Dáil debates

Wednesday, 13 February 2019

National Children's Hospital: Statements

 

6:15 pm

Photo of Simon HarrisSimon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Wallace. He is one of the few people in the House who can speak with authority on this subject and I thank him for his reasonable points, which I have been noting down furiously. The first point to make about the decision makers and how we got to this process is this: some version of the National Paediatric Hospital Development Board has been in place since 2007. That was a recognition by successive Governments and Ministers that the skill set required to build such a specialist hospital, which is at the core of the Deputy's point, does not exist within a Department. We could argue over whether the Government got the appointment right or wrong in 2007. Many of us have served in government since then. Deputy Shortall will get her moment soon. I am dealing with Deputy Wallace's question.

Deputy Wallace has asked where the decision makers were. I am making the point that there have been various iterations of the National Paediatric Hospital Development Board in place since 2007, which was a recognition that this expertise was required.

I do not want to use up the Deputy's time outlining the reason the decision was arrived at to do the two-stage process, but long consideration was given to it and it was recognised that there were specific benefits because of the complexity of the project. The Deputy may have a different view and may be much better informed. Some of the reasons were that it allowed early commencement on site two years ahead of traditional procurement; it allowed market engagement with Irish and international contractors - they had identified through this market engagement; this procurement approach would attract increased competition in a situation where, as we know, there was very limited competition at this time; claims would be addressed upfront and, therefore, we are talking about a potential cost overrun before it has happened so we can have the chat about how to mitigate those costs as well; it would reduce exposure to rising inflationary pressures in the construction market; it would provide an opportunity for the three contractors to interrogate detailed design; and the programme for the main works were fully aligned across three contractors with a single point accountability for site management. There was definitely a view from the procurement experts available to Government, from the Government's construction contracts committee and the procurement sub-committee that there was merit in this.

What the Government decided yesterday, as my colleague, the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform outlined, was that we need to seriously interrogate this approach as we go forward on other capital projects. However, a solid and explicit rationale was put forward back as far as 2015 that this was the right way to go.

Regarding many of the questions the Deputy is asking about detailed design and the like, it is clear we were badly let down here somewhere and we need the PwC report to identify where we were let down.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.