Frank Feighan (Sligo-Leitrim, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Cathaoirleach and Senators for the opportunity to attend and to discuss developments in the area of public procurement. The Department of Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation operates at the centre of government to drive the delivery of improved public services, higher living standards, and sustainable infrastructure for the people of Ireland. As Minister of State responsible for public procurement, digitalisation and eGovernment, I work closely with the Minister, Deputy Chambers, towards these aims. Our Department’s remit spans three broad and interconnected areas, namely, the governance and oversight of public expenditure, building capability and capacity across the civil and wider public service, and the effective delivery of key Government policies. These strategic priorities are set out in the Department’s statement of strategy for the period 2025 to 2028. Central to this strategy is the need to deliver effectively by leveraging our responsibilities across public expenditure, infrastructure, reform and digitalisation in order to respond to the evolving needs of society.

The importance of public procurement to achieving these objectives is reflected in two key supporting actions. First, we are shaping a future for public procurement that embraces reform and is transparent and socially, environmentally and economically sustainable, and accessible by SMEs, through the national public procurement strategy. Second, we are focused on leveraging the benefits of the State’s expenditure by delivering procurement solutions that provide value for money, meet the needs of the public service and benefit society. As Minister of State with special responsibility for public procurement, I have tasked my officials with advancing this important work. I am pleased to be here today to provide an update on progress to date and to outline our priorities and planned actions for the period ahead. Indeed, I am always pleased to come back here to this august assembly as I was a Member here from 2002 to 2007 and from 2016 to 2020 and have very happy memories.

My Department is developing Ireland’s first national public procurement strategy, which will set out the strategic direction of public procurement in Ireland for the next five years. Programme for Government 2025: Securing Ireland's Future includes a commitment to review the public procurement process to make it more transparent and work to ensure greater participation from SMEs. This strategy progresses this commitment. Drawing on the feedback received as part of the review, and taking account of wider policy developments at national and EU levels, the strategy expands its focus beyond transparency and SME participation to provide an holistic blueprint for the future direction of public procurement over the next five years.

Reflecting the insights gathered through extensive consultation and considering wider programme for Government commitments, three critical outcomes for the strategy have been identified. First, the strategy will embed value for money as the linchpin underpinning every procurement but reframe it to include looking beyond the lowest price to take into account Ireland's strategic interests and wider societal economic and environmental outcomes and impacts. Second, it will facilitate a shift in mindset across the public sector to view procurement as a key policy and expenditure management tool. Third, it will support simplification by making doing business with Government easier for SMEs, start-up innovators, microenterprises and social enterprises as well as larger companies.

Delivery of this simplification agenda is already under way. Last year, my Department published Public Procurement in Ireland: A Roadmap for Digital Development 2025-2031, which sets out a vision for user-focused digital solutions that enable users to seamlessly navigate the complexities of end-to-end procurement processes. Implementation of this vision is now progressing in practice, and my Department is focusing on the needs and experience of public buyers and suppliers, enabling greater simplification and harnessing digital and emerging technologies. For example, design groups have been established for both contracting authorities and suppliers to ensure user-centric co-design for all tactical projects. My Department is undertaking journey mapping with suppliers to identify pinch points and explore opportunities for simplification.

One of the key themes permeating the strategy will be transparency, and I recognise that public procurement can play a critical role in maintaining and building public trust. We will work to strengthen confidence in the procurement system through the provision of better data and increased visibility of how and what the State procures. The Department has recently launched a new initiative to resume the collection of procurement spend data from across the public service. This project marks a new step towards building a richer national dataset that supports advanced analytics and enables meaningful comparison between estimated contract values and actual spend. This initiative will provide deeper visibility into procurement performance, supplier behaviour and value for money across the public sector. In addition, we are developing dedicated data analytics web pages to further drive transparency. These portals will make eTenders publication and contract information far more accessible and intuitive than before. By turning raw data into clearer visual insights, we will ensure greater accessibility and accountability in public procurement.

As I stated earlier, my Department is also responsible for leveraging the benefits of the State's expenditure through the establishment of central procurement solutions. The Office of Government Procurement, which operates as part of my Department, and its sector sourcing partners in education, health, defence and local government have established a range of centralised procurement arrangements for use by public bodies. Government policy is that, where possible, public bodies should use central procurement arrangements. By aggregating the State's buying power, these arrangements deliver greater value for money by generating administrative savings, reducing duplication of effort and improving process efficiencies. Central procurement solutions also support public bodies in meeting their obligations to consider more strategic outcomes, including green, social and SME-friendly considerations. The Office of Government Procurement is responsible for sourcing common products and services for the public service, from pens and paper to laptops and professional services.

We have established 83 central procurement arrangements, with over half of these allowing public sector bodies to award contracts without the need for further competition, which improves the overall administrative efficiency for public sector bodies and framework suppliers. In 2025, €2 billion flowed through central procurement arrangements established by the OGP.

These developments provide the context for the ambition I want to conclude with today. Our ambition is to build a more strategic, innovative, sustainable and transparent system of public procurement that supports SMEs and delivers better public services and the best value for money for the taxpayer. The programme of work I have outlined demonstrates that this ambition is realistic, measurable and already being advanced in practice, with firm foundations now in place for continued progress.

Nessa Cosgrove (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before I move on to our next speaker, I welcome Deputy Michael Cahill and his two guests, Seamus Farrell and Mary McKeever. Up an Cabhán and Cavan town. You are very welcome.

Glaoim anois ar an Seanadóir Cathal Byrne.

Cathal Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I very much welcome the Minister of State back to the Chamber and congratulate him on his recent appointment, which I have not had the opportunity to do in this Chamber until today.

This is a very important issue. I think it is often forgotten just how much money flows through these public procurement policies and through the Minister of State's Department. When I am out speaking to voters and residents in Wexford, one of the key things they say to me is that they are fed up with and tired of how much money they feel is being wasted on certain projects. The Minister of State's Department has a unique opportunity to restore trust among people that the money that is being spent is being spent wisely, that there are a series of procedures and processes there and that there is a firm grip on how hardworking taxpayers' money is being spent. With the new office that has been set up, the centralised Office of Government Procurement, the fact that data will be collected across all Government Departments and all agencies and put in one central place where things can be managed and that there is a clear set of eyes over how the money is being spent is really important.

The second key point I will make about this whole area is that in order to drive value for taxpayers, it is not just about the lowest costs but also about what is the best value. Too often we have seen contracts that have come in at the lowest price and then, when the work starts, things are more complicated than they originally seemed and inevitably the price goes up. Value for money means value at the end, when the job has actually been paid for, not just the cheapest price when the job is being tendered for. That came across very much in the Minister of State's contribution, that this is what he is driving.

Another key issue here is making these large Government contracts available to small businesses in order that they are able to come forward and tender for contracts. It should never be the case that taxpayers' money being spent on a large procurement contract is available exclusively to large companies while the small businessperson who set up their business and who is looking to make the jump from being a small business to being a medium-sized business does not have access to those contracts. I very much welcome the opportunity that will be available to small businesses through the new eTenders that the Department is rolling out in making information available. People running small businesses do not have hours and hours to be trawling through large tender documents. They are under enormous time constraints and time pressure. They need easy access to be able to say, "Yes, this is a contract we can do", "No, that is a contract we cannot do" or even "This is a contract we could do if we were to recruit a few more people, grow our business and really put an effort into securing that contract". Unfortunately, however, those small businesses, sole traders and small companies do not have the time to trawl through tender documents that are complex and detailed and in respect of which they are not in a position to swiftly make a decision as to whether it is something they can apply for.

I also want to highlight a concern I have had in the seven years I have been a public representative for the people in Wexford, which is about the prevalence of consultants and consultants' reports and the large amounts of money being spent at local authority and national level commissioning external consultants' reports. If every project, particularly an infrastructure project, will require a set of environmental analyses and technical data, and given that this will be repeated again and again, is there an opportunity to bring that in house rather than externally tendering it and hiring different consultants on every project repeatedly? For example, if there is a road project, a bridge project or another infrastructure project that can be delivered by the local authority, is there not an opportunity to bring that in house?

Finally, I want to underscore the need for suppliers to these contracts and these tenders to have the opportunity to tender again rather than having to apply individually each time and put in the name of their business, the address of their business and their VAT number, that the portal that will be rolled out for eTenders is simplified, that it will store that data and that suppliers would effectively have a digital passport whereby they are able to log in and that detail is already captured by the website. That has been available in the past and it is very important that it is available again in the future. I encourage the Minister of State, as part of rolling out this roadmap for the digital development plan, to incorporate that in it. I wish him and his officials the best and thank him for coming into the Chamber to give us an update. We look forward to seeing how this will be rolled out over the months and year ahead. Perhaps the Minister of State will come back to us over the coming months again and give us a further update when that is necessary.

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister of State is welcome to the House. Public procurement is one of the most powerful instruments of public policy in Ireland. Nowhere is it more evident than in the field of defence. The choices we make about where we source our equipment, technology and support systems shape not only our economic landscape but also our national security and our ability to act with confidence in an increasingly uncertain world. It will be no surprise to the Minister of State that I will focus mainly on defence today.

For a country like Ireland, militarily non-aligned yet carrying growing responsibility in maritime security, cybersecurity and EU mission defence procurement, it is not simply a matter of buying equipment but also about ensuring that what we buy remains reliable, sustainable and under Irish control throughout its entire life cycle. One of the greatest risks we face is over-reliance on a single supplier country. Such reliance can arise for understandable reasons, specifically efficiencies in training, maintenance and interoperability, long-standing diplomatic relationships and the convenience of dealing with a familiar partner. However, when too much of our capability comes from one external source, we expose ourselves to vulnerabilities that are strategic, political and economic.

The first vulnerability, the strategic dependency, is such that if our crucial capability depends on one country, our operational readiness becomes tied, whether we like it or not, to that country's political decisions and priorities. That is not just a technical risk; it is a political one. Across Europe, governments have had to rethink their reliance on single suppliers because political change, even in friendly countries, has already altered export policies and delivery priorities. This is why so many European states are diversifying procurement and rebuilding sovereign production capacity.

The second vulnerability is the risk of political change within the supplier state. Governments change, policies shift and export controls tighten.A country that is a reliable partner today may, after an election or a geopolitical realignment, impose restrictions, delay deliveries or prioritise its own domestic needs. Even without hostility, such changes can disrupt supply chains that we expected to remain stable for decades.

Third, concentrated sourcing exposes us to supply chain disruption. Defence systems rely on continuous access to parts, software and technical expertise. Any interruption, whether caused by politics, industrial action or global events, can have immediate consequences for our ability to operate. The evidence is clear. Deloitte has warned that after decades of optimisation, global defence supply chains have become fragile, opaque and vulnerable to shocks ranging from pandemics to global political pressure. PwC describes global defence supply chains as “in turmoil”, with nations now competing for limited industrial capacity. In Sweden, major manufacturers like Saab and BAE Systems report severe production bottlenecks and long lead times because supply chains cannot keep up with demand.

A well-known case in France involves shortages of strategic raw materials, especially titanium, aluminium and nickel, some of which historically came from Russia. After the invasion of Ukraine, sanctions and countersanctions disrupted these supplies. French manufacturers including Dassault Aviation and Safran reported that several SMEs in their supply chains were in serious difficulty because of these disruptions, threatening production rates for military equipment such as aircraft engines and airframe components. Two factors make the problem worse. The first is a heavy dependence on subcontractors. For example, Safran receives 65% of the parts for its LEAP engines from external suppliers, making any disruption critical. The second factor is longer lead times and industrial saturation. The surge in orders linked to the war in Ukraine has stretched French industrial capacity, so any supply chain shock becomes even more problematic. For an island nation with unique maritime and airspace responsibilities, these are not theoretical concerns; they are practical ones.

Fourth, there is the question of our own industrial and technological base. Ireland may not be a major defence manufacturer, but we have real strengths in engineering, technology and advanced services. If procurement is focused entirely abroad, we underuse those strengths, we miss opportunities for innovation and we fail to build the domestic capacity that strengthens national resilience. We already see examples of what Ireland can do. In Shannon, Irish companies are developing advanced drone technologies with global applications, which is proof that we have the talent and the industrial capability to contribute meaningfully to national security. The Irish Defence and Security Association, representing firms across cybersecurity, aerospace, engineering and advanced manufacturing, has repeatedly highlighted the potential for Irish industry to play a larger role in supporting national capability. These are assets we should be leveraging, not overlooking.

This is especially important now, as Ireland moves to double its defence budget to €3 billion, with plans for a 12-ship Naval Service fleet, new armoured vehicles, a military intelligence school, a 300-person cyber corps and even a future fighter aircraft capability. These investments demand secure and reliable supply chains.

We must be honest with ourselves. Ireland has seen the consequences of weak procurement governance in other sectors. The national children's hospital, which was originally costed at under €1 billion, has become the most expensive healthcare project in the world, with costs escalating far beyond initial estimates. The search and rescue aviation contract has also faced significant scrutiny, with legal challenges, delays and questions over process and oversight. These examples are not about defence, but they demonstrate the simple truth that when procurement goes wrong, it goes wrong for years and the State pays the price. Defence procurement cannot afford those mistakes. That is why it is essential that defence procurement supports Irish industry and Irish jobs. Suppliers should be required to maintain some level of manufacturing, assembly or high-value industrial activity within the State. This is not protectionism; it is prudent policy that ensures public spending contributes to our own economic resilience, anchors key capabilities at home and builds a sustainable industrial ecosystem that can support our defence needs over the long term.

Europe is moving in the same direction. Under the ReArm Europe and Readiness 2030 initiatives, more than €800 billion is being mobilised to rebuild Europe’s defence industrial base and reduce reliance on external suppliers. Countries across the Continent are onshoring production, especially the production of ammunition and critical components, because they have learned the hard way that relying entirely on foreign production is no longer viable.

How do we respond to these challenges? First, we must make diversification a core strategic objective. We do not abandon key partners, but we avoid excessive concentration. Working with multiple suppliers reduces risk and increases flexibility. Second, we must structure procurement contracts to protect national autonomy. This means securing access to maintenance, ensuring we have the rights to adapt and upgrade systems, and embedding domestic industrial participation wherever feasible. Local manufacturing and long-term maintenance capacity are not luxuries; they are safeguards. Third, we must align our procurement strategy with broader European frameworks. EU collaboration offers opportunities to diversify supply, strengthen partnerships and operate within a stable political and regulatory environment. Fourth, we must maintain strong governance and oversight. Defence investments last decades. They must be evaluated rigorously with explicit consideration of geopolitical risk, including the risk of political change in supplier states. Finally, we must adopt a full life cycle approach. The real vulnerabilities often emerge not at the moment of purchase, but years later when systems need upgrades, parts or technical support. Domestic industrial capacity is one of the best tools we have to ensure continuity throughout that life cycle.

International partnerships will always be essential to Ireland's defence, but over-reliance on any single supplier introduces avoidable risks that are magnified in a world where political change can alter the terms of engagement overnight. A diversified and strategically governed procurement system that supports Irish industry, protects Irish jobs and strengthens Irish autonomy is not just good policy; it is an expression of our sovereignty and our responsibility to future generations.

Having said all of that, the Minister of State's Department has played a crucial role in Ireland since the financial crash. I know he was elected soon after that crash. The Department plays an important role but the oversight sometimes involves too much micromanagement. It should be more like macromanagement, particularly in the areas where we are about to spend massive amounts of funds. I thank the Minister of State for his time. This is my first time to address him since he got promoted. I am delighted to see him here as a former Member of this House.

Aidan Davitt (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am also delighted to welcome the Minister of State here. We served shoulder to shoulder here in the Seanad for many years. It is quite fitting that he is here in the Upper House today. I met an old adversary of his, Terry Leyden, in the corridors today. I well remember those two colossuses of politics clashing here in the Upper House, usually on the topic of Roscommon hospital if my memory serves me right. They had several heated debates here. I was remembering them with a wry smile when the Minister of State came in.

On the overview the Minister of State has just given us, I certainly welcome his proposals. They make a lot of sense, as he has outlined. A lot of work has gone into them. I would like clarification on one particular facet of this. I believe there is a general shift in the parameters for the awarding of contracts in favour of EU countries. This has been coming down the tracks for quite a while. The EU is publishing a memo on this at present. Will the Minister of State bring us up to speed on this? What effect is it going to have? There is definitely going to be a policy shift because heretofore we had companies from Turkey and lots of different places being awarded large contracts but this will shift decisions on contracts in favour of EU countries. This ties in with a lot of what my good friend, Senator Craughwell, has said. Will the Minister of State enlighten us about that when he gets an opportunity? I am not going to delay the House any further.

Chris Andrews (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome this debate and I thank the Minister of State for being in attendance to discuss this important issue. This debate is timely given that the Department of public expenditure and reform, through its Office of Government Procurement, is in the process of developing its first national procurement strategy. Transparency, openness and a level playing field are of paramount importance when it comes to spending public money. Members of the public as taxpayers are entitled to feel that the State is utilising and investing their money in an accountable and efficient manner.

Unfortunately, there are too many examples in recent memory of the State getting procurement badly wrong. Small projects like the famous bike shelter, security huts and little walls have garnered big headlines in recent years and rightly so. The public are right to inquire. If the Government cannot get the small things right, what are the chances of the big projects going awry? We can of course point to the children's hospital coming in now at more than €1 billion over budget, which is just staggering and made worse by the fact that its completion has been delayed time after time. The children it was meant to serve will be well into adulthood before it opens its doors. I recently heard there are other issues with making sure all the rooms are ready and for fit for purpose.

This is from a Government that has tried to paint my party, Sinn Féin, as economically challenged. There is a certain irony when we hear that accusation being thrown at us. We did not crash the economy and we are not presiding over the worst housing crisis the State has known. We do not continue to give tax breaks to landlords, banks and insurance companies at the expense of the working people who are put to the pin of their collars trying to put fuel in their cars and heat in their homes.

The Government itself has reported that State expenditure and public procurement stands at between 10% and 12% of GDP. This makes the Government a significant player in the economy of this State. For too long, reform of public procurement has been ignored. I acknowledge the work of others in this space. My party colleague, an Teachta Mairéad Farrell, introduced a policy report, Towards a New Strategy for Progressive Procurement, in 2021. She followed this with her Transparency and Social Value in Public Procurement Bill 2024, which the Government last year amended and delayed for two years. Similarly, Senator Alice-Mary Higgins, who is on cue behind me, has done tremendous work in this area. Her Quality in Public Procurement (Contract Preparation and Award Criteria) Bill 2021 was passed by the Seanad but rejected by the Government earlier this year. While I welcome the Government's move to produce a national strategy on public procurement, I hope it has taken on board the content of both of these Bills and the debates that took place on them in these Houses.

I will also mention the North's public procurement policy which was first introduced by Senator Conor Murphy when he was finance minister in the Northern Assembly in 2022. That new policy introduced for the first time mandatory scoring of social value within public procurement contracts. This means that in the North, Executive procurement is used to meet policy objectives, for example, reducing poverty through the creation of jobs for people living in disadvantaged areas and delivering environmental benefits by requiring contracts to employ low- or zero-carbon policies. These are all measures that should be employed in this State. In addition, 23 councils, North and South, have passed ethical procurement policies. This means that procurement in these councils is guided by the UN guiding principles on business and human rights, OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises and the global Sullivan principles.

The State has many models that it can draw from in creating its own procurement strategy. At the heart of its considerations must be the integral role of social environmental and ethical considerations in procurement and the positive effects these can have on well-being and sustainability.

Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I find the Minister of State's opening statement surprising because some of the language used speaks to and seems to respond to an argument and discussion that I have been highlighting and moving forward for almost a decade in these Houses - the fact that under European procurement rules, value for money does not necessarily mean lowest price. Value for money can be lowest price, it can be the best balance of price and quality, and it can be life-cycle costing.

The Minister of State spoke about the extraordinary amount - billions and billions - that is spent in procurement. The State is the largest customer in the State. The policy of having an integrated approach in terms of green, social and other considerations is a conversation I have been having with the Office of Government Procurement and the Department for years. The Minister of State supported my Bill in the Seanad along with his Government colleagues many of whom spoke in favour of it. Let us be crystal clear on what it did. The Bill provided that quality should be the default when thinking about both price and quality with procurement rather than going with price only. People can go with price but if they do so, they need to tell us why they have gone with price only. It required people to think about quality and give us an explanation on record as to why quality was not followed.

The Bill also included the idea that very large, once-in-a-generation projects and major works worth over the EU threshold of fives and tens of millions would have a 50% quality threshold. It was a very common-sense proposal which was backed by the Construction Industry Federation, the Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland and pretty much everybody we spoke to in procurement over a long period of time. It was backed by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael previously. However, it was voted down and then we had the rhetoric.

I will go back to some of the reasons. When it was debated in the other House, having passed all Stages here in the Seanad and gone to the Dáil, the rationale we were given did not really add up. It was pointed out that we had moved only 12% to price only. That was a move from basically a quarter of all contracts going on price only that moved down during the period of time I engaged with the Minister of State's predecessor, Ossian Smyth. He issued circulars specifically asking for the approach specified in my Bill and asking that price-quality would be the preferred model. I am very aware that there was an improvement in practice. That was an improvement that I saw taking place in my regular meetings with the OGP and the Minister of State at that time. However, the problem was with the culture shift that the Minister of State referenced in his speech. For that to really happen, we needed to have something which specified an explanation was needed when going with price only. It is not that the Minister needs to explain - that was another thing suggested in the Minister of State's reply to the Chamber which is not accurate - it is that a senior officer would give an explanation.

We need to think about what these contracts mean. The current approach is entirely discretionary, and it would remain discretionary, but there is not an explanation mechanism. I will give examples of what it means when we are going with lowest price only. The cervical check contract was on price only and that had very real consequences for women in the State. On the children's hospital, price was given a 75% weighting and quality was given only a 25% weighting. Even though the Minister of State has said that now about 80% of projects are going on quality criteria, what is the weighting? If it is less than 50%, price will automatically trump it based on whoever puts in the lowest number.We know the problems. That is why the Construction Industry Federation, the architects and all of these other groups backed the proposals in this Bill. When you have underbidding, you get subsequent claims, you get bad practices and you do not reward the companies that come in with realistic pricing, with quality they can deliver and with proper, decent treatment for their staff. They get penalised because of the advantage given to those who are willing to underbid, and who then deal with it in subsequent claims that drive up the cost indefinitely, as we have seen. When we look at the children's hospital, we see not just the costs but the errors that need to be corrected. We are now hearing about further corrective measures that need to be done in the children's hospital. Frankly, that is the approach the Minister of State has stuck with. He made the choice to stick with the model that can allow major projects in the fives, tens, 15s and 20s of millions to be given on a majority price-only basis rather than on a quality basis.

The other rationale that was given was a misquoting about increased costs of 3%. That was the cost of the tender process. That is the cost of advertising and of reading it. The actual figures from the Netherlands showed that while there was an increase of less than 1% in certain costs with regard to contracts, there was a massive increase in benefits to the public - I think it was 7.5 or 17.5; I will look into the figures - when you put quality in it. That is because the Netherlands has been making quality the default. That is what my legislation was based on. I know officials from the Minister of State’s Department travelled there. I wonder why we are not delivering on that.

Another rationale that was given was that a new directive is coming. We did not take full advantage of the 2014 directive, but now we are told that a new directive is coming. It will be negotiated during the Minister of State's watch. I am a little worried, because I was told that was why we could not go ahead and put quality into public procurement. May I ask what position Ireland will be taking in those negotiations on quality in public procurement? Is the Minister of State anticipating, expecting or hoping for a simplification that lessens the weighting and the focus on quality in public procurement? That is not what is in the narrative of his speech, but it is what is suggested by the unwillingness to commit to quality in advance of the new directive being negotiated. I would like to know what that position is.

I come now to a few specific questions. There is discussion of more data. Will that include reporting in relation to the public duty on equality and human rights? This is a public duty that applies to all public bodies. They currently report in the context of the public duty in general, but it applies to procurement. It applies to what you spend the public’s money on. Right now, separate to reporting on the public duty, we do not have within procurement a reporting system that says how we delivered the public duty on equality and human rights when we did our procurement. That is even as we have heard that ethical considerations are immensely important to the public. I would like to know how the Minister of State plans for this to be reflected. How is he planning to monitor how the public duty in equality and human rights is being implemented in procurement, for example in terms of the ethics issues we have heard about with regard to those who are committing human rights violations or in areas that overlap with questions of security?

I will give an example. Across Europe, we are seeing a move away from procurement with regard to Microsoft. The Italian military has moved off it. There have also been moves in Denmark and France. A huge number of public service areas are moving away from a company that testified in the French Senate that it will share our data with America. Here in the Oireachtas and in many Departments, we have changed our entire telephone system to be subject to and part of a company that, as we heard in testimony in the AI committee, is vulnerable to hacking. These are significant issues. These are massive public procurement issues and major contract issues. Yes, there are massive human rights and equality issues, but there are also crucial security issues. I would like the Minister of State to address that specific and large area of public procurement in the context of public security and how it is being addressed.

I would like the Minister of State to answer those questions. I would like answers on his position going into these negotiations and explicitly on quality and on environmental factors. I would like to know where public duty, human rights and equality are going to be addressed in public procurement. I would like to know what he is going to do the next time there is a scandal. What is he going to do about weighting for major projects? Will it be 50% weighting? Is he going to bring in a measure to make that happen, or is he just going to hope it happens? I would also like explicit answers with regard to the security risks and exposure that has been flagged as a concern by many equivalent democracies across Europe.

Frank Feighan (Sligo-Leitrim, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Senators for their contributions, which underline the very strong interest in public procurement across this House. This kind of engagement is not only welcome, but also essential if we are to deliver on the ambition of a more strategic and innovative, sustainable and transparent public procurement system that supports SMEs and delivers better public services and the best possible value for money for the taxpayer. For that reason, consultation and collaboration are central to the approach the Department is taking. Meaningful reform depends on ensuring that suppliers, public bodies and the public, directly or through their political representatives, are actively involved in shaping how public procurement evolves. The Department is therefore continuing to expand the scope and depth of strategic engagement to ensure the voices of all those with an interest in the future direction of public procurement in Ireland are heard.

As Minister of State with responsibility for public procurement I chair two high-level stakeholder groups which provide structured and ongoing channels of engagement. I chair the public procurement advisory council, which was established in 2024 to advise on the development of public procurement across the public sector. The council meets quarterly and provides me with guidance and advice on procurement policy, digital transformation, data analytics and strategic centralised procurement issues. I also chair the SME advisory group, which includes industry and public sector stakeholder representatives and provides a direct forum for SMEs to share their experiences of tendering for public contracts, and to raise issues affecting their participation. Earlier this month, reflecting the growing role that social enterprises play in delivering social and community outcomes through public procurement, the group was expanded for the first time to include representation from the social enterprise sector.

Alongside these high-level structures we are placing a strong emphasis on engagement at an operational level. The forthcoming national procurement strategy has been subject to an extensive consultation process, which has been critical to understanding the primary challenges and opportunities for both public bodies and suppliers, including micro and social enterprises. This engagement included a public consultation that ensures all those with an interest in the future direction of public procurement have an opportunity to inform the new strategy. Regional workshops were held in Dublin, Cork and Athlone that included public buyers and policy makers from across the public sector and representation from across the broad spectrum of Irish business, including social enterprises, representatives from civic society, public representatives and members of the public.

We recognise the crucial role played by SMEs, including social enterprises, in driving economic and societal prosperity. As stated earlier, the programme for Government includes a commitment to review the public procurement process to work towards greater participation from SMEs in Ireland. This commitment is reflected in one of the critical outcomes of the strategy, which is to make participation in public procurement easier for suppliers, particularly micros, startups, SMEs and social enterprises. This focus has been put into practice through targeted and early engagement with suppliers during the development of the strategy. A dedicated webinar was provided to help our suppliers. We undertook direct engagement with SME and social enterprise representative bodies during application of the SME test.

Beyond engagement to inform the strategy, the Department has always focused on creating practical opportunities for direct engagement between Government buyers and suppliers. In November 2025 we reached an important milestone with the first Government supply expo organised by the Office of Government Procurement. This event was designed specifically for the supplier base on the island of Ireland and operated in a trade show format.It allowed suppliers to engage directly with procurement teams from the State's largest spending bodies. The response was extremely strong, with over 2,900 attendees on the day. It demonstrated the real value of direct engagement between Government buyers and suppliers. Building on the success of this event, the Department is working towards holding a further event next year.

In parallel with this expanded engagement with the supplier community, my Department is also strengthening its support of and engagement with public buyers to help embed better and more consistent public procurement practices right across the system. In the past year this has included information sessions on central procurement arrangements, eTenders training, practical guidance on core procurement requirements and a series of procurement officer network meetings hosted by the Office of Government Procurement. In total, almost 7,000 participants took part in these initiatives, reflecting the strong demand among public buyers for practical support.

Building on this progress, my Department will continue to expand the scope of our service offering for public buyers, supporting effective and successful implementation of the strategy. In that context, to date, discussions have been both timely and valuable, as outlined in my opening statement. My Department operates at the centre of the Government to drive improved public services, higher living standards and sustainable infrastructure for the people of Ireland. Public procurement is one of the key mechanisms through which these objectives are delivered in practice.

The forthcoming national public procurement strategy will bring together the work I have outlined today into a single coherent framework. Shaped by extensive consultation and formed by the experiences of public buyers and suppliers, it will set out the strategic direction of public procurement in Ireland for the next five years. It will represent a further step towards realising our ambition to build a more strategic, innovative, sustainable and transparent system of public procurement that supports SMEs, delivers better public services and the best possible value for money for the taxpayer.

I want to respond to a few of today's contributions. Senator Cathal Byrne said that the cheapest price is not necessarily the best and that we need value for money. He talked about large government working with small business. I do not just talk about SMEs, family businesses have to come into it. That is what this public procurement strategy is doing.

Senator Craughwell talked about strategic dependency and defence. He referred to the need to rethink our over-reliance on a single supplier. He is right. Governments change and we must be careful about over-reliance on a single supplier. Across Europe we need to consider the ever-changing geopolitical events.

Senator Davitt talked about EU countries. They are beginning to look at evaluating public procurement directives and modernising and simplifying procurement rules. We must also have a sustainable, strategic autonomy for European countries. That is happening.

Senator Andrews talked about the social value. The Executive in Northern Ireland did learn lessons from the Republic of Ireland. It brought in a procurement strategy that has a social value. That is in line with what we want as well. It is great that the United Kingdom is working with Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland and across Europe and sharing good ideas. These are really good ideas.

I thank the people who started the office of public procurement and the Department of public expenditure in 2011 and 2012. Over the years it has brought a lot of organisations, Departments and local authorities into the procurement strategy. Having such a system in place is better for transparency and value for money and, most of all, it is better for taxpayers. That is what it is all about.

Senator Higgins talked about European procurement rules. We are a member of the European Union and we are waiting for the document on European procurement to come out - hopefully in the next few weeks. Ireland is working very closely on the new procurement strategy, which will have less administration. It will restructure how public money flows within the European Union. Sometimes we have a difference of opinion, but there are some very good ideas that can be included in the procurement strategy. Ireland will be working with Europe to have a strategy that is negotiated as well as possible.

I thank Senators for their contributions. The issues raised today provide a valuable perspective and will help shape further consideration on how best to advance that ambition.

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the GAA memorial group from Galway. They are guests of Deputy Pete Roche. I hope they all enjoy their visit here this afternoon. They are very welcome.