Cork Institute of Technology denies report amounted to 'effectively investigating itself'

Review examined the college’s relationship with some of its subsidiary companies

Alan Kelly: Wrote to PAC seeking more answers from CIT. Picture: Gareth Chaney/Collins

Cork Institute of Technology (CIT) has denied that a report, carried out at the behest of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) into the college’s relationship with some of its subsidiary companies, amounted to the institution “effectively investigating itself”.

The review, by professional services firm Mazars, was completed in April 2019. It resulted from a report published by PAC itself in July 2017, and examined potential conflicts of interest stemming from employees of CIT also receiving remuneration from its subsidiaries.

The Mazars review found that some CIT employees were being paid for part-time work for the college’s offshoots. 

It added that documented details of how that arrangement was managed were “not provided or evident at the time of our review”.

However, one employee was found to have worked anything up to 125 hours per month for a company, when the contracted limit for such work was 15 hours. Another employee earned up to €50,000 in excess of their base salary of nearly €80,000 from similar work.

Read more: Cork Institute of Technology to face grilling from PAC over subsidiary companies

The Mazars review found that some CIT employees were being paid for part-time work for the college’s offshoots. 

Labour leader Alan Kelly wrote to PAC in December last year asking that CIT clarify certain matters and answer a number of further questions regarding the report, a request delayed by the general election and subsequent Covid-19 crisis.

“They ask the senior management of CIT who presides over the companies within CIT rather than carrying out an independent investigation of facts and figures,” said Mr Kelly, who is no longer a member of PAC.

“They have effectively investigated themselves,” he added in his correspondence to the committee, which will be considered at its meeting this morning.

However, CIT has said that the queries are a matter for the Higher Education Authority (HEA) since it was the authority which appointed Mazars in the first place.

“It was not a case of CIT ‘effectively investigating themselves’,” said a spokesperson. “The terms of reference were determined by the HEA in conjunction with Mazars, not CIT. 

"CIT then co-operated fully with the review as required."