Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 21 Apr 1998

Vol. 489 No. 6

Adjournment Debate. - National Convention Centre.

I apologise to the Minister of State for retaining him so late in the evening. The national convention centre is one of the most important tourism projects ever planned. It will be a great boost to the tourism industry and will attract thousands of high spending visitors to our shores every year. The construction and operation of a convention centre will create thousands of jobs and could revitalise areas that have been bereft of development for many years.

The contribution a convention centre will make to the economy is beyond doubt. However, the delay and prevarication that has surrounded this project is beyond belief. The Dublin Chamber of Commerce estimated that delays in getting this project off the ground have cost the economy £145 million in tourism income. While this probable loss of revenue is a grave cause for concern the more immediate worry is that EU funding earmarked for the project is at risk. A sum of £25 million in EU aid has been pledged for the project under the National Development Plan 1994-9. However, the series of setbacks that have dogged this project leave us perilously close to losing this crucial investment.

There are currently five consortia bidding for the contract for the national convention centre. The continuing delay is not only placing pressure on each consortia, it is leading to unease in many of the communities that could benefit from such a project. Most of the convention centre bids are sited in areas which have been starved of development for many years. The construction and operation of a convention centre should lead to increased local employment and give an impetus to the local economy. However, the continuing delays in deciding on a winning tender are causing serious concern in local communities and many observers are concerned the project may never get off the ground.

There is a complex tendering process at the centre of this controversy which is the creation of the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation and he is responsible to ensure it functions effectively and coherently. The events of recent days call the effectiveness of this process into question. The management project board for product development was charged with making a recommendation to Cabinet regarding which tender should be awarded the contract. The board in turn was advised by a 14 member evaluation committee that has spent months examining each application. However, after this detailed process it appears the management board is not in a position to make a recommendation. A new expert group will be appointed to enter into negotiations with all the consortia which have tendered for the project. It is not known how long this process will take.

There are a number of questions that need to be answered about this ongoing saga. When will the new expert group be appointed and when will it be required to report? What is the difference between the new expert group and the previous evaluation committee? Did the previous evaluation group require more information from the relevant consortia in an effort to avert the need for a further expert group to examine the tenders? Is the Minister aware of the objections that a Canadian company, Moyatura, raised regarding the tendering process and, in particular, the conduct of CIE in regard to the North Wall site? When does the Minister expect a grant offer to be made to the successful applicant?

The Minister is responsible for this project and it is his job to ensure the tendering process is completed and the available EU funding is drawn down. Despite the complex process established by the Minister, he is ultimately accountable for this project and must be prepared to provide answers to the House regarding the ongoing delays. It is vital we maintain this degree of accountability in the House. Ministers cannot expect to wash their hands of issues by establishing various groups and quangos. As Government becomes more complex with the interplay of EU considerations in national politics, it is imperative that this principle does not become blurred or diluted. The Minister must give a full and frank account on the latest delays in this project. The House and this democracy deserves nothing less.

I thank Deputy Ferris for raising this matter on the Adjournment even at this late hour and his patience in waiting for the reply.

The tender procedure for a national conference centre is being organised by Bord Fáilte under the aegis of the independent management board for product development, and is being conducted in full compliance with the EU Council Directive 93/37/EEC, concerning the co-ordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts.

The full tender procedure notice was published in the Official Journal of the European Communities on 13 September 1997, and in the Irish media on 16 September. It invited applicants to submit requests to participate in the tender procedure by Monday, 20 October. Bord Fáilte received 12 responses within this deadline set for receipt of applications to tender. On 31 October 1997, ‘Invitation to Tender' documentation was dispatched by Bord Fáilte to seven qualified applicants, six of whom confirmed their intentions to submit full tenders before the 14 November deadline, for so doing. The closing deadline for receipt of tenders was 5 p.m. on Monday 2 February. Bord Fáilte received full tender submissions from five consortia, and immediately commenced its assessment of these submissions.

At the management board's meeting of 14 April 1998, the board considered these assessments and concluded that the tenders submitted were not such as to enable it to make a decision at that time. The board thus decided to utilise the 'negotiated procedure' as provided for in Article 7 of the EU Directive, and negotiations with tenderers will now be conducted by an independent team of technical experts. Such negotiations will be conducted in an impartial and non-discriminatory manner, and on the basis of the principles of transparency and equality of treatment. These experts will then report back to the board and provide it with the necessary technical advice to enable it to come to an informed decision.

The procedure is being conducted by the independent management board for product development, which is an autonomous entity established under the Operational Programme for Tourism 1994-9. Under the terms of the Programme, the agreement of the Government and the EU Commission, on foot of a cost-benefit analysis conducted in accordance with Community Law, will be required in respect of any final selection made. It is hoped the grant offer can then be made to the successful candidate, who will thus be able to proceed with construction plans.

A specific timescale for commencement or completion of the national conference centre project cannot possibly be determined until the proposal has been formally approved by the Government and the European Commission and matters such as planning permission are in place.

The Dáil adjourned at 12.04 a.m. on Wednesday, 22 April 1998 until 10.30 a.m.

Top
Share