You are all very welcome to today's meeting. Before we proceed, I have a few housekeeping matters to go through. Members are reminded of the provisions within Standing Order 226 that the committee shall refrain from inquiring into the merits of a policy or policies of the Government or 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 of the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I remind members of the constitutional requirement that in order to participate in public meetings, members must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex. Members of the committee attending remotely must do so from within the precincts of Leinster House.

We will first deal with minutes, accounts and statements, correspondence and upcoming meetings. We will then suspend and then begin our engagement with officials from the Department of Education and Youth at 10.30 a.m. The minutes of the meeting of 19 February were agreed by the committee and will be published on the committee website.

There are six sets of accounts and financial statements laid between 16 and 20 February 2026 that are due to be considered today. We are joined by the Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. Seamus McCarthy, who is a permanent witness to the committee. I will ask the Comptroller and Auditor General to address these before opening the floor to members.

The financial statements of the Judicial Council for 2024 received a clear audit opinion.

The financial statements of University College Cork for the year 2023 to 2024 received a clear audit opinion but I drew attention to a material level of non-compliance with procurement rules. I think the amount in that case was €1.76 million.

The financial statements of the Pre-Hospital Emergency Care Council for 2024 received a qualified audit opinion. In my view, the accounts give a true and fair view except that they account for the costs of retirement benefit entitlements of staff only as they become payable. As members will recall, that is standard for many of the health bodies at the direction of the Minister for Health.

The financial statements of the Adoption Authority of Ireland for 2024 received a clear audit opinion. The financial statements of the Heritage Council for 2024 received a clear audit opinion.

The financial statements of the National Training Fund for 2024 received a clear audit opinion, however, I drew attention to one matter. Skillnet Ireland is a company that receives almost all of its funding from the National Training Fund. Concerns were disclosed to Skillnet Ireland in September 2023 about the operation of one of the training networks it was funding. Skillnet Ireland commissioned an independent investigation of the concerns, which concluded in June 2025. The Department of Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, which manages the National Training Fund, had not received the investigation report on 23 December 2025 when the financial statements were being signed. I understand that the Department has since received the full report.

Could we put the National Training Fund on the list of bodies to appear before us at some stage? It is being allocated a significant amount of money at €1.2 billion so I would like it to come before us to go through its accounts.

It is worth noting that the fund balance has again increased. At the end of December 2025, it stood at €1.77 billion. I did report on the accumulating funds in my annual report not last year but the year before.

What was the reason for that?

Effectively, the funding is increasing because numbers in employment are increasing and, therefore, the funds are flowing in but the expenditure is lagging, although obviously there are purposes to which it could be put.

How much in funding did Skillnet Ireland receive?

I do not have the exact figure but it is of the order of about €45 million to €50 million per year.

The Comptroller and Auditor General does not audit its accounts?

I do not. It is a company.

Was it a whistleblower who came forward?

Yes. It was a protected disclosure.

Do we know the outcome of that investigation?

At the date of reporting, the Department did not have the full report. I understand that it has since received the full report from Skillnet Ireland.

We certainly need to follow up on that.

I agree with Deputy Bennett that we will include the National Training Fund in our work programme. In the meantime, we will write to them to get a full briefing note on this and seek a copy of the investigation that was commissioned to see its exact nature and conclusion. It is pretty concerning. Is it agreed to take this course of action? Agreed. Do any of the other members wish to raise issues or make comments in relation to those accounts? Is it agreed to note the listing of accounts and financial statements? Agreed.

Moving on to correspondence, there are a number of B items to consider. No. R-2026-0064 has been received from the HSE in response to the committee's request for further information regarding the matter of respite centres in County Monaghan that have been renovated on a temporary basis. It is dated 9 February 2026. I call Deputy Bennett.

I asked for this letter to go to the HSE. It has written back to say it has no objection or whatever. I was trying to ask for both respite centres, at Urbalkirk and Drumbear, to be made permanent. One was converted just as a temporary measure. There is a need in County Monaghan. I received figures yesterday on the need for respite centres, so I ask that the HSE make the respite centres at Urbalkirk and Drumbear permanent.

Okay.

Given the amount of money spent on the temporary one, why would the HSE want to lose it and let it go to waste?

Okay. The Deputy is proposing that we write back to the HSE.

Yes. I am proposing we write back and ask if both centres will remain open, once the second centre opens. I thank the Cathaoirleach.

We can do that. Is it agreed to note and publish that item? Agreed.

No. R-2026-0066 is correspondence received from the Secretary General of the Department of Transport dated 10 February 2026. It provides a response to the committee's request for further information following the meeting of 15 January 2026. This item has been flagged by Deputy McGrath.

I am not satisfied with the level of detail provided in relation to the bus service in Cork city. The correspondence states that payment deductions made for the non-operation of contracted services in Cork city amounted to €1.836 million in 2024. This seems to reflect that payment is not being made when a bus is not run, which is not the same thing as penalising for non-performance. In other words, if the bus service is not provided, there will be no payment for that particular service. That is very different from performance-related penalties in relation to the bus service. I ask that we go back and seek further clarification in relation to what penalties were imposed on Bus Éireann for bus service reliability and dependability issues.

Is it agreed that we will write back to the Department to get further clarity in relation to the penalties imposed? I call Deputy Farrelly.

Additionally, we now see the figures that have come out from the Department regarding expenditure on MetroLink in 2024 and 2025. It is provisionally set at over €200 million, which the Minister has confirmed is outside the €2 billion budget allocated for the period from 2026 to 2030. With that in mind, I think it is worth the committee going back to ask for the detail of that expenditure and to propose that we seek a quarterly report from the Department in order to be prudent with continuous oversight of such a big project, as opposed to waiting for an annual report. I propose that the committee request a quarterly report on expenditure on the MetroLink project.

Yes, okay. I call Deputy McAuliffe.

If I recall correctly, when we had our hearings on this matter, and we will obviously have some type of outcome report at some point, I suggested in the course of the discussions that we would have a subhead specifically relating to the MetroLink project that would allow us to see it more clearly in the Department's accounts. Perhaps we could write to the Department to ask for an update concerning the consideration it was giving to providing a specific subhead for MetroLink. That would also assist with what Deputy Farrelly is seeking.

Yes. Deputy Bennett spoke on this matter in private session.

Yes. I had noticed that €64 million was spent in 2024 and I asked if we could get a breakdown of that figure to show exactly what has been spent. There is no MetroLink yet, but €65 million has been spent on it.

I think that is a conservative figure, based on what Deputy Farrelly has said.

Yes, there was €200 million the year before as well.

Is it agreed that we will write to the Department to get that information and to try to get a commitment that we will get quarterly updates on the expenditure on this project in the context of the subhead that Deputy McAuliffe referred to? Agreed. Is it agreed that we will note and publish that correspondence? Agreed.

No. R-2026-0067 has been received from the CEO of the National Shared Services Office, NSSO, in response to the committee's request for further information regarding the review of pension-related deductions impacting civil servants and Government Ministers. It is dated 10 February 2026. Do any members wish to make comments?

Yes. I noted this matter from the emails before coming into the meeting. I think it would be a good idea to get quarterly reports here too. This matter is going to go off the radar after this meeting if we do not get a report back again to see how the money situation stands. I see some of the money has been repaid. There was a total miscalculation of €359,000, and there is still an outstanding amount of €100,000. I would like the committee to keep following up on what we are doing here in the committee and ensure that moneys are being repaid. This would ensure that we would also know when repayments are complete. I ask that we keep it in line to make sure it does happen.

There is a chapter in relation to exactly these matters that the committee has not yet examined. It is open to the committee to have the NSSO come in to explain what happened and what the progress is.

I propose that we also add the NSSO to our work programme.

Yes. Is that agreed? Agreed. Is it also agreed to note and publish the item? Agreed.

No. R-2026-0069 is correspondence received from the Secretary General of the Department of Education and Youth in response to the committee's request for further information regarding the new Monaghan community special school. It is dated 11 February 2026. I call Deputy Bennett.

I asked for this letter to be sent. I think over €3 million, and maybe another €3 million now, had been spent on temporary Portakabins outside the building. A permanent special school was supposed to be established in Monaghan. It has not happened. We all very much welcome this school, but it was only for 18 students. Approximately 40 students need to avail of the special school in Monaghan. I propose that the committee write back to the Department to ask what plan and budget it has in place for the permanent special school in Monaghan.

We can do that. Just to note - I know the Deputy is aware of this - that we will have the Department back in with the committee to look specifically at the capital end of things. It will be an opportunity to raise the issue.

Perhaps we could notify the Department that I will be bringing up this issue.

Yes, we can do that. Is it agreed to note and publish the item? Agreed.

No. R-2026-0070 is correspondence received from the CEO of Uisce Éireann in response to the committee's request for further information regarding its performance-related award model. It is dated 11 February 2026. Do any members wish to comment? No. Is it agreed to note and publish the item? Agreed.

No. R-2026-0071 is correspondence received from the Clerk of the Dáil, providing an update on the current arrangements for the provision of broadcasting services within the Houses of the Oireachtas. It is dated 11 February 2026.

Do members wish to make comments about that correspondence? No. Is it agreed to note and publish the item? Agreed.

No. R-2026-0072 is correspondence received from the chief executive of the City of Dublin Education and Training Board in response to the committee's request for further information, dated 11 February 2026. Do members wish to make comment? No. Is it agreed to note and publish the item? Agreed.

No. R-2026-0073 is correspondence received from the Secretary General of the Department of Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science in response to the committee's request for further information regarding the MySUSI project, dated 13 February 2026. Do members wish to make comment? No. Is it agreed to note and publish the item? Agreed.

No. R-2026-0074 is correspondence received from the Secretary General of the Department of Children, Disability and Equality in response to the committee's request for further information, dated 13 February 2026. Do members wish to make comment? No. Is it agreed to note and publish the item? Agreed.

No. R-2026-0075 is correspondence received from the Secretary General of the Department of Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation in relation to the miscalculation of pension deductions of persons whose remuneration is transacted by the National Shared Services Office, dated 12 February 2026. Do members wish to make comment?

It will come up when we have them in for the meeting.

Yes. Is it agreed to note and publish the item? Agreed.

No. R-2026-0077 is correspondence received from the Secretary General of the Department of Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation regarding the minute of the Minister on the report on the examination of the 2023 Appropriation Account for Vote 33 - Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media 2023 and the National Gallery of Ireland, dated 12 February 2026. Do members with to make comment? No. Is it agreed to note and publish the item? Agreed.

Our next item is the work programme. Next week, 5 March, the committee will engage with the Department of Social Protection, the Office of the Revenue Commissioners and the Department of Enterprise, Tourism and Employment. We will discuss the classification of workers for PRSI purposes.

The last item on our agenda is any other business. Do members wish to raise anything?

I said earlier that I would raise this. Tusla, in reply to a parliamentary question I submitted, gave us the figures in relation to the number of persons who claimed to be children who Tusla determined were not children or unaccompanied minors. They were then sent back to the International Protection Office, which comes under the Department of justice. In the figures provided to me, there were 86 of those people in 2025, adults who were purporting to be children who were subsequently determined to be adults. The corresponding figure for 2024 was 67. The Chair will recall that last week the Department of justice provided us with correspondence where it gave us the global figure. I think it paints a different picture in terms of the scale of unaccompanied minors who are actually coming into Ireland and are in the care and custody of Tusla. What it said in its correspondence is that as of 1 February 2026, Tusla has made determinations on 491 of the 592 unaccompanied minor applicants, judging 141 of those not to be eligible for services and 348 to be eligible. That is an enormous number of adults in the care of Tusla in child-based settings. We have teased this out with Tusla and the Department of justice. The Department of justice was reluctant to even indicate on the first occasion that it was its legal responsibility to carry out age assessments. We heard from Tusla of the challenges it has in funding and management. We might write to the Department of justice asking it to assess the figures that Tusla has provided to me as against the figures the Department of justice has provided. We could also write to Tusla to inquire the length of time between when a person who purports to be a child is placed in the care of Tusla and subsequently turns out to be an adult. There are serious safeguarding issues involved in this. There are governance issues between the two entities, the Department of justice and Tusla. I am not convinced that the Bill currently going through the Dáil is necessarily going to satisfy these significant challenges, a lot of which were unearthed at this committee. The Department of justice needs to account for it.

Do any other members wish to comment? No. I support that, and the other area of major concern on top of that is the unregulated accommodation that Tusla has been using due to capacity issues within its own system. We know a lot of concerns have been voiced at many levels about the use of unregulated accommodation. To have situations like this where high numbers of people who are presenting claiming to be minors subsequently turn out to be adults in that unregulated accommodation space adds to the seriousness of the issues and concerns. It is a complex area but it is deeply concerning. There are serious failures with all of those issues that we need to follow up on. We need to get a fuller briefing note from the Department and Tusla. It is an issue that we will be returning to. I know it has even been voiced by judges who have raised serious concerns about the use of that unregulated accommodation for these individuals. Is it agreed that we take that course of action to follow up and seek that information? Agreed.

Where are we with regard to inquiring about the children's hospital? We raised it a number of times. Have we inquired? Have we got any response back at this point from CHI?

We received a quarterly report from them recently. They are on our work programme and will be coming in to us.

When is that scheduled?

They are coming into us on 30 April. It is an issue we have a keen interest in. That has been confirmed for that date.

Is it our view that we allow that schedule run, and that we do not try to bring them in before that date?

We have obviously agreed our work programme. For all of our dates between now and then, we have agreed for witnesses to come in. I think that has been agreed with them also. It is up to members, if they wish to reschedule, but it has been agreed that it will be Thursday, 30 April.

Okay, that is fine.

I raise two things. One, we have written to all of the Departments with regard to IT projects and I know we have received responses. Can I get a sense of what the plan is? Are we going to discuss that?

I know the clerk and his team have done a huge amount of work on this. Most, if not all, of the data has now been furnished from all of the Departments and the agencies under them. It has taken a lot of time because of the format in which some of the information has come back. Some have included that, and some have not. There have been some challenges in compiling that.

I know there is ongoing work and I think over the next couple of weeks we will have a full report on this. I know the clerk and the team are looking at the best way to present it to us. It is very a useful piece of work and some very useful information will come from it. We expect to have that completed in the next couple of weeks and we will bring it forward to the members and maybe have a full presentation it then. On foot of that, we will then determine what course of action to take.

Will that document give us all the names of all the IT companies we have been paying, or the Oireachtas has been paying?

We can check that. I am not sure as to whether we will have that level of detail but we will check that.

I will take the opportunity before we see anything tangible or have anything in our hands to thank the secretariat for what undoubtedly has been a significant amount of work to collate. Will we have an opportunity as a committee to contribute to a set of recommendations that might come from that report? I am sure we all have ideas when it comes to IT overspends.

Yes. Does anyone else want to come in on this?

Is there going to be a report?

The data will be presented to us in the first instance and then it is entirely up to us as committee members. I think it absolutely should lead to a series of engagements with whatever witnesses are agreed. It is to build on the work we had done in relation to the Arts Council where we issued a report and put forward a series of recommendations. Stemming from this, there will be a natural course of action to follow in terms of a report and recommendations coming from it as well. Let us wait until the work is completed. We will have full engagement on it and a full presentation from the clerk and the team that compiled the information. This will not sit on a shelf. Certainly, from my perspective, this is a process that we will repeat annually to ensure there are learnings and lessons and that we are not repeating the same mistakes that happened previously and that whatever recommendations stem from it are referred to and, more importantly, implemented.

It would be very valuable that IT companies are named to ensure ongoing overspends stop within Departments. At the moment, IT companies have been used by different Department, so it is to recognise that and see why there have been such huge overspends on certain IT companies.

Okay, we will try to get clarity on that and see what information has come back. Are members happy to conclude?

Sorry, there was another issue I wanted to raise. We were to write to the Department of Transport and the National Transport Authority, NTA, requesting certain information in relation to the national train control centre and to the metro to make sure we are getting regular updates. I want to confirm we have requested that information and when we might expect to get it back.

Yes, we checked on the first request and on the second item, metro, we discussed that and agreed a course of action. We will follow up again and try to get a specific breakdown and quarterly report on expenditure within the metro project.

I think we sought minutes on the national train control centre in that letter.

The clerk will check that out and see where we are in regard to that.

Yes, I know that. I thank the Chair and the clerk.

That concludes this session. We will suspend the meeting for five minutes or thereabouts and will resume at 10.30 a.m.