Dear Editor,

IN HIS Stabroek News article dated September 19, 2016, Mr. Anand Goolsarran (AG) was misleading. I give him a C-grade due to his obfuscation of the material available to him and his tendency to ignore the substance of the transaction.If my grading was done at Ivy University level, the grade would have been lower because of his convenient omissions.

1. The Chairman of the GWI Board issued a statement…. False
2. Where in accounting or law does it define that property, building and erections sold exclude a water well or similar asset?
3. NICIL’s position on who owns the well is omitted. Who owns the well is a question AG should ask NICIL. GWI awaits from NICIL the sale agreement for the entire property, with building and erections thereon.
4. Vesting order number 14 of 2002, according to AG, does not detail the assets transferred to GWI.
5. AG says via order No. 40 of 2010 the Sanata Complex was transferred to QAII, then makes a convenient and illogical disconnect between the Public Corporation ACT and the Companies Act.
6. There is no evidence that several
buildings and erections are included in the Valuation of June 2007, including the Well.
7. It is revealing that items certified by the external auditor provide sufficient grounds for AG to treat the Auditor General’s findings as irrefutable evidence — September 20 Article, SN.
8. AG does not state when and how the well was included in GWI’s asset register re: September 20 Article, SN.
9. What rational basis does AG use to pontificate that QAII is a customer of GWI for the property formerly known as Sanata Complex, when QAII is the owner of the property, buildings and erections where the well is located?
10. Based on several references to absence of evidence – see September 20 Article, SN; AG still manages to conclude that QAII does not own the well.
11. Is AG suggesting that QAII should pay electricity costs incurred related to the 9,000 plus residents receiving water from the well? It strikes me that AG undermined several positions he took during the NICIL audit. NICIL should issue a statement on who owns the well.

Regards,
NIGEL HINDS