Dear Editor,
I have read with little surprise the announcement by the government (Stabroek News Sept 9; Demerara Waves Sept 10) that that it has scrapped the contract with the Indian company, Surendra Engineering Company Limited (SECL or Surendra). The PPP regime gave as its explanation for scrapping the contract to build the Specialty Hospital at Liliendaal, the company’s failure to account for public funds and fraud.
I was not surprised because the arrangement with the company was fraudulent in the first place. The regime has been hoodwinking the Guyanese public over this contract since 2012. The APNU has consistently opposed the project on the basis of the fact that the procurement arrangements were irregular, the Vice-President of Fedders Lloyd, the Indian company that had bid lowest, practically accused the PPP Government of misrepresenting what had happened and of breaking its own rules regarding procurement (amendments to submissions, security bond etc). In addition, there was the PPP failure to provide information requested. The government’s games involved trying to throw off opposition complaints by awarding the subsidiary contract to a contractor, Bovell, whom it has been alleged they knew could not meet the terms of the contract.
It needs to be understood that our initial decision to refuse money to support this project arose from what we recognised as a financial irregularity. The ministry claimed that money was needed for mobilization (an advance to buy some supplies/equipment and prepare the land, etc) but the details provided showed that it was to have been spent on studies. Mr Ramkarran suggested in a letter to the press that it was actually for the purchase of land. In fact the land had already been compulsorily acquired long ago, so that was a fraudulent request. As we investigated further we unearthed more problems and irregularities, not the least of which was the dispute over the award of the main contract to a firm, Surendra Engineering, alleged never to have built a speciality hospital before. At the same time, the firm with such experience and a lower bid had been overlooked and in turn accused the government of favouring persons with whom some of its members had personal or business links. The dispute at one stage involved the Indian EXIM Bank. In spite of evidence to the contrary, the Minister denied the existence of any dispute. Nonetheless, Dr Luncheon, the HPS, undertook in September 2012 to review the award of the contract. He did not. In the process and the debates in 2013, the House was typically treated to a tirade from the Minister of Health and the abuse of an APNU MP, Ms Ferguson, whom the Minister called impertinent for asking a question.
The project was to have been funded by the Indian Government but the GOG seemed in the process of funding up-front elements that did not appear acceptable. It is also the case that many members of the public seemed to believe that this was an extension of the national health network that would make specialist services available to the Guyanese public. This is far from the truth. The project is neither intended to provide services to Guyanese nor to employ Guyanese doctors (and probably nurses). We are not opposed to an enclave hospital of this type which caters for US and international patients funded by foreign insurance companies, but we believe that if Guyana funds and an imprimatur is required, the arrangements should be above board. Believing that we were refusing to fund more facilities for local patients, many people supported the government.
The APNU opposed this project on all the four subsequent occasions when it was submitted to the Parliament. Notwithstanding the foregoing points we raised and widely published, the government went ahead and spent the money, even when not approved in 2013 and it did so again this year.
The Minister of Finance is to answer for that when the Parliament re-convenes and the case against him has to be stronger with this most recent admission on the part of the regime.
The government’s recent revelation is a testimony to the complete irresponsibility and corrupt state of the government. The monies, apparently fraudulently spent or not accounted for, need not have been lost if the regime had paid attention to the protests, respected the Assembly’s decisions and heeded the laws of the country.
What the Guyana public is seeing here is typical of the manner in which the PPP operates. In the face of facts to the contrary, it continues to spend and to bolster their actions with a campaign of misinformation and abuse to hoodwink the public and interested parties including its own associates. Representatives of
bilaterals, often prompted by the government, weighed in in support of the government’s position. I myself, have been accused by an Ambassador and a High Commissioner of not having a defensible case for blocking this project and I was blamed for blocking Guyana’s development – a blatant PPP line. At the very outset of this case in 2012, the former Speaker of the Assembly, who himself had been on the receiving end of PPP vindictiveness in retaliation for a Mirror column he had written on corruption, accused the APNU of pandering to ethnic sentiments. More astonishingly, former PNCR colleague Dr Faith Harding (‘No-confidence vote -a mistake’ KN, Sept 1) a little over a week ago voiced a repetition of her criticism of the APNU in not supporting this project which she believed would improve local services!
Let there be no doubt, if fraud is involved in Surendra’s activities, they are not alone. There are two culpable parties, one of which is the PPP government.
The government (having unearthed their information and bearing in mind what I have said about the role of government agents in the exercise,) needs to let us know therefore what it proposes to do apart from terminating the contract.
Some weeks ago the press raised a red flag regarding the location and manner of acquisition or indeed the existence of what now appear to be Bo-peep pumps. It goes without saying that the other Surendra contracts such as those for these irrigation pumps, should also be investigated and possibly terminated. I, as Chairman of the PAC, followed up fresh press revelations regarding the pumps, by calling on the Auditor General to undertake a special investigation into it. He undertook to report on it to the PAC in his 2013 report which is due to be presented in October. I look forward to that report.
In the meantime, the APNU will be insisting that the government clean out its Augean stables. I would expect our erstwhile critics who have been attacking the APNU for its principled position, do likewise. I, for my part, call on the government to remove the Minister of Health and the MOF, both of whom sanctioned and oversaw this farce.
Yours faithfully,
Carl B Greenidge
