In the wake of the recent difficulties engulfing Mr Paddy Teahon and Campus Stadium Ireland Development Limited (CSID), many are wondering what is to happen with the CSID's sister project, the Dublin Digital Hub.
Mr Teahon, who resigned as chairman of CSID, remains the executive chairman of the hub project's management team, Digital Media Development Limited (DMDL), and as with CSID, Ms Laura Magahy of Magahy & Co has the executive services management contract. As with CSID, Mr Teahon was hand-picked by the Taoiseach for the project.
However, some key differences exist between the projects. Most importantly, the structure of Ms Magahy's contract with DMDL has differed for some time from that with CSID. Several Government officials have expressed concern at the form of the CSID contract, which is based on a percentage remuneration.
If costs rise for the CSID project, Ms Magahy's executive services team would receive a matching percentage increase in payment, an arrangement questioned by the Public Accounts Committee's examination of CSID's Aquatic Centre deal.
The same arrangement was originally in place for the DMDL, at the time that the project was, like Campus Stadium Ireland, under the aegis of the Department of the Taoiseach. However, in March of last year, the Taoiseach's Department and the Department of Finance asked DMDL to alter the contract to a flat fee remuneration. The contract had also been examined by the Attorney General, Mr Michael McDowell.
In June of last year, the hub project was transferred to the Department of Public Enterprise (DPE). By the time it arrived there, the executive services contract had been altered.
Clearly, the Government felt it was prudent to alter the contract. But one wonders why similar action wasn't taken at the same time with the CSID contract?
It indicates that both the Government and the Attorney General were aware of the more curious aspects of the management contract a year ago, but apparently did not consider it necessary to question or alter the CSID contract.
Since the project was in the Taoiseach's Department until that point, the Taoiseach should also have been aware that very little had progressed with the hub project. While some rather worthy but vague plans, devoid of any specifics, had been published on the hub by DMDL, many obvious steps had not been taken to advance the project. In contrast, the stadium had been architected and contracts signed for the aquatic centre. Construction had begun on some areas.
In the same period, it is understood that while DMDL had spent much time looking at potential buildings it had failed to spec out the area for a broadband network by engaging an expert in this area. The fibre network is not only the essential foundation of a high technology district, but is also an element that is going to take time to complete. So, nearly a year into the project, precious time was lost in getting this obvious initial step organised.
That left DMDL unable to tell businesses or researchers what kind of connectivity would be guaranteed for the district.
This is not a point that can be left to guesswork. People working in R&D or business activities of any digital kind need this crucial information. On receiving the project, DPE put a telecoms adviser to work and had the network sorted in weeks.
No wonder, then, that both researchers and businesses have watched the development of the district with a bemused look. I wrote about this last July and looking back at it is a bit of déjà vu - nearly all the key questions raised then remain unaddressed. I wrote: "Many of the academics and businesses one would expect to have been included in the consultations over the eight months since the hub's announcement say they still know little or nothing about the project. Yet, dynamic input, a broad research base, and private sector funding and development will be essential."
Unfortunately, this still is the case. I also argued then that problems with the project's image "prompt questions about intent, purpose, timescale, funding, and political will". This, too, is still the case.
I must emphasise that I believe Mr Teahon and DMDL, with whom I have spoken several times, in general care deeply about the project. But I also believe that, even had both projects run smoothly, managing both of these massive building and urban renewal projects would have stretched the resources and capabilities of a small property development and management company to the limit.
It is hard to imagine why the Taoiseach's Department felt the two, so distinctly different in their demands and needs and objectives, could be bundled together for joint supervision.
Unsurprisingly, one of the two projects was clearly given the lion's share of resources over the past 18 months, both as it was nurtured through the first stages of its development and then, in shoring it up under a barrage of criticism. That project obviously wasn't the digital hub. This prompts one to ask whether the Government initially had any real commitment or vision for the hub, which, in economic, cultural and social terms, has far more riding on it, much further into the future, than a massive sports complex.
The hub was eventually moved to another department, Public Enterprise. Two committees, one to oversee the development of Media Lab Europe, which is at the core of the hub's plans, and one to oversee the hub, were assembled. Each includes, with some crossover, representatives from the Departments of Finance, Enterprise Trade and Employment, Public Enterprise, and the Environment; the Higher Education Authority; the Office of Public Works; Enterprise Ireland and the IDA.
That's the good news. The project seems to have found a solid and supportive Government home and is under tight fiscal and management supervision. But it needs far more than the ministrations of a single department to make it a success.
This is a national project that should have an extremely high profile. To understand why, one has only to look at similar projects under way in places such as Seoul, Korea, where a digital park that far out-visions the hub is already well under construction. Our economy is seriously under threat from such challengers. And that is an issue I will come back to next week.
