Debate contribution: Construction and Procurement Delivery: Value for Money

Debate contribution by Mr Trevor Clarke on 3 February 2026.

MLA: Mr Trevor Clarke
Party at the time: Democratic Unionist Party
Date: 3 February 2026
Type: Debate contribution
Business: Oral Answers to Questions
Heading: Construction and Procurement Delivery: Value for Money
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 5362743

Text

I thank the Minister for that answer. However, it did not really answer my question about value for money. It is not good enough to suggest that CPD is in full cost recovery. I have been a member of the Commission in this Building for some time, and I am not speaking on behalf of the Commission. My concern is that, between that and other public procurement, we can clearly evidence that we are not getting value for money in how those projects are costed. Indeed, a number of years ago, the PAC published a report criticising the CPD. What I am really trying to get from you, Minister, is this: will you carry out a review of CPD to determine whether it offers value for money to the taxpayer or to itself?

133 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Part of an exchange

This follow-up belongs to: Oral question AQO 3043/22-27.

Assessment

Not analysed

This is the same MLA’s follow-up within the exchange on their own question. It is analysed together with that question and is not counted separately, so one question is never counted twice.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification