Mr. Brian Purcell:

A contractor was selected in September and permission to proceed was sought from the Department of Finance. However, in October 2008 that Department objected to the use of the GDLA form of contract and directed that a new form of contract drawn up by the Government construction contracts committee, GCCC, be used. The new form of contract is focused on fixed price lump sum bids, with risks transferred to the contractor. This decision obliged the project board to completely revise the tender documentation to comply with the new GCCC contract and required a painstaking and detailed upgrading of all tender documentation and specifications.
The project board used the GDLA form of contract because the relevant paragraph of the circular on construction procurement reform provided that where detailed development tender documentation had already commenced, the GDLA contract could be used. The project board decided in January 2008 to use that form of contract to avoid incurring considerable additional costs and delay. The contract notice was placed in the Official Journal of the European Union in April 2008 and in August 2008 tenders were invited from eight pre-qualifying contractors. However, in February 2008 the Department of Finance issued a new circular on construction procurement reform and the facility to use the GDLA form of contract was withdrawn from early March 2008. The April contract notice thus missed the deadline by a number of weeks.
As it would not have been possible for the project board to foresee that the provisions of circular 33/06 would change so radically and that permission to use the GDLA form of contract would not be forthcoming, it proceeded as planned. Having considered the matter, I can understand the decision of the project board to use the GDLA form of contract. The decision was taken in good faith based on a desire to avoid spending additional money on reworking the project documentation and further expensive delays, and in the belief that it was permissible to do so given that the documentation was in place prior to the introduction of the new contract. As we now know, this did not prove possible due to the decision taken.