I propose to take Questions Nos. 25 and 109 together.
A contract was placed by the Government Supplies Agency on behalf of my Department with Westport Clothing in October 1998 for the supply of combat suits in disruptive pattern material during the years 1999 and 2000. The requirement for 1999 was set at 13,000 smocks, 13,000 winter trousers and 33,000 summer trousers at a value of £979,000 approximately, exclusive of VAT.
However, Westport Clothing experienced ongoing difficulties in providing a sample of the specified fabric and consequently failed to meet the original delivery date of 1 February 1999. Because of the need to meet the extended delivery requirements of the Defence Forces to equip the UNIFIL battalion by September 1999, it was considered prudent by the Government Supplies Agency to place a supplementary contract with an alternative supplier. An order was, therefore, placed by the agency with Seyntex N.V., Belgium, in May 1999 for the supply of 4,000 smocks, 4,000 winter trousers and 20,000 summer trousers at a value of £476,000, exclusive of VAT.
The agency has indicated that at present both companies are on schedule to supply garments in July-August 1999 for the UNIFIL requirement arising in September 1999 and to deliver the balance of the contracts, as scheduled, to the Defence Forces. The combined supply by both companies will satisfy requirements for 1999 and 2000.
Both contracts were placed following a tender competition which included advertising in the Official Journal of the European Union. Westport Clothing submitted the lowest tender to meet the required specification and Seyntex N.V. submitted the second lowest tender.