The Government has been accused of keeping plans for what precisely it intends to build at the Maze under wraps. What will the proposed stadium look like?
What sort of transport arrangements do they envisage? Who's to say?
Then suddenly this week NIO minister David Hanson made an unexpected revelation about what he describes as the 'Maze/Long Kesh Masterplan'.
The Government's looking for backers to help foot the £400m bill.
Exactly. Four hundred million pounds.
This should be interesting.
According to Minister Hanson, the private sector is just gagging to throw money at the project.
At least that's what he appears to be saying when he announces: "I am delighted that the market's strong message has been that the site represents a significant development opportunity for the whole region and, indeed, for the whole island."
True, there may be aspects of the plan (such as housing development and a business park) which may represent a good investment. But you have to wonder how many private investors will be lining up to back the stadium itself.
Those of us who worry about the white elephant potential of a stadium being built miles and miles from the centre of anywhere, won't be joining the queue.
Especially since it's been revealed that a rival stadium is to be built in Belfast close to the city centre and existing transport links - and, perhaps more pertinently, close to hotels, restaurants, carry-outs and any number of local hostelries.
The Government makes much of the fact that the Maze plan has the support of both the DUP and Sinn Fein.
But it isn't cross party political support a sports stadium needs to make it a winner.
It's the support and, more precisely, patronage of sports fans.
The Maze prison was built on that particular site because it was well out of the way. But what works for a prison doesn't necessarily work for a major entertainment facility.
The artist's optimistic impression of the proposed sports stadium show crowds flocking to its doors. A lot of them, I notice, are carrying hand baggage. Are they coming prepared to camp out for the night?
Put it like this - the Government assures us that it will be able to efficiently and effortlessly transport 35,000 people to and from the site. Bearing in mind the current regular hold-ups on the M1, which the Government appears to be powerless to do anything about, we'll take that one with a spoonful of caution.
Caution, of course, is something you tend to associate with private investors.
So here's the question.
What if investors don't come up with the required whack of the £400m bill that the Government envisages?
Will the Maze Masterplan still be realised? Downgraded? Or just quietly forgotten all about?
That is something taxpayers here will have to think about long after Messers Hain and Hanson have vacated these shores for a whole new political ball-game.
All we want for Christmas is a bit of common sense
I'm fast coming to the conclusion that the most divisive element in society today is not - as some would argue - religious fanatism, but the legal profession.
What lies at the back of all those stories we are daily bombarded with, about how this or that firm has cancelled Christmas on the grounds that decorations may injure or offend, is fear of litigation.
It's not the concern that a worker may be taken out by low-flying tinsel or that a colleague could take the hump at the sight of a nativity scene that actually has bosses hyperventilating with worry.
It's the possibility that the aggrieved party might beat an immediate path to the door of Sue-it, Screw-it and Line-my-pocket and take a costly action against the company.
Of course, it's only fair that if a worker gets toasted on a set of dodgy Christmas lights he or she should have recourse to the law. Equally, those parties whose lives are made hell in the workplace should be able to turn to the courts.
But the law as it now stands - the law that sides with every perceived injury, 'offence' or slight, no matter how minor - increasingly looks like an ass.
Do employers' have to go along with this madness, though?
Whatever happened to common sense?
Or have we finally reached the stage that before a firm chances using a bit of gumption, it has to first call in a team of consultants to assess any risk this might entail?
Another week, another horror
Another week - another horror story concerning attacks on the elderly. This week, it was a 92-year-old lady assaulted in her own home by five young men. We're told they took her jewellery.
It goes without saying that they also took her peace of mind. And could just as easily have taken her life.
So wouldn't it be good to hear just a little more public outrage voiced by our public representatives on the matter? Not just condemnation of this week's attack - but of all similar attacks on the elderly.
Our politicians tend to have no problem making their presence felt over any issue they suspect there might be a vote or two in.
But lives are more important than votes. Their combined pressure on this one would not only push it further up the news agenda.
It would also put the onus on the authorities to deal more forcefully with the lowlife who prey on vulnerable people living in terror in their own homes.
A friend, indeed
The former head of the Armed Forces, General Sir Michael Jackson, said this week that for Britain to pull out of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq would be morally wrong.
When did being morally wrong ever bother the current Government?
IN the old days, when a celebrity couple insisted that they were "just good friends" it was taken as shorthand for being romantically involved.
These days, it's the other way round.
This week, Jennifer Aniston announced her break-up with Vince Vaughn by releasing a statement that says they're no longer together but still " good friends".
With friends like these € the gossip columnists no longer expect wedding bells.