Where we stand‎ > ‎News & Comment‎ > ‎


posted 7 Nov 2017, 05:27 by Gerry Kangalee   [ updated 7 Nov 2017, 05:28 ]
Here is my take on the recent newspaper reports of there being serious conflict between Emile Elias and the Housing Development
Emile Elias
Corporation (HDC) over the construction of a housing project at Mt. Hope.

The Bids - as invited, stipulated terms and conditions among which was the requirement for all bidders to finance the project at their own risk. Payment is the single greatest risk on construction projects - if not the only one facing Contractors/Consultants in their Contracts with Clients. All bidders would or should have clearly understood this and fashioned their bid to suit.

Elias won the bid and is now on the job and is requesting a payment guarantee from the HDC. This request according to the HDC and the State would constitute a variation to the terms of the Request For Proposals (RFP) and, therefore, could not be included in the terms of the Contract to be entered into between himself and the HDC.

Mr. Elias is insisting otherwise and is citing, inter alia, differences he has with persons in Government for the reason his request is not being entertained. Mr. Elias knows better than most where the courts are and how to use such places.

The simple fact is that if Mr. Elias is allowed his request, the HDC is running the risk of legal challenges from unsuccessful bidders who would have submitted bids based on the terms of the RFP. Similar challenges can come from members of the public like me and many others in order to safeguard our “public interest” in the matter.

I also hope that the HDC does not allow Elias to exit the project and thereby force a rebid. If this takes place and results in an increase in the project cost, there are consequences that would and should accrue to Elias...and not to the public.

Having said all the aforementioned and knowing of the chronic lack of competence and corruption among public officials, I wouldn’t be surprised if there is some screw up by one or more public official that gives Mr. Elias win in all of this.

Notwithstanding the screw up factor the facts on the surface puts Rowley in a tight spot; because given pressing and prior claims on the public purse - including the one billion dollars plus his Government is refusing to pay citizens for lands “stolen” from them by the State (and some of these crimes were committed by the State more than forty years ago by way of what they called “compulsory acquisition”), it would be interesting to see how he prioritises payments when the interests of “friends” are involved - as against the interests of those who are not “friends”.

There is also the dire need to prioritise the completion of the National Oncology Centre which I am sure is contributing to the suffering and deaths of citizens and possibly “friends” daily: although most of his “friends” do like him and others in his Government and fly abroad (some at our expense) for their treatment. But I will deal with that separately and at another time very soon.

Eugene A. Reynald