§ Mr. GINNELLasked whether Local Government auditors report, or take any action to prevent, the continued reappointment, year after year, on visiting and inspection committees of local bodies of the same members of those bodies, being servants or debtors or contractors to those bodies; if so, to what is the persistence of this practice due; and whether he will have a rule introduced disqualifying unfree members for service on those committees and requiring a rotation, or at least some change of personnel, in such committees each year?
§ The CHIEF SECRETARY for IRELAND (Mr. Birrell)The Local Government Board have not received any reports from their auditors commenting on any such practice as is referred to in the question, nor does there appear to be any ground for supposing that such a practice exists. The answer to the concluding portion of the question is in the negative.
§ Mr. GINNELLasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant whether he will take steps to have the rule that Local Government auditors inquire and report only upon such irregular and illegal practices as come officially under their notice so amended as to empower and require every auditor to inquire into and report upon all irregular and illegal practices that add to the rates, by whatsoever means those practices have come to the auditor's knowledge?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThere is no rule that auditors shall confine their inquiries when auditing the accounts of local authorities to what is officially brought under their notice. They audit the receipts and expenditure of the year or half-year, as the case may be, and investigate all matters necessary to enable them to decide as to the legality of the expenditure.
§ Mr. GINNELLasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant whether' the 1522 Local Government Board take any action regarding an accounting body until complaints take the shape of a formal charge and the time for preventing an abuse has passed; whether they send the same or a fresh auditor to examine the accounts, and give any special instructions; if there is any efficient examination of auditors' reports, how do the Local Government Board explain the survival of irregular practices, especially in connection with contracts, and the immunity of the auditors under whom the irregularities flourish; and whether he can see his way to requiring a higher standard of efficiency in auditors and a systematic examination and comparison of their reports?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe Local Government Board cannot take action until a complaint reaches them. It is open to any ratepayer to make a complaint to the Board with a view to the prevention of abuse, and when there is a primâ facie case an inspector is sent to hold an investigation unless the matter is one which will come before the auditor in the ordinary course. The Board inform me that there is an efficient examination of auditors' reports in their Audit Department, and that in their opinion irregular practices are rare. They require and maintain a high standard of efficiency on the part of their auditors.
§ Mr. GINNELLasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland when an auditor states in his report that accounts have been carefully prepared and vouched in a most satisfactory manner, and the accounts so described contain entries of alleged payments in fact never made, and the same thing occurs year after year, as in the case of the accounts of the Commissioners of Charitable Donations and Bequests for Ireland, will the Government allow the accounting body to take shelter behind an old statute and resist investigation, or will the accounts and vouchers be submitted to a fresh auditor or to any independent examination?
§ Mr. BIRRELLAs I have already in formed the hon. Member in reply to a question asked by him on 8th December last, the Commissioners and the auditor tell me that there is no foundation for the allegation that the accounts contain statements of payments not actually made. The accounts have been audited as required by law, and I have no power to direct a further audit. If the hon. Member will furnish particulars of the case to which he refers, I will have inquiries made.
§ Mr. GINNELLasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will explain the declaration of the Local Government Board for Ireland in November, 1908, that it was not in possession of any information regarding local bodies paying fixed sums yearly to their solicitors and making additional payments to the same solicitors, and its production in December, 1908, of accounts of a district council illustrating the objectionable practice; if he will now say what scale an auditor applies before passing the fixed yearly payment in such a case, and on what principle he requires no deduction when the work done falls below, but allows an additional payment when the work is alleged to be above, the measure of the fixed payment; whether it is the. duty of an auditor to report on such practices and of the Board to examine and decide which is the safer method of payment and enforce that uniformly; and whether he will have this done?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe hon. Member asked in November last for the number of local bodies who adopted certain methods of remunerating their solicitors, and I informed. him in reply that the Local Government Board has no information on that point. There is no inconsistency between that reply and the fact that cases occur from time to time in which solicitors receive both annual salaries and also occasional additional payments for extra services. Where a yearly payment by way of salary is made to a solicitor the auditor acts on the resolution of the local authority fixing the salary. If additional payment be made on the ground that extra duties have been discharged he requires a further resolution of the local authority. The auditors report cases of apparently irregular payments, but the Board have no power to compel all local authorities to remunerate Their solicitors on the same scale or method. Local authorities must be allowed a discretion in these matters.
§ Mr. GINNELLWould the auditor consider himself precluded from practically taxing the amount of the account on account of the resolution of the Board?
§ Mr. BIRRELLIf the resolution of the Board fixed the amount of remuneration of the solicitor, then, no doubt, the auditor would leave it alone.