EXCLUSIVE: Hon Julian Fraser dismisses Report on SCB Project
Our news room had the document in our procession since Monday, September 8, 2014, however, because it was not laid on the Table of the House of Assembly (HoA) we decided to hold the information as we had done with many others until it became a public document.
However, after a pro government online news site broke the report that will be laid on the Table today, September 11, 2014 at the HoA Sitting, we sought an exclusive interview with the Honourable Julian Fraser RA (R3) and Chairman of the Opposition Virgin Islands Party (VIP).
The Report’s findings & Fraser’s response on Government breach of contracts
In No. 83 of the report the Auditor General Ms. Webster reported that the project is at a standstill and that the sheet piles that had been prepared in 2011 are still there on the job site and she recommends that Government must take steps to recover sums issued to the five petty contractors who did not complete work under the bulkheading contract.
However, according to Hon. Fraser this statement is erroneous as the facts are, following the 2011 General Elections that saw the National Democratic Party regime taking power “the contractors were served notice to cease all works on the project.”
Hon. Fraser whose Ministry of Communications and Works at the time was executing the project told our news room “as far as the deposit (mobilization) is concerned, these contractors all have contracts, and I am sure there are procedures, legal and otherwise when terminating ones’ contract, if that is their intention.”
Hon. Fraser, the man who most have concluded will be the next Premier of the Virgin Islands reminded the public of the current Premier‘s response to a question in the HoA on another projected stopped by the NDP Administration; Premier Smith said, “non-performance by the Government of the Virgin Islands for their contractual obligation under the properly executed contracts has resulted in a breach of contract by the government of the Virgin Islands.”
In other words, if the government stops a project then the Government of the day is in breach and contractors could take legal actions against the government therefore no mobilization needs to be paid back. In fact the Auditor General failed to educate the public as to who must pay; in this case it is the Government and not the contractors.
Two different matters - Earl P. Fraser’s Application and Government’s project
In No. 33 of the report the Auditor General (AG) claims that there was an application for Earl P. Fraser of Hannah Reclamation Limited to lease the seabed on the western end of the habour adjacent to Parcel 105 Block 2736C. Ms. Webster also went on to say that contracts were to engage bulkheading the west side of the Sea Cow’s Bay Harbour.
However, Hon. Fraser scoffs at this insinuation. He told us in an exclusive interview that the two events were independent of each other, “one is private the other is government, whereby government is doing the bulkheading only as all the bulkheading including at Parcel 105 as mandated by Cabinet. Note the play on words here to create the impression that one thing has to do with the other….what is the point in mentioning the applications made by Earl P. Fraser for the Western End of the Harbour? The applications were to install 2 jetties attached to Parcel 105 Block 2736C in which is part of the Western Side of the Harbour was to be bulkheaded by Government.”
Hon. Fraser clarified the matter by reminding us that the Earl P. Fraser lease application was for jetties, the petty contracts were for bulkheading. “They had nothing to do with each other” he told Virgin Islands News Online.
No evidence that Hon. Fraser’s brother got special attention
In No 76 the AG Report claims that all of the funds applied in 2011 ($335,706.30) were focused on bulkheading the west end of the harbour, which included but was not limited to an area owed /leased by Mr. Earl P. Fraser of Hannah’s Reclamation.
Again Hon. Fraser who was Minister at the time of the project strongly refuted that statement in Ms. Webster’s report.
He said, “there was never a focus on the West End of the Harbour”…the accurate statement here would be “all of the funds applied in 2011 ($335,706.30) were focused on fabrication Pile Panels and Piles for the bulkheading of the West Side of the Harbour which included but was not limited to, and areas owned/leased by Hannah Reclamation.”
Hon. Fraser the popular veteran legislator reminded the public that the project was mandated by the Executive Council/Cabinet and that reference to ‘West End’ is wrong and borders on the malicious because nothing that was done points in that direction. The West End was prepared as the project’s staging area including fencing as this area will be the last to get bulkheaded by virtue of its use. The area according to Hon. Fraser belongs to Hannah Reclamation and Glanville Fraser.
High cost of project
Another issue that raised concerns in the AG report was in No. 46, in which Ms. Webster wrote that although the preliminary design and overall principle was approved by Executive Council/Cabinet in 2002 the details were not presented to the body. This is essential she wrote as the estimated cost of the project has expanded.
When told this Hon. Fraser described her statement as “ridiculous” as he said the Executive Council at the time never approved a cost for the project. He said the consultancy on the project AR Potter was hired to convert the Smith Arneborg Conceptual Design into a Design Development Set. “They were not hired to price the project...there were no working drawings to work from and neither were they competent in pricing the project,” Hon. Fraser said.
It is unclear if the report will be debated today at the HoA sitting that the Opposition has already described an illegal session.
Many residents have already dismissed the Sea Cow’s Bay Harbour Project report as just a political attack on Hon. Fraser and a sign of the current Administration’s desperation to say in power and view this as pay back for the damaging Ports Development Auditor where by the Public Accounts Committee and the Auditor General detailed corruption, conflict of interest, no one looking out for the tax payers and suspicious spending.
.png)
.png)
.png)
Follow Us On
47 Responses to “EXCLUSIVE: Hon Julian Fraser dismisses Report on SCB Project”