Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The purpose of the meeting is to discuss to the work of the accelerating infrastructure task force and the findings contained within the recently launched report and action plan. I am pleased to welcome the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation, Deputy Jack Chambers. We are very pleased to have him here. It is the second time we have had him at the committee. It is very important we keep in constant contact with the Minister and his officials in relation to this committee's work. We are also joined by Kevin Meaney, infrastructure oversight and NDP background; Mr. Ken Cleary, legislative reform and action plan background; Ms Jenny Connors, housing and water; and Mr. Eoin Dormer, transport and energy.

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 they comply with any such direction.

Members will be afforded a six-minute speaking slot for questions and answers. If they want to come back in for a second opportunity after the other speakers have been called, that is also quite in order. I now invite the Minister, Deputy Chambers, to make his opening statement on behalf of the Department.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Cathaoirleach and members of the joint committee for the opportunity to discuss the issues relevant to my Department, in particular recent developments in accelerating infrastructure delivery. As we look ahead to the coming decade, the choices we make about infrastructure delivery will determine our economic competitiveness, our climate resilience and the quality of life enjoyed by communities across the country.

Ireland is experiencing rapid demographic and economic change. We require transformative action across energy, transport, water and housing. Infrastructure is now a central pillar of Ireland’s future prosperity. That understanding underpins the Government’s publication of the NDP review last July and the accelerating infrastructure report and action plan in December 2025.

Ireland is at a critical moment in its development. The economy continues to perform strongly and the population is growing steadily. Capital investment has grown consistently over the last ten years. This significant level of investment is being supported by an infrastructure reform programme progressed by Government. As well as establishing an infrastructure division in my Department to co-ordinate delivery, the Government launched the Accelerating Infrastructure Report and Action Plan in December 2025. This publication sets out a comprehensive programme of reforms to break through inertia and accelerate the delivery of infrastructure that our people, communities and businesses urgently need. Infrastructure bottlenecks act as a drag on national competitiveness. This report and action plan represents the culmination of extensive engagement with delivery bodies, semi-State agencies, private sector experts and the public. It sets out a clear roadmap for reform to ensure that Ireland can deliver the infrastructure necessary to support housing, climate action, economic growth and quality of life.

The plan addresses 12 key barriers that were identified through stakeholder consultation and contribute to delays, cost escalation and uncertainty in delivering critical projects. These barriers include planning complexity, lengthy consenting processes, regulatory fragmentation and challenges associated with judicial review. The plan sets out 30 specific, time-bound actions to speed up the pace of infrastructure delivery for Ireland. These actions represent a transformative approach to streamlining development processes and significantly reducing delivery timelines. It sets out an ambitious reform agenda, and streamlining approvals to allow concurrent processing, rationalising delivery guidance to reduce duplication and complexity, enhancing procurement practices through clearer project pipelines and fostering a delivery-focused culture that balances safeguards with urgency.

The four key pillars are legal reform, regulatory simplification and reform, co-ordination and delivery reform and public acceptance. These measures provide a whole-of-government approach to ensure that unprecedented levels of capital investment translate into timely, co-ordinated delivery of infrastructure that is so critical to our country’s long-term growth. In terms of legal reform, the proposed reforms set out a comprehensive programme of legislative and procedural measures, including reforms to judicial review, to accelerate the delivery of critical infrastructure projects. Key measures include enacting a critical infrastructure Bill and emergency powers legislation, implementing targeted legislative changes and modernising environmental assessment frameworks. Further actions focus on raising exemption thresholds, ensuring rapid responses to legal precedents, and advancing civil reform legislation to streamline judicial review procedures. Collectively, these initiatives aim to enhance efficiency, reduce delays and provide a robust legal foundation for critical infrastructure delivery.

The second area concerns regulatory simplification and reform. The focus here is on streamlining planning and regulatory frameworks for critical infrastructure through national planning statements, regulatory simplification, legislative rationalisation and agency process reform. They also include proactive engagement on EU legislation, enabling developer-led delivery and strengthening the planning regulator’s role in promoting consistency and sight of pipeline.

Third, on co-ordination and delivery reform we want to embed strategic co-ordination across the infrastructure system. A suite of legislative, institutional and financial reforms will be implemented. These actions are designed to reduce fragmentation, align planning and funding and create a more predictable, efficient pathway for delivering of critical infrastructure.

In terms of public acceptance, recognising the importance of community support, the plan places an emphasis on public communication, ensuring that the benefits of major infrastructure, such as improved services, climate action, and economic opportunity, are clearly explained to citizens.

Ireland’s economic model relies on agility, connectivity and credibility. Delays in infrastructure delivery risk undermining our competitiveness, our ability to attract and retain investment, our capacity to meet environmental obligations and public trust in the State’s ability to deliver. Addressing these deficiencies is essential to sustained and future economic performance. While the action plan is ambitious and comprehensive, its success will depend on consistent implementation, continuous monitoring and the willingness of all stakeholders - Government, regulatory bodies, industry and communities - to work collaboratively towards this common goal. These reforms are not designed to reduce environmental protection or compromise fiscal governance. They are necessary to ensure Ireland can meet its wider climate and environmental goals and ensure value for money while meeting the evolving needs of our society and the economy.

The action plan is not just a list of isolated actions. It is a comprehensive programme of reforms designed to cut red tape and reduce infrastructure delivery timelines by years. Ireland has an opportunity to modernise its infrastructure systems, accelerate sustainable growth and enhance resilience at a time of global uncertainty. The reforms outlined provide a roadmap to deliver the infrastructure our society and economy urgently require. It sets out not only what must be achieved but establishes the expectation that this Government will act decisively to make it happen. The measures outlined are designed to move beyond aspiration to implementation and to ensure that the vision translates into real outcomes for communities and the country.

As mentioned, the delivery of essential infrastructure is a key driver in ensuring our economy’s competitiveness and resilience. In the past five years, there has been more than €65 billion invested in capital infrastructure projects across our country. While this funding has delivered a significant amount of infrastructure including roads, houses, schools, hospitals and more, all of which have improved the lives of people living in Ireland, the programme for Government recognised that more investment is needed to address infrastructure deficits. This ambition for increased delivery is reflected in the updated NDP published last July, the largest long-term investment programme in the State’s history. The revised NDP commits to €275.4 billion in public capital investment out to 2035. Crucially, this NDP prioritises investment to comprehensively upgrade our water, energy and transport infrastructure to enable the delivery of 300,000 homes by 2030 and boost our international competitiveness. In addition to the significant Exchequer allocations, €10 billion in equity or fund releases have been provided for the period 2026 to 2030 to support the delivery of large projects in the water, energy and transport sectors. Specifically, €3.5 billion in equity funding is being allocated to fund enhanced energy grid capacity to support the Government’s housing and competitiveness objectives and €2 billion in equity funding is being provided to Uisce Éireann in 2025 to enable the delivery of thousands more homes. A further €2.5 billion is being provided to Uisce Éireann for the water supply project and greater Dublin drainage projects out to 2030. Some €2 billion will be released from the Infrastructure, Climate and Nature Fund to support low-carbon transportation and will provide a dedicated funding stream for the MetroLink project.

These investments will accelerate the modernisation of our water systems, expand grid capacity, and ensure critical infrastructure keeps pace with population and demand growth. Following the publication of the review last July, Departments began development of sectoral investment plans that provide more specific details on the projects that will be delivered between 2026 and 2030. These plans were published by Departments in the last couple of months and provide the construction and built environment sector with a clear and structured pipeline of projects to be delivered over the coming five years. By outlining the scale, scope and timing of upcoming infrastructure projects, the plans provide greater certainty to industry sectors, thereby allowing them to prepare and scale capacity through investment in hiring, technology and innovation to deliver the national development plan.

Considering sectoral needs and ministerial decisions, these plans reflect Government priorities, including the national planning framework and the commitment to balanced regional development. The published plans outline the intended investment in projects across the country, including a range of projects across transport, justice and utility services. For example, in Cork, the Midleton wastewater treatment project will be delivered as will transport works around the Mallow relief road, the M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy and other important projects. In Dublin we have the completion of the children's hospital, the relocation of the national maternity hospital, the delivery of thousands of social and affordable housing units, investment in Cloverhill Prison, the Dublin family courts, the development of the RDS and much more. The plans and the specific geographical breakdown with respect to different Departments are set out online.

These reforms we are making to how we plan, design and deliver infrastructure will shape Ireland’s trajectory for a generation. By embracing reform, prioritising efficiency and maintaining public trust, we can ensure that infrastructure becomes a true catalyst for national progress. I look forward to the engagement today.

Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for that broad and detailed opening address. Before I call the first speaker I will take up one item. The Minister mentioned at the end the "trajectory for a generation." I know the plan is geared for investment in construction and infrastructure to 2035. What does he expect the population to be at that time and maybe a generation later? We are not just building for that particular date because the population is increasing. What kind of work has he in relation to the population increases, not just up to 2035 but beyond? We are building the work to be done by then for the forthcoming generation. That is the first question.

Second, while we all look forward to work progressing on the various items mentioned, there is now international competition for materials, a skilled workforce and people to carry out this work. We will be doing a lot of this work at a time when major rebuilding work will, we hope, be going on in Ukraine and Gaza. Some of the biggest construction companies in the world will be heading to Ukraine and Gaza to do the rebuilding work, which will make it more difficult to attract some businesses to Ireland to do the major projects we are talking about.

Finally, back in the day when we invested in the country previously, a lot of the work was done through public-private partnerships, PPPs. The motorways network was the result of such partnerships, and everybody sees that as a great job. Court buildings and schools were also built under that model. Are there any PPPs specifically in this plan? Everything should not depend on the Government receipts in a particular year and that method spreads out the payments over a period. Where motorways were done by PPPs, they seem, years later, to have done a very good job. The population has increased and all those motorways are chock-a-block but that is another day's work, which ties back to the population projection that this whole plan is based on.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Cathaoirleach. On the first question, the national planning framework set out the wider trajectory for the population. I think there will be approximately 1 million more people by 2040. The Future Forty report published by the Department of Finance sets out a more updated trajectory. There is a need to build an abundance across our infrastructure systems.

The Cathaoirleach also asked about the construction sector pipeline. The sectoral investment plans have been positively received by the construction sector, including the international consortiums and others, which will play a clear role in partnership with the Government in the pipeline we want to deliver out to the medium term. We sought to provide specific sectoral plans across the strategic areas and other areas so there was visibility for the construction sector to invest in modern methods of construction and digitalisation, as well as to future-proof the pipeline out to 2030 and beyond.

Assessments with regard to PPPs are made on a project-by-project basis in different sectors. I suspect there will be PPPs through the overall capital investment but the decisions will be made on a project-by-project basis.

Peadar Tóibín (Meath West, Aontú)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as teacht anseo. One of the biggest difficulties over the past while has been the absolute failure in the delivery of infrastructure around the country. We were promised, for example, that the national children's hospital would be open by 2020 at a cost of €700 million. It is still not open and has cost €2.25 billion. For a ten-year period, we had the lowest investment in infrastructure of any country in Europe except Romania. We were not even maintaining the capital stock of this country during that period.

The Minister mentioned Midleton. That town had a massive flood in 2012 and the people there were promised that flood defences would be put in place but no planning application has gone into Cork County Council yet to provide a flood defence system for Midleton.

In County Meath, for example, the Navan to Dublin rail line was built in the 1860s with picks and shovels in three years. Today, it will go from concept to completion in 42 years and that is if there is no judicial review or extra delay.

We have a significant problem in the delivery of infrastructure and that is fraying communities in a significant fashion. It takes four hours to complete a return journey for someone travelling from Navan to Dublin for his or her working day. I have no doubt but that it is having an enormous economic effect on those families. It is also having environmental effects. The children of those families are not getting to see their parents from one end of the day to the other, which is, I imagine, leading to anxiety among the children being raised in those circumstances.

Infrastructure must be one of the biggest issues facing this country. When will the legislation for critical infrastructure be laid out? Is there a date for submission to the floor of the Dáil? Will infrastructure be taken on a case-by-case basis? Will each piece of infrastructure require legislation? Will it be generalised so that certain categories of infrastructure are included? That is my first question. I might ask all my questions in this contribution.

There is obviously a balance required in terms of judicial reviews, as the Minister alluded to in his presentation. How will he strike a balance? It is incredible that a person in Cork, for example, can, as part of the normal planning process, oppose a slatted shed being built by a farmer in Cavan. The person in Cork has no material interest at all in that location. Where will the Minister strike the balance on judicial reviews, the number of which needs to be reduced? He is right that Ireland has some of the longest timescales for planning, licensing, tendering, permitting and judicial reviews in the whole of the European Union at the moment.

One of the things that is missed is the staffing issue. An Coimisiún Pleanála still does not have enough staff to do its job. It is still behind on planning applications. I know builders whose applications have been awaiting decision for 18 or 19 months. They are still not coming out of the process. Even the court system in this country does not have the staff it needs. Judicial reviews are slow. There are things we can do now without any legislation being necessary for them. How do we reduce the proliferation of regulatory bodies in order that there are fewer regulatory bodies that must be dealt with in the course of the delivery of infrastructure?

Representatives of Uisce Éireann were before the committee a couple of months ago. I asked them when it is likely that all the gaps in infrastructure currently holding up the building of homes will be filled. They said 2050. That is eye-watering. Perhaps the Minister could answer those questions.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To the Deputy's initial point, pubic investment was too low for too long. That is part of the issue. This Government has sought to correct that. The trajectory in the medium-term fiscal and structural plan is to have total capital investment at 5% of GNI* over the next five years. That represents an ability to narrow the gap in comparison with our European peers. That is why we have emphasised capital investment in the context of overall expenditure versus the growth in current expenditure. That is why there is a moderation of current expenditure planned over the next five years.

The Deputy asked about the critical infrastructure legislation. We are currently working on that legislation and hope to have a scheme. We will work with the Attorney General's office in quarter 1 of this year. I will bring the legislation to the Government and we will have quick publication of a Bill thereafter, and enactment in the first half of this year.

As to what it seeks to do and to the Deputy's question on whether it will be on a project-by-project basis, we are working through the details at the moment. I expect there will be an emphasis on particular sectors, including transport, water and energy. We are working on what a project-by-project list would look like in the context of the ongoing drafting. It is about reform and there will be an important legal reform in respect of judicial reviews. I agree with the Deputy's synopsis that someone in a random part of the country can weaponise judicial reviews on a minor procedural or technical matter and stop a project for years. I do not think anyone on this committee supports such an approach. People should not be facilitated in that regard and minor technical issues should not be able to hold back major investment for the country. That is the current status quo and there has been a growth in the number of judicial reviews.

The Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, is working on the civil reform Bill to put judicial reviews on a statutory footing. That will have a significant impact on the rules of engagement around judicial reviews, in addition to the work we are doing on the environmental legal costs scheme, the critical infrastructure Bill and the emergency powers, all of which are about rebalancing rights in the context of the public good and delivering the projects that the Deputy referenced much quicker. I accept that delivery is too slow and we can list countless projects that have been on lists for decades. We want to build momentum and put reform at the centre of our approach. It is not about more expenditure, which is often the binary political discussion at committees. It is about how we reform the State and public service, and how we back public servants to increase their risk appetite in the interests of delivery. All of that is included in our considerations.

We must also respond rapidly to precedents.

If there is a technical or legal issue on which we see, say, a High Court judgment that promotes a risk aversion in the decision-making, responding rapidly to that precedent within the Oireachtas is something that has not happened in recent years. The aim is to respond to that with a legislative response, if required.

I am told the staffing in An Coimisiún Pleanála has significantly increased. Since 2023, there have been 212 additional permanent full-time local government posts in local authority planning departments, for example. When it comes to An Coimisiún Pleanála, in the 2023 appropriation accounts it had an allocation of €30 million. At the outturn of 2025, it was €40 million. That is €10 million more, a majority of which related to pay and is connected to staffing.

Peadar Tóibín (Meath West, Aontú)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is still too low.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We can get the detail on the specific numbers but there have been substantial staffing increases in An Coimisiún Pleanála. We have worked with it collaboratively to ensure it has capacity, as well as ensuring that the local planning departments have greater capacity to make decisions in the context of public service numbers.

Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Time is up so I will move on. The next speaker is Senator Stephenson, with six minutes.

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for coming in. Obviously, in the past few days we have had this awful storm, which makes us more acutely aware of how important infrastructure is and having that in place. Many of the areas flooded yesterday did not have an adequate warning system. I know there is a flood warning system but are there plans to make that publicly available, that is, beyond just having that internally?

I also have a question on how we do flood management in our infrastructure space. I live on the Carlow-Kilkenny border and we had places in Kilkenny, such as Graiguenamanagh, that were flooded earlier in the week. Then, later on, Thomastown, Inistioge and Bennetsbridge were all badly hit by the flood. Kilkenny city, for example, was not hit by the flood in the same way because the flood management was done there. However, there was an issue in that this led to communities downstream being affected by the flood measures which were put in place for one section of it. What are the lessons around that in terms of how we fix one section of the river and the impact that has for other communities?

I want to give a shout out to our local media, KCLR, and our local newspapers because they have been - and I am sure it is the case in everyone's communities - very important in updating communities and keeping people informed on what was going on, as well as of course, the local fire services and council workers who were doing everything they could to help. We will have lessons to learn from all these instances but people hear that lot. What we need are solutions and proper warning measures in place to mitigate the damage as much as possible.

Moving on to the report, it is brilliant the Minister is here and we had booked this session for a while. It was disappointing for many of us that we only got the witness statement this morning, because this had been scheduled. Our job and role as parliamentarians is one of scrutiny in this committee and it makes it challenging when we receive the report at 11 a.m. on the day of the committee, particularly when it has been scheduled for so long.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Particularly when it is much different from what was read out.

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is important to note, in terms of this being a collaborative relationship, that it is super challenging when we get that stuff so late.

The statement is very worthy but there is a challenge there. If we are bringing in legislation that may breach EU law in some ways around changing procedural rules, this will actually open us up to more litigation if we are changing rules around timelines that we can review. People have reviews in terms of the consultation process or parts of the planning process where they can engage in consultation, particularly in respect of environmental concerns. If we are not in line with EU directives, then we will be risking opening ourselves up to further litigation. I would love a little more detail on how the streamlining processes will meet those EU standards. I know we are not meeting EU standards in several cases like the Dublin drainage scheme, where there was not a consultation with the EPA, which is mandatory, for example, when it comes to the Aarhus Convention.

It is an aspirational plan but there is not concrete deadlines. I do not think there is anything measurable. As the Minister has noted there has been significant underinvestment for decades, having measurable targets for people will be crucial in order that the public can have faith in this going forward and we are not just hearing more words. The word "streamlining" is being used a lot. In the context of the EU, streamlining and simplification are often used as a synonym for deregulation, so I would like to hear how the Minister feels that is not the case in his plan. I also would like to hear a bit more about what this simplification unit will do in practice.

The Minister also mentioned staffing and that there has been a lot of staffing activity. Some of the biggest challenges we are having are in a lack of staffing in councils and that we need more experienced planners. We definitely need more judges to get through the judicial review caseload. It is very important to highlight that judicial review is there to make good on bad planning decisions. That perhaps is because the planning decisions could not be effectively carried out because of understaffing or a lack of sufficiently experienced staff. We have had so much planning legislation coming through and the rules are changing all the time. The legislation against which planners are having to make decisions is ever-changing and that makes it very difficult for planners to do their job effectively and within good time. That is very important to highlight.

The Minister also mentioned minor technical judicial reviews that are holding up processes. Could he give us an example of a few of those?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will try to get through all those questions.

First, I am aware the Minister, Deputy Browne, has been critical of some of the information published by Met Éireann relating to flooding and its ability to respond to that and he is engaging with it on that. The OPW, with the Department of local government, co-ordinates flood risk management. I do not have a specific breakdown of each scheme relating to each county. I know the Senator referenced Carlow-Kilkenny in terms of her own area but we have sought to prioritise flood investment and risk management in terms of our capital investment sectoral plan published by the OPW. We have €715 million in funding over the next five years, which will bring many projects from concept or on-list to delivery. We understand the real risk many people face in property infrastructure damage and for communities right across the country and that is a priority for us. The wider infrastructural reforms we are progressing will make an impact on significantly reforming the ability to deliver some of these, which in some instances, have been complex and we have had a very stop-start nature to the planning and development around them.

We brought forward the reform scheme on the Arterial Drainage Act, which has required reform for many years and with which we are closely involved with An Coimisiún Pleanála, to Government in the past couple of weeks. That will come before the Oireachtas shortly for pre-legislative scrutiny. That is just reform relating to any of the flood relief schemes.

On the Senator's point regarding streamlining regulation and the European Union, we have examples which we found within the barriers report where Ireland has gold-plated regulation beyond the European minimum requirement. That has added further bureaucracy delay in an unnecessary way. The regulatory simplification unit is examining the broad realm of regulation and regulators within the economy to see what is necessary in the context of infrastructure delivery. That is something where we need to be open about how simply adding more legislation regulation and piling it on top of an existing layer is not necessarily going to drive delivery and efficiency for the future.

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Absolutely, but I also noted that in my own contribution.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We all have to be open and questioning of existing layers of regulations and regulators. We have 90-plus regulators now, all established for good reason and with particular processes and regulations that underpin them. In some instances, we are seeking what could be a simple change like having parallel consents around licensing approvals to reduce time and then in other instances, we need to increase our risk appetite to cut out some layers and decision-making gates that are not in the interests of speed and delivery.

As for judicial reviews, they are out of control. We are seeing massive growth of judicial reviews in recent years. Certain judicial reviews have been taken purely with the focus on delay. In some instances, they are taken on technical or procedural matters when in fact, the delay is causing further environmental harm, if you take the example of wastewater treatment plants or others. This is about responding to legal precedent in a forward looking way but also looking at the legal system and ensuring we have balance. We know from the public consultation we conducted with stakeholders across the board that we do not have a balance right now.

This risk of judicial review is permeating its way through every part of the project life cycle. There are thousands of pages being written up just to mitigate a potential risk on a procedural matter. Ultimately, if we want to deliver on our climate goals and energy targets, and to deliver public transport and infrastructure for communities, we need to strike a better balance.

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I absolutely agree-----

Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Senator has gone way over time.

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A quick point. Judicial reviews are issued in the context of regulation, not technicalities. That is a point of clarification.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are examples from Irish Water where a minor procedural matter has held up projects for years. That is just not acceptable. We need to reform our processes. We can put all the investment before the Oireachtas but, ultimately, if there is a risk of a of a minor procedural matter holding up a critical capital project for the State, most people the Senator and everyone on this committee represent want to see the thing started and accelerated. If there is a need for a minor correction to the issue identified by the court, that is something that should be able to be advanced quickly.

Again, we have a system that essentially paralyses delivery in some instances, and its effect on the broader project development cycle is unsustainable. It is too slow and will harm delivery. We need to strike a better balance. We have multiple cases. The response by the public, even to the metro judicial review that has since been taken off the table, shows that the public is up for reform and a rebalancing. We are not trying to take away respective rights but we are trying to say that the public interest, the community interest in terms of delivering for people and critical projects, matters over some procedural matters where many of these cases are being taken. We have an obligation to progress those reforms.

Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I call Deputy Cronin.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I apologise about the statement. There was no intention to withhold-----

Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It shows we are listening carefully.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It shows we put a lot of preparation into it as well and we generally like to do that preparation. The draft the Minister sent us at 11 a.m. is not the same as the statement he read out. There was not much of a difference but if he is going to be that late sending in his opening statement, it would be nice to get the right one.

To continue on from what the Senator was saying, what most people really want to see is an efficient Government that gets its planning right so that there is no need for judicial reviews. One of the task force’s key findings was that nobody seems to be clearly in charge. Who is going to be accountable now? Is it going to be the Minister’s Department?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are essentially centralising a lot more responsibility around reform and delivery. The task force, which I established, is continuing to provide clear accountability and focus around the 30 actions listed here. We have established the joint utilities and transport clearing house group to cut-----

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister’s Department will be-----

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My Department is the lead on infrastructure reform and delivery with other Government Departments and agencies.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister’s Department will be able to hold them to account as well.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are seeking to drive reform, but also to use our ability around sanctioning of requests for other matters, as well as the budgetary process, to ensure there is co-operation on reform and delivery, and that is why we are establishing the respective co-ordination structures in the infrastructure division and published guidance on the National Development Finance Agency this week. We aim to ensure we have much greater central co-ordination of infrastructure and reform.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is welcome.

To get on to judicial reviews, certainly there was a narrative in respect of judicial reviews and the people bringing them. An Teachta Tóibín made anecdotal reference to somebody in Cork objecting to a slatted shed. That does not mean it is judicially reviewable. Those kinds of things are a bit silly.

Regarding the action plan, the Minister said that judicial reviews, if not addressed, are going to paralyse infrastructure development. He pointed to a growing number of cases. He also wrote to the Minister for the environment, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, in June of last year, saying that his officials were preparing a report to identify key barriers to infrastructure delivery and that the impact of judicial reviews had become one of the most significant barriers. Has that report now been completed, and if so, could the Minister provide it to the committee, please?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The barriers report was published in July and it set out some of the trends in judicial reviews.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Did it give concrete examples?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If we look at all the wider public consultation and the trend which I can set out here, the environmental and planning list completed its first full year of operation in 2024, during which 241 new cases were filed on top of the 143 already active. As of July 2025, a further 107 new cases had been entered, bringing the total to 260 live cases at the time, which represented a 28% year-on-year increase. The list now spans challenges related to housing, wind farms, emissions, licences, agricultural infrastructure, communications masts, quarries and bus corridors. Again, this wider litigation trend has continued. We got an update recently. On 13 January 2025 it was 252 cases. On 10 October last year it was 311. We looked at this yesterday. When we look at the wider trends, going back 10 years there were maybe 30, 40 or 50 cases. There has been a massive increase in the number of cases taken. What I would say is-----

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have had a lot of people in here who say that the constant changes to the planning laws and the transposition of EU legislation into Irish legislation is what is causing many of the delays. The goalposts keep moving and that is the reason for many of the delays.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am not saying this is the only issue at all.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A person in their car listening to the radio would think judicial reviews are the cause of the delay, rather than governmental incompetence.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I cannot dictate what the media say or publish. As regards what this report seeks to do, it goes from a particular agency deciding it wants to do a road project, and how we put discipline on the time spent to develop that piece of infrastructure, because a lot of time is wasted-----

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome that as well.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A lot of time is wasted, sometimes two or three years in business case development or project design. All of this is inefficiency that can happen before it even reaches a planning application. That is public service performance that needs to be improved in the context of infrastructure. There is as much focus on that in the report as there is on judicial reviews.

Every area that what we have set out in terms of the interface of a project with regulation, where one needs licences or approvals, is about putting it on a parallel basis to cut time. Judicial reviews are a risk. They are a risk that go from when someone decides to do a project. The risk of a judicial review is what people are trying to mitigate at every point of the infrastructural life cycle, all adding time and bureaucracy. We need to provide certainty around that.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Has the Minister’s Department considered the impact of this kind of clampdown on judicial reviews on the Aarhus Convention? That is EU law and we have to abide by it.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Everything we do will have to be in compliance with EU law. We are taking a wider position in our approach to European legislation. Our approach in the context of the EU Presidency will prioritise simplification. The EU has brought, in some instances, excessive regulation for countries to transpose, which harms delivery. That is a wider issue in the context of European legislation. However, we should not be gold-plating EU legislation either. We have examples which our own regulatory simplification unit has identified where we should not be going beyond the EU requirement. That adds time and bureaucracy.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When we look at the flooding we are experiencing at the moment, so much of that was because of bad environmental decisions that were made in planning. We have to use our planning to look around the corner and make sure we are not caught-----

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When the pendulum swings to the point where environmental law stops everything, we do not have a balance.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have to have balance.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is what we are trying to strike. We are trying to strike an appropriate-----

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We do not want people suffering at the end of it either.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No. I was down in Mayo a few months ago. There is a wastewater treatment plant proposed for Newport.

When I met the local communities, they raised the time it was taking to move that project through the life cycle because of a lot of assessments that have to be carried out. All the layers are adding time. There is raw sewage going into the river. In some instances, the need to comply with existing rules, procedures and legislation is permeating the actual environmental damage that is the issue in the first place. Our ambition here is to have much cleaner water and rivers. To do that, we need better and more wastewater treatment plants delivered. We have responded to that around the capital investment side with €12 billion-plus allocated in terms of Uisce Éireann. That means more water supply to enable housing but also cleaner water.

Similarly, on the energy system and our renewable ambition, there was reference in the Dáil by one of Deputy's colleagues or one of her Opposition colleagues to the renewable energy we are generating but wasting because we do not have a grid that is able to capture that energy.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I think that must have been me.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is just an example of where the pace of delivery in terms of transforming our energy system is harming our ability to build a low-carbon future. My priority is to enhance the environment and the built environment through reform and to ensure the renewable energy ambition that we have. The Draghi report pointed to Ireland as having some of the slowest delivery of renewable energy in Europe. That is something we have to own at home. It is not just a European responsibility. That is why reform is important. I assure the Deputy that I am trying to strike the appropriate balance.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I understand. I will come back in on the second round.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I just spoke in the Chamber about this infrastructure. It is funny that it has happened twice quickly in that way. It is good to be able to chat to the Minister again. Other members seemed to speak first and then wait for the Minister to reply at the end, but if he does not mind, I might jump in and try for short questions with short answers. It might be more informative.

One thing I have noticed is that accountability is a theme throughout the accelerating infrastructure report. At the same time, though, and if the Minister does not mind saying, it is overly focused on his Department. A lot of it seems to come back to him, but much of the responsibility ultimately should lie with other Departments. The accountability of the Minister and me is that we know we are accountable to the public. We will either get re-elected or not based on this. Are the likes of the bosses of Uisce Éireann and EirGrid and chiefs in the local authorities fully accountable for what is required to be done here?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have an infrastructure task force. As part of that, we have dealt with the chief executives of the respective utilities. The ex officio members are centrally involved. We are having an infrastructure task force meeting this week where we are focusing on a particular sector. Accountability has been centralised in that way. They are involved in the workings of it as well. We have the Cabinet committee on infrastructure, which we did not have in the previous Dáil. We have this Oireachtas committee providing accountability and oversight of me and the wider system. To be frank, if there are hundreds of recommendations in other reports spread across every element of the system, there is not always delivery. There is a responsibility for me with the infrastructure division to drive reform and use the tools that I have in terms of the budgetary process to ensure that we get delivery.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister just mentioned a version of the word "centralisation" a couple of times. He has also mentioned it previously. If we have learned one thing in the past 100 years, it is that centralisation does not necessarily work. That is something we should very careful about because the Department is putting all the responsibility for the plan back onto itself. Ultimately, the risk is that all the chiefs we talked about get away scot-free. That is just a follow-on point.

There are a couple of issues that come up. Multi-annual funding keeps coming up here as a significant reason people do not trust what they are going to get out of working with departmental schemes.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Those are being delivered. The water investment profile is €12 billion in the next five years. For the energy system, it will be €18 billion under PR6.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is that not done by year?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is allocated that way, but we have worked with the respective utilities to ensure that it is allocated in alignment with their respective plans.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If someone is a contractor, how do they accept it? Ultimately, work is not done. How do they know which way it will go? There is no point doing one third of the work. If it is a three-year plan, two thirds of it might sometimes be done in the first year, but then they have to wait until the following year to get the next tranche. That is not a way to do business.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have worked with the respective sectors involved to ensure that the scale of investment matches the delivery pipeline that is being developed.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is the Minister happy enough that is being dealt with?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It has been welcomed by both utilities and the various sectors involved. We have engaged with the construction sector, IBEC and others. All have strong support for how we have funded this. The issue before was that water did not get the level or threshold of funding required.

Regarding centralisation, what I meant was reform. Clearly, we still need the transport sector to deliver, but we need to ensure that there is better oversight of that. Part of the problem------

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister is talking about centralisation of responsibility. Ultimately, that centralisation of decision-making empowers to a degree. It all comes back to it in the end.

We have a timetable for actions. I am delighted to see that. Will we be seeing a regular scorecard of the timelines of those as we go along?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will. All of the quarter 4 targets have been implemented. We have ongoing tracking of quarter 4 of last year. We have a dedicated team to deal with delivery. I want transparency and the delivery of this.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know. We are all the same.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We do not have 400 actions; we have concrete actions. Each of them will move the dial and cut delivery times. That is the role of the task force, myself and the division. There is also wider engagement with Departments on driving accountability and why we will be transparent around delivery on the timelines.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the fact that we are doing this. Obviously, we should have been doing this before. The Minister spoke about the 11% of spend in previous years and 16% in 2026. It is capital spend, but it almost should not be turned away because, from an accounting perspective, it is essentially all current spending and all needed. That is something we should be doing, not as a matter of choice, but as a necessity. I welcome that change.

One thing the Minister has mentioned a couple of times is the gold-plated element of the European rules and regulations. It is something that keeps coming up. It is something that struck me since I became a TD. I hear about the EU. It is not that it is getting blamed, but we hear this thing about how Portugal or Spain, for example, would not do that. Why are we doing it? It takes a few months. Is this just an institutional laziness to adapt the highest one for someone to cover themselves?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The focus is that we are not any more. The history of some of these goes back years.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is almost a prerogative to take the gold-plated-----

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

At the time, the respective Ministers may have wanted to add extra regulation for a particular reason. Where we have identified a particular directive or European regulation as a barrier to delivery, we want to strip it back to the minimum requirement to ensure that it is not getting in the way in terms of delivery. That is why we have set up the regulatory simplification unit and are taking a much different approach in the context of our European engagement where simplification is at the heart of our wider engagement on future directives and regulations.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am conscious of time, so I will raise one last little matter. One of the single biggest issues that I often see when dealing with a large body like the Civil Service, a local authority or so on is the decision-making. Sometimes, the biggest individual risk that someone can make is make a decision. They sit there and think that if they do not make a decision on something, then they cannot do anything wrong, but if they make a decision, they can be held accountable. It is easy to push away a decision. I am referring to all relatively senior levels all the way up. The second-best thing is that, if they have to make decision, at least they are going to get two reports to tell them that they made the right decision. How do we get away from that institutional-----

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy is right. What we are doing on that is publishing risk appetite statements where we are going to back decision-makers to make decisions and take risks. That may mean a different conversation in these committee rooms where we do not get what was planned in one out of whatever number of projects.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It goes wrong.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ultimately, if we have delivered a lot more a lot quicker, we need to back that.

That may mean backing public servants to take risks, and we will be publishing risk appetite statements that seek to do that along with a very clear protocol. I want a delivery-first culture and not one that has 20 business cases telling somebody why they want to do something. If we are keen about delivery, which we all are, there may be a downside risk to that. However, ultimately delivering more and doing it quicker is my objective. That means backing people. From an Oireachtas perspective, there may be an example that grabs headlines, but we and the political system need to be mature in pointing to what we have delivered in the interim and the basis for it. I will be very clear about that when I publish the risk appetite statements.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for his openness in answering those questions.

Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for giving us its time. One of the key issues when it comes to the delivery of projects is that decisions are taking too long. I give the example of the Galway ring road, which has been held up in planning for around 20 years at this stage. We have now been told a decision is due from An Coimisiún Pleanála in the coming weeks. However, people who are stuck in hours of traffic in Galway week in, week out have been badly let down by the failure to deliver this project. What learnings have been taken from this project and other similar ones? How will the Minister ensure there are no more barriers to its delivery in the time ahead?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

From being in County Galway regularly, I know that this matter is brought up at every second door. I understand the importance of it. As the Deputy said correctly, we are due to get a decision from An Coimisiún Pleanála quickly. The road has had stop-start development over the past 20 years. There are specific examples here where judicial reviews were taken and it was put back to the start. In some instances, that added years. It is one of our many priority projects in the context of the legal reforms we have set out.

Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On this project and many others, too much time is spent with An Coimisiún Pleanála and in the courts. The Minister mentioned earlier that the staffing in these bodies had increased. Has it increased by enough? Are we seeing enough of a reduction in the times taken for decisions?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The statutory timeline associated with An Coimisiún Pleanála is now 48 weeks where previously projects were stuck for a couple of years.

Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Are those timelines being met?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is certainly a lot of progress. My understanding is that An Coimisiún Pleanála's timelines are much closer to the statutory position than they once were based on the resourcing we have provided and the reforms at An Coimisiún Pleanála.

Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will resources in those bodies continue to be increased until those statutory timelines are met? Does the Minister agree that they do not have enough resources at present?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sometimes, the binary discussion on resource allocations is a problem in our broader body politic. I could say that every regulator needs a 20% increase in resources. However, do we need to question the regulations that underpin the regulatory role? Even if we gave every regulator everything they wanted, we would not necessarily guarantee improved timelines in certain instances. I am saying it is as much about reform as it is about resource allocation. I acknowledge that An Coimisiún Pleanála needed to increase its staffing and that has happened, as seen in comparing the 2023 outturn with the 2025 outturn. In parallel with that, we have also had significant reform of An Coimisiún Pleanála. We need similar reforms with other regulators and the rules that underpin their respective roles in the economy. That is the work we are doing from a regulatory simplification perspective.

Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I want to move on. One of the actions in the plan is with developer-led infrastructure. For example, who is going to pay for wastewater infrastructure in unserviced towns and villages? Small and medium-sized developers will not have the funds. If they do, will those costs be passed on to the people buying the homes? What will happen in cases where the infrastructure does not meet the Uisce Éireann specifications and cannot be taken in charge? There are many such schemes across the State. I ask the Minister to comment on that.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There were issues with developer-led infrastructure in the 2000s. We have provided specifications and standards for that infrastructure. Uisce Éireann is working through that with the water division in the Department of housing. The Minister, Deputy Browne, will look for further details on the specifics of how that will work. The private wires legislation is critical to energy infrastructure to build out digital infrastructure in our economy. We know from industry that this will be really important to provide regional development. The private wires legislation will obviously have regulatory rules on how it is meant to be developed with particular specifications and standards. It is done on a project-by-project basis. We have a €1 billion fund for local infrastructure investment. It could depend on whether it is for public or private housing. It will depend on each scheme as to who is paying for it.

On the wider point, there is an amount Uisce Éireann can do. If a developer is willing to advance particular infrastructure in the interest of enabling more housing supply, we should facilitate that if it meets particular rules and standards. That is what the Minister, Deputy Browne, and the Minister of State, Deputy Cummins, have advanced. Similarly with the energy sector, we know the progression of private wires is critical investment both from a domestic and a-----

Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am short on time. Sticking with wastewater, I have raised an issue with the Minister a number of times and have still not got a substantive response. Funding has been announced for wastewater infrastructure upgrades in the villages of Craughwell and Clarinbridge in my constituency. We have a serious barrier to delivery of that infrastructure in terms of the co-funding contribution Galway County Council is expected to make of at least €2 million, money it does not have. This is holding up these projects, which are on the smaller scale of things but really important for the communities in those areas. Could the co-funding by local authorities be reviewed in order to ensure these schemes can go ahead?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I appreciate the Deputy's raising these two schemes. Other local representatives have also been raising it with me. I will have to get an update from-----

Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is the third time I have raised it with the Minister and he said he would get an update but I have not received an update at any stage. I hope that this time I will receive an update on it.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My office has been following up on it because I was in Galway in November when it was raised with me. I have come here today with a specific briefing on infrastructure reforms.

Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know, but this is the third time.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I was not here the last time and I do not have a list of every local Uisce Éireann project. I will come back to the committee on that specific point and try my best to get a response.

John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister and his officials for joining us today. I will pick up on the area of culture, something I raised with the Minister at a previous meeting. I would welcome a change to a delivery-first culture, encouraging officials to take risks. We often hear about public good and what is required in the delivery of infrastructure. I also feel there is an element of public mood. We often hear about the bike shed and the sign with a typo. It takes away from the good work being done in the Department. There is a body of work with the quarterly reporting, or whatever it is going to be, of openness, transparency and putting up hands where there is an error. We will bring the public with us in relation to that mood if we get that piece right, but if we do not, this could go wrong. People often ask if they will ever see a certain project in their lifetime. There is a sense that delivery is not going to happen. In essence, the communication around this report in the coming years will be absolutely vital. It needs to be in a messaging format that the public can interpret, understand and feel comfortable with.

I will raise the issue of schools, particularly as schools are in vogue today. We have a process whereby we are turning principals into property developers. Do we need to look, from a lean processing perspective, at the methodology we use to development infrastructure in circumstances where different Departments are involved? I regularly meet principals who are trying to run schools and build extensions or new school buildings at the same time. Should responsibility for such projects, from step 1 right through to new buildings being opened, rest with the Department? Does the Minister have any thoughts on this? Those are my first two questions.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree with the first point. There is a public mood for reform and for a delivery-first approach. As I said to Deputy Neville, the risk appetite statement will make a big difference to changing the approach to infrastructure delivery.

On wider reforms, we have set out that we need to communicate these and show progress. We want to be transparent and open around them. We will be doing that. Building the case for public acceptance of infrastructure is something that has been missing. People might see the local impact in a negative light, and we need to work with them to foster trust about the State and its agencies to try to reduce opposition. We have a role not only to reform but also to help build a case for reform. The public is ahead in that regard as well.

On the Department of education, we have a model of education where school boards and principals have a central role to play in the running of schools. That is why they play an important role over the life cycle of projects.

John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sorry to interrupt, but should it be the case that the Department does the work and brings, say, three options to the principal and the board of management whereby they can make minor changes but that is what they will progress with? It would be working off a cookie-cutter template within the Department. They are all working with individual agents, architects and engineers. I feel we could be getting better economies of scale.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The funding model has brought that when they tender for particular projects. There has been a much greater level of standardisation advanced by the Department of education in recent years. You see that with projects in our communities, many of which are similar to others in their development. The Department of education has a high level of efficiency in capital spend and delivery. It is a good example of how a Department should operate. We have a lot of stages and gates, but we have seen strong outturn in the delivery of both education infrastructure and important social infrastructure compared with other sectors of the economy.

There is more involvement from external bodies and from the Department in the design process than used to be the case, but I am happy to engage with the Minister for education on that.

John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I get the sense that the back and forth creates a level of expectation, but it also brings a level of uncertainty. If there were rigid timeframes by which the Department had to deliver, it would give us all a greater level of authority.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In education, there is demand in every community for maybe a new build or a new project. As a result, it is about aligning demand with the allocation we give the Department of education over a series of years. It is €7.5 billion for the next five years, which is a 50% increase on the base position in 2020. Even with that, however, there will be more demand. The Department of education has to have a process to manage the pipeline in a way that aligns with the overall allocation. There has to be an element of managing demand to meet the budgetary position.

John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will the task force manage co-ordination when we hit unexpected bottlenecks? Something was brought to my attention earlier this week. We have had a very ambitious objective towards active travel in all our towns and villages. We are prioritising pedestrians and cyclists, so we have narrowed roadways, etc. That is all good work; it is very welcome and it enhances the public realm. However, in modern methods of construction, we see more prefabrication in workshops to reduce risks on site and improve quality. What that leads to, which I have already seen in my county with the likes of Banagher Precast Concrete, is that trucks are carrying heavier and more abnormal loads. As a result of the active travel programme, the roads on which these loads are being transported are getting smaller and less accessible. There is a situation in Birr, County Offaly, where a road - a bypass for want of a better word - has just been finished. It was built to active travel standards, which means that the abnormal loads being transported by trucks from a company ten minutes up the road were not accommodated. As a result, the trucks involved are still being drive through the centre of the town. This is a great example of a lack of co-ordination and joined-up thinking. We are potentially cutting off the oxygen supply of a small to medium enterprise that must now meet additional costs and that needs to satisfy more regulations in order to try to transport these loads. Someone is going to have to embrace this issue over the course of the development in question. This is going to happen in respect of water pipes, modular homes and data centres. It is happening with beams for large structures such as Dexcom Stadium, which opened last weekend. I ask the Minister to prioritise this because it is going to become a bigger problem very quickly.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Department will act as an escalation point where there is misalignment around co-ordination. That is a good example of where there should have been better co-ordination in the context of utilities, transport and local authorities. The task force is there-----

John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

TII was asked and refused-----

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is something we can take up with TII. There should be co-ordination in terms of meeting the demands of businesses. We will take that up with TII. Part of why we set up the utility and transport clearing house was to ensure that we have much greater alignment between the respective utilities and the transport sector regarding infrastructure delivery. That is why we have that group. The task force is there as an escalation point as well.

John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister.

Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Are there any final questions?

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the Minister think that there may be a misunderstanding among members of the public regarding judicial reviews, what they involve and how they can be pursued?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is an understanding that we have too many of them.

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In terms of what the threshold is, it is not as if an application when missing or someone put the wrong address on the envelope. That would not be a threshold for carrying out a judicial review.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have procedural and technical issues regarding the judicial review process. The Oireachtas as a responsibility in this regard. That is the work the Minister for justice, Deputy O’Callaghan, is doing on the civil reform Bill. Putting the matter on a statutory basis will set the rules of engagement around the judicial review process. We also need to look at our legislation and wider regulation in order to better streamline delivery and mitigate the risk of judicial reviews happening. The growth in the number of such reviews is alarming.

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree-----

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have random cases being taken by people where the infrastructure proposed has no impact on them but where they are seeking to stop something.

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, but-----

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In many instances-----

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, sorry, I am with the Minister-----

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----they get free legal aid in order to pursue their cases. It is a crazy system.

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am with the Minister on the idea that we should not have judicial reviews being taken for no reason. Generally, a judge will make a decision on whether a case meets the threshold for entering the judicial review process. Responsibility in that regard sits with the Judiciary at present. That is how the process operates. I would see that as a high threshold. Judicial reviews are different from the objections that happen as part of the planning process. I am asking about this matter because earlier the Minister told one of the Deputies that he is not in control of the narrative around judicial review, and people were saying that commentary will be what it is. However, the head of the accelerating infrastructure task force has come out in the media several times to say that judicial review is the biggest problem in the context of infrastructure planning. That messaging is coming from the task force directly. While I agree-----

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is a big problem. I am just saying that there are other problems.

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is, but it absolutely is not the only problem.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree that it is not the only problem.

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The narrative around it now is that if we get rid of judicial reviews or either limit the number that can be taken or make it more challenging to take them, all the infrastructure challenges will be solved. I think the Minister would agree that this is not the case.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a fundamental view. We live in a constitutional democracy. In that context, we should legislate to deliver for the people we represent. That means achieving a lot of the projects that the Senator and other members are talking about.

In many instances, they are being held up by the weaponisation of a particular interpretation of certain laws in circumstances where, maybe, the original intention was never to stop something in the first place. We need to clarify that and ensure we strike an appropriate balance between the rights of the individual taking a judicial review and the need to deliver public infrastructure for citizens across the State. I do not think the status quois achieving that balance. That is why we need to reform it.

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree, but the challenge is that planning decisions are enabling judicial reviews to be taken in order that judges can say there is something inherently wrong with those decisions. We do not have enough planners at county level. I agree that there is an issue with the process. I just think that issue relates to a different part of the process and that we need to resource that, resource the courts and get things moving. I am also of the view that certain things should not the subject of judicial review where the original planning decision was correct and in line with regulation.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are people trawling through thousands of pages and looking for minor technical issues in order to stop projects.

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Many judges will say that technicality does not count. That does happen.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The pattern is excessive. It needs reform, and this is why we have an obligation to change.

Patricia Stephenson (Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

An article by the head of the Bar Council that addressed the question of judicial review and the notion that people think "Oh, well this is just being taken on one ground". Let us take the example of wastewater and Dublin Bay. People think the review in that regard was taken on one ground, but that ground was the fact that wastewater was getting into Dublin Bay. We hear the narrative that it was just taken on one small ground, but that ground was significant. It is challenging for us when we are constantly hearing from the Government that judicial review is the only problem and that once we fix the system, all will be well. While the Minister might disagree, it does feel like that. I recognise that he has not said that here, but I am referring to matters more widely. We are getting this false narrative that this is the only issue. That is not necessarily what the Minister is saying, but it is what is being picked up. If the head of the task force is saying it in the media, it is a challenge, particularly as we have the Aarhus Convention and our obligations in respect of it.

Perhaps there will be another opportunity to talk about this. The Minister spoke about how Ireland has a gold-plated regulatory framework. I would love to know why this is the case. When all this gold-plated regulation came into being, why did we choose to make the regulation so much stronger than our European counterparts? What was the rationale for doing so? Is there anything we can look at in the context of the history of that matter in order to get a better picture? Something being gold plated sounds fantastic, but not if it is affecting our ability to get stuff done. A conversation on how we arrived at this point in comparison with what happened in other EU member states would be interesting.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In some instances, it could be that a particular Department may have had a particular focus regarding the policy under its remit but did not balance it against the wider infrastructure needs of the economy in its overall consideration. If one packages all that and accumulates it, one has a concentration of regulation that is excessive and that may be gold plated. There are countless examples where judicial reviews are holding up broader infrastructure delivery, which is why we must strike a better and more appropriate balance. It is one element of reform.

The Senator cares about the environment, as do I. There are multiple cases before the courts where we cannot improve the environment or our energy system because something is caught up on foot of a minor legal or technical matter. I do not think this Oireachtas legislated to enable that interpretation in the courts. We have a responsibility within the democratic system to be clear about what the intention of particular legislation is. If it is being interpreted in a way that may not have been originally intended, we should change it. Particular interest groups will say they are not the problem, as will the regulator, interest groups in the legal system and everyone else. Everyone needs to be part of the solution. This means that everyone needs to be subject to the respective reforms we have set out here. That is why we have been open about involving every element. The public service has to be involved in terms of project development life cycle. There is no one outside of this or not being involved in terms of the reform agenda. Everyone will not agree about changing judicial reviews, but that does not matter. We need a better balance.

Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will outline my direct experience of some of these issues. I can list a few places, and I am sure many members have seen cases, where a wind farm is proposed for an area and where people say they are against it for whatever reason, even at the initial preplanning stage when they are shown the maps. I have gone to public meetings where people where shown maps of where it was proposed to launch an planning application. Some people did not want it, as was their right, and said that they would object and appeal to An Bord Pleanála when the time came. I have met many people who have told me this directly. I asked them what would happen then, They told me that if planning permission were granted, they would go for a judicial review. They decided to go for judicial review way before the planning application was lodged. I have several cases like that. The explanation was that if they delayed matters long enough, the project would go away. It was part of the armoury to prevent something from happening. I am not commenting on the rights and wrongs of particular wind farms. However, as part of the armoury, lots of our constituents' ensure that projects like those to which I refer do not happen in their areas. I am outlining my direct experience of what people have said.

Cathal Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My town of Enniscorthy is under water. Unfortunately, at about 3 a.m. on Tuesday, the River Slaney, which flows through the town, burst its banks and spilled water out right across the quays into the Templeshannon area and onto Island Road. Since 2000, Enniscorthy has been flooded 16 times. The much-discussed and long-promised flood relief scheme has still not been progressed. I remember how the then President of Ireland visited Enniscorthy in 2014 after another flooding event. At the time, he said that everything that could be done would be done. Matters moved forward, with €55 million of funding being allocated and application being sent to the then Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform for planning consent. Unfortunately, that consent was refused. The letter setting out the reasons for that refusal really speaks to many of the infrastructure projects and the failures and difficulties we have at the moment. I would describe the Enniscorthy flood defence scheme as a case study of infrastructure failure. The letter in question stated:

There are significant shortcomings in the biodiversity assessment in relation to impacts on habitats and species which make it uncertain if the project can comply with environmental legislation including the Wildlife Acts. This assessment also shows that the scheme would cause significant residual impacts to endangered and protected species such as the loss of range of the freshwater pearl mussel.

This really sums it up - the prioritisation of protected species such as the freshwater pearl mussel ahead of the businesses and residents of the community in Enniscorthy. Our town is being held back because of the impact of flooding and here we have an example of a scheme that is funded, in respect of which there are no local objections and which is not subject to judicial review. Nobody made a submission in the last round because the people of the town and the local area bought into it. What can be done for the people of Enniscorthy to ensure that the flood prevention scheme goes ahead? What legislative change can be brought forward to ensure that we prioritise the needs of the people and businesses ahead of the freshwater pearl mussel? What is the expected timeline for this in order that the people living on Island Road in Enniscorthy will not be looking out of their windows every time it rains to see whether their homes are going to be flooded again?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I acknowledge the Senator's advocacy for Enniscorthy. I know he has been working on this for a significant period. He set out the shocking history relating to the delivery of the scheme in question.

People are beyond frustrated, particularly with the flooding in recent days as well. The first reform we are seeking to advance is of the Arterial Drainage Act where the Minister at the time must make the assessment in the context of the environmental submissions that are made to them. I brought a scheme to the Government after Christmas in early January on reforming that so it goes to An Coimisiún Pleanála and there is more certainty around that in terms of the planning process.

Some of the rules around the biodiversity assessments and the environmental impact assessments appear to lack the respective balance that one would expect or any ordinary person would expect when they are underwater, as is the case today in so many instances. There is a complexity in terms of environmental law with the habitats directive and certain environmental impact assessments and their compliance. The Department of housing's heritage section has the remit around the Wildlife Act and we must, from an Irish perspective, ask how we simplify this as best we can while recognising that EU law oversees a lot of it. That is something we will be seeking to do more generally. I do not have the history of the particular pearl mussel that was referenced. However, if people hear -and the people of Enniscorthy hear- that this particular species is holding back any sort of scheme, we will lose the room. We will lose the public, and rightly so. From an Irish perspective, we must do what we can to navigate the existing legislative position we have in the context of EU law and, indeed, in many instances to have environmental impact assessments. I do know the OPW and Wexford County Council have developed a new design in respect of what happened in 2022 and that scheme is due to be submitted to An Coimisiún Pleanála in quarter 3 of this year. I know that means nothing to the people who are flooded right now.

That is why we need to be stronger advocates in the context of EU law and the simplification agenda from an EU perspective, to strike a better and more appropriate balance, is important as well. I appreciate the Senator's advocacy on this and we need to look at our own legislative landscape to make this simpler but there is a complexity with the habitats directive and some of the requirements of the environmental impact assessments, which obviously prevented this advancing at the time.

Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister. Deputy Cronin indicated she wanted to come in.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My dog was called Slaney and he came from Enniscorthy so I feel awful for the people of Enniscorthy and, as was said, there was no judicial review involved in that delay. We really must get more efficient. We cannot be blaming things on judicial reviews all the time when that is not the case.

I would love to talk to the Minister about all the infrastructure projects in north Kildare such as the bridge in Celbridge, the DART+ West and DART+ South West, but I do not expect the Minister to have all that detail here and I will deal with those through parliamentary questions.

The Minister's Department's Secretary General talked about the soaring electricity demand and admitted it was largely attributable to data centres. We had a case of houses that were reliant on a data centre in Castledillon I think, but the first-come, first-served model meant that all the energy that substation produced has now gone to a data centre rather than the houses it was planned for. Housing is a huge infrastructure need that we really have to get on top of. The report mentioned the North-South interconnector. I know it is frustrating for people who have wind farms seeing wind farms being turned off when we have a lot of wind because we do not have the capacity to store the energy. That is really annoying. I want to make sure we use our position on this committee to make sure we are delivering infrastructure faster. On the judicial reviews I do not want the Minister to go into the detail today. However, in the letter he wrote to Deputy Darragh O'Brien, he mentioned he had evidential data. I would love to hear concrete examples of that. Not today, but maybe he could get that to me.

Returning to the data centres and our electricity needs, we had talk about Grok and AI for the last few weeks and the demand AI is causing on energy is insatiable. We are going to have to get on top of that as well. In price review 6, there is talk that the data centres are going to get a reduction in energy prices and that households are going to face an increase. Data centres are the ones driving up the electricity demand. They are gobbling up the capacity on the grid. We are going to need to produce more substations and the North-South interconnector. The Minister mentioned it in the plan. Could he explain the importance of the North-South interconnector in relation to the grid capacity of the future?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The North-South interconnector is hugely important for our wider energy system and it is well documented. Its progress is something the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, is seeking to advance.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Can the Minister balance how we are going to be able to produce the energy for the homes that are needed and the data centres?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If we stand back and look at the scale of investment, it was €6 billion in the last five years and it is €18 billion over the next five years. That speaks to the level of housing supply we need in our country and why housing is central to that, but also driving industrial development. Digital infrastructure is and must be a clear part of our wider economic development in the medium to long term. I share the Deputy's concerns relating to Grok, but the megatrend is there on AI and digital in terms of the future of our economy and digitalising our economy for the future provides opportunity for future jobs, growth, prosperity and employment. That is why what we are trying to do from an infrastructure perspective is to build greater abundance into these sectors in the economy so that when we have an investor in a data centre or for digital infrastructure ,there is not the same constant discussion of constraint. The medium to long-term position must be to provide sufficient headroom with low-carbon energy and a better grid to enable digital infrastructure but also the housing connections, which is obviously the single biggest issue and where we have a present constraint. The public debate that it is a trade-off between one of the other misses the point around the long-term position for the economy where we have to drive digital investment and digital infrastructure for the jobs of the future.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We could at least ask them to pay their fair share. We should not be giving them a better offer than-----

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is a regulatory process through the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU. It sets the respective pricing and we have an independent regulatory system around pricing for industry and for households.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The CRU has said to expect energy outages over the next two to five years and that we are not at the capacity we need to be at.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The single biggest priority as part of price review 6 is to scale that delivery. That is why we are working with EirGrid and the ESB to ensure that the respective substations and the electricity generation and grid development can move much quicker through the infrastructure cycle in which it exists so we have much greater abundance of energy with the renewable ambition we have in the economy. In 2020-21, there was risk in terms of energy supply in the economy and there were emergency responses to that in certain instances but we have a good plan here in terms of the investment cycle and matched to reform we will see progress for our energy system.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know the Minister is not going to make any decisions now, but the Minister does have to bear in mind that we are going to be facing brownouts and blackouts if we do not take control of the amount of energy that data centres are consuming.

Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister mentioned in his opening remarks about how the Department has established a new joint utilities and transport clearing house and a new regulatory simplification unit is to be set up. These new groups and units will come on top of already established groups like the accelerating infrastructure task force, the construction sector group, which has been in existence since 2018, and the wider infrastructure division that all sit within the Minister’s Department. We now have task forces, clearing houses, sectoral groups and Department units and divisions all looking at the same issues of infrastructure development. It seems a bit all over the place. Is there any clear direction as to how they all sit together to deliver recommended actions going forward?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Absolutely. The task force is there to oversee the implementation of the reforms we have set out. We had a recommendation from sectoral experts and private sector experts on a clearing house. When it comes to the construction sector group, we know that if we want to build out the infrastructure in the economy, we need to have a constant focus around the construction sector workforce, including both the people we train and the people we will need to come here to help us build the infrastructure. The regulatory simplification unit has a clear mandate around simplification, which has dominated a lot of today’s discussion. There are clear mandates and separation between the respective roles.

Imagine if I were to sit to sit here and say that we have got one division overseeing everything. In organisational management, structures and co-ordination systems are needed to ensure delivery. These have been established with an evidence base. We know, particularly in the utility and transport sectors, that having a clearing house addresses the point Deputy Clendennen and others raised about the misalignment of utility infrastructure delivery in certain instances and how it is co-ordinated with the transport sector. That is very different to the task force overseeing the kind of broader reform agenda that we have. The task force agenda is different to the construction sector group that looks at labour market impacts on the economy and construction sector supply in the economy. That is different to the regulatory simplification unit, which has a clear mandate around the simplification of procedures, cutting back some of the gold plating and trying to parallel licensing and consenting.

Those are examples of four of the structures the Deputy has raised and none of them are duplicating another. If we had three structures replicating what another one were doing, the Deputy’s point would be well made but I do not accept the point that any of them are unnecessary. We have a major task and a major reform agenda and we need to have clear lines of responsibility and co-ordination structures to deliver. That is what we are seeking to do.

Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Do these groups interact with one another on similar issues? Are there any potential issues of conflict between groups when they interact on issues?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The utility clearing house has had its first meeting. The infrastructure task force has been ongoing for a significant period. There will be officials who sit across the respective groups. My message to everyone on those groups is that we want to hear about conflict and where there is no co-operation. We want to solve those issues. A group that is agreeing with everything is a group that is not focused on-----

Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I mean with one another.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They have very different mandates. The regulatory simplification group has a very different mandate to the construction sector working group. They are very different. There would not be the same level of alignment. Issues, for example, where I see certain interaction is when something cannot be resolved at the clearing house for the utility and transport sectors. We have the CEOs of those respective entities in the infrastructure task force. There would be a point of escalation there if required when we are seeing a systemic issue holding back delivery as a barrier. It would be appropriate for the task force to assess that in the context of reform. While each group has a different mandate, they all have a single focus to progress reform and deliver things quicker. Each has a different set of responsibilities, however.

Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To follow on from that, I take it that the Minister chairs the accelerating infrastructure task force.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is correct.

Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Who chairs the joint utility and transport clearing house?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I chaired its first meeting.

Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister will not be the ongoing chair, however.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will chair some of the meetings but there will be a group of officials. It will depend on a meeting-by-meeting basis.

Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will there be other clearing houses similar to this one?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, that is the one we have established. We also have a co-ordination group on the use of the National Development Finance Agency, NDFA.

Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Who chairs that?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That will be officials, including the deputy secretary general of the Department.

Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What I was coming at is that I hope the Minister is not chairing everything, from his own point of view, although he needs a fix on it.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I chaired the first meeting. I am not on the construction sector group. I am not on everything. The task force is the central oversight structure that we have. We have co-ordination groups at official level on, say, the NDFA’s role and what it will do in terms of using its advisory system.

Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Generally, will they meet once a month? I ask that generally; I am not seeking exact dates.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The task force meets monthly. The utilities group is due to meet every six weeks, approximately. They will be meeting regularly. I do not think quarterly structures work. That is my wider view. We need more regular engagement than that. That is my view with any group.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To go back to the accountability theme, will individual people be held accountable for the delivery of individual major infrastructure projects, or how will that work?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We do. For example, we have a person appointed to deliver the metro, namely, Dr. Sean Sweeney. One thing we are trying to do, whether it is the CEO or the Minister in the respective Department, is ensure accountability for delivery in that sector, such as the transport sector. On the reform side, it is for Ministers. The national planning statement, say, is for my colleague, the Minister, Deputy Browne, and working with him to ensure we have clarity in terms of the development of critical infrastructure. I do not have the report in front of me but it has a strong emphasis on accountability for individuals involved at a senior level.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What will the consequences be for those people who do not deliver on time?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As Minister who holds an economic Ministry, I have other tools in respect of expenditure management. If I do not get co-operation on reform, there will be consequences for a Department or agency.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What will they be? Consequences are key for someone who does not do his or her job properly.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There will be an escalation within the infrastructure task force and the Cabinet committee, as well as sanctioning on funding. We are not going to take non-co-operation. That is the point.

We get other funding requests. We have bilateral engagement in respect of each budget. People will have had enough time to implement a lot of this prior to budget 2027. Delivery will be critical. If we have non-performance with respect to a particular agency or regulator, it will be my view that we will have a more fundamental review of its role in the economy if it is not delivering.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What about the role of the individual, in local authorities and such, for example?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We need local authority oversight-----

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is an example. I am not calling out anyone in particular.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My colleague, the Minister, Deputy Browne, is working with the housing activation office, which will play an important co-ordination role with respect to local authorities and accountability. He has already published, for example, the housing targets in respect of local authorities to get better transparency and accountability for management in local government as well.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

While MetroLink is the big project, when it comes to medium-sized projects, such as three-to five-year projects of roads, bridges or whatever, do we have defined deadlines for all of those?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We do. The sectoral plans set out the-----

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I was not sure whether there were defined timelines for delivery. In fairness, there are timelines for the actions and I see them very clearly and transparently. I just was not sure if the same-----

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The sectoral plans set out indicative timelines for different projects.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay. What are the key learnings from failures or non-delivery that we may have learnt over the last five years? There are obviously learnings. The children’s hospital has gone on and while it is not necessarily a failure, it has taken longer and cost more than it should. Are there any key learnings from that?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The barriers report takes stock and gives a sense of where we are and the failure to deliver and what it is doing. Ultimately we have a system under severe pressure because of an absence of delivery. On each of the reforms we have set out and the barriers that are set out, we have the 12 different areas which set out the failings across critical areas.

Joe Neville (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ultimately there will be learnings from them and we may flag them earlier than happened in the past so we do not go into a situation a number of years later. That is what we want to avoid. Who will be held accountable ultimately, only us?

Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for assisting the committee today. We have had progress and more information than in our initial meeting. That is what it is all about. As time goes on, more and more progress will be evident. For any information members have requested, I ask the officials to supply it within two weeks. If there is an issue regarding clarity, they should check with the clerk to the committee.