Mr. Maurice Mullen:

Under the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform rules, we are required to undertake this type of value for money review by external bodies.

There are no "ifs" or "buts" about it. That is what must be done.

With regard to who is being consulted, we opened up to Fisher Associates anybody we knew of who may be involved in the sector. As this is an independent company undertaking a value for money review, this is not a management report where we sought the company's assistance to help develop some management issue. This is an outside group whose job it was to assess the process critically.

A significant number of representations were made to Fisher Associates and included in the first draft. I must assume that Fisher Associates saw this as a challenge process. In that deliberative process they decided they would not run with the recommendations of other stakeholders. If a recommendation from a stakeholder comes out, it must be borne in mind that it was a Fisher Associates decision as to whether it would come out and it was the right of the firm to decide that. I cannot be definitive on the issue but the only conclusion I can draw is that when the firm added two plus two, the result did not stand up. That is part of a robust deliberative process in which the firm tried to engage. The language was tough but that is the game we are playing. This was not an advisory report but a value for money report.

As I noted earlier, Fisher Associates stuck to their view and they do not mind what we do with the report; it is Ireland's report now. Fisher Associates held the view that we are going about the process wrong. They believe we should have two centres rather than three or one.