Mr. Hubert Loftus:

To summarise what Ms O'Neill has said, the design and build programme is very much about project management which is one of the key themes which emerged from the discussion here. That has delivered solutions quickly for the Department. Obviously, it requires the site to be in place and ideally that there is a smooth delivery through the planning permission process. The adapt programme is a separate programme which uses project managers on traditional projects. We have had successful projects working through our planning process to tender in that and we will continue to use. For projects which are still on the Department's building programme that have to work their way into planning, we will see if there are means by which the rapid build programme or the adapt programme can be used to move those projects forward as quickly as possible.

Before Mr. Power speaks about the GIS, I will deal with some of the issues raised on particular schools today. I am conscious that I am coming here having been assistant secretary for six months and I might not necessarily know all background detail. Looking at Whitecross in Julianstown as a project to see what can be learned from it, the design team was appointed in March 2011. It is a 16 classroom school project, which was envisaged as a phased construction. That meant that the school would continue to operate and there would be a small decant from the existing building as the project was being worked through rather than a full decant off site. That is how the project started and how it got planning permission, which was granted in the first quarter of 2014.

Separately, options were presented for a full decant of the school from the site. Various options were examined and ultimately the school bought some land adjoining the school site which enabled a decant. The temporary accommodation needed for that required planning permission and that permission was not received until summer 2016. The change in the overall project, the time involved in getting the site and securing the planning permission had an impact on the project. It has now completed design.

On 16 March we received a revised version of that design with the cost plan. Costs were mentioned earlier but I do not want to get into that because of the commercial sensitivities in a project that has not yet been tendered. We expect that we will respond to the school on the design within the next couple of weeks and that the project, which has been given a letter by the Department on its progression, will be through the tendering process during 2018 with the intention of being on site in the first quarter of 2019. If the design team thinks it can do better than this and be on site in the fourth quarter of 2018, so much the better.

I am not saying the Department is blameless in this. I do not doubt there were issues that could have been turned around more quickly by the Department but I am looking at the project in hindsight to see what can be learned and how we can move forward. This is a traditionally managed project. There is a question of would the use of a project manager, such as we have in the adapt programme, have been beneficial in driving a project such as this one forward.

St. Paul's secondary school in Monasterevin has been mired for two reasons. One relates to the identification and acquisition of a site and the other was the particular planning issues.

As an example of a project, therefore, we probably could not have identified a better one.