In his first full Press conference since the termination of Pro-Active Management System's contract to build the new senior secondary school at Berkeley, Premier Alex Scott insisted that the decision was a sound one and the new school would be finished before ProActive would have had they continued on the job.

"If we are out a week, two weeks or whatever period of time that it takes - and it's not going to be more than two or three weeks ? to assess the project, that time lost will still not be equal to the project running longer than it would have done under Pro-Active."

The Premier said he was not concerned that litigation may hold up the restart of work at the site.

"Let me say as one who knows - documentation of Government is inspiring, overwhelming, prodigious, accompanied by videos and photographs... meaning if one wants to go that route you are opening up yourself to costs and all sorts of expenses if you are going to challenge the government's position and I think even Pro-Active would agree with this. Their documentation may not be as robust. So I would hope they would pursue their remedies by arbitration."

And, while he acknowledged that the assessment team will identify where Pro-Active left the job, he dismissed a suggestion that Pro-Active may dispute the choice of the assessment team and question its independence.

"How independent can you get ? I don't even know the bye who's coming in. You're not getting john blow down de road - you're getting someone who comes sees it for the first time," he said.

"Pro-Active have their record of their accomplishment on the site. Pro-Active can go through and I think that' s being discussed ? for their own purposes. But we need an assessment that doesn't say look what they left. We need an assessment that says look what needs to be done....It's not just a subjective thing, it's a very clinical, very professional and very technical job that's going to be done."

Mr. Scott defended himself from criticism that he has been missing in action since Works Minister Ashfield DeVent announced the termination, saying the matter was in the hands of a "very capable Minister".

But this press conference was clearly different ? eight Cabinet Ministers were there to lend support as well as a clutch of civil servants.

The Premier was prepared - notes in hand, he handled often vigorous questioning with his trademark humour and confidence.

"It's unfortunate that you put that question to me because I'm universally loved, " he said when asked if Government had encountered uncooperative civil servants.

But pressed he admitted that some Government Ministers had "in a moment of candour said they could see things being better but, I, in actual fact have not had that experience."

Mr. Scott, who was Works Minister when the contract was awarded, also reported, when asked, that Pro-Active had complained that civil servants sabotaged them almost from the start of the Berkeley project.

He investigated and found no truth to the allegations, he said.

"I have had those complaints continually. Appreciate. Works and Engineering are the keepers of the public purse and welfare. Pro-Active would be acting in their own interests so therefore if they came up against a hard, unmovable object who happened to be an Works and Engineering officer and once we as Cabinet or Government are satisfied that Pro-Active are being treated fair we couldn't undermine his or her carrying out their responsibility. They were judicious and in actual fact in the early days they were very very supportive. The esprit de corps was as high as Pro-Active.

"Every one had high hopes for the project under Pro-Active. And he managed to sound an empathetic tone for Pro-Active while defending the decision to let them go.

"In the meetings ? several meetings, but one in particular ? Pro-Active representatives suggested that they too felt that it would be difficult for them to carry on. You will find that any inquiry into how Government has managed this project, it has been tough. Pro-Active had to raise the bar to a very high standard to get support in that this thing has been rigorously managed."

And Government's tight fiscal management had made it especially challenging for the company.

"That was the problem with Pro-Active ? if they had limited assets it is difficult to go forward if they can't get extra cash out of W and E."

The construction industry is "very competitive and tough" he added. "And Pro-Active succumbed to the rigours of, I think still at this stage, the unavailability of credit at the early stage."

Mr. Scott added that he hoped the relationship with Pro-Active would "remain an amicable one and a good one, and of course, they have the right to pursue their remedies with anything they feel aggrieved about."

Asked why it took so long to determine that it was best to let Pro-Active go, given that there had been so many complaints, Mr. Scott said that they supported the company until there was a compelling argument to terminate them, and they had to consider the cost and time implications of that decision.

"One issue does not a termination make. There comes a time when there's a compelling argument which includes some of the things you may have heard but no one allegation is sufficient to terminate," the Premier said. "The complaints were there but there wasn't a compelling case for termination. Now there is a compelling case for termination."

That compelling case included safety issues on the site and a less than watertight facility, he said.