Public projects lack accountability

The temptation to use public money in an effort to deal with political problems is understandable

The temptation to use public money in an effort to deal with political problems is understandable. Some ministers have built careers on the delivery of lucrative projects to their constituencies. But there must be some accountability when mistakes are made and costs run wildly out of control. Because of that, the Dáil Public Accounts Committee (PAC), with a chairman chosen from the Opposition parties, has been given responsibility for examining government and public spending and ensuring that the waste of money is kept to a minimum.

It is an imperfect system. PAC members interview senior public servants who have responsibility for initiating projects and overseeing spending in an effort to discover what went wrong. But the policy decisions of ministers that gave rise to the projects - and their flaws - are not explored.

The greatest deficiency, perhaps, arises from the long delay between the identification of a mistake by the Comptroller and Auditor General, John Purcell, and its public ventilation at meetings of the committee. If we are serious about political accountability and ensuring future value for money, we must do better.

The latest report from the PAC harks back to 2002 and pays particular attention to the acquisition of five properties by the Office of Public Works as accommodation for asylum seekers. Because of local opposition, the properties were never used for the purpose intended and it is now accepted that a considerable amount of the €19 million spent on them will not be recovered.

READ MORE

There were also cost overruns and waste in relation to the renovation of Cork Courthouse and other properties.

The importance of holding the OPW to account at this time was emphasised by the vice chairman of the committee, John McGuinness. Ridiculous decisions had been made by the OPW that would have forced the closure of a private company, he said, and they had to ensure there was no repetition during the roll-out of the Government's decentralisation plans.

The Minister of State with responsibility for the OPW, Tom Parlon accepted there would be "some loss" on the five properties, but argued it was unfair to take them as a general example. Lessons had been learned, he said, and they would be more careful about refurbishment estimates in future.

We have been here before. Promises of reform and the introduction of better financial management invariably follow critical reports by the C&AG and the PAC. But when a minister insists that premises must be purchased to deal with an influx of asylum seekers, or to provide accommodation for a decentralised department, normal commercial criteria go out the window.

The chairman of the committee, Michael Noonan, recognised this reality and the constraints placed on public accountability by long delays when he proposed the Dáil should take a more active role in reviewing expenditure. Such a development is long overdue.