Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1979 > Committee of Public Accounts > Interim and Final Report - Appropriation Accounts 1977

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Déardaoin, 24 Bealtaine, 1979

Thursday, 24th May, 1979

The Committee met at 11.30 a.m.

DEPUTY O’TOOLE in the chair.

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

VOTE 35—NATIONAL GALLERY

Dr. J. White called and examined.

172. Deputy N. Andrews.—On subhead G —Appropriations in Aid—£1,918 was realised. I presume this is from the sale of postcards and the other excellent reproductions you have on sale in the foyer?

—Yes. There is a slight explanation here. The figure to which you refer deals only with those publications that come through the Government Publications Sale Office. We also operate a bookshop and we sell prints, postcards and so on under a separate heading—what we call the Magawly-Bannon fund. This was some money left to us by an American lady of that name and we used it to finance a bookshop. We are able to publish and sell postcards, books and so on of a more elaborate nature than would normally come from the Government Publications Sale Office.

They are excellent reproductions.

173. Chairman.—In relation to subhead B —Travelling and Incidental Expenses—my own county. Mayo, is one of the areas involved in the pilot scheme for art and other exhibitions. You have material on loan for exhibitions. How is the scheme going?

—In regard to the National Gallery, the Board of Governors are very happy indeed to assist in lending pictures to public museums and so on, provided the conditions in such museums or galleries are satisfactory for the proper care of the pictures. Whenever we are asked to loan pictures we generally examine the premises and try to meet the request. At the moment we have a number of places where pictures from the Gallery are on view, for instance, in Damer House in Roscrea, in Malahide Castle, and we lend to galleries in Sligo, Castlebar, Trim, Cork and Wexford. If we get a request we try to meet it but we do not operate a lending scheme as such.

174. Deputy N. Andrews.—Are all the pictures on loan fully insured?

—Yes. The situation is that as a rule the borrowing institution or the Gallery takes out an insurance policy to cover the pictures. There is also a very good scheme that the Government were good enough to introduce whereby the Government will give indemnity to half the value of the pictures borrowed by a local authority. For instance, if Cork makes an application for a loan of £100,000 the Government will indemnify for half the money, thus reducing the insurance on the local authority by half.

175. Deputy C. Murphy.—It appears from the Appropriation Account that, of the grant of £21,000, only £13,152 was expended. The note states that the saving was due to fewer exhibitions than expected. Was that somewhat disappointing?

—Perhaps I can explain the position, although it is difficult to put it succinctly. For instance, last year we had an exhibition of the works of Sir William Orpen. We had to bring pictures from America and Australia. The expense of mounting this kind of exhibition is very large. In this case we took in £5,000 at the door which helped to reduce our expenses. If it happens in any year that there is no expensive exhibition to organise we would make a saving. For the year we are dealing with we were fortunate enough not to have great expenses. For instance, last year we got an exhibition from Greece and the Greek Government paid for the exhibition to come here, but sometimes we have to pay a lot for such an exhibition. In the year with which we are dealing the exhibitions we got were not very costly.

176. Do we have reciprocal arrangements with other governments? Do exhibitions leave Ireland and do we meet the costs?

—The situation must be explained. We have a number of bodies—the Arts Council, of which I am Chairman, but that has nothing to do with my being here, and there is the Cultural Relations Committee which is run by the Department of Foreign Affairs. The Cultural Relations Committee are mainly concerned with exhibitions leaving Ireland and they try to sponsor this. As a matter of interest, I have made a number of exhibitions of Irish paintings which have gone to America—there have been exhibitions in New York, Columbus, St. Louis and so on. Sometimes this happens when bodies abroad approach us and ask for a loan of paintings. In that case we are able to get them to pay for insurance and transport. We publish the catalogues and we still have copies for sale in the Gallery. It may happen that they come to us, to the Cultural Relations Committee or to the Arts Council.

177. There are different channels of approach?

—We are at present planning a large-scale Irish exhibition to be held in London next year. The Institute of Contemporary Arts have invited us to have a series of exhibitions. This is being organised by an Irish committee and it includes music, drama, the Abbey Theatre and symphony orchestra. Aspects of various arts are being brought to London for what will be called an Irish month in 1980.

178. Deputy N. Andrews.—On subhead D —Purchase and Repair of Pictures—there is a grant-in-aid. You had money carried over from the previous year giving you a sum in excess of £20,000 for activities under this subhead?

—Yes.

179. You spent £14,117?

—Yes.

180. This was mostly on repairs?

—Yes. The background to this is that we have a restoration department and three restorers. We have to have equipment and materials. We have a very large collection of pictures and restoration is a continuing process. As well as doing our own pictures we also do pictures for other institutions when requested by Government Departments. From time to time we have to replace equipment and we also have to buy all the materials used in restoration. By having a grant-in-aid it means that, if the expenses in one year are not so great and if we have to buy equipment the next year, the money goes forward but in the long run the amount in question I think is reasonable to cover the continuing expense of running the department. It does not include salaries of course.

Chairman.—We are glad to have had you here again, Dr. White. It is appropriate again to wish you every success in retirement and many years of happiness.

—Thank you very much.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 52—OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

Dr. N. Whelan called and examined.

181. Chairman.—This is a new Department and as Accounting Officer, are you happy with your present complement of staff? How are things shaping up?

—They are shaping up pretty well. We have had a phased approach to recruitment of staff. In 1977 the first group of officers who were intended to get the Department off the ground were transferred from other Departments. We had the minimum at that stage and it lasted up to about December 1977. In 1978 the second phase of staff recruitment took place. We are now in the third phase where we are reaching the top of the plateau. At the present time our staff quota is almost complete.

182. You had been initially operating on the Contingency Fund which has been reimbursed and you are now operating on your own Vote?

—Yes. The background generally is that the Ministry was created on 8 July 1977 and the Department was not formally created until 13 December, so it was necessary for us to operate out of the Contingency Fund. When the Vote for the Department was passed on 13 December we then switched to our Vote. We repaid what we had spent from the Contingency Fund and continued from that.

183. Deputy N. Andrews.—On subhead A—Salaries, Wages and Allowances— £9,000 was granted and expenditure was £5,849. I assume that all salaries for the staff were paid at that time by the Department of Finance or the Department of the Public Service and that now you have your own Vote for salaries and other expenditure?

—That is true. The grant of £9,000 was designated to cover mainly the Minister, his personal assistant and an economic adviser who had been recruited. All of the other people were paid for up to the end of 1977 from the Vote for the Department of Finance or the Vote for the Department of the Public Service. For instance, I have been with the Ministry since it was set up in July 1977 but up until 31 December 1977 my salary was met from the Department of the Public Service Vote.

184. On subhead C—Appropriations in Aid—there are receipts for £261. What other receipts are credited here apart from recoupment of travel expenses?

—That is all. The £100 that we had estimated was based on the Minister’s travel requirements because he was the only person travelling to EEC meetings under the Departmental Vote. It became necessary for him to attend more meetings than had initially been envisaged. The refunds from the EEC were made quicker than we had anticipated. That is why there is more realised there than was estimated.

185. From 1978 onwards you will have your own accounts. We will not have to look back to the Department of Finance or the Department of the Public Service for accountability.

—That is true. We have a self-contained Vote now for the Department of Economic Planning and Development.

Chairman.—I thank you, Accounting Officer.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 28—ENVIRONMENT

Mr. G. A. Meagher called and examined.

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

“Subhead R.—Grants of £1,000 for First-Time Owner Occupiers of Certain Dwellings

Provision for the payment of grants at the rate of £1,000 for first-time owner occupiers of certain dwellings was made in 1977 by supplementary estimate which indicated that legislation regarding these grants would be introduced before the end of the year. While a Bill containing a provision to validate these grants was introduced in Dáil Éireann on 14 December 1977 it had not been enacted at the date of this Report. I have recently been informed by the Accounting Officer that the preparation of the legislation has reached an advanced stage.”

Mr. Mac Gearailt.—This paragraph draws attention to the fact that the necessary legislation to validate the payment of grants, under a new housing grant scheme operative from 27 May 1977, had not been enacted at the date of my report. As the Committee is, no doubt, aware the Bill mentioned in the paragraph was withdrawn earlier this month and leave granted to introduce the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, 1979.

187. Chairman.—On the £1,000 grant, one of the conditions for eligibility for applicants is that they have not owned a house either here or elsewhere?

—That is correct.

188. What form of checking is applied to ensure that this condition is fulfilled? It strikes me that it is a difficult area to check.

—It is difficult. There are two main forms of scrutiny. We maintain an index of grants previously made to people as evidence of having got a grant for the purchase or reconstruction of a house. Secondly, we require a statutory declaration where we have doubt.

189. The declaration applies across the board for everyone?

—It does. We have in the declaration a clause that they did not own a house already.

190. Apart from the declaration there is the double check of looking at the index to determine whether or not people have been in receipt of grants before. In the case of a person from abroad you are totally dependent on the declaration?

—Yes.

191. You are depending on the integrity of the applicant?

—Yes; and going beyond that involves disproportionate costs relative to the advantage to be gained. The maintenance of a central index is an expensive and rather delaying mechanism. We have been looking at this and may have to dispense with it.

192. Because of the cost involved?

—Yes and because it delays the administration of the grants. Provision for these grants in the current year is £13 million. The flow of work would be impeded if we have to continue to maintain the index.

193. You are falling back on human nature?

—That is true. In the Bill dealing with housing we are proposing to amend the statutory declaration provisions in order to facilitate applicants.

194. The declaration is not an affidavit in the legal sense?

—No.

195. It is a declaration to the effect that a person did or did not, as the case may be, own a house before.

—That is correct.

196. How legally binding is the declaration in relation to more formal legal documents such as an affidavit witnessed by a Commissioner for Oaths? I understand the declaration can be signed by certain categories of people such as a member of the Garda Síochána, a clergyman and other designated persons.

—Yes. We are proposing to extend the category of persons who may take and receive a statutory declaration.

197. All I am concerned about is whether or not you go beyond the declaration in cases of people from outside the country.

—No, we do not do that.

198. Paragraph 21 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Motor Vehicle Duties

A test examination of the revenue from motor vehicle duties, etc., was carried out with satisfactory results. The gross proceeds for the years 1977 and 1976 were:

£32,671,264 was paid into the Exchequer and £3,652 was refunded during the year leaving a balance of £295,776 compared with £498,805 at the end of the previous year.

The motor tax transactions of the 29 licensing authorities are subject to examination by Local Government auditors whose reports are made available to me. In recent reports I referred to the delay in the completion of the audit of these accounts. Information furnished to me by the Accounting Officer in July 1978 indicates that the audit position has improved somewhat.”

Mr. Mac Gearailt.—This paragraph gives particulars of the motor vehicle duties collected under the various heads. It also refers to the audit of the motor tax accounts by the local government auditors whose reports are made available to me.

199. Chairman.—With regard to the last sentence in the report: “Information furnished to me by the Accounting Officer in July 1978 indicates that the audit position has improved somewhat”, what is the current position of licensing authorities and their audited accounts?

—The current position shows a further improvement. At 31 October 1978 there were two motor tax accounts unaudited for 1973-1974, two for 1974, eight for 1975, 15 for 1976 and 24 for 1977. At the 8th of this month there were no audits outstanding in respect of 1973-74; none for 1974; two for 1975, eight for 1976 and 17 for 1977. In the case of some of those listed as still outstanding the audits have been completed but the documents are held up because of the postal dispute.

200. A common complaint these days. Even though it is late in the day when talking about 1973-74, this represents an improvement on the situation?

—It is an improvement.

201. Deputy N. Andrews.—On subhead L —Miscellaneous Services—what other activities, other than An Chomhairle Leabharlanna and Oil Pollution, were funded under that subhead?

—It includes rehabilitation of itinerants, grants to regional planning and development groups, grant to An Comhlachas Snámha agus Tarrthála, oil pollution, grant to An Bord Pleanála and contribution to the United Nations’ Environment Fund.

202. What amount was made available to An Bord Pleanála?

—In 1977 the grant was £125,000, which covers salaries, expenses and accommodation. That does not represent the total cost of An Bord Pleanála. Under the relevant statute provision is made for the Minister for the Environment to provide staff to service the work of An Bord Pleanála on an interim basis. In fact, more than 60 officers of the Department of the Environment provide services to the Bord. The grant for 1977 and the current grant does not include these staff costs.

203. In other words some of the staff of the Department of the Environment are seconded to the Bord or made available on request?

—They are available for the service provided by the Minister. They are not seconded formally.

204. Chairman.—On subhead B—Travelling and Incidental Expenses—I should like to mention a matter which the Accounting Officer might be able to clarify. It is in connection with officers going out on initial and final inspections of houses. From my own experience I am aware that occasionally inspectors travel down the country only to find that some householders are not at home when they call. I accept that that is something beyond the control of the Accounting Officer but I should like to know if it would be possible to give some notice of an intending visit by an inspector. That would cut down on the number of second visits inspectors have to make. Can the Accounting Officer say what the cost of such a service would be? Although nobody can be blamed for the time-wasting involved in this, such notification would reduce the amount of time spent on inspections and expedite them generally. Would the Accounting Officer like to comment?

—I accept that this is a problem. In practice what happens is that we seek the telephone number from people who have a telephone at home or at their place of work so as to inform them when an inspector can call. The inspector who calls is required to put a notice in the door of the house stating that he called to inspect the house for the grant and asking the householder to contact him to let him know when it would be convenient to call again. Notwithstanding that, it is true that quite a number of abortive visits are made by inspectors.

205. I appreciate the difficulty and that it may be tying down inspectors too much to get them to prepare an itinerary two or three weeks in advance, but if something like that were possible it would cut down on the number of abortive visits. Would the Accounting Officer agree to look into this matter?

—I will look at it again to see if that suggestion is feasible. Every so often we review the situation.

206. Deputy N. Andrews.—On subhead R —Grants of £1,000 for First-Time Owner Occupiers of Certain Dwellings—there seems to be a slower pick-up rate than was expected. Can the Accounting Officer say if it will improve in future?

—Subject to the Post Office situation righting itself, the flow of grants, the processing of the applications and so on, should be more expeditious. There is now a wider understanding that applicants must not alone be eligible but that they must also occupy the house. Very often when a house was completed by a builder the applicant expected the grant to be paid, but it is a condition of the grant that the house be occupied by the applicant.

207. The Chairman has already referred to delays in relation to other inspections and I should like to state that a similar situation arises in regard to these grants. I accept that the fact that people who buy new houses are not always available during the day will hold up inspections, that this poses difficulties and is costly for the Department, but would it be possible to ask the inspectors to leave a note to the effect that they would be returning at a specific time on a certain date?

—Inspectors are required to leave a note to the effect that they called—I am not familiar with the precise wording of the note. I will look into this matter to see if there is any scope for improvement.

208. I am referring particularly to urban areas where inspectors may be calling to estates or groups of houses.

—I will investigate the matter.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 49—SOCIAL WELFARE

Mr. C. Collins called and examined.

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

“Subhead E.—Payment to the Social Insurance Fund under Section 39 (9) of the Social Welfare Act, 1952

The charge to the subhead represents the amount paid towards meeting the shortfall in the income of the Social Insurance Fund which bears the expenditure on social welfare benefits. I noted in the course of audit that a considerable number of stamped social insurance cards had been stolen from an employment exchange as a result of unauthorised entries on three occasions in 1977. I have asked for information as to the number of cards stolen, the face value of the stamps thereon and whether any of the stolen cards have been recovered.”

Mr. Mac Gearailt.—This paragraph deals with the theft of social insurance cards. Shortly after the date of my report the Accounting Officer furnished me with details of the numbers of cards stolen in the case referred to in the paragraph indicating that the value of the stamps involved was £220,000 approximately. He also stated that none of the stamped cards had been recovered. He recently informed me that the total value of stamps on insurance cards stolen from employment exchanges and offices in 1976, 1977 and 1978 amounted to £870,000 approximately. As social welfare insurance contributions are now being collected under the PAYE income tax system, the use of insurance cards has been discontinued.

210. Chairman.—Over a three-year period the sum involved is £870,000. What was the number of break-ins during that period?

—There was a large number of break-ins in exchanges. In the year 1976 there were about eight; in 1977 there were between 15 and 20 and the same in 1978.

211. Have you security problems?

—We have been in touch with the Garda Síochána on this matter. They did security surveys in the exchanges and naturally we adopted any additional safety precautions they recommended but, as the Comptroller and Auditor General has mentioned, as from April of this year insurance cards are no longer being used.

212. From now on the attraction for stealing them will not exist?

—That is so. Perhaps I should also mention that unless the stamps are detached from the cards and used again there is no loss to public funds and we have no evidence of any of these stamps having been so used. In the normal way the stamps are cancelled by the employer when they are affixed to the cards. When cards are being exchanged our staff are always on the lookout for any stamps that look as if they might have been used before but we have no indication that any of those stamps were so used. In the case of one theft, the cards were subsequently abandoned somewhere on the side of the road. Presumably the person who got possession of them realised they were of no use to him and just left them.

213. You mentioned consultations with the Garda Síochána with regard to security. I presume in many cases the solution to this problem would involve expenditure of moneys for reconstruction of offices and other undertakings. In the event of being confronted with that kind of situation, do you comply with the recommendations of the Garda Síochána?

—Yes, certainly. In the case of the Gardiner Street premises where three break-ins occurred, these were facilitated by the copying of the keys which were handed out by a temporary messenger. He was subsequently dismissed and charged in the courts.

214. Paragraph 41 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General reads:

“Payment of disability benefit is made by the Department of Social Welfare by means of a computerised system. A test examination of this system carried out by my officers in the year under review revealed a number of deficiencies in the control procedures in operation. Because of these deficiencies it appeared that fictitious records might be created through the introduction of unauthorised data into the system. It also appeared that if such records were created they might remain undetected. Furthermore the validity of cases passed for payment was not always properly established and the checking of error reports produced by the computer had fallen into disuse. I have sought the observations of the Accounting Officer.”

Mr. Mac Gearailt.—This paragraph draws attention to the results of an audit of the computerised system for paying disability benefit which revealed serious deficiencies in the control procedures in operation. The Accounting Officer has informed me that steps have been taken to reintroduce controls in certain areas where they had been allowed to lapse and to introduce a further control by recording all disability benefit payments on computer files. He stated that otherwise he was satisfied that adequate organisational and supervisory arrangements existed to ensure the necessary degree of control. He added that the internal audit is relied upon to detect any attempts to insert fictitious records into the system. I have been in communication with the Accounting Officer seeking clarification on some points in relation to the level of control in the system. Matters arising from his replies which have been received very recently are under consideration in my Office at present.

215. Chairman.—On that point, computerisation seems to have caused more problems than it has solved. I realise that is a very general statement and is probably an erroneous one, but there seems to have been some problems with security and the access to computer terminals. What is the present position?

—While these problems arise at the moment on the computerised system, there was always a security problem even in precomputer days. In regard to the video terminals, part of our difficulty is that we must allow staff in the benefits section to have unrestricted access to the videos to key in information. We take all the precautions we can, such as separation of duties and rotation of staff and we ensure that a person keying in data is not checking that particular data. I think that is as far as we can go. We have examined the question of restricting access but in rush periods or where the computer might not be working for a few hours due to a fault or in the event of an electricity failure there is obviously a necessity to meet deadlines and at times every terminal has to be in operation at the same time. There is a problem and we are trying to exercise all the control we can both by switching of staff and by means of the normal chain of control that applies throughout the system. In regard to error reports to which the staff of the Comptroller and Auditor General drew attention previously, we had discontinued checking these because over a period they had not brought to light any particular irregularities. We have reintroduced a 100 per cent check in the interests of security.

216. I presume this is at the technical end where fictitious data could be programmed. Have you a watertight system for cross-checking that?

—Yes, we call them the translists. The details on the computer-produced listing of all payments keyed into the system are checked against the basic benefit documents. That should eliminate the possibility of insertion of fictitious data on the video terminal.

217. There is no way fictitious programming could result in payments now?

—We are satisfied that that is so.

218. Paragraphs 42 to 44, inclusive, of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General read:

“I have been informed that overpayments of benefits from the Social Insurance Fund outstanding at 31 December 1977 were of the order of £1,171,000 as compared with £873,000 at 31 December 1976. 96 individuals were prosecuted for irregularly obtaining or attempting to obtain benefits. Convictions were secured in 76 cases.

I have been informed that 100 employers were prosecuted for failure to comply with the provisions of the Social Welfare Acts and convictions were secured in all cases. Civil proceedings for recovery of arrears were completed during the year in 52 cases. Decrees in favour of the Minister for Social Welfare were obtained in all cases, the total amount being £17,875.

Overpayments of Social Assistance

I have been furnished with the following information regarding overpayments of Social Assistance:—

Eight individuals were prosecuted for irregularly obtaining or attempting to obtain assistance. Convictions were secured in seven cases.”

Mr. Mac Gearailt.—These are the usual paragraphs included for the information of the Committee.

219. Chairman.—In paragraph 43 there is reference to 100 employers. That is quite small, as are the amounts. Taking inflationary trends and other considerations into account, how does that compare with previous experience in this area?

—The figure of 100 employers prosecuted represents the number of cases dealt with by the courts in 1977, but in fact the number of cases sent by the Department to the Chief State Solicitor in that year for the institution of prosecutions was 157 and for civil proceedings it was 403. It takes quite a while to process these cases and get them through the courts. In fact, the figures are up on previous years—that is the figures of cases referred for proceedings. Also, our outdoor staff recover quite a lot of arrears without having to resort to prosecution— arrears discovered on inspection. In most cases the employers pay up the amounts without our having to take proceedings.

220. Do you envisage difficulty with the present position in regard to payments? It will come before us and I suppose it will confront you also in due course—the emergency arrangements?

—Yes. The difficulties have been rather formidable but we must try to keep payments going. That is the general idea.

Deputy N. Andrews.—There are extraordinary difficulties and the Department of Social Welfare have done a marvellous job. I have been at the payment centres and I have seen the operation. I am glad of the opportunity to pay tribute to all concerned.

Chairman.—I would endorse that and I hope those difficulties resulting from the present situation will be overcome and that you will be able to handle the situation.

—Thank you very much.

221. Deputy N. Andrews.—On subhead A—Salaries, Wages and Allowances—I assume you now have a full complement of staff?

—That is so. There are the usual delays that are associated with a large Department while awaiting results of competitions. Beyond that we have no particular difficulties.

222. On subhead G—Old Age Pensions (Non-Contributory)—you seem to have taken a substantial Supplementary Estimate here. Was this due to the inadequacy of the original provision or was it because of increases in rates?

—It was because of increased rates and improvements in pensions. The Estimate would have been prepared in the previous year and the Supplementary represents the effect of that year’s Budget improvements.

223. All along the line here, I assume the same applies, in subhead H, subhead I and so on?

—That is so.

224. Chairman.—This is a rather general question. I refer in particular to unemployment assistance but it applies generally in the case of assistance and benefits. You said you are happy with your staff complement. In my own experience I have noted that overpayments have taken place, in some cases comparatively substantial overpayments. Your ground staff have just stumbled on something through a routine inspection. I suppose if more staff were available this could not have arisen: they would have more regular inspections more frequently which would avoid loss to you and hardship to the clients who received overpayment and then had to refund the money?

—For some years we were short of staff, particularly on the inspection side—outdoor staff. At the same time there were increasing pressures with, for example, reduction of pension age year by year and naturally the work involved in that would tend to take precedence over inspection. I accept that more frequent inspection would benefit the Department and reduce hardship on individual recipients.

225. Deputy N. Andrews.—On subhead N —Losses—you had losses of £7,226 which according to your note you did not recover and, presumably, were written off. What kind of errors were involved or was it a series of errors? Were they localised errors?

—There are three main headings in the Losses subhead: assistance paid in error, which is irrecoverable because there was no fault on the part of the person getting the payment—

226. This was an error made by your staff?

—Yes. Another heading is cash shortages at local offices where people are paying out under pressure on pay days. Each case of a loss of funds is investigated in detail to ensure that there is no question of fraud or culpable negligence. If we are satisfied that there is not, that it was a genuine error, we get the sanction of the Department of Finance for writing off the amount. There was one other small item of £70 under that subhead. There was a break-in at an employment office where approximately £70 was stolen and was not recovered. We got Department of Finance sanction for writing off those amounts.

227. Considering the amount of expenditure in your Department, it is very small indeed.

—It is, yes.

Chairman.—Thank you, Mr. Collins, for your co-operation. We wish you every success in dealing with the present difficulties you have to tackle.

—Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The witness withdrew.

The Committee adjourned.