The way in which the contract was devised in 1996 was entirely unsatisfactory. I was made aware of this matter by outside sources. That was how it came to my attention. Many of the points the Deputy made are correct. The nature of the contract as it was drawn up was very unsatisfactory. The contract documentation was not tight enough. Having read the report which was given to me by the chairman of CIE, I would have grave doubts about certain aspects of the whole operation concerning the public procurement of this signalling system. The Deputy is correct in what he has said. When the contract was drawn up in 1996 or early 1997 it was envisaged that it would cost £14 million, yet it has now risen from £25 million to £40 million. The work is not scheduled to be concluded until 2002, which is remarkable.
Equally remarkable is that many of the people involved in initially drawing up the contract back in 1995 or 1996 have left to join one of the firms in question, MTL. Letters have been written to me concerning legal matters arising from this affair. While I know that matters raised here are not tenable in a legal situation, I am aware of the situation. The whole matter is entirely unsatisfactory.