Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I welcome Mr. Griffin, Mr. Colgan and their colleagues before the committee today. Perhaps I can start with the last point raised by Deputy Nolan as to whether anything of this nature could happen again or whether this could have happened with the other 420 projects of that nature in INTERREG III. While the witnesses felt that this was an exceptional situation, how can they come to that conclusion, considering that the only reason we have been able to have the results we have seen unfold here today was because of a whistleblower? Moreover, it was not just because of a single whistleblower but because of two whistleblowers. In the case of the first, no attention was paid to the details of what was presented and in the second case, eventually it came to the conclusion. The SEUPB's own damning report from 2012, when it set up an independent audit of the entire project, came to the conclusion that 97% of the funds that were paid out were ineligible for European Union funding. The report found that the entire project was poorly managed and appraised. The SEUPB's own independent investigation in March 2012 is a damning indictment of the entire project. However, the only reason it could have come to that conclusion was because of a whistleblower. As there were no whistleblowers in the other projects, how can one now present this committee with an assessment that this is exceptional? I understand there were 420 other projects under INTERREG III and 7,500 projects under the PEACE programme, all of which were drawing on European money, all of which was linked to various Departments. Obviously, a substantial number of projects were in place. Will the witnesses answer that question first? Would they like to revise the conclusion that both have presented, namely, that they would perceive this Bytel situation as being exceptional?