The second item on today's agenda is the consideration of the Revised Estimate for the Office of Public Works. On 24 February, the Dáil ordered that the Revised Estimate for the Office of Public Works, Vote 10 — Office of Public Works, be referred to this committee for consideration. I invite the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Parlon, to make an opening statement.
Vote 10 — Office of Public Works (Revised).
I am pleased to be here to introduce the 2005 Revised Estimate for the Office of Public Works. Before I deal with the main areas of expenditure within the Estimate, I wish to bring the committee up to date with current developments in the OPW.
The Office of Public Works has been charged with a significant role in the decentralisation programme, including acquiring the necessary buildings and sites, managing the provision of office accommodation in the regions for decentralising staff, rationalising and consolidating the use of Dublin office space following decentralisation and managing the disposal of surplus Dublin office accommodation. To fulfil these requirements an allocation of €70 million has been included in the OPW Vote, of which €30 million has been ring-fenced for the purchase of sites and €40 million for the erection, provision and fit-out of the accommodation.
On 23 November 2004 the names of 15 Departments and organisations to move in the first phase of the programme were announced. This involves 21 projects, 20 locations and the transfer of eight headquarters and 3,492 posts to four corners of the island to locations such as Clonakilty, Drogheda, Wexford and Knock Airport. Allowing for completion of the procurement and planning processes, it is envisaged that eight buildings will be fitted and furnished and ready for occupation in 2006, nine in 2007 and the remaining four in 2008.
The capital costs of procuring office accommodation in the decentralised locations was ring-fenced by the Minister for Finance in the budget and approximately €900 million is earmarked for completion of the programme in the coming years. To date, 11 property solutions have been agreed in principle and a further 20 are close to agreement. The balance of the sites for the remaining locations in the programme are being proactively pursued by the Office of Public Works. Some of the locations where solutions have been identified are Carlow, Longford, Newcastle West, Athlone, the Curragh, Sligo, Dundalk, Furbo and Donegal.
A broad range of factors will influence the cost of acquiring sites. These include: proximity of the site to commercial, leisure and educational facilities; proximity to public transport; access to and from a good quality road network; and zoning for development. In addition, the prevailing property market conditions in each geographical area will also have a significant bearing on land acquisition costs. Several methods of procurement from public private partnerships, design-build, property rental-leasing, to a design, build, finance and maintain approach have been considered. However, the Office of Public Works now recommends that a design-build approach be pursued in most cases to allow the advancement of projects to tender stage at a faster pace.
This overall strategy will be reviewed in the light of experience with the market during the first phase of implementation of the programme. I am convinced that decentralisation will offer considerable benefits for all the Departments involved, the communities to which they will be relocated, the staff that will transfer and the country as a whole.
One of my principal objectives as Minister of State at the Department of Finance with special responsibility for the Office of Public Works is to transform under-utilised State properties and maximise their potential for disposal or redevelopment. In 2004 the State realised considerable funds from the disposal of surplus properties, including a major site at Lad Lane, an office block at 72-76 St. Stephen's Green and a State-owned property at Lord Edward St., with combined receipts of over €83 million for these three properties. In addition, two sites at Infirmary Road and Jamestown Road have been identified for use under the Sustaining Progress affordable housing initiative and the transfer is being finalised with Dublin City Council which may provide up to 600 housing units. Other sites and buildings are being actively considered for sale and will proceed this year.
The management of national monuments and historic properties, including the provision of visitor services for the public, has been successfully merged into the day-to-day operations of the Office of Public Works in the past year. I am convinced this has led to a more coherent approach to the protection and maintenance of our natural heritage and historic built environment. National monuments and historic properties have responsibility for some 760 sites and 831 permanent staff. The heritage service will account for €37 million of the Office of Public Works Vote in 2005, a significant proportion of the overall Revised Estimate.
The total amount of Vote 10 being sought is €469.361 million, which represents an 8% increase on the 2004 outturn. A sum of €295 million is sought for the ongoing accommodation programme, excluding decentralisation. At €140 million, construction works for other Departments under subhead E is the largest element of the accommodation programme. The relocation of the Department of Agriculture and Food and State Laboratory facilities to Backweston will be completed at a cost of €25 million in 2005. The relocation of the Marine Institute to Galway will incur expenditure of €22.7 million this year. Additional accommodation for Garda trainees will be provided in 2005 at Templemore Garda college at an estimated cost of €18 million. This will allow the Government to meet its target of increasing Garda manpower levels to 14,000. Major improvement schemes on Garda stations will account for a further €12.3 million in 2005 and will see the completion of buildings at Ballyshannon, New Ross, Ballina and Bantry.
The Office of Public Works will continue to upgrade and enhance office accommodation for Departments through the rationalisation of office accommodation programme at a cost of €19.5 million in 2005. Cultural institutions will have an annual spend of approximately €9 million and the ongoing improvement and refurbishment works at the Houses of Oireachtas complex will account for over €4 million this year. The allocation for the universal access programme has been increased in 2005 and again demonstrates that the Government and the Office of Public Works are committed to the principle that all environments should be accessible to everyone. This will not represent the full extent of the Office of Public Works expenditure on disabled access as all our major new construction projects, including the decentralised accommodation, will be fully accessible.
This year rent and rates paid on behalf of other Departments will cost almost €115 million. The Office of Public Works manages over 1 million sq. m. of accommodation, of which some 41% is leased. The State property portfolio contains 1,781 properties made up of 1,987 buildings. As a significant player in the property rental market, the Office of Public Works is in a position to demand terms and rates that compare favourably with what can be obtained by the private sector. The maintenance of the vast State property portfolio is the final element of the accommodation programme and has an estimated requirement for 2005 of €33 million.
A major review of national flooding policy has been carried out. The purpose of the review was to assess the extent of the flooding problem, clarify roles and responsibilities amongst the various State agencies involved in flood relief and recommend practical action to deal with the problem more effectively. The report has been approved by the Government and phased implementation of the major recommendations will begin shortly. The flood relief and ongoing arterial drainage maintenance programme is the other main area of expenditure on the Office of Public Works Vote, for which there is a financial requirement of €39 million. Works on the Kilkenny scheme will be completed in 2005 and works will continue on the flood alleviation measures on the River Tolka. Many schemes will continue to be implemented with the close co-operation of the local authorities in 2005 and major schemes at Mallow, Clonmel, Ennis and Carlow will be advanced in 2005. Expenditure of approximately €3 million will be incurred in 2005 on flood hazard mapping. The information provided by digital mapping will allow for the early identification of existing developed areas at risk from flooding and priority areas for future flood alleviation schemes thereby assisting local authorities in the planning processes.
I appreciate the vital role the Red Cross played again in the area of humanitarian aid provided to the victims of flooding at the end of 2004. Assistance was provided to 238 victims to relieve hardship arising from the flooding of people's homes as a result of the severe rainfall over several days during the last week of October 2004. The Irish Red Cross administered the scheme on the ground establishing eligibility in line with previous aid schemes.
I compliment the staff of the Office of Public Works on continuing to meet the challenges the decentralisation programme has presented to the organisation. The office is implementing a detailed implementation plan for its own decentralisation, while continuing to provide an efficient and effective management service for its wide variety of functions. I thank the Chairman and members for their interest in the Office of Public Works.
I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Parlon, for his presentation on the Vote for the Office of Public Works. What is most remarkable is the dramatic expansion in the office's scale of operations in the past eight years. Employment in the office has increased by 68% from 1,200 to 2,200 persons. Spending has grown threefold on the current side and even more on the capital side. What performance indicators does the Minister of State apply to the activities of the Office of Public Works to ensure that, as a property management company, it is performing to the highest standards?
I find it frustrating that the presentation only gives a crude figure of how much is spent on the rent when over 1 million sq. m. are rented. I presume the Minister of State is looking for approval that this is well-managed rental portfolio. He did not, however, seem to present any data with which we could make those comparisons, other than the bald statement that these rates compare favourably with the private sector. Will he consider the need for an independent statement to go alongside his own that the rent portfolio represents good value for money? I note that the cost of the rent portfolio in the past eight years has trebled. Have private rents risen by a comparable amount? Are there other factors at work here?
I am interested in the decentralisation programme. The Minister of State has responsibility for the property end of it. I will not discuss whether some of the hairier aspects of particular proposals make sense. However, he is proposing to rationalise and consolidate the use of Dublin office space following decentralisation. How many square metres of space does he intend to close down in Dublin, commensurate with the property he is acquiring for €900 million? The Minister of State admits the sale of property in Dublin will clearly not meet the €900 million figure because some if it is leased. It is important that we see what is happening in terms of the property portfolio and are confident the process is being managed efficiently.
The Minister of State has indicated the capital costs of decentralisation work out at some €900 million. This translates to approximately €260,000 per post being moved, the price of a considerable house in most locations concerned. Against what standard is this judged to be efficient and good value for money? As a layman, it seems extraordinary to me that office accommodation for one individual should cost as much as house. My intuitive reckoning is that it should be much cheaper than the cost of a house to move a staff member to an office space. Will the Minister of State explain why it is so expensive and how the projected cost compares with what is available in the marketplace in terms of office accommodation?
The Minister of State has decided to opt for a design-build approach in respect of the decentralisation programme because this will allow the advancement of projects to tender size at a faster pace. Is this a cost-effective strategy? He indicated that better value may often be attained by leasing. However, a 100% non-leasing approach has been taken in the case of this large-scale investment project. I had anticipated that some type of judicious mix of lease and non-lease would provide greater flexibility than buying into property solutions that may become inappropriate to needs over time.
A consequential issue is the question of how the OPW will charge out to the client Departments. If the design-build route is adopted, how are we to judge the efficiency with which spaces are used? I presume Departments will pay rent as indicated by the figures for appropriations-in-aid. Will the Minister of State indicate how those rents will be set? Will it be on a full cost-recovery basis in light of the capital costs involved? What is the rule of thumb in this regard?
The Minister of State referred to two major projects involving the decentralisation of the agricultural and State laboratories to Backweston and the Marine Institute to Galway. I assume these projects represent the final vacation of the Abbotstown site. What has been the total cost of removing these facilities from that site and what is the proposal for the cleared site in the longer term, now that the national sports centre is off the agenda? There has been an issue in respect of the existing investment in the Abbotstown site in that there is considerable delay in repairing recent damage to the National Aquatic Centre. Has the OPW a role in the reinstatement of that property?
A concern in my constituency is the ongoing danger of flooding in Dublin. My chief concern relates to the Tolka River, where construction on the river bed outside the city created a significant flooding problem several years ago. I commend the OPW on the quality of its work on the river to date. However, what are the proposals in respect of the new assessment of flood risk in Dublin? These risks present both on the catchments of the rivers and in respect of high tides. Last year, a number of houses on the sea front in Clontarf were flooded by the encroachment of the sea on existing defences.
Among a series of flood relief measures which Dublin City Council has presented to the OPW is a proposal that the sea walls on the Clontarf sea front should be raised to provide better protection against flooding. Is it expected that this measure will be approved for expenditure in 2005? What is the Minister of State's assessment of the scale of investment required to complete the planned flood relief programme? I understand a considerable overall capital cost is involved and I expect the OPW will deal with this over a series of years. What is the Minister of State's estimate of the overall capital cost of flood relief in respect of the Tolka River and the sea front?
I thank the Deputy for his extensive list of queries. The increase in staff numbers at the OPW is necessary because Dúchas, having been under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, is once again under our aegis. More than 1,100 staff members have been absorbed by the OPW as a consequence of this change and all attendant discussions with unions and others have concluded. Dúchas's staff was originally part of the OPW's staff complement but political changes some years ago meant that responsibility for that body was removed from the OPW. That change is now reversed and Dúchas once again conducts its work in preserving and presenting national monuments under the aegis of the OPW. Apart from this, there has been little or no increase in OPW staff numbers.
In regard to the value for money available through the leasing of buildings in Dublin, we benchmark our prices against the prevailing rates in a given area. The Government is unfortunately obliged to take buildings within the Dublin 2 area of the city, where property is at its most expensive. I am satisfied that the OPW is seen as a good client. There are occasions when the OPW, on behalf of the Government, must acquire property on an urgent basis, which may result in a less than competitive deal. In general, however, we are getting good value for money.
In regard to the question about efficiency, we measure our vacancy rates very tightly. The only criticism in this regard might be that we are strict in ensuring vacancy levels are low. Our policy is to dispose of surplus space either through the surrender of leases or the sale of sites. Deputies may have observed that as soon as the headquarters of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform on St. Stephen's Green became vacant, as a consequence of that Department's relocation under the decentralisation programme to two different sites, the OPW took the decision to sell the building.
There is some degree of inflexibility when property is urgently required but we have been measuring that very tightly. When we must negotiate with the Department of Finance for substantial sums of money, we are aware there is no great generosity from that side. We are strongly obliged, therefore, to take an efficient line with regard to overall office space.
As regards the question on office space per individual, it is our policy to have more open plan offices. If one looks at the private sector, the multinationals use open plan offices and new workspaces tend to be open plan. It is generally accepted that it leads to a more efficient and better work environment. The design of the planned headquarters for the Office of Public Works in Trim will include an open plan work environment. However, not all other Departments have embraced the concept. Some Departments stick rigidly to the concept that officers in the grade of assistant principal and upwards should have an individual box or workspace. We will strive to introduce greater efficiencies in this area into the decentralisation project and any new offices.
Deputy Bruton asked about the OPW's plan to acquire new accommodation. We will lease accommodation where possible. Unfortunately, in many of the decentralisation locations such an opportunity does not exist. In most cases, we are obliged to buy the site and then undertake to provide the building on a design-build basis. Where buildings are available, we pursue leasing arrangements and we may lease up to 40% of the total property space. In general, we lease if there is good quality office space available that has been built already. Some space has been built reasonably in the provincial areas which allows the decentralisation project to move ahead more rapidly.
Deputy Bruton also asked about Abbotstown and the total cost for the new State Laboratory, the new agricultural laboratory and the provision of services to the site. The total figure will be approximately €250 million which provides two brand new, state-of-the-art laboratories. Anyone who saw the standard of the existing laboratories, as I did myself, will be aware that had we not replaced them in short order, we would not have been able to accredit many of the activities they carry out. The issue of accreditation will become more important in the future. The overall cost of €250 million for providing the two laboratories also includes the new relocated Marine Institute in Galway. In effect, this constitutes a decentralisation of the Marine Institute to a fabulous site on Galway Bay, which will be concluded by the end of 2005. This will leave the Abbotstown site practically vacant.
The Deputy also mentioned the aquatic centre, which is up and running. Its roof was damaged by the freak storms in January, but this is being dealt with. There has been some criticism of the response to the storm damage, but Rohcon, the original contractor, is on site and Campus and Stadium Ireland Development, the organisation with responsibility for the project, is dealing with it. The details regarding insurance and liability are being worked out. Recently, a group visited my office seeking to establish a visitor facility in north County Dublin that involved an OPW heritage site. The group produced figures to suggest that the single biggest tourist attraction last year was the Abbotstown aquatic centre. It has been extremely successful in providing a facility for people in north Dublin and for the greater Dublin area as a whole. Some difficulties may have been identified with the roof. It was a freak storm, and while there was some damage done in Dunboyne and elsewhere, in Abbotstown, the damage was almost solely confined to the new roof on the aquatic centre.
Another issue raised by the Deputy concerned the Tolka river. It is good to receive compliments on the work in either Dunboyne or along the Tolka. The work carried out there has been very effective and so far it has stood up to any weather related challenges. As to the rest of the project, further works are to be undertaken at the bridge area of Distillery Road, including the replacement of the bridge and the widening of the river. These works are the subject of negotiations between the council, the property owners and developers, as part of a proposed development in that area and are expected to commence after Easter. Works in the Botanic Gardens are also due to begin after Easter 2005, as is the construction of embankments in the Bennettstown area of County Meath. In June, the OPW will undertake the replacement of Loughsallagh bridge between Dunboyne and Clonee. Works will also commence in the Mulhuddart area in 2005.
In the greater Dublin area, initial indications are that the cost of the proposed flood defence works in the report drafted by Dublin City Council in association with Fingal County Council and the OPW will be more than €100 million. The report will require careful examination by all the stakeholders before committing to any of its recommendations. In particular, the OPW will need to consider the cost implications within the context of its annual budget for flood relief activities, which is approximately €20 million, and the large number of flood alleviation projects in hand.
I seek clarification of two points. In respect of the €100 million programme, the Minister of State has stated that he has €20 million in his existing budget that is not allocated and the sum of €20 million could be used for some of these works. Is this the case?
No. Last year we spent close to €20 million and we have allocated that sum again for this year.
Is all the money gone?
I am sure that Deputy Ned O'Keeffe is anxious that his Mallow scheme takes place as planned. We are about to begin work there and the major scheme will shortly be publicly exhibited.
I am preparing for it.
Notwithstanding the flood review report, there is a substantial need for investment in the area. This year, we have €20 million to spend which is spread across a number of schemes. Most schemes cannot be completed within a single year and, in general, the major schemes are spread over a number of years.
I do not wish to dwell on the point excessively but can the Minister of State explain the process of evaluation of the €100 million so that at least we can establish if the prioritised works within it might be brought forward for early consideration? He appeared to state that the project had to be considered as a whole and the report was being put onto a back shelf. Can the OPW not prioritise the works so that the high priority jobs would commence? The Minister of State could move on the other works in the longer term.
I seek further clarification concerning the Abbotstown site. The Minister of State stated that it is now largely vacant. Does the OPW have plans for the site, and if so, what is the nature of those plans? As regards the cost of €260,000 per decentralised post, has the Minister of State performed any analysis as to how it compares with other greenfield start-ups by banks or other agencies that deliver similar services? To a layman, the fact that moving one person to work in the provinces costs as much as buying him or her a new house sounds very expensive. This is particularly so when one considers the complexity in a house compared with a space in an open plan office,
With regard to Deputy Bruton's question about the figure of €100 million, the report was commissioned after 2002 by Dublin City Council in association with Fingal County Council, the OPW and the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. The report examined the causes and impact of flooding in the area from Portmarnock to Booterstown and includes the Tolka, Liffey and Dodder estuaries. In particular, the report deals with the risk to Dublin and Fingal from coastal flooding and the need for an early flood warning system, the identification of appropriate strategies and policies to combat and manage the risk of flooding and the identification of various works which would add to coastal defences already in place. Early indications are that such measures would cost €100 million. In terms of priority, we feel that the works already carried out along the Tolka and out to Dunboyne have stood up to the recent challenges.
In the past 12 months, houses on the coast have been flooded by incoming tides and the combination of high rains and high tides. This is not an academic matter or one that will de dealt with by the Tolka works. Many of the works are stand-alone so I would appeal to the Minister of State to examine the high priority elements of that and see if they can be brought forward, if not for 2005 then at least for early 2006.
I am sure the people of Mallow or Fermoy would also say that their particular scheme is a priority. We are starting work in Clonmel, a town which has seen substantial flooding, even in 2004, and which has been prioritised. Clonmel was the focus of the main expenditure in the humanitarian aid scheme. We are about to bring that to public exhibition. There was a review of the scheme as a result of the last flooding, which forced some of the original engineering plans to be reviewed. It is important that practical lessons are learned when drawing up schemes. I have a fair idea of where OPW funds will need to be spent unless we get substantially more than €20 million. Clearly, we will be watching the situation in Dublin and we will take on board the comprehensive report and advice we receive.
Does that mean that the Minister of State will identify some priority areas and bring them forward for early consideration or will these areas be sidelined until the €20 million has been spent?
If we are warned that there is genuine severe flood risk due to coastal erosion and if there is an engineering solution to the problem, we will examine it. However, some of these engineering solutions can be quite challenging and some of them can very expensive.
I think it would cost approximately €1.5 million to prevent flooding on the seafront, which is not an enormous amount. The area would be regarded as a priority even by those who drew up the report. I would like to ask a final question about possible plans for Abbotstown.
The Government decided in January 2004 to improve phased delivery as resources permit of a sporting campus at Abbotstown to include medical and training facilities, administrative facilities and eventually, with private investment, an indoor sports arena. Campus Stadium Ireland, a company specifically established by the Government to oversee the development of the sports campus, commissioned a development control plan for the campus and it is expected that a Government decision on the implementation of the plan will be sought by the Department of Arts, Sports and Tourism in the near future.
Does the Minister of State have a member on the board of Campus Stadium Ireland?
Sean Benton is a member of the board and Con Haugh, who is the assistant secretary of the Department of Arts, Sports and Tourism, is the chairman of the board.
I would like to see some presentation on the merit of the proposals coming forward from the board because there is a degree of scepticism about the sports campus and a suspicion that it has been excessively politicised. There is a need to get the project on to a rational level and see if we are getting value for money. I have not seen any reports from Stadium Campus Ireland. Perhaps we could obtain a report from it.
It is the responsibility of the Minister for Arts, Sports and Tourism and both he and the committee are actively working on a report that will be brought before Government in the near future.
Could the Minister of State send the committee a note setting out his own outlook from a property management perspective?
I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Parlon, and his progress report on decentralisation, the locations that have been identified and the progress that has been made regarding sites. Decentralisation is being implemented and will be concluded over the next few years.
I would like to discuss those locations that were not selected under first announcement of the decentralisation programme. In particular, I would like to ask the Minister of State about progress regarding the identification and purchase of a site or building for the town of Roscommon which has been earmarked for the relocation of the Land Registry. I understand that contact was made with some of the people who put forward proposals to the Department of Finance and for which it had advertised in January 2004. Will the Minister of State indicate the level of progress that has been made regarding these proposals and when the announcement regarding the next phase of decentralisation will be made?
Will the Minister of State inform the committee when the new building in Roscommon to accommodate civil servants from the Department of Agriculture and Food, the Department of Health and Children, the Department of Social and Family Affairs and the Revenue Commissioners will open? What procedures will be used to recruit people to run the building? Obviously, civil servants will occupy the building but other staff will be needed to run the building, be they maintenance staff, ushers or porters. I am informed that there could be 30 or 40 people in that category. Will these people be recruited directly by the Office of Public Works or will they be recruited through maintenance companies or contractors?
I have two questions regarding the area of flood maintenance. Both the Minister of State and I attended many public meetings on this issue regarding the lack of maintenance on the main channel on the Shannon, particularly the section which has caused all the problems south of Athlone. I know that the Minister of State commissioned a report on this area. Unfortunately, I did not receive a copy of it and I do not know if it was ever made public. Are there any proposals to deal with that maintenance problem, particularly in that section?
The Minister of State is aware that all Bord na Móna developments are drained into tributaries and end up in the main channel in that section. Up to 50,000 acres of peat lands are used by Bord na Móna and this is to be welcomed as it creates employment and provides energy in power stations. However, peat lands must be drained for peat to be harvested and all this drained water goes into the main channel of the Shannon.
This has created enormous problems for farmers. It causes problems on the Leinster and Connacht sides, particularly in the south Roscommon and west Athlone area. People have been forced to leave their homes in this area. Two to three times a year they are forced make a 20-mile round trip to reach Athlone when in normal circumstances the journey would last two miles. People in this area have always identified lack of maintenance as a problem. It is well documented that there are large deposits of peat in that area that have lodged in the river along the banks and mouths of the tributaries and at the weirs. Meelick Weir has been identified as one of the areas where complications have occurred. Does the Office of Public Works propose to develop a maintenance programme for this section? There is no wish to drain the main channel of the river as it would not be acceptable. There are European rules and directives for wetlands but people are entitled to normal maintenance. The river cannot remain an outfall forever, without some form of maintenance being carried out.
Many of the tributaries that lead to the main channel are maintained by different drainage boards, which are overseen by their respective local authorities. The Office of Public Works has responsibility for maintenance of the main channel but has not carried it out in my lifetime. I do not know which report was given to the Minister of State or what it indicated concerning the problems and their resolutions but I would welcome being made aware of any proposal for maintenance and so on.
On the issue of heritage areas, the Minister of State indicated that there are hundreds of national monuments and historic properties for which the office has responsibility. He said there are 760 sites in total, with 831 permanent staff employed to maintain them. Some of these receive significant attention and money is spent on them but there are others that are never touched. No money is spent on them and no great attention is given to them. The Roscommon county manager informed me of the wish to give attention to Roscommon Castle on the basis that his local authority, with the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, has built a town park adjacent to the castle. It was a major development that cost approximately €1.5 million in construction terms alone. It covers many acres and includes over 5,000 saplings, a created lake and walkways. It is the county manager's opinion that the lighting of the castle would add to the attractiveness of the town park, which is now a main feature. However, he has encountered little joy in his attempts to have this done. The castle is an imposing structure and, due to its location, would give a great focus to the town. The Minister of State is not in a position to comment on this but perhaps the request will receive a favourable hearing in the interests of tourism. Tourism is not the Minister of State's responsibility but the castle comes under his remit.
I thank the Chairman and the Deputy. The decision was taken last year to treat the 15 Departments and 21 different agencies as the priority or first train. This has not excluded any of the others, in particular Roscommon. The Land Registry was decentralised there. I saw the other decentralised office recently and it looks extremely well. It should be ready for occupation by the end of April. However, we are still in intensive negotiations for a site for the Land Registry in Roscommon and there have been substantial expressions of interest.
All of these areas are being pursued. Clearly, we are giving priority to sign off on the earlier ones but many of them have already been finalised and the remaining number are close to conclusion. The criteria used in respect of the first carriage of the train included the personnel required under the central applications facility, CAF, and the need for a property solution. I do not expect any major difficulties with that solution in Roscommon. The issue, therefore, will be to sign up people for the Land Registry and to get them ready to go.
The issue of maintaining the new offices has already been examined. A number of different Departments will be involved. The occupying Department of a building generally has the responsibility and liability for cleaning, landscaping, security and so on. It would normally farm these tasks out to a local group. The OPW will examine the matter in terms of the different numbers of personnel between the Department of Agriculture and Food and the other Departments.
Which Department will have responsibility? The Department of Agriculture and Food will have the most personnel while the Department of Health and Children will be next with 50 or 60 employees.
The Department of Agriculture and Food will be the largest occupier there and I assume it will have responsibility. This must be worked out within that Department's Vote. I am sure it does not wish to take on the full budgetary costs if there are other Departments involved as well. This is a detail that can be worked out. They are superb offices and are well located and landscaped. For this reason, they should be maintained and the OPW will be monitoring to ensure this will be the case. Many private service providers in the Roscommon area will be keen to take on this particular responsibility.
I am surprised the Deputy does not have a copy of the Shannon report. I will make one available to him. The report has been published and made widely available to the interested parties. When I attended its launch in Banagher, many people were there and it was made available to the local press and so on but we have not received any responses. I have heard about reasons for the flooding of particular areas throughout my life. People tried to point their fingers at Meelick Weir or Bord na Móna but this report did not identify any causes. It examined much and held extensive consultations with the landowners, local authorities, State agencies and all the stakeholders. It sought to find a culprit, if there was such a thing, and was carried out by a qualified engineering group. The group did not indicate any stark difficulties. Even the issue of silting did not prove to be a major problem in terms of examining the profiles carried out many years ago and those done more recently.
The problem is that it is a shallow basin. Changes in farming, forestry and developments, combined with any heavy rainfall, cause water to drain into the Shannon so quickly that it has difficulty coping. The cost involved, in comparison with the modest level of benefit and the scale of the environmental and ecological issues, means that any major works on the Shannon are unlikely to rank high in potential flood relief measures.
One does not witness many homes or businesses flooded along the Shannon. People have been conscious of this throughout the years in terms of developments. There are new developments that some believed were madness but the research and engineering carried out has allowed these developments to escape flooding, particularly in the Athlone area. This report did not identify an easy solution. The minute a digger or another machine is put on the Shannon there will be difficulties from the environmental and ecological points of view. I will make a copy of the report available to the Deputy in the coming days.
One of the areas covered in the report was the efficient management referred to by the Deputy. A number of different stakeholders have responsibility for the levels of the Shannon. Waterways Ireland, the ESB, Bord na Móna and the OPW must adhere to statutory obligations. The report states these obligations are being met but recommends that there could be a liaison between the OPW and the different factors to ensure the most efficient management. Waterways Ireland is concerned with maintaining water levels for water craft, particularly during summer. This is the purpose of the weirs and their extensions. Bord na Móna is obliged under law to maintain water levels at Ardnacrusha which, however, is no longer a major element of the national grid. Alongside greater sophistication in weather forecasting, optimal management of water levels may prevent a recurrence of past summer and winter floods.
Roscommon Castle is an OPW site but the issue of illuminating it has not crossed my desk. The lighting on Trim Castle is a major attraction to that town. I am willing to pursue the matter further if the Deputy so wishes. The local authority may be prepared to pay the electricity charges or other arrangements may be agreed. Light pollution in rural areas can give rise to problems but I understand that Roscommon Castle lies within an urban area. The site's attraction would be enhanced if it were illuminated.
I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Finance. I have a number of issues I wish to raise with him. A commitment was made to relocate Bus Éireann to Mitchelstown but this has not yet happened. It is now rumoured that the relocation will not take place and only one application was made for transfer to Mitchelstown. This appears to be a negative indictment of the proposed relocation. I ask for a commitment that another State agency be relocated to Mitchelstown if Bus Éireann does not do so. The only Munster town benefitting from decentralisation is Clonakilty. Why has it jumped ahead of other Munster towns?
I listened attentively to comments on public private partnerships. Are we now moving away from this concept because it is not cost-effective? Does an alternative proposal exist? I am aware that one of the financing parties, Jarvis Projects Limited, is experiencing difficulties elsewhere. Is this is a factor?
As a Deputy for east Cork I feel let down because serious flooding continues to occur in Mallow and Fermoy in the aftermath of heavy rain in the south west. Fermoy suffers more severe effects than any other town in the Blackwater valley. I fail to understand why definite action is not taken. I am told amelioration of the situation is to be deferred until next year. That is not good enough. Analysis of flood cycles suggests that a major flood may occur this autumn or early winter. Something must be done. It is tragic that 37 private homes require protection and that commercial developments at flood level aggravate flood problems for others. I inquired into the possibility of alternative approaches to fast-tracking the flood plan but I have not yet received an answer.
Salmon fishing on the Blackwater, which is one of Europe's most beautiful rivers, benefits the region. A number of guest houses and hotels thrive on foreign visitors who come for coarse angling and sport fishing on the river at different times of the year. Any interference with the weir on the river arising from refurbishment or flood alleviation is a cause for concern. There are concerns that a rebuilt salmon weir may resemble the work done in the aftermath of Kilkenny's misery.
I have a long shopping list for the Minister of State.
We have the whole evening.
I have more time than the Minister of State. There are a number of veterinary laboratories in the Munster region, including regional laboratories in Cork and Limerick, with which the Minister of State will be familiar from his days as a farmer. The brucellosis and dairy laboratories, which are part of the Minister of State's brief, are to be relocated to Macroom. I would like an update on this. The regional veterinary laboratories are important facilities for animal disease in the context of the discontinuation in 1992 of quarantine for animal imports from the Single Market. Will the Minister of State consider, as a rationalisation measure, locating one regional veterinary laboratory in the centre of Munster? Many people are aggrieved that the brucellosis laboratory is being relocated from Cork city to Macroom. This is not the right location because it is in the south west.
Some in Mallow and Fermoy, a majority of whom are shopkeepers and small business people, have not yet received compensation from the last flood relief fund. They are left out on a limb because their homes and businesses are in the same building. A number of do-gooders distributed forms and claimed that money would be available. My belief was that business people would be compensated for their loss of goods. Many suffered greatly from the floods late last year and early this year and their fate is still uncertain. I have been in correspondence with the Minister of State's officials and I would like to see a prompt resolution of this issue.
Coastal erosion has occurred around Youghal, including the recent incident where a bank burst on the River Oomaning which flows into the sea at Ballymacoda. An inspector surveyed the damage. Will the work be done to ameliorate this state of affairs which occurs every 25 or 30 years? Some of the finest agricultural land on this island was damaged. Will that work be carried out? I await the Minister of State's reply in respect of which I may have some further questions.
The Deputy raised the issue of the proposed decentralisation of Bus Éireann to Mitchelstown and of there being a poor take-up of the posts through the CAF. The trade unions within Bus Éireann took issue with the CAF and there was an understanding that there would be a difficulty. The CAF applied itself mainly to Civil Service Departments and the ability to make transfers within those. We can examine that area. Bus Éireann has made substantial investment in the Munster area. I understand, from documentation I have seen, that it has in excess of 500 people based there.
There is the involvement of Bus Éireann in depots at Killarney, Tralee, Cork city and so on. There is no reason Bus Éireann should not operate out of Mitchelstown. We are the delivery arm of the State. The operation of the programme is up to the Ministers with responsibility for each Department and the decentralisation implementation group. The Deputy should raise this issue with the Minister for Transport. The Government is fully committed to the implementation of the full decentralisation plan. There is nobody, as such, being dropped off at this stage. The issue of Bus Éireann must be progressed from within. Issues of dissatisfaction have arisen among other agencies but progress is made as soon as the chief executive and the Minister with responsibility start dealing with and solving the problems. I am aware that a number of these have been substantially resolved.
The Deputy also raised the issue of whether the Government is turning its back on PPPs. The advice on PPPs is that they are cost-effective but projects must be of a certain scale because there is quite an expense involved in terms of projects qualifying. We would consider them for some of our bigger projects. The four big headquarters are Mullingar, Carlow, Drogheda and Portlaoise. The Portlaoise project to accommodate more than 800 people would probably cost around €80 million. That would lend itself readily to a PPP project. We could also consider linking that with the project for the headquarters in Carlow, which is only 25 miles further down the road. There is substantial scope for PPPs among those four big projects.
The Deputy stated that Clonakilty is the only decentralisation location in Munster. He seems to have overlooked Killarney, Kilrush, Listowel, Newcastle West, Limerick, Thurles and Roscrea. From my limited geographical knowledge, they are also in Munster.
I do not know that much about geography.
I do not know what particular attractions the Deputy sees in Clonakilty. It is a lovely town. Is he implying that there are other suitable locations? It is only one of the many decentralisation projects for Munster.
The Deputy will be up to date on the plans for the Fermoy scheme. I hope his predictions of a major flood there this autumn do not come to pass. If he has better information on that, he had better inform the OPW. Was it Old Moore's Almanac he consulted or has he some better information on that?
I understand the cycle. That is what people tell me. There are good historians in the town.
The Deputy referred to the issue, which he raised previously, of the small number of houses that will be served by the scheme. It is an expensive scheme. The cost of the scheme is in the region of €30 million. There are only 37 private houses in that area. At the height of the flooding in Clonmel, people who live in the new apartments with steps up to their hall doors were safe and happy in their homes while the old traditional houses were inundated yet again. There will be public consultation on the scheme but it will probably be the autumn before that takes place. Such consultation will present an opportunity for the Deputy, others in the area and the local authority to raise such issues. However, at present we are charged to devise an engineering solution for the design and the feasibility of the scheme. Before the Department of Finance approves a scheme, it must be shown the cost-benefit analysis of it. In this case, it must be shown that the benefit of the proposed scheme to Fermoy will be in excess of the cost of the scheme. The Deputy might argue, as he did previously, that providing alternative accommodation for the owners of the 37 private houses might be more cost-effective than implementing a big scheme. However, the scheme has wider implications.
Could they be grant-aided or considered as individual houses?
There is a consideration if the only issue involved were the 37 private houses but there are further implications in respect of the scheme. We are conscious of provision for those houses. With the limited moneys available to the OPW going forward, we must find the most cost-effective solutions. All those issues can be thrashed out in terms of the design put forward and at the public exhibition.
There is concern about features of the river, particularly on the eastern side.
The dredging of rivers has become an issue of late, as we discovered to our cost in Kilkenny and elsewhere. Where toxic substances have secured themselves in riverbeds they are quite safe as long as they are not removed and dumped elsewhere. The experience in Kilkenny has caused us to examine the most up-to-date measures that can be taken. The use of mountable barriers is a new solution. If there is a flood risk, there is a facility to mount barriers. As the Deputy said, the river in Fermoy is beautiful. The easiest solution to a risk of flooding in any place would be to build a six foot high precast concrete wall along the edge of a river and make sure that it never overflowed. However, for the 11 and a half months of the year that there is not a flood risk, people would not want such constructions.
The Deputy raised the issue of the salmon fishery and concern about the depletion of salmon stocks. There is a wider discussion going on about drift netting.
I raised the issue of the salmon fishing in terms of the Fermoy weir. I am aware of the misery and the difficulty that arose in Kilkenny.
A good salmon fisherman who is a colleague of the Deputy's approached me lately.
From the midlands?
Yes. He fishes in the Deputy's part of the country. His only concern is drift netting and why we do not address it. That, however, is a bigger issue.
In terms of the Deputy's concern about interfering with the weir, I assume we have learned from our experiences in Kilkenny. I understand that works are now planned for the weir in Kilkenny to deal with concerns regarding fishing. There was an issue there and we put in place a temporary measure.
I do not want to enter into an argument on engineering with the Minister of State. There is quite a difference between the Mallow proposal and the Fermoy proposal. The Mallow proposal is set down on paper. It proposes that there will be floodgates in Mallow based on the polders in Holland. Different structures are proposed for Fermoy. There is concern among people engaged in business organisations and fisheries about the proposal for Fermoy. I might arrange for a deputation to discuss it with the Minister of State.
We took the best advice in Kilkenny and there was a deficiency in the plan. It was caused by a very low water supply which had not been a problem previously in Kilkenny but that probably indicated the success of the scheme. The fish catch that was there will be modified and I hope that will not be a problem. I do not want to be bombarded by salmon fishermen following the implementation of any other scheme. I hope we will learn from our experiences in Kilkenny.
With regard to the siting of the veterinary laboratories, the Deputy proposed that one should be based in the centre of Munster. I do not know where he would call the centre of Munster. It would probably be around Mallow or Fermoy. Their siting is an issue for the Department and the Minister for Agriculture and Food. As soon as the Minister directs the OPW to provide the facilities, we will do that.
I raised that issue initially because the Minister of State talked about cost-effective considerations. My Opposition colleague often refers to the cost-effective and savings considerations. We would get a better service if that was achieved. There will be another day to debate this matter. The logistics of where the facilities will be based will lie with the OPW. There is also the relocation of the office in the South Mall, Cork, to Moorepark, which is acceptable. When will that happen?
Having made representations, visited the brucellosis laboratory in Cork city and being aware of lengthy delays, the new experience will be quite different. It is an efficient service. The documentation is sent by post generally and the turn around is almost immediate. If there is a new location for that facility, I am sure that, if anything, performance at it will be enhanced. The location is not a difficulty. If there is an overnight delivery by courier, whether from Cork city, Mallow or Mitchelstown, the capacity of the State Laboratory and the agricultural laboratory in Dublin is substantial. Massive investment has been made there. It would be worth the Deputy's time to visit the start-of-the-art facilities there. From an efficiency point of view, they should be maximised. The facilities are superb. The siting of the facility is an issue for the Minister for Agriculture and Food.
The Minister of State is referring to the regional veterinary laboratories.
Yes and likewise in terms of the relocation. We were directed to relocate the State Laboratory and the agricultural laboratories. We took that on board and delivered on it. The Deputy also raised the issue of the transfer of the small number of people in the offices in Cork, which he also raised previously.
I raised that matter. What is the situation regarding the transfer of the Department of Agriculture and Food offices from the South Mall in Cork to Moorepark in Fermoy? I am in favour of the transfer.
The decision was announced by the Minister for Finance and the Deputy over a weekend.
It was announced by the Deputy and the Minister?
It came as a big surprise to me as well because nobody consulted me or the OPW as to the suitability of Fermoy. The Deputy just went ahead and announced it.
Well done.
The Minister of State will have to go back to the drawing board.
I am sure plenty of space is available. They are State-owned lands which meet the criteria. I am confident a cost-effective office can be put in place there.
On the question of the people who have not yet been compensated, this refers to a small number of private residences attached to business premises. They did not meet the criteria laid down for the humanitarian relief scheme. However, we have made representations to the Department of Finance seeking clarification. Following a preliminary assessment by the Irish Red Cross Society on the extent of the damage, a sum of €3 million was transferred to the special flood aid scheme. Each application was subsequently carefully examined and assessed in detail, including on-site inspection and interview. To date, €2.3 million has been paid out. A small number of cases did not meet the strict criteria. We have consulted the Department of Finance to determine whether these cases can be dealt with under the aid scheme and we await a reply. I will repeat the request to the Department.
I am not quarrelling with the Minister of State. I suggest these people should be considered on compassionate grounds because they have suffered a great deal. They are the owners of small businesses and all their marketable goods were lost. A number of do-gooders distributed application forms from the Minister of State's Department. They gave these people a commitment because they had been told by officials that they would be helped. This is causing a lot of local anger. I ask for the matter to be addressed.
The OPW will clarify the situation very quickly.
I appeal to the Minister of State to use his influence to ensure they are paid.
Humanitarian aid in these circumstances has become a substantial cost to the OPW and to the taxpayer. In the case of a private house being flooded, some blame can be apportioned to the lack of infrastructure in the area. However, business people have a responsibility to insure their property.
They cannot get insurance, as the Minister of State is probably aware. One cannot obtain insurance for a flood land.
It is possible in some cases. The Government cannot leave itself open to such costs. Criteria have been laid down for the humanitarian aid scheme.
There are only ten cases.
We are seeking clarification from the Department of Finance.
I suggest they should be compensated for the damage to the living area of their business premises.
I am hopeful that they will be paid. However, the Government cannot leave itself open to claims from a large company which may not have insured its stock. We cannot create a precedent in the case of paying out in Fermoy and then be faced with a claim for €10 million for loss of stock.
I suggest the Minister for Finance should make that announcement.
The OPW sent an engineer to Fermoy and he is completing a report. We will consider the consequences of the report. The situation is clearly also an issue for Cork County Council. The Deputy and others have made representations on this matter. There may be substantial consequences from an expense point of view. In light of the flood review report, a significant issue will be the matter of who picks up the tab.
This arises from the equinoctial gales in September and October when the winds blew the river banks apart. Historically this work had always been carried out on a 20 to 25-year cycle by the Office of Public Works in conjunction with the former Department of Lands. I asked the people concerned to consult their property deeds but as farming is a commercial business and most deeds are lodged in banks and financial institutions, they were a little reluctant to make inquiries. It is a very good commercial farming area.
A preliminary inspection of the area was carried out but survey work and the examination of levels is still required to form a preliminary view of the full nature and extent of the problem. The report will issue shortly. The OPW will consider the report and consult Cork County Council on liability for the cost of the work.
Why is Cork County Council to be involved? This is not coastal erosion but inland damage.
The information is that the OPW has no responsibility for the embankments in question. The agency is responsible for arterial drainage in cases where it has installed that drainage. The OPW cleans and maintains all rivers under its care on a regular basis and according to legislation.
Has the OPW checked in detail?
The OPW has information from the preliminary report.
I could refer to coastal erosion in the area but that is the responsibility of the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. This area is well inland.
The flood review group set out to clarify individual roles and obviously somebody will need to take responsibility. However this was not the responsibility of the OPW in the past.
The Minister of State indicated in his opening statement that 3,492 posts were being decentralised. Will he give the committee a statement of the capital cost of accommodating those 3,492 posts and a list of the properties in Dublin being vacated as a consequence of the decentralisation of those 3,492 posts? The Minister of State has not provided the committee with any clear, hard-cut costings of the moves. This seems very similar to what the committee was told before and no new information is being provided. I suggest the Minister of State provide a tabular statement of the cost associated with this number of 3,492 and the likely revenue to be generated by the properties vacated in Dublin.
Regarding the costs, I was in Sligo yesterday to turn the sod and sign a formal agreement with the contractor for the extension to the Department of Social and Family Affairs premises. The cost is €14 million. Other buildings will be put to tender for sale and we will look for value for money. The actual costs are not available. This will be commercially sensitive information. They will be sold through competitive public tender. It is expected that between 30% and 40% of the total office space either leased or owned by Departments in Dublin will be vacated.
Is that 30% to 40% of everything?
This will be 30% to 40% of the entire property portfolio.
The Minister of State is bringing forward a first phaseso I presume he has more details in respect of the first phase than of the indicative percentages in respect of all the programme. Can he not provide the committee with more detailed information on the cost and impact of the 15 early moversso that it can be given a handle on what is happening? The Minister of State seems to be depending on this €900 million and I do not understand what he is dividing by to give the cost per unit moved. The committee at this stage has a right to see a little bit more in terms of financial projections on the first phase.
What has been announced is phase one of an overall scheme to decentralise 10,600 people into the regions. That overall decentralisation will make available for either surrender of lease or sale 30% to 40% of the total office space in use by us in Dublin. Any examination of the property costs in the provinces will note a substantial increase but they are substantially cheaper than in Dublin.
The Minister of State knows the number of posts and the Departments from which they originate. He therefore will know the properties which will be vacated. To offer figures of 30% to 40% is not adequate at this stage. The Minister of State has highlighted a first phase and knows what property will be vacated but we are entitled to more detail than the global estimates we have heard since the start of the programme.
The relocation of 10,600 civil servants is a substantial process. The civil servants choosing to move to Sligo come from different Departments; they have not all chosen to come directly from the Department of Social and Family Affairs. That is why from a cost benefit analysis point of view there will be a negative cash flow for the first few years.
The sections are being moved.
They are not. This issue has come up time and again. It is a voluntary scheme. Civil servants will be decentralised because they choose to be decentralised.
What will they do when they get there if there are no tasks allocated to them?
The tasks are clearly identified.
What about the tasks vacated at this end?
The 100 civil servants going to Sligo will not all come from the specific area where the work is done in Dublin.
As they will no longer process disability benefits, the space occupied for the processing of disability benefit will no longer be needed and there will be a vacant site.
Of the 100 civil servants who choose to go, ten may come from the Department of Agriculture and Food, ten from the Department of Defence and ten from the Department of Finance.
Yes but the disability benefit processing unit is still being closed in Dublin and opened in Sligo. There must be a vacant property at this end to match the new activity at that end.
There will be but we will have vacant desks in a number of Departments initially. Eventually we will be able to rationalise the entire project but it will take time. We cannot just say "to hell or to Connacht" and move 10,600 civil servants. That is not feasible and it was never proposed it would be done overnight.
It is the Minister of State's job to sketch the critical path on the property management side but it sounds as if there is no plan and it is all up in the air, with a vacant desk here and a vacant desk there. We do not know what we will do. The Minister of State prides himself on how quickly he will turn around these vacant spaces but it does not sound as if any critical path analysis has been undertaken.
Obviously, there must be a degree of flexibility. It is a voluntary scheme and civil servants will choose to move. The first years will be the least beneficial in terms of costs because there will be space in the decentralised unit and space in Dublin.
How long will that go on?
The faster we move with decentralisation, the faster we can rationalise office space in Dublin. As soon as we have a building vacant, we will rationalise it. I have given the example of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform that was vacated for a different reason.
If the disability benefit unit is closed and all those working in it are reassigned to other tasks or sent to Sligo, surely there will be a property available for another use? The Minister of State is saying the staff who used to process disability benefits will still be at their desks if they decide not to move.
In some cases half a floor in the headquarters building will be vacated.
This sounds chaotic.
It sounds as if Deputy Bruton would like a diktat where staff will be shifted regardless of whether they are ready.
No, the Minister of State is responsible for property management and has said this is all planned.
The Deputy insisted this must be voluntary but is now saying there should be a diktat where staff are sent at his insistence.
That is not what I said. The Minister of State cannot offer any coherent analysis of what property will be vacated and when. We are entitled to know because this is State money, not the Minister of State's own money. We want it to be used properly.
We will monitor the position closely.
Rather than being polemic, the Minister of State should face the responsibilities he is paid to face.
The Deputy cannot speak out of both sides of his mouth. This is a voluntary scheme. The Department of Agriculture and Food has vacated two floors that are now being prepared for new staff who have been taken on in the Oireachtas. The two floors have been vacated with maximum efficiency without causing any upset within the trade union and among the representatives of the workers.
This is the first phase. Surely the Minister of State has some idea of when the property will be vacated. Otherwise there is no end date and double rent will be paid for an indefinite period. Was a process for reallocation not negotiated with the trade unions or is the Minister of State leaving it in the air to see what happens?
To build the offices in Sligo, there is an 18 month €14 million project. It will be a year and a half before they are available for staff. We are committed to the project and the contractor on the ground will be paid. He has arranged his terms with the OPW to be paid as the process advances. In the meantime we must continue to accommodate the staff in Dublin. When the building is finished, the human resources issues will be worked out and the staff will move and create 100 vacancies. However, they will not all be on the one floor of one Department. It will be up to the Civil Service Commission to rationalise it to best effect. There is that pressure for every Department. No Department in Dublin has extra space. This will give them all opportunities to rationalise space and give the OPW an opportunity where a building or section of a building becomes available to rationalise it for another Department, surrender the lease or dispose of the building.
What are the cost incentives? If many of the spaces are occupied in a Department, even though the task is being undertaken elsewhere, will there be a financial penalty while such shadow offices are occupied? Does the OPW bear the rental penalty? There must be an incentive if this is to move efficiently.
The OPW polices this issue because it must seek resources from the Department of Finance in every Estimate. We are fully aware of total staffing levels and the space available.
If a Department continues to occupy shadow offices, will it pay the rent or will the OPW do so?
The OPW will pay the rent but if it is paying for a new building in Sligo or Tullamore and also expected to pay rent for the headquarters where there is vacant space, we will take action.
Should a strategy not describe how that action would be taken?
That is what we do on a daily basis.
I am at a loss to see the strategy behind this. I do not understand what the Minister of State will do to ensure this happens as efficiently as it ought. Perhaps the Chairman has a clearer view but it appears it is being left to chance. There is no financial incentive and no negotiated deal with the result that we could experience long delays before this is resolved. It is not satisfactory.
We have laid out the indicative construction completion dates for all 25 projects. The indicative construction completion date is the date the new Department will be ready to move in. We are coming at it from two angles. The responsibility of the OPW is to provide property solutions. The personnel unit of the Department of Finance and the Civil Service Commission are dealing with the HR and retraining issues.
By autumn 2006 the building will be complete for the Department of Social and Family Affairs and staff will be ready to move. In the interim we want to find out what office space will become available as a result of the move and how we can rationalise the plan for the entire portfolio in Dublin. It will be an ongoing process. We have never had property to spare; every Department is crying out for space.
While I accept it is an ongoing process, I do not accept that this committee has been shown a strategic approach that might give us some understanding of what will happen if something goes wrong or how the process will work. I cannot see why the Minister of State's section is so reluctant to offer this; it has created an implementation committee which acts as a cushion with the result that we get no answers from the OPW because responsibility has been delegated to the committee. It is not a satisfactory process but the Minister of State must be accountable.
I am accountable for it and so too are the staff of the Office of Public Works. We have a good record——
It is not accountable to the Oireachtas.
If the Deputy has a query about a particular property——
It is not about a particular property but the efficiency of the process. Why is there no financial incentive for Departments to occupy shadow space when their post is clearly being moved on? Why is there no way of putting the penalty where it ought to be to ensure they move promptly to resolve those issues?
There is an element of the carrot and stick approach. For various reasons, there has been considerable opposition from different unions to the decentralisation programme. Every representative group has its own angle to get a better deal for its members. That is why unions and representative bodies are set up. This is a major process and we have not decided to move just one Department. Up to eight Department headquarters are being moved and it will take several years for it to come together. The Office of Public Works will be watchful of the use of resources.
The main Dublin headquarters of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform was sold immediately when it became available. We have taken the opportunity of the buoyant property market. I will not pre-empt the cost of providing a particular space for a worker. That is up to the private sector and its competitive factors to apply. Neither will I pre-empt property values. Many eminent property specialists claimed we would get X, Y and Z amounts for different properties when they went up for public tender. Thankfully, they all substantially exceeded those amounts. The private sector will get involved in a competitive tender while we will get the best bargain for the State. Likewise, the available office properties in the Dublin 2 area are meeting a ready market.
There is an issue with accommodation provided for the Department of Health and Children. If another State property becomes available, the Department of Health and Children will have first option on it. We will provide the best deal for the public service first and any property excess to requirements will be put on the open market.
I thank the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Parlon, and his officials for attending and assisting in our consideration of the Estimates.