Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Did the advisers, McCann FitzGerald, advise the executive or the board? That is my first question.

The report states: "The understanding of the risk profile associated with the procurement and contracting strategy was poor at all levels of the governance structure". Was the risk profile for the particular project misunderstood and, if so, by whom?

I asked previously how it was, in the second stage of the project, the bill of quantities was based on a preliminary design, not a detailed design. That was a recipe for disaster. I would like to know who made that decision.

From what I can see, the national children's hospital project was approached as a medical project, not so much as a construction project. It is both. Why were they not put together? From what I can see, they were not.

The standard forms are fine in terms of construction discipline, but when one standardises a construction project in one form, one has nothing but problems. That is what has happened in this instance. I do not understand it.

It is a fact that the Government does not know where the final price will land because it is not manageable because of the form of contract in place. That is why I am pleading with the Ministers to change it. They do not want the project to be stopped and delayed, but they would save a great deal of money. If PwC states it is not a good idea, can we have the evidence from it to prove that it would not be a good idea because it has not given it to us? There is nothing to back up that statement. If there is, I would like to see it.

Can we see the contract that was executed eventually? Am I entitled to see it? I would love to see it.

See this speech in context