|
|
|
|
MIONTUAIRISC NA FIANAISE(Minutes of Evidence)Déardaoin, 13 Feabhra, 1975.Thursday, 13th February, 1975.The Committee met at 11 a.m.
ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN.1. Deputy Pattison.—I propose that Deputy de Valera be elected as Chairman of the Committee. Deputy Griffin.—It gives me great pleasure to second the nomination of Deputy de Valera as Chairman of the Committee. Question: “That Deputy de Valera be Chairman of the Committee”—put and agreed to. DEPUTY de VALERA took the chair. 2. Chairman.—Gentlemen, accept my sincere thanks and appreciation for the honour and for your confidence. Thank you. The agenda before us is the Appropriation Accounts for 1972-73. Mr. S. Mac Gearailt (An tArd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste) called and examined.VOTE 20—OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE.Mr. A. Ward called and examined.3. Chairman.—Paragraph 27 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows: “Subhead H.—Compensation for Unsaleable Chemical Substances Provision was made by way of supplementary estimate to enable compensation to be paid to firms holding stocks of chemical substances that became unsaleable in the State as a result of being classified as explosive under the Explosives (Ammonium Nitrate and Sodium Chlorate) Order, 1972. The charge to the subhead, £70,129, represents payments made to firms who incurred losses either by destroying stocks or disposing of them on foreign markets.” Mr. Mac Gearailt.—This paragraph is for information. Further payments of compensation totalling £8,369 were made in 1973-74 and the Estimate for the period April— December 1974 contained a provision of £3,750 for such compensation payments. Chairman.—I take it this was a security decision and does not call for any comment. —It was, yes. 4. Paragraph 28 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads as follows: “Stamping of Insurance Cards Pay lists in respect of State employees insurable under the Social Welfare Acts should bear the certificate of a responsible officer that the relevant insurance cards have been duly stamped. I noted that certificates were not furnished in respect of a number of insurable employees in offices under the control of the Department of Justice and I have asked the Accounting Officer for his observations.” Mr. Mac Gearailt.—This paragraph relates to the stamping of social insurance cards of State employees remunerated out of the following votes:— Justice, Prisons, Courts and Land Registry and Registry of Deeds. Insurance stamps are the equivalent of cash and it is essential that there should be the same control over their use as would be imposed in regard to cash transactions, especially having regard to the increased value of insurance stamps. Such control includes frequent surprise checks to ascertain whether all cards have been duly stamped. The Department of Finance have given instructions that all pay lists should bear a certificate of a responsible officer that insurance cards have been duly stamped. The Accounting Officer in his reply drew attention once more to long-standing difficulties at various levels in the Accounts Branch of his Department which were still being attended to and informed me that the failure to complete the necessary certificates on the pay lists mentioned in the paragraph was due to misunderstandings. He has confirmed that the matter has now been put right and that the insurance stamps have been duly affixed to all contributors’ cards. 5. Chairman.—Could you tell us what the difficulties were, Mr. Ward? —It was a matter of staffing. The difficulties concerned both the number of staff available in the Accounts Branch and the grade—in other words, what the appropriate staff structure in the Accounts Branch ought to be. We were involved in argument with the Department of the Public Service on both these issues, and during that period some things were not done as well as they ought to have been done and the stage was reached when we had to do something about the situation. We have transferred staff now into the Accounts Branch from other sections of the Department and we have set up a new structure which, we are confident, will ensure that these accounting difficulties will not arise again so far as it is humanly possible to guarantee that. 6. I presume the change in stamp values and so on complicated things from time to time? —That is so, but we hope the new staff structure will enable these various difficulties which arose to be permanently solved. 7. What is your relationship with the Department of the Public Service in this connection? —The numbers and grading of staff throughout the Department are, of course, subject to control by the Minister for the Public Service and that means, in effect, that staffing ultimately is determined by that Department. We have a certain amount of discretion to transfer within the Department from the total pool and that is what we had to do in order to meet the difficulties in relation to the Accounts Branch. 8. We come now to the Vote itself. On subhead B—Travelling and Incidental Expenses—there was a Supplementary Estimate there. What was the necessity for this Supplementary Estimate amounting to £7,500? —Offhand I am not able to go beyond saying that there was an increase in travelling. I have not the details with me. The amount of travel during the year increased and had to be covered. 9. Under subhead D.1.—Payments to the Incorporated Council of Law Reporting for Ireland—there is a note to say the saving was due to an unexpected delay in the publication of a legal textbook that had been approved. What was the legal textbook? —A book on Land Registration. It has since been published but only very recently. 10. Under subhead D.2.—Committee on Irish and Comparative Law (Grant-in-Aid) —presumably the money was not made available there? —This is what you yourself, Mr. Chairman, described last year as something in the nature of a token sum. This committee was set up some years ago in an effort to establish a link between the lawyers in the North and lawyers here. It did not function in recent years but it may function again. 11. Under subhead E.—Commissions and Special Inquiries—what were those inquiries and commissions? —They are the ones named on page 51 of the Appropriation Accounts. 12. Deputy Crotty.—The Committee on Court Practice and Procedure appointed in 1961-62, is that on-going? —It is an on-going committee. It has already reported on a number of matters and it is continuing in being. Is it for things which may emerge? —Something more than that. It is a very active committee. It has produced a number of reports. It is not, so to speak, sitting back waiting for things to turn up. This is the committee which produced the report last year about family maintenance and in relation to which the Minister has promised legislation in the fairly near future. 13. Chairman.—Under subhead F.—Legal Aid—it was necessary to look for a supplementary to the extent of double the original provision. Deputy Bermingham.—I take it there was more need for it. It was more than was anticipated? —Yes, but the fees also increased. It was a combination of the two factors. 14. Chairman.—Under subheal H.—Compensation for Unsaleable Chemical Substances—this has been covered by the Comptroller and Auditor General’s comment and the Accounting Officer’s answer. Does any member wish to ask the Accounting Officer any question in regard to the Vote? I will ask one general question. How far are your Department responsible for authorising expenditure on security installations on public or other buildings? How far are you involved? —In relation to expenditure itself, practically not at all because the Office of Public Works are responsible for public buildings. We are involved both directly and through the Garda Síochána in a consultative way, but so far as expenditure is concerned where public buildings are involved the Office of Public Works and, no doubt, the Department of Finance are the authorities responsible. 15. Have you any responsibility for the security of the Oireachtas buildings? —No direct responsibility. It is under the control of the Ceann Comhairle but again there is a system of consultation with the various interests. But your Minister does not make the decisions. —No, not in relation to the Houses of the Oireachtas. As far as I know, the Ceann Comhairle is the authority in that regard though, presumably, the Cathaoirleach of Seanad Éireann would have a role. Subject to correction, I think the Ceann Comhairle is the final authority. So you are not responsible for the security of the Oireachtas. Is that the position? I am talking now within the limits of this committee. I do not wish to talk about policy? —That is so but we can be affected by decisions made by the appropriate authorities and, as I say, I think the Ceann Comhairle is at the head of the group, though there are various structures whereby he has advice available to him, committees and so on. If, pursuant to a decision taken in that way, there appeared to be a need for an increase in the number of Garda Síochána, in that way the Department of Justice would be involved since the money would be borne on the Justice Vote. 16. What about physical installations? Is that borne on your Vote? —No. I assume you are referring to such things as the protective devices recently put up at the gates. They are not ours. VOTE 21—GARDA SÍOCHÁNA (EXCESS VOTE.)Mr. A. Ward further examined.17. Chairman.—Paragraph 29 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads: “Excess of Expenditure over Grant The account shows excess expenditure of £27,818 over the gross estimate and a surplus of appropriations in aid of £69,539. The Accounting Officer has informed me that the excess expenditure was incurred because anticipated savings on subhead B. (Travelling and Incidental Expenses) and on subhead G. (Transport) which were provided for in a supplementary estimate taken in March 1973 did not materialise.” Mr. Mac Gearailt.—The paragraph gives in brief the circumstances in which the provision made in this Vote was overspent. To bring this matter to the notice of Dáil Éireann with a view to having it regularised it will be necessary for the Committee to submit an Interim Report on it in order to enable the Dáil to vote the sum required to make good the excess, if the Committee sees no objection to this course. 18. Chairman.—Could you tell us the circumstances in which this occurred, generally, Mr. Ward? —When there is an excess, as there is here, one of the problems is that one can say that if any one of several things had not happened there would not have been an excess. So, in one sense, the explanation one gives involves a sort of arbitrary selection of some one or two items but I think the most important single incident here was that in the first quarter of that year there was a substantial increase in the number of Garda inspectors. Naturally, one section of the Department knew about this but they did not advert to the fact that if there is a big increase in the number of Garda inspectors there will, within a couple of months, be a substantial increase in claims for travelling and incidental expenses because there will be a lot of transfers. In other words, there was—perhaps lack of co-ordination is the best way to put it. If I may go back to the point I made earlier, as a result of new staff structures we are confident that this will not happen in future. The Committee can understand your particular problems here. Is the Comptroller satisfied in this case? Mr. Mac Gearailt.—Yes. Chairman.—The Comptroller is satisfied in the circumstances in this case. The Committee will deal with this matter according to precedent. We do not want to make any further comment on that. —Thank you. VOTE 21—GARDA SÍOCHÁNA.Mr. A. Ward further examined.19. Chairman.—Paragraph 30 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads: “Subhead H.—Superannuation and other Non-Effective Payments Reference was made in paragraph 33 of the report for 1971-72 to the provision, by supplementary estimate in March 1971, of a grant-in-aid of £400,000 to enable arrears of pension to be paid under the terms of a new ex-gratia pensions scheme to widows and children of former members of the Force who died or retired before 23 July 1968. This sum was paid into a Grant-in-Aid Account from which payments of £379,468 and £10,606 were made in the years 1971-72 and 1972-73, respectively, being arrears of ex-gratia pensions for the period ended 31 March 1971. Reference was also made in that paragraph to the inclusion in the charge to subhead H. of expenditure in respect of ex-gratia pensions although the relevant estimate did not expressly indicate that provision was included to meet such pensions which are extra-statutory in nature. The charge to the subhead for the year under review includes £429,240 in respect of current ex-gratia pensions although the estimate, as in the case of the previous year, does not expressly indicate that provision was included to meet these extra-statutory pensions. As indicated in paragraph 26, I understand that the preparation of the necessary legislation for these pensions has not yet been completed.” Mr. Mac Gearailt.—This paragraph refers, inter alia, to the inclusion in the charge to subhead H. of expenditure in respect of ex-gratia pensions although the Estimate did not expressly indicate that provision was included to meet such pensions, which are extra-statutory in nature. The Accounting Officer has, however, drawn attention to the matter in a note to the Appropriation Account on page 54. The matter was referred to in the report on the Appropriation Accounts for 1971-72. It was discussed at length by the Committee when that report was being considered and was dealt with in the Committee’s report dated 23rd January, 1975. Chairman.—The Comptroller is satisfied with the position? Mr. Mac Gearailt.—Yes. 20. Chairman.—Paragraph 31 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads: “Suspense Accounts In the course of audit it was noted that advances of moneys, issued in the period 1968 to 1972 to members of the Force in respect of subsistence allowances and witnesses’ expenses and charged to suspense accounts, had not been cleared at 31 March 1973. The Accounting Officer has informed me that the delay was due to long-standing staffing difficulties. He also informed me that the whole question of the staffing of the Accounts Branch and of financial control generally within his Department was being pressed forward both at Organisation and Methods level and at consultancy level and that reports will be available very soon. He added that pending the receipt of these reports an officer would be assigned fulltime on these accounts.” Mr. Mac Gearailt.—This paragraph draws attention to the delay in clearing suspense accounts to which moneys advanced in respect of subsistence allowances and witnesses’ expenses had been charged. Failure to clear suspense accounts promptly can weaken financial control and can result in certain charges in the annual Appropriation Accounts being understated. I understand that some progress has been made towards solving the staffing difficulties to which the Accounting Officer referred in his reply. 21. Chairman.—Would Mr. Ward like to expand on that? —Yes. First, may I say that we fully accept and appreciate that the comment of the Comptroller and Auditor General is quite justified here and I would like to make that clear at the beginning. The problem, as will be seen, is not a recent one in that it goes back as far as 1968. It is an old problem. What we have now done is, so to speak, to draw a line beginning at 1st April last—that is nearly a year ago—and set up a new system beginning as from that date so that nothing of this kind can arise in respect of current items. That is the first part of it—we have set up a new system with effect from then. The second line of action relates to items that are outstanding and that go back as far as 1968. We have set up a special task force in the Accounts Branch of the Department to clear them. It is in the nature of things very difficult to say what kind of progress in percentage terms has been made to clear up these older items. One really has to have reached the stage where the whole thing has been virtually finished before one can really make a confident progress report but we have a special task force and have had for many months working wholetime on this. It is difficult because it goes back as far as 1968 and the problem was building up until it was noticed some time ago. The existence of the problem was not known to us in the Department until a member of the staff of the Comptroller and Auditor General spotted it and drew attention to it. Mr. Mac Gearailt.—We have looked at the current situation and my recollection is that there is no reference to it in my more recent report which is with the printers. —To be fair, we have to concede, as I hope I have made clear, that the arrears are not even yet cleared off. This is because it was comparatively recently that the problem came to notice and it was a very substantial task going back as far as 1968 but on the other hand it is not a current problem. By that I mean it does not arise in relation to anything from 1st April last onwards and the arrears are being tackled on a basis of urgency and with a wholetime task force. Chairman.—There is obviously a spirit of co-operation with the Comptroller on it and we will leave it to you. —Yes. Thank you. 22. On subhead D.—Clothing and Equipment—there is a note. Was it that supplies were not available and on what equipment does this big shortfall arise? —It was mainly on clothing. There were difficulties about getting supplies of overcoats. There were manufacturing problems and, therefore, delays in manufacture. There was also some difficulty about getting supplies of the material used in Garda uniforms and quite a good deal of difficulty in getting caps. 23. How do you procure your supplies? is it by contract? —Yes. May I say, first of all, that the Department of Justice does not itself handle this. It is handled by the Post Office Stores. To answer the question, the firm which used to make Garda caps went out of business and it was extremely difficult to find another firm willing to supply. In fact, it has not been found possible to get an Irish firm to supply and the Department of Posts and Telegraphs have had to make inquiries on the Continent to get these items. There were also difficulties in the particular year under review; a substantial item was a hold-up in the manufacture of Garda overcoats. 24. Deputy Crotty.—With regard to the supply of caps—I am sure bus conductors and a great many other people would be involved in uniform caps—would it not be a good thing to approach the Industrial Development Authority or are they aware of the fact that it is impossible to get an Irish supplier to supply our own requirements instead of being forced to go outside the State for our supplies? —I could not answer with any certainty here. Chairman.—Mr. Ward’s difficulty is that his Department are not directly responsible and we can understand his reluctance, perhaps, to talk about the responsibility of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. I can see the difficulty the Secretary of the Department of Justice is in and we should, I think, take this up with the Accounting Officer for Posts and Telegraphs as it is that Department who supply these uniforms. Deputy Crotty.—Do I understand correctly that it is the Department of Posts and Telegraphs who supply? —They do all the purchasing and make all the arrangements. 25. Is there dissatisfaction in the Garda Síochána because of the delay in providing the required clothing and dissatisfaction on the part of the officers that their men are not clothed as they would like them to be? —There was no serious delay insofar as individual members were concerned. For instance, overcoats are issued on the basis that a new overcoat is issued every four years, but these overcoats have a life well above four years. Every member has two overcoats on issue at any one time. While, on the accounts here, this under-expenditure shows up fairly substantially, in terms of how an individual member is affected it is a matter of not getting an overcoat today but getting it in, perhaps, three or four months’ time and no special difficulty is therefore caused. It can fairly be said, I believe, that the only thing that has caused dissatisfaction as far as uniforms are concerned was the delay in getting a suitable summer uniform and, as far as that is concerned, the various Representative Bodies are aware there have been genuine difficulties there. 26. Chairman.—Under subhead E.— Station Services—there is a note to the effect that the furniture supplied was less than was provided for. Deputy Crotty.—I do not think the Garda stations are over-furnished and I should imagine that any money provided would be spent? —There are really two items involved here. One was the fact that the number of new stations which came into being during this year was less than was expected and so the amount provided for new furniture for the stations could not be spent. The second item is that single Gardaí are no longer under an obligation to live in official quarters even when official quarters are available. When I say “under an obligation”, the obligation was a long-standing one and it naturally takes some time for a change to have an impact on the purchase of furniture. When single men go out from official quarters and are not replaced by new men moving in, it is not necessary now to furnish quarters. It is a combination of these two things that is reflected here rather than any shortfall in the furnishing of stations in the ordinary way. 27. Does this obligation apply to housing supplies for Gardaí in certain areas? —We were talking about quarters in the Garda station rather than houses. Does this obligation also apply in the case of houses? —We are talking now about single men. Where there are one or two houses available do you make sure there will be married men in the station so that the houses will be occupied? —Generally, but it may not always be possible. There are stations in rural areas where there are one or two houses available and at this present stage there may be only two members of the force in the particular station and they may not be married. 28. Chairman.—With regard to subhead I.—Witnesses’ Expenses—that was dealt with earlier on by the Comptroller and Auditor General. I take it these are expenses incurred by witnesses for the State? —That is correct. 29. Deputy Toal. How long does it take to pay these expenses? —It depends on circumstances. Normally we try to achieve immediate payment but sometimes there are delays because of the complexity of particular cases. Again, this is a different matter from the matter raised earlier. The system of payment was changed a couple of years ago in order to speed up things and, by and large, it seems to be working very well. I have come across a few people who were waiting quite a considerable time for payment? —That kind of problem, it is fair to say, arises occasionally through human error rather than because of any deficiency in the system. It is not general and the position now is quite satisfactory. 30. Deputy Crotty.—One other point. The amount of money involved seems to be small. What fee is paid to witnesses appearing for the State? They should be adequately compensated if we want them to come forward regularly? —I do not think I have that here. I could send the Committee a note. The total amount seems to be rather small. 31. Deputy Toal.—Does it include Garda attendance in the courts? —No. If a member of the force has to travel is he compensated? —What I mean is that his expenses would not be included under subhead I. They would be included under subhead A. or B., as the case might be. 32. Chairman.—Could we have a note on witnesses’ expenses? —Yes.* 33. Deputy Crotty.—Have you any difficulty in getting witnesses for the State? —Not related to the level of expenses. 34. On the Appropriations-in-Aid, Note 1 states: “The amount consists of the cost of traffic wardens and a contribution out of the Road Fund in respect of the pay of Gardaí engaged on road traffic duties.” What is the tie-in between the traffic wardens and the Department of Justice? —For the time being the traffic wardens are still under the wing, so to speak, of the Garda Síochána. Legislation is expected fairly shortly under which traffic wardens will be paid directly by the local authorities concerned. In practical terms at the moment even though not in the formal sense, the traffic wardens in Dublin are appointed by Dublin Corporation. The cost is recouped to the Corporation by our Department but our Department, in turn, are recouped by the Department of Local Government. This is an interim arrangement to enable Dublin Corporation to operate the system in advance of legislation. In due course, the Corporation will be given direct responsibility and this system will die then. At that stage the Corporation or the local authority will be in a position to appoint traffic wardens in their own right? —Yes. Now they must get the sanction of the Department of Justice —Technically it is not really the Department of Justice. It is the Commissioner of the Garda Síochána who is, in fact, the appointing authority. He exercises that power for the Corporation at the moment. It is expected that the powers will be given directly to the local authorities. 35. Deputy Toal.—Does that mean that proceedings will be taken by the local authority and not by the Garda Síochána in the case of traffic accidents? —I would not say that follows. There may be a limited amount of that. I rather doubt that there will be any substantial transfer of the Garda role in prosecutions. 36. Chairman.—In the Statement of Losses there is a reference to the larceny of a radio from a Garda car. How did that happen? —So far as I recall it was a matter of the car being broken into by force. These are part of the equipment of the car. Where was the car? —I cannot be certain. I do not recall the details. I assume the car was parked somewhere and was broken into, probably by breaking the glass. I am afraid I just do not recall the details. 37. I notice in the next sentence that the word “robbery” is used. Was this the forcible taking of the personal radio set from a member of the Garda Síochána? —That is probably a misuse of the word. By the way “Garda personal radio set” could perhaps be misleading. It is the accepted Garda terminology but it does not mean it was his personal property. I know that. —It is a walkie-talkie. Was it forcibly taken from him? —I am sorry. I cannot say. There is the contrast between the use of the word “larceny” in the first sentence and the word “robbery” in the second? —Subject to correction, I think it relates to a Garda station being broken into at night. I see. 38. Deputy Moore.—One case of theft from a Garda station caused a loss of £1,653. What were the circumstances? —This was the time of the bank strike. In the normal course money of that kind would not be kept in a Garda station. It was an unfortunate coincidence that it was during the bank strike and the money was there. It is a fact that a Garda station in Dublin was broken into on this night and things were taken from it. Chairman.—Was there no one in the station? —This occurred five years ago. I am sorry but I cannot remember. I was not personally dealing with the report at the time and I just do not know. Deputy Toal.—Were there no proceedings? Was nobody apprehended? —No. Nobody was found. 39. Deputy Crotty.—Would you not think that there would be somebody on duty in the Dublin stations at all times? —This happened in 1970. I could send the Committee a note on that if that would suffice. Chairman.—These are the accounts for 1972-73. —My point is that it was in 1970 that the break-in occurred. I was never personally aware of the details and that is why I cannot say offhand what the details are. I could send the Committee a note. The loss was brought to account that year but the break-in occurred in August, 1970. 40. I presume there was an official inquiry? —Yes. I have a formal note here from the Garda Síochána which was received at that time and which says that the Commissioner is satisfied that the arrangements now in operation for holding cash in the Kevin Street office are such as to avoid a repetition, that there is full awareness at all stations that large sums of money should not be held as a general rule and that there was no negligence on the part of any member. If it has been investigated by the Commissioner and if it was accounted for in a previous year and had Finance sanction, is it necessary to ask the Accounting Officer to send us a note? Deputy Governey.—I would not think so. 41. Chairman.—The Garda Síochána Reward Fund, 1972-73, is the next heading. Deputy Crotty.—For information, what are rewards paid for? —The position has changed. Traditionally rewards were paid for outstanding police work but, following on the report of the Conroy Commission and by agreement with the Representative Bodies, that has been discontinued except in relation to people who have been awarded a Scott Medal for bravery and one or two other limited exceptions such as members earning revenue rewards, rewards paid by the Revenue Commissioners. But, by and large, the idea of payment of reward for ordinary police duties has, with the consent of everybody concerned, been discontinued and the money that used to be paid out in that way is now paid for the benefit of the Force as a whole into what is called the Medical Aid Society. 42. In other words, the emphasis has probably changed to being on promotion rather than on monetary reward as such? —Yes. I would say that is one way of looking at it, but the immediate, so to speak, cause of or occasion for the change was that this was recommended in the Conroy Report and was subscribed to by the three Representative Bodies. There was general agreement that this was not a good idea—this payment of rewards to individuals as a general feature—but it has been retained as something to go with the Scott Medal for Bravery and in the other limited areas. 43. You referred to rewards from the Revenue Commissioners. What would the Revenue Commissioners be rewarding the Garda Síochána for? —Mainly, I should think, poteen seizures. VOTE 22—PRISONS.Mr. A. Ward further examined.44. Chairman.—On subhead A.—Salaries, Wages and Allowances—the expenditure was considerably less than granted. There is a note which says “Saving was due to delay in filling vacancies”. What is the staffing position now? —The staffing position, generally speaking, is improved but there is a limit to the speed with which one can recruit and give training to suitable prison officers and a limit to the degree to which it is appropriate to add new people to the existing corps because ratio between experienced and inexperienced officers would be out of balance. Taking account of the difficulties, the position is fairly good now. Apart from what you have mentioned, the Department of Justice have no particular problem in this area, have they? —No. 45. Subhead F.—Manufacturing Department and Farm—the note says that the cost of tools, raw materials, et cetera, was more than anticipated. I take it that this is in line with the general inflation that has been experienced over the years, as the note refers to cost rather than quantity? —Yes. VOTE 23—COURTS.Mr. A. Ward further examined.46. Chairman.—On subhead A.—Salaries, Wages and Allowances—the explanatory note says that the additional assistance provided for was not approved and there was delay in filling vacancies and that this accounts for the saving on the subhead of £71,700 as against what was granted. What additional assistance was not approved? —It related mainly to welfare officers. Sanction came afterwards. It was more a postponement. That is outside the year under review? —Yes. It was a delay in the sanction which naturally affected the level of payment within the year. But it related to welfare officers? —Yes, mainly welfare officers. Were there any instances of court officers or people of that nature? —No. These were new posts that we are talking about. 47. In regard to the Appropriation-in-Aid I notice that the revenue from fines was underestimated. You realised £72,534 where you estimated £53,000. —In the case of fines, it is in the nature of a guess rather than an estimate. 48. Similarly, there is an underestimation in regard to fees. What is the explanation as to why the fees are up by £12,000? —The fees referred to there are for the most part made up by one particular kind of fee, fees in connection with the execution of Court Orders and Land Commission warrants by the County Registrar. That, rather like fines, is something which it is impossible to estimate in advance. 49. There is a note on page 60 with regard to fees. The sums are substantial. Deputy Toal.—I suppose the District Court fees would have increased with the extension of the jurisdiction of the court? —I would imagine so, but I am not certain. VOTE 24—LAND REGISTRY AND REGISTRY OF DEEDS.Mr. A. Ward further examined.50. Chairman.—Under subhead C.—Post Office Services—we noticed in the Votes before us this morning that there is a tendency for Post Office charges to be down rather than up. In the case of the Garda Síochána they are up, but this is the third instance now in which they are actually down. Is there any particular significance in that? —I do not think so. 51. Deputy Crotty.—Was there an over-estimation originally? —I suppose, on what the figure shows there must have been. Chairman.—That is the only conclusion. —May I make a point? One of the difficulties here is that there could be a balancing out between one year and another because the estimates supplied by the Department of Posts and Telegraphs can be a bit earlier or a bit later, as the case may be, and it may be that deficiencies in one year would be offset in the following year. There is no particular reason that we know of for any change in the level of telephoning and that sort of thing by the Land Registry or any other office like that. The witness withdrew. The Committee deliberated. The Committee adjourned. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
