Skip to main content
Normal View

Public Procurement Contracts Expenditure

Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 18 January 2018

Thursday, 18 January 2018

Questions (42)

Mick Wallace

Question:

42. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he has satisfied himself that the €11,842,195 his Department paid to a company (details supplied) for contracts and projects in each of the years 2011 to 2017 constituted value for money; if each contract complied with public procurement obligations and requirements; if all contractors engaged through the company by his department recorded their hours of attendance on an electronic time recording system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2218/18]

View answer

Written answers

To support value for money and the building of its own internal capacity, my Department limits the use of external consultancy to instances where the relevant expertise is not available within the Department.  The nature of the work which the Department leads in relation to the Public Service Reform programme means that it undertakes some very significant transformation projects, which in some instances require external expertise.  This includes, for example, the development of the first Public Service Reform Plan in 2011, the establishment of major Civil Service Shared Services Centres such as Peoplepoint and the Financial Management Shared Service, and the transformation of our approach to public procurement through the establishment of the Office of Government Procurement.

I am satisfied that the contracts referred to by the Deputy represented value for money in supporting the Government’s ambitious programme of Public Service Reform and that it was necessary to engage external expertise on these projects.  Where external consultancy has been used, the engagement of such service providers by my Department is undertaken in compliance with public procurement rules, with every effort made to minimise costs and ensure skills transfer.

I can confirm that all of the contracts in question were managed appropriately.  The Deputy may wish to note that the nature of the work carried out in these instances was project based, with very clear outputs required as part of the contracts and the delivery of these outputs was managed robustly through regular activity and status reporting.  For example, the review of the central procurement function was required to be completed in a two month period and all the necessary work was done by the service provider in this timeframe, with close tracking of the detailed project plan on a regular basis overseen by a Working Group.  Finally, it should be noted that one of the contracts in question was a secondment arrangement to support the development of the first Public Service Reform Plan in 2011 and the secondees were required to attend the Department for normal working hours for the duration of the contract and reported directly to a senior manager.

Top
Share