2026-02-12

12. Deputy John Connolly asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation if the infrastructure guidelines have been amended as per action 23 of the Accelerating Infrastructure Report and Action Plan, including for increased project expenditure thresholds; the removal of the external assurance process and enhanced timelines for the preparation of the preliminary business case; when infrastructure projects can expect to benefit from the new guidelines; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10933/26]

Tugaim faoi deara ar maidin go bhfuil go leor de na ceisteanna ar an téama céanna, ar nós an chinn a bhí ag mo chomhghleacaí ar mo thaobh clé anseo maidir le cúrsaí infreastruchtúir agus an luas ar breá linn a fheiceáil le cur chun cinn i gcúrsaí infreastruchtúir agus infreastruchtúr a thógáil níos tapúla. Roimh an Nollaig, d'fhoilsigh an tAire an tuairisc nua. Before Christmas the Minister printed the Accelerating Infrastructure Report and Action Plan. I saw it described as one of the most comprehensive and ambitious Irish Government reports of recent times. This ambition is due to the number of actions and the timeline laid out for the completion of these actions. I want to ask about one in particular, which is action 23.

I thank Deputy Connolly and I appreciate his support on this. My Department is responsible for the infrastructure guidelines, which replaced the public spending code for capital appraisal since the end of 2023. These set the value for money requirements and guidance for evaluating, planning and managing Exchequer-funded capital projects. Management and delivery of investment projects and public services within allocation and the national frameworks is a key responsibility of every Department, Accounting Officer and Minister. Action 23 in the accelerating infrastructure report, published in December 2025, commits my Department to streamline and speed up the project approvals process by amending the infrastructure guidelines. In line with this action, I brought a memorandum to Government this week on the following changes to the infrastructure guidelines. In relation to major projects, the threshold will increase from €200 million to €500 million for sectors with a well-established track record of delivery, particularly in the energy, transport and water sectors. The external assurance process will be replaced with a streamlined and time-bound internal review by the Department for all sectors to save significant time. Major projects at approval gate 2 will no longer need ministerial approval and may now be approved solely by the Accounting Officer of the Department that is funding the proposed project. Ministers will continue to be involved at approval gates 1 and 3, which are the critical decision points. Trying to remove duplicate and unnecessary steps to save time has been the central objective for us in government. These changes will remove unnecessary time delays for critical infrastructure projects while retaining the necessary governance and oversight arrangements to ensure value for money for the taxpayer. In particular, the removal of the external assurance process, which was taking on average 20 weeks, will ensure projects move more rapidly through the delivery lifecycle while ensuring projects over a particular threshold will see the major project advisory group involved. These and other recommendations in the action plan, including on the introduction of administrative guidance on timelines for preliminary business case assessment and maintaining a maximum length, will be included in the overall public financial management and control framework as part of the wider review of public financial procedures. Saving time and improving delivery is our wider focus.

I welcome the Minister's confirmation that we are not removing political approval for these projects. There was some concern about the elimination of ministerial approval at stage 2 of the project timeline but the Minister has clarified that ministerial approval will still be required at stages 1 and 3. This is very welcome. There was a sense that we were moving on and leaving decisions to unelected officials rather than Ministers. One of the reasons I have focused on this action plan is because of its reference to transport and water infrastructure. We are all familiar with delays in the progression of major transport infrastructure and major water infrastructure. One of the things outlined in the action is that the approval processes in transport are to be reviewed to identify opportunities to eliminate duplication. Uisce Éireann receives a lot of criticism for how it implements infrastructural plans but it is clear now that the guidelines we have set down for it are part of the reason for this. At present, Uisce Éireann business cases must be approved through the infrastructure guidelines and by the CRU. Will the Minister provide clarity on transport and water in particular, and on the elimination of dual processes?

On Deputy Connolly's first point, this is removing an unnecessary middle step which was adding time. The critical points are approval of the preliminary business case, which sets the political direction for a project to be advanced with prospective capital spend, and final approval for a contract award, which involves the respective Minister. Again, it removes a middle step which did not provide value and just added time. This is what is being changed. In terms of transport and water projects, we will have a regulatory simplification unit to look at the wider regulatory landscape where we have duplication of approvals, whether through the CRU or other respective bodies. The changes we are making relate to the thresholds and will significantly help the better delivery of water infrastructure in the State by moving the threshold from €200 million to €500 million. There are certain dual approvals required and, in some instances in transport, sometimes more than two approvals required and multiple agencies regulatory bodies are involved. This will be assessed by the regulatory simplification unit to simplify the approval process and avoid duplication, as Deputy Connolly has referenced, to speed up delivery.

I thank the Minister. I would like clarity. The emphasis and focus in action 30 is on transport and water. Will the Minister confirm that it is not limited to these and that we are looking at using this action in other areas? The Minister mentioned energy at the outset. Further clarification on my next point would also be welcome. How do projects in the planning process stand in terms of this new action? Will they benefit from it? I hope we will get a positive planning decision, although it cannot be guaranteed, on the Galway city ring road. We would like to see this project move quickly should a positive planning decision come through. Another project on my mind is the quay in Rossaveel, which is in the planning process. I hope both of these, should they be granted planning approval, can move quite quickly to construction. Will the Minister clarify the status of those projects that have already been granted planning permission, such as the passing loop in Oranmore? Will there will be a difference in how projects in the planning process and projects that have completed the planning process are treated by this action plan?

We have taken every step in the infrastructure life cycle and tried to cut time. The Deputy referenced transport and water. We have the joint utilities and transport clearing house. That reflects those key sectors which build the foundations of any community in terms of water, energy and transport infrastructure. Improving co-ordination in how that wider infrastructure is delivered is part of that objective. All the utilities are involved in that, including Eirgrid and the ESB in the context of infrastructure. We will advance the critical infrastructure Bill, which will help set the prioritisation and political direction for the Government and the Oireachtas around particular projects. That could be in advance of projects going into the planning process. With some of the projects that are in the planning process, the wider risk when they leave it is that licensing and consents are sometimes required. We are reforming that area so we can deliver some of them in parallel. The risk of judicial review also hangs over a lot of projects. The reforms we will advance this year in the context of judicial reviews are to try to deal with that issue. One of the major issues when a project receives permission is whether it can actually start it if there is a threat of judicial review. My colleagues and I are also advancing that reform.