Written Answers Nos. 328-347
328. Deputy Emer Currie asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to provide the full costs involved in strategic reviews, studies, consultations, and plans in relation to the Phoenix Park, including the Phoenix Park Visitor Experience, the Phoenix Park Transport and Mobility Options Study, and Phoenix Park Parking Strategy, in tabular form. [2954/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe Office of Public Works (OPW) has undertaken three studies/reviews in the Phoenix Park in recent years; the Phoenix Park Visitor Experience Strategic review, the Phoenix Park Transport and Mobility Options Study, and the Phoenix Park Parking Strategy.
The OPW and the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, under a partnership agreement with Fáilte Ireland, received funding to undertake a strategic review of visitor experience in the Phoenix Park. There were three objectives of the Review:
1. To review the future ‘tourism’ development potential of the Phoenix Park
2. To prepare a development plan for the Phoenix Park Visitor Centre
3. To prepare a development plan for the Magazine Fort.
The total cost for the ‘Phoenix Park Visitor Experience Strategic Review’ was €353,366.50. Fáilte Ireland grant-aided this project to the value of €300,000 and the balance was funded by the OPW.
The ‘Phoenix Park Transport and Mobility Options Study’ aimed to develop a coherent framework for how visitors access, experience, and move within the Phoenix Park while protecting the Park’s character and enhancing the overall visitor experience. The study was undertaken by consultants appointed by the National Transport Authority (NTA) and was largely funded by the NTA. The OPW provided some funding to the value of €4,500.
The ‘Phoenix Park Parking Strategy’ was commissioned on foot of recommendations set out in the aforementioned Phoenix Park Transport & Mobility Options Study. It considers both vehicular and cycle parking, and the needs and parking requirements of those with mobility issues. It provides a comprehensive vision for parking management in the Phoenix Park and complements existing wider plans, policies and strategies adopted by the OPW and key stakeholders. This report is due to be published shortly.
The total cost of the ‘Phoenix Park Parking Strategy’ was €98,699.65.
|
- |
Amount Ex VAT |
|
Phoenix Park Visitor Experience |
€353,366.50* |
|
Phoenix Park Transport and Mobility Options Study |
€4,500 |
|
Phoenix Park Parking Strategy |
€98,699.65 |
329. Deputy Timmy Dooley asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform the number of public sector workers in each of the local electoral areas in County Clare, per sector (details supplied), in tabular form; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2973/25]
Amharc ar fhreagra354. Deputy Donna McGettigan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform the number of public sector workers in each of the local electoral areas in County Clare under headings (details supplied), in tabular form; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3375/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 329 and 354 together.
My Department has Civil Service staff located in Newbridge, Galway, Roscrea, Cork and Dublin, with its headquarters in Newbridge, Co. Kildare. The Department also employs Civilian Employees who work to support Defence Forces’ capability in military establishments around the country. My Department has no locations in any of the local electoral areas in County Clare in which it employs public sector workers.
330. Deputy Aidan Farrelly asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to provide a schedule of special advisors attached to him, as of 29 January 2025; and the official grade and or title held by that special advisor. [3003/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe information requested by the Deputy is set out in the table below:
|
Name |
Title / Grade |
|
Sam Griffin |
Special Advisor (Principal Officer PPC) |
|
Shane Smyth |
Special Advisor (Principal Officer PPC) |
331. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to provide a list of all public sector occupational pensions that are invested rather than operating on the pay-as-you-go; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3062/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraOccupational pension schemes for public service employees, or for employees in the wider public sector, are in general provided for under legislation relating to the body or sector and subject to the oversight of the relevant line Minister.
I and my Department are responsible for the civil service pension schemes, which cover members of established and unestablished civil service and State industrial schemes and the Single Public Service Pension Scheme, and the pension schemes of bodies under the auspices of my Department. All of these pension schemes are operated on a pay-as-you-go basis.
There are a number of funded schemes operated by commercial semi state bodies and public sector bodies. Although I, as Minister, have certain consent functions relating to these schemes, none of these schemes come under the direct auspices of my Department.
It would be a matter for the relevant Minister to supply such information in respect of the number of funded occupational pension schemes in operation in their sector.
332. Deputy Brian Stanley asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to respond to the request by an organisation (details supplied) to have the remains of the five executed Invincibles exhumed form the yard in Kilmainham Gaol; if his Department and the OPW will facilitate this in order that they can be reinterred in Glasnevin Cemetery; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3096/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraKilmainham Gaol, National Monument 675, opened in 1796 as the new County Gaol for Dublin and closed in 1924. Today the building symbolises the tradition of militant and constitutional nationalism from the rebellion of 1798 to the Irish Civil War of 1922-23. Leaders of the rebellions of 1798, 1803, 1848, 1867 and 1916 were detained and in some cases executed here.
Requests such as this are of a very sensitive and delicate nature and there are a number of matters to consider, both in terms of the significant practicalities involved and the ethical issues. While the general area of the site of graves in Kilmainham is relatively well known, there is no detailed plan showing definitively exactly where individuals were interred and even were it to be precisely located, there would be practical issues involved in positively identifying the remains.
Were the OPW to possess the power to institute such a move (which it does not, given the responsibility of the Minister for Heritage under the National Monuments Acts), it would still likely be of such delicacy as to require being considered at the highest levels of Government.
333. Deputy Sorca Clarke asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform if he will publish, when completed, the full report by the ecological consultant, as appointed on 5 June 2024 to carry out a high-level environmental study to consider the potential positive and negative ecological impacts of the proposed works on the River Shannon between Athlone and Meelick (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3101/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraAs the Deputy is aware, an ecological consultant was appointed to consider the potential positive and negative ecological impacts of the proposed removal of the 'pinch points' on the River Shannon between Athlone and Meelick Weir. This work is nearly complete and a draft report will be submitted to the Shannon Flood Risk State Agency Co-ordination Working Group for consideration at its next meeting in April 2025.
The final approved report will be published in due course.
334. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to detail all of the construction projects currently tendered by the OPW throughout the State and to break down the cost and quantities involved in each. [3111/25]
Amharc ar fhreagra343. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to detail all construction jobs delivered through the OPW for the past ten years, the costs, length of time to deliver and quantities of each. [3121/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 334 and 343 together.
OPW are collating the information and will respond directly to the Deputy.
335. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform how long the wall on the Hill of Tara has been under construction, the quantities involved and the cost to date. [3112/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe Hill of Tara in Co. Meath is a significant, expansive heritage site that visitors can access year round. It is used locally as a walking amenity in addition to attracting visitors from all over the world. The church at the Hill of Tara houses the OPW Visitor Centre for the site and this is open between May and September annually. Tara is one of the five monuments assemblages listed in the current UNESCO World Heritage Tentative list as the The Royal Sites of Ireland.
The OPW Trim District National Monuments team is charged with maintaining the Hill of Tara year-round but they also have responsibility for 165 National Monuments across the district including for example Glendalough, Kilmainham Gaol, Trim Castle and the UNESCO World Heritage Site of Brú na Bóinne.
The works to the graveyard wall at Tara have been ongoing at various times since 2014 and have run concurrently with a number of other conservation projects across the district. OPW craft workers and stone masons carried out the repair and reinstatement works under the direction of OPW Conservation Architects, Engineers and the District Works Manager. These are conservation stone repair works with varying levels of complexity requiring input from a number of sources including the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, from which OPW needs to obtain Ministerial consent for any works at National Monument sites. The consent process can, in some cases, take significant time.
During the period of these works, OPW masons were periodically directed towards other priority projects in the district depending on need. It should be noted also that this type of work is somewhat seasonal as lime mortar should not be applied when temperatures are liable to fall to lower temperatures.
Works to the North, West and South walls are complete, the latter section being completed in 2024. The remaining Eastern section of the wall is archaeologically sensitive. The OPW is engaged in detailed discussions about the methodology to address this section of wall with the National Monuments Service of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage (DHLGH). The remaining works will not progress until agreement is reached on this methodology and Ministerial Consent obtained. This process of deliberation, which is ongoing for the last two years, has impacted on progress of the very final stage of the conservation works but is a necessary part of the process of protecting the archaeological heritage of the site.
As noted above the work was delivered by the OPW direct-labour workforce. Expenditure on the graveyard wall for the period 2014 to 2024 amounts to €124,159.50 for the purchase of materials (predominantly lime and sand) and the provision of specialist services including expert engineering, archaeological and conservation advices, ongoing monitoring and surveys.
336. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to break down the individual costs contained in the €82,200 quoted for ancillary costs on the wall that was built around the WRC office. [3113/25]
Amharc ar fhreagra337. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to break down all the individual costs detailed in the initial quote for the €213,000 cost for the construction of the wall at the WRC office in Ballsbridge; if this figure included any car parking facilities for staff discommoded by the construction project. [3114/25]
Amharc ar fhreagra338. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform was the high-voltage live electricity cable, which delayed the works at the wall at the WRC office in Ballsbridge, contained in any ESB or other utility maps in the area. [3115/25]
Amharc ar fhreagra339. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to break down the €61,500 Dublin City Council costs. [3116/25]
Amharc ar fhreagra340. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform whether the construction of the wall at the offices of the WRC was tendered for directly by the OPW, or whether the service provider (details supplied) tendered for the job; the name of the company that won the tender and that delivered the job; the quantity surveyor that signed off on the job; whether that quantity surveyor was an OPW staff member or was a member of the service provider or another private firm. [3117/25]
Amharc ar fhreagra341. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to give a detailed breakdown of the services provided by the ESB for the €54,000 charged to the OPW. [3118/25]
Amharc ar fhreagra342. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform the accountability that will be imposed on the processes and individuals involved in the project to build a wall at the offices of the WRC in Ballsbridge. [3119/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 336 to 342, inclusive, together.
The Office of Public Works (OPW) is responsible for managing and maintaining a significant part of the State’s property portfolio including over 500 office buildings nationwide.
In fulfilling this remit in 2021 an on-site building inspection of a Government owned office building at Lansdowne House in Dublin 4 was carried out. During this inspection, the OPW found that a boundary wall was unsafe and in imminent danger of collapse and would have to be dismantled. The boundary wall was fenced off as a temporary measure, and made safe and a project was initiated to dismantle and reconstruct the wall.
This project was however complicated by the discovery of a high voltage electrical cable beneath the wall which represented a significant hazard if not dealt with in the appropriate manner.
The OPW is satisfied that the correct processes were followed by the project team in the course of this project and in particular in the response to the discovery of the high voltage cable. While this discovery resulted in significant delays and additional costs, the OPW were obliged to address the health and safety risks posed by the discovery of the high-voltage and dangerous live cable. The OPW is also satisfied that their staff and contractor acted appropriately in the particular circumstances that arose in this case. As the planned element of the works (reconstruction of the wall) was delivered in line with estimates the OPW considers that value for money was achieved.
The works to dismantle and reconstruct the wall were carried out under the OPW’s Multiparty Framework for Building Maintenance Services and General Building Works. Phase 1, the demolition of the existing wall, was carried out by PJ Hegarty Ltd who held the OPW contract at the time. Phase 2, the reconstruction of the replacement wall, was carried out by Sensori Facilities Management who then held the OPW contract for the Dublin South region. Quantity Surveying services were provided by Carron and Walsh who have been appointed by the OPW as Contractor Administrator to manage the Framework on their behalf.
The initial inspection by the OPW architect and engineer of the wall noted the absence of piers along the boundary. Given the appearance of the reconstructed wall was to remain unchanged, the engineer proposed the inclusion of additional steel structure within the new wall (to provide additional stability in the absence of traditional piers) and identified the requirement to design a new foundation, to form part of the reconstruction work. The existing wall was dismantled with all existing blockwork retained on site for reconstruction at a later date.
The cost of dismantling the wall was €21,500 ex VAT. The cost of rebuilding the wall was €180,000 ex VAT against an original estimate of €188,000 ex VAT as detailed in the table at Appendix A.
Prior to construction a Design Risk Assessment was undertaken by the design team to establish the location of utilities and services in and around the site. This included an inspection of utility maps and there was no evidence found of services underneath the perimeter wall on Lansdowne Park. In addition, and in accordance with good practice, prior to the contractor beginning the excavation for the new foundations, a ground penetrating radar scan was carried out around the site which showed a cable underneath the now-dismantled wall. The main contractor carefully uncovered the cable and notified the ESB who confirmed it was a live high-voltage power cable.
The discovery of the live cable posed a serious health and safety risk and led to very significant delays as well as increased costs to the overall project. Among the extra costs incurred were €54,000 to the ESB to redirect the live wire. This was the fee charged by the ESB to cover the costs associated with the diversion of the high voltage cable and the OPW was not provided with a further breakdown of the cost.
The payments made to Dublin City Council are costs associated with road closure licences, and recompense for fee paying parking spaces being taken out of commission for the duration of the works. The works were delayed by 20 months as a result of the discovery of the high voltage cable and road closure licence and the decommissioning of the car parking spaces had to be retained for this duration. This resulted in an average cost of €3075 per month. The wall could not be rebuilt without this area being taken into charge within the building site to facilitate the works.
The following table shows the breakdown of the ancillary costs amounting to €81,926.
|
- |
excl VAT |
|
Fencing & Traffic Management |
€73,632.47 |
|
Signage |
€7,738.00 |
|
Traffic Cones |
€555.55 |
|
Total |
€81,926.02 |
Appendix A. Breakdown of original cost estimate.
|
- |
- |
Sub-total |
|
- |
Excl. VAT |
Excl. VAT |
|
Wall reconstruction works |
||
|
New wall foundations |
||
|
Excavations |
€23,793.72 |
|
|
Concrete works |
€7,742.20 |
|
|
Steel reinforcement |
€6,887.70 |
€38,423.62 |
|
Rebuilding wall |
||
|
Wall reconstruction including manufacture of new blocks |
€29,467.52 |
|
|
New concrete capping's poured on-site |
€5,324.55 |
|
|
New structure within wall including stainless steel parapet wind posts, wall ties and notching of posts |
€30,114.11 |
€64,906.18 |
|
Groundworks either side of boundary wall |
||
|
Making good to carpark inside the site, public road and footpath on completion of works including line marking |
€15,680.85 |
|
|
Line marking |
€1,880.63 |
€17,561.48 |
|
Ancillary works |
||
|
Works to existing crash barriers to parking, gate and sign posts, including removal; storage and reinstating |
€4,665.00 |
|
|
Hoarding and traffic management |
€6,979.56 |
|
|
Estimate for Licencing of Temporary partial closure of parking spaces and footpath for the duration of 8 weeks |
€34,973.64 |
|
|
Dilapidation survey for feature wall on-site (protected by hoarding) |
€375.00 |
|
|
Temporary ground water removal sumps to excavations |
€3,013.50 |
€50,006.70 |
|
Preliminaries |
||
|
Contractors overheads, including supervision, insurance, administration, role of Project Supervisor Construction Supervisor, lighting, power and water for the works |
€17,089.80 |
€17,089.80 |
|
Sub-Total |
€187,987.78 |
€187,987.78 |
|
Cumulative Sub-Total |
€187,987.78 |
|
|
VAT on construction work (13.5%) |
€25,378.35 |
|
|
Total |
€213,366.13 |
344. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform the steps Ireland will take, and argue for at EU level, in simplifying access to EU funds over the coming period; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3138/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe systems for accessing EU funds are largely set at EU level, meaning they are proposed by the Commission and negotiated and agreed by the Council of the EU (Member States), and the European Parliament. This approach is important to ensure consistency in how funds are accessed and used across Member States.
My Department has responsibility for the Resilience and Recovery Facility (RRF), the Brexit Adjustment Reserve (BAR), the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), PEACEPLUS and coordination of Ireland’s cohesion policy and matters related to cohesion policy funds in Ireland, including the European Social Fund + (ESF+), EU Just Transition Fund (EUJTF), European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF), Asylum Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF), Internal Security Fund ISF) and INTERREG funds.
The administrative requirements for applying and drawing down of these funds are in line with the terms and conditions as set out in the Regulations governing these funds.
Ireland has in the past and will continue to argue for simple, and straightforward pathways towards accessing EU funds, while recognising that a level of safeguards are necessary to ensure they are spent appropriately. Ireland considers this to be an integral part of the overarching drive towards simplification and it is important to ensure our citizens and companies benefit from the EU budget.
The Programme for Government references this objective to reduce where possible the regulatory burden, simplifying EU rules for the SME and Farming sectors.
345. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to list all cases where Ireland applies “goldplating” in the process for applying for and drawing down EU funds and in each case to explain the rationale; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3139/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe systems for accessing EU funds are largely set at EU level, meaning they are proposed by the Commission and negotiated and agreed by the Council of the EU (Member States), and the European Parliament. This approach is important to ensure consistency in how funds are accessed and used across Member States.
My Department has responsibility for the Resilience and Recovery Facility (RRF), the Brexit Adjustment Reserve (BAR), the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), PEACEPLUS and coordination of Ireland’s cohesion policy and matters related to cohesion policy funds in Ireland, including the European Social Fund + (ESF+), EU Just Transition Fund (EUJTF), European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF), Asylum Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF), Internal Security Fund ISF) and INTERREG funds.
The administrative requirements for applying and drawing down of these funds are in line with the terms and conditions as set out in the Regulations governing these funds.
346. Deputy Mairéad Farrell asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform the breakdown of the OPW’s total staff complement by its six business units, project management services, property management services, property maintenance services, architectural services, engineering services, and Government supplies agency, in tabular form; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3154/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe breakdown of the OPW’s total staff complement by business area is as follows : as of 31st December 2024. Numbers are for permanent staff and excludes seasonally increased numbers in Heritage Services which averages 400 for summer season. Business unit names don't directly correlate to those requested in the query.
|
- |
Established |
State Industrial |
Total |
|
Estate Management |
293 |
15 |
308 |
|
Chairman’s Office |
17 |
0 |
17 |
|
State Architect Principal Architects Office |
97 |
0 |
97 |
|
Flood Projects Management |
188 |
365 |
553 |
|
Corporate Services |
262 |
0 |
262 |
|
Planning and Climate Adaptation |
53 |
0 |
53 |
|
Heritage Services and Capital Works Delivery |
210 |
889 |
1099 |
|
Total |
1120 |
1269 |
2389 |
347. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to detail the size in square metres of the new Mayo Coast Guard station being built in Westport; the details of the bill of quantities for the project; the way he can stand over a cost of €6.8 million for the Westport Coast Guard station given a similar building was built by the RNLI on the island of Árainn Mhór in Donegal for €1.4 million. [3187/25]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe Department of Transport (DoT) is responsible for the investment in the Irish Coast Guard (IRCG) building programme aimed at ensuring Coast Guard Units along the coast are fit for purpose.
The programme is fully funded by the DoT as Approving Authority, with project delivery managed by the Office of Public Works (OPW), as the Contracting Authority from planning and design to construction and on-going maintenance.
The investment priorities are decided, and the entire IRCG capital programme overseen, by a Programme Oversight Group consisting of representatives of the DoT, the IRCG and the OPW at Principal Officer level. The IRCG is responsible as Sponsoring Authority to develop business cases for individual stations but the DoT, IRCG and the OPW collectively agree a priority list that includes 23 locations around the country, with Westport being one of the highest priority locations.
Tendering for the works at Westport was undertaken by the OPW in August 2023 following approval from the DoT as Approving Authority. The contract was awarded, again following approval by the DoT, to MVS Construction Ltd on 29 January 2024. The contract sum was €4,619,817.66 ex. VAT. The total project cost including VAT, contingency of 7.5%, Per Cent for Art, surveys and reports and fees (including Planning, Building Control and Fire Safety fees), is expected to be €6.879m. As per the Infrastructure Guidelines, the business case for this project was prepared by the IRCG and accepted and approved by the DoT as Approving Authority.
The Árainn Mhór RNLI Station was delivered by the charity body the Royal National Lifeboat Institution. The basis of the publicised construction figure of €1.4m is unclear and as such it would not be possible to provide a quantitative comparison between the projects.
However the OPW makes the following observation:
• The size of the buildings is substantially different, at 657 square metres the Westport IRCG station is approximately 40% larger than the RNLI station on Árainn Mhór.
• In Westport the OPW is delivering a building that has been specified and approved by the Department of Transport and IRCG as being suitable to meet their considerable operational needs in the area.
• The design of the two buildings appears to be substantially different. For example, for health and safety reasons, the IRCG requires space to allow vehicles with boat trailers to enter one side of the boatshed and exit the other, thus avoiding the safety risks involved with reversing large trailers. The large turning circles needed for these trailers has determined the width of the current site and access driveway. In addition, direct exit to a public road is needed to reduce the risk of the route becoming blocked by neighbouring activity.
• While the Árainn Mhór RNLI station is located on an island necessitating the transportation of construction materials from the mainland, the location of the IRCG station in Westport is not without its own challenges being within the Clew Bay Complex Special Area of Conservation (SAC) (001482). The OPW was required to commission an ecologist to prepare a Natura Impact Statement (NIS) for the assessment for the development of the coastguard station in accordance with Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora). Mitigation measures identified in the report to protect the SAC, have been included in the design and have contributed to the overall cost.
• It must also be noted the new IRCG station is being built on reclaimed land, necessitating significant additional costs not typically incurred at other sites. The site was chosen to accommodate the IRCG Station in Westport and was identified in Mayo County Council’s 2012 Master Development Plan. The site was owned by Mayo County Council and was transferred at a nominal fee to the OPW for the new station.
• The IRCG consider the position of the site to be suited to their operational needs and their requirement for high visibility. A station in this particular location benefits from good views of the quay to the north, the harbour to the south and broad views towards the mountains to the west, including Croagh Patrick where approaching weather systems can be observed.
• The Westport IRCG station has a design-life in excess of fifty years with minimal maintenance requirements and associated lifetime maintenance costs in a hostile marine environment.
