Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

It is being said that because construction inflation may have exceeded 4%, the contractor will be allowed to charge so much extra. Why was inflation removed from being the contractor's risk? That does not make sense. Why was the 4% figure used? Who made this decision, which means if there is inflation above 4%, the contractor is entitled to more money. The FIDIC contract template was recommended as best international practice, and if this had been used we could have attracted European contractors rather than the couple of fish in a bowl in Ireland.

5 o’clock

However, FIDIC set the benchmark at 12% or 13% before the problems of construction inflation would kick in. For the life of me can someone in Government tell me who made the call that the benchmark would be 4%?

The talk yesterday was that construction inflation is the big problem and so on. That is rubbish. It is part of the problem. We are not talking about a cost of €1.7 billion. The cost will not stop at €2 billion. The Government does not have a clue where it will stop because of the nature of the arrangements it has made. The nature of the contract is so poor it cannot know where the price will stop. How can that be a satisfactory arrangement for the Government? It is beyond me. I do not understand how the Government can possibly stand over it.

See this speech in context