Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

That relates to my final question. If I understood Professor Barrett correctly, he stated that we should exploit a possible flexibility in the fiscal rules around capital investment in housing. I agree with that, as it is logical. Will Professor Barrett comment on what he believes is the situation? Are the rules open to that flexibility? Can we make an argument that would get a hearing to the effect that we should be allowed to borrow money for direct investment in housing and other key infrastructure without breaching the rules? When we argue that there should be direct State investment, the Government tells us that there must be public-private partnerships, PPPs, and that everything is being slowed down because it must do things for the private sector or else breach the rules. This is an important question and I would like Professor Barrett's opinion on it.

Will Professor Barrett comment on the fact that 85% of the housing plan is based on PPPs, with the private sector building and the State leasing from it? That seems more expensive for the State. Also, it would be more difficult for the State to make an argument to the EU that we should be allowed to breach the fiscal rules because PPPs would not generate a return to the State in the same way that direct investment would. The Government might leverage some extra money from the private sector up front, but the longer term return to the State is not guaranteed because the buildings are in the hands of the private sector. Does Professor Barrett know what I mean? I do not know whether I am explaining it fully. Since everything will be leased, our capital stock will not increase. The housing will be built, owned and managed by the private sector but leased to local authorities.