Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1975 > Committee of Public Accounts > Interim and Final Report - Appropriation Accounts 1972 - 1973

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Déardaoin, 24 Aibreán, 1975.

Thursday, 24th April, 1975.

The Committee met at 11 a.m.

DEPUTY de VALERA in the chair.

Mr. M. Jacob (thar ceann an Ard-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste) called and examined.

VOTE 33—NATIONAL GALLERY.

Dr. J. White called and examined.

657. Deputy Toal—On subhead D—Purchase and Repair of Pictures (Grant-in-Aid)— this is a very small sum for the purchase of pictures. Are these the only moneys provided by the Oireachtas?

—Yes.

What percentage of the total would that be?

—It depends on how you look at the total. If you mean the total spent in a given year, then it is a very tiny percentage. In the year in question we bought one picture for £125,000. So, £6,000 as a percentage of £125,000 is very small. On the other hand, we must bear in mind that we received our total expenditure grant from the Government. To speak of the isolated figure for purchases and repairs is perhaps to minimise the great contribution we get from the State. We would like the amount for the purchase of pictures to be very considerably increased.

658. Deputy C. Murphy.—I note in subhead B that exhibition expenses are down. Is this due to the infrequency of exhibitions?

—Allow me to explain about exhibitions. The National Gallery, as an institution, has a large public collection and our main function is to show it. Since I came to the Gallery we tended to introduce special exhibitions because one needs to attract the people in the area to the Gallery by some means. From time to time I have obtained the loan of pictures from foreign countries as a special attraction. The combined statement here, the reduced travelling, advertising and exhibition expenses, are the items covered by subhead B. The saving was more in the area of travelling than anywhere else. Travelling can be a big item during the year because of our board members coming to meetings and my travelling to foreign countries. One year we might have an exhibition which is rather expensive and the next year we might have a local exhibition. This coming year we are having an exhibition related to the Architectural Heritage Year which will show paintings and drawings describing our architectural heritage. They will be drawn from local sources, so expenses will be low.

Do you intend bringing exhibitions to the country?

—The National Gallery has no power outside Dublin. We lend to local institutions. At the moment we are in the process of lending two groups of paintings, one to Cork and the other to Wexford. There are proposals coming up soon for Castlebar and Trim. My board are most anxious that the treasures of the Gallery should as far as possible be available where there is a suitable place to show them in provincial areas. We do not pay for that. We lend the pictures but the expenses for transport and insurance must be met by the borrowers.

659. Deputy Moore—Has Dr. White a figure for the number of visitors to the Gallery?

—We issued our last report at a Press Conference about ten days ago. The attendance for last year was approximately 305,000. That was our second highest attendance ever. There was a fall in attendance when the troubles started in the North. We had a very bad spell last year when the bombs were dropped, one in Lincoln Place. For about a month around that time very few came into Dublin city. Because of that we did not have a record year but I think we would have had otherwise. I anticipate that the coming year will be very satisfactory.

660. Deputy H. Gibbons.—From where does your main income come?

—From the State. This grant of £98,000 from the Government is what runs the Gallery. The only other sources of income we have are by way of gifts and bequests or by proceeds from the sales of reproductions. Proceeds from the latter go to making more reproductions.

661. Last year you told us that the security situation prohibited you from having access to the Gallery from Kildare Street. Is that still the position?

—The security of Dáil Éireann and the surrounding Government buildings is vital. Therefore, I should think that until such time as there is secure peace in the whole island we shall not be able to open a passageway along the side of Government Buildings from the College of Art to the Library. There should be no problem once this peace has been achieved.

662. Chairman.—So far as I know that passageway has not been in use since the Dáil began sitting here?

—I would have thought it was closed about 1931 or 1932. I have a recollection of being told by a former Minister, Mr. P. J. Little, who was then Director of the Arts Council, that the passageway used run past the Dáil Library but that it was closed because of the risk this involved.

Perhaps it was closed during the Civil War?

—Yes, We have a restaurant at the Gallery and it is my ambition that this passageway would serve not only the Gallery but also the Library and the Museum and that visitors would be able to use it to get to the restaurant.

663. There are no more questions. Has the Accounting Officer anything to add?

—I have nothing further to add except to express my gratitude for the continued support of the Oireachtas without which we could not survive.

So far as we are concerned, we have been impressed in the past few years by your efficient enterprise. We compliment you on that.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 27—OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION

Mr. D. Ó Laoghaire called and examined.

664. Chairman.—Paragraph 34 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Subhead A.4.—Higher Education Authority

The Higher Education Authority, which was set up on 1 September 1968 as a non-statutory body with advisory functions in relation to higher education, was replaced as from 15 May 1972 by An tÚdarás um Ard-Oideachas, a statutory body established under the Higher Education Authority Act, 1971 with general and specific functions in relation to higher education.

The charge to the subhead, £48,220, comprises £1,580 paid in respect of the expenses of the Higher Education Authority in the period from 1 April 1972 to 14 May 1972 and £46,640 paid by way of fees and expenses in the period from 15 May 1972 to 31 March 1973 on behalf of An tÚdarás. The accounts of An tÚdarás are audited by me.”

Mr. Jacob.—This paragraph is for information. The accounts of An tÚdarás for the period ended 31st March, 1973, and for the year ended 31st March, 1974, have been audited by me.

Chairman.—This is purely for information?

Mr. Jacob.—It indicates that the authority was set up on 1st September, 1968 and was replaced as from 15th May, 1972 by An tÚdarás um Ard-Oideachas, a statutory body established under the Higher Education Authority Act, 1971.

665. Chairman.—And you are adjusting your accounts accordingly?

Mr. Jacob.—We are placing on record that at the time of the Report the accounts for the period ending in 1972 had not been prepared. The accounts for the period ending March, 1973, and for the year ending March, 1974, have since been audited and are up to date.

Chairman.—And satisfactory?

Mr. Jacob.—And satisfactory.

666. Chairman.—Paragraph 35 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Subhead A.5.—Grants to Bord an Choláiste Náisiúnta Ealaine is Deartha

The National College of Art and Design Act, 1971 provides for the establishment of Bord an Choláiste Náisiúnta Ealaíne is Deartha to carry out the management of An Coláiste Náisiúnta Ealaíne is Deartha (formerly known as the National College of Art, Kildare Street, Dublin), the organisation and administration of its affairs, and other particular and general functions in relation to education in art, crafts and design. The Minister for Education, by Order, appointed 1 May 1972 as the establishment day. The charge to the subhead, £153,869, comprises £7,302 paid in April 1972 in respect of expenses of the former National College of Art and £146,567 paid in respect of fees and expenses of An Bord in the period 1 May 1972 to 31 March 1973. The accounts of An Bord will be audited by me.”

Mr. Jacob.—As the Department of Education continued to control the revenue and expenditure of the College for a transitional period, the expenses referred to in the paragraph have been examined in conjunction with the audit of the Vote. I am in communication with the Department of Education regarding the submission of formal accounts by An Coláiste.

667. Chairman.—Has the College submitted any formal accounts yet?

Mr. Jacob.—Not as of this moment. We communicated with the former Accounting Officer requesting him to use his good offices to hasten the submission of formal accounts and I presume the matter is being processed at present.

Chairman.—Does this mean that the accounts for the College have not been furnished and are not available to you?

Mr. Jacob.—Yes, but as I said we are in a transitional period and the expenses incurred under subhead A.5 have been audited by us on the basis of a vote subhead but under the Act accounts are required and when the stage is reached that the form of accounts is approved—

668. Chairman.—Is there any time by which these accounts should be furnished to you?

Mr. Jacob.—Section 15 of the National College of Art and Design Act, 1971, requires that the board shall complete in such form as may be approved by the Minister with the consent of the Minister for Finance all proper and usual accounts of all moneys received or expended by it. Subsection (2) provides that accounts shall be submitted annually to the Comptroller and Auditor General for audit and immediately after such audit a copy of the income and expenditure account and of the balance sheet and of such other, if any, of the accounts as the Minister, after consultation with the Minister for Finance, may direct and a copy of the Comptroller and Auditor-General’s Report on the accounts shall be presented to the Minister who shall cause copies thereof to be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas.

669. Chairman.—Have the provisions of subsection 15 (2) of that Act been complied with?

Mr. Jacob.—Not as yet.

Chairman.—By what date should they have been complied with?

Mr. Jacob.—It says “annually”.

Chairman.—At what date?

Mr. Jacob.—Within a reasonable period. You might have a broken period in the initial period from the commencement of this Act, which was passed in December, 1971. You might have an account from 1st December, 1971 to, say, 31st March, 1972 or 1973. That would give a 16-month period when they were starting off, or, by arrangement, you might have a four-month account and then you would get on to an annual basis.

Chairman.—That section has not been complied with yet?

Mr. Jacob.—No, and we have communicated with the Accounting Officer in an endeavour to ensure that the board would proceed and prepare and present accounts to us.

670. Chairman.—Are we correct in understanding that more than two years have passed since the establishment of this board and that accounts have not been sent to the Comptroller and Auditor-General?

—Yes.

Can you give us any explanation for that?

—Yes. This is a matter for the Board of the College, which are independent. They had to build up their staff and they had asked the Department to carry on making payments for them and look after their accounts for them. We did this up to 31st December, 1974, and we gave them notice then that from then onwards, having sufficient staff themselves, they would have to handle the matter on their own. The onus, I take it, is on the Board and on the chief officer of the College to deal with these accounts and prepare them in the form required by the auditor. The Department have been in touch with the auditor and with the Department of Finance on the form of the accounts and that has been settled and has been transmitted by us to the College and the onus is now on the College to submit the accounts in this form to the Comptroller and Auditor General.

671. Is this the position as I understand it from the Comptroller and Auditor General, that as far as the Department are concerned, that is the provision and the accounting of the Department for grants provided for under subhead A.5, all that has been done in time and in order?

—Yes.

Do I understand that, having handed over the money, in the transitional period your Department undertook, so to speak, the administration of the fund for the College and to that extent the accounting for them in the interim period? Is that a fair inference from what you have said?

—I think the inference is fair enough. Perhaps we went a bit farther than we should have done but we were interested in helping the Board of the College over their initial difficulties. We were making the payments for them but the responsibility was legally theirs.

672. In that case did you undertake to do their work? Does that mean that the accounting of these moneys so expended from the State’s point of view has still not been formally accounted for and passed by the Comptroller and Auditor-General?

—One set of accounts was envisaged for the period from 1st May, 1972, when the board took over, to the 31st December, 1973, and calendar year accounts for the years from the 1st January, 1974. These are the accounts which are now in preparation.

Does this mean that the accounts are for 16 months and 12 months, in other words, that the money spent by the college have not yet been formally accounted for?

—That is true.

673. What is the Department’s responsibility for that situation?

—For the interim period we will have to bear some responsibility since we were making payments. The legal position is that the Board of the College must bear full responsibility. In a sense, we have been using our good offices with the Board to endeavour to get the preparation of accounts expedited. This is a new board with new officers and we have had to be patient with them.

674. Deputy Moore.—Are the officers civil servants?

—No, they are officers of the College.

To whom are they subject?

—To the Board of the College.

675. Chairman.—How will you get this matter cleared up?

—I have been in office for only seven days.

I appreciate that.

—I will endeavour to see the Chairman of the Board and have this matter cleared up as quickly as I can. We have been in touch with the College at various levels on a number of occasions.

Public moneys from the Oireachtas are involved in this case. As you know, there is a need for stricter control when grants are made where the immediate Accounting Officer is concerned.

676. Paragraph 36 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Subhead A.6.—National Council for Educational Awards

The National Council for Educational Awards was appointed in April 1972 by the Minister for Education to examine curricula, to structure courses, to set examinations and to award diplomas, certificates and degrees for third level non-university education. The Council is operating as a non-statutory body pending the introduction of legislation to establish it on a statutory basis. As shown in the account £4,270 was charged to the subhead in respect of expenditure incurred by the Council in the year under review.”

Mr. Jacob.—This paragraph is for information. I understand that the Council is continuing to operate on a non-statutory basis for the time being.

Chairman.—Why do you make that comment?

Mr. Jacob.—It is intended to introduce legislation to establish the Council on a statutory basis. As I said, the paragraph is for information and indicates, in effect, that the date for the introduction of the legislation to put it on a statutory basis has not been settled.

677. Deputy H. Gibbons.—Do those who get awards from this body suffer any disability because it is a non-statutory body?

—I do not think so. The stature of the body itself is the best guarantee at the moment.

678. Internationally, are there any guidelines with which you can objectively view the awards and say they are up to standard with comparable European bodies?

—I do not think there are any guidelines. The Council have not made many awards but they would be concerned that the awards would be up to the level recognised abroad. There might be guidelines in the EEC context and they would be set down by directives. The expectation would be that any awards made by the NCEA would be recognised in those directives.

Would they be accepted internationally?

—We hope so.

There is some anxiety about this.

—There was, but it has been allayed. The Government have decided that the NCEA should continue in being at the moment and retain their title. They are still empowered to award degrees in respect of degree level courses already underway where it is found that the universities are not able to validate them at present. That power will remain with the Council until the universities are prepared to undertake validation.

679. Can any body, other than a university, award a degree? My understanding of a degree applies only to universities.

—Yes, certain bodies, such as the Royal College of Surgeons, have their own bye-laws. They do not award degrees but their bye-laws could be amended to allow them do so.

Chairman.—It is a question of interpretation. For instance, the barristers at Kings Inns describe their qualification as Degree of Barrister of Law. This raises an interesting legal point.

Deputy H. Gibbons.—It is a question of definition.

Chairman.—Nowadays the anxiety to have B. something after one’s name has perturbed our whole approach to higher education.

680. Deputy C. Murphy.—On the question of the status of these diplomas or certificates, is it envisaged that some form of external examiners would be engaged as happens in the case of the universities?

—Yes. The NCEA operate panels of assessors and advisers in connection with these agreements.

And they determine the acceptability of a degree?

—Yes.

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

“Subhead B.2.—European Schools Day

The annual Youth Forum of the European Schools Day was held in Dublin in July 1972. This was the first occasion on which Ireland acted as host to this event and the charge to the subhead, £20,002, represents the net cost to the Department of Education of providing accommodation, travel and other facilities for the delegates.”

Mr. Jacob.—This paragraph is for information. Normally a contribution is made from this subhead to the country acting as host.

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

“Subhead F.4.—Grant to Rose Teoranta

In March 1973 a grant of £20,000 was paid to Rosc Teoranta, with the sanction of the Minister for Finance, towards meeting the deficit of the company in connection with the 1971 Rosc Exhibition.

The deficit at 15 February 1973 was stated to be £22,751, made up as follows:—

I have inquired whether the associated exhibitions were an intrinsic part of the Rosc Exhibition, whether the company had given prior undertakings to the organisers to meet any losses and whether audited accounts were available in respect of these exhibitions.”

Mr. Jacob.—The Accounting Officer informed me that the grant of £20,000 was provided at the request of the Department of Finance. The Accounting Officer, Department of Finance, in reply to an inquiry stated that the associated exhibitions formed part of the main Rosc Exhibition and that the proposal to stage them was initiated by the Executive Committee of Rosc Teoranta. He also stated that there was no prior undertaking given by the Rosc Committee in regard to deficits on associated exhibitions but Rosc Teoranta decided to assist them financially in view of its involvement with them. Audited accounts of the associated committees are not available but details of the deficits incurred were furnished.

683. Chairman.—As Accounting Officer for the Department do you consider yourself responsible for making these grants?

—We assumed the duty at the request of the Department of Finance and it follows from that we have responsibility.

684. There was a grant of £20,000 but there was also a deficit?

Mr. Jacob.—There was a grant of £20,000 and the deficit as calculated at February, 1973, was £22,751. An analysis of that deficit caused us some concern regarding associated exhibitions, particularly as to whether they should be financed from the Vote. At the date of our Report we had an inquiry with the Departments of Finance and Education regarding the association of the associated exhibitions with the Rosc exhibition. It transpired that the Rosc Teoranta body gave no prior undertaking to meet those deficits which amounted to £5,800 but that since they related to the project in general it was decided the effort should be financed by them. At the date of our Report we had not received clarification from the Accounting Officers in regard to this matter but the clarification has been received in the meantime. Audited accounts of the associated committees were not available but details of the deficits have been furnished. In the light of the details given to us we are prepared to accept the charges.

—These were made on behalf of three exhibitions, in Limerick, Castletown and Galway. The understanding at the outset was that the local people in these areas would endeavour to finance their own exhibitions but apparently it did not prove possible for them to collect as much money as they had expected to collect. Some of the expenses were for such items as printing, carriage and so on, which charges were undertaken to be catered for jointly by the main Rosc exhibition and the others. They regarded their own credibility with their creditors as being at stake if in respect of the exhibition which they had sponsored partly they were unable to make ends meet. It was on that basis that it was considered proper for the costs to be charged to the main subhead.

685. Deputy H. Gibbons.—Are Rosc Teoranta a statutory body?

—They were an ad hoc committee set up at the time to deal with the Rosc exhibition.

686. This exhibition would seem to be more appropriate to the Vote for the National Gallery than for the Department of Education?

—The exhibition was held in various places, including several centres in Dublin. There were some exhibits in the National Museum and since other exhibits related to the Museum, the charge was considered appropriate to the Department of Education.

687. Chairman.—Am I to understand that in respect of these exhibitions there were no formal accounts available to the Comptroller and Auditor General but that he got the details he was looking for?

Mr. Jacob.—There is an audited account for Rosc. Our problem concerned the associated exhibitions.

Chairman.—I take it that the Accounting Officer accepts responsibility for ensuring that the Rosc accounts are satisfactory when making adjustments to the final grant?

—Yes.

688. Were you satisfied before the Comptroller and Auditor General made his comments on the figures that the net losses on associated exhibitions should be included?

—Looking back, I would say yes.

If one subtracts the £5,838 from the total of £22,751 it is seen that the £20,000 grant would have been too much?

—Yes.

You are satisfied that the situation is under control?

—Yes.

689. Paragraph 39 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General states:

“Subhead G.11.—Chester Beatty Library (Grant-in-Aid)

The Department of Finance has approved a scheme for the provision of additional accommodation at the Chester Beatty Library at an estimated cost of £105,000, including professional fees. Plans for the work have been approved by the Office of Public Works and the charge to the subhead includes an initial payment of £10,000 made to the trustees of the Library towards the cost of the scheme.”

Mr. Jacob.—This paragraph is for information. Further grants of £30,000 in 1973-74 and £74,180 in the period ended 31st December, 1974, were paid to the Trustees of the Library towards the cost of the scheme.

Chairman.—Any observations?

—This is a very valuable collection which needs to be fittingly housed and could be a very big asset to the country.

690. Paragraph 40 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Subhead G.16.—Institiúid Teangeolaíochta Éireann (Grant-in-Aid)

With the approval of the Government, Institiúid Teangeolaíochta Éireann was incorporated on 27 October 1972 under the Companies Act, 1963 as a company limited by guarantee without share capital. In the years prior to the incorporation of An Institiúid the Language Institute of Ireland functioned as a section of the Department of Education, the salaries, wages and allowances of its staff being paid from subhead A.1 of this vote. Payments from the grant-in-aid in the year under review were made by the Department of Education. The accounts of An Institiúid will be audited by me.”

Mr. Jacob.—This paragraph is for information. The accounts of An Institiúid for the period 27th October, 1972, to 31st December, 1973, have been audited.

691. Deputy H. Gibbons.—Do they publish anything? We do not hear much about them? They were in the news at one time?

—Perhaps the reason that much is not heard from them now is that they have settled down to work.

Chairman.—We will turn to the subheads of Vote 27, page 67. We have already dealt with the controversial matters on the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General.

692. Deputy H. Gibbons.—What does Subhead B.4—Educational Research—cover?

—Various research projects that are funded by the Department but not actually carried out by them. They are carried out by various people who make suggestions for the research.

And the results of the work become available to you for your information?

—Yes.

693. Deputy C. Murphy.—On subhead B.5— Language Research—can you give us any idea of the progress of the work?

—This is the language research?

Yes.

—One of the problems here was that the people engaged on the project had to be assigned to other fairly urgent work and the research was interrupted for a period. I am not quite sure what the present position of the work is but I can send the Committee a note on it.*

694. Chairman.—On subhead C.1—University Scholarships—there is a note saying that the number of scholarship holders was less than expected. Is there any explanation as there is a significant saving on the subhead?

—The savings were mainly on two sections, scholarships for courses taken through Irish and the recoupment to local authorities in respect of scholarships awarded by them before 1967. In the second case it is a matter of scholarships being phased out because of the operation of the main scholarship scheme. On the first one, scholarships for courses being taken through Irish, I had thought it might have been a lack of applications but I found on inquiry that it was rather more complex than that. It was a question of candidates having to choose between getting educational grants or accepting these scholarships. It seems that there is such delay at times in candidates making up their minds to accept these scholarships for courses through Irish that it sometimes happens that it is not possible to award the scholarships.

695. Deputy C. Murphy.—What kind of courses through Irish?

—These courses are mainly held in UCG.

What subjects?

—Mainly art and commerce. They were fairly extensive in commerce but I do not think they are quite so extensive now.

696. Chairman.—On subhead C.4—Fellowships—there is a note which says that the saving was due mainly to the fact that three holders resigned their fellowships during the year, that one holder was granted three months’ leave of absence without pay and that some candidates were unable to take up appointments at the beginning of the year. What type of fellowships are involved?

—First, there are senior visiting fellowships which enable scientists and engineers from Ireland to go abroad for a short period of study. This was originally financed by OECD and it is now financed by the Royal Irish Academy. The second one is post-doctoral fellowships awarded under a scheme initiated in 1967. This is a grant to persons with Ph.D. or equivalent research experience to enable them to do two or three years on research in science or engineering at an Irish university.

697. Deputy H. Gibbons.—Would there be any tie-up between subhead C.4, Fellowships, and subhead B.6, Technical Assistance in Education and the scientific research grants. Do they overlap?

—No, they are three separate items. The research is something that is done on projects organised by a committee in the Department. These fellowships and post-doctoral fellowships are organised by the Royal Irish Academy. The technical assistance provision is to assist teachers and others, not officers of the Department, to go abroad for experience and to enable the Department to bring people from abroad to this country to share their experience with us. There are three separate schemes and no overlapping.

698. Deputy H. Gibbons.—Could we have a brief note of when people might apply for fellowships?

—Certainly.*

699. Chairman.—The academy administers them but they are university fellowships worked out in institutions equivalent to university research level?

—Yes. There were 116 applications in 1972-73. I can give particulars or circulate a note later.

700. On subhead C.5—Higher Education Grants—the sum involved seems quite large. Were the numbers of students looking for grants lower than anticipated?

—Yes. This is a question of the difficulty of anticipating the number of students who will qualify.

701. Is there any reason to believe that students feel there is saturation at the higher levels and, so, are not as anxious to go to university as previously?

—There is a marginal feeling to that effect but I do not imagine it would affect the grants position for some time.

Part of the unexpended money is due to the fact that you are dealing with an estimate and there is a tendency to over-estimate?

—Yes.

702. Deputy H. Gibbons.—On subhead D.1 —Publications in Irish—when can we look forward to the publication of the Irish-English dictionary?

—It is hoped that Part III will be available next year.

Part III?

—It might be more satisfactory if I gave a written note on this also.*

If there is to be a delay I suggest that the parts which are ready should be published. This would be of benefit to some of us.

703. Deputy C. Murphy.—Are the books on sale in the Government Publications Office in this category?

—Yes.

Was there a fall-off in Irish books, especially for children, last Christmas? I was looking for books for my nephews and nieces in the 5-14 age group but found only one new book on sale.

—I am not aware that there has been a falling off in production. I would be surprised if the Gúm people and other independent publishers were not aiming at the Christmas trade.

I am surprised to note that £33,384 was not spent when I remember how few books were available over Christmas. Others who wished to buy Irish books had the same experience as I had. Perhaps Mr. Ó Laoghaire would look into this? I know it is a very small item in a very large Estimate.

—Certainly.

704. Chairman.—On subhead D.2—Grants to Colleges providing Courses in Irish—does this include University College, Galway?

—No, summer colleges in the Gaeltacht.

705. Deputy C. Murphy.—On subhead D.3 —Transport Services—what exactly is meant here by “transport services”?

—Services to post-primary schools, allowances to the transport liaison officers, services to primary and special schools and a subsidy for fare-paying passengers.

Does this involve the use of buses for matches? Are such services subsidised?

—No, this covers transport to school. It does not cover the cost of other transport.

706. On subhead D.4—Audio-Visual Teaching Aids—is it true that some of the schools could not avail of this equipment because they had to make up part of the payment?

—This may enter into the picture to some extent, but some of the schools could not furnish the necessary receipted vouchers within the financial year.

707. Deputy H. Gibbons.—On subhead D.6 —Physical Education—what does this cover?

—The maintenance of physical education students who attended St. Mary’s College in London before the NCPE was established, the maintenance of the first students attending at Limerick and the fees of female students attending Sion Hill College at that time. It also covers the salaries and running expenses of the NCPE in so far as it was developed in that period.

708. On subhead E.2—Survey and Reproduction of Irish Historical Records in Foreign Collections (Grant-in-Aid)—on whose initiative are reproductions from foreign collections published?

—On the initiative of the Director of the National Library.

709. Chairman.—On subhead E.3—Fees and Expenses in connection with Inspection of Manuscripts and Editing of Publications—on previous occasions the accommodation problem was mentioned. What is the position now?

—A decision was taken in principle that the Library should endeavour to expand on its present location in Kildare Street and properties have been acquired in that area. As time goes on we hope to acquire more property to enable the Library to expand properly. There is also the question of the National College of Art the premises of which are behind the Library and which was expected to be available to the Library when that College moves to other premises. So far there has not been any tangible movement in that direction but the ultimate picture is for expansion in the Library.

710. Meanwhile confusion in the Library has reached inconvenient proportions both for the staff and for readers?

—Yes.

Therefore, for readers and research workers it is difficult to gain reasonable access to material and the staff must be harassed and and put at a great disadvantage?

—Yes.

There is an urgency involved here?

—Yes.

711. Has it reached the stage where there is a danger that material will have to be stored or buried so that in effect it becomes unavailable?

—I do not think the situation has reached that stage. Storage space is available and this is convenient to the Library. The problem is to get the space fitted out and put into use fairly quickly but this costs money.

And you cannot get the money?

—We can never get as much as we would like to get.

712. On subhead F.2—Fittings, Materials, etc.—there is a note which tells us that the projected expenditure did not materialise. Was this because the Department of Finance did not sanction the money or that the Museum did not avail of the facility?

—It was not that the Museum did not avail of the money but that for some reason they were not able to complete the purchase.

Was the purchase sanctioned?

—It would appear so.

713. Deputy H. Gibbons.—On subhead F.3— Archaeological Excavations—is this the total sum available for this purpose?

—Private people and the Office of Public Works make money available also.

714. Chairman.—On subhead G.2—Royal Irish Academy—why was there £4,000 less than the grant taken?

—The difficulty here was that a new scheme was started—the international exchange scheme —and it was difficult to get that scheme operational at the beginning. There was a question of deciding, first, where the exchanges should take place and then getting the machinery into operation. Later expenditure on that scheme increased considerably. It was £6,000 in 1973-74.

715. On Appropriations-in-Aid, I note that sales of publications in Irish realised a little more than estimated.

Deputy C. Murphy.—Here again I would refer to the lack of publications in Irish for children. I remarked on this situation to the people in the office in the Arcade.

—The Deputy will appreciate that we are dealing here with a different year—1972-73.

716. Chairman.—On the non-voted funds, these accounts are administered by the Department of Education?

—The list of securities held comprises mostly Government stock.

VOTE 28—PRIMARY EDUCATION.

Mr. D. Ó Laoghaire further examined.

717. Chairman.—Paragraph 41 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Subhead A.1.—Training Colleges

Reference was made in paragraph 40 of the report for 1971-72 to the provision of State aid towards the cost of building a new Church of Ireland Training College at Rathmines. In the year under review further grants of £30,640 were issued for the project bringing the total of such grants to £441,530 at 31 March 1973 although State aid, sanctioned by the Minister for Finance at that date was limited to £371,810. I communicated with the Accounting Officer in November 1972 in relation to the issue of grants in excess of the approved limit but I have not yet received a reply.”

Mr. Jacob.—The Committee reported on the issue of grants over and above the limit set by the Minister for Finance following its examination of the Appropriation Account for 1971-72. I understand that the Department of Education have sought covering sanction from the Minister for Finance for excess expenditure.

718. Chairman.—What is the position since then?

—The excess expenditure has been discussed between the Department of Education and the Department of Finance and we are in correspondence in regard to it. We still have not sanction for it.

What is the position if the Department of Finance do not sanction it? I gather since you are in correspondence about it, it is not an automatic procedure?

—This is something we will have to face when it arises.

719. We are interested in the procedural aspects of it. Has such a situation ever arisen? Could the Comptroller say what would normally happen next?

Mr. Jacob.—I would imagine that the correspondence would continue. It may be only in the initial stages.

—May I say we have had a long tradition of very good value for money in the case of these training colleges and a good deal of liberty of action was traditionally allowed to people in charge of colleges and they were able to make very good bargains with contractors down the years. Arising out of that, perhaps rather more liberty of action was given to the directors of colleges than should have been given, but at the moment, with the activities of our building unit and for the future, I would imagine that these things would be much more tightly controlled. The tradition has been there that training colleges as sort of semiprivate institutions were in a position to get very good value for the money expended. I think this is one of the reasons why the operations of the college were not as tightly controlled as might have been expected.

Chairman.—One can understand this, but we might consider putting this point to you: the flexibility that might be required might be best secured by absolute compliance with the accounting rules at the State level. The disturbing feature of this, in a broad sense, and perhaps going into the area of policy, is that taking your remarks and the information we now have, there would be a tendency to restrict what is possibly a desirable and commendable freedom of action and that this would be a consequence of allowing the accounting system to become so elastic as to pose problems for the Comptroller and Auditor General. If the rules could have been strictly abided by the necessary elasticity could be preserved. We have had this problem in other larger areas on grants-in-aid and we would like to make that point to all Accounting Officers—the importance of rigidly adhering in the best traditions of the service to accounting procedures. Perhaps this is one of the reasons why I asked the question whether sanction had been obtained in another case, because in my short experience I know the internal administrative difficulties when you have a very efficient watchdog in Merrion Street. That is a general comment and no doubt the Committee will consider it when making their report.

720. Deputy H. Gibbons.—On subhead C.6— Grants towards the Cost of Free School Books for Necessitous Children—I notice that less was expended than was estimated for. This does not seem to be in keeping with our experience down the country where the demands of necessitous people cannot be met. Is the scheme administered by the teachers?

—By the principal teacher, yes.

Do you give them any guidelines or are they left on their own in this matter?

—A considerable amount is left to their own discretion because they know the local circumstances better.

721. On subhead C.7—Fees for Pupils in Secondary Tops—have these gone out yet?

—Not yet. In 1974 we still had 12 and the expenditure was of the order of £8,000.

722. Deputy C. Murphy.—On subhead C.8— Special Educational Project—I see a note to the effect that the excess is partly due to the increased cost of school meals. I was under the impression that these schemes were run through local authorities in some cases?

—This is the special project in Rutland Street which is run by the Department and the Van Leer Foundation. It is a special project aimed at guiding us in dealing with priorities in education in the case of disadvantaged children.

Deputy H. Gibbons.—Has it been concluded?

—We have not got the final report yet but it is in its last stages.

Has any decision yet been made to follow it up?

—No. We want to consider the report first.

723. On 1 (b) of Appropriations-in-Aid— Recovery of loans to training college students— were there losses?

—There are some cases under an agreed procedure for write-off if a student is unable to pay. Usually a relatively small amount is involved.

What type of student would be unable to pay?

—A student who fell ill.

If he were subsequently trained would he not be able to pay?

—If he were subsequently trained it would come up again.

This applies to the student who must leave altogether?

—Yes.

VOTE 29—SECONDARY EDUCATION.

Mr. D. Ó Laoghaire further examined.

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

“Subhead GG.—Ex-gratia Pensions for Widows and Children of certain former Teachers

Widows and children of secondary school teachers who died or retired prior to 1 October 1969 have been in receipt of ex-gratia pensions similar to those enjoyed by the dependants of other public servants who died or retired prior to 23 July 1968. These pensions were paid out of the Secondary Teachers’ Pension Fund in the first instance but, as the Fund scheme did not provide for them, it was decided that they should be met from voted moneys. The charge of £62,000 to subhead GG. in the year under review represents a refund made to the Secondary Teachers’ Pension Fund towards exgratia pensions paid from the Fund in the period 1 October 1969 to 31 March 1973.”

Mr. Jacob.—The ex-gratia pensions are paid directly from the vote since 1st April, 1973.

725. Chairman.—Is this simply an accounting matter?

Mr. Jacob.—Yes. The paragraph is for information. We said that these pensions were paid out of the secondary teachers’ pensions fund in the first instance but as the fund scheme did not provide for them it was decided that they should be met from voted moneys. The charge of £62,000 on subhead GG in the year under review represents a refund to the secondary teachers’ pension fund towards ex gratia pensions in the period October, 1969 to March, 1973. The system changed on 1st April, 1973, and these pensions are now a direct charge on the Vote.

726. Chairman.—Are these charges regular or irregular?

Mr. Jacob.—The normal procedure is that ex gratia pensions are paid from voted moneys —usually from the Superannuation Vote and a few other votes. For example, the Post Office pensions are a charge on the Post Office Vote. In this case, we are coming into line with that.

Chairman.—Has there been an accounting adjustment?

Mr. Jacob.—Yes.

Chairman.—From an accounting point of view, is everything in order?

Mr. Jacob.—There is no irregularity.

Chairman.—It is important to put on record that there is no irregularity. It is also important for the Committee to know the nature of the transaction and the charges made.

727. Paragraph 43 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Subhead I.2.—Secondary Schools —Building Grants

Reference was made in previous reports to a scheme under which the Department of Education makes funds available for the erection or extension of secondary school buildings on the basis of 70 per cent. free grants and 30 per cent. loans repayable with interest over fifteen years. The charge to the subhead comprises £1,309,153 grants and £189,050 loans. Loan repayments under the scheme amounting to £240,559 were received during the year and appropriated in aid of the vote (subhead L.4). A Statement of Loans is appended to the appropriation account.”

Mr. Jacob.—This is an informative paragraph to show the amount of grants and loans made in the year under the building scheme. The statement of loans is set out on page 80 of the volume.

728. Chairman.—Paragraph 44 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Subhead J.2.—Comprehensive and Community Schools—Capital Costs

Reference was made in paragraph 48 of the report for 1971-72 to the building of comprehensive schools in eight centres and to a proposal to build a further six State comprehensive schools and eighteen community schools. The charge to the subhead in the year under review included £1,124,864 paid towards the cost of the acquisition of sites for seventeen schools and £2,244,705 towards building costs. Total expenditure to 31 March 1973 on site costs and building works for comprehensive and community schools amounted to £5,950,110, including £697,636 for professional fees. Expenditure on furniture and equipment totalled £155,254 at that date. I am asking the Accounting Officer for a copy of the Finance sanction authorising the expenditure in 1972-73 on the acquisition of sites and the placing of contracts for comprehensive and community schools.

As mentioned in the previous report, fees amounting to £5,000 were paid in 1971-72 to a design group for a survey programme in connection with the development of a component system relating to the building and equipping of schools. A further £4,000 was paid to the group during the year under review.”

Mr. Jacob.—The Accounting Officer has forwarded to me a copy of a minute from the Minister for Finance which clarifies the authority given to the Department of Education authorising expenditure on the acquisition of sites and the placing of contracts for comprehensive and community schools.

729. Deputy H. Gibbons.—What are the Department’s definitions of a “comprehensive” and of a “community” school? There is a lot of confusion about this.

—There is a distinction but I doubt if there is a real difference. The difference is in the management structure. The genesis of the comprehensive school is that they were set up by the Department in areas where second-level schooling was deficient. As a concept they are now superseded by community schools. The idea behind both was that comprehensive facilities should be available to the whole community in one school, rather than distributed over two, three or four schools.

730. Do any of them include adult education courses?

—All of them include adult education as part of their service. Some secondary schools are also engaged in this work. Of course the vocational schools have always done so.

Is there any question of this entering the definition?

—Yes, it would be a distinction by way of definition between the community and, perhaps, the secondary schools. In practice, there is not a major distinction.

731. Chairman.—The question arising under this paragraph refers back to the report of last year. Did the Department of Education incur expenditure without the sanction of the Department of Finance? When the argument developed there seemed to be a question as to responsibility of both Departments: how far should the Department of Education confine itself to the authority given by the Department of Finance. I understand that this matter has been the subject of subsequent examination between the two Departments and that we are to get further information on it.

Mr. Jacob.—We had asked for a copy of the financial sanction for the expenditure on the acquisition of a site. At the date of the report we had not received that.

Chairman.—Have you received it yet?

Mr. Jacob.—Yes. We have been furnished with a copy of the sanction in the meantime.

732. Chairman.—But is this matter resolved as between the two Departments?

—I do not think it was ever in question between the two Departments. There was a question of some anxiety on the part of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s office as to whether the position was clear. In regard to comprehensive and community schools the two Departments were acting very closely in relation to acquiring finance from the World Bank and many of these schools were in specific projects approved by the World Bank. An original sanction was given by the Department of Finance in general terms subject to certain safeguards. The question that arose afterwards was whether there should have been sanction in specific individual cases but this point has been clarified by the Department of Finance in their minute dated 8th May, 1974.

This point arose last year. Who is responsible for specific sanction?

—Both Departments were working in tandem on the question.

We should like to have the minute before we report.

Mr. Jacob.—We have been furnished with a copy of the minute since the date of this report and this clarifies the matter from our point of view. We were in some doubt at the time.

733. Chairman.—Paragraph 45 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“In August 1965 the Government authorised the Minister for Finance to accept the offer of £30,000, payable in instalments of £1,500 per annum, from the Bishop of Raphoe for the lands (136 acres), premises and effects of the former Preparatory College, Coláiste Brighde, Falcarragh. The property was demised by the Commissioners of Public Works to diocesan trustees for a period of twenty years from 1 September 1965 with an option to purchase for a nominal sum at the end of that period.

In July 1972 the Department of Education approached the trustees with a proposal to purchase 16 acres of the lands as a site for a new community school to be established in Falcarragh. In the course of audit it was observed that a payment of £40,000, being the purchase price of the community school site, was made in March 1973 into a joint bank account in the names of the Minister for Education and of the solicitor who was acting on behalf of the diocesan trustees. I asked the Accounting Officer on what date the legal title to the site had passed to the Minister. He has informed me that, since it was necessary to commence building the new school as a matter of urgency, permission was obtained to enter into possession of the site on payment of the agreed purchase price pending the conclusion of the legal transfer. He has further stated that the Commissioners of Public Works were seeking the sanction of the Minister for Finance to enter into negotiations for the transfer of the fee simple of the entire property at Falcarragh to the diocesan trustees and that the transfer of the legal title of the school site to the Minister for Education could not be effected until these negotiations had been concluded.

I also asked the Accounting Officer for information regarding the basis on which the purchase price of £40,000 had been agreed and he has supplied me with a statement which, he states, sets out this basis. According to this statement the figure £40,000 was agreed at meetings between representatives of the diocesan trustees and the Department of Education. The trustees’ representatives indicated that, following the approval by the Department in 1967 of their proposal to extend the buildings of Coláiste na Croise Naofa, the secondary school for boys which they had opened in Falcarragh, they had gone ahead with the erection of new boarding accommodation at a total cost of £150,000. The Department of Education subsequently decided to build a community school and the proposed extension of Coláiste na Croise Naofa was stopped but the trustees claimed that the decision to build a community school meant that they should continue to run the boarding facilities as a hostel from which pupils would attend that school. The trustees’ representatives therefore sought the refund of the sum of £150,000 expended by them on the provision of these facilities but this claim was rejected by the Department. It transpired that the outstanding balance of this debt was £40,000 and it was agreed that the Department would pay the diocesan authorities this sum for the site for the new community school. The statement furnished by the Accounting Officer also points out that when agreeing to make this payment the Department was aware that the going rate for sites in the area was £2,500 per acre and it adds that the Valuation Office had stated that in their view the full market value of the land was £50,000.

There are a number of aspects of this transaction which call for comment. The price—£40,000—paid to the diocesan trustees for 16 acres of land appears excessive having regard to the price—£30,000 payable in annual instalments of £1,500—which the trustees had paid for 136 acres of land as well as College premises and effects. The basis on which the site purchase price— £40,000—was established is open to question. The costs incurred by the diocesan trustees in providing boarding facilities were entirely separate and distinct from that price. The opinion of the Valuation Office that the full market value of the lands was £50,000 was not obtained by the Department of Education until August 1973, subsequent to the date of my inquiry and five months after the payment of the purchase price into the joint bank account. In connection with this valuation, it is noted from the relevant file in the Office of Public Works that the Valuation Office stated in September 1972 that they considered that, were the Commissioners, as lessors, selling the school site to the Department of Education, the lands should be disposed of at only slightly more than the agricultural value and that consequently a figure of £3,000 would be reasonable. Finally, it should be pointed out that the payment of £40,000 for this school site was made and charged to the vote in the year ended 31 March 1973 although the transfer of the title to the Minister had not been effected at that date. This was in breach of a long-standing principle of government accounting, namely, that only payments which represent matured liabilities may be charged in any year.”

Mr. Jacob.—In this paragraph we have commented on the acquisition by the Department of a 16 acre site from the Diocesan Trustees of Raphoe. The major point is the discrepancy between the price paid by the Department in March 1973—£40,000 or £2,500 per acre and the valuation placed by the Valuation Office on the same site in September 1972—£3,000 or £200 per acre. It should be noted that this 16 acres was included in the former Coláiste Bride property of 136 acres acquired by the trustees from the Office of Public Works in 1965 for £30,000 payable in annual instalments of £1,500. We sought the observations of the Accounting Officer of the Valuation Office regarding the considerable discrepancy between the valuation of £3,000 and a subsequent one of £50,000. He replied that the valuation of £3,000 was the fair current value of land in the Falcarragh area in September, 1972, while the valuation of £50,000 for the same 16 acres, supplied in August, 1973, was related to a specific proposal by the Department of Education to purchase defined lands from the Diocesan Trustees and was based on their experience of valuing and negotiating purchases of building lands in the circumstance that a Department of State was already committed to the transaction and related to a current date.

734. Chairman.—On paragraph 45—there are two points here. One relates to the value of the property. The main point is the accounting one?

Mr. Jacob.—We have some difficulty in this case. There is a difference in valuation which we find difficult to understand, that is, that 136 acres were sold for £30,000 but when 16 acres were required back out of that 136 acres, the price is £40,000 for the 16 acres.

735. Chairman.—Can the Accounting Officer offer any explanation for that?

—There is a fair amount that I should like to say about this. The question goes a little further than that of accountability. I am a little puzzled at the comment here. I am not objecting to this but one needs to look at the whole picture here. The Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General refers to three matters. In one instance it says that when matters were taken into account in relation to the bishop’s building of a boarding block, this was a separate transaction. If one excludes one part of this question, one wonders why the original transaction regarding the sale of the College should have been mentioned and left there. The three questions are, first, that the price paid appears excessive; secondly, the basis on which the assessment was made and, thirdly, the manner in which it was accounted for. All three points are important and I should like to deal with them. In relation to the last point we have said that we regarded this to be a fair charge and that it should have been put into a suspense account. However, looking back on the matter, I am not so sure of that. To take the situation historically, we sold Coláiste Bhride as it was in 1965 to diocesan trustees. Before we sold it, the Office of Public Works asked for tenders but received only two. That was in 1961 and the tenders were of the order of £20,000. The Valuation Office considered the valuation to be about £35,000. Ultimately, a proposal came from the diocesan trustees to the effect that they would purchase the college and lands for £30,000 payable during a period of 20 years from 1965. The Auditor’s perspective on this transaction may be a little different from that of the Accounting Officer. From the Accounting Officer’s point of view and also from the point of view of the Minister for Education here was a college that was costing the Department something of the order of £16,000 a year. During the period 1965 to 1975 that meant £160,000 that the Department did not have to pay. In addition, the Board of Works were collecting from the diocesan authorities a sum of £30,000 and the school that existed there was continuing to be run as an A school. There were a number of things behind that were not appreciated at the time, I think, either by the diocesan authorities or by the Department. This was a continuing liability and something the diocesan authorities were undertaking in the interests of the locality. It was a boarding school and they felt they had to put up additional boarding accommodation. When the facilities in the area later came to be surveyed by the Development Branch of the Department there was a vocational school in Gortahork and a secondary school in Ballyconnell and another secondary school in Falcarragh village. The two secondary schools came together and formed one. The position that then arose was: how could communities in that area be best served and the idea that came to the fore was by way of a community school. There were difficulties in the communities about the actual siting of the community school. Gortahork people felt it should be closer to them and Falcarragh felt the same on the other side. These factors had to be taken into account when the decision to acquire the site was made. The choice of the site was an important factor in securing agreement locally. The purchase of the site, to my mind, has to be governed by a number of criteria and I wonder who is the person in the best position to judge those criteria. The matter was discussed between the Bishop, the Minister and the Accounting Officer at the time and they arrived at this decision to pay £40,000 for the site they wanted. Incidentally, the Bishop was continuing to provide a boarding block in the original building and the suggestion was that the development of this boarding block had already cost the diocesan authorities £150,000. Looking back on it there is no doubt that the decision to pay £40,000 was influenced by the rather complicated partnership that exists between the Church and the State in regard to the running of schools. There were liabilities on the local people and the state of the market had also to be taken into account. In 1961, when the whole site was available there was not very much demand but in the seventies the position was very different. When the Development Branch went looking for sites and when vocational education committees were looking for sites it was found that the demand for land had increased. It had been the practice to get a valuation from the Valuation Office. In this case that was not done until after the event. The Development Branch people were aware of what they were paying for sites in other places. The £2,500 per acre was a figure they had paid in other places. The figure that the Valuation Office put on the site for a transaction between the Board of Works and the Department of Education is a very different thing from the figure that one would have to pay in a different transaction. One has to bear in mind all the time the parties to the transaction and the relationship between them. Another factor in the situation was that the hold-up in regard to this question of title was one related to the release of the trust that the diocesan authorities had entered into to run an all-Irish school on the site. The release of the trust was a matter for the Office of Public Works because they were the lessees of the site. There was bound to be delay in regard to clearing up that but the contract for the actual building of the new community school has been placed. This was again one of the cases in which the World Bank was involved. The position the Accounting Officer and the Minister found themselves in was that if they could not allow the contractor on to the site to commence the actual building of the school, there would have been additional money due to the contractor and additional expense in relation to costs generally. In the circumstances the arrangement was come to to pay an agreed figure of £40,000. On the third point that the Comptroller and Auditor General is raising, I bow to the experts on this but it seems to me that dealing with the matter by way of suspense account would not really have disposed of the essential problem which was: was it a proper charge at all? My feeling is that it was a proper charge and that since it enabled the contractor to enter on the site and the building of the school to go ahead, it was reasonably proper to charge it at the time. One is always aware of arrangements when one is purchasing a house, that the payment of a deposit will enable one, by agreement with the parties concerned, to enter on the property and carry out decoration and so on. In short, my submission to the Committee is that first, by reference to the criteria and assessment that had to be made, the price was not excessive and secondly, that the basis of arriving at it was not unreasonable in the circumstances and I am not too sure that it should not have been accounted for in the way that it was.

Thank you.

736. Deputy H. Gibbons.—What is the quality of the land that was at issue there?

—It is good land along the road. This is a fairly large estate of 130 acres in the townland of Ballyconnell. Some of it is not good and in fact we had a massive problem with it when we were running it as a preparatory college for student teachers because we had to provide sufficient milk for the staff and the students.

It was extremely difficult to keep cows on the land. It was pretty poor land for that purpose. But the site that was acquired for the community school is along the roadside, not far from the village of Falcarragh.

Would the site have been on the better agricultural land?

—I am not in a position to say that.

Chairman.—I suggest, in view of the lengthy statement by the Accounting Officer, that further consideration of this paragraph and of the remainder of the matters arising in connection with Vote 29 be adjourned until the next meeting to give members an opportunity of reading the transcript. We can go ahead now with the rest of the agenda.

Further consideration of Vote 29 adjourned.

VOTE 30—VOCATIONAL EDUCATION.

Mr. D. Ó Laoghaire further examined.

737. Chairman.—Paragraph 47 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Subhead I.1.—Regional Technical Colleges—Running Costs

Subhead I.2.—Regional Technical Colleges and Colleges of Home Economics—Capital Costs

Reference was made in previous reports to the building of regional technical colleges at eight centres. Seven colleges are in operation since the year 1971-72. The college in Cork is still under construction and is expected to open in September 1974. The capital expenditure on these colleges (subhead I.2) to 31 March 1973 was as follows:—

The cost of the major renovation and extension work being carried out at St. Angela’s College of Domestic Science at Sligo is also being met from subhead I.2 and amounted to £58,077 at 31 March 1973. This includes £10,614 and £41,911 paid in the year under review in respect of professional fees and contract works, respectively. The balance of the charge to subhead I.2, £384,808, represents the cost of equipment provided for the regional colleges.

The charge of £859,989 to subhead I.1 represents the running costs of the regional colleges during the year under review.”

Mr. Jacob.—This paragraph is for information and indicates the capital expenditure as at 31st March, 1973 on building and equipping the eight regional technical colleges and on extending and renovating St. Angela’s College of Home Economics, Sligo.

738. Deputy H. Gibbons.—On subhead I.2— Regional Technical Colleges and Colleges of Home Economics—Capital Costs—is this building programme completed?

—The original building programme is finished. These colleges are now full and we are in the process of expanding them.

Expanding them or building new colleges?

—Expanding them.

Chairman.—Is this for subsequent years?

—Yes.

VOTE 31—REFORMATORY AND INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS.

Mr. D. Ó Laoghaire further examined.

739. Chairman.—Paragraph 48 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Subhead F.—Building and Equipment Grants

Reference was made in paragraph 55 of the report for 1971-72 to the building of a Remand Home and Assessment Centre at Finglas and of a Training School for boys at Oberstown, Co. Dublin. Sums of £172,646 and £300,029, respectively, were expended on these two projects during the year under review and the cumulative expenditure to 31 March 1973 amounted to:—

The charge to the subhead also includes contract payments, £20,136, professional fees, £15,079, and other expenses, £1,235, incurred on a scheme for the erection of group homes for children in care at Cappoquin, Moate, Drogheda, Cork and Limerick. As it appeared that the group home at Cork, in respect of which £1,078 was paid, might not be built, I asked the Accounting Officer for information. He has informed me that this project has been deferred for the present as the need was greater in other areas.

The balance of the charge to the subhead consists of professional fees, £1,509, and expenses, £162, in connection with proposed alterations and repairs to the reformatory school at Letterfrack, Co. Galway. I have been told by the Accounting Officer that consultants had been engaged to survey the building and that their report indicated that expenditure of the order required would not be warranted. It has since been decided that this school should be closed.”

Mr. Jacob.—This paragraph is for information. The Remand Home at Finglas was opened in August, 1973 and the Training School at Oberstown was opened in January, 1974. Some further expenditure on both projects was incurred in 1973-74.

740. Deputy H. Gibbons.—Is this programme finished?

—There is always work to be done in this area.

Do you intend to continue with it?

—Yes.

741. Deputy C. Murphy.—On subhead G— Courses in Child Care—are these courses organised in co-operation with the health boards?

—This is the Kilkenny Child Care course and I am not sure if it was organised in co-operation with the health boards.

No, I do not think it was. I know about that course. I should have asked you to identify it first.

—These are in-service training courses for senior and other personnel.

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

Mr. D. Ó Laoghaire further examined.

742. Chairman.—Paragraph 49 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Subhead G.1.—Limerick Institute of Higher Education—Current Expenditure(Grant-in-Aid)

Subhead G.2.—Limerick Institute of Higher Education—Building and Site Works (Grant-in-Aid)

Reference was made in previous reports to the costs incurred on site acquisition and development, building work, planning, and the supply of furniture and equipment for the Institute of Higher Education at Limerick. The total capital cost (subhead G.2) to 31 March 1973 was as follows:—

In addition, amounts of £125,000 and £50,000 were issued to the Institute from subhead M in 1971-72 and 1972-73, respectively, for the purchase of equipment.”

Mr. Jacob.—This paragraph is for information and gives the cumulative vote outlay to the 31st March, 1973, relating to the building of the Limerick Institute of Higher Education.

743. Chairman.—Paragraph 50 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Subhead L.—College of Physical Education—Capital Grant (Grant-in-Aid)

Reference was made in previous reports to the acquisition of a site for the National College of Physical Education at Limerick and to charges arising in connection with the building of the college. The capital expenditure incurred to 31 March 1973 was as follows:—

The college commenced operation in temporary accommodation in October 1972 and running costs, amounting to £36,510, were charged to Vote 27.—Office of the Minister for Education (subhead D.6—Physical Education).”

Mr. Jacob.—This paragraph is for information and gives details of the cumulative costs up to 31st March, 1973, in relation to the building of the National College of Physical Education in Limerick. Further expenditure was charged to the vote in 1973-74. The college is in operation since the start of the 1972-73 academic year.

744. Deputy H. Gibbons.—Is building completed in so far as the institute at Limerick is concerned?

—Not entirely. This is a complex which includes the College of Physical Education, the NCD and the National Institute of Higher Education. Phase one of the buildings has been completed but there are other phases. There is also the question of another college on that site—a college of education for the training of specialist teachers.

745. Chairman.—Paragraph 51 of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s Report reads:

“Subhead M.—Capital Equipment Costs for Third Level Institutions (Grant-in-Aid)

The charge to the subhead consists of the following amounts issued for the purchase of equipment:—

Mr. Jacob.—This paragraph is for information and shows the amounts issued for the purchase of equipment at University College, Galway and the Limerick Institute of Higher Education.

The witness withdrew.

The Committee adjourned.

*See Appendix 15.

*See Appendix 15.

*See Appendix 15.