Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)

The Comptroller and Auditor General's report is another catalogue of error, omission and waste. We know the Comptroller and Auditor General has a technical job to examine Departments and so on. However, we have had a catalogue such as this in each of the past five years. I have no doubt citizens and taxpayers grow weary on hearing of them. Each item catalogued by Mr. Purcell and his team is quite shocking to most people, like this afternoon's events, although not necessarily to those in the more rarefied atmosphere of upper Fianna Fáil politics.

The headline items in the report, such as the shambles made of the purchase of Thornton Hall, are of a scale that the word "shocking" is simply inadequate. There is also the question of integrated ticketing, to which I will return, and the question of what has happened with regard to the health service, but most shocking of all is the deep-rooted indifference the Government displays to these reports. Just as the Taoiseach this afternoon seemed able to weave a wide area between himself and normal ethical considerations so, in regard to the Comptroller and Auditor General's report, no one in the Government parties accepts responsibility. No one resigns or is dismissed, and no one apologises to the Dáil or the people, whose taxes fund these errors and mismanagement.

The weary citizen is moved to protest but gets the cold shoulder for his or her trouble. Like General Smuts, Fianna Fáil sneers in thinly disguised contempt. The dogs bark but the wagons carry on. This sums up Fianna Fáil and what we witnessed this afternoon. It is the Fianna Fáil attitude in a nutshell, in that the arrogance of long decades in power allows it to take a wholly casual line when auditors produce these case studies of waste. It is just something that happens at this time of the year, which is forgotten in a few days and safely ignored forever.

Why do we tolerate this attitude? I looked at the Minister's colleagues this afternoon — it was a splendid picture. Every one of the Minister's colleagues has presided over some shambles or other, as listed in this or numerous other reports from the same source. For example, in any genuinely accountable system, the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Martin, would have been shown the door years ago for the long list of policy and administrative failures he created, for example, the scheme for medical cards for the over 70s, which is way over budget, the PPARS episode or the nursing homes charges fiasco. Yet he survives and even thrives and achieves promotion, and he sat in the middle of his colleagues today. Deputy Martin may even become leader of his party some day, as the public memory of his woeful incompetence fades and the years pass, although Deputy Cowen may also have an interest in that position.

Given that they have been in Government and, therefore, been driven around by official drivers and Garda drivers for nine years, it is easy to understand how Ministers forget what it is like to be a commuter or to have to collect a child from child care and to be stuck in traffic chaos, with no public transport available. I understand how Ministers forget this, unless they have children who are commuters in that age group and hear it from them.

The integrated system for Dublin that commuters and public transport users so desperately require has failed to materialise despite more than half a decade of promises. The Comptroller and Auditor General reveals that the very large budget of €29.6 million for this project is inadequate and that the project now requires €42.7 million. In March 2002 the RPA was given responsibility for developing an integrated ticketing system using smart card technology, so that people could transfer from the DART to buses or Luas, as is the norm in many European countries and throughout the world. Ministers may have used public transport when abroad and therefore may have experienced this type of system.

This system was to be delivered by 2005 for an agreed budget of €29.6 million. It is October 2006 and despite spending almost €10 million on the project, we are no closer to implementation. The Comptroller and Auditor General's report concludes that approval of the revised budget of €42.7 million represents the best value for money at this stage, presumably because having spent so much and committed so much, we cannot turn back. In any event, an election will intervene and the Government will need something to tell enraged commuters.

It defies belief that such a huge amount of money has been spent on this project over so many years without producing anything for taxpayers. While developer friends of the Government, particularly friends of Fianna Fáil, are making huge amounts of money from the new housing developments that sprawl around the edge of Dublin city, the Government cannot get its act together to provide an integrated transport system to transport new home owners to their jobs, usually in the morning, and back to their homes, usually in the evening.

Even the existing plans fall far behind what is needed. It has been clear for some time that the planned infrastructure for the west of Dublin, which is the main growth area, and the Leinster area is completely inadequate. The census estimates of new population show the problem is far worse than was estimated. For example, the major project for people living in north-west Dublin city is the development at Spencer Dock. This development could reach Navan in County Meath rather than just Clonsilla and could ultimately reach Longford, Sligo and Westport in County Mayo. This will allow greater capacity on the Maynooth line.

However, the new Spencer Dock station is located 800 m from the proposed new pedestrian footbridge, leaving commuters with at least half a mile to walk to get to a central location on the southside of Dublin. The distance is even further if one walks to Connolly Station through the bottom of Sheriff Street. Many people will not be anxious to walk late at night through dark city streets with a poor reputation. It has been promised that the Luas may be extended to Mayor Street and provide some linkage. However, without integrated ticketing, a commuter from Maynooth will be forced to get off the train and either buy separate bus tickets to get back to Connolly Station, take a taxi or buy a separate Luas ticket. I do not know if the Minister is aware of how much the minimum Luas fare is but it is fairly significant. The Minister could possibly ask his officials what is the fare.

The integrated ticketing system seems to have fallen foul of inter-agency difficulties between Dublin Bus, CIE and private operators. This undoubtedly has been partly caused by the confusion surrounding the management of this project and the political intentions of the Government, particularly those of the Progressive Democrats in respect of public transport in the greater Dublin area. We know the Progressive Democrats have considerable reservations about the role of Dublin Bus in the commuter bus system. The key failure highlighted in this report is the political infighting that leaves people in constituencies like Dublin West at the mercy of the nightmare of the M50 and the train from Clonsilla.

I am aware the Minister has not yet had an opportunity to travel on this train but it is known locally as the Calcutta express because of the level of overcrowding which involves people hanging on for dear life. We have embryonic bus lanes in developing areas in Dublin and west Dublin but due to political rows between the Minister and the Progressive Democrats, it has been impossible to get the additional buses to provide a service on these lanes. Again, the issue is where the buck stops. Does it stop with some junior civil servants who simply cannot end the impasse between the different agencies? Alternatively, does it stop with a Minister or the Government collectively? The Minister has been unable to give us an answer. As we heard this afternoon, his defence is bound to consist of one excuse after another but he should tell this to the commuters facing a journey to work of two or more hours each day and a further two-hour commutehome.

The Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform must answer very serious questions arising from the special investigation by the Comptroller and Auditor General into the acquisition of the Thornton Hall prison site. Spending on this site was sanctioned on the condition that procurement guidelines had been strictly followed, yet the report from the Comptroller and Auditor General's office indicates that this was not the case. Chapter 4 of the report supports many of the main criticisms of the deal. It is clear that the Government paid at least twice the market rate for the land in handing over €30 million for the site. It acquired 50 acres more land than was needed at the excessive price of €200,000 per acre and did not pay sufficient attention to secondary costs, such as developing access routes and public access to the site. I know the Minister cannot know where Thornton Hall is but the area possesses completely inadequate road infrastructure and is served by one bus per day, which leaves early in the morning and returns late in the evening.

The report indicated that the detailed evaluation criteria for comparing sites that was laid out on paper was not applied. Factors such as road access were not taken into account. Cost was given an exceptionally low weighting as though it had no importance with regard to the decision. The total cost was €30 million, which was way over what it should have been. The hiring of consultants to advise on site acquisition did not comply with procurement requirements laid out by Departments. A total of €310,000 was paid to consultants. This should have been the subject of procurement tendering. This episode shows the need to reform land acquisition so that sites can be properly evaluated, with considerations such as access and other facilities being accounted for during the purchasing process.

Throughout the process, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform refused to answer questions from other Deputies arising from genuine concerns that the site was unsuitable and overvalued and that locating a super-prison in this rural location destroyed the possibility of strategic planning of development in the area. The Minister refused point blank to answer the questions at the time and, reading this report, we now know why. Again, the impulse behind developments at Thornton Hall seems to be ideological. The Progressive Democrats want to close Mountjoy Prison not simply because it is an old-fashioned and inadequate Victorian prison, but because the new Thornton Hall prison will be a super-prison on an American scale and easily privatised down the road, should political circumstances allow the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to do so. I see the Minister for Finance is smiling but he will not be smiling too much when this happens.

One of the regretful aspects of the Thornton Hall proposal is that as a result of the development of the new prison, the women's prison, Dóchas, on which tens of millions have been spent and for which many female Deputies from all parties, including the Minister for Finance's own party, campaigned in this House, will be closed down. Successive studies have shown the need for female prisoners to maintain access to and contact with their children when they are in prison if they are to be successfully rehabilitated. A prison using this good model of penal practice, which has proved to be rather successful, is to be closed down to be replaced by this super-prison. How are female prisoners' families, including their children, supposed to reach Thornton Hall to visit them? In practice, the only way the families of the type of people who end up in our prisons can visit them is by using a prison bus service and prison vans. This means that families will face journeys to and from the prison in this van of over an hour each way. This provides plenty of opportunities for criminal elements to lean on them as they see fit in respect of criminal activities within the prison, which is disgraceful.

Regarding taxation, the Minister for Finance's predecessor stated many times that there was no hidden pot of gold from people who did not pay their fair share of taxes. It is interesting to note that this report states that the investigations into life assurance products have already yielded some €398 million and are expected to yield another €100 million. This again proves some people in society are determined and prepared to take the chance that tax evasion will work for them. Why can they do this? The report shows that the number of audits carried out by the Revenue Commissioners fell from 16,321 in 2004 to 14,214 in 2005, which represents a decrease of 13%. Therefore, people who want to evade tax do not have to worry too much about Fianna Fáil being on their case. Despite a construction boom that has lasted ten years, the Revenue Commissioners have only recently begun to examine tax compliance in the construction sector. There are people who fail to pay taxes and thereby rob our schools and hospitals, yet single people on PAYE are forced to pay tax at 42% on €32,000 should they be fortunate enough to get a bit of overtime.

Last year there were only 12 convictions for tax evasion. That figure should be contrasted with the 256 prosecutions undertaken for social welfare fraud. How much money was involved in the social welfare fraud? According to the Comptroller and Auditor General's report it was €1.3 million, yet tax evasion amounted to billions, as we know from the results of all the inquiries. The problem is not failed civil servants but a Government that fails to take any sense of responsibility. When crises arise it is always somebody else's fault, never the Minister's.

We published a document, The Buck Stops Here, which sets out in detail what would happen and how we would reform accountability on spending hard-working taxpayers' money.

See this speech in context