I have now had an opportunity to read in more detail the results of the review carried out by the consultants, PricewaterhouseCoopers, into procurement procedures used by the Office of Public Works in Dublin Castle. I am disappointed that the Minister involved, the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Parlon, is not present as I have questioned him previously on this issue.
The conclusions of the consultants are quite shocking as they find that EU tender procedures, OPW procedures and public procurement procedures have all been breached in a systematic way. This report raises serious questions for the Minister in charge, Deputy Parlon, who must accept the ultimate responsibility for what can only be described as serious lapses in the OPW operation in Dublin Castle.
This is not some trivial matter but a clear and systematic breach of the principles that should govern the State's approach to doing business with the private sector. What confidence can private firms, seeking to do business with the OPW or other State agencies, have that they too are not being victimised by the failure to implement proper procurement procedures?
It is also clear from the report that the last minute decision of the Government to increase substantially the number of EU Presidency events to be held in the country created pressures on the OPW and encouraged the cutting of corners and bypassing of normal procedures. The report states that the OPW was originally informed that there would be no more than seven informal ministerial council meetings in the first six months of this year. The clear desire of individual Ministers to secure a bit of the action led to this number increasing to an unbelievable 32, which clearly created great planning difficulties for the OPW.
However, none of this excuses the systematic ignoring of procedures designed to ensure that public contracts are offered on a fair and impartial basis and that taxpayers get the best possible value for their money. Neither does it excuse what seems to have been the absence of the Minister of State, Deputy Parlon, when all this was happening. Given the key role that the OPW was asked to play in the organisation of Irish Presidency events, I assume that the Minister of State, Deputy Parlon, would have been closely involved in the preparation and planning for these meetings. Why did he not satisfy himself that appropriate procedures were being applied in regard to the allocation of valuable contracts? Did he or any other member of the Government lobby for any contract to be awarded to any particular firm? If confidence in the OPW is now to be restored, it is essential that the recommendations made by the consultants for procurement procedures are implemented in full.
It is also essential that new procedures be introduced to provide greater transparency regarding the involvement by public servants in outside commercial activities. There must be a demarcation line drawn to ensure that not only is there no conflict between a public sector employee's role and any outside interest they may hold, there must be no basis on which anyone dealing with a public sector company could even fear that there was such a conflict. That statement is clearly made in this report in which PricewaterhouseCoopers says it can understand how contractors might have feared there was an inside track on Government contracts.
I have questioned the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Parlon, on at least four occasions on this matter. I have tabled a parliamentary question to the Minister for Finance on the issue today. I regret the report was issued last evening before there was the opportunity to debate it in the House.