Averil Power (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

While I welcome the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Phil Hogan, to the House to debate this matter, the proposed massive sewage treatment plant in north County Dublin comes within the purview of the Department of the Public Expenditure and Reform. This matter was tabled to the Minister at that Department, Deputy Brendan Howlin, who gave a commitment to the Seanad in November 2011 that he would ensure this project was evaluated from a cost-benefit perspective. As the Minister with responsibility for public expenditure, cost-benefit analyses come within his brief.

My colleague, Senator Darragh O'Brien, raised this issue with the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform in the context of a number of financial projects which come within his brief. He responded by stating Senator O'Brien, the Fianna Fáil spokesperson, had made a number of constructive points about the proposal and gave an express undertaking to have the matter investigated. He stated:

There is a propensity for engineers to have big schemes. They much prefer to build reservoirs than fix leaks. There is nothing sexy about fixing a hole but construction of a multi million euro dam and piping water for miles is a big event. I prefer to fix the leaks.

The Minister's statement shows a healthy and welcome degree of scepticism about the proposal to build a massive sewage treatment plant in north Dublin. He also gave an explicit undertaking to have the proposal investigated to ensure, as we would all expect, that the sums add up and the project is appropriate. A half-page chart published yesterday indicates the sums involved. The project will cost, at a minimum, almost €500 million because the chart lists the costs associated with the construction of a pipeline, utilities and land acquisition but does not take account of factors such as traffic disruption and the broader economic costs that are supposed to be taken into consideration.

The Government's own guidelines for cost-benefit analyses make it very clear that broader social costs must be taken into account and that every proposal should be evaluated from the perspective of society replacing all of the costs and benefits on a comparative monetary scale. Instead, we had this fiasco yesterday where a multi-million euro project, worth at least €500 million, has been decided on and a location has been chosen, but the distinctions were made between alternative sites on the basis of half a page of data.

I welcome the fact that the Minister is here and I am happy to debate the issue with him. I raised this matter in a previous debate with the Minister of State, Deputy Cannon, some months ago. It is an absolute disgrace that the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform - who was sitting in the same chair as the Minister, Deputy Hogan, up until ten minutes ago and who was in this House for an hour - instead of staying here and responding with regard to specific commitments he gave to this House last year, chose to leave the Chamber. All I can take from that is that he does not stand over this project and is not comfortable with answering any questions on it. It does not stand up. That is the very clear message I have taken today from the fact that the Minister, Deputy Hogan's Cabinet colleague just walked out the door instead of staying here and accounting for the decision that was made yesterday.