Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Harty for his questions. In the House the other day, Deputies were asking about an oversight mechanism for this project which allows Members to keep a close eye on it and to hold people accountable. That mechanism is the Joint Committee on Health, chaired by Deputy Harty. It does a very good job and provides an opportunity to be more expansive. The committee can also invite people before it who are directly involved in the project, as I know it does. In these back-and-forth sessions, it is difficult to get down into the nitty-gritty of many of the questions posed.

The Deputy has his views on the site, which I appreciate.

The Deputy has acknowledged that the PwC report was very clear about proceeding at this stage. I also take comfort in the views of many practising paediatricians about the site.

I will address some of the residual risks and will write to Deputy Harty about the rest. Those risks are exactly the same as those set out by Mr. Barry at the health committee meeting on 12 June - no more and no less. On that occasion Mr. Barry said:

The committee will be very aware that the construction costs of these works, as finally agreed with the main contractor BAM, are considerably higher than the previously estimated costs. [That refers to the GMP] Notwithstanding the difficulties in reaching agreement with BAM, the view of the development board was that it would be better to proceed with BAM rather than stop the project and retender ... We could have retendered the contract, but it would have added years of delay.

He then noted that chapter 6 of the PwC report stated that there are significant residual risks. That claim did not first appear in a letter to Deputy Micheál Martin. Mr. Barry said at that meeting that these residual risks are not included in the guaranteed maximum price, and that it is likely some of those risks will materialise. He specifically referenced general construction industry inflation. He also pointed out that if there is an additional amount due to inflation, it will be determined by a formula based on various construction cost indices as they emerge over the next few years.

The other significant issue regarding residual risk is claims. Concerns about very significant claims are evident in conversations and memoranda to me from around the time of the original cost escalation. The actual amount was significantly reduced as the robust process of interrogating those claims went on. Mr. Barry also said at the health committee that the process of claims coming in is an ongoing one, which I echo today. There is obviously a commercial sensitivity aspect to it as well, but we need to be satisfied that the board is robust and can challenge claims where it is appropriate to do so. I am satisfied that is the case.

Does the Deputy want me to-----

See this speech in context