Pat O'Neill (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

By an Irish company. Since it was set up, the National Roads Authority has helped to save this State money and deliver great efficiencies.

Why are we putting these two agencies together? It all comes from the McCarthy report of 2009 on public service numbers and expenditure, which pointed out that these two State agencies were responsible for delivering major transport infrastructure projects, some of them on a public-private partnership basis. It was clear there was a significant level of overlap in the type of service they delivered for the State and in the skills and expertise of the staff in capital project management, the procurement process and contract managing. The report stated that merging these bodies would create a single entity responsible for the procurement of all major network infrastructure in rail and national roads. In addition to pooling their expertise in areas like project delivery, archaeology and PPPs, the merger of these agencies should also yield savings in support areas such as finance and corporate services and the report reckoned a minimum saving of between €3 million and €4 million would be generated by a reduction of 30 in staffing levels for the new organisation. This is more of what this Government promised. The new agency will help further the progress we have made with motorways and other projects at a time when funding is low.

The Minister said it would will be called the " TII". Why do we have to retain the name of the National Roads Authority rather than use the new name?

This new body will help to guarantee the infrastructure of Ireland in the 21st century and into the 22nd century. The report said it was all about savings and efficiencies and the new organisation will benefit from combining technical expertise in the NRA and the RPA. I intended to ask about the timescale for the new agency but the Minister has already said he hopes to dissolve the RPA in mid-year to bring the new agency into being.

The new organisation will also deliver efficiencies in management and we will only have one CEO of the new body, rather than one in each. There will be only one board and associated support structures. I look forward to the passing of this Bill, which shows the commitment of this Government to reform of and efficiency in the public service. If Members will excuse the pun, it will either cement or tar the savings this Government has promised.Consider the summary of the recommendations from the McCarthy report. Four options are given. If there were no merger of the two bodies, there would be no benefit to the State. Recommendation 4 is for the full merger of the two bodies. In this regard, reference is made to a reduction in the Exchequer funding requirement, the creation of a world-class transport infrastructure procurement centre, maximising flexibility to meet funding and operational requirements, the possibility of exploiting opportunities relating to the body's expertise in a flexible way due to its commercial mandate, and the contribution to improved national competitiveness. This is why the two bodies are being merged.

I welcome the initiative. It has taken too long to do this but the Minister, Deputy Donohoe, is responsible for transport and he has shown he is willing to make changes. I support the Bill.