Q121 Mr Williams: What did you mean by it, NAO, what was the implication you drew? It seems to require completely different people with completely different skills. Where did the overlap come that caused a distraction?
Mr Shapcott: I think the point we are trying to make was that the other bidder in the competition, Osborne were to some degree being ruled out of the thing because of the planning issues to do with the commercial development of the land and therefore really Laser were so clearly ahead in the competition it meant the competition was not a strong force to encourage them to improve their proposition.
Q122 Mr Williams: Do you see that as-?
Sir Brian Bender: Well, it a fact that we did not think the Osborne bid, for the reasons Mr Dawes explained earlier in reply to another Member's questions, was sufficiently competitive and therefore there was only one really viable bid to go for, so to that extent I do not disagree at all with the NAO. As I tried to explain earlier in response to questions, we nonetheless had reasonable confidence that what we were asking for was deliverable, which is why we proceeded.
Q123 Mr Williams: A final question because I think everything has been asked, why did the Department wait six to ten months before challenging the completion certificates for the non-performing laboratories?
Mr Dawes: I think it takes a while to assemble the evidence associated with any challenge of that type. You have to be very sure of your ground and it just takes a while to develop the case that you are going to put. It is a characteristic of the job that it is not immediately evident how you are going to present the case and it does take a while to put together.
Mr Williams: I do not think there is anything else.
Q124 Chairman: I think that probably concludes our hearing, gentlemen. It is rather sad that when we have got a facility which is perhaps one of the best in the world, or certainly the third best in the world, that the Department could have constructed a contract in which, as it says in paragraph 2.28: "This arrangement meant that, provided construction work was complete, JLC Ltd would be paid most of the contractually set price for a phase, even though it did not meet the specification and required significant remedial work." I think that sums it up, that our scientists, who are working in such a vital area for the nation, have, in your phrase Sir Brian, been condemned to put up with a Heath Robinson arrangement because of the way that this contract was constructed in the first place. It is rather regrettable, if you do not mind me saying so.
Department of Trade and Industry, Serco Investments Ltd, John Laing plc and Abbey National plc
Sir Brian Bender: That is your conclusion, Chairman, and it clearly is a regrettable position to be in. I just repeat the point that we have a situation, albeit five or six years late, where we will have these facilities that had we gone down a different route I do not believe we would have had.
Chairman: That is fair enough as an answer. Thank you very much.