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

Question 248: To ask the Minister for Finance the projected costs associated with decentralisation; the initial projection in this regard when the scheme was first announced; the number of persons to date relocated under the scheme as a percentage of the original projection; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4393/07]

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

When the Government's Decentralisation Programme was first announced, it was stated that the overall objective would be to ensure that property being acquired at a regional level is matched as closely as possible, both in time and in cost terms, by the disposal of property currently held in the Dublin region, whether held on lease or otherwise. In November 2004 the Decentralisation Implementation Group prepared a report on the procurement methodology and financial assessment of the property aspects of the programme, including a financial model, based on a property finance study carried out by the Office of Public Works. While the prevailing property market conditions in each area will have a bearing on cost, this model indicates that the break even position in relation to property will be reached in about 20 years.

Initial costings of the Decentralisation Programme estimated a gross cost of approximately €900m in respect of procuring sites and office accommodation for the Programme. This financial model for the Programme also includes estimates of receipts from sales of State owned property in Dublin which will be surplus to requirements post-decentralisation. The financial model is currently being updated by OPW. While individual aspects of the underlying assumptions may have changed, current indications are that the property elements of the Programme will be achievable within the original €900m gross estimate.

In terms of actual outlay to date, the total amount committed in principle by the OPW on site acquisition costs, excluding VAT, is approximately €53.6 million. Expenditure to date is approximately €38.4 million.

A study was commissioned by the Decentralisation Implementation Group (DIG) which provides a model for identifying non-property costs and savings that arise both during the relocation phase and in the context of a post-decentralised civil service. Decentralising organisations have been asked to use this model to make periodic reports identifying non-property costs incurred and savings made both since the programme was announced and in its implementation in the future. Expenditure to June 2006 is reported at €3.3 million. Expenditure to end December 2006 is currently being collated by Departments and will be made available to the Deputy as soon as this process is completed.

At the end of December 2006, over 2,400 staff had been assigned to decentralising posts, which represents just over 22% of the total originally announced in Budget 2003. Some 700 of these are currently in place, in 15 new locations, while the remainder are being trained in advance of decentralisation to a new location, as soon as accommodation becomes available.

It is envisaged that by the end of 2007 public services will be delivered from 33 of the decentralisation towns with approximately 2,000 staff transferred. The OPW conducts a review of the property timeframes for permanent accommodation on an ongoing basis. Based on its experience to date in relation to timeframes for property selection and acquisition, brief and design issues, tendering periods, planning issues and contractual arrangements, it has provided an updated schedule of the likely availability of accommodation.

This schedule allows for the planned movement of up to 6,800 staff in the next three years in line with the timeframes set out in the June 2005 report of the DIG. The delivery time for some locations will be later than originally projected, however, leading to a greater concentration of moves in 2009 rather than in 2008. Matters outside the control of the OPW, which could give rise to delay, will continue to be monitored and mitigating action taken where possible.

I am satisfied that good progress continues to be made on this ambitious programme and I look forward to seeing the fruits of this as the programme continues to be rolled out over the next few years.