A dramatic visual marker for the aspirations and ambition of a country in the 21stcentury. This is how a potential “Celtic Bridge” between Ireland and Scotland has been described. The estimated £15-20 billion project would no doubt be eye-catching and enterprising. That notwithstanding perhaps one of the more noticeable aspects of this recent discussion has been that although Stormont hasn’t been sitting, and therefore has been unable to make core budget and spending decisions on issues such as health and education, this unbudgeted mega-project was given days of serious media coverage and captured the imagination of many politicians.

Why does an idea like this capture people’s imaginations and the thoughts of politicians in such a way?

Infrastructure is often a boring subject. Think about how you are reading this article, how you travelled to work today or how you have clean water for a shower. Think about the health service you use or the road you might use to visit a relative or the electricity you used to make that cup of tea. All of this requires every day, functional infrastructure which if it works well has the reward of most people not noticing it, yet if it doesn’t, summons the ire of thousands.

Good infrastructure can make daily life easier and better but it isn’t necessarily a headline grabber like the Celtic Bridge, which politicians like. However, it is essential to our daily lives and the communities it serves and projects such as roads through to energy infrastructure are still highly complex, requiring large capital investment decisions and long-term planning. These are important decisions about what kind of society we want and how we want that society to operate. It is something that forms the platform on which an economy can be developed.

Where a solid base infrastructure exists alongside well thought through projects (a region may require a more electricity but a new power station will do little if there is no grid connectivity) there is a general acceptance of what is known as the ‘multiplier effect’. This dictates that for every pound spent on a project the positive impact on the economy will be a multiple of this – for example if you can reduce transport or communication costs then, along with other benefits, the productivity of private sector businesses may be boosted. That isn’t to say that good infrastructure is a panacea to all economic issues that have varied and complex roots.  Nevertheless, questions such as why unemployment benefit claim rates largely run at a higher percentage in a less well-connected region such as Derry City and Strabane should not be posed without an assessment on how improved infrastructure may increase access to opportunities or indeed help develop inward investment decisions.

Beyond the economic effect, and of at least equal importance, particularly when discussing a region such as Northern Ireland, the social role and impact of infrastructure must be considered. Recent and ongoing research by the International Monetary Fund has looked at the ‘welfare multiplier’ of public infrastructure investment and found that this can be greatly beneficial where projects are implemented correctly. This is trying to quantify things such as shorter journeys and spending more time with family, greater levels of road safety, a cleaner environment or communities becoming more connected with one another. Findings suggest, as one may expect, that this welfare benefit is greater when the productivity benefit is also greater.

The obvious question that needs to be addressed in the context of such potential benefits is one of cost and how to pay for it. To look at only one sub-sector take Assembly Research Matters’ publication of figures on the transport spend per capita in each of the UK regions. Northern Ireland sits bottom of the table at £232 which is just under 60% of what Wales spends and not even half of what Scotland spends. There are some explaining factors for this such as the comparative paucity of Northern Ireland’s rail network and the lack of ongoing maintenance costs thereby (although this raises a separate question – look at a map of rail networks today across the island of Ireland). However, the general conclusion is that Northern Ireland does not spend enough on transport infrastructure. In an already constricted fiscal environment how would additional expenditure be funded?

Currently in the Republic of Ireland a national development plan for infrastructure is being widely debated. These are challenging discussions with many differing points of view but the point is that a long-term, committed plan once agreed upon provides society, businesses and investors with visibility.

For many reasons a form of the same debate should be happening in Northern Ireland. Although the Department for Infrastructure does have a project pipeline, particularly in the transport sectors, when was the last time there was a real cross-party political debate on the subject, including an approach to funding these that goes beyond waiting for further handouts from Westminster?

Of course, let’s hear ideas for mega infrastructure projects such as the Celtic Bridge, but let’s also use that pique in interest to stimulate a real debate on infrastructure around what money should be spent on. This debate should include the various benefits that might be derived from any project and a cost-benefit analysis that includes the welfare and social aspects.

The £15-20 billion for one Celtic Bridge equals roughly 400km of high speed rail network (using the World Bank’s higher end cost estimate per km). It would upgrade Belfast’s sewer network many times over, provide better transport and connectivity from west to east, develop energy infrastructure or broaden high speed internet access. Affordability must be part of any planning cycle, but this should be part of a credible and coherent plan, laying out the various benefits and rationale, with strong political support. An open-minded discussion on funding should be had with all stakeholders involved should take place in an environment where the benefits and necessities of various projects are explained and informed choices can be made, allowing leverage of private sector capital where possible and keeping best value for the public purse in mind.

This is a matter for everyone living in Northern Ireland today regardless of political outlook and given the lifespan of such projects for many generations to come and therefore shouldn’t be treated as either a soundbite or a sideshow. Infrastructure development, or lack thereof, has been a controversial subject in Northern Ireland’s past; it is critical for the region’s development that it is done correctly and on a sufficient scale as we move forward. General infrastructure may not have the cachet of the Celtic Bridge project and as such the public does not tend to think or talk about it, but politicians should.