Members of the 1997-98 officer board of USI acted outside their powers in granting themselves expense allowances which were effectively unauthorised pay rises, an inquiry has found.

The inquiry's report, presented to USI's annual congress in Westport, Co Mayo, described the union's expense procedures at the time as being "inadequate and lax" and "open to abuse".

While the inquiry did not find "any evidence of fraudulent activity on the part of any individual within the organisation", it criticised the lack of "checks and balances within the system".

The three-member committee of inquiry - composed of former students' union activists with no present connection to USI - was set up by last year's USI congress after a report in E&L outlining expenses claimed by former USI president Colman Byrne. The committee's report reveals that Byrne claimed expenses of £12,119 in the year ended June 30th, 1998.

Included in the expenses claimed by Byrne is a mobile-phone bill of £3,198 for the year.

Byrne also sublet a room in his own rented accommodation for use by the union's regional conveners. The committee called this "clearly an error of judgment"; Byrne told the committee he felt the arrangement was "fine from a financial point of view for the union" but a "PR disaster and the worst decision I made in five years in student politics".

The committee praised Byrne's "full and complete co-operation" with its inquiry but strongly criticised the union's finance committee, which refused to answer any of its questions. Dermot Lohan, this year's union president and a member of the finance committee, asked that a note be made in the committee's report of his dissatisfaction with the committee's refusal to co-operate.

The committee concluded that two sets of expense claims, a monthly expense allowance of £80 for sabbatical officers and a £1,900 lump-sum clothing allowance, were effectively wage supplements. The report notes: "It is the committee's view that the remuneration package for sabbatical officers within USI [currently about £10,000 per annum] is designed to remove barriers and ensure that officers do not suffer any financial disadvantage as a result of taking one of these positions. The president of USI for 1997-98 [Byrne] does not share this view and compares the role to that of chief executive of other similar organisations."

In all, £48,105 was spent by USI on eight officers' expenses in the year ended June 30th, 1998, £10,475 of which the committee describes as "unapportioned". It is not known to whom £2,900 of this money was paid, as many of the cheques involved were made out to cash.

Overall, telephone expenses in USI in 1997-98 went up 156 per cent - from £11,017 in 1996-97 to £28,235 in 1997-98.

Expenses under the heading "Staff Welfare" increased from £2,293 to £12,973 and motor expenses for officers jumped from nothing in 1996-97 to £5,338 in 1997/98. More than £5,000 was spent on "bonding sessions, parties and presents for officers" in the same year.

A letter to the committee's head from USI's accountants points out that general organisational expenses are included in the figure for Byrne's spending, and that the "Staff Welfare" category "was used for more categories of expense than in previous years". The letter concluded: "the financial control of the union improved . . . compared with the previous year."

One of the committee's central recommendations is that candidates only be allowed to run for office in USI if they have served fewer than three years as union officers already. The committee says "this would be of assistance in ensuring that officers would be more in tune with the lifestyle of an ordinary student". Colman Byrne had served as a union officer for three years in DIT before he became president of USI, an office he held for two years.

Byrne told the committee that its inquiry had taken a heavy toll on his personal life. "I have suffered a huge amount of personal damage, much of which is irreversible regardless of the outcome of the report. I lost a job over this in August, I was supposed to be a candidate in the local elections but someone has been added in my place because this report was not published in time. "This has added to the continuing embarrassment suffered by myself and my family because of this ongoing investigation . . . I have already paid far in excess for the honest mistakes that I might have made."