Richard Bruton
Ceist:10 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Finance his views on whether the recent ESRI review of the implementation of the national development plan provides a sound basis for future investment strategy. [25842/03]
Written Answers. - National Development Plan.
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Ceist:11 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Finance if he has received the ESRI report on the national development plan; his views on same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25689/03]
Seymour Crawford
Ceist:76 Mr. Crawford asked the Minister for Finance if he has satisfied himself with the percentage of spending under the national development plan that is taking place in the BMW region and especially the Border region; his views on whether it is out of line with the moneys being spent in the eastern and southern regions; the steps he intends to take to rectify this during the reminder of the plan; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25684/03]
Eamon Ryan
Ceist:82 Mr. Eamon Ryan asked the Minister for Finance the actions his Department intend to take on foot of the recent ESRI report into expenditure to date on the national development plan. [25717/03]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 10, 11, 76 and 82 together.
As I have already indicated in my replies to Priority Questions Nos. 2 and 3, I have noted the broadly positive conclusions of the ESRI mid-term review of the national development plan. The evaluation finds that the overall strategy remains valid and that significant progress has been made towards the plan objectives in relation to maintaining sustainable national economic and employment growth. The report states that investment under the NDP 2000-03 will add 3% to GNP growth which is equal to a rate of return of 14%. In addition, the evaluation concludes that the NDP will have a sustainable positive effect on competitiveness and the productive capacity of the economy in the long-term.
The evaluation also generally endorses the investment priorities of the Government in implementing the plan particularly in areas such as infrastructure, education and training, research and development and child care. It generally recommends that these should be the priority areas for the remainder of the plan. The evaluation also pinpoints areas where the ESRI believes that lower priority is warranted. It also proposed a number of policy changes in areas which span a number of Ministerial policies.
The ESRI evaluation whilst purely advisory will be an input into ongoing Government consideration of investment priorities. As Deputies will appreciate, Government consideration of investment priorities has to take account of a number of factors including the value for money and economic impact of the investment. The ESRI report contains much useful guidance in the latter regard.
As regards regional development I acknowledge that the Border, midlands and west regions are behind the indicative target for infrastructural investment set out in the plan as published. This reflects the fact that the infrastructure gridlock and bottlenecks are most severe in the southern and eastern regions, especially in the greater Dublin area and that priority has had to be accorded to major projects in this region.
In relation to my Department's response to the evaluation I would point out my Department does not have direct responsibility for the various investment programmes under the plan. More generally, my Department is concerned at the findings of the evaluation on cost overruns and deficient management of infrastructure projects and programmes. My Department is currently revising the capital appraisal guidelines for public sector capital projects and the revised guidelines will issue shortly to Departments and public agencies. The existing guidelines do of course remain in place and set out guidance in relation to the evaluation, planning and execution of capital projects. I must stress that the onus for proper appraisal and management of capital projects rests with the implementing agencies. My Department will however, strive both in the context of the revised guidelines and otherwise to impress on Departments and implementing agencies the need for best practice in regard to evaluation and execution of capital projects.