Ms Aoife MacEvilly:

As was stated earlier and reiterated by Dr. MacGowan, the importance of the rigour of the process is only underlined by issues such as cash for ash. It is important to state there is nothing in the application that suggests anything of the sort. In fact, we can say with hand on heart that this applicant has been completely above board, it has given us information that we consider credible, and we have no issue with it.

In terms of the rigour of the process, it underlines the public interest requirement to ensure we are not giving a certification level that is higher than is warranted by the application we have received. That is the only part of the context that comes into it.

In terms of the learnings from this case, every regulatory process is about continuous improvement and learning. I do not believe there is any aspect of that learning that would fundamentally change. If we knew everything in 2012 that we know now, the business case was so strong in 2012 that it would have got exactly the same answer. We would have to test that again.