Vol. 885 No. 3
6. Deputy Sean Fleming asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the public private partnership projects where contracts have been signed and construction will commence in 2015; his views on the value for money offered by PPPs compared to direct Exchequer funding; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26390/15]
Can the Minister provide some details in relation to public private partnership contracts which have been signed and where construction will commence this year? I know there are ongoing projects from last year and the previous year, but what new ones are starting this year and where are we now?
Of the eight public private partnerships, or PPPs, in the current programme announced in 2012, the position is as follows. Two projects are currently in construction; the N17/18 Gort-Tuam PPP and schools bundle No. 4. A preferred tenderer has been appointed in a further five projects; the M11 Gorey-Enniscorthy PPP; the N25 New Ross bypass PPP; the Courts Service PPP; the primary care centres PPP, and the Grangegorman PPP. The preferred tenderer is expected to be appointed at the end of the summer for the final project, which is schools bundle No. 5. I expect that contracts will be signed in 2015 for the two roads PPPs and also the courts and primary care centres PPPs with construction then commencing on those projects this year. It is likely to be 2016 before the contracts are signed on the remaining two projects; schools bundle No. 5 and Grangegorman.
In regard to value for money, I am satisfied that the PPP model has the potential to offer value for money for the Exchequer for a number of reasons. First, PPPs enable the public sector to harness the innovation, expertise and efficiencies that the private sector can bring to the delivery of certain facilities and services traditionally procured solely by the public sector. PPPs also facilitate the assigning of risks to the party best positioned to manage and mitigate the risks, which has value for money benefits for the State. In addition, PPPs involve long-term contracts where payments are linked to performance and availability over the lifetime of the project and deductions apply when the facilities are not performing or are unavailable. This has the benefit of making PPP bidders focus on the whole life-cycle cost of projects and not just on the upfront capital cost. These factors combined ensure that added rigour and controls are brought to the planning and delivery of PPP projects.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
Under the PPP guidance there are four specific value for money, or VFM, tests that are applied over the course of the planning and procurement process, which focus on assessing whether or not the PPP approach compares favourably with the alternative cost of using traditional procurement to achieve the same result as the PPP. The purpose, sequence and format of the four VFM tests in the PPP approval process are set out clearly in the central PPP guidance in order to ensure that all PPPs are regularly assessed and do, indeed, offer value for money.
The Minister probably has a bit more information on file which I will ask him to send along. I know a couple of projects are due to commence this year.
If the Deputy has any particular projects in mind, I would be delighted to provide the information.
I am sure the Minister knows all about the N11 and the N25. He might send me a note on or include in the written reply included in the Official Report the details of courthouse projects and their locations. The Minister mentioned the schools in bundle No. 5 and he might provide a list of where the five schools are. I think he said schools bundle No. 4 is currently in the system and he might provide a list of where they are around the country. On Grangegorman, the Minister might provide a brief outline of that project. Is public private partnership intended to be the main method of progressing Grangegorman and the primary health care centres? I encourage the Minister to progress with as much haste as is reasonable with schools in view of the demographic pressures facing them. There is going to be an issue in meeting the requirements for classroom accommodation because most children are in schools with very crowded classrooms. With the demographic changes, we need to deal with that.
Rather than try to answer within a minute, I will send the Deputy a note on the public private partnerships to come on stream. I will go through a couple very quickly. I expect the contracts on the N11 project to be signed within weeks. There was a slight difficulty in regard to foreshore licensing in respect of the N25. That is being concluded and I expect the contract to be signed within weeks. As the Deputy knows, the tendering process for the Grangegorman project has been delayed because of legal proceedings. That is why it is likely to be next year before construction commences. Primary care centres are not mainly being provided through PPPs but there is a bundle of PPPs that will provide a number of them. I will send the Deputy the list. I am working on the capital programme with colleagues. While I am looking at PPPs as part of it, I want to have a ceiling on the proportion of the total capital that goes to bullet payments for PPPs. We will debate this in more detail and I will explain it further when we publish and launch the capital plan in due course.
I thank the Minister. He might also provide the details in regard to the schools at the preferred tender-preferred contractor stage. He might give us a list in particular of the schools that are in the system but which have not got to that stage and which will probably commence next year and in subsequent years. I am sure there are quite a few which have gone through the planning and land acquisition processes but which are only at the initial rather than the preferred tender stage. It is so we can have a broader view of how PPPs are progressing into next year and subsequent years.
While there is a great need in regard to schools, the Minister might also consider if PPP funding can help with house building. Housing is probably the most significant problem which has arisen over the last couple of years. There was no housing problem previously but we have stopped building for the last few years. Finally, when does the Minister intend to publish the capital expenditure programme? It must be imminent.
The vast bulk of schools are being provided through normal Exchequer funding. While I do not have the details in front of me, from memory Deputy Ruairí Quinn announced approximately 272 schools when he was Minister. We have built all but 99 and those are in train and will be provided under the capital plan. It is an enormous number of schools. Obviously, we have supplemented that with PPPs. The PPP model is an interesting one. I opened a school in Gorey in my own constituency and the level of finish at that PPP project involved a complete fit-out, right down to automated grass cutters and a caretaker. The teachers were amazed when they walked in.
There is an automatic caretaker.
No, the caretaker provided is a human being. What I am saying is that is all part of what is provided by a PPP.
The laboratory and science rooms are fully equipped. We have to compare like with like in terms of value for money and they maintain it for the duration of the public private partnership.
We have provided a huge sum of money in capital for direct social housing. We have also provided two other mechanisms, a special purpose vehicle using the resources we got from the sale of BGE, which will be leveraged to provide resources for housing and a PPP bundle and which is being negotiated with local authorities, particularly in the greater Dublin area.
What about the capital expenditure plan?
It is still a matter of debate.
Will it be this month?
I hope so. We are very close to the end of this term and I am still in bilateral discussions with all of my colleagues. I am trying to bring to a conclusion as quickly as I can.
9. Deputy Seán Kyne asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will report on the progress of initiatives such as the free Wednesday scheme, extended opening hours and operating seasons involving the Office of Public Works sites, heritage and otherwise, with particular reference to counties Galway and Mayo; if these initiatives are subject to review; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26127/15]
This question relates to progress on initiatives such as the first free Wednesday and extended opening hours and operating seasons involving the Office of Public Work sites. Are these initiatives subject to review?
I thank Deputy Kyne for the question. The Office of Public Works operates guide services at approximately 70 sites nationwide. Some of these locations are open on a full-time basis. However, the majority, approximately 46, are open seasonally on various dates between April and October. The guided visitor sites operated in Galway and Mayo and their relevant opening arrangements this year are that Athenry Castle is open from 3 April to 22 October; Aughnanure Castle is open from 3 April to 26 October; Dún Aonghasa is open all year; Portumna Castle and Gardens is open from 3 April to 25 September and subsequently on weekends only until 26 October; Pearse's Cottage was open over Easter from 17 to 21 April, and is open from 22 May to 3 September; and in Mayo the Céide Fields are open from 3 April to 29 October. All of these details are available to visitors through the main web information portal of the Office of Public Works, which is www.heritageireland.ie.
As the Deputy appreciates, a number of sites may from time to time be unavailable for particular reasons. For example, a number of castle sites have no opening, or limited access to grounds only, because of urgent work being undertaken to electrical systems. Generally speaking, while the OPW tries to keep such works to a minimum to avoid the main visitor season, it is not always possible to do this and some interference in the delivery of visitor services may result.
Representations are sometimes made to extend opening dates at sites. However, it is not feasible to do this in all cases given, in particular, the significant constraints on budgets. The OPW is open to the possibility of entering into arrangements with committed and organised local partner groups which might be interested in providing limited access to sites in the off season on a volunteer basis. A number of successful initiatives in this regard have been arranged. I thank the community groups which do this because no matter what resources the OPW has available it would never be possible to open all of the sites to the maximum so we do rely on community support.
The OPW has sought to encourage more people to visit heritage sites and with this in mind, introduced the free Wednesday scheme in 2011, allowing free entry to all visitors on the first Wednesday of each month. This has been a popular initiative.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
In 2014 for example, the OPW recorded approximately 79,600 complimentary visits on these dates. The detailed position on Galway and Mayo sites, where there were 6,711 free admissions in 2014 under this scheme, is as follows:
|
Site |
Free Weds Admissions |
Total Admissions |
|
|
Galway |
Athenry Castle |
743 |
13,532 |
|
Aughnanure Castle |
1,161 |
32,289 |
|
|
Dún Aonghasa |
2,719 |
121,001 |
|
|
Portumna Castle and Gardens |
679 |
15,211 |
|
|
Pearse's Cottage |
151 |
7,206 |
|
|
Mayo |
Céide Fields |
1,258 |
28,484 |
|
Totals |
6,711 |
217,723 |
As stated earlier, opening hours at sites vary throughout the year. At some sites for example, it would clearly be unsafe to operate late in the afternoon during winter and these sites must operate within safe tolerances. During the summer season, it is feasible to operate later in the evening and at certain sites, with a high visitor demand, later opening is employed. This is particularly the case at Brú na Bóinne and Cashel, where visitor facilities have been open until 7 p.m. during summer months for some years. This extended opening will also be introduced this year at Kilmainham Gaol for the first time, recognising the huge appetite among visitors for that particular site. It is not, however, economically viable to open later at the broad range of sites as there would not be a viable case to be made for the additional costs involved when the volumes of visitors are not sufficient to justify the investment.
All visitor service provision at OPW-managed heritage sites is kept under review and should circumstances dictate a different approach in the future, some of these arrangements can be modified appropriately. In some cases the OPW must be mindful that for conservation reasons access to a site experiencing over-pressure of visitors may need to be curtailed to ensure the historical fabric is not damaged. It is also appropriate, of course, to have some regard to certain more explicitly commercial considerations, given the fact that under changes introduced during 2013, the OPW can retain a certain proportion of income earned for reinvestment in the heritage estate. This may dictate a different approach in the future in regard to issues such as admission charges, franchise fees and so forth. The free Wednesday scheme, for example, which was designed to support the tourism economy at a particularly difficult time, may also need to be reassessed having regard to the income possibilities foregone. All these matters should continue therefore to remain under review to ensure that the right blend of management measures is applied for the circumstances facing the OPW. However, in all cases the OPW will operate from a general principle of maintaining a high level of public access, mindful of the central place occupied by many of these sites in the tourism economy and as part of the social and historic fabric of local communities.
I thank the Minister of State for his reply. I welcome the first free Wednesday initiative. We are coming up to its fourth anniversary and I am aware of the success of the initiative locally. The Minister of State mentioned areas in Mayo and Galway including the Céide Fields, Athenry Castle, Aughnanure Castle, Dún Aonghasa, Portumna Castle and Gardens and Pearse's Cottage. There are big plans for Pearse's Cottage as part of the 2016 commemoration, and the Taoiseach and the Minister of State, Deputy McHugh, will visit there next Monday.
We have a rich built heritage nationwide, particularly in Visitors Galway. This needs to be linked to the Wild Atlantic Way, which is another wonderful initiative of the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, Fáilte Ireland and the Minister of State, Deputy Ring. Our tour guides have extensive knowledge of the sites in question. I understand there is a possibility of a recruitment competition later in the year, which will confined to seasonal guides and information officers employed at present by the Office of Public Works. This is in conjunction with the unions, as it is their wish that it be confined to those in seasonal employment at present. Some people have been in seasonal employment for up to 16 years which is of concern to them. I welcome the recruitment competition. Does the Department have a strategy for the protection and promotion of built heritage? Does the Minister of State see any other initiatives which could be evolved within budget?
I thank Deputy Kyne. Athenry Castle had 743 visitors on free Wednesdays last year out of a total of 13,532 visitors. I will make these figures available to the Deputy. All in all, more than 6,700 people visited our heritage sites in Galway and Mayo on the free Wednesdays and more than 217,000 people visited those same sites in Galway and Mayo during the entire year of 2014. In addition to this being great for promoting our heritage it is also hugely economically beneficial in Galway and Mayo.
The guide service of the OPW is a key element of the presentation to visitors and it forms a significant part of the OPW's protection regime for the site. They present the sites in an entertaining and engaging way. Our guide workforce numbers include 82 permanent staff, and rise to approximately 350 including seasonal staff during the peak summer season. The resource is funded through the OPW vote, and in the current year €7.217 million has been provided to fund this element.
We look forward to working with Fáilte Ireland in aligning our objectives with the Wild Atlantic Way and Ireland's Ancient East.
I thank the Minister of State. He mentioned communities working with the OPW and I acknowledge this. I have come across certain instances of difficulties in hiring out a venue for a one-off community event for a celebration at a certain time of the year. Is a departmental or OPW insurance scheme available for communities or are they required to have their own insurance for one-off events? A celebration might involve a night-time event. Are communities required to have their own insurance or is the OPW involved? Might this area be explored?
I will be happy to look at this on a case-by-case basis. The Office of Public Works approaches these issues with a view to wanting to engage with the community. We are very reliant on community support. The success of the OPW in presenting our heritage is based on this collaborative approach between community organisations, local authorities, Fáilte Ireland and the Office of Public Works. I am grateful to my colleague, the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, for introducing a scheme in 2013 whereby some of the funds generated at our heritage sites can be ploughed back into further investment in them. This had never previously been available to the office of Public Works, and we are beginning to see significant progress in a number of areas. We look at specific community events on a case by case basis, with an effort to try to be helpful where possible.
10. Deputy Sean Fleming asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform his views on the view expressed by the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council that the Spring Economic Statement projections did not take into account expenditure needs in health, education and welfare associated with the demographic pressures which will arise in the years ahead; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26393/15]
Will the Minister comment on the views expressed by the Fiscal Advisory Council on the Spring Economic Statement that the projections did not adequately take into account expenditure needs in health, education and welfare associated with demographic pressures?
I indicated in an earlier response that I welcomed the establishment of the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council, IFAC, which brings an independent expert perspective to assessing fiscal matters. In its recent report, IFAC commented on the demographic pressures on expenditure in the context of the forecasts made in the Spring Economic Statement, SES. As the demographic profile of our population changes, certain sectors, including social protection, health, and education, will face additional demands. In my statement to the House on the SES, I outlined that demographic changes in the health area will cost an estimated €200 million per year over the coming years, the cost of the contributory and non-contributory State pension schemes is projected to increase by €200 million per year out to 2026, and by 2021 we will need an extra 3,500 teachers at primary and secondary level.
However, expenditure demands in other areas are also changing. Key priorities of the Government have been to provide a societal safety net for those who lost their jobs during the economic crisis, with expenditure on live register-related payments increasing significantly in recent years, and to create the environment for a sustainable recovery in employment. Unemployment has reduced from its peak of more than 15% in 2012 to 9.7% most recently. With this recovery in employment, expenditure on live register-related payments has reduced.
The fiscal projections in the spring economic statement for the post-2016 period reflect a no policy change scenario from an expenditure perspective, other than provision being made for an increase of €300 million in gross voted expenditure per annum to offset demographic pressures outlined above in sectors that account for 80% of gross voted current expenditure in 2015. In addition, given the improvements forecast in the labour market, with unemployment forecast to fall from 9.6% in 2015 to 6.9% in 2020, certain live register related savings will make funds available to meet expenditure pressures in other areas. This is the balance we have struck in formulating the statement.
The Minister indicated that an informal balance was reached behind the scenes between savings from jobseeker's allowance and expenditure in other areas, but this was not made clear in the published documentation. That is probably the reason for the fiscal advisory council's analysis. I do not think anyone believes €200 million will be adequate for health in light of our ageing population. Supplementary Estimates are introduced annually for sums in the order of €600 million. The fiscal advisory council pointed out that the old age dependency ratio, that is, the population aged over 70 years in proportion to the working age population, is expected to rise by 2% by 2020 and to continue rising thereafter. That is one of the most significant issues that have to be taken into account. It is not just a question of pensions because there are implications for the health budget and demographic pressures. There is insufficient transparency in the document in terms of spelling out those details.
This is the first time a Government has made, six months in advance of a budget, its best effort to provide the economic framework for budgetary decisions with extensive supporting documentation. We previously submitted stability programme updates to Brussels after fairly cursory debates, but the spring economic statement is a new departure. The Deputy is correct that forecasts for demographic pressures in health do not take account of any new services or drugs that might be needed, some of which may be expensive. This is why, in general terms, we publish the spring economic statement on a no policy basis. Real-time decisions will be made by Governments based on the fiscal space available to them in compliance with the Stability and Growth Pact and on the divide between expenditure and tax. These decisions will have to be made yearly. Despite these caveats, I consider it a good exposition of where we think the economy is currently placed, the fiscal space available to us next year and our intentions in respect of the divide between tax reductions and further public expenditure. Decisions on these areas will, of course, be refined at budget time.
While I acknowledge that it is published on a no policy change basis-----
Beyond next year.
-----the Government has made policy commitments which are not factored into the spring statement. What we are getting does not reflect the Government's intentions. The Minister admitted this is a first stab at the new procedure. We have this document six months before the budget thanks to the European Semester rules. Similar statements are being made in the other parliaments at the same time because we all have to publish our budgets by mid-October. However, this is not the first time we made such statements. Last year the Government published its economic forecasts without a debate in the Chamber. The reason for our debate this year was to allow the Government to claim it is doing wonderfully in the run up to the election. The document issued 12 months ago indicated an adjustment of €2 billion would be required but by the time of the budget €1 billion was available in the opposite direction, which means the spring forecast was out by €3 billion. I do not know how inaccurate it will be this year but there is no basis for assuming the forecasts in the spring statement will bear any relation to the figures announced on budget day.
I do not think the Deputy is decrying the fact we made more progress than we expected. The economic situation improved more than we prudently forecast in the stability programme update. We did not issue a spring economic statement before this year. We issued a stability programme update, which is a different animal. The update is a technical set of documents prepared for the European Commission in accordance with the Stability and Growth Pact. These updates are prepared annually and, while they are managed by the Minister for Finance, I understand they were subject to cursory debate. This year we presented a more robust analysis to the House and the nation. That is a new departure in terms of how we prepare economic policy, and as we emerge from our difficult years, it will be a useful exercise in preparing for the budget in October. It is preferable to the old approach whereby the Minister for Finance kept everything as a great secret until the budget was announced.
The relevant Deputy is not present for Question No. 11.
12. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the steps which he is taking to remove paper-based processes from the public service; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26110/15]
Every year Government agencies and Departments waste millions of euro on the maintenance of paper-based systems for those who do not have access to online services. The Revenue Commissioners spent more than €500,000 to establish a paper-based system for returning the local property tax which could have been more efficiently delivered through the local post office network. Every sub-post office has the same information technology system as the GPO in Dublin. Rather than maintaining separate systems, we should be making use of the resources available through this network.
I thank the Deputy for raising this important question. Efforts aimed at reducing the amount of paper-based processes in the public service have been under way for a number of years. As the Deputy will be aware, the Government approved the ICT strategy for the public service earlier in the year. The strategy has five key strategic objectives which set the future direction for innovation and excellence in ICT in public service. In line with the public service reform plan, the focus of the strategy will be to enable delivery of better outcomes for citizens and businesses. The focus of the digital first stream of the strategy is the digitisation of key transactional services and the increased use of ICT to deliver improved efficiency. My Department is working with other public service bodies to identify candidate projects to drive innovation in the delivery of services. One outcome of these initiatives will be to remove paper from the process. In addition, my Department is working with public service bodies to support innovation in the use of data to enable delivery of integrated services and improve decision-making, openness and transparency. These innovations will contribute to reducing paper-based processes in the public administration.
My Department is making major strides towards a paperless working environment. We have introduced a system for electronic processing of parliamentary questions which has cut down on a huge amount of paperwork. This is complemented by an e-submissions system which encompasses submissions to myself and to senior management in the Department. Measures like this will also be foundation blocks for my Department's move to an electronic documents system which will ultimately see the fading away of paper files. This greater use of electronic work processes will also assist policy-making and research and retrieval for both archival and freedom of information purposes.
I thank the Minister for his reply but I would like to go a step further by requiring every agency of State to introduce procedures to manage paper applications and processing. While it is commendable that his Department is endeavouring to reduce volumes of paper, it will continue to be necessary to maintain a paper-based system. In regard to the example I gave earlier, people were encouraged to submit the local property tax online but the Revenue Commissioners were none the less required to spend €500,000 to put in place a paper-based system to facilitate those who are not technology literate or who do not have access to the Internet. We could abolish paper-based systems across the board if we used the local sub-post office network. The post office information technology system is the same in Cahirciveen and on O'Connell Street in Dublin. By utilising that network we could make significant savings across the public service.
There is a lot in what the Deputy is saying. We obviously have to have access for all citizens. We cannot simply decide to do it electronically only and have a whole category of citizens excluded from availing of services or even being frightened to go to a public library or post office. The Deputy will have dealt with people in his office, as I have, who are intimidated by receiving a letter with a harp on it, much less the notion that they have to fill in a form online. We have to have much more than a resource base with online services available. We also need to provide training and have local dimensions about which the Deputy talked. The notion of using post offices is not a bad one. The Tánaiste, for example, is developing concepts to use post offices for a range of services. The biggest user of post offices is overwhelmingly the State. More than 80% of the revenue generated in local post offices is from State-based services.
I am putting this proposal to the Minister because the post office network covers the country and thus is easily accessible. Its staff are the only non-State employees who sign the Official Secrets Act. There is a mechanism for them to assist people in filling in forms and inputting data online. Not only could we save a lot of money, but the other great advantage is that there would be far fewer errors and less fraud involved. As mistakes could be identified more quickly, people would be paid sooner if they were seeking grants or other supports. The system would drive efficiency across the public service. Will the Minister or his officials engage directly with An Post and Mr. Bobby Kerr's working group to see how, in using a pilot scheme initially, this measure could be implemented? A labour-intensive, paper-based system is being used. Let us see if we could get this new system fully operational.
I welcome the work being undertaken by Mr. Bobby Kerr's group which has been helpful to us. We, obviously, have to comply with European law in the procurement of any service.
I am talking about a pilot scheme.
There is no point in having a pilot scheme if it will not impact on people. We need to ensure what we do is robust and actually delivers what is intended. During the Irish EU Presidency we passed three new procurement directives to make the procurement of services simpler. They will be transposed into Irish law in the coming year. We are always looking at new delivery systems that would be more efficient and effective in delivering public services. We now have more than 400 services online and do not need a locations for the vast bulk of them because most people can access them from home 24 hours a day. That demonstrates their efficiency. Post offices have an extremely important role to play and are very dependent on State services. The Tánaiste was happy when they won the procurement contract for the provision of social welfare payments. In an open competition, however, one cannot always assume that they will win. We need to map a future for post offices which will not be dependent on always winning any set of contracts.
As the Deputies who tabled Questions Nos. 13 to 16, inclusive, are not present, we will proceed to Question No. 17 in the name of Deputy Mary Lou McDonald.
17. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will provide, in tabular form, the expenses incurred by him between 2011 and to date in 2015, to include the date, expense type, description and amount; if each expense was vouched; his plans to introduce changes to the expenses system to ensure all expenses are fully vouched for; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26123/15]
As láthair, ach tá mise anseo. It is due to the late sitting.
Anseo.
My question refers to the thorny issue of ministerial expenses. When I drafted the question, it was to refer to each Minister, but it appears that it is now focused entirely on the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform.
I thank the Deputy.
That was not my intention, but, nonetheless, that is how the question is phrased. It asks the Minister if he will provide, in tabular form, the expenses incurred by him between 2011 and to date in 2015. It is not directed at him personally or in particular. I raise it because there has been for the umpteenth time public unease and concern about ministerial expenses. I, therefore, thought it worthy of airing it today.
The data are contained in the following table.
Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform: Expenses 2011 - 1 July 2015
|
2011 |
Location |
Purpose of Visit |
Flights |
Hotel Accommodation |
Transport Costs |
Other Expenses* |
|
15 - 16 Dec |
Brussels |
Formal meeting for Ministers responsible for Cohesion Policy |
€295.17 |
€0.00 |
€430.00 |
€136.13 |
|
2012 |
Location |
Purpose of Visit |
Flights |
Hotel Accommodation |
Transport Costs |
Other Expenses* |
|
9 Feb - 10 Feb |
Belgium: Brussels |
Meeting with Director of Economic and Financial affairs at the European Commission, Istvan Szekely |
€509.30 |
€0.00 |
|
|
|
15 Mar - 22 Mar |
Singapore |
St Patrick's Day Promote Ireland abroad |
€2,345.05 |
€0.00 |
|
|
|
14 May - 16 May |
Belgium: Brussels |
Preparation for Irish EU Presidency |
€246.98 |
€310.00 |
€701.50 |
|
|
4 Jun - 7 Jun |
Turkey: Istanbul |
World Economic Forum |
€339.26 |
€993.04 |
€642.07 |
|
|
03 Oct |
Belgium: Brussels |
EU Commission/Visit by Cabinet |
€0.00 |
€0.00 |
€108.00 |
|
|
18 Oct - 19 Oct |
United Kingdom: London |
Trade Mission |
€467.98 |
€0.00 |
|
|
|
5 Nov - 7 Nov |
Cyprus: Nicosia |
World Economic Forum |
€0.00 |
€0.00 |
|
|
|
13 Dec - 14 Dec |
The Netherlands: Amsterdam |
Meeting with AWEPA - The Association of European Parliamentarians with Africa on Aid Effectiveness |
€407.21 |
€0.00 |
|
€0.00 |
|
2013 |
Location |
Purpose of Visit |
Flights |
Hotel Accommodation |
Transport Costs |
Other Expenses* |
|
22 Jan - 24 Jan |
Belgium: Brussels |
EU Committee of the Regions |
€315.66 |
€468.00 |
€138.00 |
€409.36 |
|
30 Jan - 31 Jan |
Belgium: Brussels |
Meeting with Commissioner Hahn |
€0.00 |
€168.00 |
|
€72.33 |
|
12 Mar - 22 Mar |
Indonesia/Singapore/Philippines |
St Patrick's Day Promote Ireland abroad |
€3,116.51 |
€378.15 |
€1,523.47 |
€1,825.53 |
|
12 May - 13 May |
Belgium: Brussels |
EU Committee of the Regions |
€0.00 |
€127.20 |
€72.33 |
|
|
8 Jul - 9 Jul |
Belgium: Brussels |
High Level Seminar on Public Service Innovation |
€247.32 |
€202.15 |
€322.00 |
€72.33 |
|
7 Sep - 15 Sept |
China: Dalian/Beijing |
World Economic Forum |
€2,771.62 |
€1,344.99 |
|
€1,238.39 |
|
30 Oct - 2 Nov |
United Kingdom: London |
Open Government Partnership |
€272.51 |
€831.40 |
|
€514.91 |
|
25 Nov - 27 Nov |
Lithuania: Vilnius |
Meeting of EU Ministers responsible for Cohesion |
€0.00 |
€369.52 |
|
€134.96 |
|
2014 |
Location |
Purpose of Visit |
Flights |
Hotel Accommodation |
Transport Costs |
Other Expenses* |
|
12 Feb |
Northern Ireland: Belfast |
British Irish Chamber of Commerce Event |
|
€108.04 |
|
|
|
10 Mar - 20 Mar |
China: Shanghai/Hong Kong/Beijing |
St Patrick's Day Promote Ireland abroad |
€4,441.78 |
€1,381.53 |
€2,181.91 |
€2,962.42 |
|
10 Apr - 11 Apr |
Wales: Cardiff |
Meeting in relation to the INTERREG Programme Ireland/Wales |
€261.97 |
€179.83 |
|
€233.94 |
|
23 Apr - 24 Apr |
France: Paris |
Conference on Open Data to Open Government |
€0.00 |
€220.00 |
|
€457.56 |
|
24 Apr - 25 Apr |
Greece: Athens |
Informal Ministerial meeting on Cohesion Policy |
€0.00 |
€0.00 |
|
€207.49 |
|
20 Jun - 29 Jun |
Korea: Seoul |
Attendance at 2014 United Nations Public Service Forum |
€2,774.28 |
€783.81 |
€312.16 |
€2,032.21 |
|
11 Sept - 12 Sept |
France: Paris |
Meeting with the OECD on Public Service Reform |
€593.15 |
€225.00 |
€606.00 |
€291.99 |
|
31 Oct - 3 Nov |
Jordan: Amman |
Government Leaders Forum |
€0.00 |
€0.00 |
|
€1,150.21 |
|
2 - 4 Dec |
Italy: Rome |
EUPAN - the European Public Administration Network |
€203.69 |
€0.00 |
|
€314.66 |
|
2015 |
Location |
Purpose of Visit |
Flights |
Hotel Accommodation |
Transport Costs |
Other Expenses* |
|
23 - 24 Feb |
Belgium: Brussels |
Ireland's 2014 - 2020 ERDF Operation Programmes |
€331.98 |
€149.28 |
|
€151.80 |
|
10 - 22 Mar |
Japan: Osaka/Tokyo South Korea:Seoul |
St Patrick's Day Promote Ireland Abroad |
€2,222.07 |
€1,985.57 |
€2,257.53 |
€2,097.04 |
|
26 Mar |
Wales: Swansea |
Keynote address at Ireland Wales Co op programme |
€108.98 |
€0.00 |
|
€77.76 |
|
8 - 9 Jun |
Riga: Latvia |
Informal Meeting of EU Cohesion Ministers under the Latvian Presidency |
€172.92 |
€0.00 |
|
€89.25 |
*Please note other expenses include: Briefings/Interpreters/Meetings/Travel & Subsistence & Gifts
I should be relieved that the question was not focused entirely on me. If the Deputy did couch it in such a way that it referred to each line Minister, she would have had to table a question to each of them.
Perhaps that is what happened.
That is what happened; it was sent to every Minister, as I would not have access to data for expenses. I have set out data for every cent I have spent and claimed since I entered office in March 2011. The Deputy has referred to there being unease and disquiet, but there is nothing in the tabular statement that has not been aggregated, published and republished a multiplicity of times under freedom of information legislation. No doubt, I will read them again in a reaggregated and republished form, no doubt multiplied by ten, to show what they would look like if I were to be in office for ten years.
Will people have to suffer that long - ten years?
My goodness, I thought the Deputy would welcome such things. Short of reading the long list of every European Council meeting I have attended and trade mission I have been on, I will give all of the information to the Deputy and hope it will satisfy her. She will also have everybody else's data to compare and contrast. We will then see the modest expenses that have accrued to the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform.
I am sure we will all agree that the Minister is nothing if not modest.
No more than the Deputy.
I thank the Minister. This is turning out to be a positive day, but we will see how long that lasts.
Why does the Minister not have access to, or sight of, the expenses of other Ministers? This has happened in other contexts where the Minister's Department has an overarching umbrella, yet when questions are asked - this being a particular instance - the Minister says it is a matter for the line Minister or Department. I would have thought that his departmental officials would have their beady eye across the board. He should be able to provide me with the information on each and every Minister. He might give the aggregate figure for his own personal expenses in the period outlined. As he is aware, this is a vexed issue owing to the hardship faced by many families outside the Chamber. In addition, it is the vouched and unvouched nature of some expenses which needs to be ironed out.
The Deputy describes the listed expenses as "personal", but they are not personal to me. Many of them relate to hosting meetings or lunches when EU ministerial colleagues visit me. In the normal course, they also involve hiring transport to bring officials to meetings that I am attending. In that regard, they are not personal to me.
The Minister knows what the figures are.
The notion that, as Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, I determine each line Minister's expenses, or that he or she should have to run them past me before booking a flight to Brussels to attend a European Council meeting would not amount to an efficient way to operate.
It is not a question of the Minister sanctioning them but of having information on them.
All data are readily available in every Department and published. Most of us receive FOI requests on every cent incurred in expenses every month. Most of us now put everything online to obviate the need to do so. If there is one area that is rigorously exposed to public scrutiny, more than any other I can think of, it is the expenses paid to politicians.
What is the aggregate figure?
I actually do not have the aggregate figure, but the Deputy can do her own tot.
