When someone uses a fallacious argument to justify an unwelcome announcement, you can be certain that there'll be repercussions!

In defence of Olympic Delivery Authority boss' David Higgins' decision to scrap six months of bidding process (and presumably the bidders' costs), "the ODA said that changes to European Union procurement rules which came into force in January meant it could not alter the scope of the contracts within the existing tenders" (24 January, www.building.co.uk).

I believe they'll find in the small print that the transitional measures state that tenders for which notices were published prior to 31 January 2006 are still valid and subject to the previous rules of European public procurement, which were not as stringent as the new rules.

What is the real reason for his vicarious profligacy?

Tim Oakley, Croxley Green, Hertfordshire

Topics