I present Virgin Galactic. Today, thanks to a 19-year-old Richard Branson, who watched the moon landings on TV with his parents and determined that he too will one day experience the wonder of space, we can now book a flight to space. Who is Sir Richard Charles Nicholas Branson? He was born July 18, 1950, a British industrialist, best known for his Virgin brand of over 360 companies. His first successful business venture was at age 16, when he published a magazine called Student. Now he is the 261st richest person in the world according to Forbes’ 2009 list of billionaires.
Branson was educated at Scaitcliffe School (now Bishopsgate School) until the age of thirteen. He then attended Stowe School until he was sixteen. Branson has mild dyslexia and had poor academic performance (note) as a student, but discovered his ability to connect with others.
Why am I bringing this up? Well, it is in response to some comments blossoming from a recent news item, ‘Synergy faces questions after winning contract for Amaila roads.’ Most seem to be questioning Mr Makeshwar Motilall and Synergy Holdings experience and ability to do road construction. The point is, how did a man with “mild dyslexia and a poor academic performance as a student” ended up building a commercial spacecraft?
You see, the emphasis here is on the wrong thing or person. I do not know Mr Motilall but I have been following his involvement in the Amaila project and the government’s endorsement, for many years. For instance, there is the Stabroek News article os 25.9.08 – ‘Amaila hydro on the cards next year’; and that of 28.3.10, ‘Contract award for hydropower project access roads to be announced soon,’ which shows that Motilall was sure the contract would go to him.
I blogged in response to the news item, ‘Synergy faces questions after winning contract for Amaila roads’: “If persons were following this hydro project deal and the efforts of Motilall for many, many years, they will be more inclined to understand what is happening here.
The govt is selling this as a contract to Synergy to build the road but I see it as a loan or grant to the developer to give the developer a better bargaining position to get the remainder of the financing for the hydro project.
“That is why this so called contract could not be given to any other person (company) but Synergy. Govt needs to explain why they cannot say what it really is. I expect that Synergy will get a sub-contractor who knows about road building to complete the road. (You see Motilall is the developer, he is the ‘brains’ behind the project. All other skills needed can be hired)
“Motilal has been behind this project for a long time. The govt wants this project to happen for obvious reasons. Bottom line, I think this is a loan to Synergy to jump start his investment. Motilall now have some show money. Potential investors would not have to also finance the road.
“Govt will be buying power if the hydro is built so there is a way to get back taxpayers’ money. Govt may be hiding their approach to this deal after the firestorm with the stadium deal.” .
That is the only explanation I can come up with. The questions should be why the use of words like ‘tender’ and ‘award of contract.’ Tendering and awarding contracts have strict legal procedures. Here is where the issue should be. What is government’s real approach in this? I do not see anything wrong with the government financing the road. I await to hear from Motilall and government on this approach.
SN, I expect an editorial on this.
Yours faithfully,
F Skinner
