Dear Editor,
Reference is made to the exchanges regarding the purchase of a property from the state (SN and KN March 11th and 12th).
Carl Greenidge has stated that the property referred to in the name of Michael Shree Chan was sold for a price substantially less than his (March 11th). This property exists and a sale took place.
Mrs. Shree Chan in a March 12th letter in response to Greenidge stated the, “Late Minister Shree Chan never bought any property from any government.” Facts in the absence of the context within which the decision was made can give a different interpretation of history. While Shree Chan did not buy the property because he was deceased; it was his name that was used to justify the sale to his family. The property was sold to Chan’s widow at a price recommended by Mr. Winston Brassington, Head of the Privatization Unit.
As the then Trades Union Representative on the Privatization Board I attended the meeting when the decision was taken to sell the property to Chan’s family. Brassington’s justification for the sale was that the late minister’s wife and children were occupying the home since he was minister and he had served the nation. It was on this premise he sought the Board’s consideration to sell the property to the family. This decision received my support because I believed the request was buttressed by human consideration for a widow and fatherless children.
Her late husband was the principal factor in the acquisition of the property by Mrs. Chan.
Yours faithfully,
Lincoln Lewis
