PwC conflict of interest
Deputies challenged the use of PwC to investigate the children's hospital overruns, arguing it had audited BAM and could not be independent. The Taoiseach said he had already answered the issue, later corrected the date PwC ceased auditing BAM, and argued Ministers cannot alter signed contracts.
I have asked several times, as have others, whether PwC is the appropriate group to investigate the scandal of overruns in the national children’s hospital. As the Taoiseach is aware, PwC worked for BAM, the main contractor, at the centre of this issue. It has received up to €34 million in fees for auditing BAM. That is a serious conflict of interest. I do not see how one can seriously expect us to believe that PwC is capable of being independent when it has that long history of a close relationship with the main contractor, BAM. Does the Taoiseach believe that PwC should be removed to ensure another company can provide a genuinely independent investigation and analysis of these scandalous overruns?
Comment on this
Has the Taoiseach informed himself, as the Head of Government, of any potential conflict of interest between PwC, which is carrying out the inquiry on behalf of the Department, and the main construction company, BAM? Has he personally questioned the fact that BAM has PwC on its books as its auditors? Is he satisfied there is no conflict of interest? If he is, will he outline his reasons to the House?
As I mentioned earlier, we now know that the development board was aware of the overruns in June and it discussed at a meeting-----
Comment on this
The Minister appointed the board without asking any questions as to whether this was on track. Does the Taoiseach believe it is appropriate for a Minister to appoint an entire board without even having a conversation with the chairman to see how a project is going, if it is overrunning or if is in budget or without asking any questions of that nature?
Comment on this
On the alleged conflict of interest, I answered that question when responding to Deputy Lowry earlier, namely, PwC ceased to be auditors in 2005.
Comment on this
My apologies. It was 2015, four years ago. This emphasises my advice to Deputies. Rather than asking the same questions again and again, perhaps they would familiarise themselves with the questions which already have been asked and the answers already given.
Comment on this
That is not an answer.
Comment on this
On the contract and hyperinflation clause, the Deputy is well aware that no Minister or no Government has the authority to change a contract already signed. Politicians and Ministers are no longer involved in contracts. That practice ended in tribunals many decades ago.
Comment on this
I requested the board change it, not the Minister.