Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees
Wednesday, 8 October 2025
Committee on Infrastructure and National Development Plan Delivery
The Role of Engineering in Delivering High-Quality Infrastructure: Discussion
2:00 am
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The purpose of the meeting today is to discuss the role of engineering in delivering high-quality infrastructure, including those projects set out in the national development plan. I will ask people to put their hands up so that those watching on screens know who is who. I am pleased to welcome Engineers Ireland, from which we have Mr. John Jordan and Mr. Damien Owens. From the Irish Academy of Engineering, we have Mr. Sean Finlay and Mr. Tom Leahy. From the Association of Consulting Engineers of Ireland, we have Mr. Tim Murnane, Mr. Shane Dempsey and Mr. Joe Burns.
I have a note in relation to Oireachtas privilege. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks.
It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.
I remind members that they will each be afforded a six-minute slot for questions and answers and we will have a second round if people want to come in again. We will hear from the groups in the following order: the Irish Academy of Engineering; the Association of Consulting Engineers of Ireland; and Engineers Ireland. I now invite the witnesses to make their opening statements, which were agreed at eight minutes each. Some people will have a side presentation as well.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
For the benefit of people watching, we have presentations by way of slides on our screens and the first witnesses are just logging in to the Oireachtas system so they can make their presentation. We will give it a moment. I will suspend the meeting for a minute while we get the IT bits sorted.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We are now back in public session and will have the first presentation from Mr. Sean Finlay, president of the Irish Academy of Engineering.
Mr. Sean Finlay:
A dhaoine uaisle, gabhaim buíochas libh as an gcuireadh a bheith anseo inniu. We are very pleased to have this invitation to be here today. At the outset, let me say how appreciative the academy is of the formation of this committee, which is carrying out very important work in relation to infrastructure. Joining me today is Mr. Tom Leahy, special adviser, director and past president. Also in support I have Mr. Tim Corcoran, chair of the infrastructure committee, and Ms Anne-Marie Conibear, who is a fellow of the academy.
The aim of the Irish Academy of Engineering is to advance the well-being of the country by gathering the expertise and insights of eminent engineers to provide independent, evidence-based advice to policymakers on matters involving engineering and technology in Ireland. We have affiliations with other academies in Europe, with Euro-CASE, and worldwide with the International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences. We also have a memorandum of understanding with the Royal Academy of Engineering in the UK and we have just recently signed a memorandum of understanding with Engineers Ireland, whose representatives are here today with us.
I will hand over now to Mr. Leahy, who will bring us through the next couple of slides.
Mr. Tom Leahy:
I thank the committee. Engineers are fundamentally problem-solvers. We are here to solve problems, not create them. It is our strong belief that Ireland now has the correct structures to deliver key infrastructure, notably with the establishment of a range of commercial semi-State companies, etc. We will list them on the board. The freedom of these organisations to deliver has been hindered by barriers. We will talk a bit about those. In terms of reform, it is our strong belief that the Government is responsible for setting out policy and that it should then hand over to the State companies and the local authorities to deliver the policy objectives of the Government. In doing that, we are concentrating in this initial presentation on housing but we have carried out a range of studies in broad areas of infrastructure. We are happy to cover those during the questions and answers session.
The first recommendation we highlight is the need for policy alignment across Departments, not just within them. All State bodies need strategic plans to 2050. Before we get lost in terminology, a strategic plan will get people absolutely nowhere. It will point them in the right direction. If after this meeting members' intention is to head off to Galway for a meeting there, the strategic plan will only say to go to Heuston Station and that is probably where they will start their journey to Galway. That is what a strategic plan is. What is really missing are what we call sectoral master plans and project delivery plans. They outline exactly the infrastructure that each semi-State body and local authority is meant to deliver. In the example of the journey to Galway, these plans will say how many trains, carriages and seats will be needed and what infrastructure, maintenance and so on is needed. Most importantly, it will tell us the arrival time. That is what is needed. That is, in one sense, the missing gap.
These plans need to be accompanied by national planning statements, which we are suggesting need to be formally adopted by Ministers and signed into law by statutory instrument. This is something rather new; I have not heard of it before. Following approval in Dáil Éireann, they can only be altered by subsequent Dáil approval. We could probably christen it as the housing, infrastructure essential-in-the-public-interest statutory instrument of 2025. I will tell the committee later on why a statutory instrument is so important.
These plans will then need to cascade in line with the national planning framework and feed into national, regional and local plans. To return to that example I gave, one does not want to arrive in Athlone and be told locally that a little bit of change had been made and in order to get to Galway, one has to go to Sligo first and then be brought by bus to Galway.
God knows what time you will arrive. This is where the alignment from top to bottom is absolutely essential. We have already discussed the issue of multi-annual funding. These large projects are delivered over five to seven years and sometimes over periods longer than that. You cannot build them if you are getting an allocation each year. Multi-annual funding is absolutely essential. There should be explicit Government support for the necessary infrastructure, particularly the removal of policy-target conflicts. In the question and answer session, I will give a couple of good examples of these policy-target conflicts.
We welcome the reform that has already taken place, particularly the infrastructure guidelines reducing the number of gates from four to three, but there are still too many approval gates at agency level. The committee has already heard me say that the major companies should be allowed to get on with it. They have the ability, the governance and the boards and they report directly to Ministers. The only approval that should be required at agency level is approval from the appointed board. This would save time and money. In our opinion, it would be a game-changer.
Mr. Sean Finlay:
I will turn to our recommendations on the reform of planning. Everybody knows we have serious delays in that regard. One of our recommendations is that all Government agencies and planning authorities should include infrastructure delivery as part of their key mission statements. That is not the case at the moment. Minor upgrading of existing facilities should be proportionate and should not require the same level of scrutiny as a multibillion euro project. There must be a much greater emphasis on the societal cost of capacity deficits. As parliamentarians, the members will unfortunately be well used to hearing this about project over-runs but, if you have a €1 billion project that is held up for ten years at an inflation rate of 7%, it will cost €2 billion, which is clearly not a desirable outcome.
We recommend some reforms to the legal system. We may be venturing into areas that are not within our immediate expertise because we are engineers but the system of environmental consent seems to be incredibly complex. It would greatly assist the courts if the Law Reform Commission could take a look at the environmental legislation with a view to some consolidation. We recommend that the commencement orders under the 2024 Act be introduced immediately. I am not aware of any move to introduce them quickly. Procedures should be simplified for small capital investment. Some members of this committee have already referred to that. The same approval process should not apply to a small wastewater treatment plant as applies to a large one serving 1 million people.
I will ask Mr. Leahy to say a few words about legal powers under the Water Services Act to address leakage on private property. It may seem very detailed but it has significant implications for rural water schemes.
Mr. Tom Leahy:
The Water Services Act 2007 was a root-and-branch reform of all water legislation going back to the Public Health (Ireland) Act 1878. The local authorities were given substantial powers under the Act but not all of those powers were transferred to Uisce Éireann. One of those not transferred to Uisce Éireann was the power to deal with leakage on private property. For the avoidance of doubt, I am not talking about somebody spending another ten minutes in the shower. I am talking about clearly identified leaks where an individual domestic property is using between 50 and 200 houses' worth of water a day. These can be fixed at no cost to the customer under the first fix free scheme but, if the customer chooses not to engage and is not interested, those leaks cannot be fixed. Fixing those can often result in the go-ahead for housing developments where the reason the housing has not proceeded is the absence of headroom in the water system. These are quick fixes that are easy to implement and should be carefully considered.
Mr. Sean Finlay:
Moving to our last slide, I will make some recommendations on the common good. There is wide agreement that the central authority should balance the rights of individuals with the common good but we do not have any definition or specific legislation specifying what the common good is that can be taken into account in the judicial process, which makes the job difficult for judges. At this stage, virtually everybody agrees that it is essential to deliver infrastructure. We suggest that legislative underpinning of infrastructure investment through statutory instrument should be identified by the Government as being essential for the common good. We hope that would assist the courts in the unfortunate task it has of dealing with the plethora of judicial reviews they have to deal with at the moment. For the benefit of the committee, I have provided links to previous reports including our annual report, which includes information on our membership and finances.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the witnesses for that presentation, which was clear and to the point. I will now ask the Association of Consulting Engineers of Ireland to deliver its presentation.
Mr. Tim Murnane:
I am the president of the Association of Consulting Engineers of Ireland. I am joined by Shane Dempsey, our director general. Fellow members of the executive Joe Burns, Gemma McCarthy and Ciaran McGovern are sitting behind me. We are having some technical difficulties but we will keep going regardless.
I will start by talking about who we are. We are the representative body for consulting engineering businesses in Ireland. It is important to emphasise that our members are the businesses responsible for delivering the designs to support infrastructure delivery in the country. I say that to distinguish us from the other bodies here today. Our member firms include small local SMEs and range from one-man or one-woman bands right up to global consulting engineering businesses. I think our technical issues have been sorted. There is a full range from small companies right up to very large companies. It is very important that the work of the public sector in delivering infrastructure in Ireland is attractive to that full cohort. That is really important for diversity within the country. Our member firms play a critical role in every construction project planned or constructed in Ireland. If you are driving around the country and see someone with a hi-vis vest, whether on a footpath, a road, a bridge or a building, our member firms will have designed whatever they are building. Nothing gets built without our member firms' involvement. We play a very central role in construction in the country. With regard to the slide being displayed, I emphasise that we have consulting engineers in the middle with housing, cities and so on around the edge. We are involved in everything.
On this slide, we have set out some of the challenges. I will not labour them because we all know what they are. Our role is to assist and support the Government in delivering infrastructure. One of our key points here today is to communicate to the members the challenges we see in enabling us to do the work to help the Government and the country to deliver the vital infrastructure we need. To use an analogy, I have talked about snowplough parenting in some of my previous speeches. This is the concept of removing obstacles from the path of our children as they go to school and so on. We can comment on whether that is appropriate as regards children's resilience but, in terms of engineering consultancies, it is really important that there is a snowplough to remove the barriers to the delivery of infrastructure. We need the Government to help us to remove these barriers. We will then play our part in delivering the infrastructure.
It is important to say that, as engineers, we are doers and, as Mr. Finlay put it, problem solvers. We just want to get on with solving the problems. It is very important that we are not dragged into the mire that prevents us from doing that. I want to communicate that and today's meeting is very beneficial for us in that regard. The projects we are talking about are those outlined in the national development plan, the national planning framework and the climate action plan.
I will really emphasise this final point regarding our members as being designers and the businesses that design the solutions. The design phase is really crucial. It is a really important stage in the project. It is where we can bring maximum value in terms of value for money, ensuring things are delivered on time and having detailed designs that can be constructed on budget. It is really important in terms of procurement that this design phase is appreciated and valued. That is where it is won and lost.
If we want to ask where our problems with infrastructure are, quite often it is that design is not given the value and the time it deserves and demands. This is the key message we want to convey today. If we invest in design, we will get better project outcomes. It is a really important message.
To focus a bit more on our request, it was very interesting to hear the Minister for public expenditure saying the other day that the systems and mindsets that have held infrastructure development way behind should be removed. This is very consistent with my snowplough analogy. Whether I have said that to the Minister and he has adapted it or not, I am not sure, but it is the same principle. We need to remove the barriers and whatever we call it, whether it is a snowplough or anything else, that is what we want to do.
Red tape is a widely used term. In terms of cutting it, a few red tape things really impact our work. I will start at a higher level with European regulations. We are in the EU and have benefited greatly from being in it, and that is very positive. We have a tendency, though, to gold-plate EU regulations and we really need to look at it. We are doing it because we are very good European citizens, but it comes at a cost in terms of delivery. An example is that we are working on a joint venture with a global engineering consultancy at the moment. We were tasked with providing an environmental impact statement on a project and it was a 200-page document that took months to prepare. The consultancy was aghast at this and said it was doing the same job, basically, in Spain and a two-page document was required. How can require a 200-page document when a two-page document is required in Spain? This all means delays and additional costs. It is about how we can streamline and strip back this process to ensure we are as efficient as possible.
I will give other examples of red tape. Every town in the country has SMEs, which are five-employee bands. There are one-off and bespoke contracts with the likes of housing agencies that the LDA and the HFA, etc., tend to use. It means the director, the senior person in a company with five people, who has no legal expertise has to negotiate the contracts. We are saying this is an utter waste of their time. We should be using standard contracts because these directors' time should be invested in designing projects and ensuring the designs are the best in class and not wasting their time getting into legal areas where they have no competence. There should be standardised contracts, which we have in our organisation, as an example, or, indeed, the public sector has them as well. These bodies I mentioned, though, tend to deviate from them. This is waste and red tape and we need to deal with it.
We have three very specific requests. We are asking for the immediate introduction of median pricing rather than the lowest price. We can all understand the logic of going with the lowest price when it comes to goods or whatever. When it comes to the work we do, though, which is intellectual services, the lowest price is an absolutely crazy way to select. What is being bought here is time and expertise and what the State is saying as a purchaser by using the lowest price is that it wants to pay for the least amount of time to design the project. I think that is crazy. There is an example of a project we worked on for which there were four prices. One price was €1.8 million, the second price was €1.1 million, the third price was €1 million and the last price was €500,000. If we look back there, I think most reasonable people would say the €500,000 price must be wrong and the company that offered it must have underestimated the complexity of the job. In the procurement system we have at the moment, even though quite often there is a tender that is the most economically advantageous, an abnormally low price sways the marking so much that the lowest tenderer is bound to be given the contract. It is a problem from the start to the finish. We even had the CEO of a local authority speaking to us recently who said that when this happens and it is seen who got the job and that it was the lowest price, they say “Oh no, this is going to be a problem from start to finish”. We therefore need to deal with procurement and median pricing is the way to go for intellectual services such as those we do. Mr. Finlay spoke about multi-annual funding and pipeline continuity. In fairness to the committee, I know it has reported on that and its importance, so I will not labour the point.
Turning to net contribution clauses, this is another major issue on public contracts in terms of risks for our members. This is to do with the Civil Liability Act 1961 and the fact that if you are found to be 1% liable you can be held 100% liable. This happened in 2008 when a lot of companies went into liquidation. I will give a very quick example. I am a structural engineer and I design the structure of a building. Let us take the example of the lighting in a school being found to be suboptimal and defective. Let us also suppose that the electrical engineer, the contractor and the other suppliers have gone bust. The client will have a situation where the lighting is suboptimal and people are slipping or it is damaging people’s eyes or whatever. As the structural engineer, I would have had nothing to do with that. Clearly, most reasonable people would say I had not. The argument then, though, might be one of asking me did I not realise when I walked into the building, given I have 30 years of experience, that the lighting was deficient. I would have to try to defend the fact that I am not 1% liable there, because if a court finds I am 1% liable, then I am 100% liable. This is a really problematic situation for our member firms in terms of our insurance costs. There is a complete absence of reasonableness and fairness. We are asking that net contribution clauses are introduced into Government contracts as a matter of urgency. It would make a massive difference for us and our ability to serve the State in terms of delivery on infrastructure.
We have detailed priorities, but they are in our submission, so I will not go through them all. I am conscious of time. We have detailed priorities across procurement, delivery and barriers. It is very much the same theme. Please help us to help the committee to help the State. If the committee supports us with the requests we have, we will play our part in that. I thank the committee very much.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Mr. Murnane. We will move on to Mr. John Jordan of Engineers Ireland.
Mr. John Jordan:
I am the president of Engineers Ireland and I am joined by Mr. Damian Owens, our director general. Mr. Cian O'Dowd and Mr. Keelan Keogh from our policy team are seated behind us. We are pleased to have this opportunity to address the committee today. Engineers Ireland is the representative body of engineering professionals in Ireland, with over 30,000 members working across every sector of engineering at all stages of their careers. Our organisation also carries statutory responsibility for the awarding of the title "chartered engineer" pursuant to the provisions of The Institution of Civil Engineers of Ireland (Charter Amendment) Act 1969. As the committee members might be aware, chartered engineers are permitted to exercise certain reserve functions in law, such as the performance of the roles of assigned certifier and design certifier under the Building Control Acts. An engineer may obtain the title of "chartered engineer" if he or she can demonstrate competence and experience that marks him or her out as a leading practitioner. Engineers from all sectors play a vital role in delivering the kinds of infrastructure and their supporting systems that Ireland will need to provide a high quality of life for those living here and to remain an attractive destination for investment over the coming decades.
Unfortunately, Ireland's infrastructure today lags behind many of our comparators. The International Institute for Management world competitiveness ranking 2025 places Ireland seventh in the world in terms of overall competitiveness but 44th in terms of infrastructure, with the management of water infrastructure, the density of road and rail networks and energy infrastructure singled out as being of particular concern. The Irish Fiscal Advisory Council has stated that Ireland’s capital stock, a measure of its overall infrastructure, is now 25% lower than the average for a high-income European country. The view of this country’s engineers is largely the same. Our recent report, Engineering 2025, found that 79% of engineers here view Ireland's infrastructure as either mediocre or poor, with housing, transport, energy and water and flooding infrastructure all regarded as problem areas.
Engineers encounter a range of challenges when working on infrastructural projects but they may be described using two words, "uncertainty" and "scarcity". Unfortunately, much of Ireland’s infrastructure pipeline has been subject to significant and repeated delays. A clear example of this is the greater Dublin wastewater drainage scheme, a project of pivotal importance to Dublin’s development. Uisce Éireann has warned it may be unable to grant new connections to the wastewater network in parts of the greater Dublin area until 2028 given current constraints in wastewater treatment capacity. An application for planning permission for the project was first submitted in 2018 to what was then An Bord Pleanála. It was subject to repeated delays. In July this year, An Coimisiún Pleanála finally granted permission for this project. It was confirmed last month, however, that yet another judicial review was being taken against the decision, further delaying construction. Given the estimated timeline, four years for the construction of the project, it is certain that the development of housing and other infrastructure in the Dublin area will be significantly constrained as a knock-on effect. The delays experienced here are, unfortunately, symptomatic of Ireland’s planning system and other forms of vital infrastructure, from housing to roads to energy, suffer as well.
This serious uncertainty dogging the pipeline of infrastructure in Ireland exacerbates existing resource problems and inhibits the ability of those working in the construction industry to support development projects. Engineers are already in short supply and a wide range of engineering disciplines are listed on the Department of Enterprise, Tourism and Employment's critical skills occupation list. These include civil, structural, site, electrical and project engineers.
SOLAS also notes that skills shortages exist in these areas, as well as other forms of engineering. Research by ourselves indicates this country will need more than 22,000 additional engineers over the course of the next decade to meet the demands of various sectors. Furthermore, 85% of engineering employers have stated it has recently taken them more than three months to fill roles, while 22% have stated it has taken them more than a year, given supply constraints in the market. Such skill shortages play a major role in impeding progress across infrastructural projects. However, measures may be taken to address this issue. Recent revisions of the primary school curriculum to include more STEM content are welcome. However, the provision of greater information and training to teachers and guidance councillors on engineering careers, a widening of apprenticeship routes into engineering and the greater promotion of engineering careers at Government level, especially to girls and young women, will be pivotal to building the pipeline of engineering talent necessary to deliver key infrastructure over the coming years and decades.
Similarly, expanding the number of engineering roles within local authorities could allow for inspections and oversight of construction projects nationwide. This would further instil vital engineering insight across the local government sector. Additionally, public funding for the fifth year of study of integrated engineering masters degrees would allow engineers to apply for the title of chartered engineer more quickly, expanding the number of chartered engineers available to support construction projects. Engineers Ireland supports the delivery of the national development plan and will continue to engage with a wide range of stakeholders on how infrastructure in Ireland can be delivered.
Through our participation in the Washington, Sydney and Dublin accords, we facilitate international recognition of engineering qualifications. Allowing for greater mobility of engineering professionals, these recognition agreements provide quality assurance of the qualifications of engineers coming to Ireland to work, thus, allowing greater access to Ireland to an international market of professionals, as well as helping Irish-trained engineers gain experience abroad. Such agreements can assist the delivery of the national development plan by facilitating the mobility of engineering talent but certainty is needed in the pipeline of development to allow engineering firms and others to plan effectively. Engineers are pivotal to designing and building the infrastructure this country needs. Simply put, the more barriers to development that can be removed, the more engineers and other professionals can do to deliver this vital infrastructure quickly.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Mr. Jordan. Before we go to members of the committee, I have one question. It is probably for the second group who spoke. When a project starts construction, why does the public always hear how there are so many changes needed in the design and layout during the course of the project and how there are so many changes made to big projects that were not foreseeable at the beginning? That seems to add extra work. Why was it not adequately taken into account? Was there lack of sufficient engagement with the client? Could it be possible that the client did not fully understand the project because it had not done a project of that scale before? I ask for a comment on that because that is the obvious thing. How much are the extras and why do we have the extras? We have them because we changed this and we changed that. Why does that happen? It is rare to hear of a contract where that does not happen. Maybe they are out there and we do not hear about them.
My last quick question is why we do not have more standardised design. If you go back over the decades, every school built in Ireland during the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s was identical. You knew by looking at every one of them. Now, and in recent decades, every school has to be different. Maybe somebody said it is to build up the level of expertise in the country but that all costs money. For example, I know in the Courts Service, there is one courthouse in one part of the country that will nearly be the same design as somewhere else. Why is there not more of that? Whoever wishes to comment can or we can get a quick comment from each. I will then ask Deputy Joe Neville as he is our first questioner today. I would like a quick response to my questions from whoever wants to answer.
Mr. Tim Murnane:
I might take the second question first about uniformity in design. As engineers, we are takers of design. An architect, in response to what is in a town plan or development plan, will determine what the outline of the design is, in conjunction with the client. We have to receive that and respond. Our designs respond to others so it is difficult for us to influence that. On the general question of types of modular construction, modular schools and special needs units in schools, etc., there is certainly a move toward that and creating modularity and repetition. In terms of apartment design, there are certain solutions where repetition is appropriate, efficient and it is a sensible approach. My comment earlier on forms of contract follows the same principle. If you have a tried and trusted solution, repeat it.
That question should really be directed more towards architects and town planners in terms of whether we want all the towns to look the same and whether we want variety in design. We probably do, but as an engineer, I am not qualified to comment on that. We are receivers of the architectural solution and we put structure on that. There is certainly a lot of sense in what the Cathaoirleach says. It is consistent with what I say about contracts. Why are we inventing the wheel over and over? Why are we introducing ourselves to risk and problems associated with a solution that has not been done before when the answer is to have as much uniformity as possible without compromising on quality in design.
In terms of design changes, which was the first question, everything we do is new and unique in lots of ways. When you do a construction project, you examine the ground. The ground is never uniform anywhere. You could have one field with one particular set of ground conditions. If you go to another field, it could be completely different. When we do site investigations, we try to mitigate the risk of things being different. The ground is a good example of why it is very difficult to predict everything. There could be archaeology that had not been discovered.
It goes back to my point about design. It is about investing in design and giving enough time for design. Sometimes, we are so driven by the programme as a community of construction people - I include the clients, design team and contractors in that - and that we have to be out by a particular time, that you are immediately trying to design solutions within the time you have rather than the time that is required to do it fully and completely. That question is one I ask as well. I agree. We should invest in design, give appropriate time for design and you will really reduce the risk of subsequent variations. The answer is in part of our submission and that is my view. Others may have their own.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
One thing I heard there is that we need talk to the architects at this committee on another day.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have eight minutes to ask questions and I might just fire questions different ways. It is tricky because there are three different organisations so it is a bit awkward as normally there would be one. I will go to the Irish Academy of Engineering first and ask what would be the one message it would like to spread here today, which I will ask all groups.
Mr. Sean Finlay:
It would be to continue the focus the Government has brought in on infrastructure. This is not a pro-Government statement. It just happens to be that this Government is doing it, in our view, due to the fact that infrastructure is now part of a Government Department, and an integral part of it, with a dedicated secretariat focused on identifying the barriers and trying to get rid of them. Our message is to continue that process and make sure the engagement that has been undertaken by the infrastructure division of the Department of public expenditure does not just end up as a report somewhere and that it is implemented.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is one of my fears, even with this committee, and it is something I always say to the Cathaoirleach. How do we best maximise the output of this committee so it is not just a biannual report that we send up to someone else. I want key outputs from it.
Mr. John Jordan:
Engineers Ireland is about the people. We have 30,000 members. Companies are represented by others and there is then the academy so to make the distinction, we are about the people. We run a programme called "STEPS to engineering" for primary and secondary school students. We reach approximately 100,000 students per annum with our programme. If that were to be extended, maybe in collaboration with Government and other bodies, we could try to reach 300,000.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I do not want to cut across Mr. Jordan but I take that point. Engineers Ireland was slightly different from the other two groups from that point of view.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Mr. Jordan is leading down the path of awarded apprenticeships. We know there is a huge dearth of apprenticeships in Ireland. In fairness, it does need to change. At third level, we have probably got the balance wrong over the last 20 to 25 years. We have pushed way too many people towards university in a way, and turned people off going into basic apprenticeships.
Mr. John Jordan:
I totally agree with that. That was my other point. I know the Deputy said one point but one leads into another. The issue we find is that parents and maybe teachers and career guidance teachers do not fully understand the breadth of engineering and the opportunities that are out there. It is not just muddy fields, boots and so on. There is so much more and the opportunity is for people to see their creations come out of the ground.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What could the Government do to make it better? If Mr. Jordan was the Minister for higher education, what would he do?
Mr. John Jordan:
Two things. We already have apprenticeship degrees in some areas. That should be expanded so that, immediately, it is more accessible for people. They learn and earn. They are already getting paid. There is immediate productivity on the ground. When they start their education, they are already making a contribution to the economy. As well as that, they are being helped along by earning. You hear the thing in the news around it not being free education and so on. In this case, they would actually have the opportunity to earn money.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Like the old-style electrician's apprenticeships.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is like that. It is the equivalent of it.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Engineering itself; I get you. I know what Mr. Jordan is saying.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
You do not hear of that. You think about it from the plumber's or electrician's point of view but not necessarily from an engineering perspective.
Mr. John Jordan:
It is common practice in parts of Europe to do it that way. The other thing I would say, if we were asking for things, is "help", maybe. We are experts in the outreach peace with STEPS, but if we had a mechanism or some kind of collaboration with Government - essentially it means more funding - we could reach more people earlier. The research that was carried out by University College London shows that seven to 11 are the years when you need to get people. That is when people are forming ideas about their career choices. If you do not get them at that stage, they have gone off and they have not got that in their minds. There is a huge opportunity around that and we are certainly in a position to help. If we do not have those people, we will not be able to deliver.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is perfect. I know the Chair will give me an extra 30 seconds so the witnesses do not have to worry too much. I want to put the same question to Mr. Dempsey. Would he mind referencing local authorities and his own experiences? I wanted to ask what the witnesses' views were on local authorities and how they think it is working. I know it is a completely separate point but I want to lean into it as well.
Mr. Shane Dempsey:
I will say one thing. The key thing we recommend is that this committee follows up on this report, which was produced by the Department of public expenditure. It involved a number of people from Uisce Éireann, Transport Infrastructure Ireland - the Government's own contracting authorities. It identified all the blockages everyone here has mentioned on the representative or private sector side. The Government's own contracting authorities are saying that the procurement system is inadequate and the Government contract is inadequate for modern construction and engineering projects and infrastructure delivery.
There will be another iteration of this report. The Minister mentioned it yesterday when he announced the capital increase for the budget. The key thing this committee could do is familiarise itself, as I am sure members are, with the measures here, ensuring they are in that report and that the Minister has that to remove barriers in future.
The key thing we see is that on net contribution clauses, we have been asking for years - long before my time - for fairness in Government contracts for consultant engineers, which are largely SMEs but which have to pay for insurance to cover all the potential mistakes of million-euro turnover contractors and suppliers they have never even encountered-----
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does that mean that everyone is liable? Is it Mr. Dempsey's point that everybody on the chain is liable?
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Even if it is the 1%. That is the point that was talked about, the 1% versus the 99%. That was interesting.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The last person standing gets caught for everything.
Mr. Shane Dempsey:
The last man standing, yes. As a result, you can imagine what the insurance costs are for an SME to cover all of that. That is why a number of international PI providers such as AIG have left the market in Ireland. They do not provide PI anymore. That would be the key thing that, from a selfish engineering firm point of view, we would ask the committee to ensure is in the follow-up to this report.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
On local authorities, maybe it is a general question for who might best equipped to deal with it. Do the witnesses feel local authorities are individually equipped in the way that Uisce Éireann and those other bodies may seem to be to deal with contracts? How do they find them and what is the feedback? Without calling out any individual names, obviously. Ultimately, a lot of what we are looking to do will be delivered in the local authorities. Are they equipped to do that?
Mr. Tim Murnane:
I would make a general point on collaboration versus adversarial contract-type arrangements. Unfortunately, the changes that were made to the Government form of contract in the mid-noughties or the Celtic tiger era really made construction an adversarial sport, if you want to call it that. Local authorities are victims of that as well in that everything is more difficult than it should be. If we go into a local authority with a planning application, there is not a sense of collaboration.
Mr. Tim Murnane:
As I have talked about, engineering is a very noble profession. We want to work with you to deliver stuff whereas, sometimes local authorities are more inclined to gold-plate things as I talked about earlier, making it more difficult than it should be whereas we are all on the same team here. We want to solve the housing crisis and the infrastructural challenges. We want to work together. If local authorities adopted that collaborative approach, they could make life a lot easier on themselves and use us. In theory, in that situation, we are coming in with a planning application and representing AN Other. Ultimately, as engineers, we have to stand over the designs we are producing and we are not trying to catch anyone out. That mindset is really important, and that collaboration. We are all on the same team and trying to do the same things. All of a sudden, that would ease demands on local authorities. They should not be the police trying to catch us out. We should be working together to get the best designs. They would be my observations on local authorities.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay. I thank the Chair for the extra time.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I presume that on every major project, the witnesses go in and have an extensive preplanning meeting.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is that not the place to suss out some of this stuff?
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I know that, after that process, it is handed over like a judge making a decision. It is very impersonal after the planning application is lodged.
Mr. Tim Murnane:
Those engagements are provided for in the various recent changes to planning. It has been going on since the former Minister, Simon Coveney's time, when he changed planning rules. In theory, it is a really good idea. There is engagement. There are various section 242 meetings etc. and you go through the process. That is brilliant if it works but sometimes it can be very frustrating. You do all that, everything is done and you get confirmation from the local authority before you submit the application. That is perfect and, after two months, you get back a refusal for something that was openly agreed. That is very frustrating and an example of this adversarial approach. If there is genuine collaboration, that just should not happen. Why are rabbits are pulled out of the hat subsequently? That leads to delays so the developer has to invest in the planning application and figure out what we have to change, which should have been done the first time. When I say developers, equally it could be a Part 8 or a public situation. Then you have to go back in and there are delays, with costs going up all the time like the compounding impact that Mr. Finlay mentioned. It is much harder than it should be or needs to be, in my view.
Tony McCormack (Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the witnesses for coming in today and for their presentations. They talked about the infrastructure issues we have around the country. I know they have met with the Minister, Deputy Chambers, and there is a huge appetite there at the moment to sort out whatever issues are holding up, slowing down or preventing infrastructure projects from happening. That is right across the board, whether it is planning or whatever area. We realise that infrastructure is such a vital part to the whole economy and country, so we need to make sure it happens and happens quickly.
I have a couple of questions. We talked about regional balance in infrastructure delivery. The witness spoke about the ACEI member firms being at the heart of delivering Ireland's ambitions. How can consulting engineers ensure that counties like Offaly and the wider midlands area get their fair share of infrastructure investment and not just Dublin and larger cities?
Mr. Tim Murnane:
From an ACEI perspective, it is difficult because we are the receivers of policy. We can try to influence county, regional and national development plans. We are available to consult and give our views and input but ultimately, we cannot dictate where development takes place. Our member firms are in every town and village in the country, with the local knowledge to support whatever needs to be done, but influencing is difficult from an ACEI perspective.
Tony McCormack (Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Regarding rural infrastructure delivery, a lot of public focus is on housing, transport and energy is on metropolitan areas. What kinds of infrastructure investments are most urgently needed in rural counties like Offaly? What type of infrastructure is needed to make sure these counties that are outside the major cities will benefit and grow?
Mr. Sean Finlay:
Local transport would be very important. Under the last Government, some progress was made in rolling out local bus services but that needs to improve. To go back to the Deputy's original question, the regional planning guidelines are probably the place to try to effect the changes and influence the policies the Deputy seeks to deliver for Offaly and rural areas in general. It is a matter for the local representatives to do that in a collaborative way as much as possible.
Mr. Tim Murnane:
The issue of water and wastewater is fundamentally important in not putting the cart before the horse. These vital services have to be put in to enable subsequent development in towns, etc. Transport is another fundamentally important one. We need to invest in these basic public infrastructure utilities in advance. We need to invest in design before we go to site and it is the same in terms of investing in public utilities. There are good examples of this in some of the urban areas, for example putting in roads and the Luas in Cherrywood, Dublin, in advance of doing the residential development. That should be modelled in towns in rural Ireland. It is terrible thing when towns or villages have a wastewater constraint and cannot get planning permission because there is no capacity in the wastewater system. That is an appalling vista and sadly, applies too often. There needs to be investment in Uisce Éireann to enable it to upgrade those facilities and prioritise them, linked into regional development plans.
Tony McCormack (Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There is a huge focus on Dublin because it is the economic driver for the country. Should we be trying to put more focus on other cities to try to grow them and to take the pressure off Dublin? Would ACEI recommend this?
Mr. Tim Murnane:
Cork docklands is a great example of a major urban centre that can be redeveloped. There is also a major project on the North Quays in Waterford and another in Galway and the Opera Square in Limerick. We can include Wexford and consider these projects as a hub to counterbalance Dublin. That is essential.
Mr. Tom Leahy:
Regarding the urban-rural divide, over the years the Irish Academy of Engineering has produced a number of evidence-based reports. One of those important reports was entitled Atlantic City Regions - Towards 2040. An idea was first postulated about 15 years ago that Galway, Cork, Limerick and Waterford should work together as an economic unit. This would give them the ability to act as a counterpoint, particularly to Dublin, and ensure balanced regional development throughout the country. In terms of the investment to make sure that it comes in the rural areas, I note that the extra €2 billion that came from the Government to Uisce Éireann to provide additional water services provided a specific €300 million ring-fenced fund for towns and villages. The rural areas have certainly not been forgotten about, in that ring-fenced funding was provided there.
The initial question was about one big idea that might get things moving again. There is and we have tried to highlight this. I have worked in local government for 39 years and ten years in utilities. These 49 years give me a certain perspective on life. The biggest problem of all is that there are far too many steps, punctuated by gaps. It is very much like a game of snakes and ladders, with far too many snakes and not enough ladders on the board.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
As an example, there has been a proposal for a bridge in Celbridge for the last number of years. It seems that these things are raised, talked about and then it disappears from view for a year or two. Then it goes to some other step and then it disappears. The process seems to work in a very strange way. It could take ten years to do something that could be done a lot quicker. Is that typical?
Mr. Tom Leahy:
The process for delivering capital investment started in the 1950s and 1960s, and it was at a time when Ireland had very little money. Those involved in development could not say that something could not be done because of a lack of money. A phased system was brought in which comprised a preliminary report, moving to a feasibility report, and then towards advancement for site investigation to be carried out. That was the system which worked at the time. Where we are now, we have the money. In order to make sure that we can get the best value for money, we need to put accountability and delivery together. That is why we suggested two things here. The first is a statutory instrument because while Mr. Finlay referred to the common good, there is no legislation in Ireland that speaks to what the common good actually is. We have a common law system. We are the last country in the European Union now to have a common law system. Judges will make their decision on three things, namely, legislation, evidence put before them and precedent. I will deal with judicial review for the moment. If somebody objects to a scheme, there is nothing a judge can look at that allows him to decide that certain legislation or a specific statutory instrument tells him or her that these particular projects are necessary for the common good. That is one particular change.
Now that we have local authorities and utilities that are well set up and have their own boards, let them go ahead and lead the charge, without these gaps from time to time which involve stopping and going back. We are now at a unique point where everybody, both Government and citizens, believes that housing is essential. In order to move that forward, we have to look at the legislation, the common good, etc., but then look at who is best able to deliver quickly. In many cases, the local authorities, if given their head, can build houses. They are experts at it. The utilities, be it gas, be it water, be it Uisce Éireann have the ability to do it. Rather than coming backwards and forwards for approvals, let their individual boards make those decisions with Government approval. The boards have the necessary oversight, governance, and the necessary link into Government. Those two together have the capability of making a sea-change and utilising the moneys that we have now to turn this country into a much better place.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I was not particularly excited about this particular meeting, but I have to say the witnesses have certainly changed my mind about it. It is much more interesting than I was expecting.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
A bit like me when we first met.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have a question for Engineers Ireland, which noted that engineers are in short supply and that Ireland is going to need 22,000 additional engineers over the course of the next decade to meet the demands of various sectors.
Does Engineers Ireland think we can meet those targets? I am also interested in what was said about local authorities overseeing national projects. Are there any county councils or local authorities looking for that power at the moment or would be interested in it?
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There is only one local authority that has that?
Mr. Damien Owens:
Relatively few local authorities would have county engineers. It used to be a more prominent role in the past. As we build out infrastructure, building it is one thing but the next stage is maintaining it. A lot of that maintenance role will fall on the county councils. Engineering is a global profession. Irish engineers are going to work overseas. We have to compete to get that Irish talent to stay working on projects in Ireland. The only way to do that is to provide certainty. Certainty is a pipeline of investment so companies see the projects they can invest in and put resources into. Also, people, including schoolchildren, can see careers. The engineers we will need in 2040 are currently in primary school. We need to show them a career path.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Local authorities, with the education training boards and such, could play a part. There are a lot more primary schools now under the ETB than there ever was. Gaelscoileanna and so on are under the ETB-----
Mr. John Jordan:
The answer to the question on how we will get enough engineers is two-pronged. We need to generate our own but also through bringing people into the country with the international agreements we have in place. It is a mixture of the two. As Mr. Owens and a few others have said, if we had certainty of projects and a pipeline, we could then show people what we need to do, and they cannot say they are unsure whether it is going to happen. That is true not only for companies but for parents of children who can show their children how much work is coming down the line and how it is work on their doorstep, not necessarily up in Dublin. It will be throughout the country.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
All the witnesses have mentioned multi-annual funding and that pipeline continuity.
I think the ACEI statement mentioned red tape and how the EU laws and regulations are transposed into Irish law. I do not know how an EU communication can be two-pages long in Spain and 200-pages long in Ireland. I used to live in Spain, and it is really easy to get planning there. You go down to the ayuntamiento and talk to the mayor and he decides. It is all done quite quickly. There is no corruption, or anything involved in it.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I was unsure what the Chair's laughing meant.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Yes, it is just so simple. Why are we transposing EU legislation and making it 200 pages and other European countries can do it with two pages?
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is that the report the witness has?
Mr. Shane Dempsey:
Yes, it is the report I mentioned earlier. It says that in many cases Ireland, through legislation, policy statements and strategies has opted to go beyond the requirement specified by the EU and adopt extremely ambitious targets. I think somebody used the phrase "gold-plated" earlier. In Ireland, we tend to go above and beyond what is required. I think there is a move across the EU, and as we heard in the budget statements, to challenge that mindset. I will put out something stark that relates to all the questions by giving members a thought experiment. If there were two projects on the table here tomorrow, one public sector and one private sector, all things being equal, due to the nature of the risk involved in the public sector project the industry will select the private sector project. Companies will look at their profile of projects and be concerned if there are too many public sector projects because of the last man standing and legal situation. To the Deputy's point about whether we can get projects in around the country, first we need to look at public sector projects and what can be done to make them attractive. Again, this is ISME, as the representative of the association saying this, but it is also stated in this report that the number of companies across the different design professions applying and tendering for public sector projects is dropping. Furthermore, there is plenty of private sector work coming down the line. It really is a huge challenge. As Mr. Murnane said, we want to deliver the promises in the NDP and the NPF, but if the profile is too risky, we cannot get insurance to cover it, we cannot deliver these projects, we cannot hire and we cannot invest in technologies and digitalisation. Part of the certainty in the pipeline and for careers is knowing that we can actually take on these jobs and deliver for Ireland.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is there an example of EU legislation that is 200 pages in Irish legislation and two pages in Spanish? Can witnesses back that claim up?
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I would be really interested in that because that is a job committees do. We are in charge of making sure those laws are transposed.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I remember as a councillor I would get all the reports. I often wondered if anybody read them or even the county development plan. I remember when I was elected only a couple of months before and I was handed this huge thing. I was the first Sinn Féin member to be elected in Kildare and I just wanted the Six Counties back, to be honest. I was handed this big national development plan, and I said Jesus, Mary and Joseph. We did go through it. We were really diligent and went through every page. I often thought that if you are inserting something, you should have to take something out. They cannot just keep getting bigger and bigger.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We do like a pat on the head, yes.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There are loads of contradictions in it too.
Mr. Tim Murnane:
I will choose something very simple and I will not bore the members. An easy example is the amount of storm water that must be stored on a site as part of a planning application. Let us imagine the standard is 100 cu. m and the local authority asks for 120 cu. m just because that is what they would like. That is beyond the standard and somebody has to pay for that. That could be the difference between a project being viable and not being viable. It is worth exploring this gold-plating mentality towards European regulations, which then flows down through local authorities. In a certain world that might be a good thing but someone has to pay for it. It has to be viable.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Somebody has to read it as well, first.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Will Mr. Murnane pass the example on to me or through the committee? I would be interested in that.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I was at an event last week at a local secondary school, Coláiste Choilm, Tullamore. They had about 120 primary school students. They gave them four A4 pages, four A3 pages, a roll of masking tape and 2 m of string. They had a competition with awards to build the longest bridge and the best designed bridge . This was all an effort to try to instil the culture of STEM. We have done a lot of work in that space in County Offaly. I appreciate the work that Engineers Ireland does through the STEPS programme as well. We need to emphasise the importance of engineers engaging with and attending those sorts of events on the ground locally. They make a huge difference, particularly to the students and particularly now we are so busy with infrastructure development and construction moving at such a pace. There is a risk we forget about nurturing the next generation of talent. What is being done with the STEPS programme is important, but when there are calls from beyond, whether it is local authorities or schools, I ask that Engineers Ireland fulfil them whenever possible.
We all know about the need for housing. Obviously, the support through wastewater, electricity and power connections is vital.
If we are now looking at, say, 18 to 24 months for delivery of a housing project and our water and wastewater services are taking multiples of that, will we have housing delivery outpacing utilities and houses waiting almost like a new generation of ghost estates because we do not have the utilities? How will we reconfigure that pace and bring it into balance?
Mr. Tim Murnane:
That is certainly happening at the moment. There is a major Dublin water plant that has been stalled subject to judicial review, which immediately means that the houses it would feed cannot be granted planning permission. They are just premature. That is happening. The only solution, really, is to invest, whether in transport locally, which may be a rail line, in water and wastewater, or in road infrastructure. That is part of the catch-up we have to do.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
As part of our current targets for housing, is Mr. Murnane confident we will deliver those utilities, considering the obstacles that are there?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
But is there a concern coming through from Mr. Murnane's sector?
Mr. Tim Murnane:
Yes, absolutely. Looking at the development plans and so on, we do our due diligence to see whether the services are in the area. That would generally be done when the developer is looking to purchase a site, for example. We would just say that, unfortunately, there was not capacity in the wastewater treatment facility there and we would try to get a programme from Uisce Éireann saying when that was likely to be delivered. Then, the developer would apply a risk factor and ask whether it would have to add one year or five years to the schedule and what the likelihood of the programme being funded was. That directly impacts the delivery of those housing schemes.
Mr. Shane Dempsey:
From talking to TII, the delivery timeframe for an infrastructure project has expanded way past 15 years. It is rapidly expanding but methods of construction and delivery of infrastructure - the physical piece - are improving. If one talks to our housebuilding cousins, they will say they can build a house from foundation to roof and have it kitted out in six weeks, but the committee might think about long it takes for the builders to get to the point where they can actually build the houses.
As regards the delivery mechanism of the State, which is the whole ecosystem, parts of it are getting more productive - engineering, architecture and construction - but the bureaucracy and regulatory mishmash that is evolving is delaying these things. As to the announcements yesterday in the budget, every time we see an NDP with a major figure for investment, for example, €150 billion, we think "Fantastic", but we know that, tomorrow or next year, a large slew of that money will not be deployed or will be wasted through legal disputes, contractual issues, delays, judicial reviews, etc.
Regarding our focus, we are improving our delivery times but the overall project timelines are elongating because of bureaucracy.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There is almost an organisational strategy piece there. I know Mr. Leahy talked about strategy at the outset, but in terms of improving efficiencies and eliminating waste, where do the witnesses see that ultimately lying?
Mr. Shane Dempsey:
Selfishly, as we have mentioned before, if we improve the procurement system on our side, we will take a sliver of time off all the delivery, but there are multiple factors across the three bodies that members have heard from here. They all add up. It is the straw that breaks the camel's back, so to speak.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
On the median price versus the lower price, there are plenty of examples of where this situation has gone out of control in recent times. Do the witnesses think our professional fees have been overvalued or overreached in terms of that gold-plating? Has it been all regulation driven or has there been a cultural change?
Mr. Tim Murnane:
In terms of our fees and our industry, there would be huge concern that the fees are going in the wrong direction. Engineers Ireland will say that a brilliant potential young engineer looking at the career he or she wants, be that as an engineer, an accountant, a lawyer or whatever else, will look at how much he or she will earn now and in 20 years' time. Sadly, engineers are off the page in that regard. We just cannot compete. We have a major issue in terms of making engineering attractive. Deputy Clendennen talked about STEM programmes and so on. Ultimately, bright young people will ask what quality of life they will have in ten years' time and in 20 years' time and whether they will have the same quality of life if they get into engineering as if they get into law, accountancy or IT. Sadly, the answer at the moment is "No". The fees consulting engineers are charging are a fraction of what they should be. If engineering is massively important, and I say as an engineer that it absolutely is, then solving infrastructure and the role we play in it is massively important. Nationally and globally, engineering is an incredibly important profession, but if people get into it, they will earn a fraction of what they would earn if they became lawyers or accountants. That is completely - I am sorry to use the expression - gaga.
Median pricing is a method that perhaps would start to address some of that, but really it is focusing on quality. I gave the examples of the €1 million, the €500,000 and the €1.8 million. My son is 14 and I asked him which he would select. He looked at me and said the €1.8 million was too dear and the €500,000 was too cheap - someone had made a mistake - so he would obviously go for the middle one. Out of the mouths of babes. If that logic stands up for a 14-year-old, it surely would stand up generally.
I am adamant that our fees need to double. If we pay engineers more, they will give more time and focus to design and we will have an exponential impact on value for money because the schemes will be designed much better. The Cathaoirleach asked why there was so much change. Invest in design, give it the appropriate time and we will have much better project outcomes and address the elephant in the room. If we have that bright potential young engineer going off to become a lawyer, we will not solve housing crises or infrastructural crises. Lawyers are not going to design the solutions to these challenges. That is a very personal question and, as a profession, we are really changing to say we have a problem here. In 30 years' time, who will be designing the infrastructure? They will all be lawyers and accountants.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
AI. That is a challenge in its own right.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Mr. Murnane has just insulted the Cathaoirleach and Leas-Chathaoirleach all in one go, but we are thick-skinned in here and will get over that.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I left the council to become a politician. Obviously, it was not all it was cracked up to be.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Deputy Clendennen, have you finished?
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Are there any final questions for our guests before we conclude?
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Yes, the Deputy indicated she might come in a second time.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
My question is to the Irish Academy of Engineering. Mr. Finlay talked about the common good, environmental consent and so on. We all have to adhere to the Aarhus Convention. I am also on the climate committee. We have to take account of that convention. Mr. Finlay said the IAE wanted environmental laws to be streamlined by referral to the Law Reform Commission. Is that a complicated way of saying it wants less attention to be given to environmental issues or could-----
Mr. Sean Finlay:
No, certainly not. What we are looking for there is an attempt to rationalise and co-ordinate environmental requirements and laws that at the moment are not co-ordinated, and who better to ask to do that than lawyers and the Law Reform Commission? It is referred to in the recent report my colleague Mr. Dempsey referred to. Infrastructure developers are investing more time on regulatory and environmental processes whose implementation in Ireland appears to be disproportionate in comparison to peer countries. That refers back to the earlier question to the SEAI to give examples of that. We could certainly could come up with examples of that for the committee.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Yes. Perhaps Mr. Finlay could send them to the committee. Also, does the IAE have examples of the common good being mentioned in legislation in other European countries?
Mr. Tom Leahy:
Since the other European countries have the code Napoléon instead of the common law, the concept of the common good is so ingrained in their thinking that they do not need to refer to it in legislation. Our problem is that we have not in legislation outlined what the common good actually is.
A government over there, particularly at local level - the Deputy mentioned local mayors and their local powers - just looks at something and once it says that something is necessary for a town or village, it goes ahead. Nobody objects to it because people understand that it is for the common good. Unfortunately, we have to move with legislation here to give us an equivalent standing. Mr. Finlay and I were over-----
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is it a shortcoming in our Republic?
Mr. Tom Leahy:
No, it is not as complicated as that. This is my way of looking at it because we were recently at a conference in Vienna with our European partners and I had the opportunity to raise it with some lawyers who were presenting there. I explained the situation and asked how we could deal with problems of the common good because it was not enshrined in common law. One French colleague said he thought there were solutions he could recommend to us. He said he thought that some of the national legislation we had in place could be used to give us an equivalent foundation for the common good.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We would also be interested in that.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Would that involve exempted developments? Would part of it be that they are exempt to start with and there is no planning process once a public body-----
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In fairness, there is no planning permission needed for an extension on school grounds, for example. If people want to, they can put anything they want on school grounds-----
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
So, that is for a common good that is recognised.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There is that. On school grounds, they can almost build a new school on a school ground site. Just put it in and there is no planning process.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is exempted. People cannot object to it, basically.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We need four elective hospitals as well. There was something else Mr. Leahy mentioned but I cannot remember. I will email him.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The clerk can email and get a formal reply back within a fortnight. If the Deputy wants to contact the clerk with some follow-up queries, the clerk will email them directly.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There was one thing. I just cannot find it now.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
While the Deputy is thinking-----
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have one thing to ask as well if Deputy Cronin wants to buy a minute. I read something, although I am not sure where, about the number of judicial reviews in the UK compared to Ireland.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Was it 150 in Ireland versus something like 30 in the UK? Were there numbers like those?
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is ten times the size of us. Yes, it is a completely different number. I have been a councillor with Deputy Cronin; we had the good fortune to be councillors together for five years. I was a town councillor for five years before this, but I had been a councillor for 15 years before I got elected here. Judicial reviews were not overly a thing we came across as such, but my God, all of a sudden in the last three or four years, we have been starting to hear it more and more. Sometimes, we heard it anecdotally because one does not pick up on everything as a councillor - it is not one's day job - but my God, we heard about judicial reviews. That is obviously symptomatic of what we are seeing. It is the new reality. That is something we raised with the Minister, Deputy Chambers, but we need to have him attend before us.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
As I see it, there are three stages to big projects on the ground now. There is the planning application stage, An Coimisiún Pleanála and then the courts, and next maybe Europe. On all big projects that are in any way contentious, we can be guaranteed that that is the way it will go. That is a personal observation.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have a final question. I am sorry; does Deputy Cronin want to come back in?
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I remember my question. It was around how design stage was critical for value for money. We think about that as being for architects rather than engineers. Are the witnesses saying that if there was more input from engineers at, say, the design stage of the children's hospital, there could have been money saved?
Mr. Tim Murnane:
I would say it is every project. Architects are involved early but engineers - certainly civil engineers - are involved right at the start. Electrical engineers get involved a little bit later perhaps. However, design team, let us call it, involvement early in projects is important because it is a really critical stage. There is not enough time allocated to it considering the number of efficiencies, savings and better solutions. If design is really valued and considered early on, and that includes not just the architect but also town planners, then the design team should be getting involved in adequate time. It is always that the programme is almost our master. The programme is the master. We have to hit that regardless of the consequences, whereas it should be that if we get the design right, we can get the programme sorted and there is more certainty.
Mr. Shane Dempsey:
Someone might correct me if I am wrong, but the investment in the design phase in the overall pipeline of the project is 2%, so not enough money is spent. It is as low as that. If we expanded that out to 3% or 4%, the amount of variation, dispute and legal issue that would be prevented-----
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
How would that compare with other countries around infrastructure?
Mr. Shane Dempsey:
------in terms of the overall global figure. Every euro spent in this regard can give a better design in terms of sustainability, innovation and so on. I know I am harping on, but within that 2% of the pipeline, we are concerned about legal disputes or spending half our time worrying about looking around corners. Clients cannot get the best-----
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The design phase is basically looking around corners and seeing what things could go wrong.
Mr. Shane Dempsey:
If something goes wrong a year or ten years down the pipeline after the project is built, at the risk to someone else and because of someone else's fault, and we have to worry about that at the design phase and have insurance to cover it, we have to look around corners. We might be out of existence if we do not.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does anyone have any further questions?
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have one or two final points in relation to the gold-plated element of everything. Is that the type of thing that conspires against the delivery of county council homes because, ultimately, we see these exorbitant numbers where they almost have to call something off on the delivery of houses because they are coming out at €600,000 apiece? Is that what we are talking about? Then there is refurbishment. Are we holding ourselves to such high standards that it is killing us not only in terms of delivery but also in maintenance? That is why people might walk past a council estate and see that a place has been boarded up for X amount of time. It is that gold-plated element.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is that because people are afraid to make decisions? Is there a culture of fear, be it in a local authority, housing body or some other body, that unless gold-plated housing is delivered, the body might get called out and, therefore, it will not do so? Nobody is going to lose a job over looking for the best, but he or she might if questioned after it over cutting corners. I am not saying we should cut corners, but is the best in class versus-----
Mr. Shane Dempsey:
I would recommend to maybe invite representatives from the Society of Chartered Surveyors Ireland in and talk to them. The society has done a huge amount of work on the gold-plated nature of housing delivery in Ireland generally. It has identified measures in the last year and, in fairness, some of those measures have been adopted. The society has recommended so much that can be stripped out of standard design for social housing and housing generally. In fairness, there have been moves by the Government to adopt some of these measures, but the society would be a useful group to talk to.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is interesting for the work programme because who we are going to invite is exactly what we were talking about before the witnesses came in, funnily enough. Is it wrong of me to ask if anyone else had other thoughts on who to invite? Who would the witnesses recommend we should bring in?
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay, those were just a couple of thoughts-----
Mr. Tim Murnane:
I am sorry; I will respond to that. I mentioned earlier about a collaborative approach versus adversarial. I think the Deputy is kind of touching on the same sort of theme there in terms of gold-plating that because everything is so adversarial, the safest thing to do is have a belt-and-braces approach to everything else. I think it is-----
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Do a report just to double-check that it was the right thing to do.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
They will do a report while they are at it just to double-check that it was the right thing to do, which adds extra costs. I have seen that, too.
Mr. Tim Murnane:
It is probably all part of that same issue. We have a housing crisis and an infrastructure crisis, people need to be single-minded in determining how they are going to solve them rather than being worried about getting clobbered if they make a mistake. As consulting engineers, we have professional indemnity insurance. That is one of our big things with these bespoke contracts. We know we are going to get clobbered if we make a mistake. That is not the optimal environment in which to do optimal design.
That is why the philosophy around how our contracts are framed and procurement is done is too adversarial. One does not get optimal project outcomes in that environment, in my opinion.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
On the challenges of public versus private, we have discussed that the financial capacity exists and we need the time. Are the witnesses confident that there is a culture shift to deliver? Do they have concerns around that? It is hard to measure the pace of cultural change, but is a cultural change occurring? Is there anything that we need to be doing?
Mr. Sean Finlay:
I would detect that there is, in the broader sense. There is the fact that infrastructure has been added as a key part of the Department of Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation. There is also the fact that this committee exists and is doing a lot of very incisive work. We are not the only people commenting on infrastructure deficits. There is the American Chamber of Commerce Ireland, the Dublin Chamber of Commerce, the British Irish Chamber of Commerce and IBEC. Everybody is focused on this. As Mr. Leahy said, there is a broad understanding that we have to do better, and I think that is a very good starting place. The challenge is to map the particular steps as to how to do better. This committee has a lot to do in that regard. I hope that we will be able to continue to provide suggestions and ideas as to how to make the path better.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I want to ask a question about an issue that was mentioned in passing. Modular units are being built as school extensions all over the country and they are quick to build. What is the typical guaranteed lifespan of a modular unit?
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In other words, a school building that has been there for 50 years which was built solidly will be there in 30 years' time when an extension built today will have passed its sell-buy date. Is this generation, in order to get space done, short-changing the next generation? I ask because we still have generations later the schools that were built decades ago. However, these modular units are really only for one generation and every one of those schools will be back in 25 years' time asking for a new building. Are we short selling our future?
Mr. Tim Murnane:
It depends on quality. Again, there is the speed of construction and the durability over time. It is down to the performance specification that the design team will prepare, in agreement with the client, in terms of the design life they want from these units. There are apartments that were built in Ireland in the early noughties using modular construction. They were delivered on the back of a trailer and people bolted them together. Those apartments seem to be performing well in service. The mindset of building houses in factories rather than on site is a very positive one. There are great examples internationally, in China and elsewhere, where they do that very successfully. There is better quality and better control over the work and workers go to the same place to work every day, etc. It is certainly not something that I would be saying we should not be doing. It is important from a quality perspective the performance specification is very clear at the start, and the quality is ensured following through on that.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
At this stage we will conclude the meeting. I thank the representatives of the three organisations - the Irish Academy of Engineering, the Association of Consulting Engineers of Ireland and Engineers Ireland - for their support, assistance and information today. I ask them to please forward information they have on any issue that was mentioned to the committee within the next two weeks. Is there any other business? No.
Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the witnesses for giving up their time and I hope they have found this discussion informative. It is a big ask putting everything together and I hope that the witnesses got some benefit. I thank them for joining us.
Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The committee now stands adjourned until 15 October.