Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 10 Dec 2003

Vol. 576 No. 6

Written Answers. - Public Service Contracts.

Dan Neville

Question:

81 Mr. Neville asked the Minister for Finance if his Department has undertaken exercises to compare initial estimates of project costs and project benefits at the time when projects were first approved, with the ultimate outcome of such projects; if so, his findings; and if he has satisfied himself with the existing systems of project control. [30122/03]

In accordance with the principles underlying the strategic management initiative, my Department has been for some time pursuing an active policy of maximum delegation to Departments. With regard to large capital programmes, responsibility for individual projects, is therefore, generally delegated to the relevant Department.

The role of my Department is to set out a clear framework on the management of capital investment. Departments are expected in managing capital projects to comply with my Department's guidelines for the appraisal and management of capital expenditure proposals in the public sector. These guidelines provide for a four stage process appraisal, preliminary and detailed, planning, implementation and post project review. The appraisal stage aims to provide a basis for a decision on whether to approve a project in principle. This stage includes an assessment of uncertainty and risk.

Second, the planning stage involves the establishment of a project management structure, preparation of a design brief, detailed planning and design of the project and a review of costings. If changes are proposed to the project during the planning stage, the guidelines make it clear that the cost implications should be fully appraised and the approval of the sanctioning authority sought before proceeding. On receipt of a tender price and other relevant information, the case for proceeding with the proposal is again subject to review. Where it is proposed, following such reappraisal, to proceed with a project at a price higher than that originally proposed, a decision will again be required by the sanctioning authority to proceed.

Third, the implementation stage begins once the final approval for the award of a contract has been secured. If adverse developments occur, including unforeseen cost increases, which call into question the desirability or viability of the project, the sponsoring agency should consider necessary measures to rectify the situation. Where, despite these measures, increased costs are likely to arise, the approval of the sanctioning authority for the extra expenditure has to be obtained before any commitment is made to accept cost increases. The viability of the project given the changed circumstances should also be reported.
Fourth, following the completion of a project, is post-project review. Such a review is recommended to evaluate both the project outturn and the effectiveness of appraisal and management procedures and to learn lessons.
The steps outlined in the existing guidelines provide sufficient guidance to Departments and agencies for the re-evaluation of projects at key points in the decision-making process. My Department is also reviewing these guidelines. Consideration will be given in that context as to how the guidelines might be improved to better address the issue of cost overruns on projects highlighted in evaluations of the NDP and elsewhere. One element of this will be the question of including in the annual Estimates-appropriation accounts suitable information on variances between original approved budgets and projected final outturns.
In my recent Budget Statement, I announced a major change in the financial treatment of capital spending through the introduction of rolling five year multi-annual envelopes for all investment areas.
In implementing the new envelope system I intend to allow Departments to carry over to the following year any unspent Exchequer capital allocations, up to a maximum of 10% of each annual capital subhead. This carryover facility, which will take effect from financial year 2004, should significantly assist in the better planning and execution of those projects which span a number of years.
The new system should complement the capital guidelines and the proposed changes on procurement of construction contracts which I also referred to in my Budget Statement with the ultimate aim of better value for money for the State in planning and executing projects.
Question No. 82 answered with Question No. 77.
Top
Share