Member

On the information provided to date, it is not clear to the body how the fund has reached that conclusion. The Minister may reasonably say that, in the absence of the full facts, it would be inappropriate to comment. The difficulty, however, is that nobody—I underline that word—can comment because the assumptions being made, and the rationale for key parameters and decisions have not been adequately explained. Admitted bodies include housing associations, charities and many other organisations delivering vital public and social services. How are they expected to engage in meaningful consultation if they do not understand the methodology being applied? How can they reasonably question the conclusions reached or test the underlying assumptions if those assumptions are neither clearly articulated nor properly justified?