Siptu- The money was just resting in our account?

Sticky_Fingers

From the Irish Times:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/1006/breaking49.html

The trade union Siptu has said that it will repay some of the money involved in the controversy over the Skill training programme if any payments are found to have not been properly vouched.
In a statement, the union said that it had lodged a sum of €348,000 with a Commissioner for Oaths in good faith.
However the union again maintained that it had never sought or knew anything about €2.3 million paid over to a bank account, which was controlled by persons closely associated with Siptu, as part of a grant authorised by the Department of Health.
An audit by the HSE of the programme has found that fundamental elements of internal control were not in place and that there were serious shortcomings in relation to areas such as governance, funding and foreign travel arrangements.
It is to be considered by the Dáil Public Accounts Committee tomorrow.
As revealed in The Irish Times last June, the audit report specifically criticises the payment of grants, totalling over €2 million – funded by the Department of Health as part of the allocation to the Skill programme – to a bank account linked to individuals close to Siptu.
The union has said the account into which annual grants of €190,000 – €250,000 were paid was not one of its authorised accounts.
In a statement issued this evening, Siptu general president Jack O’Connor, vice president Patricia King and general secretary Joe O’Flynn, said the union “never sought any of the monies referred to” in the audit report.
“We never sought and never received the monies in question,” the statement said.
“We were never consulted with regard to these monies which were paid into an account which we never authorised or approved.
“This account was not in the control of the union. We obtained control of it in recent weeks in the context of the union’s internal inquiry into the matter.”
The union chiefs said Siptu never received an annual report on the account “or details of a single transaction conducted through it”.
“It was never audited by our internal or external auditors. We were never once queried by the HSE in relation to this account until we were contacted by its audit team in September 2009.”
In addition, no service-level agreement or contract was ever put in place by the HSE in respect of the payments, disbursements or audit of the monies in question.
“The union, therefore, has no liability in respect of the monies referred to,” the statement said.
“However, conscious of our role as a civil society organisation, we are endeavouring to assist in clarifying all the matters at issue. Moreover, we have informed the HSE that, without prejudice, any payments in respect of reimbursement of expenses which cannot be properly vouched will be repaid.”
The statement said that to this end, a sum of €348,000 as identified in the Comptroller and Auditor General’s report had been lodged with a commissioner for oaths “in good faith”.
“Our internal inquiry into this matter is continuing and efforts are being made to bring it to a conclusion as soon as possible. We will then be in a position to comment further.”
Two of the State’s largest public service trade unions said last month they would pay back nearly €240,000 which they received in “partnership funding” which was highlighted by the Comptroller and Auditor General and which was the subject of the special audit by the HSE.
Impact said it had repaid a total of €112,791.53 while the Irish Nurses and Midwives Organisation (INMO) is to give back €127,491.60.

• DoH has money earmarked for training

• DoH decides to pay said money into a bank account controlled by persons closely associated with Siptu

• Siptu are saying that they never solicited nor knew about the transfer of funds but have taken control of the account in recent weeks after they found out about it

• They accept no liability for the funds but have lodged "€348,000 with a Commissioner for Oaths in good faith"

Why are the DoH paying training money to such an account in the first place?

Why, is if as Siptu maintains, they had nothing to do with the money and accept no liability have they placed a security deposit with the Commissioner of Oaths to cover any liabilities resulting from this fund?


What in the name of god is going on????

axer

Either siptu controlled the bank account or they didn't . What does closely associated mean?

Sticky_Fingers

axer wrote: »

Either siptu controlled the bank account or they didn't . What does closely associated mean?

Thats what I'm wondering. Why would Siptu take control of such an account and why were the DoH putting money into it in the first place?

As revealed in The Irish Times last June, the audit report specifically criticises the payment of grants, totalling over €2 million – funded by the Department of Health as part of the allocation to the Skill programme – to a bank account linked to individuals close to Siptu.

I think SIPTU have been set up here to further the anti-union agenda..

jimmycrackcorm

Deleted User wrote: »

I think SIPTU have been set up here to further the anti-union agenda..

I think they just have had a lack of corporate governance. there is not conspiracy theory here - the DOH paid the money out to Siptu but it was at the behest of specific individuals which appear to have been operating under the official Siptu radar.

To suggest that this has been some sort of expensive plot just to foster an anti-union agenda is a bit wishy washy don't you think?

Count Dooku

A FORMER trade union boss was entitled to fees of up to €1,000 a day for chairing each meeting of the group overseeing the controversial state training scheme for health workers, the Irish Independent has learned.

SIPTU's Billy Attley chaired the steering group for the €60m 'Skill' training scheme, which will be at the centre of a hearing by the Dail Committee on Public Accounts today.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/siptu-official-got-euro1000-a-day-from-hses-euro235m-slush-fund-2368705.html

I don't see much difference between corrupted FF politicians an union bosses
:mad:
Not surprised that pro unions left wing Irish Times doesn't want name and shame SIPTU oficials

ei.sdraob

Careful now you are not allowed to criticize the unions on this site

I wrote about this few days ago as the news broke

and the thread was locked :rolleyes:

complaint lodged with helpdesk

Sticky_Fingers

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Careful now you are not allowed to criticize the unions on this site

I wrote about this few days ago as the news broke

and the thread was locked :rolleyes:

complaint lodged with helpdesk

Crikey, I hope my OP makes the grade. Far dues to you copping this, I heard it on the radio last night in the car and was suitably appalled that I had to look it up on the old interweb to make sure I wasn't imagining things.

ei.sdraob

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

Crikey, I hope my OP makes the grade. Far dues to you copping this, I heard it on the radio last night in the car and was suitably appalled that I had to look it up on the old interweb to make sure I wasn't imagining things.

even RTE 6.1 news had a feature on this waste while here on boards it got called "union bashing"

I wrote in length before that the only way to prevent corruption is to have free media and transparent governance.

Would this have happened if all the transactions were visible by every citizen and taxpayer? nope
Why do the people of this country have so little information about where their tax money and money borrowed in their names go?

Prime candidate for corruption is NAMA, who are working with alot of money and have alot of power but working under secrecy :rolleyes: I hope the people of this country wake up and realize where that will end up

SirPeter

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Prime candidate for corruption is NAMA, who are working with alot of money and have alot of power but working under secrecy :rolleyes: I hope the people of this country wake up and realize where that will end up

What if the people do wake up? What can they do about it?

The Government, without a mandate, has committed the "people" to billions of euro, probably the biggest ever commitment financially, without a mandate. What can anyone do about it of a practical nature?

ei.sdraob

SirPeter wrote: »

What if the people do wake up? What can they do about it?

The Government, without a mandate, has committed the "people" to billions of euro, probably the biggest ever commitment financially, without a mandate. What can anyone do about it of a practical nature?

Good point, with elections being denied we cant democratically punish them at the ballot box any time soon

I suppose:
* explain to as many people as you know that we all are being screwed in many ways, 24% still support FF for some strange reason
* put pressure on TDs like independents to drop their support for govt, talking to them and writting, cracks are already appearing
* tell the opposition to step up the pressure, i cant believe they are so incompetent as not being able to push FF after so many failures
* vote with you wallet by shopping north and moving money out of Irish banks

Mr Benevolent

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Careful now you are not allowed to criticize the unions on this site

I wrote about this few days ago as the news broke

and the thread was locked :rolleyes:

complaint lodged with helpdesk

The reason it was locked is that the OP was just an article with some prototypical comment, i.e there was no reasoned argument for or against. That's against the charter.

ei.sdraob

Confab wrote: »

The reason it was locked is that the OP was just an article with some prototypical comment, i.e there was no reasoned argument for or against. That's against the charter.

Its quite obvious from the post I made that I am not happy about the waste.

"shocking" was the word I used

what else is there to say, I outlined in this post and many times here on boards how corruption can be tackled and why corruption occurs, perhaps I should have repeated myself again in that OP, i was too angry about it as the news broke I suppose.

Nijmegen

Last I checked, people were involved in the administration of these programs. Surely these people communicate? HSE, SIPTU?

The people signing the forms and pushing the buttons on the HSE side, never spoke to the people taking receipt of the "accounted for" money in SIPTU?

If somebody was taking money on the sly to a different bank account, they would have to be bloody great chancers to expect that Mary in the HSE would never mention it to Martha in SIPTU?

This entire thing should be pulled apart, fiber by fiber, and explained in an open court.

• What was the "official" relationship and lines of communication?
• Who decided and who pushed the buttons, and what was their relationship with the folks in SIPTU?
• On what basis was this money transferred?

And, most simply of all, who were the nominated trustees of the account? If I become a trustee of a company, society, union or any other bank account I have to sign on the dotted line, and again every time I make a transaction. Somebody in the bank has to deal with me.

Simple solution, go down the bank branch and pull CCTV records for any time any transactions were made in person.

This stinks.

dan_d

According to the news the HSE appears to be under the spotlight and are currently in front of the committee for public finances.

People abused and ignored the HSE regulations regarding foreign travel - why am I not surprised.

I wonder will anyone actually lose their job over this. :rolleyes:

Somehow it seems to tie into this SIPTU account, although to be honest, I'm totally confused by the whole thing:o

Nijmegen

dan_d wrote: »

According to the news the HSE appears to be under the spotlight and are currently in front of the committee for public finances.

People abused and ignored the HSE regulations regarding foreign travel - why am I not surprised.

I wonder will anyone actually lose their job over this. :rolleyes:

Somehow it seems to tie into this SIPTU account, although to be honest, I'm totally confused by the whole thing:o

The SIPTU dodgy account is only one facet of this.

Another question of theirs is why a signifigant portion of the taxi receipts were outside of business hours, with 74 of them being between 7pm and 4am, mainly between hotels, restaurants and pubs.

And so it goes on.

rumour

Confab wrote: »

The reason it was locked is that the OP was just an article with some prototypical comment, i.e there was no reasoned argument for or against. That's against the charter.

Why are the government funding SIPTU?
Why are SIPTU putting money into an account?
Did this report go first to Unions then to Government?
Who is reporting to whom?
Is this carry on limited to the HSE where else might it be found?

Additionally where is the investigative journalism here? Are the unions the sacred cow that we cannot touch, much the same way as the catholic church was in the fifties and sixties.

These questions are so obvious...what is going on when our government is effectively funding a lobbying agency ( that already has statuatory entitlements in the form of tax breaks to secure funding) already surpassing anything found by any other lobbying group.

Personally I want to know who sanctioned this misappropriation of tax payers money.

i want to know if nothing is wrong why are SIPTU publically putting €360k into a bank account.

This all reeks of something rotten.

And only an idiot would not question why was this story snuffed out a few days ago.

Scofflaw

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Its quite obvious from the post I made that I am not happy about the waste.

"shocking" was the word I used

what else is there to say, I outlined in this post and many times here on boards how corruption can be tackled and why corruption occurs, perhaps I should have repeated myself again in that OP, i was too angry about it as the news broke I suppose.

Yes, you should have done, and then the thread wouldn't have looked like you'd set out to do a bit of rhetorical union-bashing with a completely inadequate OP - and would, like this thread, have been perfectly acceptable.

If you've started a Help Desk thread, why are you arguing about the moderation of it on thread here? Have you read the Charter at all?

24-hour ban for Charter breach.

moderately,
Scofflaw

P. Breathnach

Nijmegen wrote: »

The SIPTU dodgy account is only one facet of this...

Has it been established that it is a SIPTU account? SIPTU has denied it.

Count Dooku

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Has it been that it is a SIPTU account? SIPTU has denied it.

At the same time SIPTU agreed to pay money back in order to prevent jailing of responsible SIPTU officials, because otherwise public could learn a lot about how taxpayers money were spent by social partners

P. Breathnach

Count Dooku wrote: »

At the same time SIPTU agreed to pay money back in order to prevent jailing of Billy Attley and other SIPTU officials, because otherwise public could learn a lot about how taxpayers money were spent by social partners

Source?

murphaph

Wtf are the government even doing handing over ONE PENNY to a lobby group for? I have never been a member of a union nor would I want to be, my work and skills are enough to protect me, so why is my tax money being handed over to a lobby group for lazy types who hide behind collective bargaining and other archaic relics of the 1970s?!

Count Dooku

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Source?

OP

The trade union Siptu has said that it will repay some of the money involved in the controversy over the Skill training programme if any payments are found to have not been properly vouched.

If it wasn't SIPTU account, they could simply ignore all allegations, because they would knew from the beginning that they can easily win case in court

P. Breathnach

Count Dooku wrote: »

OP

Not there. What is in the OP is a denial by SIPTU: "This account was not in the control of the union. We obtained control of it in recent weeks in the context of the union’s internal inquiry into the matter.”

If it wasn't SIPTU account, they could simply ignore all allegations, because they would knew from the beginning that they can easily win case in court

That's a huge leap. They say that they got control hands on the money recently, and thus it would make sense for them to put it in escrow.

What about your naming of Billy Attley?

Banned Account

Some info here on it, dating back to June but it gives a bit of structure as to what's been happening to the Craggy Island training account;)

THE REPORT IN 25th Junes IRISH INDEPENDENT:
Training fund spent on €12,000 taxi bill and 31 foreign journeys
By Anne-Marie Walsh
Friday June 25 2010
THE full extent of foreign trips funded by a controversial €2.35m State training fund investigated by gardai has been revealed.
A total of 31 visits were taken over a seven-year period between 2002 and 2009, including trips to Australia, Los Angeles, Hong Kong, a variety of UK destinations, Savannah, in Georgia, US, and New York around St Patrick's Day.
The Health Service Executive (HSE) claims it channelled the Department of Finance funding into a SIPTU account to run a training programme for low-skilled workers, but cannot account for the spending.
Cheques

The Irish Independent has learned that cheques for the controversial training programme were lodged in the Bank of Ireland branch where SIPTU holds its accounts.
Sources said a HSE audit revealed that cheques totalling €250,000 a year ended up in the same Dublin branch where the union does its banking.
They also revealed the money was used to cover a €12,000 taxi bill, plus hotel and restaurant expenses.
Officials from the HSE and departments of Finance and Health were among those who went on some of the trips.
Foreign travel included:
A trip to New York in 2004, 2005, and 2008.
Two trips to New York in 2006, 2007 and 2009.
One trip to LA in 2007
A trip to Boston in 2007.
A trip to Savannah in 2008.
Trips to Australia, LA and Hong Kong in 2008.
Ten trips to London.
Trips to Birmingham, Sheffield, Oxford, Southampton, and Sheffield.
A trip to Brussels.
However, HSE sources last night said foreign travel did not make up the bulk of the spending.
The HSE contacted gardai after completing the audit and also contacted SIPTU. One official is currently the subject of an internal union inquiry.
SIPTU insists it never received any of the money for the training programme, known as SKILL. The union claimed this had been verified by an audit of its accounts.
Levy

However, sources last night revealed the internal HSE audit obtained copies of cheques made payable to the union.
They claim the cheques were paid into a national health and local authority levy fund, and were then lodged into a branch of Bank of Ireland in Dublin.
The HSE audit found SIPTU's own general secretary confirmed the union holds its accounts at the same branch where the cheques were lodged.
It said the union leader, who is not named in the audit, said SIPTU would carry out its own investigation. SIPTU leader Jack O'Connor has insisted the union did not get any of the money.
- Anne-Marie - Irish Independent

Wile E. Coyote

dan_d wrote: »

I wonder will anyone actually lose their job over this. :rolleyes:

Of course they will but they'll probably get handed a nice new role job on higher pay investigating what happened in the first place :rolleyes:.

P. Breathnach

Fitzcaraldo wrote: »

Some info here on it, dating back to June ...

Yes, indeed, this story has been around for a few months, and I have learned nothing much that is new about it in the last few hours.

Today's story, in an ideal world, would be about how people got to the basis of these things -- not that it is still unexplained.

Count Dooku

P. Breathnach wrote: »

That's a huge leap. They say that they got control hands on the money recently, and thus it would make sense for them to put it in escrow.

They simply could refuse to take control if it wasn't their money and demand court hearing

P. Breathnach wrote: »

What about your naming of Billy Attley?

I got an impression from Independent that he was in charge from SIPTU side

A FORMER trade union boss was entitled to fees of up to €1,000 a day for chairing each meeting of the group overseeing the controversial state training scheme for health workers, the Irish Independent has learned.

SIPTU's Billy Attley chaired the steering group for the €60m 'Skill' training scheme, which will be at the centre of a hearing by the Dail Committee on Public Accounts today.

but I can be wrong and he can be fully innocent
But we have another question - why now he is former?

Banned Account

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Yes, indeed, this story has been around for a few months, and I have learned nothing much that is new about it in the last few hours.

Today's story, in an ideal world, would be about how people got to the basis of these things -- not that it is still unexplained.

All I can gather to date is that the account was operated by two SIPTU officials and was to all intents and purposes a SIPTU account. SIPTU however are denying they knew of it's existence and seem to be insinuating that the account was opened and operated without the authorisation and knowledge of the board.

There are, then, two possiblities raised;

1) SIPTU are lying and knew about it all the time and are now hanging two officials out to dry so they don't get tarnished.

2) The account was operated without oversight.

Much as I dislike the Unions, possibilty number 1 seems unlikely so I will be assuming for now that possibility number 2 is what we are looking at.

If this is the case, some questions have to be asked - someone must have known about this large training programme, why would the board not ask where the money is coming from?

Who signed off to open the account in SIPTU's name - usually only a senior finance figure can do this

Where did the statements go to?

How can two individuals open and run an account with over €2,000,000 in it and have it remain unnoticed?

Regardless of whether or not SIPTU were complicit, they were certainly negligent.

Nijmegen

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Has it been established that it is a SIPTU account? SIPTU has denied it.

They've taken control of it lately, so if it wasn't an official SIPTU account in the past - which I believe - then it was clearly a SIPTU-related account, and quite close to them.

There's no way you could siphon off that much gas without someone in the HSE or SIPTU getting wind. No way whatsoever.

I want the whole papertrail laid bare for all to see. It's not their money. It's not the HSE's money. It's your money, and it's my money we're talking about here.

Banned Account

Nijmegen wrote: »

It's your money, and it's my money we're talking about here.

Sorry, I keep reading that in a Jimmy Stewart voice:D