Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)

Regardless of the fact that the Department or the Minister will respond to the report of the Committee of Public Accounts by way of a minute, there is an opportunity in this Bill to insert certain principles in respect of PPPs.

The report of the Committee of Public Accounts was clear that there are three reasons that consideration should be given to using a PPP. One would be to use it as an off-balance sheet item to avoid consideration under the Maastricht criteria in terms of infrastructure spending. Another would be to have it as a cash efficiency measure in terms of the annual budget and spending all the money at once rather than spending small amounts each year. The third reason to consider using a PPP would be value for money.

The report of the Committee of Public Accounts is quite clear that while other countries might use PPPs on the basis of the first and second items, they are not reasons to use PPPs in Ireland because we are very low in terms of our debt-GDP ratio and our budget balance. The only reason we would use PPPs is value for money. Even though it is amending legislation, the Bill should have put down clear principles in this respect.

Our objection to this Bill is not as strenuous as that of Deputy Ó Caoláin. We have strong concerns about the use of PPPs and we do not accept that it is the best finance mechanism for the provision of infrastructure. However, if we have PPPs, we need the best oversight mechanisms possible and the problem with this Bill is that it does not go far enough. The Government's unwillingness to accept Deputy Bruton's amendment is a statement of its complacency about the type of oversight mechanisms that exist.

This is a very modest amendment and only represents an interim step. It is a long way from the type of oversight that exists in other countries. PPPs will increase from 1.5% to 10% of infrastructural spending under the national development plan, so we need stronger measures. That is the disappointing aspect of this Bill and it is particularly disappointing that the Minister of State is not willing to accept the Deputy's amendment.

See this speech in context