Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move:

That Dáil Éireann:

notes with serious concern the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General for 2005 provides continuing evidence of shocking waste and overspending on a range of public projects as well as the ongoing recurrence of serious tax evasion;

deplores the continuing incompetence, mismanagement and failure to ensure that taxpayers get value for money, highlighted in the successive Reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General;

condemns the failure of the Government to take any action to ensure better value for money since the 2004 report was published at this time last year; and

calls on the Government to implement the proposals for reform of public expenditure management set out in "The Buck Stops Here", published by Fine Gael and the Labour Party to overhaul the system of public expenditure management, including the need for:

clear lines of accountability for Ministers in the discharge of their duties;

enhanced capacity in the Civil Service in terms of professional skills and training in the management of major projects;

a major overhaul of the expenditure evaluation process;

the establishment of a gateway system for major capital projects;

clear transparency when Ministers intervene to fast-track projects;

the establishment of a public buying office to manage public procurement;

steps to ensure that public bodies are accountable to the Dáil through Ministers;

reform of the Estimates process to make it more timely and enhance Dáil scrutiny of public expenditure before it takes place, including the establishment within the Dáil of an Estimates Commissioner; and

reform of the entire budgetary process to sharpen the focus of spending on strategic priorities, value for money, delivery at the front line and to ensure tax reliefs represent good use of taxpayer money.

I wish to share time with Deputies Bruton and Olivia Mitchell.

During this afternoon's events, when the Minister for Finance, Deputy Cowen, was seated beside the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, it was noticeable that neither joined in the general clapping.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

For the record, I did clap. I am glad the Deputy is observant.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I was paying the Minister a compliment. I intended to say that at least there appeared to be some standards on his side of the House.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy should keep her compliments and stick to the subject matter.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Comptroller and Auditor General's report is another catalogue of error, omission and waste. We know the Comptroller and Auditor General has a technical job to examine Departments and so on. However, we have had a catalogue such as this in each of the past five years. I have no doubt citizens and taxpayers grow weary on hearing of them. Each item catalogued by Mr. Purcell and his team is quite shocking to most people, like this afternoon's events, although not necessarily to those in the more rarefied atmosphere of upper Fianna Fáil politics.

The headline items in the report, such as the shambles made of the purchase of Thornton Hall, are of a scale that the word "shocking" is simply inadequate. There is also the question of integrated ticketing, to which I will return, and the question of what has happened with regard to the health service, but most shocking of all is the deep-rooted indifference the Government displays to these reports. Just as the Taoiseach this afternoon seemed able to weave a wide area between himself and normal ethical considerations so, in regard to the Comptroller and Auditor General's report, no one in the Government parties accepts responsibility. No one resigns or is dismissed, and no one apologises to the Dáil or the people, whose taxes fund these errors and mismanagement.

The weary citizen is moved to protest but gets the cold shoulder for his or her trouble. Like General Smuts, Fianna Fáil sneers in thinly disguised contempt. The dogs bark but the wagons carry on. This sums up Fianna Fáil and what we witnessed this afternoon. It is the Fianna Fáil attitude in a nutshell, in that the arrogance of long decades in power allows it to take a wholly casual line when auditors produce these case studies of waste. It is just something that happens at this time of the year, which is forgotten in a few days and safely ignored forever.

Why do we tolerate this attitude? I looked at the Minister's colleagues this afternoon — it was a splendid picture. Every one of the Minister's colleagues has presided over some shambles or other, as listed in this or numerous other reports from the same source. For example, in any genuinely accountable system, the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Martin, would have been shown the door years ago for the long list of policy and administrative failures he created, for example, the scheme for medical cards for the over 70s, which is way over budget, the PPARS episode or the nursing homes charges fiasco. Yet he survives and even thrives and achieves promotion, and he sat in the middle of his colleagues today. Deputy Martin may even become leader of his party some day, as the public memory of his woeful incompetence fades and the years pass, although Deputy Cowen may also have an interest in that position.

Given that they have been in Government and, therefore, been driven around by official drivers and Garda drivers for nine years, it is easy to understand how Ministers forget what it is like to be a commuter or to have to collect a child from child care and to be stuck in traffic chaos, with no public transport available. I understand how Ministers forget this, unless they have children who are commuters in that age group and hear it from them.

The integrated system for Dublin that commuters and public transport users so desperately require has failed to materialise despite more than half a decade of promises. The Comptroller and Auditor General reveals that the very large budget of €29.6 million for this project is inadequate and that the project now requires €42.7 million. In March 2002 the RPA was given responsibility for developing an integrated ticketing system using smart card technology, so that people could transfer from the DART to buses or Luas, as is the norm in many European countries and throughout the world. Ministers may have used public transport when abroad and therefore may have experienced this type of system.

This system was to be delivered by 2005 for an agreed budget of €29.6 million. It is October 2006 and despite spending almost €10 million on the project, we are no closer to implementation. The Comptroller and Auditor General's report concludes that approval of the revised budget of €42.7 million represents the best value for money at this stage, presumably because having spent so much and committed so much, we cannot turn back. In any event, an election will intervene and the Government will need something to tell enraged commuters.

It defies belief that such a huge amount of money has been spent on this project over so many years without producing anything for taxpayers. While developer friends of the Government, particularly friends of Fianna Fáil, are making huge amounts of money from the new housing developments that sprawl around the edge of Dublin city, the Government cannot get its act together to provide an integrated transport system to transport new home owners to their jobs, usually in the morning, and back to their homes, usually in the evening.

Even the existing plans fall far behind what is needed. It has been clear for some time that the planned infrastructure for the west of Dublin, which is the main growth area, and the Leinster area is completely inadequate. The census estimates of new population show the problem is far worse than was estimated. For example, the major project for people living in north-west Dublin city is the development at Spencer Dock. This development could reach Navan in County Meath rather than just Clonsilla and could ultimately reach Longford, Sligo and Westport in County Mayo. This will allow greater capacity on the Maynooth line.

However, the new Spencer Dock station is located 800 m from the proposed new pedestrian footbridge, leaving commuters with at least half a mile to walk to get to a central location on the southside of Dublin. The distance is even further if one walks to Connolly Station through the bottom of Sheriff Street. Many people will not be anxious to walk late at night through dark city streets with a poor reputation. It has been promised that the Luas may be extended to Mayor Street and provide some linkage. However, without integrated ticketing, a commuter from Maynooth will be forced to get off the train and either buy separate bus tickets to get back to Connolly Station, take a taxi or buy a separate Luas ticket. I do not know if the Minister is aware of how much the minimum Luas fare is but it is fairly significant. The Minister could possibly ask his officials what is the fare.

The integrated ticketing system seems to have fallen foul of inter-agency difficulties between Dublin Bus, CIE and private operators. This undoubtedly has been partly caused by the confusion surrounding the management of this project and the political intentions of the Government, particularly those of the Progressive Democrats in respect of public transport in the greater Dublin area. We know the Progressive Democrats have considerable reservations about the role of Dublin Bus in the commuter bus system. The key failure highlighted in this report is the political infighting that leaves people in constituencies like Dublin West at the mercy of the nightmare of the M50 and the train from Clonsilla.

I am aware the Minister has not yet had an opportunity to travel on this train but it is known locally as the Calcutta express because of the level of overcrowding which involves people hanging on for dear life. We have embryonic bus lanes in developing areas in Dublin and west Dublin but due to political rows between the Minister and the Progressive Democrats, it has been impossible to get the additional buses to provide a service on these lanes. Again, the issue is where the buck stops. Does it stop with some junior civil servants who simply cannot end the impasse between the different agencies? Alternatively, does it stop with a Minister or the Government collectively? The Minister has been unable to give us an answer. As we heard this afternoon, his defence is bound to consist of one excuse after another but he should tell this to the commuters facing a journey to work of two or more hours each day and a further two-hour commutehome.

The Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform must answer very serious questions arising from the special investigation by the Comptroller and Auditor General into the acquisition of the Thornton Hall prison site. Spending on this site was sanctioned on the condition that procurement guidelines had been strictly followed, yet the report from the Comptroller and Auditor General's office indicates that this was not the case. Chapter 4 of the report supports many of the main criticisms of the deal. It is clear that the Government paid at least twice the market rate for the land in handing over €30 million for the site. It acquired 50 acres more land than was needed at the excessive price of €200,000 per acre and did not pay sufficient attention to secondary costs, such as developing access routes and public access to the site. I know the Minister cannot know where Thornton Hall is but the area possesses completely inadequate road infrastructure and is served by one bus per day, which leaves early in the morning and returns late in the evening.

The report indicated that the detailed evaluation criteria for comparing sites that was laid out on paper was not applied. Factors such as road access were not taken into account. Cost was given an exceptionally low weighting as though it had no importance with regard to the decision. The total cost was €30 million, which was way over what it should have been. The hiring of consultants to advise on site acquisition did not comply with procurement requirements laid out by Departments. A total of €310,000 was paid to consultants. This should have been the subject of procurement tendering. This episode shows the need to reform land acquisition so that sites can be properly evaluated, with considerations such as access and other facilities being accounted for during the purchasing process.

Throughout the process, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform refused to answer questions from other Deputies arising from genuine concerns that the site was unsuitable and overvalued and that locating a super-prison in this rural location destroyed the possibility of strategic planning of development in the area. The Minister refused point blank to answer the questions at the time and, reading this report, we now know why. Again, the impulse behind developments at Thornton Hall seems to be ideological. The Progressive Democrats want to close Mountjoy Prison not simply because it is an old-fashioned and inadequate Victorian prison, but because the new Thornton Hall prison will be a super-prison on an American scale and easily privatised down the road, should political circumstances allow the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to do so. I see the Minister for Finance is smiling but he will not be smiling too much when this happens.

One of the regretful aspects of the Thornton Hall proposal is that as a result of the development of the new prison, the women's prison, Dóchas, on which tens of millions have been spent and for which many female Deputies from all parties, including the Minister for Finance's own party, campaigned in this House, will be closed down. Successive studies have shown the need for female prisoners to maintain access to and contact with their children when they are in prison if they are to be successfully rehabilitated. A prison using this good model of penal practice, which has proved to be rather successful, is to be closed down to be replaced by this super-prison. How are female prisoners' families, including their children, supposed to reach Thornton Hall to visit them? In practice, the only way the families of the type of people who end up in our prisons can visit them is by using a prison bus service and prison vans. This means that families will face journeys to and from the prison in this van of over an hour each way. This provides plenty of opportunities for criminal elements to lean on them as they see fit in respect of criminal activities within the prison, which is disgraceful.

Regarding taxation, the Minister for Finance's predecessor stated many times that there was no hidden pot of gold from people who did not pay their fair share of taxes. It is interesting to note that this report states that the investigations into life assurance products have already yielded some €398 million and are expected to yield another €100 million. This again proves some people in society are determined and prepared to take the chance that tax evasion will work for them. Why can they do this? The report shows that the number of audits carried out by the Revenue Commissioners fell from 16,321 in 2004 to 14,214 in 2005, which represents a decrease of 13%. Therefore, people who want to evade tax do not have to worry too much about Fianna Fáil being on their case. Despite a construction boom that has lasted ten years, the Revenue Commissioners have only recently begun to examine tax compliance in the construction sector. There are people who fail to pay taxes and thereby rob our schools and hospitals, yet single people on PAYE are forced to pay tax at 42% on €32,000 should they be fortunate enough to get a bit of overtime.

Last year there were only 12 convictions for tax evasion. That figure should be contrasted with the 256 prosecutions undertaken for social welfare fraud. How much money was involved in the social welfare fraud? According to the Comptroller and Auditor General's report it was €1.3 million, yet tax evasion amounted to billions, as we know from the results of all the inquiries. The problem is not failed civil servants but a Government that fails to take any sense of responsibility. When crises arise it is always somebody else's fault, never the Minister's.

We published a document, The Buck Stops Here, which sets out in detail what would happen and how we would reform accountability on spending hard-working taxpayers' money.

Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputy Olivia Mitchell.

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I congratulate the Comptroller and Auditor General once again on producing an excellent report, which is unique from a Government viewpoint in that there is no spin in it whatsoever. It is straight up, fair, refreshing and tells it as one sees it. It is important to take this opportunity to debate the report but, sadly, it has become a litany of Government failure and waste, which we are witnessing once again this year. This time the taxpayer was asked to stump up double the cost of a site to build a prison, involving a hit of over €15 million. The taxpayer was also asked to stump up the cost of 30,000 phantom medical card holders. The Government promised to provide 200,000 extra medical cards but this is the only sign so far of any extra cards. Over a period of years, taxpayers have had to stump up €20 million for 30,000 people who did not exist.

In addition, we have had the continuing saga of integrated ticketing, which Deputy Olivia Mitchell will deal with later. It is the longest running saga of its kind. Sadly, a lot of taxpayers' money has been lost week after week, amounting to €10 million already on that project alone.

All these projects, which have gone off the rails, are distinguished by the fact that they are pet projects of Ministers and driven by ministerial demands for action. There is a problem with Ministers who clearly have an appetite for headlines when such projects are announced, yet do not seem to follow through by ensuring the systems put in place will deliver such projects efficiently and punctually.

As we have heard from his colleague, I am sure the Minister will say this is a drop in the ocean and does not matter but I do not accept that for one minute. This does matter because it goes to the heart of the way in which public money is spent. If we tolerate it in these cases, we will be accepting a standard that is not good enough. I examined the report on the prison site and it is unacceptable; the selection of consultants did not comply with the rules of procurement. They dropped the site cost per acre from the evaluation scheme, which is a key issue for anyone conscious of taxpayers' money. They ignored the fact that they were in a unique position to use unzoned land, yet went instead for a public advertisement system which guaranteed they would go for the top price. At that stage, the top price for land with potential was €100,000 per acre but they paid twice that. They paid almost full development land values, even though if they had handled it correctly they could have bought it for a much lower price at unzoned levels. They bought more than they said they needed at the site ultimately decided upon. They also entered into negotiations with just one buyer when the whole purpose of the system was to have multiple buyers and real competition in the market, which the Comptroller and Auditor General says compromised their position. The report is a litany of how not to handle a project. I think even the Minister, who will want to defend the Tánaiste today, will accept in private if not in public that this is not good enough.

The medical cards case is not acceptable. This was driven by a budget day announcement — one of these rabbits that was produced out of the hat, providing medical cards for everyone over 70. We know that project was not costed and the number of people and the cost were incorrectly estimated. They put themselves in an impossible negotiating position whereby they had to pay a huge amount for it. Then they used a trailing issue of the new discretionary cards. It is unclear where the information came from but they came up with a figure that 75,000 of these cards were provided because of exceptional medical circumstances. They paid away merrily on the basis of those 75,000 but we now find in an audit that the database only shows 36,000 such cards. Not even all of those cards were supposed to be compensated because they did not all come within the criteria for compensation. Once again, we see the taxpayer being treated like a patsy or fall-guy who must take up all the slack and carry the cost of Ministers making announcements they did not think through in the first place.

It is the same with integrated ticketing which has been in every programme for Government including the PDs and Fianna Fáil, yet it still has not been managed as a coherent project. One cannot escape the fact that Ministers have been at the heart of a consistent pattern of waste that is repeatedly coming to our attention. The consistent themes involving Ministers include an abuse of procedures, which was clear in the case of the really big ones that attracted public attention, such as e-voting, Media-Lab Europe, Stadium Campus Ireland and Punchestown. In every one of those cases the Comptroller and Auditor General found that Ministers abused the procedures under which projects were to be handled.

The other major area — I hope the Minister does not do it this year — is producing rabbits out of hats on budget day which have never been properly costed and have never gone through any private consultation within Departments. The high-water mark for that is decentralisation for which we will pay for many years to come because it was not planned.

Another area concerns bad deals struck by Ministers who rush in to such projects. We saw the former Minister, Deputy Woods, do it and we saw the former Minister, Pádraig Flynn, do it with toll roads. These approaches by Ministers need to be curbed and the only way to do so is by putting clear responsibility on the shoulders of those who commit to spending public money. One of the pillars of the Fine Gael-Labour Party document is to hold Ministers responsible so they cannot wash their hands of responsibility when projects they have pushed through and have not properly controlled go wrong. Ministers should not be promoted to something higher because they got such projects so seriously wrong.

We can change that system which is dogged by decision making without taking responsibility. There is a weakness in the follow up. I admit the mismanagement of projects has been partly down to poor experience. We have suddenly got into big public spending on infrastructural projects, yet have not until recently built up the expertise. I accept that some of the overruns were culpable because the Comptroller and Auditor General found there was a failure to do proper costings. However, they could possibly be excused on the basis we did not have the expertise and were trying to do things too fast. That cannot be accepted anymore, however, because we have been at this for a long time. We are at a high level of capital investment and can no longer tolerate projects coming in so far over budget.

A comprehensive set of reforms is required as regards the way we handle public money. That point is at the heart of the Fine Gael-Labour Party document. We must begin by reforming the gaping flaws in the way we formulate the budget. It is not acceptable that the tax side is not subjected to scrutiny other than a once off scrutiny by the Minister. That one-off investigation was scary to the extent to which huge sums had been committed, not only now but into the far distant future, which were yielding virtually nothing, in many cases, of commensurate value to the taxpayer. That has to change. We cannot have the discovery now and again of huge amounts of money gone down the tubes in tax schemes that have outlived their usefulness.

We have to change also the horse trading that characterises the budget and estimation formation. We must have systems where performance drives money and budgetary allocations and where Ministers take responsibility for performance when they get extra money. The day they get €200 million extra in their Estimate they must pin down exactly what is new and what they will deliver, and they should be held responsible. We have to get to that level of accountability from Ministers in the way the budget is formulated. The present system of phoney secrecy where the Estimates are produced at the end of November and the budget two weeks later, and the House packs up for Christmas after one omnibus vote does not pass as proper scrutiny of whether the decisions being made in the budget are the best ones for the taxpayer. We have to get away from that system. There are many changes that need to be made in the way we approach public spending.

A decade has elapsed since the Public Service Management Act was passed when we had to have proper strategies, objectives and performance indicators, and we had to measure these. The Minister would put his hand on his heart and say that has not happened. There are no proper performance indicators for huge swathes of public spending.

Recently I have looked at the area of crime. The budget has been doubled in this area and yet the detection rate for serious crime has collapsed. That is not Ministers being held accountable or using their budget formulation in a way that ensures the taxpayer gets value for money. That has to change. There is a need to put reforms in place to make that happen.

The Irish economy is rightly admired by many throughout the world. We have pursued consistent policies from one Government to another. There has been a pattern of consistent policy, protecting enterprise and ensuring that incentives are provided for enterprise. That has been a great success. There is the same opportunity to look at public service reform and to bring to it the same commitment to innovate, to fresh thinking and fresh management, the same openness and willingness to be held accountable for results that has characterised our success in other areas. That is the next great mountain that has to be climbed by Ireland.

It is not acceptable that as one of the most wealthy countries we have to justify accident and emergency departments that do not work for people in serious need, and in the area of disadvantage that children ten years into programmes of so-called combating disadvantage are still as badly off, relative to their peers, as at the start of those programmes. That belies a breakdown in the way we manage our public money and policies and form strategies, and what we accept as proper plans. I believe there is political responsibility for this.

On the last occasion this Government won office with all sorts of glossy plans for which there was no strategy whatsoever unpinning. It has created this cynicism and underperformance culture that we have to live with. There was no strategy to deliver and end hospital waiting lists by 2004. There was no strategy to reduce waiting times in accident and emergency departments or to reduce class sizes to 20 or fewer for children of nine years and under. Yet Ministers went out and said what they would do but there was nothing to underpin it and it did not happen. We have to get away from that scenario and set higher standards for ourselves in politics in the way we handle public money. That is one of the key themes that has to be addressed as we look to the next election. I hope there will be a clear and resounding vote for a better way to deal with public money.

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

My colleague, Deputy Bruton, dealt with a variety of issues, including the misspending of public money. I shall deal solely with transport issues, a field that is strewn with over-spending, misspending, opportunity costs, from the bus lanes on which more than €100 million has been spent, many of which are devoid of buses, the Dublin Port tunnel project which is coming in at probably the most expensive infrastructure project ever in Europe, the Aer Lingus debacle and the terminal at Dublin Airport where a decision must be made — the opportunity costs there are unknowable. The actual costs of construction are greatly increased and still unknown.

Against a background of the order of over-spending on these projects presided over largely by the Minister for Transport, no doubt the over-spending on integrated ticketing might appear minuscule to Ministers who have so much money that they consider millions of euro as small change. The Comptroller and Auditor General's report on integrated ticketing is a sorry saga of pitiful public governance. From the start the project was badly conceived, poorly supervised, inadequately supported and doomed to failure because of the absence of political commitment to the kind of framework necessary for its success. The report makes it clear that the bottom of the problem was a political failure.

Already €10.5 million of taxpayers' money has been spent and we have no card, smart or otherwise, and no early prospect of such a card. The budget has gone from €29.6 million to €42.7 million and nobody knows where it will end. The €10.5 million already spent is dead money. It makes no contribution and has been completely wasted. We will have to start again. More has been lost in the initial financial outlay of the €10.5 million. The opportunity cost of failure to deliver something promised as far back as 1997 by the then Minister, Senator O'Rourke, must also be factored in, as well as the inconvenience to the travelling public, the potential synergies that might have arisen in the actual integration growth of the transport systems from an integrated and co-operative ticketing system and the distraction and time wasted by the various actors and organisations involved in this whole unproductive exercise. On all fronts this was an exercise in how not to do business and how not to manage public money.

The project was precluded from success by the absence of political direction and political decisions about the future regulatory framework for public transport. There were hints of what might happen in the future. This resulted for everybody in complete uncertainty as to where they stood. There were question marks over the existence of some of the organisations post the setting up of the promised Dublin Transportation Authority and none knew the extent or the nature of their future involvement in public transport delivery. Small wonder then their reluctance to get involved in any particular ticketing system. The Minister was well aware of the tensions between the players but continued to sit on his hands, refusing to give direction or comfort to those who were uncertain of their future role——

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A stop.

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——while at the same time expecting the impossible of those charged with ensuring a viable ticketing system. Will the Minister please stop shaking his head? This failure to make a decision, the failure of leadership, the failure to govern is at the root of this total waste of public money.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am used to giving honest assessments in any event.

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Notwithstanding the Minister's fence sitting, there are also serious questions to be asked about the refusal of Dublin Bus to participate and co-operate in the implementation of a Government decision. No matter what the excuses and irrespective of the motivation which may well have been bus users' interests, the Government as a whole cannot allow this blatant rejection and ignoring of a Government decision by anybody, particularly semi-State bodies. This sort of behaviour cannot go unquestioned and should be questioned by the Minister. No public body can be allowed to subvert the implementation of Government policy, no matter how poorly articulated or overseen that policy has been.

Clearly there was a failure of co-operation, a failure to put partisan chip aside, but the big failure was at political level, first, by the refusal to clarify the future transport framework for Dublin and also by the Minister's failure to respond, take charge, ask questions or show any particular interest at any stage even when there were clear signals that disaster was glaringly obvious. There were rumblings for a time but when the tendering system failed, a very unusual event, at that time surely the alarm signals should have gone off. Instead the Minister came in here and in response to my questioning he shook his head in despair, tut-tutted at the lack of progress and generally behaved as if it had nothing at all to do with him. In this Government's world it had nothing to do with him. The buck never stops with the Government because it is not its buck. It is not its hard earned money. Not alone is it not just the taxpayers' money, there is plenty more where that came from. This is the attitude that pervades the Department of Transport and every Department — incompetence and indifference to wasteful public spending, a failure to plan, monitor and evaluate projects and a complete denial of any responsibility for any of the public service spending outrages that have been the hallmark of this Government.

The public can forgive incompetence, but it will never forgive or forget the blatant denial, haughty indifference and dismissive arrogance of the Government's approach to people's hard earned money.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "Dáil Éireann" and substitute the following:

"—notes the Annual Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General on the 2005 Appropriation Accounts and that in line with normal procedure it will now be passed for scrutiny to the Committee of Public Accounts;

acknowledges the need to pursue best practice in the management of public expenditure to ensure value for money for the taxpayer, and in this regard commends the initiatives taken by Government in recent years to promote more efficient and effective management of expenditure including:

the introduction in 2004 of rolling multi-annual capital envelopes for better management and control of public capital programmes and projects;

the publication in February 2005 of new guidelines for the appraisal and management of capital expenditure proposals in the public sector;

the additional value for money measures in relation to major projects and ICT projects and consultancies announced in October 2005;

the introduction this year of new arrangements for value for money policy reviews in place of expenditure reviews;

the establishment of a central expenditure evaluation unit in the Department of Finance to promote best practice in evaluation and ensure compliance by Departments and agencies with value for money requirements;

recent reforms to the procurement of public construction contracts and reform and modernisation of the system for employing construction related consultants;

the introduction of the national public procurement policy framework for implementation by public bodies, in particular the development of corporate procurement plans that set targets for achieving savings and broad value for money objectives; and

reforms to the Estimates and budget process announced in budget 2006;

notes the measures taken to improve tax compliance; and

acknowledges the major improvements in public services since 1997 arising from the very significant level of resources allocated by Government over that period."

I propose to share time with my colleague, the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen.

I will make some remarks of a general nature on the Comptroller and Auditor General's report for 2005 to put it in context. I intend to concentrate on the Government's reforms to public expenditure management and value for money initiatives, the actions taken by Government on tax evasion and on the Government's overall achievements in regard to public services. My colleagues will, in the course of their contributions to this debate, deal with specific issues raised in the Comptroller and Auditor General's report and with sectoral reforms and achievements in their areas.

The 2005 report of the Comptroller and Auditor General must be put in the context of gross annual spend by central Government. In 2005 gross expenditure by central Government on public services, including the social insurance fund, amounted to approximately €45 billion. Of this some €15 billion was in respect of pay and pensions, over €12 billion in respect of social welfare, €12 billion in respect of health and €7 billion in respect of education.

The Comptroller and Auditor General has long been a core part of the systems of oversight in this country. There is a statutory requirement on him to report annually to Dáil Éireann on his audit of departmental appropriation accounts. His annual reports are exceptionally valuable, especially where they point to systems errors which should have prevented waste occurring. I welcome his report as an important input into the ongoing process of ensuring better value for taxpayers' money.

The 2005 report is not therefore some major new report on Government waste, but simply the comptroller discharging his annual function. As Deputies are aware, the Comptroller and Auditor General reports are transmitted to the Committee of Public Accounts and form the basis for the questioning by the PAC of the Accounting Officers of each Department. The report of the PAC is in turn remitted to me for comments and my comments are relayed back to the PAC after I have consulted the relevant Departments. This process enables the points made by the Comptroller and Auditor General and the PAC to be fully followed up and the necessary changes to be introduced to remedy any shortcomings.

Poor management of public expenditure and occurrences of wasteful expenditure are not acceptable at any time. The Government is determined to redress problems that come to light. Nonetheless, promises that all instances of inefficient and wasteful expenditure can be totally eliminated are not realistic. Is there a person or organisation, let alone a government, in the world who can honestly say that they have maximised the return from every cent of spending or every investment decision? Of course not. However, what we can and must do is have systems for planning and evaluation which minimise the risk of waste and maximise the chance of finding it when it occurs.

While there have been problems and incidences of waste, the Government has continually sought to learn from those mistakes and we have been proactive in introducing measures designed to optimise value for money from public expenditure for the taxpayer. A number of important initiatives have been put in place by the Government in recent years to secure this objective. These include the introduction in budget 2004 of rolling five-year multi-annual capital envelopes for better management and control of public expenditure programmes and projects; the publication in February, 2005 of new guidelines for the appraisal and management of capital expenditure proposals in the public sector; the additional value for money measures with regard to major projects, ICT projects and consultancies announced in October 2005; the introduction this year of new arrangements for expanded value for money policy reviews in place of expenditure reviews; recent reforms to the procurement of public construction contracts and reform and modernisation of the system for employing construction-related consultants; the introduction of the national public procurement policy framework for implementation by public bodies, in particular the development of corporate procurement plans that set targets for achieving savings and broad value for money objectives; the recent establishment of a central expenditure evaluation unit in the Department of Finance to promote best practice in evaluation and compliance by Departments and agencies with value for money requirements; and reforms to the Estimates and budget process announced in budget 2006.

The objectives of these initiatives are to ensure that there is more effective and efficient allocation and management of resources by Government, Ministers, Departments and agencies, better value for money for the taxpayer and greater accountability to the Oireachtas and the public in regard to public expenditure policy and achievements for public expenditure.

We are acutely conscious that we must get optimal return for the significant levels of capital investment we are committed to. Currently we spend close to 5% of GNP on capital investment funded by central Government. This is approximately twice the European average. Public investment under the 2006-10 capital envelope will amount to over €43 billion.

The rolling five-year multi-annual capital envelopes with a 10% capital carryover facility is a common sense move which breaks the rigidity of the annual allocations system which undermined good planning. Departments and agencies now have greater medium term budgetary certainty and more flexibility in planning and managing their capital programmes and projects. We see the benefits of this. They have general delegated responsibility for selecting and managing their capital programmes and projects within the framework of the capital envelopes, provided that they comply with my Department's guidelines for capital appraisal and public procurement and the other value for money requirements introduced last year. The response by Departments and implementing agencies to the multi-annual capital investment framework has been uniformly positive. This is being reflected in better project and programme management.

The February 2005 guidelines for the appraisal and management of capital expenditure proposals in the public sector are designed to encourage a better approach to appraisal and management of capital programmes and projects and to reflect best international practice. Key features of the guidelines are that all projects over €30 million must undergo a full cost benefit analysis and small to medium projects must undergo an appraisal commensurate with their scale. The capital appraisal guidelines contain all that is necessary to assist proper costing, appraisal and efficient execution of projects. There are checks and balances built into the guidelines to ensure that projects are properly appraised and managed from project inception to procurement and post project review. Sponsoring agencies and Departments must carry out preliminary and detailed appraisal of all projects and seek approval of the relevant sanctioning authority before proceeding through the key stages from appraisal to planning and implementation.

The guidelines explicitly state, as part of the appraisal process, that "the cost of the project should be the expected outturn cost, including construction costs, property acquisition, risk and contingency" and that "the cost of possible future price increases and variations in project outputs should be factored into the calculation of project costs".

The value for money initiative which I announced in October last includes a number of important measures to promote better accountability at project level. It is now a specific requirement for all major capital projects and ICT projects that an individual project manager must be appointed who is responsible for managing and monitoring project progress and for reporting progress to a project board. There must be regular reporting of progress on capital programmes and major projects and value for money generally to the management advisory committee of Departments and to boards of State agencies. The objective is to ensure that problems arising are brought to notice and dealt with at an early stage. A further innovation is that details on progress on project outcomes against budgets and scheduled completion dates for projects above €30 million must be included in departmental annual reports on their statements of strategy.

Departments are also required under the new value for money arrangements now in place to report annually to my Department on progress under their capital envelopes. They must include, as part of that reporting requirement, an account of progress on major capital projects and compliance with the general conditions of my Department's delegated capital sanction and the capital appraisal guidelines, including details of spot-checks for compliance carried out by them.

I have recently established a central expenditure evaluation unit in my Department. It will have a key role in promoting best practice on appraisal and evaluation generally and in ensuring compliance by Departments and agencies with the capital appraisal guidelines and other requirements under the enhanced value for money framework now in place. The unit will review the annual reports from Departments to my Department in regard to compliance with capital appraisal and value for money requirements. The objective is that deficiencies in Departments and agencies with regard to project management and value for money are identified and, more generally, to facilitate more systematic engagement between my Department and Departments and agencies in taking any necessary corrective action.

With regard to ICT projects, a formal peer review process for major projects is also in operation. The peer review is carried out at key decision points, preliminary business case assessment, detailed assessment, pre-tender, post-tender, and project close-out, by a team of experienced people external to the project board and the organisation. In 2005, I also introduced, the national public procurement policy framework. The aim of the policy is to encourage strategic change in public sector procurement by improving the procurement process in public sector organisations. Under the procurement framework each public sector organisation is required to develop and implement an individual corporate procurement plan. The plan must include an overview of existing procurement expenditure, procedures and processes, a set of high level procurement goals and a detailed breakdown of the process for implementing each goal. These target driven measures will help improve procurement processes, policies and procedures across the service and will result in better value for money outcomes to procurement.

The Government has introduced significant reform to the public construction contracts regime to achieve greater cost certainty and cost effective and timely delivery of public capital works projects. My Department has now completed a suite of five new forms of construction contracts for civil and engineering and building works and, for the first time, put in place standardised public sector conditions of engagement for construction consultants. The new contractual conditions are focused on transferring identifiable risk to contractors to allow tendering for capital works projects on a lump sum fixed price basis for three years.

The conditions of engagement for consultants are structured and balanced in a way that incentivises more efficient and effective consultant performance to better protect the public sector client's interest. The conditions also change the fee payment mechanism by introducing competitive fee bidding but allowing quality to remain a key award criterion for quality-dependent projects.

The new contracts and conditions of engagement will be applied with effect from January 2007. Prior to this, an intensive training programme will be undertaken to ensure public sector clients are fully familiar with the new contractual terms and conditions. The new contractual conditions for contractors and consultants are a key element in the drive towards greater value for money from capital works projects over the medium to longer term.

As part of its ongoing commitment to reform and building a robust management and value for money assessment framework, the Government decided to replace the expenditure review initiative with new arrangements for value for money policy reviews. These arrangements which I announced on 11 June last, build on the value for money reforms already in place, such as the multi-annual capital envelopes, the revised capital appraisal guidelines and the procurement reforms.

A programme of 90 value for money reviews has been agreed for Departments for the period 2006-08. I am determined that what I accept has been a poor record with regard to the timeliness of completion of reviews under the earlier round of reviews will not occur on this occasion. In addition, to address criticisms about the scale and nature of the topics reviewed under the former expenditure review process and to ensure greater accountability, the value for money reviews being undertaken by Departments in the period will, as a general rule, have a minimum indicative coverage of at least 10% to 15% of Departments' budgets. The completed reviews will also be published and submitted to the relevant Oireachtas select committees for their consideration. I hope the committees for their part will take an active interest in the reviews and will engage with Departments in assessing their impact on value for money for the taxpayer.

My announcement of last June also encompasses reviews which impact on value for money but which are not part of the formal value for money policy review initiative. There are many instances of dedicated reviews and studies carried out by Departments which impact on value for money. Henceforth, details of all such reviews will generally be made available to the relevant Oireachtas committee and copies of the reviews will generally be given to the committee.

The Government's reform of the Estimates and budgetary process which I announced in budget 2006 will significantly enhance accountability for public expenditure. From 2007, Ministers will be required to submit an annual output statement to the Oireachtas in tandem with their Estimate. This statement will set out the target outputs of Departments and agencies for the resources provided in their Estimates and, from 2008 onwards, Ministers will report progress on performance as compared with targets. The performance information which the annual output statements will contain will enable the select committees and citizens to see what outputs are being achieved for public expenditure. All Departments are currently actively engaged in the process of producing their outputs statements to meet next year's deadline. I envisage the process will be developed and refined in the light of its operation.

Under this reform, the Select Committee on Finance and the Public Service, taking account of the deliberations of the various select committees, will submit a report on expenditure to the House. This report can be an input into subsequent Government consideration of the expenditure Estimates for the following years.

The above package of measures marks a major move towards ensuring that we at least match international best practice in achieving value for money and better accountability for public expenditure. These measures refute the alleged inaction as set out in the Opposition motion. Following a review by my Department of tax reliefs and exemptions, I introduced significant changes in the budget and the Finance Act 2006, to curtail the potential for individuals to reduce their net liability for tax by using tax reliefs, including a restriction on the use of specified tax reliefs by high income taxpayers. The restriction will come into effect from 1 January 2007. The list of specified reliefs includes various property-based tax incentives and certain other reliefs such as the business expansion scheme, film relief and donations. Tax exemptions, including artistic income, stallion fees, and patent royalties will also be subject to this restriction.

The aim of this new restriction is to try and get the balance right between promoting tax equity in relation to those on high incomes while at the same time maintaining the incentive effect of the various tax reliefs introduced to achieve a particular public good. The measure is being introduced with effect from 1 January 2007 to allow sufficient time for individuals affected by the restriction and their tax advisers to become familiar with the operation of the restriction. It is estimated this restriction will yield €5 million in 2007 and €50 million in a full year.

It is important the record is set straight with regard to achievements for the expenditure applied by this Government. It is very easy for the Opposition to play politics with this area in an attempt to undermine Government achievements by singling out individual instances of waste for mention or by making exaggerated claims that expenditure on programmes is wasted if any part of it showed waste, or that the failure to solve every problem means there has been no progress on delivering services. The vast bulk of all public expenditure provides real value for money and delivers essential services and a good return for the taxpayer. Every day this expenditure is effectively delivering significantly important services to our citizens. Over €50 billion will be spent this year and social welfare, health, education and capital investment will account for almost 80% of that expenditure, bringing significant improvements.

The Opposition has complained that no progress is being made on the long waiting lists. It is the case that for some operations the waiting lists have shortened from five years to five months. We have built record numbers of schools——

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are lots of children in Dublin West with no school place. That has not been heard of since 1916.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A significant amount of resources have been invested in providing for people with disabilities and in placing them in mainstream education. This may have deferred in some instances the question of reducing pupil-teacher ratios which have been reduced by a further one this year and a further one next year, as outlined by the Minister for Education and Science. The Government's record in education and health is very good in terms of investment.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What about the parents with no school for their children?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The real achievements cannot be ignored.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What about the parents who have no school for their children?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

People expect us to recognise——

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

People expect school places.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I remind the Deputy that heckling in a childish manner in this Parliament does nothing to add to the quality of debate.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

People expect a school place for their children.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Significant progress is being made in a range of areas. The Comptroller and Auditor General's annual report to this House, as is the case for every Government of every composition, points out where we can do better and where we need to do better. The important point is whether we put in the systems of accountability that minimise the chance of risk and whether we can ensure that we have the systems in place to enable us to make the sort of progress which taxpayers can rightly expect from the huge sums of money being invested in public services with real returns and real results.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am happy to participate in this debate and to deal with issues which are of significant national importance and which concern the Department of Transport.

Yesterday I opened the Fermoy bypass which has been completed eight months ahead of schedule and under budget. This bypass will remove 17,000 vehicles each day from Fermoy town centre and will reduce journey times by up to 30 minutes. The Fermoy road opening is not an isolated event but rather is typical of what is happening on the national roads network, nationwide, on a weekly basis. This is known by all colleagues from all sides of the House because they all turn up, along with all their councillors, to welcome these projects which transform and have a significant impact on people's daily lives.

The Kilcock-Kinnegad motorway was delivered ten months ahead of schedule. The Dundalk bypass was also opened ahead of schedule. To date in 2006, nine projects have already been delivered on time and within budget. They include the Cavan bypass, the Enniscorthy-Clonroche realignment, the Ashbourne M50 bypass, the Ballyshannon-Bundoran bypass, the Edgeworthstown relief road, the Naas road widening, the Mitchelstown relief road and the Castleisland-Abbeyfeale project. All these projects are on budget and ahead of schedule. As can be seen from the spread, the projects being delivered affect every part of the country. It is not just roads that are being developed. The Luas project is a tremendous success and improvements to the DART and the intercity rail services are making a real difference to public transport.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It did not come in on budget though.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Most of it is on time and under budget. The Government remains committed to implementing ambitious projects with greater effectiveness and with emphasis on speedy delivery.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Where are the buses in Dublin?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The national roads programme is now part of the wider Transport 21 investment framework and, as such, it is now subject to the rigorous monitoring——

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are buses in Transport 21. Where are the buses?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will deal with the Deputy in a minute. I will come to it.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Where are the trains for Clonsilla?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The bleating of the Labour and Fine Gael parties, both diametrically opposed in policy, has delivered nothing——

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Tell us about integrated ticketing.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——and will not deliver anything as the Deputy well knows. I am happy——

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Tell us about e-voting.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Tell us about integrated ticketing as that is what is contained in the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the House knows, Ireland has become unique and a Government decision——

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are no buses. That is what is unique about it.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Are we going to have order in the House when a Member from the Government side is speaking?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A Government decision unique in Europe was taken in recent times——

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What was unique?

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Order, please.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Was it e-voting?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, can we have order in the House, please?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——by investing in——

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On a point of information——

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is no such thing as a point of information.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is there something wrong with Deputy Burton this evening?

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This motion is about the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General. It is about the prison at Thornton Hall and integrated ticketing. The Minister has not addressed either matter yet.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If the Deputy would stop talking, I might address them in the time allowed.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister addresses matters not contained in the report. On a point of order, is the Minister required to address the motion on the report?

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is not a point of order. The Deputy is being disorderly.

John Curran (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On a point of order, the motion is much broader than Deputy Burton indicates. The Minister is giving a general reply.

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister should be allowed to make his contribution without any further interruption.

John Curran (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The motion makes no mention of the particular incidences.

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Please allow the Minister to continue.

John Curran (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Deputy knows, a wide range of issues come before the Committee of Public Accounts. She can pick any one or two of them, but they are in isolation and not representative.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Curran should be making representations to get buses for his constituents.

John Curran (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have done and we are getting them.

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister should be allowed to speak.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy did not get them.

John Curran (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes, we did.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Burton should cop herself on. It is no wonder she is going to lose her seat with the way she carries on.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister should congratulate me for having standards at least.

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Order.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Some €34.4 billion has been allocated by the Government through the Minister for Finance to the Department of Transport for expenditure on Transport 21. It is interesting that this is the first Government in Europe to set out and recognise that investment in heavy infrastructure requires a long-term view to bring certainty to the market and deliver projects well ahead of schedule and on budget. I know that in Deputy Burton's case there is enormous jealousy and upset in the Labour Party in Dublin that all the things they bleated about for years are being done by the Government.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Has the Minister taken a bus or train in Dublin?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That has always been the hallmark of Fianna Fáil in Government.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Has the Minister taken the bus to Thornton Hall?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On the issue, to which the Deputy referred, I was very pleased to have concluded all the negotiations in recent days and to have brought a very strategic, important and fundamental reform package to Government, which will at last remove the 1932 Act, provide 100 buses for passengers and commuters in Dublin, provide 160 buses to Bus Éireann for the regions throughout the country, and, for the first time, allow for a Bill to be brought to Government shortly that will allow the private sector to participate in on-street delivery of buses, thereby expanding the bus fleet in Dublin and throughout the country. That is the sort of progress that would not be possible for Fine Gael and Labour to make. All the bleating in the world will not change that fact.

There has been considerable success in recent years in managing the delivery of public transport projects. No major CIE projects have had cost overruns in the recent past, with a number of projects including the Heuston Station project, the DART upgrade project and the Drogheda railcar depot coming in under budget.

A group responsible for the high-level monitoring of Transport 21 on a national basis has been established. The group comprises representatives of the Departments of Finance, Transport, the Taoiseach and the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, and the National Finance Development Agency. The CEOs of Transport 21 implementing agencies attend the meetings as invited. In the first year of implementation, considerable progress has been made in advancing the two key strategies of Transport 21, namely developing a high quality national roads and public transport network together with transforming the transport system in the greater Dublin area. I have already dealt with the roads programme.

In Dublin, the public transport system is well on the way to being transformed with substantive progress on the two metro lines, the seven Luas projects, the Kildare route project, the Navan line project and the new Dublin Docklands station. Nationally, heavy rail projects such as the western rail corridor, the Cork commuter rail project, the intercity rolling stock replacement programme and the Portlaoise railcar depot have all been progressed. Public consultation on metro north commenced earlier this year and is at a very advanced stage. The RPA is in discussions with the local authorities and developers regarding exact route options for metro west.

The green Luas line from St. Stephen's Green to Sandyford will be extended to Cherrywood and Bray. The railway order for the Cherrywood extension has been granted and construction will commence in 2007. Public consultation on route options for the extensions to the Bray environs has commenced. The green line will also be extended northwards to interchange with the red line in the centre of the city and onwards to Liffey Junction where it will interchange with the Maynooth and Navan line. This has the potential to add another 7 million passenger journeys to the Luas each year as a result of simply connecting the lines. The greater impact will come when metro north comes into being and all these significant methods of public transport will interact and interchange with each other.

There will be fundamental roles for bus, light rail, the DART system with the interconnector and the impact of metro north and metro west on our great capital city. The red Luas line will be extended to the Dublin Docklands and also to City West and we have progressed that development. I expect to make a decision shortly on the railway order for the Dublin Docklands extension, which is scheduled for completion in 2008. Public consultation is ongoing on the City West extension and the RPA is expected to lodge a railway order application for this in early 2007.

Considerable developments are also taking place on the heavy rail network. I recently agreed to grant a railway order for the Kildare route project and the text of this order is being finalised. The project will double the number of tracks to four between Cherry Orchard and Hazelhatch on the Kildare rail line which will allow for two dedicated tracks for commuter services and two for intercity and other suburban services. Many new stations will be added, for example, at Adamstown, Lucan, Balgaddy and Park West. It will give greatly increased capacity on the Kildare commuter services.

The western rail corridor project was launched last week and involves the phased opening of the rail lines in Ennis, County Clare, and Claremorris, County Mayo. I approved funding for phase 1 from Ennis to Athenry and phase 2 from Athenry to Tuam. Works are due to commence in 2007. Phase 3 from Tuam to Claremorris is scheduled to go to planning shortly.

The Intercity rolling stock replacement programme involves the purchase by Iarnród Éireann of 217 new rail carriages to replace the current fleet. We are replacing the entire Intercity fleet. Four or five years ago, who would have believed that by 2008 we would have the most modern railcar system of any European country?

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

And the slowest.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is a real demonstration of the Government's commitment in recent years. The only thing that is slow around here is the voice of the Deputy opposite who seems to be determined to talk to the ether for the evening. Inevitably, in a small number of projects difficulties occur. The integrated ticketing project was conceived as a multi-operator system of integrated public transport, using smart card technology with initial deployment in the Dublin area.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is it like e-voting? The Minister is unlucky with computers.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Not at all. It is pathetic to listen to the Deputy.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There must be something about the Minister and electronics that do not go together.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Integrated ticketing projects are recognised to be inherently complex and difficult to implement in a multi-operator environment. When particular difficulties became apparent as they did when I came to the Department, I took immediate action to bring together the parties, the Railway Procurement Agency and Dublin Bus as the principal operator.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister knew about electronics from his previous Department.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy should go and buy herself a train and track set to keep her happy. These projects were sent out for review and the two reviews completed in April and May, respectively, considered the options of abandoning, mothballing or continuing the project and recommended continuing. Both reviews strongly endorse the continuation of the project, subject to enhanced governance arrangements being put in place. In July, I notified the Government that I would proceed with the project on the basis of enhanced governance arrangements and, in particular, the establishment of an integrated ticketing board under an independent chairperson who would be accountable to me. In the coming days, I expect to receive the first progress report from the chair of the integrated ticketing project board. Members should acknowledge the Government's foresight in introducing smart card technology.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Was that like electronic voting?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

People keep coming to me with outdated paper ticket technology or to make reference to Hong Kong and Singapore. Members should be aware that the integrated ticketing system in Hong Kong, which uses smart card technology, took ten years to implement at a cost of €250 million.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That does not augur well for Ireland.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The expertise we have brought to bear on the integrated ticketing system——

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Were the people responsible for PPARS involved?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Obviously, the Deputy opposite does not frequently use public transport in this city or she would be aware that the first phase of the integrated smart card ticketing system is already working successfully on the Luas. Of course, that is ignored by a Labour Party which, with Fine Gael, said Luas was a waste of time and would never be delivered.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No, we did not say that.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not think they will remind the people of Dublin, when they are canvassing in next year's general election, of their lack of commitment to and investment in public transport. The speeches made by the Ministers for Finance and Transport in the rainbow Government made hardly any reference to investment in public transport. They ignored the fundamental basis of travel within a modern society, namely the necessary infrastructure for commuter and intercity travel. Through the good offices of the Minister for Finance, the Government will continue to win the confidence of the Irish people in spite of the failures of the parties opposite when they were in power.

Shane McEntee (Meath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I would like to share time with Deputies Durkan and Twomey.

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Shane McEntee (Meath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The theme of today's Dáil debates was money. All day, we listened to somebody who had no money and now we are discussing somebody who had money but did not know how to spend it. The person in the best position of all is the Minister for Finance, who discovered today that we have lots of money. We have just heard the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, speak about all that has been done. The Minister for Finance might consider sending a few euro to east County Meath to build a few schools for the children of the area or a hospital for their parents and the Slane bypass might be put on the Minister for Transport's desk now rather than leaving it until 2008.

The manner in which money was obtained by individuals in this House and the way in which money was spent on buying a farm in north County Dublin as a prison site were both wrong. The farm was valued at €6 million and would be worth a maximum of €8.9 million if it was zoned, which was unlikely given that it lay on the borders of County Meath. The Government ended up paying an extra €15 million for it, money which could have gone a long way in other areas if it was not improperly spent.

I have only been here for 15 months but I learned a great deal last week. Certain matters have not changed since I was a young fellow. The Government sent a man to north County Dublin to pick out a farm and told him not to ask for more than €200,000 per acre but the deal had to be signed regardless of what was found. In ten years' time this issue will come before another tribunal inquiring into the scandalous waste of taxpayers' money. How can we get these people, who say they have so much money, to carry out their duties properly?

No consideration has been given to the school adjacent to the site and we now believe there is no intention to change the direction of the road leading to it. In an emergency, how will we protect the children in that school? We should not think nice people will be living in that place because we have seen down the years the types of people who are incarcerated. They are in prison for a reason, and it is out of order to build a prison near a school. There is no infrastructure in terms of water, sewerage or roads in the area and the installation of these facilities will come at great expense merely to provide a prison for people who do not want to behave themselves. Why did those responsible for the purchase of these lands not manage the money properly? No farmer would put a premium on land he or she wanted to purchase.

Fair dues to the individual who received €30 million for the land. I have no grudge against him and hope the matter works out for him and his family. However, while it is clear that a prison requires to be built, why pick an area with very few people? The land is situated on the border of County Meath, so the Government thought the objectors would be divided. Fortunately, objections will be made because very good people live in the area and they have discovered the faults in the deal.

One enters politics in the hope that mistakes will not be repeated. This matter was probably one of the first I encountered and the manner by which it was addressed stinks to high heaven. I have no doubt that the truth will come out in ten years' time because it always does. I suppose there will be no going back but how much will it cost and why was the project not managed properly? Why do we have to end up before tribunals? Why can people not be straight? One does not enter politics for the job but to do a job.

As a nation, we had a good name internationally but we have destroyed that today with the prison and because we allowed this Government to continue. This prison should not be built. People should not throw in the towel but should fight because they know it is wrong. They know it is not right to build a prison beside a school and that €15 million is too much to spend on the site. The Members opposite never seem to admit when they are wrong, with the result that in ten years' time, we will be still fighting over tribunals. Both of the money matters discussed today were wrong. Those in positions of responsibility should not take money, and money belonging to the public should not be spent unwisely.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am glad of the opportunity to speak on this motion, which I fully support. As someone who spent a number of years on the Committee of Public Accounts, I regard the reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General as being of critical importance. That committee is probably the only one with the resources necessary to undertake investigations of spending throughout the public sector. The Minister for Finance offered the services of other committees, such as the Committee on Finance and the Public Service. Unfortunately, those committees do not have the resources required to delve deeply enough into expenditure at that level. However, the Committee of Public Accounts does and has done a tremendous job. That applies to the staff and all involved with that committee over the years.

I smiled as I listened to the Minister, Deputy Cullen, recount all the good deeds that have been done. One simple matter that was mentioned earlier is e-voting. The issue with e-voting is not only the €50 million or €60 million spent but the contempt with which the Government proceeded to spend more and more money with no regard for what was happening. It also spent money on public relations exercises in an attempt to teach the public to use the machines, despite the fact that there was ample evidence in the public domain to the effect that the machines would not work.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Who said they did not work?

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It was criminal what the Minister and his colleague did.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Where is it written that they do not work?

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They proceeded, regardless of public opinion——

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy is talking through his hat.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——and of the technical information——

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy is talking through his hat as usual.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister should withdraw that remark and use it in company that is more akin to his own.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy should engage in sensible debate.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When the Minister makes stupid remarks like that we know he does not understand what he says.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The issue is that the count software cost about €1.5 million.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister inherited e-voting and he did not have the guts to say it would not work.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It did work. It worked in a general election and in a by-election.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister was afraid and did not have the guts to say it would not work. He still does not have the guts.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What is wrong with it? It is used in Brazil, India, Africa and elsewhere.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister knows that sooner or later somebody will have to climb down and the Minister will have to accept his failure and responsibility in that awful debacle.

There is also the issue of the port tunnel. Let me explain about that tunnel.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What is the Deputy's problem?

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The forward planning for that tunnel was amazing. Public money was being spent so nobody cared a damn about it. It was only public money. Four years ago I put down a parliamentary question asking how the traffic would be funnelled into the port tunnel. There was a massive snigger from the Government; funnelling was not on its mind. However, funnelling is the issue. The N11, N7, N9, M4 and other roads around the city will have to funnel traffic into the port tunnel, which is not high enough to accommodate super trucks.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is it Fine Gael policy to allow super trucks in this country?

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Ultimately, the soon to be upgraded M50 will have trucks parked on it all day attempting to get into or out of the port tunnel. I have never seen anything like it.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is not functioning yet. The Deputy does not know what he is talking about.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not the only one who does not know what I am talking about it.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy is part of the brigade that decides something is a disaster before it even opens. That is Fine Gael policy. The same speech was made about the Luas.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister saw the events in Hungary over the last couple of weeks. He knows what would happen to him if he was in Hungary.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Imagine what would happen if Fine Gael got into power in this country.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He would have to leave office surreptitiously, in the middle of the night, apologising to the general public on his way out the door.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It would be 1973 to 1977, the mid-1980s and the mid-1990s revisited. God help this country if that were to happen.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to mention some other matters. The Minister is impervious to anything but basking in his own glory. He spoke about rail transport.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What is wrong with rail transport?

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister does not seem to look at the simple things. Park and ride facilities could hugely enhance rail services throughout the city and suburbs. What is the Minister doing?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am providing the resources. What are the local authorities controlled by the Labour Party and Fine Gael doing? Nothing. They cannot even draw down the money.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister is doing as little as possible for as long as possible——

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They cannot find the land and do not have the inclination. They do not want to provide any facilities.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——and that is in keeping with past performance. Despite my best efforts, the Minister is the same as he was about e-voting — deaf to any advice from any quarter.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Regardless of the arguments the Minister makes, this Government is a failure at implementing anything related to information technology. PPARS has been a disaster. A total of €160 million has been spent to date and there is an €11 million cost every year to pay 30,000 people. A cost-benefit analysis should be carried out on that system. The iSoft project is another which looks ready to collapse at any time. The HSE is not working. The Government reads too much of its own spin but the HSE is falling apart. It will not fall apart before the general election so the Government will be saved from that.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is a reflection of Fine Gael and the Labour Party — falling apart.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The only value for money I have seen from this Government in the last five years is that it published a report on health in 2001. However, it has not delivered much value for money in the case of the health services. A cost-benefit analysis——

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As a doctor, the Deputy should be ashamed of himself.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If the Minister gives me the time, I will explain it to him.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

To make that statement as a practising medical practitioner is outrageous.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister should not be foolish and silly.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy is going along with the old hogwash. Be a man and for God's sake say something that makes sense.

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Allow the Deputy to continue.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Jesus, Mary and Joseph.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If the Minister is so well informed, does he know——

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Unbelievable.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——how many patients are waiting for dermatology services in Waterford Regional Hospital in his constituency?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I know the difficulties.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is 2,500 people. Is that the type of service he is proud of?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are issues of imperfection in the health service. I have not said there are not.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does he know how long a person in Waterford must wait for an orthopaedic appointment? It is five years. That is information from the south-eastern region of the Health Service Executive.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is rubbish.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Instead of mouthing off here, the Minister should go back to Waterford and find out whether it is true.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Make it up as you go along.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is no need to interrupt me. Every major Government project costing more than €30 million is supposed to be subject to a cost-benefit analysis. Has a cost-benefit analysis been carried out on the new home care projects that have become part of the privatisation process of the health service? Given that a home care package includes 13% VAT and assuming the private company makes 10% or 12% profit, is the Minister certain that it is more competitive for the HSE to give that job to a private company?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is it now Fine Gael policy to scrap the HSE?

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister is a cranky little fellow.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

One of these fine days some policy will emerge from Fine Gael. It does not have any policies.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When the Minister makes such proposals they are obviously at the back of his mind so perhaps he agrees with many aspects of what I have said.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not agree with anything the Deputy says; neither will the electorate. Fine Gael has nothing to put before it.

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Twomey without interruption.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is a far greater issue. The Minister has a privatisation agenda as well so perhaps he might explain something else to the House. It is proposed that approximately six new private hospitals be built on the grounds of public hospitals. The Government's policy is to sell off public land for an unknown price, give €400 million in tax concessions and take €1 billion from the public system and hand it over to the private sector. Has there been a cost-benefit analysis of such a huge transfer of money within the health service from the public to the private sector? It is up to €1.4 billion.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I supported the building of the new private hospital which will open shortly in Waterford and I never looked for public lands.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister is supporting what he knows nothing about.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

My opponents said it would not happen but I stuck my neck out and delivered it.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is not what I am asking the Minister. Does the Minister know if a cost-benefit analysis has been carried out? The Minister supported what he knew nothing about; e-voting was a perfect example of that.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not have the Deputy's arrogance so I will let that remark go over my head.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It would be worth the Minister's while to examine why these six hospitals are being built. Over the last 20 years in this country no more that seven such hospitals have been constructed. Why have 36 submissions been made for these hospitals?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is it reasonable to announce tomorrow that Fine Gael does not support the radiotherapy services? Is that the new position? The Deputy's Fine Gael colleagues in Waterford will be shocked to hear what the Deputy has said in the Dáil tonight. If that is the view of Fine Gael, I might as well make it public tomorrow.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister should know what my policies are; he need not ask me about them tonight. To ensure the proper delivery of a radiotherapy service in the south east, that radiotherapy unit should have been built on the grounds of Waterford Regional Hospital where the other oncology and surgical services are available——

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy is complaining about it now.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——and where there is a multidisciplinary service.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy is complaining about it now; he does not want it. The Deputy should make up his mind.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Minister disagree with the multidisciplinary delivery of health services? The Minister is the one who should listen. He is poorly informed. He is driven by a silly agenda and is not prepared to move sideways from it. The best place for that radiotherapy unit would have been on the grounds of Waterford Regional Hospital.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy has just spoken against it.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Leas-Cheann Comhairle ask the Minister to stay quiet for a while because we were talking about——

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy should move the adjournment of the debate.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Before I do so I would like to say that the Minister is totally lost in regard to what is going on here. Patient care is being seriously compromised by some of the Government's polices. The Minister is ignorant of what I am talking about and he cannot even listen. I was talking about a private hospital and not about radiotherapy. He is totally confused.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As a medical man, the Deputy really surprises me.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister needs to see a good physician because I believe he is suffering from a fair amount of confusion and is delusional. Perhaps I could do something for him afterwards but I will move the adjournment of the debate first.