Who in the David Granger administration recommended Larry Singh of Linden Holding for the controversial pharmaceutical bond contract or entertained his interest in such an arrangement?
The answer to this question, observers say, would reveal much about the nature of the deal and whether it could withstand scrutiny.
However, despite Cabinet’s establishing of a sub-committee to investigate the contract and its production of a report, no light has been shed on how Singh could be sole-sourced for such a contract when he had not been in this business and had no appropriate building ready to begin accepting drugs for storage. His being favoured with the contract under these circumstances would raise questions about the rectitude of the government’s decision to go to him.
And though his signature appeared on the contract, Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Public Health, Trevor Thomas yesterday refused to answer any questions on it. He said it would be unethical and unprofessional as President David Granger and the Cabinet have already acted on the matter via the setting up of a sub-committee.
“I really don’t want to say anything else…the President spoke and Cabinet made decisions and so forth…it would be really an unprofessional and unethical thing for me to do,” Thomas told Stabroek News.
Meanwhile, a decision on negotiating with Singh for a reduction in the proposed $12.5M monthly rental that he has charged for the Sussex Street bond is on hold until Cabinet resumes meeting next week.
“Not yet, remember Cabinet is on a two weeks break and have not had the chance to discuss the recommendations by the Sub-Committee as yet…Cabinet will meet again next Tuesday (September 6th 2016),” Minister of Public Health Dr George Norton said when asked yesterday by Stabroek News if a discussion on the recommendations has begun.
In the wake of controversy over the rental of the bond, President Granger had appointed a Cabinet Sub-Committee to do a review. Among its seven recommendations the committee urged that government should try to negotiate a reduction of the agreed monthly rental fee and that if there is a refusal by Linden Holding Inc, government should give a year’s notice of a termination of the lease and build its own facilities in the intervening period.
“With respect to the rental sum of $12,500,000 it is the sub-committee’s considered opinion that the value should be re-assessed as it is likely that a similar facility could be obtained at a lower rate,” the report stated.
It added that the general terms of the lease “are not altogether unfavourable” to the Ministry of Public Health as the lessor is obligated under the agreement to maintain the facility at a standard that will meet national and international specifications for the storage of drugs and pharmaceuticals. But it also notes that the agreement could be strengthened with more specific terms that address insurance and maintenance.
Collectively
When he was questioned extensively about whether Cabinet would be willing, in light of immense public criticism, to re-tender for bond space, Norton said that at the Cabinet level decisions are made collectively and as of now Cabinet has recommended that the contract be renegotiated, not re-tendered.
The wisdom of the bond decision was also queried as the government already has access to a state-of-the-art bond for drug storage at Diamond on the East Bank of Demerara.
Further recommendations in the sub-committee report are that the Government should release all relevant documents including the correspondence received from New GPC Inc in relation to the storage of drugs and the lease signed on 2016.7.20 and that the press should be invited to tour the facility at lot 29 Sussex Street, Albouystown.
An unsigned contract was initially released by the Ministry of Health which prompted objections by Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo. However, Norton has said that it was just an oversight and took responsibility for the error. He did inform that it was Permanent Secretary (PS) Thomas who signed the contract on behalf of government and Singh for his company, Linden Holding Inc.
The Public Health Minister said that while questions have been raised on who made initial contact with Singh and how he would have known that a bond was needed for rental, he could not answer them other than the fact that his PS signed the contract.
Other recommendations in the sub-committee report were that the Ministry of Public Health should ensure immediate payment of all sums due and outstanding to New GPC Inc. and that the Ministry of Public Infrastructure should have direct responsibility for the leasing and construction of all buildings by the Government of Guyana and should issue a Certificate of Acceptance prior to any lease or purchase agreement being signed or a constructed building being occupied.
Another recommendation was that Norton “issue a public apology for the misstatement made in the National Assembly and explain the circumstances in which it was made.”
The Minister of Public Health last Friday apologised to the nation at a press conference and to parliament by way of a letter and appealed for a chance “to do better”.
“I have come to the firm position that the answer given two responses were not accurate and wish to express sincere and profound regret,” Norton said, while adding “I take full responsibility for this unfortunate episode…,” and committing that it would “not happen again.”
Yesterday, he echoed his remorse for his actions and again pointed out that the experience now has him trying to overcome the virtual paranoia he faces daily in placing his signature on documents for the ministry.
“I literally shake every time something comes to me to sign and I question everything and every contract… I have taken out all the law books in here and am doing so much reading. This thing taught me I that have to be extremely cautious in everything I do…but that is the life of the politics eh; you win some and you take a beating for others,” he said.
