On behalf of those on this side of the House, I would like to wish the serving member of An Garda Síochána who was injured in the line of duty last night a very speedy recovery and good health.

I wish to raise with the Tánaiste an issue of job creation and inward investment. It is an issue we have raised previously in the House and it has been discussed at the Committee on Business, Enterprise and Innovation and the Committee of Public Accounts. The Tánaiste will be aware the Succeed in Ireland initiative was a concept which flowed from the Global Economic Forum, the think tank that developed after the economic crash. The concept was to connect with and harness the Irish diaspora right around the world, with a view to creating inward investment and job creation in Ireland. One thing that flowed from that was a contract which was being managed by the IDA and contracted out to a contractor known as ConnectIreland. Interestingly, as the Tánaiste, Deputy Coveney, and the former Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Bruton, will know, the cost of every job created under this scheme was in region of €4,000 whereas the cost of an IDA job is in the region of €10,000. That contract ran out in 2017. Prior to that, there was notification of a tender process which was then rowed back on. Since March 2017, which is almost eight and a half months ago, we have been promised a review of that initiative. It is important to note that the Succeed in Ireland initiative brought into this country 95 new-name start-up enterprises, equating to in excess of 2,500 jobs. To be fair, the IDA will dispute the level of jobs but there is a verification process in regard to that.

Last week, in the absence of a Minister for Business, Enterprise and Innovation and while the Taoiseach was acting in that capacity, ConnectIreland, which was the contractor and which is in dispute in this regard, wrote to the Taoiseach, Deputy Leo Varadkar, and pointed out a number of issues in regard to it. The correspondence states:

In the course of our attempts to vindicate those diaspora, we have uncovered the most egregious, systematic and deliberate misconduct by the IDA in pursuit of its own self-interest, conduct that has laid waste to potentially thousands of new jobs and billions of euro of investment in Ireland. Despite our efforts to have these issues addressed, nothing has been done. We are constantly deflected by the mantra that our issues are nothing but a contractual dispute over the number of jobs created in the initiative. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, we have been trying to expose misconduct which is of public and national importance and goes far beyond our disagreements over job numbers. However, our efforts have been met with a campaign of misinformation, concealment and attempts to silence us, our stakeholders and the diaspora through interferences in the democratic process.

What we have is a disagreement, on the one hand, but, on the other, we have the Succeed in Ireland initiative which has huge merit in terms of linking with our diaspora from around the country, and which has delivered jobs and investment to this country.

Does the Tánaiste agree the Succeed in Ireland initiative has delivered jobs and investment into Ireland, which is of benefit, and that it has done so in a value for money fashion? Does he agree the Succeed in Ireland initiative should continue in some shape or form to deliver and to work in compliment with the IDA and Enterprise Ireland?

Last March, almost eight months ago, we were promised a review. When will it be completed and when can we expect to receive it? We have raised the issue a number of times. Will the Tánaiste note from the correspondence the Taoiseach has been given that the connectors are seeking a formal public investigation into why we have reached this juncture?

I thank the Deputy for raising these issues. He will appreciate that I will not be able to give detailed answers to all of his questions, but I will ensure the line Minister will contact him about them.

I am familiar with the Succeed in Ireland initiative and have been involved in a number of promotional events with ConnectIreland at different times. Undoubtedly, ConnectIreland has reached out to the diaspora and others in an effort to bring jobs to Ireland at a time when they are badly needed. It was an example of new thinking in putting in place new structures and new ways of reaching out to the diaspora, something the Government supports, but any initiative that uses public funding needs to be reviewed and tested to ensure we are getting full value for money and that it is working in a complementary manner with the other arms of the State that are doing similar work. My understanding is this is the process ConnectIreland has had to go through. I will ask the Minister to update the Deputy on the review to which he referred. The Government constantly assesses ways of reaching out in a more effective manner to the diaspora generally but with a particular view towards returning investment to Ireland. The record of IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland in recent years is strong. There has been a strong pipeline of increased investment in Ireland in the past two or three years, not just in Dublin but also across the country. Any organisation or initiative needs to be open to independent and robust scrutiny to ensure it is the best model for achieving what we are trying to achieve. ConnectIreland cannot be an exception. If some of the issues the Deputy raised are of real concern, we will try to get answers for him. If there is a dispute between ConnectIreland and other State organisations, we must ensure there will be an independent assessment to establish the facts.

I am not advocating on behalf of ConnectIreland which is happy to take its chances in competing in an open tender process to manage the scheme; rather, I am saying the Succeed in Ireland initiative was a success. The Tánaiste and I agree that the initiative taps into the diaspora in creating inward investment and jobs. Unfortunately, for the past eight and a half months there has been nothing but drift. The scheme was brought to an end prematurely having previously been extended. There was no reason not to extend the scheme in parallel with the review. Unfortunately, we have not seen the terms of reference for the review or the establishment of a review panel. When we raised this matter at a committee meeting yesterday, we received a dead man's answer. Granted, the new Minister has only been in office for a number of days, but the point must be impressed on the Government which must acknowledge its seriousness. There is a significant resource of people around the world who want to create jobs and invest in Ireland. We are not taking this as an opportunity to bash IDA Ireland. Like the Tánaiste, we acknowledge that it has played a considerable and successful role, but it is not above questioning either.

I thank the Deputy, but he is over time.

We must challenge IDA Ireland and the Department. Unfortunately, life is being choked out of the initiative. We are asking for a degree of urgency in the process and that the initiative move again nine months on.

I will raise the issue with the new Minister in the Department, but it is important to point out that ConnectIreland's original business model did not provide a viable return for the operator and subsequently needed to be altered. A contracting arrangement was put in place and financial support provided. We need to assess what happened with the business model, whether it was returning what was expected of it under the contractual arrangements in place and whether it is the best way of spending public money to get the return the Deputy and I both want, namely, more Irish people coming home and bringing jobs and ideas with them. There is no dispute on that issue. The only issue concerns the need for a robust, independent assessment of the story of ConnectIreland and the Succeed in Ireland initiative and to learn lessons from it. If the initiative has a role to play in the future, I would be comfortable with it. If it does not, so be it. We must ensure there are other ways to do what we wanted to do with the initiative, but that question should be the subject of the independent assessment that is under way.