Supenaam stelling scandal

Anyone au fait with the defensive measures that this government employs when it is exposed to scandal would not be surprised that Cabinet Secretary Dr Luncheon could only manage to say at his Thursday press briefing that the culpable in the Supenaam Stelling bungle had not yet been identified but that in the interim taxpayers would be the ones left out of pocket for the repairs.

Even more galling was Dr Luncheon’s attempt to placate the public by stating that no view should be cultivated that those who bungled the project will escape culpability. That, is exactly what the people expect i.e. that the culpable will escape completely or with just a light tap on the wrist. After all, the main players in this foul-up are the Ministry of Works and several senior functionaries within, the much state- patronized contractor, BK International and others frequently used in project design and supervision. It must be remembered that this government is loathe to allow any hint that it or its favoured ones have been complicit in, or have fallen victim to incompetence. That apparently would be a mortal blow to its image and not an occurrence that can be tolerated in its conception of good governance.

The Fidelity scam in which President Jagdeo virtually bellowed that those blameworthy in a shameless plot to defraud the Guyana Revenue Authority would be brought to book rings jarringly in the ears even as the case has dissolved into nothingness and the guilty continue their ways.
This could very well be the direction the stelling scandal is being massaged in. If this is the case, the taxpayers and citizens of this country must resist this by applying as much pressure as is possible.  For within this scandal lies many of the ills and faults accumulated by this administration over a long period.
As part of its well-established pattern of defusing public concerns, the government commissioned two engineers to undertake a study of the faulty work that had been done on the stelling. This work was duly completed and a series of meetings held among the stakeholders involved in all aspects of the project. Since then, there has been a stony and unacceptable silence. Three months have elapsed since the defective and costly works were drawn to the attention of the public yet the government is still trifling with the public.

In the meanwhile, the citizens of Supenaam and nearby communities have been left in disarray after expecting that this new stelling would be operational soon and would improve transportation generally and for agricultural goods.
The government must act immediately.

* It must release to the public the report done by the engineers setting out its main findings and recommendations.
* It must indicate if it has accepted the findings and recommendations and how it intends to proceed.
* There should be clear information on whether the extensive remedial works can be covered in part or full under the Defects Liability Period. If there is no such provision the government must explain why.

* The government should say clearly whether there was insurance covering this project and whether a call can be made on any bond lodged.   
* Prima facie the government must establish which stakeholders in this project were culpable of wrongdoing and incompetence. It must then institute legal proceedings against them and refrain from clearing any other projects for them until they are vindicated.

* A statement should be presented on the lapses in the stelling project from the publication of the procurement notice to the final signing off on the project and setting out what steps will be taken to prevent a recurrence. 
* The government should detail what efforts were made to inculcate community monitoring of the pace of the project and the works actually being done.

In any other reasonably functioning democratic government, officials in the ministry of public works and perhaps even the minister would have either resigned or have been sacked. This government knows nothing of these codes of practice or ignores the time-honoured conventions.

It must not be forgotten that $431m of taxpayers’ money has been frittered away on this major incompetence and a further $17.2m was spent in an ill-advised rectification. How much more is to be expended on attempting to get it right is unclear. The government must not be allowed to get away without being held fully accountable for its actions.

Although the signs are not propitious, the scale of this catastrophe should be the impetus towards the presentation and passage of an engineer’s bill to enable the vetting and accreditation of those who would design, supervise, contract and sign off on work such as the stelling. This is the only way after 18 years for this government to credibly convince the public that it is concerned about the scrupulous stewardship of public finances.