A general election may be four years away, so it is a little early to be declaring that the Government is in the last-chance saloon.
But there is a growing feeling, within this administration and outside it, that if the report of the accelerating infrastructure taskforce is not quite a last throw of the dice, then there certainly won’t be too many throws after this.
Simply put, at the current rate of progress, the Government is set fair to fail totally on achieving the sort of step change on housing delivery that would have an impact on electoral politics, never mind the social cost of such a failure.
[ Infrastructure plan: Coalition expects legal challenge to judicial review changesOpens in new window ]
And the report notes that unless changes are made to the way infrastructure is delivered, there would be critical shortages to water and power within “a few short years”, as well as further congestion on transport networks.
RM Block
And while continuing housing shortages would be deeply politically damaging for the Government, shortages of power and water would almost certainly be unsurvivable.
So, given the length of time it takes to deliver even modest projects in the public and private sectors, four years suddenly looks like not such a long time after all.
At the heart of the report are 30 actions to be taken by the Government in the coming months and years. They have deadlines for implementation and identify the agencies and departments concerned, which have been charged with making the changes. Crucially, while delivery of them is the responsibility of the named agencies and departments, the relevant Ministers and secretaries general of the government departments have been made ultimately responsible for ensuring the actions are completed.
In other words, this means that there is no hiding place when it comes to political responsibility – Ministers will have to drive these reforms in their departments, or risk being seen by the public and their parties as incapable of making progress. That is a level of transparency and responsibility which is unusual in Government plans.
In addition, the taskforce which drew up the plan – including senior officials, representatives of the utilities and private sector heavyweights like Seán O’Driscoll, chief executive of the ESRI and former Glen Dimplex chief executive, and the IDA’s Feargal O’Rourke – is to stay on to monitor implementation. Again, this indicates an intention to hold the feet of the permanent government and the quangocracy to the fire. And that is unusual in this State.
Will the Government’s new plan speed up the delivery of vital infrastructure projects?
Will it work? That depends on whether the political will and administrative energy that are present now can be sustained over a lengthy period. The nature of government is that there will be another crisis to distract its leaders before long; only if the determination to implement these changes is embedded in the structures and processes will it survive when the focus is elsewhere. Only if targets must be met for the weekly and monthly meetings – and not put off until next month with a shrug – will the challenging deadlines be met. Given the pace at which government usually moves, this is quite an ask.
However, we should know pretty quickly. A raft of actions is due to be progressed in early 2026. Among these are the crucial legal changes that will reduce judicial reviews and the legislation granting emergency powers to enable some critical infrastructure projects.
This and the rest of it will be enormously complicated, politically difficult and legally fraught. But if it were easy, someone would have done it before. The difference now is that the political stakes could hardly be higher. Nothing within its power is more important for the Coalition than making this work.
