Sinn Féin leader Mary Lou McDonald has claimed in the Dáil that the debacle surrounding the national children’s hospital is a direct result of governmental ineptitude. According to her, Taoiseach Simon Harris erroneously granted the contract to BAM in 2017 and again in 2019, despite growing scepticism and issues that had already surfaced, providing the developer with a second approval for phase two of the building by affixing his signature to the contract. She pinpointed this as the cause of all predicaments linked to the development of the hospital.
McDonald criticised the legal agreements for not safegaurding public funds, nor imposing deadlines on the contractor, and also for not ensuring effective project supervision.
In response to Leaders’ Questions on behalf of the Taoiseach, Paschal Donohoe, the Minister for Public Expenditure, clarified that the hospital board, representing the Government, is taking the necessary measures to ensure the hospital’s commencement. However, he reproached McDonald, accusing her of contradicting herself by opposing policies related to the hospital while also advocating for improved youth healthcare services.
Labour leader Ivana Bacik shed light on people’s grievances about the absence of effective outcomes, responsibility evasion, and the perpetual tendency to place blame elsewhere for project overspend and postponements.
Mr Donohoe conceded that the delays and expenses were not justifiable, and affirmed that the hospital board, as the Government’s representative, has consistently and effectively pushed back against unfounded contract claims.
Wednesday is set to see the unveiling of the information that none of the rooms in the new national children’s hospital meet standard requirements.
The overseeing body of the project, The National Paediatric Hospital Development Board (NPHDB), has accused the contractor, BAM, of neglecting its contractual obligations in regards to final inspections, fit-out, and quality. The chief officer of the NPHDB, David Gunning, is set to brief the Oireachtas Health Committee about the progress of the construction on Wednesday.
In his initial remarks, he plans to corroborate that BAM has communicated to the board that the closure of the €2.2 billion project is now scheduled for June 2025. This prediction pushes back the original conclusion date by 31 months from November 2022 and comes four months later than the deadline given to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) in May of last year.
Mr. Gunning indicates that the deadlines given by BAM have been altered 14 times within the last four years, including 4 modifications within the previous year. He also emphasises issues in the quality of rooms that BAM has claimed to have finished.
In his inaugural statement, he will state that while BAM has deemed 3,128 out of 5,678 clinical rooms in the hospital as complete, not a single one meets the required standard. “All these rooms require additional work before our team can validate them as finished. BAM continues to propose sections of the hospital for assessment and approval, despite their blatant incompletion.”
Upon reaching the end of August, the NPHDB had put €1,478,606,163 (inclusive of VAT) towards the project. The board had previously held back 15% of the payment due to the developer from May 2020 to February 2021 and had considered replicating this tactic in 2023. However, the contractor arranged a plan rendering the penalty unnecessary.
Recently, news revealed that the NPHDB is planning to press charges against BAM, aiming to claim over €20 million in damages.
In response, BAM asserted its confidence in its construction work for the exceptional facility, stating, “the room handover and fixing trivial matters is a standard part of the process which has undeniably been affected due to numerous alterations instructed by the client. This is a procedure, not an isolated incident, and rooms are only regarded as final upon the handover of the completed building to the customer.”
The building firm has forcefully dismissed as ill-judged, mistaken and unfounded the accusations made about its intentions to maximise profits from the Irish public. The company asserted that these allegations not only lack factual grounding but also hamper the timely completion of this critical and intricate assignment, as further stated in their response.