Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)

Why does the Minister keep referring to trading Shanganagh for €30 million and spending it on a farm that was worth €6 million, as if that makes it all right? How does trading Shanganagh make it all right? On the auctioneers whom he quoted on the radio, there were several of them who stated that it should have been bought for approximately €6 million. The Comptroller and Auditor General stated that it cost more than twice what it ought to have cost.

On telling us that the prison service should have bought it quietly, I should have thought that is exactly what it should have done. Going around stating one has €30 million to spend on a site, what does one expect will happen but one will get a site for €30 million? From the point of view of the vendor, this was the biggest claim jump since the Yukon, and now it has collapsed.

I ask the Minister to tell us why it collapsed. He spoke of bankability. He spoke of the banking crisis and it not being off-set by reductions in building costs. What does he mean by that? He told the House as recently as 22 April that everything was on course. For whom is the banking crisis the issue here? Is it for the preferred bidder?

Why does he presume that if this preferred bidder is to be replaced by another, that the other preferred bidder will not have these bankability problems and will not have the problems of construction costs? The Minister did not explain to the House why a different builder can go ahead.

When the Minister states he has other options am I correct in assuming that he is referring to other options for the construction of a prison on this same site?

See this speech in context