Budget 2026 set out an expenditure ceiling of €117.8 billion. This reflects a significant uplift in expenditure to support the delivery of our programme for Government commitments. Expenditure figures from March were published on 7 April as part of the fiscal monitor. This is published monthly and sets out the spending position for each ministerial Vote group. It compares expenditure to the profile set out by Departments and to the previous year. Quarter 1 showed total gross expenditure was €26.4 billion. This was €1.6 billion, or 6.4%, higher than the same period last year. At an overall level, end-of-March spending is broadly in line with the plans submitted by Departments, with the aggregate variance from profile showing an underspend of 1.6%. Budget 2026 provided total capital spending of €19.1 billion, a record level of investment. This will work in tandem with reforms to support the delivery of critical infrastructure in electricity, transport, housing and energy. Capital spending at the end of March was €2.7 billion, showing an increase of 8% on the same period last year. The largest year-on-year increases were in the Department of Education and Youth, which was up €89 million; the Department of Transport, which was up €57 million; and the Department of housing, which was up €56 million. Capital spending, as the Deputy knows, tends of ramp up as the year progresses, with the highest spending levels in quarter 4. Budget 2026 also provided for a significant increase in the level of current expenditure, advancing key priorities in health, social protection and public services. End-of-quarter 1 spending was at €23.7 billion, or an increase of 6.2% on the end of March last year. This reflects budget 2026 measures such as social protection rate increases and front-line health and disability services.  The Vote groups with the largest year-on-year increases were the Departments of Social Protection and Health. Current spending is €0.2 billion or 0.9% behind the plans set out by Departments.  The majority of Vote groups are under profile. My Department actively monitors spending developments and is in ongoing engagement with all Departments to identify any spending risks and mitigations. There are other areas. I will continue on them in my next contribution.

Sentiment score: 0.10

To be clear, the expenditure ceiling increased to €117.8 billion, a significant expansion of public services and investment infrastructure in the economy. All I hear from the Deputy is to massively increase spending, which would significantly undermine the public finances. What we are seeking to do is moderate the overall growth in expenditure. In regard to the Department of education, in fact, there was a significant expansion year on year. It increased funding compared to the 2025 Revised Estimates Volume, REV, allocation funding increase, by 10%, reflecting a clear expansion for the Department of education specifically. My Department is in ongoing discussions on funding for the Department of Education and Youth. That discussion and engagement is ongoing across Government relating to any further allocation for 2026.

Sentiment score: 0.35

There is ongoing engagement with the Department of education. No decision has been made within Government on any additional funding at this point. There is a specific demand, particularly around special education, the demand of which was bigger than the budget forecasted and allocated. We are working constructively with the Department of education on that. When that concludes, I will be able to set out the broader context from a budgetary perspective. Some of the statements the Deputy has made are unfair. If she takes the quarter 1 position, as I have said, the aggregate variance from profile on spending shows an underspend of 1.6%. In fact, we are on profile or below profile across many Government Departments, which shows there is a much closer relationship between what was budgeted for and how Departments are spending, notwithstanding the challenge that exists within the Department of education and we are working with it on that. I will provide full, detailed information to the Dáil when that matter concludes within Government.

Sentiment score: 0.00

The Critical Infrastructure Bill is a central pillar of the Government’s broader infrastructure acceleration agenda. The need for a Bill to fast-track a limited number of strategically important projects through approval processes was identified in the Accelerating Infrastructure Report and Action Plan published last December. This Bill has been drafted and introduced. It passed Second Stage only this week. Its primary aim is to allow Government to designate certain projects or programmes as critical. This then requires all public bodies that may have an authorisation function for these projects or programmes to prioritise consideration of them within their approval processes. In practical terms, this means that relevant bodies will be required to prioritise, avoid delay, reduce timelines, parallel processes and co-operate to fast-track designated infrastructure but, other than modifying the application of section 15, the draft does not undermine or change any existing statutory processes or rights. The Bill and associated explanatory memorandum were published and, as I said, Second Stage progressed on 14 April. It is my intention to bring the Bill through both Houses of the Oireachtas before the summer recess and then commence the Act without delay. I propose to disapply section 15 of the climate Act to designated projects because of the delays this section may give rise to. It has opened up and risks a new channel for judicial reviews of the decisions of public bodies. The impact or risk of this is that it could slow the pace of infrastructure development and introduce additional uncertainty. Delays to infrastructure roll-out are, in my view, a key reason, in many instances, why we are not building the low-carbon economy we all want to build, particularly in the climate and renewable space. The report by Mario Draghi on EU competitiveness, for example, specifically identified Ireland as having the slowest approval process across the entire EU for renewable electricity. Designated projects or programmes will still have relevant climate considerations built into their development. Every Exchequer-funded project, for example, is already required to measure and price its greenhouse gas emissions under infrastructure guidelines. Under this Bill, climate and environmental obligations will still apply, such as the use of low-carbon cement in construction and many other areas. Disapplication simply removes an unnecessary layer that could drive further judicial reviews that undermines the development of critical infrastructure.

Sentiment score: 0.02

I do not have the legislation in front of me right now but if the Deputy looks at the Bill itself, the infrastructure definition refers to State-funded projects, for example. The designation is clearly around State-funded or supported infrastructure. I hope that clarifies that point. I know it was raised; I referenced that in my closing remarks on Second Stage as well. What we are trying to do here is remove this ambiguity and broad statutory interpretation that could emerge from section 15 relating to critical infrastructure projects. I used the example of the ring road simply because in the aftermath of it receiving permission, we already had NGOs saying they were going to use section 15 to try to get it caught up in more knots in the courts. It is my point that this has gone through all the approval stages and has been going on for decades, and we should get it done and built. We should not have further legislative ambiguity in a piece of legislation which potentially undermines a critical piece of infrastructure. Most of the infrastructure that we are seeking to build out is in public transport and our grid development, all to build a low-carbon future. For regions in the west of Ireland and elsewhere, we do need to build out important strategic road projects which also enhance connectivity and growth.

Sentiment score: 0.16

We want to lift the passenger cap. I do not believe it is a matter for broad deference to the courts to decide on that matter. We are very clear in our objective within Government to lift the passenger cap and to grow passenger numbers at Dublin Airport. I do not believe the climate legislation should be used to undermine that. It is an economic necessity for Ireland to do that. Similarly, we have critical infrastructure which should not be undermined because certain NGOs can take cases in respect of it, or anybody can bring uncertainty. People have a right to take judicial reviews but we as legislators should seek to remove ambiguity within our legislative framework. This presents risk within our legislative framework. That is the context around critical infrastructure. When it comes to what the Minister, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, is doing on LNG, there are also energy security concerns which have been brought to light in recent weeks which we have to respond to and be honest about. He is working on that separately. We are very clear that the definition in respect of infrastructure relates to State-funded projects or programmes. Obviously there would be a limited number which are designated in that context, which we brought to the Dáil as well. We have to get momentum in this. If we continue to be deferential, provide ambiguity and have multiple legal avenues and judicial reviews, no matter how much spending we put aside for infrastructure, we will not improve delivery.

Sentiment score: 0.08

The programme for Government set out the clear prioritisation for the NDP review to ensure that investment can be maximised in the coming five years for strategic infrastructure. This includes the key energy, water and transport networks on which all future development relies. This is critical to allow Government to meet the additional targets in terms of building more homes and also to support our competitiveness. My Department’s Build Report 2025 identified cost volatility and capacity constraints as key risks to NDP delivery and the recent fuel price developments accentuate these risks. While construction inflation in Ireland moderated through 2024 and 2025, recent fuel price increases are reintroducing cost volatility and will impact in a number of ways, including on direct construction costs, materials manufacture and the wider supply chain. Global fuel prices have increased sharply, driven primarily by geopolitical conflict in the Middle East and disruption to oil and gas supply chains, particularly through the Strait of Hormuz. International Energy Agency analysis indicates that this represents the most significant oil supply disruption in decades, with severe short-term volatility in crude and refined product prices. The OECD and IMF have both warned that sustained high prices will place upward pressure on inflation and weaken growth prospects across energy-importing economies, including Ireland. That is why, over the last number of weeks, we implemented a significant cut in excise duties, reducing the price per litre of both diesel and petrol. We have also extended the fuel allowance. That package was €250 million, and a new package of measures on fuel costs has been introduced in support of particular sectors. This is all about keeping supply chains moving, supporting jobs and making sure our economy continues to function. In 2023, my Department introduced a suite of amendments to the public works contracts to address the risks. I will return to that when I come back in.

Sentiment score: 0.01

I was about to say that we introduced a suite of amendments to the public works contracts to address risks relating to the price inflation of materials, fuel and energy in public works contracts. These amendments introduced a risk-share approach to price inflation of materials, fuel and energy prices. We utilise specific indices published by the Central Statistics Office which address the main input cost categories that are common to most construction projects. Price movements in the specified indices above a predetermined threshold result in an adjustment to each interim payment to reflect inflation, taking into account the weightings applied to the different materials and fuel categories. The amended price variation provision represents a proportionate and balanced approach to the risk posed by inflation to the delivery of critical public works projects. Like the Deputy, I want to see that project move quickly. It has been going on for decades. It is hugely important for housing supply in Galway and also for wider industrial development, in addition to other public transport objectives which we want to achieve in the west of Ireland. I know all of us want to see it move quickly now over the period ahead.

Sentiment score: 0.06

We have significant immediate volatility in pricing but the inflationary context is something that takes a more sustained impact. There is still wider uncertainty on that. Next week we will publish the annual progress report, where the Department of Finance will set out updated forecasts on the inflationary environment and the predictions around that, and will also provide a scenario analysis depending on how this evolves. We have good flexibility within the public works contracts, which are important. We want to proceed with our national development plan and with a lot of the priorities we have. Transport, in particular, has one of the biggest allocations for the next five years, with over €24 billion or just under one in four euro going to transport. Notwithstanding what was raised earlier, and earlier in the week, many of the projects from a transport perspective are in public transport, in low-carbon projects in terms of bus, rail and others that we want to see advanced over the next five years.

Sentiment score: 0.19

A special purpose vehicle is a separate legal entity established for a specific, predefined financial objective. From a public sector perspective, there can be risks with regard to long-term liabilities for defects, maintenance failures or operational issues. The Government has already taken action to address some of these risks. With respect to public works projects, SPVs are extensively used in the area of public private partnerships. They occasionally arise in conventional delivery models in the form of subsidiaries or joint ventures. They may also feature in housing delivery models such as turnkey or development agreements where private developers establish SPVs for specific developments. However, these agreements are contracts to purchase, rather than what would be considered a traditional construction contract. While SPVs are a legitimate means to limit a business’s liability, careful scrutiny is required in the procurement process so as to ensure that the successful tenderer has the capacity to undertake the contract to completion and to bear the liability that is placed upon them under the contract. Where public private partnerships are concerned that liability can extend to 20 years or more beyond construction of the asset. The PPP company is liable for the maintenance and operation of the asset as well as its handover upon completion to a predetermined standard. The financial standing of the PPP company and individual members of any joint venture are assessed and minimum financial thresholds for individual members of a joint venture may be specified. In the case of a member of a joint venture or a tenderer who is a subsidiary, if they are unable to meet the financial requirements of the tender, they would normally be required to provide a parent company guarantee. The terms of the contract define the extent of liability that the successful tenderer is required to bear. Under the standard public works contract, that liability may extend to a period of six to 12 years after completion of the asset. The choice will normally be predetermined by the level of complexity associated with the project. The terms of the contract also specify the levels of insurance that the successful tenderer is required to maintain for the duration of the contract. The standard form of public works contract requires the contracting authority to set a financial cap on liability. Contracting authorities may specify a lesser or greater amount depending on the risk or complexity of the project.

Sentiment score: 0.22

I might conclude what I was about to say. I appreciate the points the Deputy has raised. The standard form of public works contract requires the contracting authority to set a financial cap on liability. That depends on the complexity of the project. There are also number of other requirements that are designed to mitigate the risk of non-performance, including holding back a specified percentage of each interim payment - half the total retention sum held is released upon completion with half retained over the defects liability period. It is only released if all the recorded defects are addressed or it may be paid to a different contractor where the original one fails to address the defects. On most public works contracts, there is also a requirement for a performance bond, normally 10% of the contract sum. This is also reduced in half upon completion with the remaining portion held in place for 15 months post completion. We have a government contracts committee for construction, ensuring we develop the model with construction and manufacturing expertise so that there is a collaborative approach at the design phase in terms of the projects which are advanced. This issue has been related to me and particular sectors have raised it. It is about striking a balance and ensuring that there is respective liability. We also need to ensure we do not crowd out competition in the wider sector.

Sentiment score: 0.02

I have had this relayed to me and we have integrated some of the OGP procurement team into the infrastructure division so that there is wider industry engagement in terms of delivery. However, it is about the balance. There is a need for a framework which attaches liability and responsibility to how contracts are delivered, while ensuring we drive competition. The Minister of State, Deputy Feighan, will be publishing a national procurement strategy in the coming weeks to drive more SME involvement in the broader procurement process for the delivery of infrastructure but also in the wider economy for public contracts. I have had that relayed to me by engineers and others in the community. There is always ongoing engagement with my Department relating to this matter.

Sentiment score: 0.17

Allowing the Government to designate certain projects or programmes as critical infrastructure is the core of the Critical Infrastructure Bill. In response to a designation, all public bodies involved at any stage in the authorisation process must prioritise and accelerate the authorisation process applied to the maximum extent possible. By establishing a clear legal basis for prioritisation, the legislation will reduce ambiguity and ensure that critical projects and programmes receive focused and co-ordinated attention across Departments, regulators and agencies. It will address the unacceptable delays in our infrastructure-approval processes by mandating whole-of-State co-operation and create a fast-track pathway for critical projects and programmes to drive delivery. Section 3 of the Bill deals with the designation process. The text of the Bill has been published in full along with an explanatory memorandum. This section of the Bill allows the Minister for public expenditure to make a recommendation to Government that a designation order be made in respect of a project or programme. There are a number of matters that I may have regard to in making a recommendation. They are set out in section 3 of the Bill. They include: the need to ensure effective and efficient delivery of a project or programme; whether delay or failure to deliver a project or programme may have adverse economic or social consequences for the State; whether a project or programme may impact in a positive or negative manner on the delivery of any other project or programme; the national development plan; and such other matters in relation to infrastructure as I may consider appropriate. Project and programme are defined in section 1 of the Bill. A project means a project, the purpose of which is the delivery of infrastructure and that is funded by capital investment, by or on behalf of the State or by or on behalf of a public body. Infrastructure is also defined in the section. The definition refers to any infrastructure that enables essential facilities and systems of the State to function effectively and includes, but is not limited to, energy, transport and water systems. Following a recommendation from the Minister for public expenditure, the Government will, by order, designate projects or programmes as critical infrastructure. Every designation order will be laid before Dáil Éireann, which may nullify the order within 21 days. The process of considering which programmes or projects I may recommend to the Government will commence after the Oireachtas has passed the-----

Sentiment score: 0.05

As to what we have tried to do, the Deputy and others will appreciate that if we were to list a load of projects in primary legislation, there may be another project which will emerge and which is of a critical nature. The other challenge is that this particular list then gets caught in 2026. In four years, or when a future government wishes to update the national development plan, there needs to be an ability to utilise this legislative framework to continue to designate projects appropriately. That is why we have established the statutory framework around how projects will be designated. Obviously, they are connected to the national development plan. It relates to State-funded projects, and I have set out the broad legislative framework as to how the decision will be made. It is important to have flexibility around it being an enabling framework to allow future governments to drive delivery. That is why we have not specified the particular projects or programmes in the Bill. I have set out the broad definition, as the Deputy mentioned, regarding how the designation process will work and what is defined as infrastructure within-----

Sentiment score: 0.14

Absolutely. What we have tried to do in the first instance is build the evidence base as to where the issues were, which we did last year. There has been strong stakeholder engagement. The report was published last July. There has been engagement with the Oireachtas committee on the challenges and the delivery gaps which exist. There has been a co-ordinated response from the stakeholder community and others in what has informed the drafting process around this Bill. The issue with doing pre-legislative scrutiny is that there is a risk this would lapse into the autumn, and we want to use the Bill to get projects done. Nearly everybody in the Opposition would share the objective of getting them delivered, whether it is critical grid infrastructure, which we need to build our low-carbon, renewable future, whether it is some of the public transport projects that have been referred to, or I can list some of the other areas as well. The Bill is a very clear enabling framework, and I want to be able to enact it quickly. Again, I want to work with everyone to get it right as well.

Sentiment score: 0.21