Mr. Mark Griffin:

It is always better if there are more people bidding in at the final end of a process because it leads to competitive tension. There have been cases in this country and overseas in which just one bidder remained at the final stage of a project. For example, there was just one final bidder at the end of the UK equivalent of the national broadband plan. The other bidder dropped out at the last moment. We had to figure out what to do in the circumstances we found ourselves in. We looked at what we did over the course of the procurement process to ensure value for money was guaranteed. The procurement process we had engaged in involved competitive dialogue. This kind of process is used for bespoke projects when the technical scope of the project - what the final network design will look like - is not fully known. It allows one to engage with the bidders in the process in looking at things like subsidy levels, technology, construction and operating costs, demand and revenue projections. It was helpful for us that there are a number of different stages in the competitive dialogue process. During the penultimate stage, which was the ISDS stage, we got two bids - one from the final bidder and one from Eir. This gave us a chance to compare the bids and the factors taken into account, etc. We had something to compare against. The other useful thing from our perspective is that we did a great deal of financial and technical modelling during the procurement process. We used models that ComReg uses for regulated services. We looked at models that are used internationally. A great deal of financial modelling was done by the Department and its advisers, KPMG. At the final stage of the process, we asked KPMG to compile a report which would assess the position with regard to value for money, for want of a better term, when there is just one bidder. The other important component is making sure we have robust post-contract governance arrangements, the suite of protections Mr. Mulligan and I have mentioned, the performance indicators, the penalties, the oversight arrangements, the checkpoint reviews, the clawback provisions, the stand-alone board which is responsible for the-----