(concurring). I agree with the result and concur in sections B and C of part II of Justice Fitzgerald’s opinion. Specifically, I agree with his analysis that (B) "the permanently attached slide located on defendant’s school playground comes within the 'public buildings’ exception of the governmental immunity statute”, MCL 691.1406; MSA 3.996(106), and that (C) "a governmental agency does not waive its immunity by purchasing a policy of general liability insurance”.
It is not necessary to reach the question of whether the operation of a playground by a school district during the summer recess constitutes the "exercise or discharge of a governmental function” for purposes of immunity. Accordingly, this case need not be decided on that basis.