Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 101: To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if standardised or comparable cost-benefit analyses were used by all Departments in their submissions to him for the Infrastructure and Capital Expenditure Plan 2012-2016. [36386/11]

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Capital Investment Framework that Government agreed and I published on 10 November, sets the broad direction, level and sectorial split of investment of the years 2012 to 2016. All individual project proposals are subject to relevant value for money arrangements, including detailed appraisal - prior to the commitment of significant Exchequer resources. The conduct of individual project-level cost-benefit analyses (CBA) is a matter for each line Department, in accordance with value for money arrangements overseen by my Department, in particular the Guidelines for the Appraisal and Management of Capital Investment Proposals in the Public Sector .

Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 102: To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the decision criteria that were used by him to select the items or areas for investment in the Infrastructure and Capital Investment Plan 2012-2016; the criteria and analysis that were used to come to the figure for total spend of €17 billion; the criteria and analysis that were used to allocate the €17 billion between the various areas of spend; the instructions and conditions that were issued to Departments in developing their submissions to him; if each Department was given the final figure for total spend for its Department as contained in the plan and instructed to make submissions not exceeding those figures, or if the Departments made submissions to total values greater than those contained in the plan; for example, was the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport instructed to make a submission of a value not exceeding €4.6 billion over the life of the plan, or did it in fact make a submission seeking a greater allocation; if his officials conducted any audit or check on the analyses submitted by the Departments; and if any external body was used to support this. [36387/11]

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In undertaking the recent capital investment reviews, each Government Department was requested to prepare a submission providing the following:

· a description of the high level objective to be achieved in relation to each programme;

· an outline of the rationale for Government intervention;

· an assessment of the consistency of the investment programme with the Programme for Government;

· details of how each investment programme would support economic recovery;

· details of how each investment programme would support sustainable employment as well as employment in the immediate delivery phase;

· details of how each investment programme would meet critical economic and social infrastructure deficits;

· an outline of each Department's legally binding contractual commitments for each year up to 2016, including a list of all committed planned capital projects of over €4m in value;

· details of whether a given programme is primarily delivered by the Department or Agencies of the Department;

· the current expenditure implications of proposed future capital investment; and

· the broad outputs and outcomes expected from each proposed capital investment.

In addition, Departments were also requested to outline the programmes which would be afforded priority in the context of a lower Departmental envelope.

From this information, my Department prepared a report for the Government about a capital investment programme for the next five years. The financial baseline was the public capital programme in the National Recovery Plan (November 2010), adjusted on a technical basis for transfers of function that had occurred in the interim. The analysis drew on a range of economic literature and various data sources, both domestic and international. Secondary analysis is cited in the document. In addition, a number of external experts and organisations made submissions to the review including the Economic and Social Research Institute, Forfás, the Construction Industry Federation, the Irish Academy of Engineering, the Irish Business and Employers Confederation and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions.

Having considered this analysis, the Government decided on an approach and allocations as published on 10 November last. The main decision criteria used in setting the Government's investment priorities were the extent to which programmes and projects are consistent with the Programme for Government objectives (including returning to sustainable public finances), sustainable employment (as well as employment in the immediate delivery phase) and meet critical economic and social infrastructure deficits.

The figure of €17 billion Exchequer investment from 2012 to 2016 represents a level of expenditure that can both make an important contribution to budgetary consolidation and deliver a level of infrastructure and capital investment that will assist in a return to sustainable economic growth and job creation. The Medium Term Capital Investment Framework forms part of the Government's Budget and Estimates, and I intend that background documentation in relation to the Capital report will be made available at the time of the Budget.