As Gov't confirms VINO's story, more details emerge on airport contract award
In a press release days later, on December 27, 2016, the National Democratic Party (NDP) Administration confirmed it had selected the Chinese company over IDL/McAlpine who had a local partner.
Another Biwater?
However, new details have emerged over the decision. For months after our newsroom first broke the original story on May 17, 2016 many NDP supporters, contractors mainly from the Seventh and Eighth Districts, and other heavy equipment operators had lobbied the Government to give the runway expansion project to the company with the local interest.
After all in 2011 when the NDP first won the general elections it told the people it would look out for local businesses as it hammered the then Virgin Islands Party Government of Hon Ralph T. O'Neal OBE that they had made a mistake to give a water contract to a foreign company, Biwater, while there was another foreign company Ocean Conversion with local interest just like IDL/McAlpine.
However, what the NDP failed to tell the people and voters in their propaganda of 2011 is that months after signing with Biwater the VIP also signed a water contract with then foreign company Ocean Conversion because the VIP had taken into account that they had local partners and shareholders.
The Cabinet Decision, Two against?
It has also been unearthed that the Cabinet decision, taken December 21, 2016 on the runway extension "preferred bidder" after much delay and debate, was not unanimous.
While our newsroom awaits other details of the meeting from our senior NDP sources, we were advised that two Ministers of Government- Hon Ronnie W. Skelton, the Minister for Health and Social Development and Hon Myron V. Walwyn, the Minister for Education and Culture- expressed grave reservation and did not support the preferred bidder.
According to the same source, the Premier, the Deputy Premier Dr The Hon Kedrick D. Pickering (R7) and the Minister for Communications and Works Hon Mark H. Vanterpool (R4) all supported the Chinese company.
Meanwhile, in a previous story a source had indicated that Acting Deputy Governor Rosalie Adams had presided over the Cabinet meeting of December 21, 2016, however, we can now confirm that it was in fact Premier Smith who had presided over the meeting.
It is also our understanding that the Dr Smith Administration will seek a loan of $150M to fund the airport project and this new loan could max out the government's limit on borrowing.
This will certainly affect other goals for other major capital works, and ties the hands of any new Administration, according to a senior government official, speaking to our newsroom.
Watch the back benchers! Rebellion?
There are also reports of a possible rebellion from three back benchers over the project and the possibility that they will vote in the House of Assembly (HoA) against the loan.
However, in an invited comment from our newsroom, Julian Willock, of the local marketing and political consulting firm Advance Marketing and Professional Services, said he rejects that notion.
Mr Willock, who is also a former Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Communications and Works, said "with all the talk about a rebellion I do not see any back bencher voting against the loan or even abstaining for that matter…they will all toe the party line, and in fact the two Ministers of Government that you told me were against the deal will also vote for the loan in Parliament..."
The political consultant said over the past five years he has paid keen attention to the NDP and concluded, "like them or hate them they have learnt the art of singing Kumbaya in public at least, but will eat each other behind closed doors."
Some of the NDP critics believe this decision to go with CCCC could hurt the NDP at the polls, however, Mr Willock cautioned "it will be premature to come to such a conclusion...many voters have short memories…"
Premier Smith & the Truth
In another twist, Premier Smith told the HoA on December 19, 2016 in response to a question from Opposition Leader Hon Julian Fraser RA (R3) that no giveaways were negotiated or on the table for the low $154M bid.
However, the same NDP source said, "not so fast, as there are many correspondences on file about concession and demands made by the Chinese, including the option for the original bid to go up if their own research shows that things on the ground are different once the project commences." That in itself is a loop-hole as the bid is expected to go up.
36 Responses to “As Gov't confirms VINO's story, more details emerge on airport contract award”
No Financials, No Budgets, but they’re full speed ahead trying to get this deal off the ground to save face. This is their last ditch attempt to disguise the TRUTH STATE OF OUR COUNTRY under their FAILED LEADERSHIP. NDP will disintegrate without this deal.
.
The UK turned down the first attempt to push this through and I believe that they may well do the same this time around. The BVI is a contingent liability of the UK and they will not entertain any risk that would cause them to have to bail us out. Although we may not see these studies and the financials, I am sure that the UK will have to see them before they sign off on that loan. The Ag. Accountant General just expressed concern with the Government's ability to service their current loans, so what they do? Go and take a massive loan? Could it be that they are depending on the sale of Prospect reef to increase their reserves and then their borrowing power?
When will this Government come clean with the People who they should be serving?
Moreover, bids on a contract include some risks. Typically, a contractor bid on a contract assuming some risks, i.e., weather pattern will be per historical norms, inflation will stay within a certain percentage during the contract term, labour cost will stay stable, material and equipment prices will stay stable........etc. If prices go up the increase is on the contractor and if prices go down, advantage contractor. Will the contractor do a deductive change order if prices go down? No. The only time typically that the base bid price should change after award is 1)if owner increase the original scope of work, 2) different site conditions experienced or 3) unforeseen conditions experienced.
Moreover, if borrowing a $150M to fund this project will put the BVI at its borrowing limit, is it in the best interest of VI to incur this debt at this time? What will be the opportunity cost, i.e. some other vital projects will not get done, of borrowing the $150M? Reporting in this article indicates that at least two members of the caucus were not in support of the project. If true, should not a capital project of magnitude not earn unanimous support from the caucus? What was the reason(s) for the lack of unanimous support?
Clearly, the NDP has proven that it is adroit at retail politics. VIP let NDP defined it instead of it defining itself. And as a a result, it was shellac 11-2 in the last election. Additionally, Julian Willock understand the nuts and bolts of retail politics. He has his finger on the pulse of VI politics.
Talking about support, is it true that Ronnie and Walwyn voted not in support of the project at Cabinet? If true, why? Do Virgin Islanders need to know why? School chiren are saying that because of familiy loyalty Mark had to vote for it. Is it true? Will lengthening the runway automatically cause airlines to start direct flights into and out of Terence B Lettsome International Airport? Is passenger load factor (PLF) (ratio of paying passenger miles to avaiable seat miles) the prime factor in flight/route planning? If we (BVI) build it, will they automatically come? Are airlines rushing to start direct flights to the BVI? Have cost-benefit analysis, environmental impact assessment statements...........,,,etc been conducted? And if so, is government taking the findings seriously? Will taxpayers have to heavily subsidize direct flights to make it happen? Though BVI Airways $7M investment was a head scratching investment , nonetheless, will this project kill the investment? Should not Virgin Islanders get up off their lazy boys and let their voices be seriously heard? Will protesting after the fact be useless like people in America protesting after Ttump won? Should air-sea transportation link be seriously pursued as an a project alternative? Should the the ferry system be modernize?
Where is the medical facility to accommodate the influx of people if there is a disaster happen
We build a cruise good with a great in flux of people that was nice but look at the number taxi incidents with passengers traveling to cane garden bay
We need proper infrastructure before we keep bringing this influx of people to the Bvi
Government officials you don't think is time to have to taxi change the to cane garden bay to avoid disaster
Like avoid joes hill and go up mountain
Go down windy hill to ballast bay onto CGB one way in and exit out from CGB up round hill it's a safer route
Government leave that airport alone
It have great economic impact on lots of family
Let put about a $8 million into 4 new ferries and take another $42 million into our health care and infrastructure needs first before the airport
Let the multimillionaire companies buy get that can land on what we have it's cheaper they can loose if it don't fly in the Bvi they can fly elsewhere
Let's no burden the country with the debt and worst more with the Chinese
The VI is small and cannot afford the avoidable mistakes and poor planning. E. Leonard consistently makes the connection between small size and inherent disadvantages and vulnerabilities. Concur. We cannot ignore the fact that we are small and must plan activities commensurate with our size and resources.