By Mark McGowan
Opposition parties are calling for the government to come clean regarding the award of the US$15.4 million contract to Synergy Holdings for phase one of the Amaila Falls Hydroelectric Project (AFHEP), saying greater transparency is needed because taxpayers’ money is involved.
PNCR-1G MP Lance Carberry told this newspaper that the party was of the view that the contract inked with Fip Motilall of Synergy Holdings, “smells” and that it lacked transparency. Carberry said that it was clear that the government had made certain commitments to Motilall and that it was honouring them. “Mr Motilall did not suddenly appear,” Carberry said pointing out that his name had been connected with the project ever since the PPP/C spoke about developing the hydropower plant. He said that given this fact, and the government’s general trend of behaviour it was unlikely that the government would back down on its decision.
Carberry said that his party was concerned since it is taxpayers’ money that is being used to pay for the first phase of this project. “We owe it to ourselves [to ensure] that the money is well spent,” he told Stabroek News when reached for comment.
Carberry said he had noted the recent ruling by Acting Chief Justice Ian Chang on the application made by management consultant Ramon Gaskin seeking to have Synergy’s contract quashed. Gaskin was calling on the Public Works Ministry and the National Industrial and Commercial Investments Ltd (NICIL) to show cause why the decision to award the contract should not be quashed. Justice Chang denied the application on the grounds that no evidence was presented to support the case nor was the court persuaded that the public good would be served if the application was approved. Justice Chang, however, did say that “the execution of the project by Synergy Holdings Inc may warrant close monitoring.” This ruling, Carberry opined, was granted on a legal technicality based on the Chief Justice’s interpretation of the law. He said, though, that Justice Chang’s ruling did not address the significant concerns raised by his party and other entities. (Gaskin has since moved to the Full Court. [See story on page 21])
In May, the main opposition party the PNCR-1G declared its intention to table a motion in the National Assembly in an attempt to get answers to the various questions relating to the controversial granting of the contract. The motion was also intended to have the government submit all proposals connected with the project to the National Assembly to ensure proper accountability and transparency. The party is still in the process of drafting this motion.
Meanwhile GAP/ROAR MP Everall Franklin believes that “the government has to come clean” about the project. Franklin said he firmly believed that hydropower potential in Guyana needed to be pursued but opined that the AFHEP had got off on the wrong foot. “If you start off with the road having so much controversy… then it casts doubts on the entire project,” he said.
According to him, the government was holding “their cards… close to their chests”
and there would be no need for this “secrecy” if the administration was convinced that everything was done in order. Franklin said that the motion being brought by the main opposition party needed to be supported because it sought to bring greater transparency. He said he had concerns about the procurement process and said that he was unsure if this was done properly. He suggested that the whole procurement process may have been “incestuous.”
Additionally, the GAP/ROAR MP said that he was concerned that US$15.4 million had been placed in the hands of someone who had not appeared to have even constructed a driveway. “I’m not convinced that Mr Motilall, in himself, has the technical capacity,” Franklin said. He said that it was because of so many unanswered questions that the motion by the PNCR-1G should be supported.
Franklin said, however, that the government had time to correct its errors but noted that this would take some amount of courage. “If you have to turn around, turn around, but do the right thing… it is not too late,” he said.
Motilall and the government have repeatedly refused to provide information to show that Synergy has the ability to build and maintain roads in the jungle.
Alliance For Change Chairman Khemraj Ramjattan said that his party was concerned about the lack of transparency as it related to the awarding of the contract to Synergy Holdings. “We’re very concerned at the fact that so much information revealed that there is a lack of transparency,” Ramjattan said. According to him, the circumstances under which the contract was awarded to Synergy Holdings looked “questionable” and appeared to be “very, very suspicious.” He said such dealings only vindicated the feelings among the citizenry that the PPP/C administration was corrupt, a perception which he said had been reflected in the country’s low ranking in international reports dealing with corruption.
Ramjattan said that his party intended to support the motion by the PNCR-1G which was aimed at getting more information about the project. He argued, however, that had the Freedom of Information legislation been put in place, the motion by the PNCR-1G would not have even been necessary.
Synergy Holdings Inc was awarded the contract for the first phase of the AFHEP based on the fact that it submitted the lowest tender to NICIL. Questions have been raised about the company’s ability to execute the project, specifically as it relates to its road-building capacity. Despite suggestions by Motilall and Head of NICIL Winston Brassington that the company had significant road building experience, no evidence of this has been presented.