Skip to main content
Normal View

COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS debate -
Thursday, 1 Oct 2026

Gnó an Choiste - Business of Committee

I welcome everyone to today's meeting of the Committee of Public Accounts. We have received apologies from Deputy Joanna Byrne. Before proceeding I will go through a few housekeeping matters. Members are reminded of the provisions of Standing Order 226 whereby the committee shall refrain from inquiring into the merits of a policy or policies of the Government, a Minister of the Government or the merits of the objectives of such policies. Members are also reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I also remind members of the constitutional requirements that in order to participate in public meetings they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex or precinct.

The agenda for today is to discuss the minutes, accounts and statements, correspondence and upcoming meetings and we will then suspend and begin our engagement with officials from Tusla, the Child and Family Agency. The minutes of the meetings of 17 September and 24 September 2026 have been agreed and will be published on the committee's webpage.

I welcome the Comptroller and Auditor General. Yesterday the C and AG published the 2025 appropriation accounts and the 2025 report on the public services. These accounts and chapters are now available and will provide material for the committee to examine. In addition, there are six sets of accounts of financial statements laid between 21 September and 25 September 2026, which are due to be considered today. I open the floor to the C and AG to discuss these and to present new financial accounts.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

The appropriation accounts for 2025 were submitted to Dáil Éireann yesterday. There are 46 appropriation accounts. I do not propose to list or go through them. I think a briefing has been provided, drawing attention in some cases to matters that are disclosed and explaining the chapters that were included in the Report on the Accounts of the Public Services for 2025. These are matters that arise from the audits of the appropriation accounts, so they are connected.

Of the other financial statements that were presented, no. 1 is the financial statements of the National Paediatric Hospital Development Board for 2025. These received a qualified opinion. Like a number of other bodies in the health sector, the accounts give a true and fair view except that they account for costs of retirement benefit entitlements only as they become payable. It is a standard accounting approach. Otherwise, the accounts give a true and fair view.

No. 2 is the financial statements for the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment for 2025. They received a clear audit opinion.

No. 3 is the financial statements of Taighde Éireann, Research Ireland, for 2025. These received a clear audit opinion.

No. 4 is the financial statements of the National Economic and Social Development Office for 2025. These received a clear audit opinion.

No. 5 is the financial statements of Galway and Roscommon Education and Training Board for 2025. These received a clear audit opinion.

No. 6 is the financial statements of Cork Education and Training Board for 2025. These received a clear audit opinion.

However, I drew attention to a material level of non-compliance with procurement rules in that case.

Do members wish to comment on any of those? Okay. I thank the C and AG and his team for the report on the public services and the appropriation accounts that were published yesterday. I know members are still making their way through the 28 chapters in it. I commend the C and AG and the entire team in the office. I know it is a comprehensive piece of work that goes on for the full year annually. I commend and thank everyone. There is invaluable information there that will certainly help to map the work programme for this committee in the time ahead. Fortunately, or unfortunately, again, it puts a spotlight on huge issues in terms of control of public finances. I thank the C and AG personally and the entire team for that work.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

I thank the Chair and the committee for those kind words on behalf of the staff of the office, who really do put in a huge effort to deliver that. We have to present all of that material together because that is the way the legislation is written and it is a big ask for a relatively small organisation.

Okay. We will move on, if no one else wants to come in.

There are a number of B items of correspondence to consider today, and these have been received from the Departments and public bodies. We will start with the three deferred items from last week's meeting.

No. R2026/0471 is correspondence from the chief executive officer of the Legal Aid Board regarding non-compliant procurement, dated 17 September 2026. Is it agreed to note and publish that? Agreed.

No. R2026/0473 is correspondence from the Secretary General of the Department of Culture, Communications and Sport regarding the late laying of financial statements, dated 17 September 2026. Is it agreed to note and publish the item? Agreed.

No. R2026/0474 is correspondence from the Secretary General of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage regarding the delay in laying the accounts of the Residential Tenancies Board for 2025, dated 17 September 2026. Is it agreed to note and publish the item? Agreed.

No. R2026/0476 is correspondence received from the chief executive officer of the Dublin and Dún Laoghaire Education and Training Board regarding non-compliant procurement, dated 17 September 2026. Is it agreed to note and publish the item? Agreed.

No. R2026/0477 is correspondence received from the chief executive officer of the Beaumont Hospital board regarding non-compliant procurement, dated 17 September 2026. I flagged this item for further discussion. I will hold off on that and the next item I flagged as well. I will take the two of them together because they are similar. Can we agree to note and publish that piece from Beaumont and we will come back to it? Agreed.

No. R2026/0478 is correspondence received from the chief executive officer of St. James's Hospital regarding non-compliant procurement, dated 18 September 2026. Again, I flagged that item for discussion and I will speak to the two of them. They are both section 38 hospitals, voluntary hospitals, that fall outside the remit of the C and AG and the public accounts committee. The levels of non-compliant procurement are extraordinary. In St. James's, I think it is over €36 million and in Beaumont, it is nearly €18 million in non-compliant procurement. These are huge levels, which is really concerning in my view. We need further information about that. It puts a spotlight on something that members of this committee have cited time and time again. I mentioned it again last week. A massive gap in governance and control is allowed to exist whereby only four of the voluntary hospitals are audited by the C and AG and there is not the proper scrutiny and oversight. I fear this is allowing these extraordinary levels of non-compliant procurement to continue, something that is totally unacceptable in my mind. It is an issue we are going to come back to time and time again because of that gap in oversight and financial control and because they are not under the remit.

I agree on the general point but I think those two hospitals are audited by the Comptroller and Auditor General.

Those two are.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

Yes, they are.

I understand the wider point.

Okay. Yes, it was a broader point. We need to get a further breakdown of those.

Did Deputy Kenny wish to come in there?

Yes, on Beaumont Hospital. I asked a question previously about the payroll system at Beaumount Hospital. It has clearly outlined here, through IBM Ireland, €2.2 million on the payroll system that did not comply with procurement regulations. That is a significant amount of money for a payroll system. It identified the last time that when it changed the payroll system, it did not go to a procurement or tender process and instead went with the HSE's model.

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

I think it is a bit more complicated than that. It went with what it thought was the HSE's model but there were differences.

I think the HSE uses a German model or something. Is that correct?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

I think it is with the same supplier, but it is actually a different model and so there are compatibility issues there.

Okay. Would the wider question be: how did a section 38 hospital make this decision? Was the HSE aware of it?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

I do not know. I cannot answer that.

That is maybe something for the committee. In the case of Vodafone Ireland, €250,000 was accumulated on mobile phone network charges through non-compliant procurement. That is a significant amount of money and I do not think Vodafone makes any reference to it in its letter or appendix. We do not actually know who was using these mobile phones or the amount of money that was spent on them. Who availed of this? Do hospitals use mobile phones? I am not sure, but €250,000 on mobile phone charges through non-compliant procurement is a significant issue. I have no idea from the appendix or the letter how this was used within the hospital itself. Is that something for the committee to examine? I think it possibly is.

We can write and try to get a full briefing note on it. We will write to the HSE as well and get one. I call Deputy McAuliffe.

In regard to St. James's and Beaumont, I have to give credit to Deputy Geoghegan on this issue. I refer to the issue of insurance claims, the non-completion of forms by consultants and the loss to the State. Deputy Kenny asked a question of the HSE about it last week. It is such a significant issue and we have done such good work on it. I know we are going to do a broader report on voluntary hospitals and so on but I think we should be looking to do a short report on that issue with very specific recommendations. I do not think the answers that came out of last week were strong enough and, certainly, I would like us to crystallise our view of how unacceptable that issue is. It might be worth reflecting on that maybe in private session or whenever, but I do not want us to wait for a significant amount of time and allow it to get lost among all the other HSE issues. There is enough for a dedicated or specific report on it because we would have some strong recommendations to make.

We have raised this before and I do not know whether this has been actioned yet or not. Maybe we did not fully agree the action. I think we should agree to write to every single hospital on this specifically. What we have is an accumulation of figures by chance, to some extent. We had three Dublin hospitals here. That amounted to €12 million. We had Children's Health Ireland, CHI; I think that was €2 million or €3 million. On the HSE, through the C and AG's reports, we know what that figure is. However, we do not have the picture right across the hospital system as to what the actual cumulative figure is. It would surprise me if it was not close to between €30 million and €50 million when you put it all together across all of the hospitals. We do not have those figures.

I questioned this last week and we did get an overall figure but we did not get it per hospital. It was for the section 38 hospitals. Again, there is a huge gap there. I think we need to write to all hospitals and get the figure for all of them.

Moreover, we need to make sure they know exactly what we are writing for because there have been loads of attempts to muddy the waters between the patient insurance charges and then the debt claims on insurance outstanding.

They are two very distinct things. One is guaranteed and there are vagaries associated with the other one. They are both challenging issues but the one that can absolutely be fixed is the patient charges insurance claims and to put that figure together.

We can certainly look at doing a short report on that. I think it certainly would be very worthwhile and maybe we will have a look at who we have written to and what information we need just to bookend that piece of work. Is it agreed to note and publish that particular item of correspondence from St. James's Hospital? Agreed.

No. R2026/0479 is correspondence received from the Secretary General of the Department of Health in response to the committee's request for information regarding the national children's hospital, dated 18 September 2026. This item has been flagged by Deputy Farrelly and me.

This is about the remediation works in particular. I was struck by the report which showed us that 2,000 fire doors had to be remediated. How do you get 2,000 fire doors wrong? I would like us to go back to the board and to the Department to ask specifically for the specifications included in the design, and compare them with the actual make and model of the door installed. What were the costs associated with that? Who bore the brunt of that?

This sheds light on some of the overall issues in terms of the culture there. Either the specification was wrong or the product installed was wrong. It seems very difficult to get those things wrong. That is really what I want to highlight today. Of the many thousands of remediation works that have had to go on because of the specification, what really stood out to me was 2,000 fire doors. They have all had to be remediated. Why? Who bore the brunt of that cost? I would like to get more detail on that in further correspondence. I think it would be very helpful.

Deputy Farrelly and I also flagged a separate piece of correspondence from the National Paediatric Hospital Development Board. I will speak to the two of them at this point. It is quite concerning. There is new information in terms of the completion of rooms within the hospital. There seems to be some improvement. I think about 5,000 of the rooms are now completed. Of the 5,700, there remain 700 rooms to be completed. There has been an improvement there, but there is no completion date and there is no handover date. The briefing note there from the National Paediatric Hospital Development Board is probably the most up-to-date information out there. It was sent to us last week and that is quite concerning.

There are other areas of concern in it. The fire doors absolutely are one, but they talk about the floors in the theatres. In one theatre the floor had to be done three times. How does something like that happen? Who is looking over this? Where is the clerk of works or the person with responsibility? Looking at the amount BAM has in claims; it is nearly €1 billion. There are fundamental flaws here at every level. Who is responsible for it? I do not think it is for this committee to get stuck into that but somebody is seriously at fault to allow situations like that arise.

There is another situation that has arisen now with the bathrooms. Out of the 244 bathrooms and wet areas that have been fitted, 126 need remediative action to address issues with them. How does a situation like that arise? It goes right back to the initial contract. There were serious issues in terms of the weakness in the contract. There are other issues there with the fire doors, the floors, the ventilation systems, and all of these issues, and again, there is no deadline.

The correspondence given to us is kind of a back and forth between BAM and the Minister. I do not think members of the public want to see that. They do not want to hear that. They want a hospital delivered, not a kind of backwards and forwards between the Minister and BAM, pointing fingers at each other.

The other point that is concerning and that has come before this committee time and time again is the number of workers on site in the hospital. Again, concern is being drawn to a substantial reduction in workers on site and that has set off serious alarm bells in terms of the inability to provide a completion date. A question was put at committee yesterday as to whether we would see a completion date before 2029 and there was an inability to answer even that question. That does not give much hope to anybody out there.

We need to follow up again and continue to request up-to-date information, progress reports and those specific areas that we have referenced in our discussions here. Unless any other members wish to comment, is it agreed to note and publish that item? Agreed.

No. R2026/0480 is correspondence received from the chief executive officer at the Land Development Agency regarding non-compliant procurement, dated the 18 September 2026. Is it agreed to note and publish this correspondence? Agreed.

Correspondence has been received from the chief executive officer of Bord Bia regarding non-compliant procurement, dated 18 September 2026. I flagged this item for discussion as there were some interesting points. There was a huge level of non-compliant procurement, but the issue that jumped off the page was €65,000 for a Dutch supermarket for non-compliant procurement. I want to get further information in relation to that. Bord Bia has a specific role. I am not sure what the engagement with a Dutch supermarket relates to, so I want to get some information on that. Is it agreed to note and publish this item? Agreed.

No. R2026/0482 is correspondence received from the chief executive officer of the Cork Education and Training Board regarding non-compliant procurement, dated 18 September 2026. Is it agreed to note and publish this? Agreed.

No. R2026/0483 is correspondence received from the chief executive officer at the Limerick and Clare Education and Training Board regarding non-compliant procurement, dated 18 September 2026. Is it agreed to note and publish? Agreed.

No. R2026/0484 is correspondence received from the chief executive officer of Inland Fisheries Ireland regarding non-compliant procurement, dated 18 September 2026. I flagged this item for discussion. It makes reference to an expenditure of quarter of a million euro for weed control with no compliant procurement. It seems like an extraordinary amount of money for it not to go through that process. Given it is Inland Fisheries Ireland, what are the requirements for weed control? I wish to get further information from Inland Fisheries Ireland in relation to that expenditure. Is it agreed to note and publish this item? Agreed.

No. R2026/0485 is correspondence received from the president of University College Cork regarding non-compliant procurement, dated 18 September 2026. Is it agreed to note and publish this item? Agreed.

No. R2026/0486 is correspondence received from the Secretary General of the Department of Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation regarding the late laying of the 2024 financial statements regarding the National Lottery Fund, the Office of the Regulator of the National Lottery and the Institute of Public Administration dated 18 September 2026. Is it agreed to note and publish the item? Agreed.

No. R2026/0488 is correspondence received from the Secretary General of the Department of Enterprise, Tourism and Employment regarding the late laying of the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission accounts for 2024, dated 21 September 2026.

Is it agreed to note and publish this item? Agreed.

No. R2026/0489, dated 21 September 2026, is correspondence received from the chief executive officer of the Road Safety Authority, RSA, regarding non-compliant procurement. I flagged this for brief discussion. There was expenditure of €2.7 million on a creative agency and, again, there was non-compliant procurement for that. I would like to request a breakdown of what that spending was for, what the campaign was for, etc. Is it agreed to note and publish this item? Agreed.

No. R2026/0490, dated 21 September 2026, is correspondence received from the director of the Residential Tenancies Board, RTB, regarding non-compliant procurement. Is it agreed to note and publish this item?

Can I just query that one? There are quite a number of issues of non-compliance there but one in particular is €5.4 million in relation to Capita, a supplier, for an extension to business process outsourcing. Do we know what exactly that is? It is a substantial amount of money. Can we query it if we do not know what it is?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

From memory, I think it is the customer, that is, dealing with people who have to register tenancies and so on, but it may be best if the committee asks for details.

Yes, business process outsourcing is very vague. Given that it is over €5.4 million, I think we need to get more information.

We can write and get further information on that. Okay, is it agreed to note and publish that item? Agreed.

No. R2026/0493, dated 24 September 2026, is correspondence received from the Secretary General of the Houses of the Oireachtas Service regarding the Oireachtas broadcasting contract. Deputy Murphy and I both flagged this. I am happy just to move on. Is it agreed to note and publish this item but to redact some of the information? Agreed.

No. R2026/0494, dated 24 September 2026, is correspondence received from the chief executive officer of the National Paediatric Hospital Development Board regarding the progress of the national children’s hospital. Deputy Farrelly and I have flagged this. I have already discussed this under previous correspondence, so I am happy to move on. Is it agreed to note and publish this item? Agreed.

Moving on to the work programme, we have the following meetings: on 1 October, today, we have Tusla; on 8 October, it will be An Garda Síochána; on 15 October, we have Uisce Éireann; on 22 October, it will be the Department of Social Protection, chapter 26 - procurement of hot school meals; on 5 November, we are looking at bringing in the Department of education again to discuss school transport; and on 12 November, we have Greyhound Racing Ireland, GRI.

Just moving on to aon ghnó eile, do members wish to raise any other items at this point? No? That concludes session 2. We will now suspend for about five minutes until we bring in our witnesses. I thank the members.

Cuireadh an suí ar fionraí ar 11.03 a.m. agus cuireadh tús leis arís ar 11.08 a.m.
The committee suspended at 11.03 a.m. and resumed at 11.08 a.m.
Share