The Opposition Leader links Manning to the Church issueToday at 3:30pm
Media Statement by the Leader of the Opposition
The Honourable Kamla Persad-Bissessar
On May 15th 2010 As you would be aware, I filed a Motion of No Confidence in the Prime Minister to be debated in the House of Representatives on April 9th 2010. It is now history that the Prime Minister hastily dissolved the Parliament on midnight April 8th 2010, ending his tenure in office two and a half years before it was due.
There has been much speculation as to what promoted such a hasty decision and it is noteworthy that Mr Manning has not satisfactorily explained his actions.
Among the issues facing the Prime Minister then and now were :
the UDeCOTT and Calder Hart issue;
the release of the findings of the Uff Commission of Enquiry;
the criminal probe into the Abu Bakr land deal;
the construction of a Church at Guanapo Heights;
the dangerous Trinidad and Tobago Revenue Authority Bill;
the unpopular property tax;
fear of unchecked crime;
the breakdown in the provision of health, water, education;
the squandering of resources, and
the public perception of widespread corruption in government.
It is a widely held belief that the fear of potential revelations of abuse of public office involving the Prime Minister himself in one or more or all of the above was the core reason for the decision to call a snap election. I agree.
In this regard I wish today to place on the public record the following facts.
The Church In February Chaguanas West MP Jack Warner , speaking in the House of Representatives, raised the issue of a church being built in the Heights of Guanapo. He repeated asked the Prime Minister what the relationship was between himself and the Church. Mr. Manning did not respond.
This failure to deal with questions quickly prompted media attention on the church and soon revelations followed revealing among other things
that the Church titled The Lighthouse of Our Lord Jesus Christ, was being constructed on State lands
that the ownership deed was listed in the name of one Reverend Juliana Pena, a woman who Prime Minister Patrick Manning has confessed is his spiritual advisor and whom he had appointed the Special Envoy of the Prime Minister.
that the Church was being constructed by the Shanghai Group, a Chinese group which has received several hundred million dollars worth of contracts without tendering, by UDeCOTT, a state agency.
That the foundation stone had been laid in December 2005, even before the Town and Country had given approval for the construction of the church.
That the construction was estimated to cost some $30 million.
But there remained substantial mystery surrounding the Church which had now received the full attention of the country.
The Nation wanted to know:
Whether Prime Minister Patrick Manning was in fact personally involved in the church
Why did he see it fit to donate over five hectares of State lands for essentially a splinter group merely two years old
Was the $30m used for the construction from this project being paid for by the State
Who hired Shanghai Construction to build this project?
Why was the project going ahead without requisite EMA and Town and Country Planning approvals
How come nobody took any steps to ensure that the country’s laws were not broken.
When Manning eventually addressed the issue, instead of dispelling rumors and answering the questions raised, the Prime Minister used the opportunity to claim that members of certain Christian groups were being subject to religious persecution. The Prime Minister said then that born-again Christians must stop accepting the denigration of their faith by people who know none of their beliefs, but stopped short of explaining how this should be done.
In the end, after 53 minutes of animation, including the threat of spirit lash for two journalists, Manning said that the Prime Minister did not own the church.
No explanation was provided for the fact that the Church was being constructed in direct breech of the laws of Trinidad and Tobago.
No explanation was given for the fact that no individual, regulatory body or other state agency had at that time taken any steps to have the persons responsible for the construction of the church conform to the laws of Trinidad and Tobago with regard to the need for approvals structural and otherwise PRIOR to commencement of construction.
UDeCOTT’s denial You would recall too that when the issue was first raised that UDeCOTT insisted it had absolutely no involvement in the design of the building or in construction site.
According to the Guardian article of March 21st 2010
“Finance Minister Karen Tesheira watched Caroni East MP dead in the eye across the aisle during the Lower House sitting Friday night and swore neither Udecott nor Nipdec had ever been a party to any aspect of the construction of the controversial Light of the Lighthouse of the Lord Jesus Christ church in Heights of Guanapo”
The goodly Minister SWORE that UDeCOTT nor NIPDEC had EVER been party to ANY aspect of the construction of the controversial church. That is certainly unambiguous.
The Letters: Planning Permission I have in my possession a copy of a letter dated 19th February 2010 in which the Town and Country Division advised one Light House of the Lord Jesus Christ c/o Mr. Stephen Mendes that HIS application for planning permission was returned undetermined and asking him to collect the drawings so that the identified defects could be corrected. That letter was signed by Mr. Kirk for the Town and Country Planning Division.
I have in my possession another letter, written by Mr Mendes dated 26th February 2010, seeking to clarify his role and position in the project. This letter is addressed to …..Mr. Calder Hart, c/o UDeCOTT, 38-40 Sackville Street, Port of Spain. I checked, that IS the office of …………..UDeCOTT.
Mr Mendes advised Mr Hart, who at the time was still chairman of the UDeCOTT, that he had agreed to provide preliminary drawings only which would then be used by another person , to generate a comprehensive set of drawings.
I have a third letter, which clearly showed that Mr Mendes had submitted those drawings to Mr Hart in May 2006.
Mr Mendes in the February 26th 2010 letter wrote clearly that he had not made any application for planning permission, however it is equally clear from the Town and Country rejection letter that the application was made in Mr Mendes’ name. It appears then that somebody fraudulently placed Mr Mendes’ name on the application form and submitted it to the Town and Country Planning Division for approval. THAT is fraud, another illegal act in Trinidad and Tobago.
Members of the media, it is now a matter of record that despite the Prime Minister dissolving the nation’s Parliament on April 8th 2010, he inexplicably did not announce the General Election date. To date no explanation has been given for this.
I have here a copy of the Town and Country Planning Division’s NOTICE of grant of permission to develop land. It is signed by the same Mr Kirk and is dated April 16th 2010. It is also now a matter of history that the Prime Minister announced the date of the election on April 16th, 2010. Those are the facts and persons can draw their own conclusions.
The Letters: the Plans Based on the forgoing then we have established for all intents and purposes, that a preliminary set of drawings was done by a local architect, in 2006. That would be these. (That would be the short set of drawings with the dates on the lower right hand corner as 2006).
An examination of the drawings however reveal that other structural drawings were added to the batch and were done by others, including two draftsmen named W. Gookool and MS Narine. (Other short drawings S-01 – 04)
So we have established that a local set of PLANS were done for the building.
I have in my possession the letter dated May 2nd 2006 from Mr Mendes essentially handing over the plans, and he followed up by an email stating that the plans had been submitted. This letter is also addressed to none other than Mr Calder Hart the UDeCOTT bigwig and blue eyed boy of .. ..Patrick Manning. But this letter has some interesting revelations.
Allow me to read :
“I now enclose some of the architectural/engineering drawings that have been prepared to date. I should point out:
1. The structural drawings developed to date are not in accordance with the recent changes made to the architectural drawings as a result of the recent PM’s requests. Additionally, they need to be developed in far greater detail.
2. Additionally the consultants need to develop and finalise their general arrangement drawings due to the recent changes called for by the PM including those relating to the residential component appended to the church.” Just for clarification: PM means the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, Mr Patrick Manning. According to this letter then, the Hon Prime Minister was providing direction and guidance in the preparation of the architectural/engineering drawings, including a residential component.
I do not seek to explain why the Prime Minister would be personally involved in designing a residential building associated with a church. As I indicated I am seeking to place on the records, the facts as I have them.
We have established without a shadow of doubt that the Prime Minister is directly involved in the Church and has been so from the early design stage of the Church.
Ironically Mr. Mendes’s letter contains a curious statement “An early start would assume that building approvals will be waived” – which is not in keeping with the legal requirements of the Town and Country Planning Division. We now know that the approvals were in fact not waived – it was IGNORED, as construction began and continued without the requisite planning approval.
Essentially though this letter is suggesting the need to get someone to do a full set of architectural and engineering drawings based on or in line with Mr Mendes’ drawings.
And it looks like it was done! I have another set of drawings which I would like to show you. (Long Coloured Drawings)
This set of drawings is a detailed structural and architectural drawings … but with a difference. These are a COMPREHENSIVE set of drawings containing sufficient information and detail to facilitate construction of the building therein.
These drawings provide us with further insight into this affair. They were designed and prepared by the Architectural Design and Research Institute of Tongii University (Group) Co., Ltd. The General Contractor is clearly identified as SCG International (Trinidad and Tobago) Limited which we know to be Shanghai Construction Group, the company currently building the Church.
What is of great interest to me is the CLIENT – The client is listed as UDeCOTT.
In other words, the construction drawings were prepared for UDeCOTT and for the use of Shanghai Construction Group! There should really be no surprise there since Shanghai Construction Group was brought into the country to construct buildings for UDeCOTT.
As far as I am aware there is no other company for which SCG currently works for in Trinidad and Tobago other than the Government of Trinidad and Tobago, headed by the Prime Minister.
For clarification, in every building UDeCOTT is involved in, UDeCOTT is the project manager, the client is the government of Trinidad and Tobago, headed by the Prime Minister.
But it gets even more curious. The Project is listed on the drawings as “Outdoor stage project of Prime Minister’s House.” Just for the record, the Prime Minister being referred here is the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, Mr Patrick Manning.
It is important to recall that the Prime Minister’s House was built by Shanghai Construction Group, and the client then too was UDeCOTT. I am confident as well that the design was by Architectural Design and Research Institute of Tongii University (Group) Co., Ltd.
The drawings have many question marks but these are clearly referring to the uncertainty of the name or function of a room, as opposed to size or dimension.
It appears then that the drawings provided here for the “Outdoor stage project of Prime Minister’s House” to be built by the Shanghai Construction Group constituted part of the larger plan for the PM’s residence, as initially designed.
This “Outdoor stage project of Prime Minister’s House” was not built, at least not at the St Anns location of the Prime Minister’s House. Instead another outdoor stage building was constructed there by the same Shanghai Construction Group, at a cost of TT$10 million in 2009.
So was the original outdoor stage project of the Prime Minister’s house abandoned?
I have here, photographs taken a little over a month ago of the building on the site at Cemetary Street, Heights of Guanapo, Arima, the site of the Church of the Light House of the Lord Jesus Christ.
I also had both drawings and photographs analysed and confirm that the building described in the plans done by Architectural Design and Research Institute of Tongii University (Group) Co., Ltd. is exactly the same as the building on the site at Aripo, the site of the Church of the Light House of the Lord Jesus Christ.
I have already established that the plans done by Mendes, was for a church and that the Prime Minister was involved in its design. The Prime Minister has also admitted to visiting the construction site of the church during construction. Further I have established that the local plans are mirrored by the comprehensive construction plans done by Tongii University.
How then did a design for a church become the design for an ”Outdoor stage project of Prime Minister’s House”, designed by the same company that designed the PM’s House, and for the same client, (UDeCOTT), and for the same construction company (Shanghai)?
How then too is it that the design for an Outdoor stage project of the Prime Minister’s House come to be built by his Spiritual adviser and Special Envoy employed by the Government, as her church, also being built by Shanghai.
QUESTIONS
Obvious questions arise:
1. Was the building identified in these plans as the “Outdoor stage project of Prime Minister’s House” designed as part of the original design for the Prime Minister’s house?
2. Who paid Tongii university to undertake these designs and how much was paid?
3. How did the “Outdoor stage project of Prime Minister’s House” end up being private Church built in Guanapo by the Prime Minister’s spiritual adviser?
4. Was the cost of this project built into the cost of the Prime Minister’s residence as it now stands?
This latter question is asked in the full knowledge that according to the UDeCOTTs official statement, published on their website
http://www.udecott.com/index.php/cc/cc_news_item/construction_of_prime_ministers_residence_and_diplomatic_center_was_within_/ the construction of the Prime Minister’s House and convention centre was supposed to cost a total of $148 million.
It is a matter of public record that the costs upon construction of the PM’s House and Convention centre was well over $250 million!
Members of the media, I wish to advise that I have today forwarded the copies of the relevant documents to the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Acting Commissioner of Police and have asked for a criminal investigation into the conduct of Prime minister Patrick Manning in this matter under the Section 3 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Section 3 of the Act states inter alia:
“ (1) Every person who, by himself or by or in conjunction with any other person, corruptly solicits or receives, or agrees to receive, for himself or for any other person, any gift, loan, fee, reward, or advantage whatsoever, as an inducement to, or reward for, or otherwise on account of, an agent doing or forbearing to do anything in respect of any matter or transaction whatsoever, actual or proposed, in which the State or a public body is concerned, is guilty of an offence.
(2) Every person who, by himself or by or in conjunction with any other person, corruptly gives, promises or offers any gift, loan, fee, reward, or advantage whatsoever, to any person, whether for the benefit of that person or of another person, as an inducement to, or reward for, or otherwise on account of, an agent doing or forbearing to do anything in respect of any matter or transaction whatsoever, actual or proposed, in which the State or a public body is concerned, is guilty of an offence.
4. Any person who—
(a) Being an agent, corruptly accepts or obtains, or agrees to accept or attempts to obtain, from any person, for himself or for any other person, any gift or consideration as an inducement or reward for doing or forbearing to do, or for having after the commencement of this act done or forborne to do, any act in relation to his principal’s affairs or business, or for showing or forbearing to show favour or disfavour to any person in relation to his principal’s affairs or business;
(b) Corruptly gives or agrees to give or offers any gift or consideration to any agent as an inducement or reward for doing or forbearing to do, or for having after the commencement of this Act done or forborne to do, any act in relation to his principal’s affairs or business, or for showing or forbearing to show favour or disfavour to any person in relation to his principal’s affairs or business; or
(c) Knowingly gives to an agent, or being an agent knowingly uses, with intent to deceive his principal, any receipt, account, or other document, in respect of which the principal is interested, and which contains any statement which is false or erroneous or defective in any material particular, and which to his knowledge is intended to mislead the principal, is guilty of an offence.
5. (1) Any person who being an agent—
(a) Corruptly uses official information for the purpose of obtaining any gift, loan, fee, reward or advantage whatsoever for himself or any other person, or
(b) Corruptly communicates official information to any other person with a view of enabling any person to obtain any gift, loan, fee, reward or advantage whatsoever, is guilty of an offence.
(2) For the purposes of this section “official information” means any fact or document which comes to a person’s knowledge or into his possession by virtue of his position as a person serving under the State or being a member of a public body or holding any other public office.
I wish to also advise that I have today also written to the Integrity Commission requesting an investigation into the conduct of Prime Minister Patrick Manning and a determination of whether the Prime Minister violated the Integrity in Public Life Act 2000 by his conduct in this matter.
SUMMARY
Members of the media, allow me to summarise as I conclude: The information provided suggests that:
1. the Prime Minister was involved in the initial design of the Church for The Lighthouse of Our Lord Jesus Christ, being built by his spiritual adviser, Ms Juliana Pena.
2. The then Chairman of UDeCOTT, Mr Calder Hart, was directly involved in the design of the Church.
3. The date for general election was announced on the same day that the Town and Country approval for development of the property was awarded.
4. The building was started and continued without the requisite approvals from statutory bodies as is necessary for all such buildings.
5. The Church being constructed at Cemetery Street, Guanapo is exactly the same as the building designed by Architectural Design and Research Institute of Tongii University (Group) Co., and captioned “Outdoor stage project of Prime Minister’s House”
6. The contractor for whom the design was done is listed as Shanghai Construction Group, the same contractor who is currently building the church, and to whom the government had awarded the construction of the Prime Ministers house which cost well over $100 million above the contract cost for construction. It is now alleged that Shanghai Construction Group is building the Church for free.
7. Despite the public utterances of the Minister of Finance and the Prime Minister himself, the UDeCOTT is listed as the client of the design of the building titled Outdoor stage project of the Prime Minister’s house but eventually used as the Church of the Lighthouse of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
CONCLUSION:
I wish to remind all members of the media here and the general public by extension that this is a very serious matter which suggests criminal conduct and the abuse of State funds and lands by the Prime Minister of this country for personal gain.
However, I wish to make it clear to the population that contrary to what the PNM candidates and propaganda machine is telling the people on the ground, my stance against Manning’s apparent corruption today is not a negative stance against the Born Again Christian faith, or any other religious denomination for that matter.
It is my understanding that Manning has been telling this community they will be discriminated against under a People’s Partnership government.
That is an absolute lie. Nothing could be further from the truth. But the fact that he is willing to say it signifies the mark of a desperate man.
For the record, I remain now and always, committed to the freedom of speech, freedom of worship, of all my brethren, in every church, mosque,, temple or home. I am willing to defend that freedom with my life.
Thank you.
