Mr. Conor O'Kelly:

I do not. I take the opposite view. I do not think we do enough of them; not by a long shot. There are a number of times when PPPs are a channel that is more attractive than others. A major consideration is whether there is an interest in having things off-balance sheet due to worries about levels of debt? Another major consideration is whether interest rates are low in absolute terms. PPPs are essentially another way of locking in low interest rates for 25 years. I would have argued for a long time that if those conditions pertain, then that is a period when the channel should be opened and more should be done. When those circumstances are not in place, there is no worry about being off-balance sheet and you are happy with debt levels, or if interest rates go significantly higher in nominal terms, then I would pull back on PPPs.

Circumstances at the moment are so favourable that we want to do as much off-balance sheet as possible. Interest rates are low and are effectively being locked in. I find the current environment to be attractive for doing PPPs. I do not think the State does enough of them. I would like to see us doing more, especially for social housing. The NDFA has produced its first 1,500 social houses at attractive costs. On average, it was €250,000 to build each of the houses. It pays about 3% to investors to manage those PPPs and finance them for us over 25 years. They are high-quality houses which have been effectively and efficiently built. We should do much more of them.