Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

When we started to look at this, our initial interest was the fact the pilot projects were running on. We could see, looking back, that they were supposed to be finished much earlier. We decided we would look at the area. Obviously this brought us into looking at the CFRAM study because it was overlapping the pilot projects.

One of initial difficulties was trying to identify who we needed to talk to, and in discussions with the OPW we identified there were many steering groups and progress groups. We try to capture this in a diagram on page 23 of the report. The first question we asked was for the terms of reference so we could understand the role of each group. There were no formal terms of reference for the interdepartmental co-ordination group or for the national CFRAM steering group.

I do not recall, and perhaps I missed it, that was ever an understanding that some of these groups would be established and would suspend at particular periods. Our understanding was the interdepartmental co-ordination group would be co-terminous with the programme. The role was outlined in the presentation. As I read the role, it was to review the programme and the direction, progress and outputs of the implementation process. I have difficulty in understanding how a committee which is supposed to monitor and report on progress could be suspended. This is my reaction.

At different times different committees were established. We fully accept that each progress and steering group for the individual CFRAM studies had clear terms of reference. There is no difficulty there. The same was not true of the progress and project groups for the individual pilots.