I remind the House once again of the strict time limits laid down in Standing Orders for Leaders' Questions. The times are: leader, two minutes; the member of the Government responding, three minutes; leader's supplementary question and member of Government's final reply, one minute each; and overall time at seven minutes. I am doing so early in this session in view of the overruns last week, the first full week of the session. On Tuesday and Wednesday, Leaders' Questions overran by 14 and 19 minutes, respectively.

That is shameful.

Long may it last.

That is a precedent.

As I acknowledged previously in the House and in correspondence, Leader's Questions is regarded as one of the more visible and lively features of Dáil sittings enabling topical issues to be raised early in the sitting day.

The Chair is trying to close down Leaders' Questions.

We cannot get answers.

In the spirit of the relative spontaneity of the procedure, I have rarely intervened during Leaders' Questions. However, in view of the overruns last week, which on a given day may not be uniform and can even create a perceived imbalance, I ask the leaders to co-operate with the Chair in ensuring the time limits laid down by the House are adhered to. It should not be necessary to remind the House that Leaders' Questions time is confined to the leaders of Fine Gael, Labour, the designated leader of the Technical Group and the member of the Government responding. All contributions by others are interruptions and are not in order.

Last week's overruns reflected the gravity of the situation and they were not a waste of time. Having been scalded in the House, I am sure the Taoiseach is glad to be on State business in Downing Street.

The business of the House last week was dominated by the startling revelation that more than €150 million of taxpayers' money had been wasted on a botched project dealing with an information technology system in the health sector which did not work. The Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, speaking on behalf of the Government, said this sum was a small amount of money.

The Tánaiste has had difficulties in the past being briefed on matters relevant to her Department but I hope she is fully attuned to all the IT issues in the health sector. For example, she will be familiar with the project known as the Irish health services portal, which was to establish a single Internet point of contact for members of the public through which they could access health services throughout Ireland. A contract to develop the portal was awarded early in 2004. Fortunately, on 5 May 2004 the portal was ready for launch and at 6 p.m. that day, after a frenzied photocall staged at 5.50 p.m., the then Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Martin, launched it.

Him again.

In the last sentence of his speech, he said, "It gives me great pleasure today to launch the Irish national health services portal which can be seen at the stand behind you." The Department of Health and Children followed up this launch by confirming in the document Health Information National Strategy, published in July 2004, that the portal was by then up and running.

The only problem is that the portal is not up and running. Unfortunately, the portal cannot be seen at the stand behind the Tánaiste or anywhere else because it does not exist. It is not there, it has disappeared and it is an ex-portal. The portal which was created by the press launch of the then Minister, Deputy Martin, has disappeared into the same black hole as e-voting, PPARS, the civic hub, Punchestown and all the others.

This photocall, which was staged in Cork during the European Ministers' meeting at a cost of €3 million, must be the most expensive in the history of the State. Not only has the portal disappeared but the HSE has re-tendered for a new job, called the unified website, which has all the characteristics of the last portal.

A second one.

The tender for this was prepared on Friday 30 September and those seeking to submit a tender have a short timeframe within which to complete their business. Is the Tánaiste aware of this project, has she any concerns over the way in which it is being conducted and is she not concerned about the ridiculously short time allowed to tender for this unified website as a successor to the portal that has gloriously disappeared?

Hear, hear.

Give it to the same crowd. They will know better the second time around.

I am aware of the e-portal and work on it was suspended by the HSE last February.

That sounds familiar.

The technology may not have been compatible with what was intended. It was originally scoped by Accenture. Incredible as it may seem, surveys in the United States show that only 28% of the technology scoped for works on the first occasion.

It is a chestnut.

The Tánaiste is looking for cover.

The Government should be exported to America.

The Tánaiste without interruption, please.

The scope for the exercise was completed as part of the information society initiative, which recommended to the Government that services be provided on a single website so that people could learn the health services available in different places. Work was suspended in February and a tender for a smaller project costing less than €250,000 has been advertised.

I have asked the HSE not to proceed with awarding any tender in this or any other technology area unless it is cleared by the Departments of Finance and Health and Children. That will be the position with regard to all technology projects in the health area.

The Tánaiste seems to be setting all standards by reference to the United States, including the privatisation of hospitals. The then Minister, Deputy Martin, in his speech on this matter said, "Crucially, it will enable the health services to deliver a consistent message to the public and to its employees". It has gone with the wind.

Is the Tánaiste not concerned over the manner by which this is being advertised? It has been expressed to me by a number of concerned people in the information technology sector that the time allowed for this tender leads to the assumption that this is written for a particular supplier. Will the Tánaiste investigate that?

Will she also familiarise herself with the Butler report, which looked at the health Ireland portal in February and produced a damning critique of it? The report noted that the portal did not have any business sponsor and its writers believed that high level ownership was essential if the project was to continue. The strongest recommendation made was that a sponsor should have been sought at the earliest opportunity. That kind of language is familiar in terms of the reports we have had of PPARS last week.

The Tánaiste made some changes at the Cabinet this morning. Who has political responsibility for this project? Who is in charge and can we take it that she will investigate the short tender time involved and at least clarify that this project is not written with any individual or specific supplier in mind?

I suspect that the people who were in contact with Deputy Kenny have also been in contact with me. As a result of that, I have ordered that the HSE must get the approval of the Departments of Finance and Health and Children before it proceeds to tender on this project. Any information project in the health area which has not already been committed will have to go through a process of thorough evaluation.

Now that we have a single organisation and somebody with responsibility for information technology and extensive experience in the health area, single lines of accountability will hopefully avoid situations where unnecessary public investment is made in projects that do not satisfy our needs.

Everybody would acknowledge that it is desirable to have a single site where information can be accessed. Why is it so difficult to be able to specify the technology? Accenture is a reputable company and it completed the scoping. IBM is also a reputable company and it produced the technology. Notwithstanding that fact, the project had to be suspended in February and that is why it has re-tendered. I assure Deputy Kenny that I will ensure that the tender is completed in an open, fair and transparent manner for all participants.