charge for the use of helicopters, say, to a local authority?

—The current charge is £80 an hour for flying time.

335. Deputy Nolan.—It has gone up by 20 per cent? It was £60?

—About that, yes.

336. Chairman.—Do we use the helicopters for mapping or for fishery protection?

—They could have a limited use in fishery protection. Their primary purpose is search and rescue operations and they operate the ambulance service for the local authorities.

337. Deputy FitzGerald.—Why is their use in fishery protection limited? Do we use other aircraft for this purpose?

—They cannot fix the position of a ship accurately and prove it in court. I understand they are not equipped for that.

338. Even though they can do photography?

—Yes, they can do photography.

339. Yet they cannot take a picture of a ship vis-à-vis the coastline for measuring purposes?

—I am not technically qualified to say, but I am told they would not be able to fix the position of a ship in a way that would satisfy a court.

340. Are they used to find fishing vessels that might be in a place they should not be so that other action could be taken? Are they used for reconnaisance purposes?

—They have been tried for that purpose but they are based far away from the east and south coasts and it would be difficult to use them on a large scale.

341. The helicopter can land virtually anywhere. You mean they are based too far away?

—Yes. They were based at Baldonnel.

But they could be used around the coast?

—Occasionally, yes.

342. Deputy E. Collins.—Could we recommend that equipment be purchased for installation in helicopters so they would be capable of doing fishery protection work? It would be a very good supplement to our corvettes?

—All this has been looked at.

Chairman.—In fact, it has been raised in the House.

Deputy FitzGerald.—It is a matter of policy.

Deputy E. Collins.—I am raising the point that helicopters are not being used fully. I do not see why they should not be properly equipped for fishery protection.

Deputy Nolan.—The point is that the evidence of the captain of a helicopter would not be accepted in court.

Deputy E. Collins.—The installation of proper equipment would overcome this.

Deputy Nolan.—Would that not be an international problem?

Deputy FitzGerald.—How would it be international? It is our fisheries?

Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.—These are technical problems.

343. Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—Is it true the helicopter cannot land at night?

—Normally they do not operate at night.

344. Deputy FitzGerald.—Is that due to lack of equipment?

—They are adequately equipped but I understand night flying is not one of their capabilities.

345. Is this because of the type of helicopter or is it lack of night flying equipment?

—I think it is characteristic of the helicopter generally.

346. That no helicopter can land at night?

Deputy Nolan.—They can take off and land at Baldonnel.

Deputy FitzGerald.—Surely helicopters all over the world can land at night?

—I am told they do not fly at night.

347. Is it because we have helicopters that cannot land at night or because our helicopters lack the equipment for night flying?

—Perhaps it is that being low flying aircraft they could run into trouble in the dark.

348. That does not answer the question. Is it that we have a type of helicopter which has to fly so low that it cannot fly at night or is there night flying equipment for such helicopters which we have not got?

—It is an excellent, modern helicopter, but as regards its capabilities for night flying, I cannot say for certain.

349. Deputy E. Collins.—Could proper equipment not be installed in the helicopter in order to provide fishery protection?

—I cannot say what exactly the problem is as regards night flying.

350. Deputy Treacy.—How many helicopters have we and is it contemplated that we would buy any more?

—Three helicopters. No decision has been taken about future purchases.

351. Are the three fully utilised?

—Yes.

352. Deputy E. Collins.—On subhead P. —Naval Stores—what state are the corvettes in? There has been much criticism of the condition and usage of our corvettes. Has anything been done to rectify this position?

—One corvette is operational. It is in for routine examination at the moment.

353. There are no corvettes in use at the moment?

—There is no corvette at sea at the moment. The other two corvettes have been surveyed and the surveyor’s report is under consideration.

354. There cannot be any reflection on our naval service from the point of view of fishery protection when there is equipment there which they cannot use?

—Proposals are being pursued for the purchase of two new vessels for the naval service.

355. Deputy FitzGerald.—Surely if the present vessels are not usable this must have been anticipated. Is there some planning difficulty here that we got into this position?

Chairman.—That would be more a question for the House.

Deputy FitzGerald.—The note says that the cost of maintenance is less than anticipated. I took it they were in such good repair they did not need to be maintained, but it appears they were in such bad repair they could not be maintained.

Chairman.—The corvettes are not in good condition. We all know that for a long time.

356. Deputy E. Collins.—There have been many complaints by fishermen that they are not in use and if this is because of lack of repairs, it is having a very bad effect.

Mr. Suttle.—The cost of repairing a corvette to make it serviceable could far outweigh the value of the vessel after repair.

357. Deputy FitzGerald.—It suggests a very high level of inefficiency if you get to the stage where vessels are irreparable and we have no protection?

Chairman.—That is a matter of policy.

Deputy FitzGerald.—I am trying to bring it in.

358. Deputy Tunney.—On subhead S.— Buildings—would it be appropriate to ask a question? I visited Baldonnel. I must confess I was not impressed by the rooms which the teachers there are obliged to use in training young army personnel. The rooms were much too large. The acoustics were not good. Could the matter of providing more modern classrooms be considered? The teachers working at Baldonnel are under a very definite disadvantage.

—There are very many buildings that we would like to improve. It is a question of making money available for them.

359. Deputy E. Collins.—There is an acute shortfall of activity in that subhead. The amount granted was £230,000; the actual expenditure was £156,396. It seems a substantial difference. It would appear to me that something went wrong on a large scale?

—Yes. The maintenance men’s strike affected deliveries under that heading.

360. There must have been a substantial contract?

—There was a very large number of orders involved in this. It would not be a single contract—a very considerable number of small-to-medium contracts for various types of stores and works.

361. Deputy E. Collins.—On subhead V. —Insurance—this is in respect of social welfare insurance alone?

Mr. Suttle.—Yes.

362. You do not insure buildings?

Mr. Suttle.—No, boilers only.

363. On subhead W.—Expenses of Equitation Teams at Horse Shows—was the saving due to the fact that the teams did not go abroad?

Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.—It was decided to concentrate that year on the Olympic Games in Mexico, and to conserve the equitation team as much as possible with that end in view. An all-Army team went to Lucerne that year and Army riders participated in the London and Dublin shows.

364. Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—Do the teams get grants-in-aid from the promoters of the show for this?

—I understand some expenses are paid from the time they enter the country until they leave. There is some arrangement like that.

365. Chairman.—In item No. 2 of the Appropriations in Aid,—Sale of surplus stores and unserviceable clothing—there was a very big figure under the heading “Realised”. Could we have an explanation of that? The note says that receipts were greater than expected due to the sale of a large quantity of scrap metal?

—There was an effort made to root out as much as possible of the old stores in that year.

366. Deputy FitzGerald.—Item No. 13 of the Appropriations in Aid shows our position vis-à-vis the United Nations in respect of repayments. It is explained that we got a payment in respect of the preceding year and a payment on account of outstanding claims. Does this mean that there is not a firm agreement, that we make a claim which may be accepted or rejected?

—The arrangement with the United Nations is that they recoup us our extra and extraordinary costs arising from the sending of troops overseas for peace-keeping missions. The speed with which they pay the amounts cannot be foreseen. It depends on how well they are able to get funds. By and large, we have fared fairly well with the United Nations in the matter of recoupment of expenses.

367. There is not any argument as to what is due to us; it is only a question of ability to pay?

—That is right.

368. This is a firm figure we can count on getting when they get the money?

—Yes. These accounts are a continuous process. As each unit serves overseas its expenses are compiled and an account is sent to the United Nations as soon as possible.

369. And there is no argument about that other than the question of when it is paid?

—Virtually none.

370. Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—May I go back to item No. 6—Receipts on discharge by purchase? Could we have an explanation of that?

—Soldiers may buy themselves out by paying a certain amount as prescribed in regulations. It may be up to £200.

371. Would there be many concerned in a year?

—In the year ended 31st January, 1970, 117 cases.

372. Deputy Tunney.—What type of service is provided by No. 8—Receipts for barrack services?

—Sales of one sort or another, lending or renting of barrack service items such as beds, bedding, furniture and that sort of equipment; also sums recovered in respect of losses, breakages and deficiencies.

373. Deputy Treacy.—On No. 12—Repayments of sums advanced to officers for purchase of motor cars—may we take it that loans are available to army officers and, if so, at what per cent? They are available to all army officers?

—They are available to officers who are required to have cars for the purpose of carrying out their duties, mainly officers employed with the FCA. There is not any interest charged on these loans which are repayable over periods of up to three years.

374. It is a very limited loan?

—Fairly limited. There would probably be 30 or 40 in a year.

375. Deputy FitzGerald.—I wish to raise a general issue which did not seem to arise appropriately under a particular subhead. On the question of duplication of control, the Devlin Report states:

The administrative procedures of the Department of Defence are based on a rigorous interpretation of the requirements of civilian control and of financial supervision by the civil side of the Department. This has resulted in a dual structure, consisting of a Secretariat and a General Headquarters, in which there is extensive duplication of function. The duplication of function is perhaps most extensive in the areas of procurement, contract administration, and stores accounting and auditing. Efficiency would be enhanced if this dual structure were eliminated…

The report, in the recommendation section, advises that the supply, accommodation and lands function should be assigned to a new agency, the Defence Services agency, with joint civilian and military staffing. The director of this agency should co-ordinate the requirements of the Quartermaster General within the budgetary limits conveyed from the finance unit through the functional assistant secretary. The recommendations go on to suggest that the civilian side of the Department under the secretary should be responsible for general and budgeting co-ordination and that the military side should be responsible for military execution, with the Defence Services agency responsible for all procurement activities. These recommendations have been made by responsible people, including the assistant secretary of the Department of Finance. We have to take serious note of this question of duplication. Apparently a budgetary system of control has not been operating here. I raised this question earlier on a particular item and I am raising it now as a general issue, wondering what comments the accounting officer has to make on the suggestion in the Devlin Report that there is extensive duplication of functions in the Department and that efficiency would be enhanced by substituting a budgetary control system which would give more flexibility?

—It is very much in the realm of policy, so I would rather not comment on it now.

376. The question of what should be done is in the realm of policy but the question of inefficiency is within the competence of the committee. What is Mr. Ó Cearnaigh’s view on the question of duplication of functions as between the civil and the military sides of the Department?

—I think it would be inappropriate for me to make any comment on the Devlin Report, seeing that it is before the Government at the moment and the Government have not given any direction on it.

377. I will put away the Devlin Report. I am concerned only with efficiency. I have quoted from the Devlin Report and I ask if we have not a function in this matter if we consider that efficiency would be enhanced by substituting a budgetary control system here. Are we not entitled to ask about that?

Mr. Suttle.—You are assuming that there is inefficiency.

378. Deputy FitzGerald.—No. I am asking the accounting officer what his comment would be on the suggestion that the system involves inefficiency. I am asking the Chair whether such questions come within the competence of the committee.

Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—Our function here is to find inefficiency.

Deputy FitzGerald.—I am trying to.

Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—And when we find it we comment on it.

379. Deputy FitzGerald.—I am trying to find it by asking the accounting officer whether there is avoidable duplication of functions. The Devlin Report thinks there is. Am I entitled to ask the question?

Chairman.—It is a fair question if there is any question of inefficiency.

Mr. Suttle.—It would be a matter of adducing evidence that there is inefficiency. The secretary is responsible for the administration of his Department and he is doing the job in the best way possible. If you ask an accounting officer to condemn himself straight away by saying the Department is inefficient, that is going at the thing from the wrong angle. If you can produce evidence that there is inefficiency, then it is a question for the accounting officer and this committee, but until there is evidence of inefficiency it is not a question for the committee. The accounting officer will not condemn himself here before the committee.

Deputy FitzGerald.—He is more likely to defend himself.

380. Chairman.—We might ask for a memo on this.

Mr. Suttle.—On the whole, I find the system very efficient. You have got the civilian and the military sides together. The military side has to work on the basis of an army of discipline and knowledge and you are bound to have duplication of certain positions because, in time of emergency, in time of war, soldiers would have to do their own work of stores accounting. They would be responsible. Therefore, they must be educated and trained in peace time. That training has to be carried out but it cannot be linked directly with the ordinary day to day work of the Department which in general is carried out by civilians. Store training is part of military training and you cannot do away with that situation. That is only one aspect of it. There are military stores and military men must be trained to look after and to control them. At the same time, you must have civilians because military personnel are not available to carry out full-time stores duty: a soldier goes into the army precisely to be a soldier. He may be trained in stores but he cannot be in stores continuously because he has to do his military duties.

381. Deputy FitzGerald.—Is it your suggestion that the stores are merely training functions.

Mr. Suttle.—To a certain extent, in the same way as they started producing bread in the Curragh and meat, on the basis that there must be a nucleus of butchers and bakers in the army for training purposes. This runs right through the Army personnel, both civilian and military. You have to divorce the two. The military must be trained in every aspect of their work— store accounting, baking, and so on. In peacetime, the number of soldiers is small. They have their military and civil duties —store accounting, and so on. You have to maintain the two together.

382. Deputy FitzGerald.—This would explain that in one military barracks you have people doing control that might duplicate civilian work for training purposes. My understanding is that it is fully throughout, or is it only in certain barracks?

Mr. Suttle.—There is a certain element right through the whole Army. For example, in Islandbridge, you have a big transport stores and repair works. You have a mixture of civilian and military personnel working side by side but the military personnel must do their military duties as well as their transport workshops and repair work.

383. Deputy FitzGerald.—If it is a training function you could have some barracks where it could be carried out. I understand there is a system of control throughout the Army which seems to involve extensive duplication throughout the Army?

Mr. Suttle.—It must be—you cannot have——

Deputy FitzGerald.—You do not have baking throughout the whole Army?

Mr. Suttle.—You have stores in every barracks in the country apart from the central depots. They are maintained by the military personnel and, in certain places, by civilians and military.

Deputy FitzGerald.—I find it very unconvincing.

384. Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—I think the Deputy is trying to apply to the Army something that can be applied only to a business. The Army is in a different situation. In other words, on the whole question of economy, we should abolish it. Certain services must be developed for use in wartime, whether economic or otherwise. If this produces a dual control, this unfortunately is the position. It is the position. It cannot be done otherwise?

385. Deputy FitzGerald.—I am not disagreeing that there may be duplication in certain cases but, to have a duplicate system throughout the whole Army, but a baking system in the Curragh, is not logical. It is much preferable that there should be a budgetary system under which some money would be allocated to the Army on the basis of a statement of requirements, reasonably justified. We have the same phenomenon in local government where, we are told, there is a fourfold checking of items—the Devlin Report. We have a function at two levels: nothing I have heard so far justifies this.

Mr. Suttle.—You refer to duplication throughout the whole Army. I hardly think so.

386. Deputy FitzGerald.—I said “extensive duplication of function”. I think you told me stores control is not confined to one barracks?

Mr. Suttle.—We have stores throughout the Army but you have not duplication of stores control throughout the Army, nor inefficiency.

387. Deputy FitzGerald.—It is to be well done by duplication.

Mr. Suttle.—It is not duplicated.

388. Deputy FitzGerald.—You said there is stores control by civilians throughout the Army and also in the barracks. This seems to tally with the Devlin Report.

Mr. Suttle.—That is a very broad statement.

389. Deputy Treacy.—Is this system we are discussing just now of accounting in the Army a system we inherited from the British authorities? Does this system apply in Britain and perhaps elsewhere? Is it the same method of accounting in Armies throughout the world?

Mr. Suttle.—I think we developed our own system here. When the Army was set up in 1921-22, it was brand new. We inherited a certain amount of the old system but, over the years, I think we developed our own system here.

Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.—It would largely be the same in every Army. They have to keep track of things.

390. Deputy FitzGerald.—Is it the same degree of duplication of function?

—I do not accept the “duplication” statements.

391. Could I ask you to develop that? If there is no duplication, what does this mean? The Army has a stores control system. Do you simply accept its certificate or do you have your own stores control system?

Mr. Suttle.—It is a military function. The certificate produces evidence, in effect, that “These stores are no longer available for use”. There is duplication for training purposes only.

392. Deputy FitzGerald.—You seem to suggest that stores control is done by the civilian side but it has to be duplicated to some degree in the Army for training purposes. The Accounting Officer seems to suggest that stores control is carried out in the Army itself and he accepts the certificates and does not look behind them. They are totally divergent statements. Where is the payment carried out—in the Department or in the Army?

Mr. Suttle.—There are links at all stages between the Army and the civil side. Army personnel pay their own men, but they account to civilians for the money they get. That is only one aspect. On every side, there is a link between the civil and the military sides.

393. Deputy FitzGerald.—How is this accountancy done to account to the civilian side?

Mr. Suttle.—They certify every week. A soldier is paid every week. A military man gets his money and a list of the men he must pay. He sends back the statement to the Department.

394. When does this come back to the Department?

Mr. Suttle.—Within two days.

395. So you have, in fact, almost day-to-day control at this point. I understand from the Accounting Officer that the Army pay it out and they do not look behind it and that is that. I understand from the Comptroller and Auditor General that the Army pay and that the entire accounting is done——

Mr. Suttle.—The payment of soldiers is only one item of the financial functions of the Army and the Department of Defence. It is an example of the position. The Army daily account to the civil side.

396. Why is it necessary to account daily to the civilian side? Why can they not control the money themselves and account at the end of the year?

Mr. Suttle.—It would be far more efficient. All he has to do is to pay one group of men and he sends back to the civil side the statement that he has paid these men, and passes back whatever money he has over. That is the end of it as far as he is concerned.

397. The entire control is on the civilian side. The function of paying is simply a delagated function, handing out the money?

Mr. Suttle.—It is linked between the civilian and military sides.

398. So the control of pay is on the civilian side and the control of stores is entirely on the military side? They pay it and simply account to you?

Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.—The Quartermaster-General is responsible for stores and he operates various accounts for that purpose. These accounts are open to audit by the accounting officer, that is, myself, and a small staff, I satisfy myself that the stores received have been accounted for.

399. You only audit the accounts?

—Audit, in order to discharge my function as accounting officer. This audit involves inspection and test stock-taking.

400. How can I produce more authoritative evidence than the evidence of a committee of this kind appointed by the Minister, including the Secretary of the Department of Finance, the Secretary of the Department of Transport and Power and other people with expertise? How can I produce more concrete evidence than that?

Mr. Suttle.—The Devlin Report is not before the committee.

Deputy Tunney.—As I see it, instead of referring to specific cases we are now using the Devlin Report as a basis for discussion.

401. Deputy FitzGerald.—I had at the beginning asked the Chairman if I was entitled to raise this question of duplication. I did not think I had to have any evidence in order to ask questions on that but I thought it proper to produce authoritative evidence. However, if it weakens my case for asking questions I am prepared to discard the evidence and start from scratch.

Deputy Tunney.—The Deputy should realise that his own particular interest in accountancy and economics might not be shared by other members of the committee. We are discussing the Devlin Report and I do not think this is the appropriate time for that. If we are to have a similar discussion at every meeting a great deal of our time will be taken up.

Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—I think Deputy FitzGerald is assuming that the Devlin Report is fact.

Deputy FitzGerald.—No, prima facie evidence.

Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—He is trying to produce evidence from this report in order to substantiate his case. This is not our function.

402. Deputy FitzGerald.—I am not clear what my function is. I am learning as I go along. I understood the terms of reference do involve seeking information and inquiring into any evidence of inefficiency and duplication of functions.

403. Chairman.—Could we leave this matter over until we are formulating the general report? That may obviate the necessity for raising analogous duplication issues under every other Vote.

404. Deputy FitzGerald.—It seems to me our general report would carry more weight if we had inquired into this matter and discovered whether there was any truth in the suggestion of duplication of functions in certain cases. The discussion we have had has elicited information on stores control and on the payment of members of the permanent Defence Force which would seem to me to be helpful and relevant to our final report. It would be a pity if we were inhibited from seeking further information along these lines?

Mr. Suttle.—Unless evidence is produced before this committee it cannot be discussed. I do not think it is the function of the committee to look for evidence themselves.

405. May I just read what our function is? The terms of reference simply state that the accounts and the report are referred to us for examination and report.

Mr. Suttle.—There is nothing in the accounts or in my report alleging duplication in the Army.

406. If we wanted to raise a question of duplication, it could not be done because we could not produce evidence of it? Is that right?

Mr. Suttle.—Yes.

407. How could I conceivably get evidence from these accounts of duplication of functions since the accounts are presented, although in an entirely proper form, in a way which makes it impossible to see such duplication? Therefore, it is impossible for us to inquire into duplication when there can be no evidence.

Mr. Suttle.—I can produce evidence in my report from time to time on the duplication of functions.

408. Deputy FitzGerald.—We cannot raise any issue of duplication of functions unless you raise it?

Mr. Suttle.—I do not see how you could possibly get the information to raise it.

409. Deputy FitzGerald.—The position is we are not entitled to ask questions on duplication unless you report it to us that there is a duplication of functions?

410. Chairman.—I think I would take a broader view than that. I think the committee would be entitled to raise any matter which they think would show inefficiency and waste of public money. That is our function and anything that can be related to that would have to be regarded as in order.

411. Deputy FitzGerald.—That is what I understood to be the function of this committee. Would the accounting officer say how many staff are engaged on this audit to which he referred?

—Fifteen or 16.

412. Audit staff? Could I ask the Comptroller and Auditor General whether he regards an audit staff of 15 or 16 for purely audit purposes as appropriate?

Mr. Suttle.—For stores?

Deputy FitzGerald.—Purely for the purpose of auditing stores of the magnitude of the Department of Defence stores. I am thinking of a control system which involves the annual purchase of stores of the order of £1 million.

Mr. Suttle.—I think the stores audit section of the Department of Defence is adequate and do their work efficiently. I myself have a staff of about four or five for all aspects of army stores and everything else, and my staff do a stores audit themselves to ensure that the audit carried out by the Department of Defence is effective.

413. Deputy FitzGerald.—So that you are able to audit the entire Defence Force with four or five?

Mr. Suttle.—Yes.

414. They require 15 or 16 to do what has been described by the accounting officer as only an audit for stores control?

Mr. Suttle.—Yes.

415. You see nothing surprising in that?

Mr. Suttle.—No. You have to realise that the £1 million worth of stores they are purchasing in a year represents roughly £10 million to £15 million of actual stores on hands. That is only the annual supply.

416. We are talking here not of any system of control in the sense of ordinary control of issue from stores. We are talking of what has been described as merely an audit for stores control. I am wondering if you have outside the Army, any other function for the public service that is over £1 million a year—how much stores altogether?

Mr. Suttle.—It is only my guess.

417. How many people would you expect to find auditing these accounts on behalf of a commercial firm? If your own staff for the whole Army is only four or five, which does not involve duplication of functions, why, would you say, does this require 14 or 15?

Mr. Suttle.—If the Department of Defence did not employ 14 or 15 I might have to increase my staff because I would consider that the stores audit carried out by the Department was not fully effective. In the course of my work I examine the work of these auditors to see what results they have produced and what controls they have carried out and it is on the basis of that work that I confine my audit of the stores to a very small percentage of the total. I do that on the basis of the efficiency of the Departmental audit.

418. You have the system of stores control by the Army—then a double audit —their audit and your audit. Do you consider that it is necessary to have these three stages?

Mr. Suttle.—Yes, I do.

You must have a double audit?

Mr. Suttle.—Yes.

419. And is this throughout the service; is everything audited twice?

Mr. Suttle.—No, it is not audited twice. My auditors examine possibly point one per cent of Army stores. The section in the Department would possibly audit another 20 per cent.

420. Why is it thought necessary to have two sets of auditing?

Mr. Suttle.—On the basis that I want to ensure that the Army audit staff statements are correct. I am accepting their statements. I must ensure that their statements are correct. So, I do a test check of their work.

421. Is this done throughout the public services?

Mr. Suttle.—It is.

A double audit?

—No, it is not duplicated auditing at all.

422. Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—I understand that your function is to be the watchdog?

Mr. Suttle.—Yes.

423. Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—That is their function within their own organisation. When they submit those accounts to the Government or to us here, we are the watchdog and the Comptroller and Auditor General is the watchdog and this necessitates what you call a second audit. It is a substantial exercise, just as the local government auditor goes to the county council.

Deputy FitzGerald.—We may be getting involved in semantics. In the ordinary way in business somebody is controlling the issue of stores—a stores officer or someone —and that control has to be supervised by an audit to make sure that nothing has gone wrong. I am not clear why there should be three stages in this instance.

Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—I am not as familiar with these things as the Deputy is. It seems very simple to me. If you take any ordinary company having a managing director, at the end of the year an auditor is sent there to check on what he does. This is in fact what he does.

Deputy FitzGerald.—That is right.

Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—He must check on this thing.

Deputy FitzGerald.—He gets an auditor.

Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—No. He collects his figures from the various sections and departments. He presents those to his auditor.

Deputy FitzGerald.—Quite.

Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—I take it that in the Department of Defence the accounting officer is something similar to the managing director.

Deputy FitzGerald.—No.

Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—This is his function. I consider him to be the managing director of the Department of Defence. His figures are submitted to the Comptroller and Auditor General.

Deputy FitzGerald.—I would entirely agree with that. I would suggest that the managing director does not present 20 per cent of the stores. We have been told that that is what this managing director is doing. To have a two-stage audit seems necessary if, in fact, the Comptroller is auditing everything and spot-checking. It is his function. I quite see that because of the fact that there is another audit he is able to confine his audit to a small percentage. That is reasonable given that there is another audit. I cannot see why it is necessary to have two-stage audit. It would seem to me that there should be one-stage control and one-stage audit. I do not mind whether the one-stage control is carried out by the Army or the Department of Defence staff but if in fact, the auditing at the Army level is done by the Comptroller, to insert a second-stage in between, which involves an extensive audit, even though minimising the work of the Comptroller, seems to involve an element of duplication of function, not necessarily of work.

Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—This seems reasonable. Again, coming back to the managing director, he just does not take the books and throw them at his auditor. He supplies them under different headings and in doing so is performing the functions of an auditor. Maybe we are talking about definitions. We have been held up by this all the morning. I am not familiar with it, trying to learn as I go along.

Deputy FitzGerald.—Me too.

Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—He or somebody else in his office arranges those figures. Anybody who submits an income tax return is in the same position. You do not usually throw income tax returns into your auditor. This, I take it, is an audit of some kind—a correlation of figures to present them one against the other.

Deputy FitzGerald.—I could not accept the analogy between the managing director collecting the books in order and presenting them to the auditor and a staff of 14 to 15 engaged in an audit of 20 per cent of stores.

Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—You are going from the main point of the stores.

Mr. Suttle.—Banks’ auditors spend about a week auditing the banks’ transactions but the basis of their audit is the reports of the inspectors, the banks’ own inspectors going around auditing continuously. The banks’ official auditors, whoever they are, do a very small check. If you look at any bank’s accounts you will find the total audit fee paid to their auditors is comparatively small. The audit carried out by a statutory auditor is curtailed on the basis that the banks have a very efficient internal auditing procedure and the statutory auditors accept certificates of the inspectors and do a small check as I do in the Department of Defence.

424. Deputy FitzGerald.—And you accept the description of the control mechanism as being an auditing function?

Mr. Suttle.—Certain aspects—a lot of their function is purely managerial control; it is not auditing. Mr.Ó Cearnaigh is the Accounting Officer responsible for all accounting in the Army, not auditing. He is responsible for all accounting.

425. In answer to the question I asked in relation to stores he told me his function in relation to stores was an auditing function, that the 14 or 15 staff engaged in stores control—if I may describe it loosely—are merely auditing. You accept that description?

Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.—The Quartermaster-General is responsible to me as accounting officer for the proper control of stores. The staff, to which I referred as an audit staff, is there so that I can be satisfied that all is well with stores.

426. And they carry out an audit of perhaps 20 per cent of the total—spot checks?

—I doubt if it is as much as 20 per cent.

427. They are simply doing spot checks, auditing, and in that sense there is duplication?

—They check every paid bill to make sure the material is brought to account. They audit some of the accounts in detail, others in a small way only. They inspect and carry out test stocktakings. They do costings and prepare accounts e.g. claims on the United Nations.

428. Spot checks?

—You could describe some of the work as spot checks.

429. Some of it is not a spot check. Every individual bill is checked, yet you describe that as an audit as distinct from financial control. You said you had 14 or 15 staff and that what they were doing was checking every bill, and even some of their other work is part spot check?

Mr. Suttle.—To check every bill is auditing from their point of view. Money has been paid out for stores and the only document they have is the bill. They go into the stores and see if each item was brought in.

Deputy Tunney.—Though the Deputy may regard this as a wasteful exercise, perhaps he will allow me the thought that I might not consider it so wasteful. Might I ask the Deputy whether he is leading my line of thought to a situation where he thinks there is too much or too little auditing?

Deputy FitzGerald.—I was about to say——

Deputy Tunney.—It has taken half an hour.

430. Deputy FitzGerald.—I am getting confused between auditing and control. When you say there is too much auditing/ controlling, I am not sure which is which. I thought control meant that you checked everything, and that auditing meant you carried out spot checks on things. Perhaps I am wrong. When I talk about duplication of functions I mean checking all documents twice. It is duplication if two people do it. Auditing is a series of spot checks and, on that basis, going through the materials and certifying the accounts are correct. When I am talking about duplication of functions I am talking about two people checking the same things.

Mr. Suttle.—There is no question of anyone doing the same work twice.

431. The accounting officer told me?

Mr. Suttle.—There are two aspects of the matter. When a bill for stores comes in, it comes in generally with the stores and it goes to the man who receives them. That man is required to check that the stores are in accordance with description on the bill. He then brings them on to his stores records. He then passes them to the finance people to check the mathematics of the account. The bill is then paid. From the point of view of stores auditing and stores control or the part the accounting officer plays, he must ensure that the stores are recorded. He does no more checking than to see that the supplies were physically brought into the stores and shown in the stores records. That is the end of it. There is no more checking other than by small test check. Audit is all part of control. You cannot distinguish between audit and control. It is all one part of the whole. Control actually includes audit and every firm of any size has its own internal audit staff. There is, indeed, an association of internal auditors and the only function of the members of this association is to certify that the system of accounting is being carried out.

432. You regard this as being a perfectly normal system: the storeman takes the thing in, sends it up to a person on the civilian side. There is no question of it going to anybody else in the Army, only to a civilian?

Mr. Suttle.—I do not know the exact mechanics of who puts what in an envelope.

433. The bill does not go to anybody other than the storeman, who checks. There is one question: will somebody else check the storeman’s check?

Mr. Suttle.—You have got a hierarchy, even in the store. You have got an officer in charge of the store and he, personally, does not go along and examine every item that goes into the store. The storeman comes along and says: “I am taking a ton of potatoes into the store”. The officer will see the document in connection with the delivery, the potatoes are there, and the bill will be sent for payment. In the ordinary course of his duty, the officer will see the ton of potatoes.

434. And this is my analogy—it happens in an ordinary company. There is no extra staff involved?

Mr. Suttle.—No, there is not. Audit and inspection are part of the staff’s duty. They pay the bills, and compile the accounts. They check transport and so on. They would be involved in the costing of transport, to which we referred earlier. There are other miscellaneous duties.

435. You feel there is no duplication of functions in stores accounting and auditing. Do you feel there is no duplication in procurement?

Mr. Suttle.—Yes.

436. The same is true of contract administration—no duplication?

Mr. Suttle.—No.

437. Deputy Tunney.—Maybe it would help if it were said there is no unnecessary duplication. Obviously, there is an admission that to a certain extent there is duplication where, for instance, the Quartermaster certifies that ten chests of tea have come?

438. Deputy FitzGerald.—I accept the correction. Mr. Suttle, are you satisfied there is no duplication of functions?

Mr. Suttle.—There are certain aspects I would not go into, unless there were unnecessary staff employed on contracts, and that is a thing we check on from time to time.

439. Deputy FitzGerald.—You are satisfied this does not exist in the Department of Defence?

Mr. Suttle.—From my own experience, yes.

VOTE 44—ARMY PENSIONS.

Mr. Ó Cearnaigh further examined.

440. Chairman.—The subheads of the Vote appear on page 146. Subhead A, under the heading of Army Pensions Board, deals with Salaries, Wages and Allowances. The old Pensions Board, as we knew it, has gone?

Mr. Ó Cearnaigh.—This board is the Army Pensions Board which deals with disability only.

441. Deputy FitzGerald.—With reference to subhead D—Military Service Pensions— what does the note on the subhead, on page 147, mean—“The saving is due to a number of pensions remaining unpaid in the absence of evidence of life and to the number of deaths being greater than anticipated.”? What does that mean?

—Every pensioner is required periodically to complete a life certificate and to have it witnessed. If he does not do that, payment of pension is suspended.

442. Absence of evidence of life must be almost conclusive evidence of death, I would have thought?

—Not with us. They can return after a number of years and claim the whole lot —even 20 years.

443. And you have no statutory limitation on payment?

—There could be, but we do not use it in those cases. There is usually a good explanation.

444. Chairman.—Do I understand it correctly that these Military Service Pensions come under the two Acts, the 1924 Act and the 1934 Act?

—Yes.

445. Deputy FitzGerald.—“… certain other Military Organisations, etc.,…” referred to in the ambit of the Vote: which are these that are covered by this Vote?

—The Old IRA, Cumann na mBan, Fianna Éireann, Connaught Rangers.

446. It does not include Sinn Féin, as such?

Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—They are not entitled to pensions, as such.

447. Deputy FitzGerald.—Would people who were not attached to any of these specific bodies but who were engaged in auxiliary military activities be included?

—An essential requirement is that they be members of one of the prescribed bodies.

448. Chairman.—Subhead H deals with special allowances under the Army Pensions Acts, 1923 to 1964, to persons who served in Easter Week, to persons awarded medals and to persons granted pensions or gratuities under the Connaught Rangers (Pensions) Acts. Are we still getting applications under this subhead?

—Yes. The number of special allowances is increasing all the time. There are over 10,000 of them at the moment.

449. Deputy FitzGerald.—There are 10,000 survivors of Easter Week? This is “… under Army Pensions Acts, 1923 to 1964, to Persons who served in Easter Week, …” I had read it that they were allowances to persons who served in Easter Week?

—There are not many left now from Easter Week. They are nearly all Old IRA of later periods.

450. Chairman.—If they had service in this three months before 11th July, 1921, they receive a special allowance, if vouched?

—They have to have the medal.

451. Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—Are there still applications for medals?

—Yes.

452. How many were awarded last year?

—About 1,100.

453. Deputy FitzGerald.—For service in the Old IRA?

—Yes, mainly the Old IRA—medals awarded for membership for the three months ended 11th July, 1921.

454. Deputy Tunney.—Free travel would have generated some of this?

—Yes.

455. Deputy FitzGerald.—There are 10,000 people alive under this heading?

—Ten thousand in receipt of special allowances. Some of these would also be in receipt of military service pensions. The amount in respect of military service pensions is shown at subhead D: there are about 9,000 military service pensioners still on pay.

456. And these are still being awarded?

—Medals and special allowances, yes, but not military service pensions.

457. Chairman.—There are about 2,000 under the 1924 Act and 8,000 under the 1934 Act?

—Yes, roughly—a total of about 9,000 at present.

Deputy FitzGerald.—It must be difficult to get evidence at this stage.

458. Chairman.—How many are getting free travel, and the ESB and RTE concessions now?

—Over 9,000.

459. Deputy Treacy.—Do the concessions apply only to those in receipt of special allowances?

—No. They apply also in the case of those in receipt of military service pensions, disability pensions due to service in those years, and those who have medals.

460. Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—In the details of Appropriations in Aid item 2 reads: “Recoveries in respect of pension liability”. What would those be?

—These are in respect of aides seconded to the President and to the Taoiseach.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 36—ROINN NA GAELTACHTA.

Mr. L. Tóibín called and examined.

461. Deputy FitzGerald.—On subhead D. —Tithe Gaeltachta—why was less work completed on housing?

Mr. Tóibín.—We do not build houses ourselves, but provide grants to assist others; we have some thousands of cases current at any one time. There are, therefore, many personal decisions involved and financial circumstances and so on can all have an effect. Strikes or anything like that can also slow down the work.

462. Was there a particular reason this year?

—The maintenance strike came into this year; that could have had an effect. There is no particular reason that can be identified as influencing many individual decisions.

463. Chairman.—On subhead H.1.—Gaeltarra Éireann—Caiteachas Reatha (Deontasi-gCabhair)—has this been going up or down over the years?

—The Grant-in-Aid is in two parts. A few years back we had a long discussion here on whether the capital should be separated from the current expenditure. That has been done on your recommendation. The general tendency is for the capital part to go up, because there is a big expansion in industrial promotion by Gaeltarra Éireann, and for the current part to go down as Gaeltarra come nearer to a break-even point on the industries they operate.

464. You are hopeful they will eventually become solvent?

—Certainly. We hope to achieve that within the next few years.

465. Deputy FitzGerald.—On subhead F. —Scéimeanna Cultúrtha agus Sóisialacha— the note says there was not the expected expenditure on the £10 grant or on Irish periodicals. Why was this?

—We were proposing a modification in the £10 grant scheme which did not eventually get through and to that extent the expenditure was over-estimated.

466. It was not that the numbers declined?

—No, the number of pupils is fairly constant in recent years, around 8,500.

467. What about Irish periodicals?

—There, again, we were expecting to make more progress in the re-organisation of an Irish newspaper than, in effect, materialised.

468. Deputy Tunney.—On subhead E.— Scéimeanna Feabhsúcháin sa Ghaeltacht— I have reason to remember that originally there were 100 glasshouses in Connemara and 98 in Donegal?

—That is right.

469. They are down now to 64 and 64.

—Yes, some of the houses have gone out of production.

470. The figure in the note takes into account expenditure on glasshouse maintenance. Is it that they have just gone out of production rather than in disrepair?

—Most of those glasshouses would have been put up by the Department of Agriculture more than 20 years ago. Some of them have been very well kept and are still in production and others have come to the end of their useful life.

471. Chairman.—In general, are our glasshouse projects improving?

—Our experience, unfortunately, has been pretty bad in some cases but, again, as in agriculture or any activity like that, some people make a success of a glasshouse and some people do not.

472. Deputy FitzGerald.—In 1968 there was, according to the table “Gaeltacht Glasshouse Scheme”,* a significant increase in the average gross value of tomatoes per grower in Connemara and a pretty steep decrease in Donegal. Is there any particular reason?

—The steep increase applies to the houses “with heating systems”; the description used to be “heated” before but we got it changed because some of the heating systems are not being used. It may be that the heating systems were not being used in most of the Connemara houses which went out of production; the average would then be higher for those remaining. In Donegal a number of the heating systems dropped out of operation in 1968. The tomatoes, therefore, ripened later and that is why there is such a decrease in the gross value of production from Donegal houses with heating systems.

473. Deputy Treacy.—Could the Accounting Officer say how one qualifies for benefit under the various schemes operated by the Department, with particular reference to holiday accommodation?

—We have an information booklet which is out of print at the moment but we have a new edition with the printers. The conditions of every scheme are set out in detail in this booklet. The new edition will be widely distributed throughout the Gaeltacht and to Deputies and Senators when it is available. In regard to holiday accommodation there are two schemes involved in the expenditure shown. First, there are grants supplementary to those given by An Bord Fáilte for hotels and guesthouses. Then there are grants we give to assist people in decorating, fitting and furnishing rooms for visitors. The expenditure in the year was roughly 50/50 under those two schemes.

474. You can outline the conditions for giving grants for hotels?

—Yes, they are set out in the booklet and related to the Irish language and to Irish culture generally. Anyone who gets a grant of this type has to execute a deed of trust guaranteeing to comply with various conditions: first, that Irish speakers from the Gaeltacht or others who have a fluent knowledge of Irish will be employed as far as possible; secondly, that the Irish language, as far as possible, will be used in all activities including the running and publicising of the hotel or guesthouse; thirdly, that the Irish language and Irish music will predominate in entertainment and pastimes provided for visitors; and fourthly, that items made in the Gaeltacht will predominate among the souvenirs and so on for sale to visitors.

475. Could you kindly designate the Gaeltacht areas—I am particularly concerned about those in the Munster region —that might qualify under this scheme. For instance, would Ring qualify?

—Ring is the only Waterford area in the Gaeltacht. Of course, every application has to be examined on its merits. With this particular scheme we have found what, perhaps, might be described as an extraordinary tendency to make applications from just inside the boundary of the Gaeltacht, while our aim is to develop thoroughly Irish accommodation in the heart of the Gaeltacht.

476. Would you entertain an application from a Breac-Ghaeltacht?

—We will examine every application but whether we give a grant will depend on the circumstances.

477. Could I ask to what extent Ring has availed of this?

—Ring has got no supplementary grant so far under the scheme for guesthouses and hotels. There have not been applications from the area but there may have been preliminary inquiries.

478. Under subhead E, the expenditure on the schemes—roads, water and sewerage, marine works, glasshouses, agriculture, development of co-operative societies, Irish colleges, secondary schools, halls, holiday accommodation, miscellaneous facilities—is given. What was the expenditure in Waterford?

—I can give you the expenditure in that year in Waterford under each of these headings.

I would welcome it very much if it would not take up too much time. Perhaps, we could get a note?

—I will send you a note on the Waterford expenditure under all headings.

I would be very grateful.*

479. Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—Subheads H.1 and H.2 deal with Gaeltarra Éireann. Does Gaeltarra Éireann consist now of a complex of industries?

—Gaeltarra Éireann continues to operate the industries that have been there for a long time—tweed, knitwear and toys mainly. It is responsible for running these industries. On the other side—this is where the capital grants come in—Gaeltarra is engaged in the industrial promotion business. That is of two types: firstly, joining up with other people in companies and assisting the industries in much the same way as the Industrial Development Authority would; secondly, giving grants ranging up to £10,000 to assist people in the development of small industries without participation by Gaeltarra in these industries. These are the two types of industrial promotion. So, in recent years, Gaeltarra engages in both the operation and promotion of industries.

480. Deputy FitzGerald.—You are a member of the board of Gaeltarra Éireann?

—That is right.

481. Are there any other civil servants members of that board?

—No. There are no other civil servants.

You just provide the link with the Department?

—That is so.

482. I notice that you have two executive officers in succession receiving payments from Arramara Teoranta. Does that body come under your Department?

—Yes, the two bodies—Gaeltarra Éireann and Arramara Teoranta—are under our auspices.

483. What is the position in regard to Arramara Teoranta?

—It gets no grant from the Vote. It is a going concern, making a profit.

484. Do you get a dividend?

—It does not yet pay a dividend—it has ploughed back all its profits into development; for instance, a year or two ago it opened a factory in Donegal. The majority of the shares are held by the Minister for the Gaeltacht.

485. What proportion are held privately?

—22 per cent.

486. By a British company?

—By a British company who buy the product, the seaweed meal. It is, perhaps, an interesting case in so far as the State assistance was given to the company by taking shares before the present system of industrial grants was introduced.

487. It is the only case of joint participation by the State with a foreign company?

—Perhaps it is. Now, however, there is indirect participation by the State through Gaeltarra Éireann as distinct from a Minister holding the shares.

488. Deputy Treacy.—Is there any liaison between Gaeltarra Éireann and people like Gael-Linn?

—I suppose all bodies concerned with Irish affairs have various contacts and certainly Gael-Linn or any other body are always welcome to come forward with projects that may be assisted by Gaeltarra Éireann. The Department, however, as the Deputy may see from the Estimate, assist Gael-Linn and other Irish language organisations with a grant-in-aid.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 33—NATIONAL GALLERY.

Mr. James White called and examined.

489. Deputy FitzGerald.—On subhead A. —Salaries, Wages and Allowances—I notice that there is a difficulty in filling vacancies and new posts. Is there any particular reason?

Mr. White.—It is largely due to the fact that permission required for the filling of the posts was not given in time. We had received in principle permission to fill the posts but this has to go through various Departments and this takes a great deal of time.

490. If you are the accounting officer for this and approval in principle is given, why does it have to go to somebody else in some other Department?

—I may not be quite accurate in this; I am not a very experienced civil servant; but, as far as I understand the process, one begins by applying for the filling of a vacancy. This in principle is given, first of all by the Department concerned— Education—and then by the Department of Finance. However, before you actually fill the post you have again to seek permission to publish an advertisement, to have interviews and to take on staff and considerable delays ensue between the first idea and the second.

491. Why is that? I can understand that you cannot create posts without getting financial authority. I can understand also that that would require the intervention of both the Department of Education and the Department of Finance but, having got that, why is it necessary for further approvals beyond that?

—This is part of the structure of the Civil Service. I am afraid I do not understand it.

Mr. Suttle.—Agreement to the creation of a post is not final sanction. You have to agree to the terms of the advertisement, the terms of employment.

492. Deputy FitzGerald.—Once it is agreed in principle that a post of a certain level be created, the terms of employment are a matter for the accounting officer concerned—or could they not be?

Mr. Suttle.—I do not know offhand whether these are permanent posts. If they are permanent posts they have to go through the Civil Service Commission.

493. The suggestion here is that there is a long process of seeking permission for something or other after you have got agreement to establish posts on a particular level. Between this and when you go to the Civil Service Commission, is there another process that takes a long time? What is the purpose of this?

Mr. White.—I do not know much about it but I imagine an agreement has to be arrived at between the Gallery authorities and the Department as to the conditions of service.

494. When the post is sanctioned originally by the Departments of Education and Finance is it not sanctioned as a post with a particular grade and they say: “You can have a man”?

—It would depend on the nature of the post, I suppose.

495. The proposal is for a specific post or it is not. If it is not, perhaps it should have been?

—It might expedite things if, when the proposals were coming up at first, there were draft conditions of service attached. The thing is permanent and pensionable. there is the usual sick leave, et cetera.

496. Are not these all standard?

—It depends. It might be difficult in the National Gallery.

497. When you decide that you must create a post, you state you want somebody at the assistant principal level, at that salary scale, or do you simply say you want a man?

—In this instance we wanted a librarian to run our library. We made application to the Minister for Education to employ a librarian. In due course the Department might approve or might not approve. In this case they did. Then it would go to the Department of Finance, who would send it to the Department of Education, who would say to us: “You can regard this as coming and you can make provision in your next year’s estimate for such personnel”. Before you advertise for the post, you must get specific sanction from the Department. This is all part of the Civil Service structure which exists but which I have not been able to understand.

498. At the outset do you visualise a salary scale or do you mention it?

—That falls within certain guaranteed brackets. On the matter of delays, all I can say is that it is all part of the structure and the structure is something I do not understand.

499. Deputy Tunney.—You are aware there will be delays. Therefore, do you requisition necessary staff six months before you get them?

—If we do not apply to the Department early we cannot include it in our estimate. If we have not included it in our estimate the Department will use it as an excuse for not giving us the post. If you have an expenditure item in your estimate you are in a position, if the Department approve, to employ a person, but you cannot make the appointment until such time as you get specific written sanction from the Minister for Education. This may take years.

500. Deputy FitzGerald.—Here is a post for a librarian and, because of the grade, you know what he will be paid. Knowing his grade, you also know the conditions of service, the sick leave and, because it is to be a permanent officer, the pension. Now, in Mr. White’s case——?

—In this case there was delay because the getting permission was of a duplicated character. The admirable system would be to couple the proposal originally with draft conditions of service. If the whole package is sent to the Department by us, I do not know where the delay occurs. Obviously the best thing to do is to look into it.

Deputy FitzGerald.—Perhaps we can have a blow by blow account.

Chairman.—As far as Mr. White is concerned, the Deputy is pushing an open door.

501. Deputy FitzGerald.—Could we have details of this case?

—Yes.*

502. Deputy Dr. Gibbons.—I gather from you that you would be employing the man but that you would not feel capable of dealing with his conditions of service?

—In the National Gallery we employ our own people. We do not go to the Civil Service Commission. We have our own Board of Governors set up by Act of Parliament. We act independently. The position briefly is that we need the sanction of the Department of Education and we need the sanction of the Department of Finance. I must apply to the Department of Education in respect of every member of the staff because they are pensionable civil servants. I am, of course, talking about the creation of a post. I am not now referring to the filling of an existing post. I am talking about the creation of a post which did not exist. That must have ministerial approval. There is the advertising of a new post which needs ministerial sanction. All this happens before you go through the delays between the first and second parts of the procedure.

503. Deputy FitzGerald.—That would explain the delay in the first instance but not between the two stages we have heard about. Has the Comptroller and Auditor General some comments to make on this matter?

Mr. Suttle.—No. This is not usual. The normal practice is that the Department ask you to go to the Civil Service Commission to employ a man.

504. What is the basis of subhead D— Purchase and Repair of Pictures (Grant-in-Aid)? How is the £2,500 arrived at?

Mr. White.—This is a historical figure going back fifty years or more. When the Gallery was founded between 1854 and 1864, it was the custom of the Government at the time to give £1,000 a year. During the years it increased to £2,500. It was for the repair of frames and for the purchase of new pictures and the acquisition of new works of art for the State. It came under the heading “Old Master Paintings”. The figure has not increased, so far as I know, in my lifetime. The £2,500 is used now for repairing frames and other such small matters. We have an item called “Purchase of Pictures”. In fact this is not enough to purchase a picture.

505. Deputy Treacy.—You have not made any worthwhile purchases from this?

—Not under this head. We have certain trusts.

506. Deputy FitzGerald.—What kind of resources?

—We have a couple of funds left to us by well-wishers. Sir Hugh Lane in 1918 left about £45,000. In 1958 we became a beneficiary in one-third part from the estate of George Bernard Shaw. It is from the George Bernard Shaw Trust and the Lane Fund that the nation has been able to add works to its collection in the past 50 to 70 years.

507. What kind of resources? From the Shaw Trust, the resources vary a good deal?

—It varies. The estate itself was fairly large. It also contained the copyright on the sale of the works of George Bernard Shaw. This meant that the trust had a continuing income which has been growing less as the years pass by. By reason of a request by the trustees, we do not make public the amount we receive. We are anxious to do so. We state the price of every picture because we believe in communication. The British Museum have asked us not to do so because these institutions benefit greatly by gifts from the public and they feel that, if the public were aware of the bequests under the George Bernard Shaw Trust, they might be less generous. Therefore, in deference to the wishes of our colleagues, we do not announce the amount.

508. Deputy Tunney.—In a situation where you have just so much hanging space, and you decide you want to make room for a new picture, do you sell pictures?

—We are not allowed. The pictures are all the property of the people of Ireland. They cannot be sold unless by special Act of Parliament. The position in a gallery is a little like that in a library. One carries a stock of books. We exhibit nearly 2,000 works of art. We also carry a stock of works which are there to be referred to. For instance, if you wanted to see the work of certain artists not on view, you can see them on application. We have a large number of drawings for which there is no space to hang them but which are available on application. If you ask to see the work of an Irish artist, say, of the middle of the 19th century, we would try to produce it quickly.

509. Deputy FitzGerald.—Are you satisfied you are now in a position to display most of the works of art that are worthy?

—I think so. We must regard ourselves as one of the best-equipped national galleries in the world. We probably are one of the largest. For a country of our size, I do not think we could possibly ask for more in the way of space. We could do with a great deal more in the way of assistance for means of communication; for means of letting the people have education. If Deputies could possibly see their way to help me, it would be a boon. We have, in our gallery, a splendid restaurant which gives a very good image. However, our contact with the National Library and National Museum— who have no restaurant—is hindered by the fact that the old right-of-way between Kildare Street and Merrion Square was ended about the 1930s for reasons of security. Each member of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges approved of the re-opening of the right-of-way and the military authorities gave their approval. Although everybody in the city seems to be in favour of the re-opening, and the Minister made a public announcement in 1968 that he was about to open the old right-of-way, nothing has happened. I would indeed be very grateful if Deputies here could help me to open the old right-of-way. Only the members of the Dáil can do it.

510. Is there anybody in the Public Service who can tell you who is holding it up?

—I have tried. Everybody has indicated goodwill. However, it seems to be caught some place.

511. Could we be told?

Mr. Whitty (An Roinn Airgeadais).—I will find out.*

Mr. White.—It means that people who go to the National Library and the National Museum could pass to the National Gallery, and vice versa, by this very convenient right-of-way. To make the journey by motor-car, one must go either by St. Stephen’s Green or by College Street.

512. Chairman.—As regards your display accommodation, are you satisfied with what you have here?

—Yes.

513. What about provincial displays? On the last occasion, you mentioned the question of insurance and local authorities?

—We have an excellent structure which is not quite complete but which will be so very shortly.

514. Deputy Treacy.—What is the incidence of theft or damage?

—It is extremely low. There has not been a theft in my time. There have been small incidences of damage. They are nearly always related to a specific weakness of human mentality to do with sex. This is universal in all art galleries and museums. It is trifling. But one has to expect a small percentage of such happenings.

515. You have cataloguing. Are you happy about it now?

—We have made great progress. Here, again, we are up against the kind of problem that goes with our economic situation. We cannot afford to have the kind of staff structure that obtains in wealthy countries. A gallery of arts in the United States would have 50 or 60: we have a staff of only nine. Naturally, therefore, we are slower in producing fully-documented catalogues. We are on the way to doing this.

516. The librarian will help, naturally, when he comes?

—The librarian is the person looking after drawings, giving the public information, which we do. Everybody on the staff is working towards a catalogue.

517. Deputy FitzGerald.—You told us about looking for a librarian and having it approved. Have you looked for staff? Have you had any difficulty about getting approval for extra staff, as distinct from difficulty about getting them?

—The position here is part of the economic situation. Spending more money means asking for more money in the Estimates. I think you probably are aware of the situation there—that there is no eagerness to spend money that can be saved. I do not suppose any institute exists that does not need more staff, that is not fighting hard to get them and the money to cover demands.

—Are you satisfied that you are getting your share of the cake?

—I am not.

518. Chairman.—I understand you get a percentage of the profits on the restaurant. Are there profits?

—No. The relationship between the Gallery and the restaurant is slightly complicated. The building is vested in the Office of Public Works as in the case of the Museum, the Library, and so on. The Board of Works, therefore, is responsible for certain services like lighting, heating and maintenance of the building. As such, the Board of Works are the lessees of the restaurant and, therefore have obtained the profit from it, which is, as far as I understand, something like 10 per cent. However, as I do not operate it I cannot speak with authority.

The witness withdrew.

The Committee adjourned at 2 p.m.

* See Appendix 9

* Appendix 10

* See Appendix 11

* See Appendix 12