Very few people in the country will forget the description, in May 2002, of the campus Ireland project by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform as being "Ceaucescu-like", but recent revelations suggest that this analogy might not be as far-fetched as people imagined. After all, the infamous Romanian tyrant left behind him a battery of extravagant, egotistical, sub-standard, unfinished monuments and buildings, the price for which his people will continue to pay for many years to come. The debacle of the National Aquatic Centre truly is an apt metaphor for the Fianna Fáil-Progressive Democrats Government — massive costs to the public, a so-called state-of-the-art attraction that is all splash, with fake waves, the roof blown off and leaking like a sieve.

I put it to the Taoiseach that, as the sole promoter and shareholder of this project, he is personally responsible for the huge failures that have been exposed. Does the Taoiseach stand over his statement at the opening of the centre on 10 March 2003 that "a visionary concept has been brought to magnificent fruition"? Will the Taoiseach confirm that the facility is leaking water at the rate of 5 million litres per month and that a consultant's report has found that the original roof structure was substandard, suggesting that either corners were cut or plans were washed away at the construction stage? Were these facts known to the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, who claimed two weeks ago that the €62 million capital expenditure on the project "represents money very well spent" or can we take it that this farce is the benchmark, or rather the tide mark, of Government spending and standards?

Campus and Stadium Ireland Development has stated that the reports in the media relating to the National Aquatic Centre are inaccurate in most respects and it would be inappropriate to comment on any of these issues as there are proceedings before the court.

It might also be embarrassing to have to comment on the issues.

The proceedings are before the court. Yesterday, CSID's legal team referred to the situation which has grown murkier and murkier——

Curiouser and curiouser.

I advise all concerned to allow the courts——

Everyone should allow the courts to deal with the issue and not be fooled by red herrings, because that is what yesterday's furore in the media is about. I am very sad to see the Opposition aligning itself with the company that CSID has taken to court and acting as its mouthpiece in the House today. Opposition Deputies appear to have no compunction about making public statements on matters before the courts. I agree with CSID that court proceedings should not be prejudiced and will not attempt to prejudge the outcome of the court's deliberations. Once the court proceedings have been completed, CSID will no longer be constrained from putting the facts before the public and answering any questions Deputies, the media or anyone else may have about the various matters before the court.

I am happy to outline the factual position for the House. CSID has a legal action in the commercial court against Dublin Waterworld, the operator of the aquatic centre, for breaches of the lease agreement. In the commercial court on 3 June Mr. Justice Peter Kelly made an order regarding the following matters which were the subject of a statement of claim lodged by CSID against Dublin Waterworld.

The dispute as to whether Dublin Waterworld is liable to pay VAT of €10,254,600 on the granting of the lease has been referred to arbitration which will be concluded shortly. The dispute regarding repair and maintenance and as to whether Dublin Waterworld has properly maintained the national aquatic centre has been referred to an architect for expert determination. This process is under way as per the court ruling.

On the question of the lease, the remaining issues against Dublin Waterworld for failure to pay rent, the failure to provide audited accounts, thus preventing the profit share to be circulated; the failure to pay insurance on the building; and the failure to establish a sinking fund, are still subject to court proceedings——

Please allow the Taoiseach to continue without interruption.

Literally, it has already sunk.

I am reading from the court order.

The court jester.

If Opposition members want to make fun of Mr. Justice Kelly's order, that is a matter for them.

Deputy Burton has been claiming that the national aquatic centre is a pet project of mine. I wish to confirm to the House that this is the case. I am proud to claim it as such. The motivation of the Government in developing the centre in the first place was to provide a 50 metre pool for the country and, specifically, a suitable location for hosting the aquatic events of the Special Olympics. The project was delivered on time and within budget.

As were the cracks in the concrete.

The Taoiseach's time is up.

I only need another minute; I have injury time. Opposition members are giddy because they are getting their holidays.

Please allow the Taoiseach to continue without interruption.

He will be on his holidays.

The national aquatic centre has drawn well deserved admiration from those who have visited and used the facilities since the centre was opened just over two years ago.

It is leaking.

It has successfully hosted the Special Olympics Summer Games and later in the same year the European short course championships, both to significant acclaim. In its first year of operation it had close to 1 million visitors which placed it among the top attractions in the country.

It continues to be equally popular as a facility for those who love water sports, especially young people, tourists and swimmers of all ages and abilities. Deputy Kenny has referred to a statement made last week by my colleague, the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, who said the capital expenditure provision represented value for money. I fully agree with him.

It is time to retire.

I am glad to receive confirmation from the Taoiseach that this is his pet project and that, therefore, he knows all about it.

It is one of them.

Will the Taoiseach explain who is responsible for the fact that the roof blew off the building——

The wind.

Please allow Deputy Kenny to continue without interruption.

I hope they can put it back up in the Taoiseach's constituency office in St. Luke's.

While I am hugely powerful, I am not the one who will organise it.

I remind the Taoiseach that the wind also blew over a lot of other rooftops, none of which blew off.

It blew off a lot of them.

Who is responsible for the inferior construction of the building and the fact that 5 million litres of treated water is leaking out on a monthly basis?

Does the Taoiseach stand over the remarks he made about the shelf company on 26 March 2002, that despite being a shelf company, it was a company not only of substance but of international standing? It was criticised in the High Court yesterday when Mr. Justice Kelly queried the reason a company worth €127 should be given a 30 year lease on an asset worth €62 million. Does the Taoiseach now stand over that statement? Has the company lived up to his expectations? Will he stand over the arrangements whereby the Government entered into an agreement with the company which was sharply criticised in the High Court?

I was in the Mansion House last night to welcome the new Lord Mayor of Dublin, Councillor Catherine Byrne. In the middle of all the pomp and power, I noticed the coat of arms of the Ahern family whose motto reads——

Water wings.

——Per ardua surgo, I rise through difficulties. As the Taoiseach is nearing his escape from the House for his summer holidays, how does he intend to deal with this matter? Does he plan to wade, swim or dive through the difficulties?

I suggest he change the motto.

Since Deputy Kenny has asked for my opinion, the Government is not happy with the performance of the company. While it has done a very good job in Killarney in the Kerry operation, it has not done a good job in this case. That is the reason CSID has brought the company to court. I support the action being taken. Obviously, I do not stand over the remarks made at the time.

I have already answered the question of what happened on 1 January. People have been critical of the damage caused by the freak storm. It is unfortunate it damaged a large number of buildings in the area, uprooted 200 year old trees and hit the centre. A report on the damage was commissioned by the OPW following a request from the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism in consultation with CSID. Its findings were taken into account in agreeing the repair programme with the contractor. Legal, contractual and financial issues are being considered in the light of the report.

Our primary concern at all times must be to protect the taxpayer's investment and that is what we are doing. In spite of all the exaggerations in the newspapers about leaks and cracks, the national aquatic centre is fully operational——

In the Government.

——and bringing endless enjoyment to adults and children, day in, day out, as well as providing a top class facility for our swimming athletes. I was in it ten days ago for a national swimming competition in which children and teenagers from all over the country participated. Since the issues are being dealt with in the courts, CSID is constrained from dealing with them in the media while it is fighting in the courts. I want to see the company win the case and compel Dublin Waterworld to pay. I hope the necessary legal process will resolve the issue.