asked the Minister for Defence when the Government executive jet will be back in service; the cost of repairs to it; where the work was carried out; and if he has satisfied himself that the aircraft is suitable for our needs in the future.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Executive Jet.
27.
(Limerick West): The ministerial transport jet — HS 125 — was returned to service on 17 April, 1988, following completion of a major overhaul, refurbishment and repainting. A contract for this work was placed with an English firm following the invitation of competitive tenders. A tender was not received from an Irish firm. It is not the practice to furnish information relating to contract prices.
I am satisfied that the HS 125 should meet the requirements of the ministerial air transport service for the foreseeable future.
The same veil of secrecy seems to surround the reply to this question as applied to my previous question. Will the Minister say if there was a hope at any stage that a firm in the Republic or in Northern Ireland would be in a position to tender? Are we talking about £500,000, £1 million or £2 million because there are wild rumours circulating that this was the costliest aircraft reconstruction that has ever taken place? It is only on the floor of the House that the Minister will allay those fears. I understand that the successful company was highly paid to refurbish the Government jet. The onus is on the Minister to dispel all rumours.
(Limerick West): I can dispel those rumours. The figure involved was not £500,000 nor £250,000.
How much money was involved?
(Limerick West): To maximise the possibility of an Irish involvement tenders for the work to be performed were invited in two parts. One dealt with the overhaul which would require a qualified firm involved in the maintenance of this type of aircraft. Two Irish firms might have been in a position to meet that requirement and all four Irish firms might have been in a position to undertake the refurbishment and repainting but no tender was received from any Irish firm.
The information I have, which I must believe, is that there was not enough emphasis placed on the possibility of a tender from an Irish firm being successful for part of the job. It appears that the Department wanted a contract for the entire job and were not interested in dealing with subcontractors. I find it hard to understand that at a time when we have reached a certain level of technology here some of our State agencies were not in a position to take up this work. It is a little glib of the Minister to say that because an Irish firm was not in a position to tender for all the work the contract went out of the country.
(Limerick West): The Deputy must not have been listening to my reply to his supplementary question. I should like to repeat what I said.
To maximise the possibility of an Irish involvement tenders for the work to be performed were invited in two parts. One dealt with the overhaul which would require a qualified firm involved in the maintenance of this type of aircraft.
I have told the Deputy that two Irish firms might have been in a position to meet that requirement. What else does the Deputy expect me to do?
I understand that it should have been possible to divide the contract in such a way that part of the work could have been done by an Irish firm.
(Limerick West): That is not so because we did not receive any tender from an Irish firm. The work was advertised widely and Irish firms were encouraged to submit tenders but they did not do so. The information the Deputy has on this and other matters is erroneous. I suggest that he get accurate information in future.
I will have accurate information for the Minister when I raise the matter on the Adjournment.