Mr. Robert Watt:

The two elements are the significant spending incurred on the preliminary works and the guarantees given in regard to the approximately bill of quantities. The number used in this regard was 95% but that does not turn out to be the case. The fact that bill of quantities was wrong meant that when the final tender price came out it was significantly above what the Government was told the price would be. The fact we had committed significant spending on preliminary works made it very difficult at that stage for the Government to call a halt. The cost of re-tendering and so on would have perhaps led to a situation where the alternatives would have been more expensive than continuing with the two-stage process. I do not think per sethe two-stage process in all cases is the wrong approach but there are lessons to be learned, as I tried to set out in my opening remarks, in terms of committing to significant spend on preliminary works while saying that the Government has an option to opt out. I am not sure that is credible, to be honest. It is only credible if, of course, the guaranteed final price is in line with the price that was set but the bill of quantities was obviously mis-specified.