I advise members of the constitutional requirement that members must be physically present in the confines of the Leinster House complex to participate in public meetings. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of a person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

The first item on the agenda is the minutes. The minutes of the last two meetings, of 12 November and 19 November, have been circulated. Are they agreed? Agreed.

There are two items of correspondence. One is an invitation, received from the Construction Industry Federation, CIF, on behalf of the Master Builders and Contractors Association and the Civil Engineering Contractors Association council, inviting the committee to tour in the new year their project sites and offices to see how construction contractors operate. I suggest that we note that correspondence and agree to consider a visit to sites in the new year as part of our work programme. We will come back to it in the new year as part of our work programme.

The next item of correspondence is an invitation from IBEC and Accenture to a breakfast meeting called Ambition to Action: Optimising Ireland's Infrastructure Delivery.

It is on 9 December at 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. The correspondence received invites members to a breakfast briefing exploring the future of infrastructure delivery in Ireland and it takes place on Tuesday, 9 December from 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. Members can reply directly. Each member of the committee has got an invitation and those who choose to go can reply and attend that accordingly. We note that correspondence.

Before the witnesses come in I wish to inform the committee that the policy adviser to the committee, Niamh Murray, will be leaving us from next Monday to take up another position within the co-ordination unit of the committees secretariat, which is very important. The number of committees has increased over the years and it is very important we have good co-ordination at committee secretariat level with all the committees that are meeting. Niamh has brought a lot of policy experience to our committee, not least during the drafting of the first report of the committee, which was published in July, and we wish her the best in her new role. She will not be too far away. She will be replaced by Alan Morton, who is attending today in the Public Gallery. We wish him well too and look forward to working with him from the next meeting. He is already an experienced member of staff in the Houses of the Oireachtas.

I want to raise another issue which is totally relevant to the role of this committee. Members may have seen that judicial review proceedings have been brought in relation to MetroLink. As a committee we have discussed the impact judicial review proceedings can have on delivery of major national infrastructure projects but this seems timely for the committee to discuss matters like this. We all agree that judicial review is an important right and has its place, but this is something that the committee would like to discuss. I can ask the secretariat to look at a possible list of witnesses in this area if the committee would like to consider discussing this at a meeting, possibly on 10 December. We would contact the various sides involved from the MetroLink side, people on behalf of the residents and people who might have sought the judicial review. There may be legal constraints if the matter is before the courts but I think it is something we will discuss here within any legal constraints that apply. It is a very important piece of infrastructure. I think it is the biggest item in the national development plan. It is to carry 53 million people per annum or a million per week. It received planning in October. In the last day or so, residents – as is their right – have sought judicial review in respect of the permission granted by An Coimisiún Pleanála. This is an acid test for this committee to highlight the issues and the complications that happen in respect of much-needed public services and the rights of individuals to exercise their options as they would through the planning process and the courts. It is clear at this stage if there is a judicial review relating to MetroLink that it will delay the project to an extent and possibly significantly – we do not know. This is the biggest project in the NDP. There are ten noughts after the 1 or the 2 so that is either €10 billion or €20 billion because the estimate we had of €10 billion was some years ago, and by the time this will be finished I am sure it will be several times that. It is a major piece of infrastructure to help move a million people in Dublin. That said, it does have an implication for the residents and the people in the area. It is important this committee would deal with this in public session. I do not have specific names to propose inviting. We will have to work on that. We will come back to the committee members by email on what we are suggesting or if people have any suggestions but I think we should deal with it urgently and do so on 10 December, before the Christmas break. Can we get agreement in principle on that so we can try to arrange a meeting?

I agree on principle. It will not affect that the judicial review has been issued?

We will be checking with the Oireachtas Office of Parliamentary Legal Advisers on that. My view is we will go ahead with the meeting subject to doing it in a correct legal way rather than being told it is before the courts and we can do nothing about it.

We were thinking of having it in January. Is this about bringing it forward because of the-----

It is current; very current.

Very current.

It is current and people will like to hear this infrastructure committee at least having a view on it rather than saying we will wait until the new year. We will try and do it for 10 December if we can get people who are appropriate to come. Maybe those who have applied for judicial review proceedings will not be free to come but we will work in the next couple of days to try to get the people with views on both sides of the issue to come before the committee. We will come back to members by email on what we propose.

Is the Chair thinking of bringing them all in together?

We have not thought that out. It is only this morning we are looking at this issue.

I do not know what is right or wrong. I am just wondering.

We often do both. Both options are available at this time. Sometimes we bring in two sets of witnesses and sometimes we bring them in one after the other. We have not made a decision. It is just to try to proceed with this in the next fortnight. We will come back but all those arrangements will be cleared by the committee by email to the members. It is the acid test of where the committee is at in terms of infrastructure.

Can I make a proposal? This is down on the workplan already. At some stage we need to talk to the Ministers who are in charge of these big public infrastructural projects as well, namely, the Ministers for transport, housing, energy, etc. We are hearing from all sides of the project and the Ministers have great insight into all these things too. If there is space at the end of the first quarter, we might have some of the Ministers responsible for infrastructure in with us.

That is up to the members of the committee to go down that route. The Ministers will also be addressing the exact same issues at the line committees for each Department, whether transport, health or whatever. We want to make sure we are not crossing over each other in the same week or two weeks and there is a bit of space so one meeting is not a repetition of the one that took place the previous week.

Sure.

Do people think that is a reasonable idea? Up to now we have avoided Ministers and politicians and dealt with the people who are actually on the planning, construction or delivery side. We have held off on politicians and Ministers up to now. That is definitely open for consideration in the new year.

Grand. Very good.

We will suspend briefly while witnesses take their seats.