Vol. 1081 No. 1
7. Deputy Ruth Coppinger asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation for an update on the infrastructure projects currently being undertaken in Dublin West; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10742/26]
I ask the Minister for an update on infrastructure projects for the Dublin West constituency. The focus of my question is public transport, because of the litany of woes I hear about from constituents daily who, because of the other investment we have had, do not have access to the Luas or a metro. We have one of the largest populations in the city. People are suffering daily in their lives trying to get to work and get their children to school. What investment in public transport in particular will be provided?
As part of the budgetary process each year, my Department sets overall expenditure ceilings for each ministerial Vote group. These are laid out in the budget day expenditure report, with further detail provided in the Revised Estimates published in December.
Following the allocation of each expenditure ceiling, each Minister designs the programmes and subhead level across Departments and the agencies under their remit, accounting for the demands for services in different areas and regions and having regard to demographics, population growth and other factors. Within this process, current and capital expenditure are allocated on a departmental basis.
More broadly, the Government wants to achieve balanced regional development as part of Project Ireland 2040, the national planning framework and the spatial strategy, as part of the national development plan. Since Project Ireland 2040 was launched in 2018, the Government has overseen the delivery of many impactful national development plan projects across the country, including in Dublin West, such as the recently completed teaching building in Technological University Dublin Blanchardstown and the provision of hundreds of social and affordable housing units in Church Fields, Mulhuddart, some of which have been completed while others are being built. There have been multiple school projects across the Dublin West constituency. Many projects have been completed and are planned for Connolly Hospital.
Regarding transport commitments, the Deputy is aware of the wider Bus Connects plan, which is being progressed by the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, and Dart West has advanced through the planning process. Arising from the national development plan published in July last year, €19.1 million in Exchequer capital investment will be provided in 2026. This increases capital investment across the country that will generate substantial employment demand in the construction sector.
Departments have also published sectoral investment plans setting out the capital projects to prioritise for 2026-30. These plans provide visibility of the delivery pipeline, giving construction firms the certainty they need to invest as part of the multi-year approach designed to support industry planning and ensure that regional capacity can grow in line with demand. I will come back in on some of the other items.
I have received many representations from people about the odyssey of the 39 bus route. Every time there is a new development, it is added to the same route without new or distinct routes being created. There needs to be change. I want to focus on the Tyrrelstown-Hollystown area because that is where much if the additional building has taken place. Public transport in the area is particularly atrocious.
For a female worker from Tyrrelstown trying to get to her job in Dublin Port every morning, there is no connection to the N4 route at Rosemount Business Park and buses do not arrive early enough to allow her to get to work. Many people report having to get taxis to work. One day in particular, it cost the woman in question €67 to get from Tyrrelstown to work. The 238 is a ghost bus. It is the only route to the town centre in Blanchardstown. Parking charges are being proposed for the centre, but people do not even have a reliable bus service to get there. In a moment, I will talk about Hollystown and changes to BusConnects.
I acknowledge the particular issue that exists. I meet with many constituents from both Tyrrelstown and Hollystown, where the bus service does need to be much improved. There has been a significant increase in housing supply in Tyrrelstown and Hollystown, but there is a need to improve the service for the sake of many of the existing residents. Part of the BusConnects plan is to deliver that, which is obviously more on the infrastructure side, but there is also a need improve the frequency of buses and the respective bus routes that service Tyrrelstown and Hollystown. This is something I have engaged on frequently with the National Transport Authority in relation to the additional service roll-out in the period ahead. I have also interacted with BusConnects to ensure that those involved future-proof further developments in the context of areas, including Tyrrelstown and Hollystown, where there has been or will be significant population growth. People in both places need access better public transport, as the Deputy referenced. That is a matter on which I continue to engage with those involved.
I accept the Minister's acknowledgement of the position. However, as a Minister who represents the area, he has to deliver for people. Who else is going to be able to do that?
The 40E is going to be replaced by the 262. I have already had two representations about that. The 262 route will terminate before Hollystown. As a result, people in Hollystown will not have a direct route into the city centre. That has to be addressed.
I have been contacted by a huge group of parents who have been told that when the 40E route is replaced, the new route will no longer cross the bridge into Cabra. It will turn onto the Ballyboggan Road instead. This means that people cannot get their children to school in St. Dominic's or in the Navan Road area. That has to be addressed. We have already had issues where people in Tyrrelstown could not get their children to school in Hansfield. They had to organise car pools. Will the Minister speak to TFI and Dublin Bus about that matter? We cannot lose the connectivity people in that area have - they need more - in order to get to work and to get their kids to school.
There have been issues for people in Hollystown. Some even have quite a long walk to get to the existing bus stop. There is a need to improve the existing service but also to reflect the feedback people have given in respect of the various bus routes. Like the Deputy, I will engage with the National Transport Authority on some of the amendments that need to be made to the bus routes and in the context of reflecting the feedback we are getting from constituents. The authority needs to future-proof the transport system in the area in light of ongoing population growth. There is a need to improve in that context, and I will pursue that.
8. Deputy Cian O'Callaghan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation the status of the proposed new Garda station for Northern Cross in Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10080/26]
I did not find the answers earlier on estimated levels of service convincing ar chor ar bith. I have a briefing tomorrow and I look forward to that.
When the Minister of State, Deputy Moran, has responsibility for the OPW in 2019, a site was identified for a new Garda station at Northern Cross. It was announced that a new station would be provided. Seven years later, however, there is no sign of that Garda station. In replies to parliamentary questions last year, the Minister of State referred to needing to identify a site when one was identified seven years ago and was in the pipeline for years before that. Does he have an update on this matter? Ba mhaith liom freagra ceart.
The Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration published its sectoral investment plan on 4 December last. The second phase of the plan is to focus on bringing the projects for Dublin metropolitan region, DMR, north, to construction in 2028. Following the publication of these priorities, the OPW will engage with An Garda Síochána and the Department of justice. This engagement will support the identification and appraisal of the most suitable site for this project.
I welcome the indication that the station will be constructed in 2028. What I am struggling with are the references to identifying a site, particularly when a site was announced in 2019 when he had responsibility for the OPW. How is that seven years after this project was announced – and there were senior Ministers from the Government out announcing it at Northern Cross – the Minister of State is still talking about identifying a site? The announcement was made by the Government before last at a time when he was Minister of State with responsibility for the OPW.
The Deputy has raised this consistently at committee meetings and in the House, and I agree with him about the timeframe and the delays. As he is well aware, however, I am the contracting authority. I build the Garda station when a particular project is presented to me.
As already stated, money has been provided for the station. My Department will work closely with the Department of justice and An Garda Síochána. I cannot explain why work at the site to which the Deputy refers did not go ahead. However, I can tell the Deputy that the money for the project has been made available through the development plan. My job is to work with the Department of justice. When we find a site, we will get on with the job. We are delivering Garda stations around the country. The projects in this regard are very slow - I am not taking away from that - but an awful lot of work goes into identifying sites and building stations.
The situation is that the money is there and the Department is committed to building the station in 2028. A site was identified and announced by the Government in 2019 when the Minister of State had responsibility for the OPW. He is still talking about identifying a site when he previously identified such a site seven years ago. I do not understand this. How is it the case that, seven years later, we appear to be going backwards? The Minister of State is still talking about identifying a site. A site was announced by the Government before last when he had responsibility for the OPW. Can he explain to the community in Northern Cross, which desperately needs this new Garda station, what is happening? There has been huge development in recent years in Clongriffin and Belmane and a corresponding increase in population. Why is he referring to identifying a site when one was identified seven years ago and an announcement that a new Garda station would be built there was made?
It was seven years ago, as the Deputy said. A site was identified, but I cannot tell the Deputy why the project did not go ahead. I have been out of government for five years. I am back. The Deputy raised this with me at committee level. I reached out to the Department of justice, on his behalf and on that of other Deputies who represent the area, to try to bring this scheme forward. I am asked every type of question in this House about the building of Garda stations. As stated, I am the contracting authority. Until a project comes before me, I cannot build. When a project does come before me, I will do it. I will speak to the Minister for justice in order to see how we can expedite this matter and bring it to a conclusion. I promise the Deputy that.
9. Deputy Catherine Ardagh asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation if, in view of the impact of flooding in Dublin, he will expedite the Camac river flood alleviation scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10563/26]
This question relates to the Camac flood alleviation programme. The Camac, as we know, is one of Dublin’s main rivers. It rises in Saggart in the south west, flows eastwards towards Clondalkin, Bluebell, Inchicore and Kilmainham and joins the Liffey at Heuston Station. The River Camac flood alleviation scheme is a critically important piece of infrastructure that will help up to 413 homes along the river. Residents quite clearly remain concerned about flood risk, particularly in view of the increased rainfall we have seen. In January 2025, the bank of the River Camac at Inchicore collapsed. Will the Minister of State provide a timeline in respect of this matter.
Dublin City Council and South Dublin County Council, with funding provided by the OPW, are leading the development and design of the River Camac flood alleviation scheme to manage the flooding risk within the catchment of the River Camac to protect some 413 properties. The River Camac is an unusually complex river system, and has presented significant challenges during the modelling of the flood risk and the design options for a flood relief scheme. Work on the modelling of the flood risk is continuing and it is programmed to be completed later this year. There are monthly meetings of the steering group between the council, the OPW and the consultants to complete this work.
The proposed Camac flood alleviation scheme may include the construction of new flood defence walls with floodgates and the possible strengthening and raising of existing flood defence walls. The construction of new flood defence embankments is in addition to the possible raising of existing embankments. The current estimated cost for the delivery of the scheme is €50 million.
It is open to Dublin City Council to apply to the OPW for funding for flood mitigation works under the OPW's minor flood mitigation works and coastal protection scheme in advance of the delivery of the main scheme. The purpose of the scheme is to provide funding to local authorities to undertake minor flood mitigation works or studies to address localised flooding and coastal protection problems within their administrative areas. The OPW welcomes applications for funding under the scheme and is available to engage with local authorities.
I know first hand the pain people out there are going through out there. As I said to the Deputy, while we are waiting for the long-term scheme, there is a strong possibility that the local authority could engage around the minor works programme. I have not spoken to the Deputy before in relation to this but I have visited a lot of the areas up and down the country. I tell people that I read the water and I understand when there is a flood. I watch where the water recedes and follow the water paths. I always look at them in the context of a minor works application or some solution being found. I believe one can be found here.
I thank the Minister of State. We were told at the Committee of Public Accounts that there were issues with the initial hydraulic modelling. It has gone back to the same consultants to remedy the situation, which raises its own questions. Residents understand that the modelling has to be correct and robust and no one is looking for a shortcut. We are also not looking for a patchwork quilt in relation to this. The Minister of State is telling us to go back to Dublin City Council for any remedial works. That is not good enough. I am asking the Minister of State to expedite the situation, bring in the relevant people, ask them what is going on, get a good feel for it and give the residents of Kilmainham and Inchicore a timeline for when this is going to be done. It has been delayed for far too long.
In the first instance, it is up to the local authority to come forward with the scheme and the Deputy can play a pivotal role in doing that. She can go into the local authority and ask what stage it is at and look to engage with me. The Deputy can be part of that. It is about us all working together. Communities are being affected up and down the country. My job is as Minister of State but I keep saying in the House that I need help from all the public representatives as well as TDs to drive on these schemes. There is a minor works scheme and funding has been increased from €750,000 to €2 million. It is open to all local authorities to come in and identify a solution in the short term while we are waiting. I agree with the Deputy that this has been going on quite a long time. To bring it to the next stage, if the Deputy can get the local authorities to agree, I will meet with it to see if we can push it on together.
With all due respect, I think I have raised this at every possible forum. I have raised it in Dublin City Council, with the Minister of State's predecessor, at the Committee of Public Accounts and in the Dáil. We are all on the same page here. What we are not seeing is any urgency from the OPW to steer this scheme and programme. It is one of the flood alleviation programmes that is just left on the sidelines. I ask the Minister of State today to commit to me that he will take a personal interest in the Camac flood alleviation programme. That is all I am asking. I want the Minister of State to take a personal interest and have his own meeting. I have asked Dublin City Council, South Dublin County Council and senior representatives of the OPW at the Committee of Public Accounts,and all I am hearing is that there are significant delays with hydraulic modelling. I want the Minister of State to take a personal interest in the Camac flood alleviation scheme.
I cannot be more clear than to say it is driven by the local authorities. They work with my Department. There are significant delays in the modelling but I am giving the Deputy a way to alleviate that pressure through the minor works programme while we wait for the overall scheme. The local authorities have it within their remit to do that. While I fully appreciate the pressure the Deputy is under from the local community, delivering protection to the local community is very important. Local authorities are the people who drive on these schemes. We support them with the advice and the finance but we also help them to deliver schemes. The local authorities know only too well about the minor works scheme and I believe they can play a pivotal role in delivering an interim solution to the problem the Deputy is raising. I will go further and will talk to the local authorities for the Deputy.
As I said, everywhere is gone over the last 15 days, I have to intervene to try to drive on schemes, when the local authorities have the resources - sometimes we are funding them - and the means to get on with the scheme. People will say it is the OPW but it is not and we have to wake up to that. We all have to work together. I am sick of saying that in this House. We should not play politics with flooding. Sometimes we do have to say the scheme is there and the money is there, so get a scheme in place in the interim to deliver part of the long-term solution. As the Deputy has asked me, I will make phone calls to see how I can drive on the scheme further.
I thank the Minister of State.
10. Deputy Michael Cahill asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation if funding will be provided to tackle costal erosion and flooding in Rossbeigh, Waterville, Kenmare, Tralee, Listowel, Glenbeigh, Dooks, Cromane Lower, Killorglin and Glosha; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10966/26]
I am raising the matter of funding for a host of locations across County Kerry, including Rossbeigh, Cromane Lower, Killorglin, Whitestrand, Cahersiveen, Waterville, Ballinskelligs and the major flood relief schemes there for Tralee and Kenmare.
I am very familiar with the coastal erosion and flooding issues in Kerry having visited the county twice, on 11 and 12 September and on 20 and 21 November 2025. Localised coastal erosion and flooding issues are a matter, in the first instance, for each local authority to investigate and address. The OPW is working closely with Kerry County Council to implement a number of initiatives to tackle coastal erosion and flooding in the county. We are currently funding three local authority staff in Kerry County Council to manage the delivery of flood relief schemes: a senior executive engineer, an executive engineer and a senior staff member.
The minor flood mitigation works and coastal protection scheme was introduced by the Office of Public Works in 2009. The purpose of this scheme is to provide 90% of funding to local authorities to undertake minor flood mitigation works and studies to address localised flooding or coastal erosion problems. The scheme generally applies where a solution can be readily identified and achieved in a short timeframe. The funding available for each scheme has recently been increased from €750,000 to €2 million. Further details related to this are due to be announced shortly. The minor works scheme is a demand-led scheme. Funding allocated is based on the cost submitted by the local authorities for consideration. Since 2009, the OPW has approved some 40 projects and €4.2 million for Kerry County Council under the minor works schemes. Some €2.9 million of this approved funding relates to coastal erosion works and studies. Funding has been made available to Kerry County Council, totalling €897,405, for works or studies at Rossbeigh, Waterville, Kenmare, Glenbeigh and Cromane Lower through the minor works scheme. I have a long list of other schemes that I can give to the Deputy afterwards.
We need coastal protection works, flood relief schemes and marram grass initiatives, among other initiatives. We need to expedite funding for these schemes. From my experience, and I have been shouting about coastal erosion and flooding for almost 40 years now, this situation is not given the urgency it deserves. We seem to wait until the damage is done after big storms where there has been major flooding and homes have been destroyed. I am dealing with families living in fear when the tides are high, especially when they coincide with storms. They cannot sleep in their beds at night.
I will mention another issue we spoke about recently, which is the whole area of insurance. I am coming across numerous families who cannot get home insurance. They can get insurance for fire, theft and all the other matters but they cannot get cover for flooding.
Looking at the figures, there was €24,000 for the seawall in north Kerry through the minor works scheme. For the North Kerry Way, there was €18,000 through the minor works scheme. There was €150,000 for Tralee Bay, and €44,000 for Tralee itself. For the Fenit Road, there was €405,000, and €360,000 for the Fenit Road Lower. Over €1 million has been given out in recent years. There was €216,000 for Cromane Lower, €35,000 for Waterville, €450,000 for Rossbeigh and €195,000 for Glenbeigh.
The OPW has not been found wanting in supporting Kerry and the local authority. The Deputy knows of my visit there in recent weeks, before Christmas, where we came with interim solutions for different parts of Kerry. We are now looking at coastal areas, but this is driven, in the first instance, by the local authority. I appeal to the Deputy to go out to Portrane to see what the local authority has done to get a licence from the Maritime Area Regulatory Authority, MARA, to deal with flooding. We need local authorities to step up and apply for these licences. In order to apply, they have to show where they are going to carry out works and provide protection to people along the coast. If they do that, they can apply for a MARA licence. I thank the staff in MARA because it is the first time ever we got a licence to do work along the coast. The Deputy can see in Portrane the work that was done to protect that area. I advise Deputy Cahill, as I advise every Deputy in the House, to follow suit and deliver for his community through the local authorities.
I thank the Minister of State. I acknowledge that he visited Kerry and Rossbeigh, where I live, and saw for himself the situation there. There will be a public meeting at 6.30 p.m. this evening in the Towers Hotel. The Minister of State also visited Cromane where homes have been destroyed in the past. I have been in houses when there was 3 ft of saltwater in them.
In 2015, I was a member of a deputation that came here to discuss the cliff road in Rossbeigh, where 16 houses had been cut off. We were told by the then Minister of State with responsibility for the Office of Public Works, Deputy Simon Harris, that pilot studies needed to be carried out and that he did not want deputations coming up to the Dáil every couple of weeks. It took ten years for the pilot studies to be completed. They will indicate where funding should and should not go. As I mentioned, a host of areas need urgent attention, including Rossbeigh, Incherea, Dooks in Glenbeigh, lower Bridge Street in Killorglin near the fishery, Cromane Lower, which is critical, Glosha, Whitestrand in Cahersiveen where the public toilets and car park are at risk, Waterville, Ballinskelligs, and the Kenmare and Tralee flood relief schemes.
Deputy Ó Murchú wants to ask a supplementary question.
Le do thoil. The Minister of State will not be shocked when I raise the issues we have had recently in County Louth, particularly in the Dundalk area. In fairness, the Minister of State visited Blackrock. The local authorities stated minor works schemes could be implemented in Dundalk, more so even than Blackrock. The Minister of State has spoken of the need for a personal property scheme to be implemented. He might give some detail on that.
Obviously, we need works done. We have seen coastal erosion recently on the Carlingford Lough greenway. Ballagan has had huge issues, and Antóin Watters and Fiona Mhic Conchoille have been on to me multiple times about that. There was a bun fight with OPW around cleaning the Blackwater river but, according to the Louth local authority, it has found a way through that and it looks like it is willing to clean it, which should have happened previously. However, we also need a conversation with Uisce Éireann to keep the pressure on because we have an infrastructure deficit, with the joint system that is not going to be operated for years. Where I live, we get flooded on the basis that we cannot clear stormwaters and sewage at the same time.
Deputy Cahill is right that I visited Cromane. I met with Michael Healy-Rae's colleague in relation to the same issue only yesterday. I asked him to ask the local authority to come in with minor works for Cromane, and it will be dealt with. Let us call a spade a spade. When I visited the place during Christmas week, I identified areas that could get protection. I looked at the street and we identified one shop, a chemist, that did not flood. Why did it not flood? It put in its own individual property protection, IPP. I reached out that day to the local authorities to look at an IPP system through the minor works programme. I await that because I cannot drive it. I ask the Deputy to drive that with the local authority.
We talked about the flooding of recent days. After the devastation that happened in Enniscorthy, when we were talking about more rain my biggest concern was County Louth. Deputy Ó Murchú's colleagues in the House rang me. I was fearful. My team in the OPW met with the local authorities last week and will continue to engage. I need the local authorities to push on. I am providing staff to the local authority to deliver on those schemes.
11. Deputy Joe Neville asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation the way in which his Department plans to implement a risk scorecard to enable the acceleration of key infrastructure delivery in the next few decades; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11083/26]
I thank Deputy Neville. In December 2025, the Government published the Accelerating Infrastructure Report and Action Plan. It is a comprehensive programme of actions designed to speed up the delivery of critical infrastructure across the State. This action plan responds to well-documented challenges of lengthy development timelines, fragmented processes and rising costs. These have all been identified as major barriers to achieving Ireland’s housing, energy and climate objectives.
The plan sets out 30 targeted actions grouped under four areas, namely, legal reform, regulatory reform and simplification, delivery reform, and public acceptance. My Department has already led on a number of reforms to date, including, but not limited to, the drafting process of the general scheme of the critical infrastructure Bill to be progressed during March, which has been published in the Government’s published legislative agenda; the establishment of a regulatory simplification unit, whose work will include reviewing regulatory structures, governance, oversight and accountability and revising and simplifying different legislation and statutes; and preparing reforms to the infrastructure guidelines, which is being progressed this month.
I have also launched a new service to accelerate major Government capital investment through the expertise of the National Development Finance Agency. We have had the first meeting of the new joint utilities and transport clearing house to have shared collaboration across sectors and greater delivery and co-operation.
Under pillar 3, co-ordination and delivery reform, the aim is to introduce risk appetite statements to enable proportionate oversight and accelerate infrastructure delivery. This action is to provide a better strategic-level risk governance tool that sets a higher level of risk for Government Departments or agencies on what they are willing to tolerate, identifying boundaries on high-risk decisions and wider and clearer expectations for risk oversight. This action is intended to support the creation of a co-ordinated, legally empowered system that reduces delays, improves planning certainty, increases the risk appetite and deals with the wider issues of risk aversion, which have been well documented. Following Government approval, Departments will be asked to define and publish clear, proportionate risk appetite statements for critical infrastructure decisions that can support a higher risk appetite. This will progress better expected benefits of delivery, which would outweigh the potential costs in the context of greater assumed risk. Examples of taking on a higher level of risk could include-----
I thank the Minister.
I will go into that detail shortly.
I thank the Minister very much for his response. I know he is very passionate about this issue, which the Joint Committee on Infrastructure and National Development Plan Delivery has seen. As Vice Chair of that committee, I am very focused on it. As a councillor, I saw a lot of houses being built in north Kildare, for example. I am sure the same applies in the rest of the country. In Celbridge, we need a second bridge. In Leixlip, we need development at the top of Confey and in Maynooth, a relief road is required. These are simple things but we see delays.
A change in culture is required across the Civil Service and local authorities. In fairness, we have significant funding available due to good governance. We have €102 billion available to be spent in the next four years and €275 billion to be spent on capital projects over the next nine years. That is extremely welcome. The reason we need to ensure the right culture and accountability are in place across the Civil Service and local authorities is to ensure we get to spend this money. It is really important that we make sure people make decisions. Sometimes, the most difficult thing in the Civil Service is to make a decision because the worst thing people can do is get something wrong. Sometimes, making no decision is actually better for those individuals. That is what we need to control.
I agree with everything the Deputy said and I appreciate his inputs at the infrastructure committee as well. There are well-documented issues with the existing culture, which has been too risk averse, leading to delays and cost increases. It is too process driven. It is about putting a delivery culture and delivery focus first. That means increasing risk appetite, but also taking practical steps, for example, carrying out early site clearance works in advance of or in parallel with another part of the process or forward ordering of key components for critical infrastructure so we can start a project much quicker while waiting for something else to conclude.
Putting a lot of steps in parallel involves greater risk appetite if something does not happen as expected. It will come down to increasing risk appetite in multiple areas and decision points in the infrastructure lifecycle. The risk appetite statement is about us backing the public service to do this, which could have an adverse effect in a minority of projects but ultimately will yield better delivery and cut through the risk aversion which is well documented.
I really sympathise with the Minister's final point. Potentially mistakes will be made and we must ensure that people will be backed through the various projects. I am a member of the public accounts committee and we look retrospectively at decisions. We need to ensure that people are backed. The main thing is that they are supported and that proper guidelines are in place so they are not afraid to make decisions. This is at all levels, including at the highest level. The Minister has taken responsibility himself centrally. We need to ensure this responsibility is sent out to all areas, such as to the CEOs of local authorities or further down to the local engineers. We need to see delivery on the ground. We all know how the various people in these roles are judged. The question is whether they are judged and held accountable. We know that ultimately the people in this room will be held accountable in 2029 on the doorsteps. I want to ensure that we deliver these projects so that we will get the response we need from people.
It is about having a clear, greater and more proportionate risk appetite statement for many infrastructure decisions. Ultimately we are measured on delivery and it is a process-driven approach. We have circular analysis and delays that will not narrow the infrastructure gap, which is well documented. The risk appetite statement will set out the expected benefits for delivery for a Department or agency, and how the assumption of greater risk outweighs the potential cost. We know that some of the processes we are trying to cut through and cut out in many instances add a significant level of cost to our overall capital spend, which the infrastructure committee has discussed. We will define and publish these in quarter 2 of this year. This is a clear signal to the public service to get on with delivery and have a delivery focus first. It will allow for a broader rebalancing. In terms of the public accounts committee and others, the risk appetite statements will provide a context in the years to come when, hopefully, we will have a higher level of delivery for the infrastructure committee. This will have to be seen in the context of wider assessments when analysing spend.
12. Deputy John Connolly asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation if the infrastructure guidelines have been amended as per action 23 of the Accelerating Infrastructure Report and Action Plan, including for increased project expenditure thresholds; the removal of the external assurance process and enhanced timelines for the preparation of the preliminary business case; when infrastructure projects can expect to benefit from the new guidelines; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10933/26]
Tugaim faoi deara ar maidin go bhfuil go leor de na ceisteanna ar an téama céanna, ar nós an chinn a bhí ag mo chomhghleacaí ar mo thaobh clé anseo maidir le cúrsaí infreastruchtúir agus an luas ar breá linn a fheiceáil le cur chun cinn i gcúrsaí infreastruchtúir agus infreastruchtúr a thógáil níos tapúla. Roimh an Nollaig, d'fhoilsigh an tAire an tuairisc nua. Before Christmas the Minister printed the Accelerating Infrastructure Report and Action Plan. I saw it described as one of the most comprehensive and ambitious Irish Government reports of recent times. This ambition is due to the number of actions and the timeline laid out for the completion of these actions. I want to ask about one in particular, which is action 23.
I thank Deputy Connolly and I appreciate his support on this. My Department is responsible for the infrastructure guidelines, which replaced the public spending code for capital appraisal since the end of 2023. These set the value for money requirements and guidance for evaluating, planning and managing Exchequer-funded capital projects. Management and delivery of investment projects and public services within allocation and the national frameworks is a key responsibility of every Department, Accounting Officer and Minister.
Action 23 in the accelerating infrastructure report, published in December 2025, commits my Department to streamline and speed up the project approvals process by amending the infrastructure guidelines. In line with this action, I brought a memorandum to Government this week on the following changes to the infrastructure guidelines. In relation to major projects, the threshold will increase from €200 million to €500 million for sectors with a well-established track record of delivery, particularly in the energy, transport and water sectors. The external assurance process will be replaced with a streamlined and time-bound internal review by the Department for all sectors to save significant time. Major projects at approval gate 2 will no longer need ministerial approval and may now be approved solely by the Accounting Officer of the Department that is funding the proposed project. Ministers will continue to be involved at approval gates 1 and 3, which are the critical decision points. Trying to remove duplicate and unnecessary steps to save time has been the central objective for us in government.
These changes will remove unnecessary time delays for critical infrastructure projects while retaining the necessary governance and oversight arrangements to ensure value for money for the taxpayer. In particular, the removal of the external assurance process, which was taking on average 20 weeks, will ensure projects move more rapidly through the delivery lifecycle while ensuring projects over a particular threshold will see the major project advisory group involved.
These and other recommendations in the action plan, including on the introduction of administrative guidance on timelines for preliminary business case assessment and maintaining a maximum length, will be included in the overall public financial management and control framework as part of the wider review of public financial procedures. Saving time and improving delivery is our wider focus.
I welcome the Minister's confirmation that we are not removing political approval for these projects. There was some concern about the elimination of ministerial approval at stage 2 of the project timeline but the Minister has clarified that ministerial approval will still be required at stages 1 and 3. This is very welcome. There was a sense that we were moving on and leaving decisions to unelected officials rather than Ministers.
One of the reasons I have focused on this action plan is because of its reference to transport and water infrastructure. We are all familiar with delays in the progression of major transport infrastructure and major water infrastructure. One of the things outlined in the action is that the approval processes in transport are to be reviewed to identify opportunities to eliminate duplication. Uisce Éireann receives a lot of criticism for how it implements infrastructural plans but it is clear now that the guidelines we have set down for it are part of the reason for this. At present, Uisce Éireann business cases must be approved through the infrastructure guidelines and by the CRU. Will the Minister provide clarity on transport and water in particular, and on the elimination of dual processes?
On Deputy Connolly's first point, this is removing an unnecessary middle step which was adding time. The critical points are approval of the preliminary business case, which sets the political direction for a project to be advanced with prospective capital spend, and final approval for a contract award, which involves the respective Minister. Again, it removes a middle step which did not provide value and just added time. This is what is being changed.
In terms of transport and water projects, we will have a regulatory simplification unit to look at the wider regulatory landscape where we have duplication of approvals, whether through the CRU or other respective bodies. The changes we are making relate to the thresholds and will significantly help the better delivery of water infrastructure in the State by moving the threshold from €200 million to €500 million. There are certain dual approvals required and, in some instances in transport, sometimes more than two approvals required and multiple agencies regulatory bodies are involved. This will be assessed by the regulatory simplification unit to simplify the approval process and avoid duplication, as Deputy Connolly has referenced, to speed up delivery.
I thank the Minister. I would like clarity. The emphasis and focus in action 30 is on transport and water. Will the Minister confirm that it is not limited to these and that we are looking at using this action in other areas? The Minister mentioned energy at the outset. Further clarification on my next point would also be welcome. How do projects in the planning process stand in terms of this new action? Will they benefit from it? I hope we will get a positive planning decision, although it cannot be guaranteed, on the Galway city ring road. We would like to see this project move quickly should a positive planning decision come through. Another project on my mind is the quay in Rossaveel, which is in the planning process. I hope both of these, should they be granted planning approval, can move quite quickly to construction. Will the Minister clarify the status of those projects that have already been granted planning permission, such as the passing loop in Oranmore? Will there will be a difference in how projects in the planning process and projects that have completed the planning process are treated by this action plan?
We have taken every step in the infrastructure life cycle and tried to cut time. The Deputy referenced transport and water. We have the joint utilities and transport clearing house. That reflects those key sectors which build the foundations of any community in terms of water, energy and transport infrastructure. Improving co-ordination in how that wider infrastructure is delivered is part of that objective. All the utilities are involved in that, including Eirgrid and the ESB in the context of infrastructure.
We will advance the critical infrastructure Bill, which will help set the prioritisation and political direction for the Government and the Oireachtas around particular projects. That could be in advance of projects going into the planning process. With some of the projects that are in the planning process, the wider risk when they leave it is that licensing and consents are sometimes required. We are reforming that area so we can deliver some of them in parallel. The risk of judicial review also hangs over a lot of projects. The reforms we will advance this year in the context of judicial reviews are to try to deal with that issue. One of the major issues when a project receives permission is whether it can actually start it if there is a threat of judicial review. My colleagues and I are also advancing that reform.
13. Deputy Paula Butterly asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation to provide an update on the legislative and non-legislative progress being made to implement the measures recommended in the accelerating infrastructure action plan. [9939/26]
28. Deputy Colm Burke asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation the initiatives his Department is undertaking to speed up the delivery of infrastructure projects; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11082/26]
61. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation the immediate actions that will be taken by his Department to accelerate delivery of critical infrastructure outlined in the accelerating infrastructure action plan; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10694/26]
77. Deputy Naoise Ó Cearúil asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation whether performance indicators or delivery targets have been established for the infrastructure division and the accelerating infrastructure task force; if these metrics will be published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10997/26]
83. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation the reforms that will be introduced in his Department to deliver on infrastructure promises made in the accelerating infrastructure action plan; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10693/26]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 13, 28, 61, 77 and 83 together.
My Department will be managing the monitoring and reporting on delivery of the actions in the Accelerating Infrastructure Report and Action Plan, which will be led within the infrastructure division. The action plan details 30 headline actions for delivery by quarter and sets target outputs and outcomes to be achieved. All lead Departments have continued to engage over recent weeks and days to provide an update on what is meant to be delivered for quarter 4, 2025 and quarter 1, 2026 and the important structural changes within their sectors to aid the delivery of the 30 actions.
All actions required for delivery in 2025 have been completed. Some of the key deliverables include the publication of the NDP review 2025 and the subsequent publication of all sectoral plans. We have also had a wider step-change in investment in the water, transport energy and sectors.
The sectoral plans detail over 200 specific projects that are being prioritised, with a particular focus on projects going to tender and construction in 2026 and 2027. This is with the specific aim of providing construction sector certainty on the pipeline.
Government consultation on the scale of fees for environmental judicial reviews is being led by the Department of Climate, Energy and the Environment which will, in effect, limit the cost that the State pays in environmental judicial reviews.
The first meeting has been held of the new joint utilities and transport clearing house, which will ensure a shared understanding and better co-ordination between the utilities and transport sectors on infrastructure delivery.
We have the heads of Bill being brought to put the judicial review process on a statutory footing by my colleague, the Minister for justice, Deputy O'Callaghan, in January.
At this point, good progress is noted for actions required for delivery in quarter 1. Some of the progress areas include the following. The public consultation process on proposed scale of fees closed on 15 January 2026. Work on the critical infrastructure Bill is progressing in terms of drafting and input by the Attorney General, which is happening on a weekly basis. The publication of a general scheme in March has been confirmed in the Government's published priority legislative agenda. A high-level group on EU policy and the European co-ordinators network has been used to monitor legislation and regulations that may impact on infrastructure delivery. A meeting of this group took place on 21 January.
As committed under action 23, reforms to the infrastructure guidelines were brought by me to the Government for approval this week. These key reforms relate to higher thresholds for major projects, the discontinuation of the external assurance process and the reduced approval requirements prior to issue to try to simplify the approval steps.
The Government has also approved an enhanced role for the National Development Finance Agency to support infrastructure delivery and key Exchequer funded projects. A circular outlining how Departments may avail of this support will be published.
There has been a meeting of the joint utilities and transport clearing house which is continuing in quarter 1, 2026. My Department is also engaging with bodies to map structures and identify the key specific administrative constraints to effective co-ordination and delivery. There is also work ongoing on revised structures within the construction sector group to advise on actions detailed in the December report on how we can improve further productivity and innovation within the construction sector. The Minister of State, Deputy Feighan, and I will be advancing procurement reforms to further enhance the attractiveness of public sector construction.
My colleague, the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, Deputy Lawless, and his Department have published and are working on a critical skills needs assessment for the construction sector. This sets out the wider delivery of increased labour force with the capital investment programme that we have. At this point, we have delivered what we said we would in quarter 4 of last year and we are working on continuing to build momentum in quarter 1 and beyond this year.
I thank the Minister for his comprehensive answer. I want to go back to what he said to Deputy John Connolly in relation to gate 2. I welcome the announcement that it will no longer need ministerial approval. The Minister said it did not add value, but added only time. How much time will this actually save? Is it four weeks, eight weeks or 20 weeks? This is an important point to highlight. Whether there is ministerial approval or not gets lost in translation for the person at home, whereas if we hear a solid number or estimate of the time that will be saved, it will send out a very positive message.
We are essentially reducing the number of approval steps from three to two. The critical approval role of a Minister is after the preliminary business case. It is about putting discipline on how a preliminary business case is designed. In many instances, the administrative timelines taken for preliminary business cases are far too excessive. We are trying to put much greater discipline on that in terms of the wider project design and how a preliminary business case is built up.
Even though political direction may have been given after the preliminary business case, there was an interim approval step which varied across Departments. Again, this will just simplify what is required in terms of the approval stop process. The Minister sets the direction post the preliminary business case which justifies why a project is needed following economic appraisal and assessment. The final decision of a Minister is post the tendering process where the tenders received align with the objectives set out in a preliminary business case. The critical involvement of a Minister is in those two areas. This median step only added time. If a Minister gives a direction at the preliminary business case, the outworking of that is to see the outcome of a tender and whether it meets the value requirements and the delivery that is set out in terms of the respective project.
The biggest time saving from the changes I am making in the infrastructure guidelines is on the removal of the external assurance gate. The average time taken on that is about 20 weeks. Some take months longer than that, while others take a little less time. This was a duplicate step and the advice I received was that the value proposition involved is questionable in terms of the time that it took. That is being removed entirely, in part to try to simplify the wider delivery process.
My understanding is that 17 of the task action points set out for quarter 1 sit with the Minister's Department and nine of those, if not progressed, cannot go any further. Has the Minister already identified any pinch points that could delay this progress and, if so, how are they going to be addressed?
We engage daily with the infrastructure team in the Department and the infrastructure division. According to the latest update, everything has been delivered in quarter 4 and we are on track with respect to the actions set for quarter 1 of this year. We are working in parallel to ensure steps or actions that are required in quarters 2 and 3 are being worked on as well if they have timelines in the middle of the year or later on in this year. Right now, there is progress across the respective areas. Over the last number of weeks, we have brought different memorandums to the Government in respect of various reforms to infrastructure delivery, such as the National Development Finance Agency, the reforms to the infrastructure guidelines and the conclusion of the sectoral investment plans, all of which aim to build momentum in terms of infrastructure delivery in the economy.
We will work on the critical pieces, ensuring the continued work on the critical infrastructure Bill advances. The intention is to bring the scheme to Government in March, which is a really important piece on providing legislative backing for the acceleration of infrastructure in the State. That is on track as well.
Deputy Butterly is next on the list with parliamentary question No. 70. Does she want to take it? This is the last question for the Department. If she does not want to take it, that is okay.
May I ask a further follow-up question?
For question No. 70 or this one?
A follow-up on this one. It would probably follow on more fluently, if the Minister is so willing.
Deputy Butterly has already used her time and I cannot allow extra time. Does Deputy Butterly want to take parliamentary question No. 70? She does not want to take it. That brings an end to questions to the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation.
