Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

With regard to the gap funding model, in 2015, five elements were looked at. If one goes through the work of KPMG and PwC at the time, it seemed like a good option when looking at the pros and cons. It was the cheapest overall, with the lowest level of subsidy required upfront and it minimised State exposure to risk. It was all good.

It went with the gap funding model and it was hard to disagree with it at the time. When SIRO and Eir pulled out, I am at loss to understand how the project team and the Department did not revisit the ownership model, recognising that all of the pros had effectively evaporated, and consider how it still made sense to go with the gap funding model. Following the passage of 20 months, the State now has to carry all of the burden of risk with the figure of €3 billion. Was it a bad decision not to re-evaluate the situation at the time?