Cuirim fáilte roimh an Taoiseach, atá tagtha ar ais ón obair thábhachtach a bhí ar siúl aige inné le Príomh-Aire na Breataine. Dá mba rud é go raibh an Taoiseach anseo, bheadh sé in ann freagra a thabhairt ar cheist faoin ghrianghraf a tógadh ar chostas €3 milliún leis an iar-Aire Micheál Ó Máirtín i gCorcaigh cúpla bliain ó shin.

The Taoiseach announced yesterday a review of procedures for the management and control of major ICT projects in the public sector. As Deputy Rabbitte noted yesterday, it seems to involve consultants reviewing consultants.

Arising from the Government decision on this matter, will the review involve a look-back audit of projects currently under way, such as the Reach project? In fairness, it has a website, www.reachservices.ie, with many links to Government agencies. I understand, however, that this cost in excess of €31 million and that €24 million of that was paid to consultants. It is a good website but it cost in excess of €31 million. Will the review announced cater for that? John Citizen contacted me by e-mail last night at 10.20 p.m. to say questions should be asked about the Reach project and whether it has been good value for money. Perhaps the review announced by Government might examine that.

Will the review examine a major project between the Health Service Executive and a company called iSOFT? This contract relates to hospital information systems projects. In 2003, iSOFT was recommended to undertake this project following a detailed review by none other than Deloitte & Touche. What has happened this €400 million project since is unclear. The Tánaiste yesterday suggested that the Minister, Deputy Martin, had put a stop to it but I have been informed that the contract for iSOFT was signed following emergency high level meetings between the Department of Health and Children, the Taoiseach's Department and the Attorney General's office earlier this year. Will the review announced yesterday include a look-back audit of projects like Reach and major projects like iSOFT?

The new set of controls on which the Government decided will ensure that major IT projects in all areas are managed to best practice and standards. It will look back on projects. A new cross-departmental peer review is being introduced with immediate effect to cover existing and new major projects. Anything that is ongoing, therefore, will be examined, including the projects mentioned by the Deputy.

The new system will comprise senior personnel with a track record of successful management of projects, both IT and otherwise, and will be delivered on time and within budget. It is a cross-departmental agency and will bring the best of public service expertise to bear in all agencies and will be supplemented, where necessary, by external expertise from the private sector and internationally.

I wish to clarify the point made by Deputy Kenny this morning and by Deputy Rabbitte. I merely wish to clarify it; I am not taking issue with the point, which concerns consultants watching consultants. It will most likely not be done by consultants. If we are engaged in some major project we could bring in somebody with expertise from the private sector or banking to sit in on the review and give his best advice, as we do in many sectors. It is not a question of a paid consultant coming in to do another consultancy; it would be a group sitting down with somebody with professional expertise who has done this in the private sector. That works very well for us in many ways.

From now on the review will apply at various stages of contracts over the full life cycles of the projects, commencing with an initial approach being proposed, and the persons conducting the review will be independent of the project teams.

This is the third or fourth day we have had questions about IT related projects. Obviously, in that kind of parlance the fatal error of this Government is the fact that nobody is prepared to take responsibility when something goes wrong. The Tánaiste has made some effort to redress some of the scandalous waste of public money.

I am sure the Taoiseach is a person who likes to set the record straight. Last week, he claimed in the House with some pride that he had rejected the use of outside consultants when the e-Cabinet project was brought to fruition. He said he used his own staff and he was not prepared to bring in outside consultants because, to use his own words, they would cost a fortune.

On 15 July 2004, when the Minister, Deputy Hanafin, had responsibility for this project, she explained in her press release that there were not just one set of consultants, not two, not three, not four but five sets of consultants brought in to deal with that particular project. A company called eVision worked on the design and build, Fusio Limited did the on-line viewing, Bic Systems worked on the hardware, Fujitsu Siemens delivered the security systems and PwC did the feasibility study.

Is it not a fact of life that a catalogue of gross incompetence is the reason we do not have the additional 2,000 gardaí, the front-line services we deserve and why we still have waiting lists while trolleys are piled up in the corridors of some hospitals?

Deputy, your time has concluded.

Is the Taoiseach now prepared, at this late stage, to accept responsibility and have people down the line from him accept responsibility? They will dance to the tune of the consultants and take the credit but when something goes wrong, is there anybody on that side of the House in charge and prepared to accept responsibility for the taxpayers' hard won taxes?

As the Tánaiste said yesterday and I said last week, it is a fact that, despite intense opposition to our proposal to bring together the 11 health boards, we established the Health Service Executive——

It is all our fault.

Allow the Taoiseach reply without interruption.

——to allow us correct the ways of the past and deal with these issues in a proper way.

Deputy Kenny is right to say that people with design and international expertise were engaged on the e-Cabinet project. The point I made last week is that we did this for under €5 million because we needed the outside expertise to come in only to do some of the design work. We do not have those kind of designers within the system. The work was done by a project team consisting of members of the departmental staff. If that work had been undertaken by outside contractors the project would have cost tens of millions of euro whereas we spent only €4 million. That was my point.

Nobody in this House, or on this side of the House, defends waste. Nobody defends consultants where we should not have them.

The Government creates waste.

That is not what the Taoiseach said last week.

The project was over budget.

In many cases consultants come in where the public service does not have the expertise to undertake a job. That expertise is necessary. Where members of the public service have the expertise they do that work under the guidelines set by the Department of Finance. It is not the case that whenever someone comes in waste is created. The impression people attempt to give that every time a consultant does a job it creates waste is incorrect. We are trying to manage systems effectively and are doing so very effectively. We now have more resources than ever before which means we must be more careful. That is what we will continue to do.

The Government will continue to waste resources.

There are excellent services in this State and we have more teachers, nurses and staff.

We have more trolleys.

We have more trolleys and more crime.

It is good that we are able to spend €40 billion and we do not have to borrow that as we did before.

Spending money, that is what the Government is doing.

What happened when the Opposition was on these benches?

We do not have a national debt higher than that of Ethiopia, we have one of the lowest in the world and we should be proud of that.

I call Deputy Rabbitte.

Is there a machine that can draw up the P60s to get rid of the Government?

To which party does Deputy Ring belong? Has he joined the Labour Party?

I know Deputy Ring's name begins with an "R" but I called Deputy Rabbitte.

The Government is weary and dreary.

The Opposition would be dreary and scary in Government.

Government Members will not get jobs as consultants because they do not consult with anybody.

Contrary to what the Taoiseach says, last Tuesday he tried to defend this phenomenal waste. He also denied there was a problem. He instanced the e-Cabinet project as an area into which no consultants were brought and boasted that it cost only €5 million. How many people are involved in the e-Cabinet project, apart from the 15 computer geniuses present? Are there 100 people altogether? This project is intended to be great value for money to put the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Martin, on-line so that he does not read the document anyway.

There are two questions at issue: one, to use the dreadful phrase, is what happens "going forward", and the other is what action the Taoiseach will take as a result of what has been exposed? We rely entirely on the media to know what was decided at the Cabinet meeting yesterday. I am still not clear on this from the Taoiseach's remarks this morning. It has all the hallmarks of a solution cobbled together by some intelligent civil servant to get the Government over the hump of the single biggest scandalous waste in its seven years in Government.

What does the Taoiseach mean when he says there is to be a peer review of all IT contracts? The Tánaiste told us yesterday in the House that "there was no fixed price contract with the consultants. It appears that the more they worked, the more they got paid. There was no incentive in the contract for the consultants to deliver a particular project ". What kind of outside expertise will the Taoiseach bring in? According to The Irish Times this morning these people might be academics and other independent experts. Will they come in and work for nothing, given that we paid Deloitte & Touche €50 million for a botched job?

Will the Taoiseach take any action against those consultants? Will the State initiate legal action against the consultants who got away with €50 million of taxpayers' money to leave a mess behind, which the Tánaiste admitted did not deliver the project? We do not know if the Government is writing this off and putting it down to experience. Will legal action be initiated against the consultants and will the Taoiseach, as Head of Government, take any action against any of the three Ministers who left the taxpayers with this bill of €166 million?

The cost of the e-Cabinet project, which was projected to cost €5 million up to the end of last year, was €3.489 million. Civil servants did most of the work on this as additional work, which they did extremely well and kept down the costs. All civil servants can link and feed in to the e-Cabinet system; it is not a system for only 15 of us, it is for the Civil Service to remove the paper mountains that have traditionally been used in the system. It is an effective system, with further enhancements which will be rolled out over the course of the year and next year.

Deputy Rabbitte said he is not clear about yesterday's decision. The Department of Finance has a list of Government guidelines to deal with all contracts. Accounting Officers should make sure those guidelines are correctly followed. In the normal course of events when consultants come into the Department they either do work or give advice. There is a distinction between these roles, sometimes they give advice on a short project, sometimes they come in physically to engage in a project as they did with the HSE.

The new set of controls the Government agreed yesterday was not cobbled together. It involved issues on which the centre for management, organisation and development, CMOD, in the Department of Finance had been engaged for some time.

The Department of Finance became concerned about the PPARS system when the HSE was set up. In the letter, which is in the public domain, and through other meetings it asked the HSE if it really knew where it was going, and was it moving on despite uncertainty about whether it could roll out the package to the entire health system. The Secretary General in the Department of Health and Children also raised the issue and asked for a review of the system over the summer. That is why the HSE was discussing the issue last Thursday.

The new set of controls agreed yesterday will ensure that major ICT projects in all areas are managed to best practice standards, namely, Government guidelines which the Department of Finance will consider again to see if there is anything missing. The new cross-departmental peer review process is being introduced with immediate effect to existing and new major projects.

The new system will comprise the most senior personnel with a track record of successful project management, both IT and other, of which we have several. In the Revenue Commissioners, the Department of Social and Family Affairs, and the Department of Agriculture and Food, extremely successful schemes have been rolled out that do this country proud and are internationally recognised as top class systems.

Why were they not used in the first place?

Unfortunately the HSE did not ask them, that is why we are asking them now.

The Taoiseach is waffling.

The cross-departmental agency will bring the best of the public service expertise to bear on all agencies. It will be supplemented where necessary by the external expertise of the private sector and internationally. That would be a case of asking somebody in the private sector to give of his or her time and expertise to assist us.

The Taoiseach should ask them to give the money back.

That is a good way of proceeding. One does not need another consultancy firm to do this.

On Deputy Rabbitte's last point about what will happen next, the Comptroller and Auditor General is preparing his report and the HSE decided last week to have a comprehensive review at its meeting on 2 December. When the Government receives that report it will decide what else it should do. We should wait and let the HSE undertake a full evaluation of what happened over recent years.

What will happen to the three Ministers involved?

The Taoiseach has said a new set of controls is being introduced to ensure that ICT contracts proceed in accordance with best practice. Most taxpayers, who contribute their hard-earned euro towards the running of this State, including its health services, believed that was already being done. I am not at all clear regarding what will now be different, except that the Taoiseach is to ask a few favoured businessmen to give up their time to sit in on a committee some Thursday morning. I cannot see what change that makes to the situation.

An example of the capacity to use weasel words to get out of a series of ever more costly mistakes and errors can be seen in this morning's The Irish Times, in which a spokesperson for the former Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Martin, when asked about the e-portal, raised by Deputy Kenny, that disappeared after €3 million had been spent on it, said all the Minister had been doing was announcing the launch of a concept.

Deputy Rabbitte without interruption.

Are there many other such concepts?

The Deputy's time is concluded.

Is it like the concept of electronic voting? That was another one. How can the Taoiseach, as head of Government, go on avoiding taking action against any Minister, no matter how great the cock-up inflicted on the taxpayer, who ends up covering the cost? I cannot see what was involved in yesterday's decision other than a formula to get the Taoiseach over the hump of this debacle. Are there other open-ended contracts?

The Deputy's time is concluded.

The Tánaiste has admitted that this is an open-ended contract. Are there other such contracts in the system, and how can bringing an official from the Department of Health and Children on a cross-departmental basis to consider a project in the Department of Social and Family Affairs assure us that it is operating in accordance with best practice? Does the Taoiseach intend to take any political action?

The Deputy's time has long since concluded.

Is the Government taking advice regarding whether any action will be taken against the consultants, who apparently got away scot-free with €50 million of taxpayers' money for making the biggest hames of an IT project in the history of the State hitherto?

I have answered that already and will repeat my replies. I have already said to Deputy Rabbitte that the judgment can be made only when we have a full report on what precisely happened between 2001 and 2005 regarding the HSE contract. I cannot make a judgment on that now; it would be unwise to do so.

The Taoiseach's Ministers were asleep.

I presume I will be unable to convince Deputy Rabbitte one way or the other, but yesterday he said we were introducing a system of consultant upon consultant. Today I explained that is not what is envisaged. Rather, we use people with expertise, although Deputy Rabbitte uses the term "favoured businessperson". Were he not trying to argue a political point, the Deputy would see that the project will enhance the public service. The reason consultants are brought in is that sometimes Departments lack in-house expertise and skills, have insufficient resources to complete a task on time or need an independent and objective view.

In ICT and other projects in this country, there has unfortunately been a high failure rate. Plenty of figures have come into the public domain in that regard in the last few days. The OECD has issued many warnings regarding issues of public governance and leadership, failure to identify and manage skills, lack of skills to manage external providers and failure to involve end users.

Sounds like——

The Taoiseach without interruption.

We have been trying for many years, in most areas, successfully, to have proper guidelines in place that are operated carefully and that Accounting Officers, Ministers and officials try to implement. At times, such as when the roll-out of Revenue was carried out, when the payment system for Revenue was changed, and when agricultural issues such as payments to farmers were addressed, it was highly successful. In other areas, there has not been the same success. It is not the case that every time there is an over-run money has been wasted. In many cases, the system changed, developed or was enhanced. In this case, it seems people simply kept on going, although they were struggling to reach the end. As the Tánaiste said yesterday, the open-ended contract in this case was a poor idea.

Why did they do it then?

Deputy Gormley, please allow the Taoiseach to conclude.

Deputy Rabbitte asked if there were other contracts. Obviously, I mentioned that question would be examined in the review. Regarding taking action against Deloitte & Touche or anyone else, we must base our decision on the report's findings and whether they simply continued based on the contract they were given, which was too open-ended. We have closed down such business in the infrastructural area, and we will do so in this area if necessary. There are many people carrying out individual consultancy contracts — companies both small and large — for Departments and agencies.

The Taoiseach's time is concluded.

Many others are actively involved in projects. They are doing a good job, and we should not try to tar everyone as having made a mess of things, since that is not correct.