Picking up on the question of the decision whether to pay the subcontractors directly, as Deputy Minister Fadden said, the entity with whom we had a legal agreement would not have been likely to want to stand back from that agreement; they wanted to continue to be the entity delivering the work under the contribution agreement.
In addition, there were some 40 or more subcontractors, so the administrative difficulty of moving a contract of many millions of dollars to tens and tens of subcontractors would have been very difficult, particularly since the entity that had signed the agreement would not have been happy to do it.
So we had advice that there were options we could undertake, and we felt confident in the option we chose. As long as we did a very rigorous value for money assessment of all the business plan items, we would ensure that money was only provided for work that was completed. Then the legal relationship was between CEEA-T and the subcontractors, and the money needed to flow from CEEA-T to the subcontractors, not from the crown to the subcontractors.