Ruairi Ó Murchú (Louth, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Parlon and Mr. Sheridan. On some level, this issue has already been addressed. It was stated that there are two things we are dealing with, that is, the present running of contracts and the need for amendments. From what our guests are saying, it does not seem that there is a major difficulty there. Where two people are obviously in agreement and it is legally put together, then so be it. What they are talking about, however, is what seems to be best practice internationally, namely, FIDIC and NEC contracts.

In fairness, TII had made a major play in regard to it. I am going to ask about one specific point. Price aside, what it had spoken about was the necessity or usefulness. I believe it was outlined that, with FIDIC, one would sit down with a contractor very early to get into the ins and outs of the contracts and identify whether obstacles might appear. It gave a couple of examples of being able to deal with issues and getting them off the table. That would be necessary and deal with the issue in part. We all accept there needs to be a genuinely significant provision, not just regarding the lowest cost. Whether to deal with the issue of variable costs must be considered, but the ability to deliver is important because what is happening is absolutely ridiculous. Some of the disaster situations have arisen because of contracts based on the lowest tender price. What has happened afterwards has happened, and prices have definitely not stayed at the levels at the time of tender.

Reference has been made to coming up with a solution in around a month. The CIF has said it has discussed this many times with those concerned and all the rest of it. Is the hold-up fair enough, or is it something that could be moved on faster?