The article is incomplete, and, as such, it could be misleading.
Here is the full text of my press release on this matter, which clarifies the real issues:
PRESS RELEASE
THE ISSUE WITH THE AIRPORT CONTRACTS IS THE BREACH OF THE TENDER RULES
On Friday October 22, 2010, the Minister of Works and Transport, Mr. Jack Warner, sought to defend his decision to instruct the Airports Authority to award two contracts to two separate contractors for lighting at the Crown Point and Piarco Airports in the absence of a Board, in breach of the tender rules, by claiming that the former Minister of Works and Transport did the same thing.
However, Mr. Warner is simply playing smart with foolishness. The former Minister did no such thing and contrary to Mr. Warner’s false assertions, at no time did the former Minister instruct any State Enterprise or Statutory Authority to breach its tender rules in the procurement of goods and service.
It must be understood that the problem with these controversial contracts is not the Minister’s general authority under the Constitution to approve the award of contracts in the absence of a Board, as suggested by Mr. Warner. This general authority of a Minister is not in dispute, as Mr. Warner would have us believe. Instead, but what is in question is Mr. Warner’s flagrant breach of the tender rules of the Airports Authority in exercising his authority.
It is now a matter of record that tenders were invited in 2009 for the lighting of the runways at the Crown Point and Piarco Airports as a single package and that a recommendation was made in June 2010 to award a contract to United Engineering Services in the sum of $68 million for this work.
Upon receipt of this recommendation, in the absence of a Board at the Authority, Mr. Warner had two options, i.e. either to approve or to not approve the award of contract. He was not empowered to vary or split the contract or to sidestep the tender procedures. However, in September 2010, he instructed the Authority to effectively abort the tender process and to invite fresh proposals from just two contractors, who were subsequently awarded the contracts as separate packages in an increased sum of $83 million. This is not permitted under Tender Rule 7.4 of the Authority which states that in selective tendering for goods and services in excess of $100,000 (which is what this was), a minimum of seven (7) contractors must be invited.
Since Mr. Warner instructed the Authority to invite proposals from only two contractors, whereas nine (9) contractors had previously expressed interest and submitted bids for the lighting contract, thus making it simple to re-invite bids from seven of these nine bidders, he effectively instructed the Authority to breach its own tender rules. This is the real issue and not the smokescreen thrown up by Mr. Warner with his false allegation that the former Minister did the same thing as he did.
For the record, contrary to the false and misleading insinuations and imputations of Mr. Warner, the former Minister of Works and Transport did not at any time instruct any State Enterprise or Statutory Authority to improperly vary any contract or to breach its tender rules in the award of any contract.
Colm Imbert, MP
