Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

There are some very worrying things in this response. In terms of judicial reviews, while one cannot stop them from happening, one can minimise their effects by making sure one's processes are really robust.

We might have information after the event in many different locations. It is like buying a house; one is an expert on how to buy a house after one has bought one but one does not get a second chance to do it in most cases. I do not see in this apart from the comments in the note from Arthur Cox anything to suggest we are unlikely to see more of this. How do we ensure value for money if the process leave us open to judicial reviews? I do not see the learning from those reviews. It would almost be better to have an expert if we are going to do PPPs who could go around the country to proof them against each other as far as is possible. I am sure we can take learning from other countries on how they do this but I am not satisfied with a scenario where something will happen because there is a change in environment. We need to examine the process in this regard. The cost of judicial reviews has to be built into the overall cost of the projects because it will all come out of the public purse in any event. We need to catch issues before they get to the point where there is a failure in the process.

I am not sure I get the point in respect of the liquidation of Carillion Construction Limited on the bottom of the second page. That relates to schools about which there is great frustration because, in some cases, they are almost complete and staff and pupils are ready to move in but they cannot because they need to be finished. The note states, "Any additional costs arising from the retendering process [which will cause a delay] or completion works will be covered by the PPP Company". Is Carillion the PPP company?