Will Ms Clare McGrath, chairman, Office of Public Works, introduce her officials?
Chapter 8 – Central Government Public Procurement.
Ms Clare McGrath, (Chairman, Office of Public Works) called and examined.
Ms Clare McGrath
I am accompanied by Mr. John McMahon, commissioner in charge of project management services, Mr. John Sydenham, commissioner with responsibility for property management and heritage services, Mr. Vincent Campbell, director of public procurement operations unit, Mr. Tony Smyth, director of engineering services, and Mr. Michael Long, accountant.
Will Mr. Dermot Quigley, Department of Finance, introduce his officials?
Mr. Dermot Quigley
I am accompanied by Mr. Frank Griffin, assistant principal, Mr. Billy Noone, assistant principal and Mr. Dermot Keane, assistant principal, Department of Finance.
I now call on the Comptroller and Auditor General to make an opening statement.
Mr. John Buckley
The appropriation accounts of the Office of Public Works records spending of €635 million in 2008 and recoveries of €26 million by way of appropriations-in-aid. It spends this money on four major programmes, namely, property management, project management, flood relief and heritage property services. In addition, it manages works funded by other Votes, estimated at €117 million in 2008, including €30 million on maintenance works.
Its principal functions include the delivery of architectural, engineering, property management and project management services for both its projects and those of other State agencies. It manages a large portfolio of freehold and leasehold property with a value of €2.9 billion, allocating space in these properties to Departments on the basis of preset norms. The major expenditure from its Vote in 2008 was on new works, alterations and additions which cost €257 million and the payment of rent and rates on leased properties amounting to €131 million.
Chapter 8 in the 2008 annual report touched on its activities in which it dealt with public procurement. Public procurement functions are exercised by the Department of Finance, which has a policy-making and monitoring role, and the OPW which has an operations and co-ordinating role. From an accountability viewpoint, public procurement must achieve value for money and be seen to be competitive and conducted openly. Departures from competition are allowed in only limited circumstances.
In 2002 the Department of Finance introduced a procedure that all cases must be reported to it where all competitive processes were not followed and the procurement had a value of €25,000, excluding VAT or greater. In 2008 reported non-competitive procurement amounted to some €83 million across 508 contracts. This showed a marked increase on the figures reported two years earlier when the equivalent figures were €22 million in respect of 192 contracts.
However, it must be acknowledged that it is likely that at least part of this increase is due to more complete reporting than previously. A major omission from the figures is the Health Service Executive outturn but this will be rectified from 2009 onwards.
My report gives an analysis of the reasons given by Departments and State offices for not employing a competitive process and provides examples under each of seven different headings. The purchase of proprietary goods amounting to nearly €19 million is the single largest reason for departures. The risk in these cases is that procurers would tie themselves to branded products leading to unavoidable future commitments. In instances where contract initiators plan to do business with a single supplier, some form of internal challenge or preprocessing control is the only viable option to validate that such processing is justified. Consequently, independent review of the proposal should always be undertaken.
In reviewing the returns, the national public procurement policy unit of the Department of Finance felt that the high level of non-competitive procurement and extensions of contracts was cause for some concern but was generally satisfied that controls were being applied. A national public procurement operations unit was established in the OPW in 2009. It has done work on segmenting purchases by price and volume as well as seeking to bring about co-ordination between Departments involved in the procurement of specific categories including medical, fuel, food and plant and equipment. I am informed its work can be linked to approximately €27 million in savings to date. The Accounting Officer will be in a position to provide more detailed information to the committee.
Thank you, Mr. Buckley. I invite Ms McGrath to give her opening statement.
Ms Clare McGrath
I thank the committee for the opportunity to make an opening statement on chapter 8 of the Comptroller and Auditor General's 2008 annual report, public procurement by central government.
The national public procurement operations unit was established in the OPW in April 2009 on foot of a Government decision. The operations unit is taking a lead role in modernising procurement practices across the public sector. The board of the operations unit, established in April 2009, is chaired by the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Martin Mansergh, and consists of representatives from the OPW, the Departments of Finance, the Taoiseach, Education and Science, and the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, the HSE and the central procurement directorate in Northern Ireland.
Since it was established, it has, in conjunction with Departments and other offices across the public sector, overseen savings of €27 million. As part of its work, it is also researching public procurement expenditure with a view to completing a comprehensive spend profile for the public service. Specific markets have been identified that are appropriate for an aggregated or collaborative approach to market intervention by the operations unit.
The operations unit has taken over some of the functions of the national public procurement policy unit in the Department of Finance. The policy unit has retained responsibility for the formulation of policy while the operations unit will implement the centralisation and standardisation of public sector procurement arrangements for many common goods and services. The operations unit has engaged with the market and entered into a new competition to procure a new and improved electronic tender management facility to replace the current e-tenders website.
To streamline documents and processes used across various parts of the public sector, the operations unit has been actively engaged in a review of tendering, competition and contract documentation with the Office of the Chief State Solicitor and the Office of the Attorney General. The operations unit has also been engaged with several public service organisations in providing guidance and support in procurement-related matters. It recently disseminated information from the Chief State Solicitor's office to key purchasing officers regarding the new remedies directive.
The Comptroller and Auditor General noted in his report that the policy unit in the Department of Finance is satisfied the extent of recourse to non-competitive procurement is being addressed by Departments and State agencies. Procedures are in place, including recommendations in finance circular 40/2002, which serve to limit the practice of non-competitive procurements in tandem with standard accountability and auditing procedures. The operations unit can complement these procedures. The centralisation and rationalisation of procurement will help reduce the need for one-off requirements. Strategies such as the analysis of public sector procurement trends and collaboration with key purchasers on common requirements, will introduce economies of scale. Procurement tools, such as aggregation, the use of framework agreements and draw-down contracts, will help achieve value for money and administrative efficiencies. Standardising competition documents will help ensure that increased legal compliance is achieved across the public sector when drafting tender and contract documents — customers and suppliers alike will benefit from the use of these standard documents. Through a programme of education and training, the NPPOU will encourage contracting authorities to consider whole-of-life costs when planning procurements, as well as actively promoting correct procurement procedures while taking full account of sustainable and green policies. The roll-out of a new e-tenders facility will actively help both suppliers and buyers to be more efficient and compliant when engaging with procurement processes for both above and below threshold procurements.
These efforts, along with continued analysis of procurement trends and engagement by the NPPOU with markets, will limit arguments in favour of a single suitable supplier, as well as discourage contract extensions, and should serve to provide a more open and transparent procurement system for central Government.
I will now take the opportunity to bring the committee up to date on a number of aspects of the work of the OPW and the outputs achieved by the office, particularly in 2008, which I feel would be of interest to the members.
On the range of activities, I would first mention that although the gross 2008 outturn for Vote 10 in the Appropriation Account amounts to €635 million, this does not reflect the full range of activities of the office, as the Comptroller and Auditor General mentioned earlier. In addition to expenditure on Vote 10, the office also acts as an agent, and incurs expenditure, on behalf of a range of other Departments and agencies. Funding for this expenditure is provided to OPW by the sponsoring Department or agency and appears as a charge on the client organisation's account. The cost of providing these services in 2008 was over €117 million, the main areas of expenditure were capital works, maintenance works, leasing of accommodation, health and safety, prison projects, and purchase of school sites and buildings.
One other major area of activity not reflected on the Vote includes the agency work carried out in placing some €72 million worth of draw-down contracts in the procurement of printing, stationery, uniforms, advertising, energy and transport vehicles for other Departments and agencies, which is now the responsibility of the NPPOU. The former GSA has now been subsumed within the procurement operations unit.
Furthermore, the project management services of the office, along with other professional technical services, provides specialist procurement and technical advice to the Government and various Departments on major projects such as the new Lansdowne Road stadium and the national conference centre, and these do not appear as expenditure items on the Vote.
The Comptroller and Auditor General has mentioned some main achievements and outputs in the expenditure, but one particularly relevant at present is flood relief. OPW is the lead agency in co-ordinating the management of flood risk in the State and we deliver our responsibilities directly through our own resources and in conjunction with other agencies such as local authorities. The importance of the flood risk management programme was emphasised in recent months with the extreme flooding events in various locations throughout the country. OPW must now undertake, with other agencies, to make every effort to ensure that the effects of any future flood events are minimised for the public, and we need to do this on a nationwide basis.
In 2008, the accounting period being examined today, OPW made significant advances on works including those on the River Dodder, the Mallow north scheme which has recently been completed, the Ennis upper scheme which commenced in June 2008, and the Clonmel west scheme where construction is almost complete. Detailed design of Mallow south, Clonmel north and east, and Ennis lower schemes commenced in the second half of 2008 and are soon to proceed, with works on the Mornington scheme and Fermoy north under way.
Decentralisation, as the committee will see from the Vote, was a significant capital expenditure item in 2008. We incurred expenditure of €102 million in that year. The office has continued to carry out its full range of activities, including delivery of the accommodation requirements for the decentralisation programme, while at the same time planning for its own move. We, ourselves, were one of the Departments being decentralised. At this point, we are in occupation of our new headquarters in Trim and we have an advance office in Claremorris.
The total cost incurred to date on the property aspects of the decentralisation programme amount to €337 million. This is comprised of the cost of site-property acquisitions, fit-out works and rental payments. Some €331 million has been spent by the OPW, together with some €6 million incurred directly in respect of property costs by other organisations.
In the same period, the State has disposed of surplus State assets in Dublin which has realised more than €356 million to date.
In 2008 work was completed and buildings occupied by Departments in Athlone, Killarney, Newcastle West, Na Forbacha and Tipperary town.
Another area within Vote 10 is heritage services, which also was mentioned by the Comptroller and Auditor General. We will continue to manage in excess of 700 sites, catering for up to 3 million visitors annually, and protect site fabric by a continuing programme of planned maintenance adopting best architectural and conservation principles.
Before I finish, I want to mention a particular aspect of the Vote in 2008. The committee will note that in the course of 2008, OPW was notified by a decision of Government taken in July 2008 which had the effect of reducing our allocation for the remainder of the year and subsequent years by €75 million on our capital. The reduction of €75 million is evident in the published outturn for subhead D — purchase of sites and buildings; subhead E — new works, alterations and additions; and subhead H2 — flood relief projects.
I thank members for their attention and will do my best to answer any questions they may wish to raise on the 2008 accounts and report.
On procurement, we have it from the Comptroller and Auditor General's report that non-competitive tendering in 2006 involved 192 contracts amounting to €22 million. In 2008, that figure had gone up to 508 contracts at a value of €83 million. The Department was Finance was concerned at the high level of non-competitive tendering, and that it was increasing. Has that reduced now? Following the establishment of the operations unit, has that changed?
Ms Clare McGrath
We would need to know what has been reported to the Comptroller and Auditor General in respect of subsequent years as to whether numbers would have changed. I believe that the impact of the Comptroller and Auditor General's report in 2008 has been that all Departments and agencies which were mentioned within it have been addressing, and responding to, the Department of Finance on minimising and reducing the instances of non-competitive competitions.
I would just mention that circular 40/2002 and the EU directive allow that there may be instances, for urgency or security, where one has to instance single tendering, and that is allowed for.
With the establishment of the procurement unit which is relatively in its infancy, we would be working towards assisting other bodies to be facilitated in having frameworks in place that if they need to place a contract urgently, we have previously done a competition on their behalf and they can use that then in the instance of an urgent requirement. We would have pre-qualified potential suppliers and that would be something we would be looking to do within the operations unit.
The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Irish Prison Service were mentioned as being of particular concern in that they had a high level of non-competitive tendering, and the Department of Finance was concerned about that. Would the Department of Finance like to respond? Has that changed or what has it put in place?
Mr. Dermot Quigley
We are awaiting the reports in respect of 2009, which are due in by 31 March. We will examine those with particular interest and we are very conscious that the whole question of non-competitive tendering has arisen in previous discussions of the committee, with specific reference to the Prison Service.
Yes.
Mr. Dermot Quigley
We will hone in on a number of Departments, especially the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Prison Service, to determine how things have developed in the interim, because they were before the committee previously and because of the completion of returns in respect of 2008. Departments are allowed some time to come in with the reports. They are due in at the end of March and we expect to get a full complement of reports by that stage.
Does Mr. Quigley expect there will be some changes, given what has been highlighted to the service? Obviously, it is aware of the deliberations of this committee.
Mr. Dermot Quigley
Yes. The Prison Service is fully aware of the discussion that took place in the committee earlier in the year and the efforts of the operations unit. Also, it is probably fair to say that the knowledge of procurement and people's awareness of the need to adhere to procurement regulations is on the increase in the Civil Service. Considerable resources have been invested throughout the years in education and training. Departments now have procurement officers and courses are organised for people who are brought in to the procurement area. Criticisms have been made in the past about the level of expertise in the Civil Service on procurement issues. In previous years, one of the main thrusts of the policy unit has been to assist Departments to add to their experience and expertise in the procurement area.
Does every Department have a procurement officer now?
Mr. Dermot Quigley
Yes, every Department has a procurement officer.
Ms Clare McGrath
The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Prison Service have met the operations unit with a view to having us assist them in minimising the instances that arose and to establish how we can assist in placing contracts on their behalf. They are actively engaged with the operations unit to determine how the expertise in the unit can be used to achieve appropriate levels of procurement.
We will be looking for that.
I cannot believe what I am hearing about prison services today. The Department of Finance was present when we held the hearing with the Prison Service and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Some members expressed concern about the roll-over contract that went from €3 million or €4 million — whatever it was — up to in excess of €100 million. Allied to that was the roll-over contract with the quantity surveyor firm that oversaw the project in question. I believe the people, from Glenbeigh Construction, were involved in a whole series of contracts that rolled over from €3 million to €100 million in six or seven locations throughout the country.
On that day the Department of Finance expressed serious concern when the question of whether it viewed the situation regarding those contracts as a breach of good procurement practice was asked by myself. I also questioned whether the State was open to possible litigation because of non-compliance with EU directives. The Department expressed dissatisfaction about the matter. Is the Department now suggesting nothing has taken place since then? Were they called in? If it were a private company, the principals would be called in and asked what the hell was taking place. Has anything happened?
Mr. Dermot Quigley
First, at the time I stated we were awaiting the report from the Comptroller and Auditor General on the matter. Second, I stated to the committee that it would not have been possible to say whether there was a breach of EU law. Certainly, I stated there was a case for the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to answer. The position is that we are awaiting the findings of the Comptroller and Auditor General. We will act on those through the normal process available to the Minister for Finance. In the meantime, the discussions are continuing between the operations unit, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Prison Service to improve their effectiveness. Regarding the specific point mentioned at the hearing of the Prison Service, we await the findings of the Comptroller and Auditor General and we will definitely respond to those findings.
The Department has done nothing really, in respect of what was disclosed that day.
Mr. Dermot Quigley
No, we have not taken any specific action in respect of what was referred to at the committee.
In her opening statement, Ms McGrath referred to savings of the order of €27 million. Does this refer to total funding in the area of non-competitive tendering across all Departments? Is that correct?
Ms Clare McGrath
No, it is not in respect of non-competitive tendering or chapter 8 of the Comptroller and Auditor General's report. It refers to achieving savings in procurement. It was achieved with input from the operations unit but I must give credit where credit is due. Client Departments actually achieved the savings either by re-tendering or seeking downward adjustments on contracts in excess of €100,000. This effected savings of €27 million. It was achieved by the active management of procurement officers within various Departments, with input from the operations unit to determine how they might go about that. It was not in respect of the specifics of Chapter 8.
Is the sum of €27 million measurable?
Ms Clare McGrath
Yes, it is measurable.
The Departments went back for contracts and re-tendering. Is that correct?
Ms Clare McGrath
Yes. That would have been done and the budget for these operations would have been within departmental accounts. It is not a reference to savings on the Vote of the Office of Public Works. It has been achieved through our systems but by Departments.
Is it across all Departments?
Ms Clare McGrath
It is across all Departments.
Is the Health Service Executive, HSE, included as well?
Ms Clare McGrath
Yes. This would have been done with guidance from the Chief State Solicitor's office and the Attorney General's office. There are extant contracts in these instances and contractual and legal relations apply. There were instances of re-tendering and achieving savings. However, there were other instances of adjustments and achieving reductions on existing contracts. In total this work achieved €27 million in savings.
The McCarthy report refers to the operations unit as well. It recommends the responsibility for the purchase of IT, information technology, hardware and software should follow, commencing in 2010 but I understood that was the case from the beginning.
Ms Clare McGrath
The operations unit and IT consumables would have responsibility in that area but there are framework contracts in the operations unit within the Department of Finance in respect of IT. I understand framework contracts for IT hardware are in use by most Departments and they draw on those. The framework contracts are set up by CMOD, Centre for Organisation and Management, within the Department of Finance.
Does that apply across most Departments? I believe we have encountered this matter before in the committee.
Ms Clare McGrath
Yes, I will stand corrected but I believe it would be fair to say most Departments draw on these.
The group recommended a panel of experts should be formed as soon as possible to drive the professionalism of procurement. Would that help the Department in any way? How would a panel of experts differ from what is in place at present?
Ms Clare McGrath
One could imagine particular instances in which the supply of particular items or certain demands exist. One might need a particular level of expertise which we could draw on within the operations unit to the benefit of everyone, rather than the previous position, when an individual Department with a certain requirement sought the expertise individually. If it is possible to aggregate centrally, we will do so. I envisage we could draw on expertise in this way and we would not disagree with that recommendation of the McCarthy report.
Is the Department looking to do so?
Ms Clare McGrath
Yes. We are preparing to do that.
I refer to the area of flooding and flood relief, which, unfortunately, is very topical. Vote 10 of the accounts states that €50,000 was provided at the end of 2008. Is that the correct figure?
Ms Clare McGrath
Some €50 million.
Yes. Ms McGrath said the outturn was only €25 million. Of the order of €25 million was not spent in 2008.
Ms Clare McGrath
In regard to that, I said that in July 2008, we were advised by a Government decision that we were being cut €75 million in our capital. At that point in time in the year, one looks at what is not contractually committed as to how one will achieve that, because that is a Government decision and one must give effect to it. In terms of those areas of the Vote with capital, we then looked to achieve €75 million. Subhead H2, flood relief, was necessarily affected by that. It also affected subhead D, purchase sites and buildings, and subhead E, new works and additions. We combined those three capital subheads to achieve the €75 million and it was done on the basis of looking at what was not contractually committed under those budgetary items.
The Deputy is correct in saying that we had savings otherwise within subhead H2. Things we had anticipated advancing more quickly at Mallow and Fermoy did not do so. Having taken account of the €75 million cut, some €5 million was saved under subhead H2.
The allocation for flood relief in 2009 was €43 million. We have had €36 million of an outturn. We have been able to ring-fence what we would otherwise have been allocated had we got to spend that in 2008 and 2009 to ensure protection of the advancement of flood relief works which we would prioritise within the overall Vote. It is an unusual circumstance in 2008 that the saving actually derives from a Government decision to cut the allocation in the course of the year.
I was going to ask Ms McGrath about 2009-10. The OPW saved €43 million in 2009 and spent €36 million of that.
Ms Clare McGrath
Some €36 million of that was expended but in 2010, our allocation is €50 million. It has been ratcheting up in terms of development. The actual development of a flood relief scheme — maybe this applies to what we are seeing throughout the country, with the CFRAMs and the development of the study — can, to a large extent, take upwards of five years before we can commence work, depending on what might be involved in the development of the scheme. This is from the initiation stage, the feasibility stage, the exhibition stage, the confirmation stage and the detailed design stage of the scheme. All of these follow the capital appraisal guidelines in regard to projects.
Unusually, in the case of a flood relief project, we do not own the site. We cannot purchase and ring-fence the site. That can apply in a road scheme where there can be a compulsory purchase order. We do not do so in a flood relief scheme. We must work with the occupiers and we must serve interference notice.
Quite properly, our planning is an elongated process which, at exhibition stage, requires us to exhibit in great detail what we are planning in regard to a scheme. We must give sufficient time to all those affected — not only landowners but maybe businesses and road users. It is a wider community than might necessarily be affected in other types of development.
We have seen this in regard to the efforts and the development of the Lee catchment management plans. The work done on that in the three years is potentially five years work. That three years work has been done on development of the Lee catchment management plan which will be of benefit to all of the works we will say are being recommended from within that.
To go back to the Deputy's question on schemes and developments, the process in regard to flood relief schemes is necessarily an elongated process, and rightly so to ensure we get value for money and the return. I ask the Deputy to forgive me if I have spoken for too long.
I understand this takes time. The public may expect that some schemes take time. Some are in the process of development and others are ready to go. Everything is at a different phase of planning.
Last year the committee was told the OPW was developing criteria to look at how it would prioritise schemes across the country. We were told that review would be concluded mid-2009. Has that review been done? Has the OPW prioritised areas this year, or has that changed? It was estimated that flood damage could cost €75 million per year. That has probably changed completely in light of recent events.
Ms Clare McGrath
We have not developed the prioritised methodology. We are developing it but it is in part because we have advanced sufficient schemes. The Deputy will be familiar with Mallow, Clonmel, Fermoy, Bandon, Ennis and Newcastle West. There are a number of schemes and I can provide lists in that regard. They are our priorities at present; they are major schemes. However, in light of flood events recently or in the past 12 months, we have identified — it has been developed from our overall plans in each of the catchment areas — interim works which do no harm to our overall view of what will be the ultimate solution. We are bringing those forward.
We have developed schemes such that local authorities can apply to the OPW for funding in regard to localised works which they can undertake. They prioritise those works and we provide funding to them. We did so in 2009 and we are allocating €6 million in 2010 for that. We are allowing the local authorities within their areas to prioritise localised works for us which we will fund, subject to a relatively straightforward cost benefit analysis.
I refer to the point Ms McGrath made about local authorities applying to the OPW for funding. I know some funding could be used on works other than major capital investments. Is the OPW the lead agency in regard to flood risk management and flood relief in the country?
Ms Clare McGrath
Flood risk management, yes.
Does it work with local authorities or does it wait for them to come to it with proposals? I would have thought that if it was the lead agency and if it was developing flood risk assessments on a river catchment basis, it could identify where money could be spent and where relief could be implemented. I am thinking of river management, cleaning rivers, etc. which require relatively small investment. Who decides a priority? Is it the OPW or the local authority?
Ms Clare McGrath
With the implementation of the floods directive, and that is in the context of the water framework directive, and since the publication of the flood policy in 2005, we are the lead co-ordinating agency nationally. In taking our responsibilities on in regard to the EU floods directive, last Monday, we published the Lee catchment management plan for consultation. The Dodder management catchment plan will also be published this year. That is what we are required to do. We did so in advance of the directive being implemented; we commenced that process.
From the catchment management plans, we will identify not only works but non-structural works and management. Last November, the Minister of State along with the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, published planning guidelines in respect of flooding. It is a combination of structural and non-structural working together. From the catchment plans, priorities then emerge and they are prioritised in regard to their cost benefit and funding availability.
The Lee is ahead in the sense that it was the pilot. We have the advantage of the learning, the experience and the skills developed on that to bring forward and go to tender with all the other catchments simultaneously, using the knowledge we gained on it and the Dodder. The Shannon catchment, for example, will be tendered in the course of 2010. The priorities will come from that. However, all of us, particularly local authorities, are aware of instances within a catchment where minor works could alleviate particular issues. Local authorities are prioritising those works within their own local authority area and we are advancing those works, with a view to setting priorities based on work that arises that way and work arising from the catchment management plans. We are dealing with those in combination so that we do no harm. No works we do should do harm upstream or downstream and we must always be very conscious of that.
What I was wondering was whether the smaller works are left to the local authority. For example, the Lee CFRAMS report, Lee catchment flood risk assessment and management study, lists all the possibilities and these are analysed on a cost-benefit basis. Who will tick the list to indicate what works have been done? Is this left to the local authorities or does the OPW stand over the work and ensure it is done? The problem is that people do not know or understand who exactly is responsible, whether it is the local authority or an adjoining one, the OPW or the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Who will take responsibility and ensure that every work identified to alleviate flooding, provide a defence or whatever, will be done?
Ms Clare McGrath
The OPW will be responsible, but we will use and avail of the services of agencies, because we are not the only stakeholder.
I understand that, but I want to establish that there is, ultimately, somebody with responsibility for signing off that the work has been done, for example in an area where there was a problem, where there was a culvert blocked, a fallen tree or whatever. Will that be the case or will it be a case of passing the buck?
Ms Clare McGrath
Some works are maintenance works. Within the Vote of the Office of Public Works subhead H3 covers drainage maintenance. This refers to where we have undertaken, on some 11,500 km of channel and some 600 km of embankments, works under the arterial drainage schemes. Where we have done work under those schemes, we maintain them. We are responsible in those instances for annual maintenance programmes. In other drainage districts, local authorities may be responsible for them and we would not be responsible for maintenance. Under the catchment management plans, where we identify areas of potentially significant risk and we undertake works, we will be responsible for their maintenance.
Is it correct that if the OPW has not identified the work, it is not responsible for the maintenance?
Ms Clare McGrath
We are caught in this situation currently. The catchment management plans will identify works for the total catchment, for example for some 2,000 sq. km. in the case of the Lee. We will identify significant works in parts of that and will undertake and maintain those works. We will set out how we will manage the other works. We will look perhaps at ensuring those works are done through the local authority system. The OPW will not work in isolation. It must, necessarily, work with users and landowners.
I understand, but has the OPW the ultimate responsibility?
Ms Clare McGrath
Yes.
What about Waterways Ireland, has it responsibility for some areas?
Ms Clare McGrath
Yes, in particular instances. One might take the Shannon as an example where there are particular stakeholders, such as the ESB, Waterways Ireland, landowners, businesses and householders. We would seek to co-ordinate information flow from any of the stakeholders to facilitate the management of flood risk. However, one agency will not necessarily have responsibility. In the case of flood risk, we will manage information from stakeholders in order to facilitate the optimum outcomes with regard to flooding. People have different agendas because of the legislative and administrative responsibility they have. Their first responsibility is to fulfil those agendas. In the case of flooding, all the agencies must work together. We will co-ordinate the response, but we will rely on agencies working with us.
Is the OPW the lead agency?
Ms Clare McGrath
Yes, we are the lead agency.
If there is an issue can people go to the OPW to find out who should deal with it?
Ms Clare McGrath
Yes.
In the past number of months people have found dealing with this issue frustrating. They have seen it as a case of passing the buck with one agency claiming it is not responsible and another is. Ultimately, businesses and households have borne the brunt of the problem. The Lee CFRAMS report has been published this week and it gives us an idea of the thinking behind the plans.
Arising from Deputy Clune's questions, I want to comment on flooding, of which we were all victims in recent months. My impression was there seemed to be nobody in charge of dealing with various aspects of the flooding situation. Early warning systems should be in place. In the area with which I am most familiar, Cork, there seems to have been a difference of opinion between the local authorities and the ESB with regard to the provision of information to the public by way of warnings. There were questions raised as to the cause of the flooding and whether it was related to the level of the waters of the Iniscarra dam. What role has the Office of Public Works in co-ordinating early warning systems? Is there a system in place and is there a co-ordinator in place to provide early warnings to the public? What is the OPW's role with regard to dealing with the ESB, which is a major player in the control and governance of our waterways?
Ms Clare McGrath
There is no early warning system for the whole Lee catchment area. However, there is a warning system for the flood relief works being put in place in Clonmel, which involve demountable defences which are put in place by the local authority in the event of a flood. This warning system activates the council to come out and erect the flood defences. The Lee catchment framework management plan, published on Monday last, states that in providing protection mitigating flood risk the OPW should take the lead agency role in co-ordinating the implementation of certain physical works. The ESB, through its control of operations at Carrigadrohid and Iniscarra should also provide warning in the event of an over 90% likelihood of a flood, which is a complex situation. These combined will mitigate and provide protection. Detailed design work remains to be done on this plan, but it will be done with a view to providing protection to the greatest possible extent in the event of a situation similar to that we had last year. That is what we are bringing forward. We are putting in place, through structural and non-structural methodologies and through other agencies, a level of protection that will mitigate flooding. We are aware we can never totally eliminate flooding, but we are identifying areas at particular risk and mitigating that risk. While we may not be putting flood warning systems in place now, we are working towards developing them.
In the context of a situation where a flood could happen again next week, what has happened since the appalling floods in Cork, Galway and elsewhere? I take Cork as an example because it is the area with which I am most familiar. Have there been in-depth discussions or investigations about water levels west of the dams? Have the OPW and the ESB investigated the event to establish whether there was proper management of water levels prior to the heavy rainfall?
Ms Clare McGrath
Yes, this was done as part of the CFRAM study which was being developed at the time. However, we have yet to take full account of all of the data gathered with regard to November's flooding. Discussions have and had been taking place with the ESB and other stakeholders as part of the CFRAM study with regard to what can and cannot be done. There are some three years of data gathering, analysis and information in the study, which forms the first step for non-structural works. All this feeds into what the Deputy is saying about warnings. In terms of what would be understood as a normal, formal warning system, such could not be in place at this time necessarily.
It is ironic that with hundreds of millions of euro worth of damage done in recent times by flooding, with businesses wiped out and houses permanently damaged, there was a €25 million cut in flood defences in 2008 and a cut of €6 million in flood defence projects in 2009. I know that hindsight is a great thing but projects were put on hold because of cutbacks and as a result we now have hundreds of millions of euro worth of damage done to property and lives and livelihoods destroyed. It is ironic this should have happened and I ask for Ms McGrath's response.
Ms Clare McGrath
We are prioritising flood relief and we expended €36 million of the 2009 allocation of €43 million. I refer to the capital carry forward provisions. With regard to the development of flood release schemes, while one would wish to be optimistic in terms of delivery, because of the necessity for a level of consultation, a level of detail and the level of interference in people's property in order to bring forward schemes, they can take longer than one would hope. With the capital carry forward, the actual savings made on capital — up to 10% in a given year — are carried forward and are a first charge on the account so they are not lost to the Vote. I agree the year 2008 was unusual with the capital cut.
Ms McGrath referred to a number of studies. The Cork study was published on Monday. What funding is available for the implementation of that study?
Ms Clare McGrath
Within the budget of €50 million in 2010 we will be bringing forward elements of the Lee catchment plan.
The projected cost is approximately €100 million.
Ms Clare McGrath
No, the projected cost is in the order of €30 million. The options we are recommending — all of which is subject to the consultation process which will not be finished until the end of April — within Cork city, including the combination of elements of minor works, combined with the ESB management and control of the reservoirs and flood warning systems, including various works in various locations along the catchment, is in the order of €30 million.
I heard a figure of €100 million being mentioned.
Ms Clare McGrath
There are various options that can be developed. That would have been a full hard engineering along 10 km within the city. What we are proposing provides the same level of protection but it is subject——
How much of the €30 million is available?
Ms Clare McGrath
It is all available. This takes a number of years; it is not something that will be done in 12 or 18 months. It will take a number of years and the funding is in place. However, it will be necessary for us to undertake specific and detailed analysis on certain elements of it. We believe what we are saying is the case at present but as we do further analysis we may be making some changes to that. As we exhibit the plan, individuals may have particular issues with what we propose, as with a normal planning process and we may have to make adjustments as a result but this is to be expected and we will do so.
In her opening statement, Ms McGrath spoke about what has been happening since the establishment of the national public procurement operations unit, NPPOU. She stated that savings in the order of €27 million were made. How much is the total budget for procurement? How was the savings of €27 million estimated?
Ms Clare McGrath
We did this by means of analysis of the returns from individual Departments across various headings. The achievement of this saving was reflected in the allocations within individual Departments, as I explained to the Deputy earlier, under various different headings such as advertising. Also, in the course of 2009, individual Departments and agencies revisited contracts they held and reduced what was being expended under those contracts by either retendering, placing new contracts, or achieving reductions on their existing contracts.
Can Ms McGrath price the amount of goods and services procured by Departments?
Ms Clare McGrath
In the public service in totality — I am not sure with regard to central Government — about €8 billion in procurement and about €7 billion on construction. I would not know the current figures.
Ms McGrath referred to the HSE when responding to Deputy Clune when she asked about information from the HSE. According to my information, the HSE is not required to make a return to the Office of Public Works.
Ms Clare McGrath
It is the case they were not required under circular No. 40 of 2002 to make a return, to report on the instances above €25,000 of non-competitive procurement. I think they have now said they are going to do so and I think through the Department of Finance, they may have said they will. It is not necessarily that the operations unit would be looking for these reports as that would be a matter for each Accounting Officer in respect of his or her own area in the first instance to make returns to the Department of Finance and to the Comptroller and Auditor General. What we would be concerned to do in the operations unit is to assist them to minimise the instances in the future, by the use of framework contracts and drawdown contracts.
I do not understand. Is the HSE required to make a return to the OPW?
Ms Clare McGrath
They would not have to make a return under circular No. 40 of 2002 to the Office of Public Works.
Has the OPW or the Department of Finance any information on the extent of non-competitive tendering within the HSE as it is a multi-billion euro organisation?
Mr. Dermot Quigley
We are expecting a return from the HSE in respect of 2009. Under the terms of the circular in previous years, the HSE did not have to make a return but arrangements have now been agreed upon between the HSE and the Department of Health and Children. We are awaiting information from the HSE which we will examine extremely closely and we will also be in consultation with the operations unit when we receive the information. The details will also be supplied to the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General.
Why was the HSE excluded from the reporting mechanism?
Mr. Dermot Quigley
In 2002 when the circular was first issued, it was confined to the central Government area. It was decided in 2006 that the remit of the circular should be extended to the HSE. It would appear that there was a breakdown in communication between the Department of Health and Children and the HSE with the result that it was not until 2009 that agreement was reached between the Department of Health and Children, the HSE and the Department of Finance, that the HSE would produce these types of returns. There appears to have been a breakdown in communication between 2006 and 2008 to 2009. Certainly, the HSE did not produce returns for 2006 and 2007.
I do not understand how there could have been a breakdown in communication with an organisation spending several billion euro and nobody sounded any warning bells nor were any questions raised about the non-reporting.
Mr. Dermot Quigley
I have to accept the Chairman's comments in that regard. The error, the lacuna, took place. I can only put it in the context that when the circular of 2002 was brought into effect first, it applied to central Government and then there was a question of expanding it. Certainly, one would have thought the HSE should have been high up on people's lists but delays took place in getting the wishes of the Department of Finance enacted.
To return to the operations unit, I ask Ms McGrath to give the committee an idea of how effective it can be and its potential. What is the staffing complement of the unit? What qualifications do the staff have? Were any specialist staff brought into the unit? Is the unit able to avail of the private sector's expertise and knowledge of market conditions? Does it benchmark its activities and procurement costs against those of private sector organisations?
Ms Clare McGrath
The unit has 26 staff. Subject to the moratorium, we have the potential to increase that number to 40. We trawled most of the other Departments when we were recruiting staff. Most of the staff are based in Trim, although some of them are in Dublin. We tried to find staff with expertise of procurement across the central government agencies. We believe we have obtained such expertise. The staff in question, who are now within our office, have practical procurement experience. Many of them are undertaking further courses, including the master's programme in DCU. They are obtaining the professional expertise they need. Many of them have a great deal of practical experience of procurement within public bodies. We will get external advice, as necessary, on particular areas of procurement, including the best way of approaching market analysis and the evaluation of data. We have availed of the expertise of our colleagues in Northern Ireland in this area. They may be ahead of us in some respects, such as aggregation and supply chain analysis. We are benefiting from their input into our steering group, in particular. We are availing of their expertise. We will avail of external expertise, as needed. I imagine that the market will drive us in the direction of benchmarking. We will be on our mettle in relation to the industries. We are providing standardised documentation. We are ensuring that our selection criteria are appropriate and proportionate to suppliers in the market. That will be a driver for us as well. It does not relate solely to the buyers of the services, but also to the suppliers. We would like to widen that to all sectors. Our staff have the necessary qualifications and expertise. Ultimately, we will engage in benchmarking. That has been in operation since April. There is a way to go.
Has anybody from outside the Civil Service structure been brought in?
Ms Clare McGrath
We have not recruited. We are not ruling out recruitment.
Does Ms McGrath think the unit should have done that?
Ms Clare McGrath
Not at the moment.
I will be very blunt. Ms McGrath initially said that the unit has achieved savings of €27 million to date. In her subsequent evidence, it was revealed that €15 billion was spent on contracts — €8 billion on procurement and €7 billion on capital works. At a time when prices were decreasing, as the economy went into a downturn, I do not consider it a great achievement to save €27 million from an expenditure bill of €15 billion. Am I being unfair?
Ms Clare McGrath
Procurement normally comes under the allocations that are made on the current side to central government Departments, in this case, for 2008, 2009 and 2010. The year-on-year reductions in allocations for supplies and services have necessarily meant retendering and recontracting. The reductions being achieved in that way are not necessarily reflected when one considers it from the other side. It is not always a question of saying that the cost of contracts has to be cut — that is something that is having to happen. Not everything that is going on is reflected in the €27 million figure referred to by the Chairman. If expertise is available that would bring greater efficiencies to the operations unit of the OPW, we will seek to avail of it. If sectoral expertise is identified and there is no issue with it, we will avail of it. As we consider how we can achieve certain things, we avail of the legal expertise of the Office of the Chief State Solicitor and the Office of the Attorney General. If expertise is needed, there is no issue about bringing it in.
Given that the unit will have to benchmark itself against external bodies, one would think it will bring in some expertise from the outside.
Ms Clare McGrath
Yes, when we are position to be benchmarked.
My final question pertains to a report in this morning's Irish Examiner about the toxic dump at the former Irish Steel site in Cork Harbour. The Minister, Deputy Gormley, said some time ago that he would ask the OPW to form a working group to examine how best to deal with the site. The newspaper report suggests that seven months on, very little, if anything, has happened on this issue.
Ms Clare McGrath
The membership of the group has been identified. Work on the terms of reference, in particular, has been taking place in advance of the group's first meeting. The OPW is charged with chairing the group that will examine the further management and development of the site. We have sought to have the terms of reference agreed between the members of the group. I accept the point that the group could have met in advance of that being determined, although we would probably be at the same stage anyway. The various members are co-operating on what is being done — it is just that the group has not met yet.
Given that litigation is taking place with regard to the alleged health risks posed by the toxic site, and in light of the problems with contracts, Ms McGrath must agree that this issue must be dealt with urgently. I suggest that the group should have moved beyond the terms of reference stage by now.
Ms Clare McGrath
While I take the Chairman's point about the group, I believe its management and content are under control at present.
Sorry?
Ms Clare McGrath
I beg your pardon, Chairman. I understand that action is being taken, by the agencies which are responsible, on the management of the elements of this issue he has mentioned. I take his point in relation to the group and the future development of the site.
I understand that Mr. Tony Smyth has a prior commitment down the country. Does he need to leave?
Mr. Tony Smyth
No. I have rearranged it. I was supposed to attend a meeting of the environment committee in Fermoy.
If Mr. Smyth wishes to leave, he can do so.
Mr. Tony Smyth
I spoke to Deputy Fleming. As a result, my arrangements have changed.
I apologise for missing the earlier part of this meeting. I was at another committee meeting. I would like to ask about flooding. I am aware that the OPW's equivalent body in the UK, along with the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, have produced a very precise hydrological map of that country. The map is of great assistance to planning authorities and local authorities. I accept there is a very basic map on the website of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Those of us who live outside the Cork region, or do not have connections with Cork, were astonished when the city was submerged beneath a massive mountain of water. Have we done anything in this regard? Are we up to speed, even by comparison with the UK? If a developer wanted to develop a site in County Meath, for example, could he avail of a precise hydrological study that would indicate the 25-year or 50-year risk of flooding? We did not seem to have such a facility until very recent times.
Ms Clare McGrath
The OPW has developed maps. Information on all historical events is available on www.floodmaps.ie.
People built on the edge of a polder in my constituency five or six years ago without undertaking a hydrological study. At the time, people had to work in the dark because no detailed hydrology maps were available from the OPW or from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. There is fear that as time goes on, households near the polder will be in danger.
Ms Clare McGrath
With the catchment management plans we are identifying potential areas of risk. That information would be available to the local authorities in relation to particular areas and would be——
They are not yet available.
Ms Clare McGrath
There is a great deal of information on the flood maps at present which is available to local authorities for use in planning. Where we have undertaken any schemes, there is a substantial body of hydrological or hydrometric information which would inform planners, individuals or businesses in relation to developments.
Is Ms McGrath saying that if I wanted to buy a house in a certain area, I could, by checking the Property Registration Office's website, know fairly definitively the flood risk? I do not believe such a facility exists.
Ms Clare McGrath
No, it exists for particular areas but it will not in every instance until we do the predictive mapping. We are looking to do predictive mapping under the EU floods directive. Once the catchment management plans are in place — the Lee and Dodder plans will be done this year and all the others are being developed — we will be in a position to——
What is the timeframe?
Ms Clare McGrath
The preliminary flood maps will be done in 2010 but overall it will be 2014-15 before all the catchments are done.
Is it possible to give the committee a detailed update on what is being prepared? We were genuinely shocked that our second city was in such imminent danger. While another State agency, the ESB, had direct responsibility, the Property Registration Office clearly has a responsibility to inform us as to the hydrology of this island.
Ms Clare McGrath
We will revert to the committee with a briefing note on what we are doing and what will emerge.
I raise an item in the accounts with which my colleagues may have dealt, namely, the rents of €125 million. Did the Property Registration Office succeed in reducing this bill in 2009. In light of the recession, what developments are taking place with regard to the cost to the State of the large portfolio of rental properties? Ms McGrath may have been asked that question.
Ms Clare McGrath
Of our 2,500 properties, including heritage properties, there are 461 leases. I may not have the exact figures for 2010 but I will revert to the committee. However, with decentralisation and the rationalisation of property and accommodation in Dublin, we are looking to surrender leases when these arise to take advantage of opportunities at breaks to surrender these leases and rationalise within the State owned portfolio and reduce our rent. That is an imperative.
We have discussed this issue in the Dáil Chamber. Are we in the same boat as State agencies with regard to downward revisions in rents. What is the figure for rental costs in 2009?
Ms Clare McGrath
I can locate the figure for the Deputy. As with anybody else with a commercial lease, the Office of Public Works is contractually bound. However, because of the nature of our covenant and the nature of the relationships we have with landlords, we would be looking to achieve efficiencies, taking account of the totality of our portfolio relationship with an individual landlord. Contractually, however, we have the same difficulty.
Downward reviews are difficult.
Ms Clare McGrath
In present leases, such reviews would be impossible. However, to give an example of a response to demands to achieve savings, since relocating our headquarters to Trim, the Office of Public Works has vacated 51 St. Stephen's Green. We are also allocating to another occupier and surrendering a lease. This is achieving a saving of €1.6 million which is obviously continuous. We will do more of that and expect to achieve quite considerable savings in 2010. We have not necessarily advised everybody of some of this but we will continue to do this to bring down our rents and consolidate into old estate.
What was the final rent Bill for 2009?
Ms Clare McGrath
It would be in the order of €130 million. I can revert to the Deputy with a precise figure.
It has not declined.
Ms Clare McGrath
We must take account of the fact that with decentralisation and the provision of advance office accommodation, we have taken new leases out of Dublin. The breaks and surrenders coming up are facilitating us rationalising accommodation in Dublin where we pay the biggest amount of rent. In three or four years we will come out of rents.
My colleagues may have asked about another issue, namely, Thornton Hall. What is the position with regard to the proposed prison? Has there been any movement on the issue?
Ms Clare McGrath
That issue does not come within the remit of the Office of Public Works. While we may become involved, we are not the lead agency, which is the Irish Prison Service and Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
Before we conclude and I ask Mr. Buckley to come in, I am not happy with what I am hearing today regarding procurement. Given that contracts are valued at €15 billion, we do not want someone with a doctorate from Trinity College advising us. We want advice from an external source who knows the markets and knows the score in real life. Given the cuts being made left, right and centre in social services, the time is ripe for massive rationalisation in this area. External expertise must be brought in to get to grips with procurement. It is unpardonable, for example, that the Health Service Executive spends more than €1 billion without checks being done. We do not know how many times the HSE issued contracts without competition because no data is available and no one is making returns. Savings of between €1 billion and €2 billion could be secured in the €15 billion of contracts by having a proper and effective policing unit examining all State contracts.
Ms Clare McGrath
The operations unit of the Office of Public Works is not involved in construction procurement and has no remit in that area. The figures to which the Chairman referred are in the order of €7 billion. As the figures for 2008 show, the Office of Public Works is relatively small in relation to overall——
I am talking about public procurement by State bodies in general.
Ms Clare McGrath
The OPW does no less than other agencies. Given the very competitive pricing on construction costs, the market is providing reductions of between 25% and 30% on construction contracts. That is happening in all sectors.
On another issue, has the Office of Public Works done an audit of vacant properties throughout Government Departments and agencies, the value of such properties and what sanctions are being taken in cases of properties being left idle for years? I can reel off four or five huge tracts of property which have been lying idle and devaluing for years. In my back yard in Cork, one has the area of the north ridge and Our Lady's Hospital which is run by the HSE. We have been discussing this matter for years but the land is devaluing by the day. It was once worth from multiple millions but it is now worth little. What is being done? What sanctions have been taken? Has an audit been done of all public properties?
Ms Clare McGrath
The OPW has a remit for the central government and heritage properties, of which there are 2,500. Of these, excluding the heritage side, the vacancy rate is between 1% and 2%. The figure is largely unchanged since we last reported on this matter. Benchmarked against our international colleagues in this area, we should be operating at a vacancy rate of 3% or 4%. Our vacancy rates are very low. We need an element of vacancy to facilitate decanting while we are moving various parties around.
The report of the special group mentioned the Office of Public Works looking at areas of management and taking a wider role than what we have. As this has not occurred, we do not have a remit to look beyond the properties for which we have direct charge.
Has the Department of Finance done an audit of all vacant property held by Departments and agencies?
Mr. Frank Griffin
The Department has not done an audit but we developed a programme in conjunction with the report to the special group, which we will be rolling out in conjunction with the Office of Public Works, OPW, to work towards a capacity on the part of the OPW to bring together reporting on property held in the public service.
We share the Chairman's concern that the standard of property management is not uniform throughout the public service. Over a period of time we hope to work towards improving the standard of reporting and the management of property in order to get the best return from it.
To start, the Department should do a case history of Our Lady's Hospital property in Cork, which is the biggest derelict site on the north side of Cork city. It has been lying idle for more than ten years. It is devaluing by the day. The Department could find out who is negligent in the management of that property.
Mr. Frank Griffin
We can talk to the HSE about it.
We raised it here previously but the same situation pertains up to two years later. It should be considered as a case study of property management. I am annoyed that at a time when so many social services are being cut back huge savings could be made on the procurement and management of properties if such issues could be addressed.
We referred earlier to procurement in the Prison Service and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. The Comptroller and Auditor General has reported on that issue, specifically on procurement practices and non-compliance with procedures. There is no reason the Department could not take up the issue with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Prison Service.
The committee will do a more comprehensive report on procurement. We will publish it as soon as we have it completed. In the meantime, I thought that in view of the grave concern that was raised in the committee some considerable time ago, there would have been an immediate investigation or examination of what took place with that roll-over contract involving the Prison Service. I do not see any reason the Department could not have been proactive in that regard.
Ms Clare McGrath
When the Chairman referred to external expertise on procurement, I should have mentioned that we are putting in place a procurement advisory group of four or five people who will assist the operations unit and provide strategic expertise and a focus on value for money. That will be in place shortly. Cost savings would accrue from a more strategic sourcing of contracts.
Mr. John Buckley
Obviously the movement to become more managerial about procurement is to be welcomed. The line of reporting we have been pushing in recent years is to ensure there is comprehensive reporting of departures from competitive procurement. The next step is to ensure that the information is analysed and that the responses that are possible in order to prevent recourse to non-competitive procurement are put in place.
Apart from the situation where the shoe is pinching and we are not obeying the rules on competitive procurement or there is unwarranted recourse to it, then through analysis there is clearly room to move on to have more modern methods of procurement with user groups to ensure we agree on the needs and how they are specified for various types of purchase. There is considerable scope both to close off the recourse to non-competitive procurement, and I hope in the future we will find ourselves, in the line of reporting we are doing, bringing back to the committee how the process is going, moving from information to change through analysis.
I thank the witnesses for their evidence. Can we agree to note Vote 10, Office of Public Works, and dispose of chapter 8? I would like to leave chapter 8 open for a while because of other issues. Is it agreed that we note Vote 10? Agreed. Is it agreed that we keep chapter 8 open for the moment? Agreed.
The agenda for next week is special report No. 68, Public Service Pensions, the 2008 Annual Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General and Appropriation Accounts on Superannuation and Retired allowances, Public Service Pensions, National Treasury Management Agency and National Pensions Reserve Fund and the latest accounts from the National Pensions Reserve Fund Commission.
The witnesses withdrew.
The committee adjourned at 1.45 p.m. until 10 a.m. on Thursday, 11 February 2010.