Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1973 > Committee of Public Accounts > Report - Appropriation Accounts 1970 - 1971

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Déardaoin, 19 Iúil, 1973.

Thursday, 19th July, 1973.

The Committee met at 11 a.m.

DEPUTY de VALERA in the chair

Mr. S. Mac Gearailt (An tArd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste) called and examined.

VOTE 7—OFFICE OF THE REVENUE COMMISSIONERS.

Mr. J. C. Duignan called and examined.

167. Chairman.—Paragraph 13 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Revenue Account

A test examination of the Revenue Account has been carried out with satisfactory results.”

Mr. Mac Gearailt.—This is the usual introductory paragraph indicating that the revenue has been subjected to audit. The purpose of our audit is to ascertain that adequate regulations and procedures have been framed to secure an effective check on the assessment, collection and proper allocation of revenue and that such regulations and procedures are being carried out. Subject to the remarks in paragraph 19 regarding some delays in issuing estimates of tax due and in paragraph 20 regarding delays in lodgment of some moneys in the Collector General’s cash office, the audit revealed that the position was satisfactory in the year under review.

168. Chairman.—Paragraph 14 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“The net yield of revenue for the years 1970-71 and 1969-70 under its main heads, is shown in the following statement:—

£398,031,000 was paid into the Exchequer during the year leaving a balance of £293,955 as compared with £357,339 at the end of the previous financial year.”

Mr. Mac Gearailt.—This paragraph gives the net yield of revenue under its main heads for the year 1970-71 together with the comparative figures for 1969-70.

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

“I have been furnished with the following analysis of amounts of income tax, sur-tax and corporation profits tax outstanding:—

Comparative totals for the previous year are Income tax, £14,971,689; Sur-tax, £2,774,618; Corporation Profits tax, £3,201,831.”

Mr. Mac Gearailt.—This is the usual statement of amounts outstanding for income tax, surtax and corporation profits tax at the dates indicated. The comparative totals for the previous year are also shown.

170. Chairman.—Paragraph 16 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“It was observed in the course of audit that moneys were due under a number of heads of Revenue by a group of companies which went into liquidation in November 1970 and I have sought information from the Accounting Officer on the matter.”

Mr. Mac Gearailt.—There are ten companies in the group mentioned in this paragraph. The Accounting Officer has recently informed me that £434,745 was determined to be due from these companies under the following heads of revenue: customs duties, income tax, including PAYE, corporation profits tax and turnover tax. A claim for this sum has been made on the liquidator. I understand that the liquidation is still in progress.

171. Chairman.—To some extent this would be a normal part of your operations in any year?

—This case is a difficult one and is still under the supervision and jurisdiction of the courts. We have lodged our claims with the liquidators.

172. Deputy Staunton.—I note that the group of companies went into liquidation in November, 1970. Does that mean that they were linked with each other?

—Yes, they were associated companies.

Which companies were involved or would the Accounting Officer rather not tell us that?

—It might be better not to mention the names of the companies but I can tell Deputies they were in the transport field.

173. Chairman.—Paragraph 17 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Extra-Statutory Repayments of Customs and other Duties

Extra-statutory repayments of Customs duties, £23,605, Excise duties, £19,145, Turnover tax, £23, Wholesale tax, £3 and Stamp duties, £3,567, were made during the year.”

Mr. Mac Gearailt.—This paragraph is one which is included each year to bring to the notice of Dáil Éireann the total amounts under various revenue heads which have been repaid without statutory authority.

174. Deputy H. Gibbons.—Under what circumstances are they being paid without statutory authority?

—That goes back far into history and is connected with the control and the management by the Commissioners of the taxes. Originally, it was authorised by a Treasury Minute in the latter part of the last century and was carried over when this State was established giving the Commissioners power to remit certain duties in certain circumstances. They operate within certain limits but where an amount exceeds those limits, they must obtain covering sanction from the Minister for Finance.

175. Chairman.—Paragraph 18 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Remissions and Amounts Irrecoverable

I have been furnished with schedules of the cases involving a loss of £50 or upwards in which claims for duty under the Revenue Acts were remitted without statutory authority or passed as irrecoverable during the year ended 31 March 1971.

The total amount of the items included in the schedules, £167,930, is made up as follows:—

The distribution according to the grounds of remission or write-off is:—

I have made a test examination of the items included in the schedules with satisfactory results.”

Mr. Mac Gearailt.—The paragraph gives totals of sums of £50 or more remitted or passed as irrecoverable under the various revenue heads indicated and also particulars of the grounds for remission or write-off.

176. Chairman.—Paragraph 19 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor general reads:

“P.A.Y.E. Tax

Sections 7 and 8 of the Finance Act, 1968 enable the Revenue Commissioners to make and issue monthly and annual estimates, respectively, where there is reason to believe that a person was liable to remit tax and had failed to do so. In the course of audit it was observed that there were delays in making these estimates and I communicated with the Accounting Officer. He has informed me that delays in implementing fully the procedures for the estimation of tax outstanding were due to acute staff shortages. The large number of monthly estimates issued for 1969-77 produced much correspondence, which could not be disposed of readily, and this delayed the issue of estimates for later months. He has also informed me that the issue of annual estimates depended on the completion of the relevant computer programme and that since the programme became available annual estimates have been made for 1969-70 and 1970-71. All tax districts were working on default cases in accordance with a schedule which would enable outstanding cases up to and including 1970-71 to be disposed of by 30 June 1972.”

Mr. Mac Gearailt.—The 1968 Finance Act empowered the Revenue Commissioners to make estimates of tax due where persons liable to remit tax had failed to do so. The issue of estimates for the earlier months of 1969-70 resulted in a good deal of correspondence which, coupled with acute staff shortages in the Office of the Revenue Commissioners, resulted in delays in making estimates in the later months of 1969-70 and also in 1970-71. During our audit of the 1970-71 accounts we noted these delays and wrote to the Accounting Officer about them. As indicated in the paragraph, he stated that the outstanding cases up to and including 1970-71 would be disposed of by 30th June, 1972.

177. Chairman.—Has the computer caused disruption?

—The enormous growth in the work and our failure to get staff in sufficient numbers to cope with the growth in the volume of work is causing the trouble. We have brought the work up-to-date in so far as the year under review is concerned. The work for 1970-71 was completed in November, 1972 and considerable progress has been made in the work for 1971-72. All the outstanding work for that year, in conjunction with default cases for the following year, should be completed by next December.

178. Deputy Governey.—On the question of staff difficulty, would the reason be that the pay is not sufficient?

—There are so many demands for staff from all quarters and a high proportion of the staff are female whose period of service is comparatively short because they had to retire on marriage.

179. Chairman.—In the last few years have changes in taxation law had a serious impact on organisation and efficiency?

—We have taken on quite a number of new taxes in the past decade. There is also the problem that with salaries and wages increasing the number of taxpayers is increasing all the time. It is a twofold factor. For instance, VAT which replaces turnover and wholesale taxes, is a most complicated tax to administer. As well, according as the value of money falls, more and more taxpayers come on to the books.

In the change over from one tax to another has there been any complication?

—As I have said, VAT is a far more complicated tax and requires much more staff to operate.

180. Do you anticipate you will be able to keep up the efficiency with the staff you are able to get?

—We have put in applications for further staff and when we get them we believe we will be able to keep abreast of the demands put on us. It is a continuously changing situation because we are being called on to perform new functions each year and it is a question of doing our best with the staff we are able to get.

181. You have functions far beyond the matters of taxation?

—Yes. For instance, we will be dealing with matters in relation to social welfare and health schemes. The pay-related deductions and the collection of contributions will be quite a task.

182. Deputy MacSharry.—How do you think the staff problem can be corrected?

—It is always an evolving situation. It is easier to get staff now than a few years ago but, on the other hand, the demands are far greater, particularly with EEC participation. That involves a considerable amount of extra work—keeping in line with EEC directives and regulations and sending people to Brussels. This in itself involves extra staff at a higher level. Demands for staff seem to be increasing always.

183. Deputy H. Gibbons.—Will the proposal to allow married women to continue working be of help?

—It should be a considerable advantage because the loss of trained personnel is a very serious matter for us in the tax offices. We lose people when they are at their very best. Of course, there will be certain problems facing us when the new proposal comes into effect regarding married women but that is something that will happen at a later stage. At the initial stage, it should be of great advantage to us.

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

“Cash Office Receipts

In my report for the year 1968-69 I referred to delays in the lodgment of certain moneys received in the Collector General’s Cash Office. In the course of inspections by my officers in the year under review delays in lodgment were again noted and I invited the observations of the Accounting Officer. He has informed me that abnormal circumstances such as the aftermath of the bank closure, decimalisation, and staff shortages obtained in relation to the work of the Cash Office and he has assured me that the position has now been remedied.”

Mr. Mac Gearailt.—Our main concern here is to ensure that the Exchequer receives the benefit of all tax paid at the earliest possible date but we are also concerned to reduce the danger of loss through theft or fire. The Accounting Officer has stated that all cheques received are stamped “Revenue Commissioners Account,” thus reducing the danger of loss through theft. He also stated that it was proposed to provide fire-proof presses in the cash office to reduce the danger of loss through fire. In June, 1972, officers of my Department again visited the Collector General’s cash office and found the position satisfactory.

185. Chairman.—The Comptroller and Auditor General mentioned the bank strike and decimalisation?

—Yes, they both created very great problems for us.

Deputy Staunton.—I think that is understandable.

186. Chairman.—We are all aware of the impact of the bank strike but how did decimalisation affect the Revenue Commissioners?

—We had to change all our accounting machines and so had business concerns.

We note that the instances reported on were satisfactory, an excellent thing for the Committee to hear.

187. Deputy Staunton.—In retrospection I should like to ask a question about the number of companies which went into liquidation and the fact that so much money was due. Why are we referring to a specified group of companies? Surely in a 12 month period a great deal more of this would happen?

—Yes, but large sums were involved here. We received cheques which were dishonoured. They owed pay-as-you-earn tax which they had not handed over to us.

188. Is this a regular occurrence?

—Perhaps not on the same scale or the same magnitude.

This was an isolated case?

—Yes, particularly so because it involved a number of duties. A substantial amount of customs duty was involved. There was also the question of certain guaranteed cheques. It was a very special type of case largely because so many different types of duty were involved.

189. Chairman.—Then I presume that the Revenue Commissioners, like everybody else, occasionally receive a dud cheque?

—Yes, that happens.

190. On subhead C—Post Office Services —is this an internal account?

Mr. Mac Gearailt.—The Post Office charge for their services because, in theory, they are a commercial undertaking. We charge them audit fees, something we do not do normally.

One wonders just how much administrative expenditure is involved in this exercise?

—I think it is largely on the basis of sample tests taken for certain days. There is no question of keeping a record of everything.

191. Deputy H. Gibbons.—What comes under the heading of “miscellaneous,” because it seems a very large sum?

—There is £130,000 for that. It is in respect of services rendered to the Revenue Commissioners by the Department of Posts and Telegraphs relating to the sale of revenue stamps, pay-as-you-earn stamps, the sale of dog licences, handling of stores and various other minor services. The figure of £130,000 is calculated by the Post Office for these services.

192. Chairman.—On subhead D.— Machinery and Equipment for Security Printing and Stamping—there is a substantial over-expenditure of the grant?

—There was a considerable amount of extra work on security printing for the Minister for Social Welfare in respect of insurance stamps and widows and orphans pension orders, and for the Department of Local Government for motor licences and driving licences and also for postage stamps. The figure went up from £38,000 to £62,000 and the main expenditure was for dies and plates. Under this heading there was an additional expenditure of £11,000: it was necessary to purchase new plates for three new social welfare schemes, for the new social insurance stamps and for the new Post Office stamps arising from decimalisation. That accounted for the £11,000. A further sum of approximately £5,000 was expended on rollers and accessories for the machinery used in connection with that work. An additional £6,000 was required for new machines. This arises out of the work on the Social Welfare and Local Government Votes, the new postage stamps and the new dies to which I have referred.

193. Deputy MacSharry.—On subhead E. —Motor Vehicles—when they are being delivered in the previous year surely there should not be an excess on the grant?

—The estimates are prepared 18 months before the actual year closes. I can give more information on that matter if necessary.

194. No, I do not require it. We have come across this kind of thing previously. It seems ridiculous to me that when we have moneys voted we find a note for over-expenditure which declares that some of these things were purchased the previous year. I presume that those estimates have been brought more up-to-date now?

—I presume it is a question of whether the bill came in in time. Some of these were delivered the year before, but the bills arrived late.

195. They should not have been budgeted for then?

Mr. Mac Gearailt.—It could arise that there would be a saving under that subhead.

196. Chairman.—This is one year in arrears, and if we are to reach the stage that we will be dealing with the current year’s accounts we will not delay the witness any longer.

—We pay as soon as we get the bill but it is the Post Office who order the cars for us. We pay for them as soon as we get the bill but we took delivery of the cars some time before we got the bill.

197. Deputy Bermingham.—With regard to subhead F.—Law Charges, Fees and Rewards—what do rewards mean there?

—Those are mainly in connection with the detection of smuggling and a certain amount is related to the discovery of illicit distillation.

198. Chairman.—If there are no further queries, I should like to make just one little comment. The Committee has noted that, where there were two queries by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we were able to be told that the position had been remedied and everything is now in order. I think that is no more than we expected from this Department; it is a very efficient one indeed.

199. Deputy Bermingham.—I have just a general question. Sometimes fines are reduced and sometimes they are not. Is it a fact that, as a result of representations or something, fines are reduced?

—Fines would not be reduced unless some new facts were brought to light. Our normal policy is to prosecute and let the court decide the penalty. If the offence is a comparatively minor one, and it is a first offence, we might decide that it could be met by a modest penalty.

200. In regard to this red diesel, a car or lorry may be confiscated by the Revenue Commissioners and a fine has to be paid before it is released?

—It all depends on how serious the case is. In some instances we get cases where additional tanks have been built in in some secret part of vehicles and pipes run from those to the engines. The normal tanks are there and are, to all intents and purposes, apparently linked up with petrol. Unless the officer gets down under these vehicles and makes a very thorough examination he will not find the false tanks. Where there is evidence of deliberate fraud we naturally take a very serious view of it. In almost every case the culprit makes the case that the offence was committed only on the one occasion; he had run out of petrol and had taken some of the fuel from the tractor. Now, if it is a first offence and there is no suggestion of sustained fraud, we would not look as seriously at that as we would in the case in which we find that a deliberate course of fraud is being followed. A man might have two or three lorries in each of which red diesel had been discovered; that would be a deliberate course of fraud and we would have to take a very serious view of it.

201. That is not quite the point I have in mind. It is alleged that the Revenue Commissioners confiscate the lorry and inform the owner that he will have to pay say £500 to get it released. If representations are made is it possible to have this sum reduced?

Chairman.—Representations to whom?

Deputy Bermingham.—To anybody. This has been alleged and I am trying to clear my own mind about it?

—First of all, all these cases are dealt with in head office. There is no question of any local official being able to say that we will take a fine of a certain amount. Regulations are laid down as to what is to be done by head office. Every single case like that comes to head office and it is determined in the same section. Any case that arises anywhere in the country comes up to the same section and is dealt with there and that means there is uniform treatment of all cases. There is, therefore, no possibility of what the Deputy alleges.

202. If a decision is made to impose a certain penalty can it subsequently be reduced?

—There is no question of reducing the penalty solely because of representations. I get about 30 to 40 letters a day, some looking for reductions in fines; we are completely uninfluenced by any representations we get in these cases unless new facts are brought to light. The Revenue Commissioners have their procedures and, if someone makes representations to us, we tell him the facts and we also tell him that if it is a serious case we intend to prosecute; we do not alter that decision once we have taken it. If it is not such a serious case we may tell the person that if he pays a penalty of say, £20 we will not proceed with the case. We keep to our £20 and there is never any question of altering it, no matter what representations are made or from what quarter they come unless, as I say, new facts emerge

203. Deputy MacSharry.—Who decides whether you will settle the case without going to court? What criteria is applied? Why are some people brought to court while, in other cases, the matter is settled through correspondence between you and the defendant?

—Cases are dealt with on the facts. They all go to the Commissioners. That means that a Commissioner decides in respect of every case as to whether it is a question of a fine. There are three Commissioners and each case goes to the appropriate one. If the case is a major one, it comes to me.

204. Deputy H. Gibbons.—Have the State Solicitor or the Attorney General any function in this respect at any stage?

—Yes. A prosecution may be taken by the State Solicitor in the name of the Attorney General.

205. Can you bring a prosecution?

—If the offence is a criminal one, the Attorney General would be involved.

206. Chairman.—The point is that the Revenue Commissioners are a statutory and autonomous body in their own right, having legal powers and responsibilities?

—Yes, we are entrusted with the care and management of taxes which means that we are responsible for the operation of the law and in the particular area that we are speaking of, our policy is to take proceedings, but if a case is not very serious and the person concerned pays a penalty that we would consider as being the amount which the offence would justify, we would refrain from prosecuting. Once we so decide we would not alter our decision.

207. You are the ultimate authority?

—Yes. We are an independent body working under the Minister in so far as the operation of the tax laws are concerned. We give no information in relation to an individual’s tax figures and neither are we influenced by pressure from any quarter, but it is only fair to say that we do not experience any such pressure because it is well recognised that we act independently. We may receive representations from time to time but we deal with those precisely in the same way as if they came from the person concerned, in other words, we treat them as coming from an agent acting on behalf of the person.

This stems from the fact that you have your own autonomous authority and responsibility?

—Exactly.

208. Deputy MacSharry.—I accept fully what the Accounting Officer has said but for my own information I would like to have the situation clarified whereby, for example, in respect of two cases of smuggling, one case will go to court while the other does not. In such case would the same opportunity be afforded to both parties?

—Yes. It may happen that a fine is taken on the spot so as to release a person’s vehicle but decisions are taken by the Commissioners on the basis of all the facts put forward.

Deputy Bermingham.—It would be a great help to all of us if that were made clear to the public.

Chairman.—That is our job.

209. Deputy H. Gibbons.—Under what circumstances would an offence be criminal and, consequently, passed to the Attorney General and could it happen that the Attorney General might not proceed in respect of a case that had been passed to him?

—The Attorney General might consider that the evidence was not sufficient to support a prosecution. The case would usually be in respect of fraud where a person had made what we considered to be fraudulent returns. The Attorney General might decide that the case could be taken by the State Solicitor locally. That might happen, for instance, in relation to VAT. Obviously, the Attorney General could not function if he were to deal with every case.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 17—STATIONERY OFFICE.

Mr. B. O Brolchain called and examined.

210. Deputy H. Gibbons.—On the notes, there is just one question I should like to ask. It relates to the difficulty we have in trying to get copies of Acts.

—I was not aware of this. There is a standing rule that Acts are not to be allowed go out of print. When we find they are going out of print we re-order. This is standard practice in relation to Acts.

211. I have had experience of looking for copies of Acts and being unable to get them. I assumed they were out of print.

Chairman.—Is Deputy Gibbons speaking about here in the House?

Deputy H. Gibbons.—I have experience of being unable to get Acts here in the House?

—If any Deputy who has difficulty in obtaining Acts would let me know, I would arrange for the supply of copies immediately. It is contrary to instructions that an Act should be out of print.

212. My latest experience was last December when the Offences Against the State Act was being amended.

—It happens on occasions that there is a sudden rush on an Act. Because of unexpected demand an Act which is, for example, a slow mover or not moving at all, may run quickly out of stock. There might be, because of the introduction of a Bill, a heavy demand for it. Stocks can become used up because of such unforeseen circumstances, but we go immediately for a reprint. Unless it is an exceptionally long Act we would use our rotaprinting system to produce a limited number of copies to meet immediate demand while awaiting the reprinted Act.

213. Chairman.—The Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1963 has been mentioned as having been difficult to get. That would have been the case of a rush, I suppose?

—I would not know about separate Acts but about four or five months ago I laid it down firmly that on no account were we to be left without copies of Acts.

214. Deputy MacSharry.—How many copies of each Act would you have in stock to cope with a rush demand? If you had only 50 in stock you would not be able to cope with even the demands of 144 Deputies?

—The number in stock varies from time to time. We print about 1,125 copies octavo size or 750 copies foolscap size and it is standard practice to supply 80 octavo or 50 foolscap copies to the Dáil office. As regards the bound volumes we are in a different position. Up to 1933 they are out of print and in ordinary circumstances we do not replace out of print volumes. The expense of producing a bound volume is far in excess of what we charge for it.

215. Chairman.—Therefore, if anybody wanted to keep a library he would have to bind them himself?

—That is possible.

216. Deputy H. Gibbons.—When I came to the House first I had a practice of seeking an Act when I needed it and honestly I gave it up because I felt I was being a nuisance in the General Office here. The last Act I had difficulty about was the Offences Against the State Act when the amending Bill was being put through in December. I even mentioned the difficulty at a party meeting.

—I wonder if there is another problem being touched on here. The printed copy of the Act does not become available for a considerable time and this is a problem outside our control. Unless, exceptionally, there is a decision to the contrary, we never print an Act until we have it in bilingual form and this leads to delay. This may explain some of the difficulties Deputies have had. Until the bilingual form of the Act is ready we do not print, but we do have the print of the Bill as passed by both Houses. Recently, however, there has been a decision that we will make statutory instruments available in the language in which they were made and then go on to print in the other official language.

217. I must not have made myself quite clear. In December last it was proposed to amend the Offences Against the State Act, going back to 1940 or 1941, I think— it was the original Offences Against the State Act. I sought a copy of it and I could not get it. I found the same difficulty in regard to the Social Welfare Act. I more or less gave up the exercise of looking for principal Acts. For instance, in the recent Ministers and Secretaries Bill there were several references to the principal Act. Five or six years ago I would have been inclined to refer to the principal Act but on this occasion I did not bother because I felt I would not get it.

—I can assure the Deputy that unless there is a sudden upsurge in demand bringing about an out of stock position, which would be purely temporary and in which case we would ordinarily provide rotaprinted copies, Acts will be in stock. I should be pleased if Deputies who have difficulty would get in touch with me personally.

218. Chairman.—We will be returning to this matter shortly. We are one year in arrears and the Committee will have an opportunity of further discussing this matter when the account for the current year comes before us.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 39—LABOUR.

Mr. T. Ó Cearbhaill called and examined.

219. Deputy MacSharry.—On subhead B —Travelling and Incidental Expenses—we are informed that savings were due mainly to the delay in filling vacancies. Travelling and incidental expenses were £8,688 less than granted but salaries were only £1,689 less than granted.

—This is part of the general arrangement. There is a Vote for Remuneration and the practice is that, where there is a pay increase during the year which has not been provided for before the year started, any savings under subhead A which are available in the Vote are applied towards the cost of any additional pay during the year thus reducing the savings in subhead A. Had that not taken place there would have been greater saving on subhead A than is shown.

220. On subhead G.—Research—I should like an explanation as to the form this research work takes.

—This has to be programmed over a long period. It is difficult to get the people that you want to do a particular job. Some projects—for example, a Survey on Women in the Work Force and a Survey on the Mobility of Irish Workers—have been under taken. Invariably these projects take longer than one expects. The people involved have other assignments and other commitments in universities and elsewhere. It is a physical factor.

The two projects mentioned have been put in train?

—Yes. The two I have mentioned are in train. In fact, the first has been completed.

221. On subhead H.—Resettlement Allowances—are these people who were brought back from England all working here?

—When the Department of Labour was set up one of the projects given to it was the promotion of mobility of workers. This relates to geographical mobility. In fact, a number of survey reports showed that, while people in country districts were disposed to go to Britain for employment, they were not inclined to go to other parts of Ireland even if jobs were available. It was to assist in this mobility that these resettlement allowances were introduced. After the scheme was in operation for a few years it was decided to extend it to cover emigrants coming back from Britain, or other countries, to employment in this country. It was a few years before the scheme took on at all. Our situation now on this subhead is one of excess.

222. These resettlement allowances were only paid if the Department was involved in the actual re-employment of the individual? Many people returned home as a result of advertisements placed by your Department and succeeded in obtaining employment themselves but they were not entitled to this allowance?

—For the purpose of control we felt, especially in regard to emigrants returning, that it was a necessary safeguard to ensure that the employment into which they went was arranged through the Manpower Service. Otherwise, we feared that there might be some abuses.

223. It is probable that at this stage people are beginning to realise that fact but originally when this started they thought that if they came home and some friend had arranged a job for them that they would qualify for the resettlement allowance. However, they did not get this allowance because they did not go through the channels that have been outlined. It is possible that they understand it more now because it worked against some of those people who returned home. It is probable that the initiation of the thought of coming home started from this Department but the people did not qualify for this allowance.

—That may be so. We have had some cases which could be described as hardship cases. The scheme has been improved on from an overall manpower policy point of view. There are other reasons why it would be desirable that people returning home for employment should do so under the auspices of the Manpower Service.

224. In your advertisements abroad do you specify that they must get in touch with you in order to get fixed up?

—The leaflets relating to the scheme say this. The leaflets are widely distributed.

225. Deputy H. Gibbons.—Do you still continue to advertise to this effect in British and foreign papers?

—The advertisements placed by the Manpower Service are related to vacancies, which are known, for particular skills which are in short supply here.

226. In what papers do you advertise?

—In the Irish Post, for instance, in London. The Cork Weekly Examiner also circulates widely within the Irish community in Britain. It is rarely we put in an advertisement in an English newspaper. If we do insert an advertisement in such a paper it is done at the expense of the employer and not at the expense of the Manpower Service. General advertisements for a category like electricians, for instance, would be placed by the Manpower Service at its expense, but specific advertisements for a particular firm looking for a certain number of people would be inserted only at the request of the firm on a repayment basis.

227. Do you specify that these people should not leave without consulting you first?

—They are advised to do that. The address of the manpower office is given in the advertisement.

228. I am thinking of a particular case in which a man alleges that he came over here on foot of one of these advertisements and, if what he says is true, he certainly was most unfortunate and he places all the blame for his misfortune on your Department. This happened probably two years ago. I do not know how true his allegation is that it was due to your advertisement he came home and I was just wondering if you specified that people should not move without consulting you first.

—This advice is certainly widely given.

229. Deputy MacSharry.—On subhead I.—Career information—the amount spent was less than granted and the note says: “Saving due to a decision taken to charge publicity expenses estimated under this subhead to subhead D.” Under subhead D expenditure is also less than granted. I am wondering if there is a diminution in this type of service?

—Subhead D is only very marginally less than granted. In this particular case the service was less expensive than we thought it would be.

All I want is an assurance that there is no diminution in this service. I complimented the Department two years ago on this service and I would hope there would be no diminution in the service?

—No diminution whatsoever.

230. Under subhead M.—Grants for Advisory Services for Emigrants—to whom exactly do you pay these grants?

—The grants are paid to various bodies. There is one body in Westland Row and there are others in various towns throughout the country. They are voluntary committees who have been advising emigrants about the job situation in Britain. The Minister at the time decided that it would be advisable that these voluntary committees should be supplemented with grants from the Exchequer and these grants are made on the advice of the advisory committee, which has a certain surveillance and gathers a great deal of information about the activities of these voluntary bodies. Now, with the introduction of the EEC provisions about the movement of workers, the whole basis of this service is being reassessed, the reason being that the manpower services of all the member countries have an interlocking mechanism under which it may, in the future, be unnecessary to have any voluntary organisations involved in this.

231. Deputy H. Gibbons.—Under subhead L.—Training Grants—the note says that extra costs incurred by CERT Ltd on an expanded training programme were met from savings on the vote. Has the Department a right to transfer money from one vote to another or must you seek approval?

—CERT Ltd was threatened with financial difficulty because it was unable to finance all its programmes and it appealed for more money; we were able to make are-allocation, with the approval of the Department of Finance, to transfer these moneys.

You must get the approval of the Department of Finance?

—Yes, and we have to have the savings within the vote.

Could you create a new subhead during the year?

—Not on our own.

Could you do it with the approval of the Department of Finance?

—Yes. We would also have to advise the Dáil. The Minister would have to move an Estimate and advise the Dáil of his intention to introduce a new subhead providing a new service. The regulations governing all this are laid down firmly by the Department of Finance.

The witness withdrew.

The Committee adjourned.