It took 10 weeks to verify printer size
Emails reveal how wrong dimensions of Dáil machine were not corrected by f irm
THE company that sold the oversized printer that has so far cost the taxpayer €1.8m initially failed to correct Oireachtas and OPW staff about incorrect measurements, the Irish Mail on Sunday can reveal.
This week it emerged that the state-of-the-art printer cost €1.3m and necessitated significant structural works to Kildare House for it to fit inside, after a mistake was made regarding measurements.
An additional €424,000 was spent on major structural works to print room 2 to allow the printer to fit. The equipment is lying idle due to an industrial relations stand-off.
Before being installed, the printer was kept in storage for 10 months at a cost of €12,000 while building works were carried out.
On Thursday, the Clerk of the Dáil Peter Finnegan provided an initial report to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) on the controversy, in which he said ‘the requirements of the building and other regulations to “head height” were neither understood nor examined during the critical stages of the project’.
Internal emails obtained by the MoS under the Freedom of Information Act show that Oireachtas staff were working with incorrect measurements for months before they were corrected.
An email between Oireachtas staff and architects from the Office of Public Works (OPW) tasked with installing the printer, dated May 30, 2018 – the day before the contract to buy the printer was signed – shows that Oireachtas staff believed the printer was 2.1metres high. The actual height of the printer is 3.1metres.
‘The press at its highest point is 2130mm [2.1m] this takes into account the press and skates underneath the press. The press at it widest point is 1960mm [1.9m]. Ideally we would request a minimum of 250mm clearance,’ the e-mail reads.
On August 9, 2018, senior OPW architect Hilary Vandenberghe suggests getting the printer’s manufacturer Komori ‘back over to ensure they can install the machine working with new access’ after the removal of an interior door.
The same day, Ms Vandenberghe circulated an e-mail to staff at the Oireachtas, OPW and, crucially,
Komori. In bold and underlined text she wrote:
‘Dear All, I want to confirm the key dimensions for the print press to which we have been working to make sure we are all clear. Please comment if this is not correct...
‘Highest point at 2,130mm . . . including the press and skates beneath.’
A day later, on August 10, Richard Creswick, project engineer with Komori, replies to Ms Vandenberghe with his comments addressing issues he sees with her previous e-mail.
Mr Creswick does not correct the incorrect measurements, but instead goes on to discuss in detail dimensions and clearances required to accommodate the printer’s width and length – which were not the cause of the ultimate problems.
Concerning the width and height, he wrote: ‘Dimensions have been checked and no additional protections are required.’
However, days later, on August 14 the error is realised by Ms Vandenberghe.
In an e-mail to several Oireachtas staff she notes in bold ‘clauses of particular interest as follows . . . the machine drawing has a minimum head height called up as 3,160mm with customer head height indicated at 250mm. While the moving partitions to facilitate machine delivery as requested is underway – I note that the 3,160mm head height for operating the machine would not be achievable without significant structural works and mechanical works to the services floor overhead. This would require a much more substantial project than we have underway on site – has there been any discussion on this with the suppliers at tender stage? This needs to be clarified as matter of urgency?’
A briefing note to Mr Finnegan in December 2018 pointed out that once the deal was signed in May the machine could not be returned.
‘As the press has now been contracted for, the supplier is entitled to payment irrespective of difficulties now being experienced in respect of the required structural works.’
The MoS asked the Oireachtas when Komori first raised issues surrounding height and to whom. However, they did not reply.
Komori also failed to reply to a request for comment.
Labour TD and member of the Public Accounts Committee Alan Kelly said Komori also has questions to answer.
‘Lots of questions need to be asked of the Oireachtas, the OPW and – quite clearly as these documents show – of the company who supplied the printer as to why they didn’t correct the dimensions when they were pointed out to them.’
A follow-up report by Mr Finnegan is due to be sent to the PAC on December 10 and some members have called for him to appear before the committee personally.
‘Dimensions have been checked’
‘Questions need to be asked of the company’