The contractor is liable if he cut corners on Kato school to speed up completion

Dear Editor,

In an SN article of August 4, it was reported that the architectural firm Rodrigues Architects Limited carried out an audit on the recently completed Kato Secondary School which was built at a cost of over $728 million, and that they uncovered over $144 million of defective work (nearly 20% of the construction contract).

Poor design, sub-standard material and construction, deficient specifications and lax construction supervision have all led in one way or another to this catastrophe. It is not clear whether the auditors were commissioned to examine all these elements of the project to properly identify the causes for the defective work, as in a complex project it is difficult to lay blame for deficiencies uncovered due to any particular speciality, since construction is an integrated process. Nevertheless the contractor was obligated to build the Kato School in accordance with the drawings and specifications, while the supervising consultant appointed by the government was supposed to ensure that the contractor did not deviate from his contractual responsibilities. Unfortunately it might appear that the supervising consultant ‘fell asleep on the job’ and the contractor was able to build a school with sub-standard material and poor workmanship, as was evident from the placement of weak concrete mix and the use of poor quality lumber.

The contractor cannot lay blame for his defective work because of pressure from the government of the day to complete the project within a specified time, since the project completion time is clearly stated in the contract documents. Any change in the project completion time up or down has to be mutually agreed to. However, for the contractor to complete the project ahead of schedule he would have had to increase his work force as well as their working hours, which translates into additional project costs. Hence if the contractor was cutting corners to control cost with sub-standard work and materials to speed up completion of the school in order to satisfy the wishes of the government, then he must be held responsible for the defective works he constructed which he is obligated to rectify in accordance with his contractual obligations.

It is hoped that the defective liability period for construction of this school has not expired. If it has, the government will have to bear the cost for all remedial work, as it did for the Supenaam Stelling.

The problems related to school construction and unveiled by the Kato school should alert the Minister of Education to the urgent need for the establishment of a School Construction Division within his ministry. It’s the only way for the Minister to have control and accountability for the management of his ministry.

Yours faithfully,

Charles Sohan