Will the Minister give us an update on the projected overspends of the Department of education and how they will impact on the budgets of other Government Departments?

That was incorrect.

I will respond to it as it is written, and I am happy to engage. I know what the Deputy is raising.

That mistake was not on my side.

The latest fiscal monitor published on 6 May showed that the end of April gross voted expenditure amounted to €36 billion. This is a €2.9 billion or 8.9% increase compared with April 2025 and reflects the implementation of the priorities set out in budget 2026, and the significant uplift in expenditure to support programme for Government commitments. Compared with the profiles set out by Departments for their planned spending over the year, this was €0.6 billion or 1.8% below profile.

For my Department’s Vote, end of April gross expenditure of €593 million was €39 million or 6.2% behind the profile set out. The public expenditure group comprises eight Votes, which are my Department, superannuation and retired allowances, the Office of Public Works, the State Laboratory, secret service, Public Appointments Service, shared services office and the Office of the Ombudsman. None of these were over profile at the end of April. Ensuring that public money is spent efficiently and that taxpayers see clear outputs and outcomes from public spending is a core priority for my Department and for Government. The Government agreed a medium-term fiscal structural plan in December last year. It sets out expenditure ceilings to 2030 and provides significant uplifts in expenditure over the coming years, with gross voted spending to reach €147.3 billion by 2030. In April, Government agreed that additional funding of €646 million will be provided to the Department of Education and Youth in 2026. To accommodate this reprioritisation and to deliver on the 2027 ceiling agreed under the medium-term fiscal plan, other Departments have been asked to deliver a levy focusing on efficiencies and reforms, which will total €446 million from 2027. This should be considered through the lens of an overall uplift of €7 billion for expenditure in 2027. It will not impact the 2026 allocations.

The delivery of reforms and efficiencies supports adherence-----

Deputy Farrell to respond.

That was not the question I submitted, but I understand it is what the Minister has been told. I do not know if we should skip this question. I might just ask my question and if the Minister cannot answer it is not on him, which is totally fine. I accept that he was not aware. It is a bit of a mess, like this mess. My question relates to overspends in the Department of education and specifically how this will impact on other Government Departments, including Transport, justice and housing. My concern is that this will leave communities worse off in the long run, which is something we do not want to happen. My core question really concerns what looks likely to be cut. Of what those Departments felt was so important to get funding for on budget day, what is no longer deemed necessary? I am aware the Minister was not aware of the question.

The wording of the question is as it is printed on the question paper, which I have to respond to factually.

I know.

I am happy to respond to the question on education that was raised at the budgetary oversight committee too. First, it is being done in the context of the Estimates process for budget 2027. Transport is at 1.4%. Housing is at 0.1% and justice is at 0.7%. We have specifically provided a carve-out for housing for obvious reasons and similarly for justice pay so we do not affect front-line areas. This is obviously in the context of a growing budget. I see this differently, through the lens of driving efficiencies, advancing reforms and enhancing productivity across these areas of public expenditure. I think we can improve outputs in the context of an efficiency and expenditure levy. New priorities emerge in the context of expenditure and that is why we were right to provide that additional funding to the Department of education. That is within a new and agreed fiscal framework. In the context of budget 2027 we will engage with the Departments through the Estimates process. However, each of them has an objective now to drive those efficiencies across these respective areas.

To be clear, the question the Minister received is not the question I was asking. I thank him for the answer, but the issue is that if you look at it in the context of what he is saying here and what is being done, things do not really add up. In January, the Minister said that the Government's massive expenditure on consultancy services was adding cost, delay and significant fragmentation to infrastructure delivery. However, we now hear he is spending €25,000 on a consultancy firm to try to garner public support for his infrastructure plan, all against the backdrop of cutting spending across other Departments. It seems like cuts for everybody except the Minister's Department. If the Minister wants to run an advertising campaign, he should use the policies he has. I do not understand spending €25,000 on a consultancy firm. Does the Minister think his Department should be spending €25,000 on a marketing campaign?

The Deputy is misrepresenting what that is. It is independent research and analysis to advance the objectives set out in the accelerating infrastructure report where there are three or four recommendations or actions in respect of driving public acceptance of infrastructure in the country. It is important because that is an issue across communities where people have concerns. It is about how we build better public acceptance of that. They are doing a piece of work in that context. When you take a €275 billion infrastructure plan over ten years, it is important that we implement those recommendations and actions in the context of the evidence base being built out. In the context of the efficiency levy, it is important that all Government Departments, in as much as they are looking for more, also drive a greater focus on efficiencies and reforms. That is what we are seeking to do across government and that is why we are doing it in a context of the levy we have introduced.