Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Two issues arise with that. One relates to the area of housing leasing. We do not get the property back at the end of the lease. We have been spending on housing leasing and the property is effectively owned by the original owner at the end of the lease, even though they have their mortgage paid by the State. In those contexts, we do not have that return, so it is hard to see how that approach is justifiable in the housing context. Will Mr. Meaney talk about that?

I note that Mr. Meaney is also part of the climate division in the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. One of the other things we lose when we go for a PPP and a long-term contract relates to responsiveness. The infamous example of how PPP is a bad, perverse incentive is in regard to toll roads, where we committed the State to compensating the operators if the numbers commuting went down. Of course, from a climate perspective, we want the numbers who rely on car usage to go down. We are in a situation where we almost have to compensate a private sector company if we get what is overall a good policy outcome for the State, which would be if the numbers reliant on cars went down.

Similarly, with some of these properties or buildings we might build, we have things, for example, like State policies on retrofitting and on energy standards for buildings. If we sign up to ten and 20-year contracts, do we lose the flexibility to ensure these kind of things, these other policies, including climate policies, are properly being reflected which we can actually ensure if they are in direct State ownership and control? As the witnesses will be aware if they head up the climate unit, climate policies, targets and requirements are escalating. For example, given that Ireland is now only heading for 29% versus the 51% it still needs to get to by 2030, we are obviously going to see a whole set of new radical climate policies that will have to be introduced. In that context, will those partnerships we have signed up to be able to respond or will that come with a supplementary charge for the State? My questions concern the flexibility and responsiveness we might lose in public private partnerships. Perhaps the witnesses would also explicitly address the issue of housing leasing.