Mr. Robert Watt:

As an observation, in order to have a debate we need to put out information. We have provided an awful lot of information as part of these discussions. The first step is to look at the public sector benchmark and the comparator between the assessment of cost benefits for traditionally procured projects and those of projects procured through PPP. For the first time that information is out there and that could lead to informed debate around assessing which option we should go for. As the Comptroller and Auditor General mentioned in respect of a previous issue around risk, there is an element of estimation here. It is not clear-cut. There needs to be debate about that. People need to scrutinise the comparator and see if they are content with its robustness. Based on the information which we set out, there is potential to have a much more informed debate. Just having the information out there does not, of course, mean that debate will be informed, but it has the potential to be. The post-project reviews could also help, but let us see how that contributes to the debate.

This issue is not exclusive to PPPs. It is relevant for all public works. The whole debate is very important because there is a lot of discussion about how we fund infrastructure. People talk about off-balance sheet and innovative solutions and all the rest of it. Many Deputies responding to many policy issues suggest that there is an innovative or off-balance sheet solution when in fact there is not and the options are that the people who use the infrastructure pay for it, that the taxpayer pays for it now, or that the taxpayer pays for it on a deferred basis. It must be clarified that somebody has to pay for infrastructure and that how we pay for it is the key issue. I fully agree with the Deputy in terms of the debate.

On the public code, I do not think we would describe it as voluntary. It is not voluntary for Departments to decide whether they will do a cost-benefit analysis of a project. They have to do it or the Minister for Finance or for Public Expenditure and Reform will not approve the money because the Government will not approve it. It is not voluntary in that sense but there is no legal sanction because it is not based on legislation. Of course, there are many things which we do not put in legislation for very good reasons. Administrative rules and regulations drive much of our activity. Whether we want to go down the route of trying to codify it in law is another policy issue but it would raise many different questions.