I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 and 3 together.
I have noted the broadly positive conclusions of the ESRI evaluation of the national development plan, NDP, regarding achievement of strategic objectives and its macro-economic impact. The evaluation concludes that the strategy underpinning the plan is as valid today as it was when the plan was launched. As regards plan objectives, the evaluation indicates that the NDP has made significant progress towards its objectives of continuing sustainable national economic and employment growth and of consolidating and improving Ireland's economic competitiveness. It further concludes that the plan will have a sustainable positive effect on the productive capacity of the economy in the long-term.
On macro-economic impact, the ESRI report finds that NDP expenditure over the period between 2000 and 2002 raised the level of GNP by over 7% above what it would have been in 2002, and in the long run the level of GNP will be about 3% higher. That represents a real rate of return on NDP investment of about 14%. That is an exceptional economic performance by any standards.
At sectoral level, I note the prioritisation the ESRI accords to infrastructural investment. That the Government concurs with this prioritisation is shown by the fact that, over the first four years of the plan, the Exchequer has provided almost €1 billion more for economic and social infrastructure than was originally committed. I note the ESRI endorsement of the relative priority the Government has accorded to areas such as education and training, RTDI and child care. Although the ESRI evaluation is purely advisory, it will be an input into the Government's ongoing consideration of its investment priorities. As Deputies will appreciate, the Government's consideration of such priorities has to take account of a number of factors, including value for money and the economic impact of investment. The ESRI report contains much useful guidance in the latter regard.
I accept that the evaluation contains criticisms of cost over-runs and deficient management of infrastructural projects and programmes. It points to the need to properly evaluate projects. I accept that we must strive to ensure the best value for money in the planning and evaluation of infrastructural projects. My Department is revising the capital appraisal guidelines for public sector capital projects and the revised guidelines will be issued shortly to Departments and public agencies. The existing guidelines, which remain in place, set out guidance in relation to the evaluation, planning and execution of capital projects.
I stress that the onus for the proper appraisal and management of capital projects rests with the implementing agencies. In the context of the revised guidelines and otherwise, my Department will strive to impress on Departments and implementing agencies the need for best practice in the evaluation and execution of capital projects. I favour, in principle, a multi-annual system of financial envelopes for capital investment, recommended by the ESRI. This would facilitate more efficient project and programme management by giving more certainty in respect of the availability of resources over a number of years.
I have also been asked about the impact of the plan on regional development. I note the ESRI's conclusion that regional imbalances would probably be greater than they are today if it were not for the policies implemented under the national development plan. I accept that the BMW region is behind the indicative target for infrastructural investment, as set out in the published plan. This reflects the fact that infrastructure gridlock and bottlenecks are most severe in the southern and eastern region, especially in the greater Dublin area. Priority has had to be accorded to major projects in the region for this reason.