Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)

Regarding the Deputy's assertion that I did not indicate at any stage there were any difficulties with this, as I said many times, I was not privy to, nor did I take part in, any of the negotiations. I was informed by my officials as to how the discussions were going. No more than anyone in this House, I was agitating to ensure this would be built as soon as possible so we could have the available prison spaces.

On 9 October 2008 I said, in response to parliamentary questions asked by Deputies James Reilly and Leo Varadkar, that in the current fiscal situation facing the country it is important that we all strive to reduce costs, live within our budgets and avoid any cost increases, that the bidder must meet all the criteria, including the financial criteria, in the tender and although a preferred tenderer was selected, there were other tenderers and other viable options which could still be considered if for any reason the negotiations referred to were not successfully concluded.

On 29 October, in response to a question asked by Deputy Charles Flanagan, I said there were other tenderers and options which could still be considered. In November, I said the same to Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh. I said on numerous occasions that it had to reach certain affordability criteria. There is a long list and I can give it to the Deputy if required.

Regarding the issue of hundreds of millions of euro, this is a major project. We would have been guilty of a dereliction of duty if we were to agree to a proposal where the cost of finance, which it is accepted would be an issue with other bidders, would be a substantial issue regarding the overall cost.

Where there was not a quid pro quo regarding a significant reduction in the construction costs, and when we see in other projects that the reduction in costs of tenders can be 10% or 20% across any building project in which the Government is involved, we believe we should, in effect, cut off the negotiations because this was unaffordable in its current form and we would look again at the other viable options. As I said earlier, it may be that we will consider the possibility of funding this through PPPs or the pension reserve fund.

A number of other ancillary services within the prison might not necessarily be required in the future. For instance, there was provision for a juvenile block for Oberstown House. We can reconsider a number of the details of the original proposal that would ultimately reduce the cost but still get us the net result of having a substantial prison facility on the Thornton Hall site that would deal with the prison population for approximately 15 to 20 years hence.

See this speech in context