Saturday, October 17 2009

It is clearly not enough for Minister of Planning, Dr Emily Gaynor Dick-Forde, to say that the Urban Development Company of Trinidad and Tobago (Udecott) “went through a process” in the award of a $300 million contract to Sunway Construction Caribbean Limited to furnish the Ministry of Legal Affairs tower.

Instead, the Minister should explain to citizens whose hard earned taxes are involved the standard procedure with respect to the tendering process, how many firms were invited to tender and the method employed in the shortlisting of these companies. What does the Planning Minister mean by “this campaign of injustice and unfair attacks on the Udecott”? This, particularly, when the Government of which she is a member had, in response to Parliamentary and general public demands, a Commission of Inquiry appointed whose revelations about the operations of Udecott have been distinctly revealing.

Her statement made at Thursday’s post-Cabinet media conference, that she did not believe “a line Minister should enter into matters that were tendered and a process that went through and a Board would have oversighted (the) procedures” appears somewhat strange.

Is Dr Dick-Forde saying that boards of State enterprises should have unfettered power in their award of contracts? Are there not guidelines laid down by Cabinet in the context of the National Budget and the ability of the country, especially in this period of global economic downturn, to afford costly projects?

Additionally, the Planning Minister’s declaration that: “This notion of Ministers revoking things is very untidy and there is no basis in proper governance of institutions for that kind of behaviour,” appears to suggest that once a board awards a contract it should be irrevocable. Should not the line Minister have the right, however, when a contract has been agreed upon by a State Board, to review the award? Or if this may be regarded as somewhat awkward should the Line Minister not be fully briefed with respect to a proposed contract particularly of the size of the one awarded for the furnishing of the Legal Affairs Ministry tower?

Clearly, $300 million is not chicken feed. In addition, when it is considered that the approved figure for the 2009/2010 National Budget is appreciably below what had been approved last year for the 2008/2009 Budget, which, itself, had to be revised twice downward, the need for liaising between the Line Minister and a State Board is more than ever necessary. In turn, factored into any concern for large sum contracts should be the knowledge that Trinidad and Tobago had two consecutive quarters of negative growth.

Admittedly, the price of crude, along with that of natural gas on the international market, has appreciated within recent months, with crude reaching a high for the year on Thursday of US$77.20 on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Although this is US$22.20 higher than the US$55 a barrel on which the Budget has been based, nonetheless, there is still the question of demand. Above all this, however, whatever the increase in price and demand for the country’s energy we insist that there should be some degree of control of spending of State companies and there should be no exception made in the case of Udecott or any other State Enterprise..

Another area of interest to taxpayers is that while the contract awarded to construct the Ministry of Legal Affairs tower was $368 million, the contract to furnish it at $300 million represented a mere difference of $68 million! Instead of Dr Dick-Forde viewing queries or statements re Udecott as a campaign of injustice and unfair attacks, would it not have been better if her Ministry had queried the $300 million award decision by Udecott to Sunway before it was relayed to the company?