The Labour Party leader, Mr Pat Rabbitte, has suggested that two Ministers organised a "ready-up" to fast-track funding for a "pet project" at Punchestown racecourse without any proper cost-benefit analysis.
As the Government insisted yesterday that the correct procedures had been followed, Mr Rabbitte said the decision to give €14.8 million funding to the event centre at the racecourse was made without following normal procedures.
"All the evidence points to a 'ready-up' between the two Ministers to fast-track funding for a pet project of the Finance Minister in the heart of Mr McCreevy's own constituency," he said.
However, a Government spokeswoman denied the Government was embarrassed by the affair, which emerged at the Dáil Public Accounts Committee on Thursday. She said it was between the Public Accounts Committee and the Department of Agriculture to provide further clarity on the issue, and the legal services department of the Department was examining the matter.
The issue concerns the fact that the Ministers for Finance and Agriculture, Mr McCreevy and Mr Walsh, had had contacts with representatives of Punchestown racecourse in the absence of officials before deciding to grant funding to the event centre. The Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr John Purcell, was critical of the procedures followed in his most recent report.
The Department of Agriculture had approved an initial proposal to build a €6.9 million event centre in January 2000. However, before the approval of the proposal - for which the State was to provide 100 per cent funding - was notified to Punchestown, a more elaborate proposal for a €12.8 million centre was made and approved in June 2000.
It emerged at Wednesday's meeting that there had been contacts between the two Ministers and Punchestown before the second proposal was formally submitted.
Mr Rabbitte said yesterday that the speed of the approval was astonishing. Mr McCreevy and Mr Walsh had serious questions to answer about the procedures used to approve funding for the event centre.
"We now know that the two Ministers arranged for its approval by a simple exchange of letters and that there was no evaluation or cost-benefit analysis undertaken. It appears that none of the normal procedures relating to major capital projects of this nature were applied in this case," Mr Rabbitte said.