Patrick O'Donovan (Limerick County, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputies for their contributions. I specifically thank those who are consistent in their views and who were always opposed and are still opposed to PPPs. Of course, we have the converts along the road who, once upon a time, were in favour of them but now just 12 months later, are totally against them. This is why some of the arguments in here completely lack credibility. It is incredible to criticise PPPs less than three years after leaving a Government in which one's party advocated and facilitated the construction of the New Ross bypass, the N11, courthouses, the DIT campus at Grangegorman and the Gort to Limerick road, which all had to be done through PPPs. Several Deputies mentioned their opposition to PPPs but none of them said the Gort to Galway motorway should not have been built. None of them said that the DIT campus at Grangegorman should not have happened. None of them said that the bundle of courthouses that were built should not have happened. They cannot have their cake and eat it at a time when the country was basically bankrupt and had been left with the legacy of a massive wallop. Everything about PPPs is not bad, which is why the Minister for Finance has said that as part of the review which is under way and which will be brought to the House when the Government has had a chance to review it, that all views will be taken into consideration. However, parties must be somewhat less disingenuous in the first instance because what the voters are seeing on the part of some people - it is manifesting and being reflected in research - is a complete lack of credibility. A party that was in government two years ago advocating that the N11 road to Wexford be built through a PPP or that the DIT campus at Grangegorman should go ahead by way of a PPP through the Department of Education and Skills cannot now state it is against PPPs. That is completely incredible and I do not believe anybody actually takes that seriously. That is a dangerous road for parties to go down because they are ceding part of an electorate that supports the concept of doing capital work when we do not have money to those who have always said they have never supported private investment in capital work.

I welcome that many Deputies spoke about the 10% change and that some Deputies are now talking about fiscal responsibility. Every morning on "Morning Ireland" we hear Opposition Deputies saying they want so many hundred million euro extra for education or for some other area. The Taoiseach is right in saying that the people who are advocating for specific elements of expenditure above and beyond what is committed to in the budget should say which projects in the previous budget or in the capital plan they would not do.

Nobody has referred to the content of the capital plan, with the exception of my colleague, Deputy O'Dowd. Apart from loose references to PPPs not one person referred to the upcoming national development plan. That cuts to the chase. The people who need many of these infrastructural projects to be built are seeing the Government's commitment to spend €116 billion. However, certain Opposition parties, including some which were in government up to recently, are claiming that there is some magic way that things could have been done differently in the past - or even currently - in the absence of PPPs. That is absolutely not the case. The Government is committed to a review. Having coming out of recession, we have undertaken that route.

On existing PPP commitments, the Higher Education Authority has 11 projects for institutes of technology. Are certain people here seriously suggesting that they should not go ahead? Some €150 million is set aside for building community nursing homes. Are they saying those should not go ahead? There are Department of Justice and Equality PPP projects for Garda stations and courthouses. If that is what some people believe, let them outline the ones that should not go ahead. They cannot have their cake and eat it. They cannot have fiscal rules laid out by the European Union that everybody now claims to be a convert to and at the same time say they are against everything in the funding models that worked in the past. I do not suggest for one minute that there are not complexities.

Deputy McGuinness was the only person who made reference to procurement from the point of view of the Office of Government Procurement. I have made this offer previously and I make it again that I would welcome the opportunity for anybody, who has specific issues relating to procurement or who wants to advocate for particular elements of it - the Acting Chairman has done so - to come forward and make a suggestion which can be done by way of the procurement leadership group.

I sum up where I started off. We were in a very difficult space in 2011 and 2012. Luckily we are now out of it and we have a major capital programme under way. In advocating for that capital programme we need to reflect on why we used PPPs in the past. It completely lacks credibility to suggest we could just erase the past and say all of sudden PPPs are bad while at the same time some of these projects are absolutely necessary. The Minister, Deputy Donohoe, will bring to the House the review I mentioned in my opening remarks, for which some of the Deputies were present, as soon as the Government has had a chance to review it.

I thank the Deputies for all their comments. The officials in my Department have made note of everything and we will try where practicable to get back to people individually.

See this speech in context