Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour) | Oireachtas source

Mr. Costello is referring to the Dublin city plan. How will lessons be learned? How can the witnesses be sure that what they are doing will not result in the same situation that occurred at the Mater hospital? Can the witnesses break down the reasons for the impairment that occurred and the waste of taxpayers' money? These are the statements from 2012 and I think we must seek greater clarity on how the decision was made to put forward a planning application that anyone could have seen had no chance of success - there were too many question marks. The report says that formal processes were established to identify and evaluate risks associated with the planning. Did the previous board do this? There are planning expenses of €1.5 million and this is separate to the figures given for the four bodies - the business service, the integrated design team and so on. It states on page 14 that, arising from the Government decision to change the location of the new children's hospital to the St. James's Hospital site, the board is of the opinion that there are certain elements of the business project management services and design works procured to date that are unlikely to retain their full value as assets for the future hospital. It also says the board will complete a process to review the matter. This is the process I want to see.

The witnesses have said such issues are unlikely but have not detailed the reasons for this and I believe serious questions must be answered on why there has been total impairment. Why is it not possible to carry the value of these assets into the work that is currently being done? I request a detailed account from the witnesses based on the history of the project. If they do not read the relevant documents, get the background information on the decisions that have been made and see why An Bord Pleanála categorically refused the planning application after years of work and high expenditure, they will not understand how the impairment of assets occurred.

The accompanying letter from the Comptroller and Auditor General states that on 31 December 2012 the financial statements included assets valued at €40 million. This is with regard to planning and development costs for the national paediatric hospital. The letter goes on to state that, arising from the Government's decision to change the location of the hospital, it is likely that these assets are now impaired. I contend that is not correct - the impairment arises not from the Government's decision, but from a reckless planning application. The Government had no choice but to make its decision and this should be clarified.