–questioned by SOCU, accused of attempting to defraud ‘Harbour Bridge’ of over $100M

By Richard Bhainie

GENERAL Secretary of the Alliance for Change (AFC) and the former Minister of Public Infrastructure, David Patterson, along with the former General Manager of the Demerara Harbour Bridge Corporation, Rawlston Adams, on Friday appeared before the Special Organised Crime Unit (SOCU) for questioning.

The duo was hauled in for questioning in relation to their involvement in the procurement of Consultancy Services for the Feasibility Study and Design of the New Demerara River Bridge, specifically in relation to money used from the Demerara Harbour Bridge Corporation (Asphalt Plant Accounts) to fund the study.

In November 2020, during the installation of the Board of Directors for the DHBC, Minister of Public Works Juan Edghill had revealed that there was an active police investigation into the spending and actions of individuals in the awarding of the contract.

While in opposition, the People’s Progressive Party Civic (PPP/C) had called for a probe into the matter after a contract in the sum of $148 million was sole-sourced to Dutch Company, LievenseCSO Engineering Contracting BV, subsequent to their submitting an “unsolicited proposal” to conduct the study.

The Public Procurement Commission (PPC) had conducted an investigation into the matter, and concluded that the procurement procedure used to award the contract was in contravention of the Procurement Act.

In 2015, the Ministry of Public Infrastructure (MPI) invited companies to submit Expressions of Interest (EoIs) to the Chairman of the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board (NPTAB) to undertake a feasibility study for the development of options for a new Demerara Harbour Bridge.

Some 23 foreign and local companies submitted EoIs by the December 2015 deadline, from which 12 were shortlisted; however, only two of the companies submitted proposals by the March 2016 deadline, and after negotiations with one of the companies, the MPI informed the NPTAB of their decision to annul the tender, with the intention of retendering at a later stage; however, the contract was never retendered.

And subsequent to the annulment of the tender by the MPI, LievenseCSO Engineering Contracting BV submitted an unsolicited proposal to provide consultancy services for the Demerara River Bridge project.

Patterson, by memorandum dated November 18, 2016, made a request to the then Granger Cabinet for consideration and approval to use funds from the Demerara Harbour Bridge Corporation (Asphalt Plant Accounts) to fund the Feasibility Study, and “to commence a contractual engagement with LIEVENSE CSO as of the 1st January, 2017”.

SUBMITTED DIRECTLY BY PATTERSON

This request to Cabinet was not forwarded through the NPTAB, but submitted directly by Patterson, and on November 25, 2016, Cabinet approved a total sum of G$161,514,420 to be used from the Demerara Harbour Bridge Corporation (Asphalt Plant Accounts) to fund the study.

Former General Manager of the Demerara Harbour Bridge Corporation (DHBC) and project manager for the consultancy, Rawlston Adams on December 9, 2016, signed the contract with LievenseCSO Engineering Contracting, BV.

Adams had informed the PPC during investigations into that matter that the Board of the DHBC was not a party to the decision to use the funds for the stipulated purposes, and he did not sign the contract on behalf of the DHBC, but only because he was requested by Patterson to do so.

The PPC also was informed by Adams and then Permanent Secretary of the MPI, Kenneth Jordan, that even though the project was funded by the DHBC and signed by Adams, the project was still under the MPI; however, the contract with LievenseCSO Engineering Contracting BV identified DHBC as the client.

The DHBC, a public corporation managed by a Board of Directors, was established by the Demerara Harbour Bridge Corporation Act 2003. In accordance with Section 5 (2) of the Act, “The General Manager shall, subject to the general direction and control of the Board, be responsible for implementing the decisions of the Board and the efficient discharge of the functions of the Corporation.”

The PPC, in its report, noted “the DHBC does not fall within the definition of a Procuring Entity, as provided in the Procurement Act Cap 73:05. Except for projects financed by funds provided from the Consolidated Fund of the Government, the DHBC can conduct its procurement in accordance with its own rules and procedures, once they do not conflict with the Procurement Act.”

“As advised by the General Manager, DHBC, this Corporation, however, in practice, executes procurement in accordance with the provisions of the Procurement Act. Mr. Adams confirmed to the PPC that this project was not included in the Work Programme and Budget of the DHBC for the financial year in which the consultant was contracted,” the report further stated.

The PPC investigation into the matter concluded that the fact that the DHBC was described as the “Client” in the contract, the project was to be regarded as one of the DHBC’s.

CLEAR BREACH
And that due to the admission of Adams, the DHBC follows the provisions of the Procurement Act in the conduct of its procurement transactions; therefore, the contract awarded in the sum of $148 million was a clear breach of Section 17 (1) of the Procurement Act.

“Section 17 subsection 1 of the Procurement Act states that NPTAB is responsible for exercising jurisdiction over tenders, which exceed the amounts prescribed in the procurement Regulations. The Regulations state that, for the MPI, Consultancy projects that cost in excess of five million Guyana dollars (GYD$5 million) must be administered by the NPTAB,” the PPC report noted.

Further, Section 54 (1) of the Act states that “Cabinet shall have the right to review all procurements the value of which exceeds $15,000,000. The Cabinet shall conduct its review on the basis of a streamlined tender evaluation report to be adopted by the Authority mentioned in Section 17(2).”

“In this particular procurement, since there is no evidence that the “Authority” (the NPTAB) prepared this report, the submission by the Minister of Public Infrastructure directly to Cabinet was in breach of the Procurement Act. The Procurement Act and Regulations make no provision for the Minister of Public Infrastructure to submit a procurement request directly to Cabinet for approval of award of a contract,” the PPC reported.

During Budget debates in December 2018, while in opposition, Minister Juan Edghill had called on Patterson to explain how it was accounted that a total of G$148 million was paid to Lievense CSO Engineering Contracting BV, for the study, but figures show that G$227 million was paid over by the Demerara Harbour Bridge for that job.

Edghill had claimed that in 2017, the Asphalt Plant of the Demerara Bridge paid G$153,250,385 on the feasibility study, and in January 2018, an additional G$14,728,000, and in February G$59,340,000 was spent on the project.

In June 2019, the Guyana Police Force cleared Patterson of any wrongdoing, stating that based on legal advice, “there was no misuse of funds; there is no evidence that a criminal offence has been committed, and there is no evidence of any collusion between Arie Mol/Lievense CSO and the personnel from the Ministry of Public Infrastructure”.

Patterson is expected to appear in Court on Monday to face a charge of attempting to defraud the Demerara Harbour Bridge of in excess of $100 million.

GIFTING EXPENSIVE

Meanwhile, the Guyana Police Force has also been called in to investigate the circumstances surrounding Government agencies gifting expensive items to the former Ministers of Public Infrastructure, David Patterson and Annette Ferguson. This was confirmed by Minister within the Ministry of Public Works Deodat Indar on Thursday, who said that neither of the two ministers has indicated their intention to repay the State for the exorbitant gifts. “They have been defending themselves,” Indar posited.
According to 2016 records, the Maritime Administration Department (MARAD) had purchased a birthday gift for Patterson valued at $60,000. Further, in 2018, the same agency purchased a $384,700 birthday bracelet for Patterson from King’s Jewellery World. Patterson had initially denied receiving the gifts, saying that the reports were crafted in an effort to tarnish his reputation.

With documentations being exposed, Patterson later admitted to receiving the gifts, but said that he was not aware that his acceptance of the expensive items was in breach of regulations. Documents from May 2020 showed that MARAD went on to approve a majestic sum of $704,292 “towards the purchase of birthday gifts”. Unlike the previous years, the 2020 records did not specify that the purchase was for Patterson’s birthday gift. The then Minister of Public Infrastructure also received gifts from the Transport and Harbours Department, the Guyana Civil Aviation Authority and the Demerara Harbour Bridge Corporation (DHBC).  Junior Minister of Public Infrastructure, Annette Ferguson, was not left out, as she received items valued at $1.4 million from agencies under the ministry; however, these were classified as “donations”. A spreadsheet from the DHBC showed that in excess of $6 million in “donations” were given to the Public Infrastructure Ministry between June 2015 and July 2016.