Enda Kenny
Ceist:1 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the duties and responsibilities of the special political advisers as appointed by him; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43882/06]
Ceisteanna — Questions.
Ministerial Advisers.
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Ceist:2 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will set out the responsibilities of the special political advisers in his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3727/07]
Pat Rabbitte
Ceist:3 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the role and responsibility of each of the special political advisers or other non-Civil Service staff appointed by him; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3858/07]
Trevor Sargent
Ceist:4 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the duties and responsibilities of the special political advisers in his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6308/07]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 4, inclusive, together.
There are currently five special advisers appointed by me. The Deputy will be aware that one of my special advisers recently took up office with the Health Service Executive and no decision has yet been taken on a replacement.
There has been no increase in the number of special advisers since I took office. Under the direction of the programme manager, the primary function of the advisers is to monitor, facilitate and help secure the achievement of Government objectives and ensure effective co-ordination in the implementation of the programme for Government. They are also tasked with giving me advice and keeping me informed on a wide range of issues, including business, financial, economic, political, administrative and media matters and performing such other functions as may be directed by me from time to time.
Each of the advisers liaises with a number of Departments and acts as a point of contact in my office for Ministers and their advisers. My advisers attend meetings of Cabinet committees and cross-departmental teams relevant to their responsibilities. They also liaise, on my behalf, with organisations and interest groups outside of Government.
In addition, a number of my advisers have specific responsibilities regarding speech drafting. My programme manager meets other ministerial advisers on a weekly basis. He monitors and reports to me on progress in implementing the programme for Government.
Other non-Civil Service staff appointed by me are the Government press secretary and deputy Government press secretary or head of Government Information Services, the Government Chief Whip's personal assistant and personal secretary, the personal secretary assigned to my constituency office and the personal assistant assigned to the Tánaiste's office.
What is the difference between a special political adviser and a programme manager in the Taoiseach's Department? What has been the cost of the five special political advisers engaged by the Taoiseach over the past couple of years? How frequently do the special political advisers sit down with the Taoiseach and report progress or otherwise on the implementation of the programme for Government? Are the meetings regular or do they occur now and again? Is there a set process in the Taoiseach's Department whereby the special political advisers come together to advise the Taoiseach?
I need to tot up the figures to give the overall cost of the advisers. I will give the figure later.
The Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism is good at figures, he would be quick at it.
I may ask him to tot it for me. I have a list of costs but not the total. I have published the schedule before.
The advisers work closely with individual Departments. When we changed the system a decade ago I assigned them to individual Departments, so normally their work entails liaising with ministerial advisers in the Departments. I meet them on a weekly basis, depending on what issues are relevant. I may confer with them on a daily basis on Northern Ireland issues or on European business in the week before a European meeting. They also attend Cabinet committees, which are either weekly or monthly. I meet with them collectively once or twice a week. I try to keep them linked to Departments because it makes more sense.
There are two programme managers, one for my Department and one for the Tánaiste. They hold seniority and the programme manager in my Department chairs the weekly meeting of programme managers from the other Departments, as well as having responsibility for a number of Departments himself.
Does that cover the Deputy's questions?
I asked how frequently they brief the Taoiseach and give advice, which he probably has much of anyway.
They keep me up to date, whatever about the advice.
There is a formal working session on Mondays, depending on what issues are pertinent. European and Northern Ireland issues could necessitate more frequent meetings. With European business in particular, a key person is put in place from the country holding the EU Presidency who passes information on several times a week. This is increasingly being done by telephone contact, which is more efficient.
The German Chancellor has been doing a very good job where all her meetings are being fed back into the system almost on a daily basis. It is quite a challenge for the personnel involved because they have to ring 27 countries with updates. Many of these issues are current and the European agenda is getting more complex and demanding.
A unified position being created takes up more and more time, and unfortunately it is different to our system. Some prime ministers may not attend parliament as much as here and they involve themselves extensively in European issues. Therefore, more time is spent here phoning around, but it nevertheless it is an important part of the work.
Can the Taoiseach explain the background to the increase in 2006 in the cost of political advisers? I asked about the next matter before but I will do so again because it continues to grow in urgency. Does the Taoiseach intend to at least beef up the advice he gets on climate change? The New Zealand Prime Minister has stated climate change to be similar to the threat of a nuclear holocaust during the Cold War.
We cannot go back over Leaders' Questions.
Indeed not, and I will not. I have a relevant question on political advisers. Will the issue be a matter for an adviser who will work with the Taoiseach, given the overall responsibility he holds for Departments?
The total cost sought by Deputy Kenny is €560,000, excluding the Chief Whip and Tánaiste's programme manager.
On Deputy Sargent's questions, I depend on the staff in outside agencies and those dealing with the matter in the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. I do not have an expert of my own on climate change but there are people with considerable expertise within the system.
Deputy Sargent is correct and as this is increasingly an issue on the European agenda, I receive advice on a regular basis directly from the Department and officials within the Department.
The Taoiseach yesterday maintained that the communications unit within his Department was totally apolitical. That could certainly not be stated in any sense with regard to political advisers. Is there a role for these political advisers after the Taoiseach dissolves the Dáil and between then and the general election specifically? Are they stood down for that period or do they continue to work with and advise the Taoiseach?
For example, Deputies going forward for re-election will get letters warning them not to use Oireachtas offices, postage or other facilities for their election campaign. That is fair enough as it is supposed to be the level playing pitch for people who are not Members of the Oireachtas. What will be the position of the Taoiseach's advisers in that case?
The restrictions put on personnel employed by ordinary Members is that they should be sent off for a few weeks break. Will the same happen with the Taoiseach's advisers?
Effectively, that is what happens. If these personnel involve themselves in the political process, which most of them would do, they must take leave from their post. If any of them are involved in the day-to-day work of Government, as distinct from the campaign, they can stay. The last time all of my people, bar one, were involved in the campaign and had to clear out of the building.
Recently, there was controversy regarding the cost of ministerial advisers incurred by the Exchequer, after which a new protocol was introduced. Does it apply to the Taoiseach's advisers?
They must comply fully with the provisions of the Ethics in Public Office Acts and the Standards in Public Office Act 2001. They have annual forms to fill out and must comply with all of the protocols of the Civil Service under the Public Service Management Act 1997.
Interdepartmental Committees.
Enda Kenny
Ceist:5 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach when the cross-departmental team on infrastructure and public private partnerships will next meet; the number of meetings of the team planned for 2007; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43884/06]
Joe Higgins
Ceist:6 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach the progress made by the cross-departmental team on housing, infrastructure and PPPs; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1607/07]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Ceist:7 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the Departments represented on the cross-departmental team on housing, infrastructure and PPPs; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3726/07]
Pat Rabbitte
Ceist:8 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the progress made by the cross-departmental team on housing, infrastructure and PPPs; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3859/07]
Trevor Sargent
Ceist:9 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach when the cross-departmental team on infrastructure and public private partnership will next meet; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6323/07]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 5 to 9, inclusive, together.
The role of the cross-departmental team is to identify and assist in advancing and resolving issues related to infrastructural planning and delivery, ensuring they are adequately prepared for consideration by the Cabinet committee on housing, infrastructure and PPPs and, where necessary, the Government. This preparation has helped to improve significantly the capacity for the delivery of national infrastructure, especially in terms of time and cost. However, lead responsibility remains clearly with the relevant Minister and Department in respect of each policy area or individual infrastructural project.
The cross-departmental team is chaired by my Department and comprises representatives from the Departments of Finance, Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Education and Science, the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Transport, Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs and Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Office of the Attorney General. The team is meeting again today and usually meets on a monthly basis.
I thank the Taoiseach for outlining the Departments represented. The Departments of Health and Children and Education and Science deal with hospital and school buildings. By anyone's standards, these categories are among the most critical, but they must go through a prolonged planning process. Has the cross-departmental team suggested these buildings should form part of the critical infrastructure Bill to achieve a faster through-put in delivering projects? I make this suggestion positively. Has the cross-departmental team considered the metro line announced some time ago by the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, and the question of the outer orbital Dublin route? Does it remain an illusion? Has its location been affirmed? How far from the M50 will it run, be it 10 miles, 15 miles or 20 miles? These are major pieces of infrastructure.
On the first point, the State had more freedom when it had fewer resources 20 years ago. As the Deputy will recall, some of the projects carried out during our political time here did not need planning and were completed through OPW special orders. That situation changed during the years for good reasons. The effect of this on projects and their assessment has been a dramatic improvement in procedures, particularly in terms of road construction. The quality of the NRA's staff, resources and the technical teams it has built during the past six or seven years is superb.
Regarding the schools building programme, we used to undertake six big projects at a time. This year there are 1,500, from A to Z. The equivalent figure 20 years ago was probably 30. It is a different issue and the design has been changed, that is, more standardised designs are being used.
Regarding health, the system presents a difficulty, about which there is no doubt. The time taken for a project to go through the various structures, assessments and processes and to be built and commissioned is very long. The matter has been examined and some improvements have been made. Has it improved dramatically? No, I do not think it has. It is a slow process for which there are various reasons and answers. As the Deputy stated, I turned the sod and opened a 500-bed hotel in the airport region, whereas a health project had passed through one stage before anyone turned a sod. Some projects I announced six or seven years ago have still not been finished, but that is part of the system. Can it be improved? I will not argue that it cannot. There are huge costs in the system.
Regarding the answers given on the issues raised, there is a big difference between a hotel and a highly sophisticated ward or theatre with its special flooring, tubing, suction, cardiology equipment and so on. Some 500 reasons are given before one starts as to why matters cannot be completed far more quickly. Can something be done more quickly? Yes. Can it be done more quickly under the current system? I doubt it. That there are so many hands involved presents a difficulty. If the Deputy was doing it, would he do it this way? He would not. There is a huge degree of bureaucracy around these matters. For every step forward, we take 16 backwards. That is the honest answer. It is not for lack of effort that the situation has not improved.
On the metro, a lot of progress has been made and the team's professionalism has been considerable. I have a lot of confidence in the team which has done a good job on the Luas extensions and brought in expertise in the form of individuals who have worked on similar projects in other countries. This country does not have that expertise, although some Irish people have worked on similar projects abroad and returned. It is a big project, but I have confidence in the team. It seems to have good time slots and movements and its procedures are based on modern legislation. It is making a lot of progress, particularly in terms of the Dublin transportation authority legislation. The authority is working on an ad hoc basis, which is fine, but it needs to be legislated for. The team comprises an efficient group which is going about its business in a professional way, judging by the briefings we have received.
On the outer route, the preliminary work is ongoing in the form of a feasibility study. The Deputy knows my position on the matter, namely, that I have been pressing for it within the group because it is necessary. The Deputy spoke about the M50, but if one examines the file on it — I have read it more than once for obvious reasons — one will see that planning for it began in 1950. The road was opened in 1990, based mainly on assessments made in 1978. The bridge was the last part. The system did not consider the M50 necessary or viable. The Department of Finance did not consider it viable or necessary while I was there.
Regarding the outer orbital route, we are effectively discussing a date of 2020, although the NRA could probably complete it far more quickly. We must forget the figures on the line and scale and build it to international standards, which I have made clear to the system. Trying to project figures is a lost cause. While Deputy Sargent will not like me for saying this, it is a fact that we are well under the EU average in terms of car usage.
Not for use, just ownership. It is the——
Sorry, Deputy Sargent——
We are still way under the EU average for cars. If one talks to the people who are usually right about these matters — perhaps somebody can stop them — there will be more rather than less. On that outer orbital route both in terms of size and scale we need to look far beyond the box and that is what I have been driving towards within the system and at the committee.
The crucial role of the committee is to assist in resolving major infrastructural problems. What role has the sub-committee played, leading up to the decision by the Government to pay €600 million to National Toll Roads to buy out the M50 toll bridge? Is the sub-committee fully aware of the daily torture endured by tens of thousands of working people as they try to cross the Liffey at the M50 toll bridge on a daily basis? I see the Taoiseach is commemorating today the flight of the earls. It is just as well they did not have to go through the M50 or they would never have got away. They would still be languishing there, just like many of our people.
They would never have got out.
The key question is this——
If they continued to all fly like that in the 1980s, we would not have needed the road. People started to stay, and that is why they got the figures wrong.
Anyway, they went by boat.
Do not forget Finn Mac Cumhghaill.
Why does the State believe it should stand by a deal concluded over 20 years ago, involving a gallery of rogues, to be quite honest——
The Deputy should be more temperate in his language.
That is about as temperate as he can be.
In fairness——
The Deputy's question appears to be one that should be addressed to the line Minister. The House will allow general questioning on this matter but detailed questions are a matter for the line Minister concerned.
The Taoiseach referred to this issue and I want to get to the nub of the matter. Contracts have to be fair and equitable. Is it anything other than an unfair contract or gangster capitalism that a private corporation can build a bridge for the equivalent of €38 million and then hold the taxpayer to ransom for €600 million to buy it out?
That is really a question for the line Minister, and does not arise on Leaders' Questions.
It relates to the critical issue of infrastructure.
We are not discussing infrastructure in detail in these questions. We are dealing with the Deputy's question to the Taoiseach.
It relates to the role of the interdepartmental sub-committee on housing, infrastructure and public private partnerships.
Yes, but not detailed responses.
My question relates to PPPs and infrastructure.
I ask the Deputy to confine himself to the matter in question.
I am trying to be helpful to the people I represent and who must go through this grind daily. The Taoiseach is proposing a new electronic tolling system costing over €100 million. I join with Deputy Rabbitte in asking the Taoiseach to lift those tolls immediately, so that we may see the problems that might emerge——
That is a question for the line Minister and does not arise out of these questions. The Chair has ruled on this matter.
The Ceann Comhairle is being very unreasonable with me today. My last question has to do with infrastructural investment, particularly in the critical area of transport, which in Dublin city is one of the crucial problems confronting our people. Has it ever occurred to the Taoiseach that sometimes the solutions might be much simpler than they are made out to be? Is he aware, for example, that this week when the schools are off traffic moves much more freely through the city? Why does he not propose to the interdepartmental sub-committee that perhaps a dedicated school bus system serving every school in this city and bringing students to the schools from where they live could remove at a stroke thousands of private vehicles from the roads? Why do we not think simply in that regard? My unfortunate constituents in Dublin West spend an hour and a half or two hours accessing Dublin city centre.
A question, please.
Does the Taoiseach agree that a pilot scheme should be introduced to run buses from the key areas of that very concentrated population centre? Uninterrupted bus lanes should be run into the city centre with sufficient buses and at a stroke we could remove thousands of private cars and bring people into the city by public transport in about half an hour. That does not require metros or 15-year plans, but rather simple investment and imaginative thinking.
The Deputy has asked me an enormous range of questions. There is €16 billion in the national development plan, and there was €9 billion in its predecessor for public transport initiatives. I am in favour of bus corridors, increased buses and rail cars. The first 12 out of 60 trains are coming on stream and there are more than 100 buses. An order has been put in for another 100 buses and I am in favour of all those initiatives.
Surveys show that when the schools are open parents bring their children and they all leave more or less at the one time. If a school opens at 8.50 a.m., there is an enormous congregation of people at that time. When the parents are working the congestion is spread out over longer periods throughout the day. My route to work today took 40 minutes less, for instance, because the schools were closed. Friends of mine who live further out say they saved an hour and a quarter on Monday, so there is no doubt that the schools issue is the problem. It is not that the parents are not around, though I accept some young parents may take some time off to be with their children. Most people, however, are still working and the problem is the congregation of time, with everyone centralising around the same hour. It is a big problem. The Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, is very much in favour of what the Deputy said concerning dedicated bus corridors. He wants to do more in this regard on the quays and to have more buses. These are policies we agree with and are anxious to pursue.
I am not going to get into an argument about the contract. A State contract was agreed. The law officers of the State, officials etc. were involved in that contract. The contract must be dealt with and it is one we must get out of, regardless of what the Deputy or I may think about anyone involved. As regards the M50 toll barriers, I have questioned the relevant people at length. I do not disagree with the Deputy's thinking. However, all the people involved share a unanimous view to the effect that the lifting of the Westlink toll barriers will not solve the congestion being experienced at various locations along the M50. It is acknowledged that the Westlink toll plaza, its approaches and departure sections are inadequate to deal with current traffic levels. It is also true that there are infrastructural deficiencies along other sections of the M50, particularly at key interchanges. It is the combination of these factors that gives rise to the delays being experienced by motorists using the M50 as well as those who use the radial routes that traverse the motorway. The Government and the National Roads Authority are fully committed to improving the level of service provided to motorists on the M50 and we believe this can best be achieved by three initiatives: the €1 billion M50 upgrade, which is underway; the removal of the Westlink toll plaza; and the move to barrier-free tolling, which will happen in August 2008.
Why do they not leave them down to see where the problems will emerge?
I have told the Deputy that it is the view of the entire technical and engineering crew——
It could be done on a trial basis.
If I ignored the experts, the Deputy would be in here next week telling me I had caused the problems by ignoring the advice.
A trial basis would be a practical experiment.
The Deputy should postpone his contribution until the Order of Business.
They have done that. They have lifted it for an hour on several occasions to see what the effect might be. As I said, the M50 upgrade is underway, with phase 1 from the N4 to the Ballymount interchange to be completed by mid-2008 along with phase 3 from the M3 to the N4. The full upgrade will be completed in 2010. It is a massive infrastructural project. It will not be done overnight or without some inconvenience to motorists, but it should be an enormous success when finished. Barrier-free tolling will be introduced in August 2008, coinciding with the completion of phases one and three.
The Taoiseach's description of the construction of health facilities compared to the normal commercial activity involved in the case he cited of a hotel is sobering and dispiriting. If the man who has been Taoiseach for almost ten years tells us that is the stage of desperation he has reached about moving a project like that from conception to execution, it is a poor lookout. I accept there are differences but I am not sure I understand how complex the building of a hospital can be. We put a man on the moon a long time ago. I am completely bemused.
A question please, Deputy.
The Taoiseach occasionally indulges in a little reverie so the Ceann Comhairle should allow me to also wander off in a stream of consciousness.
I gave the Deputy my honest assessment.
I am not disputing it.
I accept that.
On the question of PPPs, it was an element of the health strategy that the Government would provide 800 community nursing beds under a PPP. What happened to that commitment, why was it abandoned, has it been abandoned or is it still on course?
Is the committee project focused, does it have a role in monitoring the national development plan, or is its approach simply that, for example, metro west is on the agenda today and how can it move forward? Is there any overall oversight of the implementation of the NDP?
I will not go back over what I said earlier but I draw a distinction between what can be achieved in other areas such as transport and some areas of education where PPP projects were approved. When dealing with a PPP, whatever about the cost and other arguments which I have gone through, the difference in terms of time and scale is enormous. One need only consider the Whitfield project in Waterford. The people involved came to see me less than two years ago and that facility is fully operational today. They told me at that time they were buying a site. I cite that project as against other schemes as to why we proceed by way of PPPs.
On the question of PPPs and the national development plan, a good oversight of the plan is in place. A unit in the Department of Finance oversees the costs and planning involved in terms cost benefit analysis, value for money issues, strategic environmental assessments and all other related issues. It is a dedicated unit which is efficient and good. It is basically a new unit because of the level of resources involved in spending €6 billion. There is a high level of efficiency in all those areas. Some good people have been recruited who are involved in this work. The cross-departmental Cabinet committee, including the officials, their advisers and others with expertise work closely with it. The unit is a good and competent one.
In the area of education projects, where perhaps ten major projects would normally have been undertaken a year, this year some 1,500 projects are being undertaken including major and minor projects under the summer works scheme. Those involved have geared themselves up; this is happening across the RPA and others are also doing this. However, there are some areas where such projects do not work nearly as effectively, health clearly being one of them and that has been the case for a number of years.
The cross-departmental team works well and the monitoring, evaluation, appraisal guidelines in place are good, tight and efficient. Sometimes one might think the system is working too slowly but in terms of the level of expenditure with which the unit is dealing, and bearing in mind it is taxpayers' money, this is an efficient way of dealing with the national development plan.
The Taoiseach did not deal with the question on community nursing homes.
I am not familiar with every individual capital project in the health area. A difficulty is that by the time the capital programme is prepared for the building, which is linked to staffing levels, equipment and all the procurement issues, the time span in too long. With regard to any of the commitments made, the Deputy will find that the projects are moving through the system but as against what can be achieved by way of a PPP project or private project——
This is a PPP project. The community beds initiative was a PPP project.
I cannot have the detail of every project, but if it is a PPP project, they tend to be very successful.
Nothing has happened.
The Deputy should table a question to the relevant Minister. In the case of PPP projects if they are approved and moved through by the Department of Finance, they tend to be completed very quickly.
I was interested to hear the Taoiseach speak about the cross-departmental team on infrastructure and public private partnerships, basically giving us the impression that it is a frustrating experience. A sense of exasperation and general lack of progress seems to be what sets projects in some areas under it apart. I wonder if some of that is not self-inflicted. Has the cross-departmental team taken on board the Taoiseach's stated wish that Mr. Justice Kenny's report recommendations should be implemented? If so, has the progress made by the team helped towards the implementation of those recommendations, or is it ignoring that stated wish and taking it as an aside without addressing it with sincerity? Has that stated wish impacted on the discussions and the delivery, particularly in the area of housing and proper planning, which impacts on transport, as the Taoiseach is aware?
A cost benefit analysis has not been carried out on the proposal for a parallel runway at Dublin Airport. On the last occasion the Taoiseach replied to a question I raised on this proposal, he told me that in the normal course he thought that a cost benefit analysis would be done. If that is the normal course, does the cross-departmental team set down requirements, whatever about guidelines, that a large project of that sort would certainly need a cost benefit analysis and far more scrutiny than is currently given to that project? Is the cross-departmental team leading or is it just a victim of other people's mismanagement?
The cross-departmental team comprises key officials in the various Departments. The guidelines set down in terms of cost benefit analysis are subject to independent scrutiny. The central expenditure evaluation unit in the Department of Finance, a question on which I replied to earlier, is charged with promoting best practice in project appraisal and checking compliance with the capital appraisal guidelines set down by the Department of Finance. The evaluation unit examines individual projects and the cost benefit analysis to ensure compliance with these guidelines and consistency. Projects costing over €30 million must be monitored through one system and different protocols apply to projects costing under €30 million related to value for money and the other procedures set down by the Department of Finance for capital project. I do not think there has been difficulties in housing, as there has been record construction. We have got on top of things in education. In transport, 11 of the last 14 major contracts have come in on time and on budget. The health area is slow in comparison to those areas in which the private sector operates. That is a reality. Across all other areas, the departmental team drives matters very successfully. A total of €16 billion will be put into transport infrastructure under the next national development plan. The total cost of transport under the next plan will be €33 billion. Roads, airports and other infrastructure are being dealt with very efficiently.
I wonder about the cost in housing——
Sorry, Deputy, but I wish to let Deputy Crowe speak.
It is efficient in the housing area. Our construction sector is second to none.
What about the Kenny report?
The Kenny report deals with the issue of land, but that only affects price rather than quality of construction.
Is there any mechanism for the cross-departmental team to report officially on the work it carries out? The report could be published at the end of the lifetime of this Dáil and it could outline what the committee has achieved and what it recommended. I presume the Taoiseach is the line manager, but does he have to make decisions on this area?
The Taoiseach talked about the success of PPPs, but there have also been failures. The Minister for Health and Children has attempted to improve radiotherapy services across the State by 2011, but reports have suggested that it may not be done until 2013 or 2014. Do such issues come back to the Taoiseach, or can the relevant Ministers deal with them? Do they make recommendations on continuing with PPPs or otherwise? Is there an all-Ireland aspect to the work of this committee? Eoin Reeves, director of privatisation and PPP research at the University of Limerick, said that the PPPs in Ireland have been unfavourable and untested.
What role does the committee have in this regard? Is it Government policy to roll out PPPs? Can the people on the committee make decisions on PPPs? In other groups, such as local councils, decisions cannot be made in committees unless they contain a senior representative and they are just talking shops.
Every project goes through a line Department and every major health project goes through the capital assessment unit of the Department of Health and Children. Every project is bound by appraisals and examinations that follow good accountancy practices. There are also State agencies involved, such as local authorities, the NRA, the Dublin Airport Authority or whatever.
The officials in the cross-departmental team are civil servants. They have access to the design teams and the experts in the various areas. The system for most of our contracts is as good as anywhere else.
The revised capital appraisal guidelines for public capital projects are less than two years old. The ten year envelope for public transport is working very well. The more efficient price-fixed contracts are working very well. The PPPs, with the expertise of the NDFA, are also working well, even if they are going slowly in some areas due to complexity. This is particularly the case in the health area. The development of roads and regional airports has been very fast. The fixed price contracts have given much better value for money, with all the contracts coming in on time and on budget. The system in that respect works well, even if it is slow sometimes.