PAC told it cannot compel ex-Rehab chiefs to appear

The Public Accounts Committee has been told it does not have the power to compel former Rehab chief executives Angela Kerins and Frank Flannery to appear before it.

The PAC had sought permission from the Committee on Procedures and Privileges (CPP), the body which sets Dáil rules, to compel the pair after they both declined to appear before TDs.

Ms Kerins gave evidence before the committee earlier this year, but has since stepped down as chief executive of Rehab.

Mr Flannery served as CEO of Rehab before Ms Kerins, and subsequently served as a director, a position he resigned from earlier this year.

The CPP met this evening to consider the compellability request, but decided it could not grant the powers to the PAC, the most powerful committee in the Oireachtas.

In a statement, the CPP said it had “declined to give its consent”. It took advice from Melissa English, the parliamentary legal adviser, and Caroline Costello SC, and both were in agreement with each other.

“The CPP formed the view, based on strong legal advice, that the Public Accounts Committee is only empowered to proceed with the examination of an account audited or report prepared by the Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG) after it is presented to Dáil Éireann,” the statement said.

“As Rehab is not audited by the C&AG and accordingly no report exists, the PAC does not have the legal authority to examine the use of public monies by the Rehab Group.”

Bodies in direct receipt of public monies, such as State agencies like the HSE and Government departments, could be compelled to appear before the PAC, however those indirectly receiving funds cannot be forced to give evidence.

It is understood that Rehab, which indirectly gets State funding through the HSE, fell into the second category.

However, the PAC has effectively been told it can compel Siptu officials “who had an involvement in the operation of the National Health and Local Authority Levy Fund”, as well as a Grant Thornton report on the fund.

The statement added: “This is the first occasion on which compellability applications were considered under the Inquiries Act 2013 and the CPP was advised that it had an important supervisory function under the Act.

“In this regard, it could not unreasonably refuse a request that is in compliance with the requirements of the Act, nor could it grant compellability powers where it would not be lawful to do so.”