Mr. Tony O'Brien:

The service provider in question provides a number of services to many clients, all of whom have particular and specialist needs, including this client. That is the nature of this service provider. In the period in question, going back to 2009, it would not have been the norm for the fully encapsulated costs of each individual being cared for to be provided in a separate account. Like most section 39 organisations, this organisation was funded broadly globally, but also with some restricted funds and some earmarked funds, for a range of services that were provided under a service arrangement similar to some in the discussions that we will be having later. In that period, and taking account of the financial position of the service provider, the service provider was being funded at a level that was sustainable for it.

There are two separate issues. The decisions at the time were in a particular context. Was the service provider being underfunded? Was it being forced into deficit? What was the overall financial position? The types of decision being made are made in that context all of the time. In this particular case, it is possible to calculate the total cost of care that was provided. With the benefit of the knowledge of the Devine report and in the context of a High Court case and the position that I said we would take, that settlement was agreed. That does not amount to a statement that, in the round, the service provider was being underfunded.