No EU funding lost

I refer to the leader Risk Of Losing Millions Of EU Funds (May 15), particularly to the commentary concerning the oncology centre project falling behind schedule. I believe this merits some clarification – if only to dispel any negative perception that the project is in fact late.

The project timelines have remained unchanged. It is expected, therefore, that in line with commissioning and testing protocol, the centre shall be operational by the second quarter of next year. It is evident to the intelligent observer that the commissioning of an exceedingly complex healthcare infrastructure does not happen overnight. Mater Dei Hospital, for example, was handed over on June 29, 2007 – with the migration of patients commencing on November 5 of that same year. The oncology centre will be coming on line progressively.

The reported delay of four months is essentially a prudent management assumption resulting from the fact that the public procurement process for the implementation of the extension of the electrical ring from Mater Dei Hospital to the new oncology centre was unsuccessful on two separate occasions. The latest Invitation to Tender for this procurement was published on May 10, and will close on July 2.

From a project-management perspective, having an open-ended work-package due to a pending public-procurement process, over which there is no leverage, results in a risk-mitigation exercise. This exercise includes an estimate of any delays expected as a result of procurement not having been completed.

I also wish to clarify the observation concerning “savings” made on this project. As is standard practice, a budget-estimate is compiled when a project is in its design-stages; and equally for the purposes of the ERDF Grant Application. This is done prior to the publication of any tenders.

The actual cost of the project, or any work-package therein, would subsequently reflect the cheapest compliant bid. In the case of the oncology centre project, the cheapest compliant bid for the principal component of the project fell below the original budget estimate.

Therefore, it was the cheapest compliant bid that was selected in line with public procurement procedure. Hence the reported savings. However, it must be pointed out that ‘savings’ were ploughed back into the operational programme such that funds are allocated to other projects. No possible EU funding was lost, therefore, from the oncology centre project.

It is in our interest to disburse as much funds as possible such that not only projects but also national targets for disbursement are maintained. From the perspective of this particular project, we will certainly continue to pursue appropriate levels of disbursement such that these targets are met - and if possible exceeded. The oncology centre project has been identified as a model of best-practice in terms of design, project-management and implementation.

We will undoubtedly continue to pursue our ultimate objective of having this facility be a reference centre for the treatment of cancer across our region.

The oncology centre will be coming on line ‘progressively’.