Martin Mansergh (Fianna Fail)

Yes, and that has been worth billions of pounds to the country. It is not based on any starry-eyed approach to PPPs.

I read the debate on the Bill in the Lower House and it appears Deputy Burton does not understands the Department of Finance if she believes that it operates under the mantra "private sector good, public sector bad". There is a difficulty with PPPs, but, unless there is real risk involved, the public sector can borrow more cheaply than the private sector. The PPP process is part of a panoply of instruments and shows a determination to drive forward the national development programme and capital investment projects.

The Minister stressed the competitive aspect of the agency. He said that a good PPP would ensure that a project was allocated to the party best able to manage it at lowest cost and would be developed to achieve the optimum balance of risk and reward. One needs expertise and there have been many complaints, from all sides of the House, that the excessive use of consultants can be very expensive. The agency provides in-house expertise and the NTMA will act as a mentor.

Senator John Paul Phelan referred to other agencies such as the waste management agency or the Rail Procurement Agency, but these have primarily technical expertise such as, in the case of the former, what is the best or most economic form of waste management. They do not necessarily possess finance project expertise.

The Minister and the Government are being perfectly realistic. This is not a panacea and it will not get around the general Government borrowing requirement. As the Minister has stated, whether a particular project accepted will be a matter for assessment by EUROSTAT. Fortunately, the Government is not living dangerously or on the margins so a EUROSTAT decision on any project will not drive us over the limit.

I am surprised to see the Fine Gael Party – in the form of Deputy Richard Bruton in the Lower House and Senator Feighan here – suggest that we should be lift the limits of the growth and stability pact. That would not be a good idea. We are nowhere near those limits; it is not as if we are pressed up against the ceiling. Any attempt by us to lift the limits would have a bad effect on confidence. I suspect that if Europe were to do it, confidence in the European economy – with some of the larger countries' economies in serious difficulties – would not be improved. We have an adequate margin for manoeuvre and we should retain it. The purpose of this is to enable us to accelerate economically and socially useful projects. I doubt the value of a massive increase in the Exchequer borrowing requirement at a time when we have 4% to 5% inflation.