Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I appreciate that. We have discussed this in the past in the context of how the Government has started to present the numbers, particularly regarding those who have come to these shores and the cost associated with them. It presented figures which suggested everyone was going to go home or there was no cost to be borne. That has been corrected here. I bring Professor McMahon back to his opening statement in which he stated, "As we view that much of the spending labelled as outside of core spending in SPU 2024 is likely to be long-lasting, we believe it should be counted in core spending." That is the rationale he gave the committee in his opening statement. I am just looking for direction. I hear what he says about undertaking a one or two-year project and whether that is classified as non-core expenditure. The question Professor McMahon is raising is nearly a trust issue, that is, can it be trusted a project will not go on for another year into a third or fourth year. In his response, he accepted non-core expenditure can be part of how a budget can be presented and Covid-19 was an example of that, but no one knew how long Covid-19 was going to go on for. It is the same with the issues with Ukrainians under the temporary protection directive. No one knows the length of time that will take.

It could be something completely unrelated. It could be a measure introduced for two years to do X, Y or Z. The question is how IFAC would define non-core expenditure in these circumstances. Does IFAC believe every Government project, despite the fact it clearly has a legislative end point, should be dealt with as core expenditure?