Civil servant knew a year before Cabinet that Arts Council IT project might need to restart
Arts Council
's botched information technology (IT) project may need to restart.
The senior civil servant, who is based in the
Department of Public Expenditure
, ordered an external review of the IT grants system in early 2024 after learning it could take three more years to finish.
That review found that the IT system was not viable, that the project could overrun and that the final system may not even be used by the council. Despite this, the review formed the basis of a 'rescue' plan, in which the council asked the
Department of Culture
for 'significant investment' to save the project.
[
Three firms that shared €4.8m from Arts Council for abandoned IT project named
Opens in new window
]
In response, the council's parent department sanctioned the council to hire two more senior IT roles in an attempt to save the doomed project. By this point, the project was geared towards overhauling the grants management system for the arts sector and had already cost almost €6 million.
READ MORE
Government
chief information officer Barry Lowry
was involved in advising the council throughout the project in his capacity as the main adviser on public service information and communication technology.
[
Government to appoint chief information officer
Opens in new window
]
Mr Lowry was approached by the council in December 2023, as the State agency became increasingly concerned about the then almost four-year-long project that had not produced a functioning IT system. Correspondence between Mr Lowry and the council in December 2023, released under Freedom of Information legislation, shows he was aware the project may need to begin again.
'What you certainly need at this stage is an accurate cost/time to fix or an honest assessment that you would be better starting again,' noted Mr Lowry. He added that 'if, and I hope this is not the case, you are in the start again space', his office had 'grant management solutions' used for the Department of Public Expenditure that should be shown to the council. Mr Lowry was also aware that the state of the project could result in the council taking legal action against at least one contractor.
In a meeting with the council in January 2024, Mr Lowry asked to discuss the suggestion that the IT project 'could be delayed by a further three years'. By February, he had ordered Storm, a technology consultancy firm, to conduct a two-week review of the architecture of the council IT project.
The Office of the Chief Government Information Officer
paid for the review, which was scheduled to cost no more than €50,000. A document prepared by the council said any architectural review should consider if the project was compliant with 'design principles' and value for money.
Following the Storm review, the council wrote to the Department of Culture explaining the report showed 'we are at an extremely critical juncture with the project, one which requires making significant investment in ... the short term ... in order to rescue the overall project'. These emails, which were released by the council to the Dáil's
Public Accounts Committee
, show the arts agency succeeded in getting sanction to hire two new directors of IT.
A spokesman for the Department of Public Expenditure said it 'has been very clear on numerous occasions that the focus of the OGCIO [Office of the Chief Government Information Officer] was solely on the technical issues with the project and not on the budgetary implications, which was a matter for the Arts Council and its parent department'.
The spokesman said the Storm review ordered by Mr Lowry 'did not examine the project costs or business case, which remained the responsibility of the parent department'.
A Department of Public Expenditure spokesman said that the review ordered by Mr Lowry found that the system 'was not irretrievable but would have an associated cost in relation to necessary actions to ensure its capability. At no stage did this review examine the cost of the project, as it focused on technical fitness for purpose.'
'Ultimately, the Arts Council and its board decided to take an alternate approach and in line with DGOU [Digital Government Oversight Unit] processes, it remained proper and correct that the Arts Council took the matter forward through its parent department.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Examiner
15 minutes ago
- Irish Examiner
EU-US trade deal: Business groups welcome certainty but say 15% tariff 'still substantial burden'
Business groups have tentatively welcomed the framework trade agreement reached between the EU and the US, as it brings more certainty for firms, but the 15% tariff on imports to the US 'still represents a substantial burden for many industries'. On Sunday, US president Donald Trump met with EU Commission president Ursula von der Leyen at his golf course in Scotland to finalise a framework trade deal with the EU. The agreement will see the US impose 15% tariffs on imports from the bloc. This is up from the 10% currently in place, but is lower than the 30% Mr Trump threatened to impose from August 1 should a deal not have been reached. Trade between the EU and the US accounts for almost a third of global trade. Speaking after the meeting, Mr Trump said: 'I think this is the biggest deal ever made.' Ms von der Leyen said the deal will 'bring stability, it will bring predictability'. Ms von der Leyen defended the trade deal as 'the best we could get', adding that it was not to be underestimated given the looming threat of 30% tariffs. A baseline tariff rate of 15% on EU goods imported into the US would apply to cars, semiconductors and pharmaceutical goods, Ms von der Leyen said. Meanwhile, a zero-for-zero tariff rate had been agreed for certain strategic products, including aircraft and aircraft parts, certain chemicals, and certain generic drugs. No decision has been made on a rate for wine and spirits. The deal also includes $600bn of EU investments in the US, along with EU purchases of US energy and military equipment. Ibec: Brexit-style supports needed Ibec chief executive Danny McCoy said the agreement brings an 'end to a significant amount of uncertainty for some businesses'. 'However, a 15% tariff still represents a substantial burden for many industries. 'Sectors which rely heavily on the US market, and operate within small margins, will once again be significantly impacted by an additional 5% tariff on top of what they have already had to absorb over the past several months, and well in excess of the 1% effective tariff which existed before April." He added: 'Our message to the Government, as it was with the 10% tariff, is that the most exposed sectors will require support similar to the interventions provided as a response to Brexit. Chamber Ireland: Viable firms need tariff supports Chamber Ireland welcomed the agreement on trade tariffs, with its chief executive Ian Talbot stating: 'Certainty is critical for businesses, and we've seen the impact of uncertainty over the past couple of months in terms of investment. 'While tariffs are never welcome news for businesses on either side of the Atlantic, reaching an agreement — however imperfect — is preferable to no deal. It, at least, allows companies to plan and adapt in the short term.' Mr Talbot also called for the EU and the Government to create a 'fund to support viable businesses in adapting to new tariffs', and also to ensure 'potential arbitrage issues with Northern Ireland are clearly understood and addressed'. This is the latest deal Mr Trump has reached with a few countries around the world before his August 1 deadline. Agreements with the US have also been reached with Britain, Japan, Indonesia, and Vietnam, but Mr Trump's administration has failed to deliver on a promise of '90 deals in 90 days'. He has periodically railed against the EU, saying it was 'formed to screw the US on trade'. Mr Trump said that the EU wanted 'to make a deal very badly' and said, as he met Ms von der Leyen, that Europe had been 'very unfair to the US'. His main bugbear is the US merchandise trade deficit with the EU, which reached $235bn in 2024, according to the US Census Bureau data. The EU points to the US surplus in services, which it says partially redresses the balance. Mr Trump also talked about the 'hundreds of billions of dollars' that tariffs were bringing in. Additional reporting Reuters
Irish Examiner
5 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Alcohol health labelling 'will add over a third to costs'
Taoiseach Micheál Martin was lobbied by business representative group Ibec to delay the introduction of alcohol warning labels for 'at least' four years due to tariff fears. Ibec chief executive Danny McCoy warned the Fianna Fáil leader that the new requirements would lead to packaging and labelling costs increasing by 'over one-third'. The letter also suggested that some distillers had even suspended brewing in fear of impending tariffs by the US administration. Mr McCoy also sent the letter to Tánaiste and trade minister Simon Harris and health minister Jennifer Carroll MacNeill in early June. The Government agreed earlier last week to suspend the rollout of warning labels for two years. In May 2023, then health minister Stephen Donnelly signed the Public Health (Alcohol) (Labelling) Regulations 2023. It was envisaged that the law would make it mandatory for alcohol product labels to state the calorie content and grams of alcohol in the product. They would also warn about the risk of consuming alcohol when pregnant and about the risk of liver disease and fatal cancers from alcohol consumption. The change was due to come into effect in May 2026, to allow a three-year implementation period for the drinks industry. However, there have been rumblings in recent weeks that the plan would be postponed, with Mr Harris saying that it would be additional disruption and a 'potential trade barrier' as tariff negotiations continue. At Tuesday's Cabinet meeting, the Tánaiste told ministers that Ms Carroll MacNeill will defer the plans for two years. This is despite reports that it would be a four-year pause. Correspondence released under Freedom of Information (FoI) shows that the Taoiseach was being lobbied by Ibec to drop the labelling plans. On June 3, Mr McCoy called for the plans to be dropped for four years 'at least'. 'The wider drinks sector, but particularly many of the new emerging distilleries, have significant exposure to these new tariffs and the wider trade uncertainty,' wrote Mr McCoy. 'The majority of distilling across the country is now suspended. The introduction of new labelling requirements for the drinks sector, which will add over one-third to product labelling and packaging costs, should be suspended for at least four years to give some certainty to operators. 'Reducing regulatory burden costs to free up resources to allow companies invest in finding new markets would be a positive development.' Mr McCoy said that the legislation had been cited by the US administration in its 2025 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, which he said was 'cause for further concern and reason for this legislation to be deferred'. He added: 'The industry does not want this to be an issue of disagreement in overall efforts to secure a resolution on trade relations and restoration of a tariff-free trading environment.' Further correspondence shows the letter was also forwarded from the Taoiseach's office to the Department of Enterprise several days later seeking an update on enterprise minister Peter Burke's engagement with Ms Carroll MacNeill. A letter sent from Mr Burke to Ms Carroll MacNeill on May 15 was also released under FoI. He said that recent months have seen 'significant global uncertainty and a rapidly shifting trading landscape', which he said 'could have profound competitiveness implications for small open economies like Ireland'. Mr Burke said that Ireland would be the first country in Europe to introduce the labels. 'The proposed measures will mean increased production and sale costs for Irish producers and importers and add to the price payable by consumers at a time when prices are also rising due to a multitude of other factors,' wrote Mr Burke. 'Notwithstanding the overarching health benefits of the proposal, I would ask you to consider pausing the introduction of the proposed new requirements.' Calls not to delay plans Meanwhile, Mr Martin was urged not to delay the plans and received a letter just last week from Alcohol Action Ireland chief executive Sheila Gilheany. She said that 'postponing alcohol health information labelling is not consequence free given the thousands harmed by alcohol in Ireland.' Read More Delaying alcohol warning labels prioritises profiteering over health, says Irish Medical Organisation
Irish Examiner
6 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Jim Power: Budget countdown begins with big promises
The publication of the summer economic statement has set the budgetary process in motion, and the destination will be reached in early October. The two relevant ministers have outlined a budget package of €9.4bn, with a net tax package of €1.5bn, and an expenditure package of €7.9bn. This expenditure package will be comprised of current expenditure increases of €5.9bn or almost 75% of the total; and capital spending of €2bn or just over 25% of the total. Proposed Vat cut On the tax side, the Government has given a commitment to reduce the Vat rate for part of the hospitality sector — the food element — to 9% and this would cost around €580m in foregone taxes. If this is delivered and applies from January 1 next, it means that effectively less than €1bn would be available for personal tax changes. To put this in context, it is estimated that a 1% indexation of the employee tax credit would cost around €230m in a full year, so to index for projected inflation in 2026 would cost somewhere in the region of €460m; or a 1% decrease in the 40% tax rate would cost around €540m. If the government delivers the Vat cut from the beginning of 2026, which it has committed to, the tax package will be small. So not surprisingly, there are suggestions that the cut might be delayed until July, thereby significantly reducing the cost in 2026. If this transpires, the hospitality sector would have every right to be aggrieved. Restaurants and food businesses are the most crucial element of our tourism product, and many businesses are struggling to stay afloat. Inflation Data released by the CSO last week show that in 2024, Irish food prices are the third highest in the EU-27 and are 12% above the EU average. In the year to May, agricultural output prices increased by 20.7%, with cattle prices up by 48%. These prices obviously feed into restaurant input costs, but the pressures are compounded by labour costs, insurance, water charges, commercial rates etc. I am a supporter of the reduced Vat rate, and I think it is now more appropriate to provide some limited support to a key employer of people all over the country, and a vital part of the tourism offering, rather than to pump money through excessive expenditure into an economy that is still doing quite well. Does the Irish economic cycle need a continuation of out-of-control current expenditure now? I think not. Even if the Vat cut is pushed out, the extent of the easing of the personal tax burden will be miniscule. We should have learned from the past We should have learned our lessons from the pro-cyclical policies of the past. The summer economic statement projects planned expenditure of €108.7bn this year, which is €3.3bn higher than planned in Budget 2025, and it is likely to turn out even higher than this latest projection. Not surprisingly, the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council is not happy and has justifiably accused the Government of 'poor planning and budgeting.' Obviously, the ability of the two ministers to deliver the proposed budgetary package, and indeed to deliver the ambitious, but detail lacking, revised National Development Plan, will be heavily contingent on the future performance of the economy, and especially the actions of Donald Trump. Downward creep in projections There is not a lot of detail in relation to economic assumptions in the summer economic statement, but it is interesting to note that for 2025 the Department of Finance is projecting growth of 2% in modified domestic demand (MDD), down from 2.5% in April, and 2.9% in Budget 2025 last October. For 2026, MDD is projected to grow by 1.8%, down from 2.8% in April, and 3% in Budget 2025. There is downward creep occurring in Ireland's economic projections, which seems logical in the context of Trump-induced uncertainty. In relation to the National Development Plan, it is quite amazing that we must await detail on the projected spend until close to budget time. What in the name of God has been happening since January? The aspirations outlined in the revised plan — such as energy, water, housing, transport infrastructure, and climate change — are difficult to argue with, but delivery on time and on budget will be essential. One hopes there will be greater control, transparency and accountability in relation to National Development Plan delivery than we have seen with major infrastructure projects such as the children's hospital and the infamous bicycle shed.
