I would like to put this in context. There is a major political requirement on the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to provide urgent and adequate prison spaces. At the time the Department did not have the technical expertise available to the Office of Public Works. The Department did a good job within these constraints. However, the concern of the Comptroller and Auditor General's office is that one can always throw money at a problem and get work done urgently, but if there is not good planning with proper budgets and benchmarks, one might end up with add-ons being requested, plans not being thought out adequately and inadequate budgets. One always learns from experience but one must respect both the political and public demand which existed in the early 1990s and the need for an adequate response to these demands that more spaces be made available.
The report mentioned two instances. The first is the Curragh project which was carried out urgently. All concerned deserve great praise for putting such a good prison in place. The original cost gestimate for this project was £1.75 million. The tender price came in at £4.8 million and the eventual contract agreed, following much haggling, came in at £3.3 million. It was obvious that the brief was not detailed enough in the beginning. Eventually a good job was done. There was no quantity surveyor appointed to that job. A quantity surveyor should have been appointed to such a major job in order to keep some control on costs.
The Accounting Officer mentioned the worldwide problem of add-ons. In the case of the Portlaoise project, the original contract was for £2.4 million. Soon after the contract began, the governor decided that serveries be put in place. Perhaps I am being unfair, but I believe that should have been obvious from the beginning and should have been part of the overall tender. On the other hand, the prices for the serveries were obtained on the basis of the work costings done on the original tender. Therefore, one could argue that the final price would not have been different. However, this meant that the overall plan for the job was not effective enough. We then gave the Accounting Officer formal and informal indications as to how matters could be improved. While audit, by its nature, raises matters of a particular nature, it also tries - and I hope succeeds - to indicate to Departments how matters can be improved. While one recognises that an audit might want pristine conditions, a Department must operate within its capabilities. The Department has taken on board many of our recommendations.
On the Office of Public Works and the project management plan, that was a response to the major problems that arose during the 1980s when projects went way off the wall and there were horrendous cost overruns, such as in the case of the Kildare Street building. There were also major overruns in the case of Portlaoise Prison with doors that were not needed being bought and so on. The project management plan was an adequate response to these major cost overruns. It was also a response to ensure that the guidelines laid down by the Department of Finance in 1982 and later in 1992 were put in place. The plan worked well but there have been instances which have been discussed here on occasions.
The Ship Street building in Dublin Castle turned out to be a beautiful job, but it went from £8 million to £10 million. There were problems with the overall planning and execution of Collins Barracks.
Improvements have taken place and projects are coming in within budget; this is welcome. We are dealing with a possible £30 million to £50 million, and capital projects, in the public or private sectors or within one's own home, can run away with themselves if they are not properly planned, managed, controlled and supervised. If nothing else came out of the discussions on the last day and the matters we raised with our technical experts and the Department of Justice Equality and Law Reform, and the responses which have been made over the years to these major cost overruns, action is now being taken. In the area of capital projects worldwide, there are dangers. We need speak only of the famous Chunnel and how that went off the rails. We are dealing with a considerable amount of money and margins are tight. Projects must be properly planned and controlled.
In summary, progress has been made but it is an area of audit at which we look every year. We look at projects which have been concluded, are in the course of execution and which are nearing completion. We are also considering - we will have planning meetings within the next few weeks - doing an overview of the overall operation as things have gone wrong with individual projects. This does not apply solely to the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform but also to the Office of Public Works, the health boards and the Department of Education and Science. We are considering doing an overview but it will not be a small job. It will take a long time because we are dealing with complex matters. Building a hospital is completely different to building a prison which is completely different to renovating this room.
