Prompt action by PM

THE COUNTRY, of course, will expect that a thorough investigation will be conducted into the charges levelled by Opposition Chief Whip Ganga Singh against Housing Minister Dr Keith Rowley with respect to construction projects in Tobago. The allegations made by Singh during the Budget debate in the House on Thursday provoked quite a furore among Opposition members who, in a display of indignation, refused to grant the Prime Minister’s request to make an immediate reply. The Government, in fact, had to use its parliamentary majority to create the opportunity for Mr Manning to speak, and he took it to assure the House that the matter would be thoroughly investigated and the results laid in parliament. The Prime Minister responded promptly and correctly, having regard to the serious nature of the charges.

There is also the need for the PM to act consistently with his fervent avowal to be transparent and accountable in the conduct of Government. In other words, he must respond in a credible way to the people’s right to know. Specifically, Mr Singh accuses the Housing Minister of siphoning off labour and material from the Scarborough Regional Hospital project at Signal Hill and using them on a private sector development named ‘Land Date’ which Dr Rowley was undertaking on nearby lands at Mason Hall. Clearly the most important aspect of this controversy now is to find an independent and impartial investigator or team of investigators who will have the confidence of the entire country and whose report will be accepted by all as containing the truth, and not subject to any accusation of bias or partiality. Given the nature of our small society, with the population divided for the most part into two political camps or between two loyalties, the Government may well have to look outside of TT to find acceptable investigators.

The corruption charges levelled against Grenada PM Dr Keith Mitchell comes readily to mind as an example, since the Governor had to go outside the island, appointing a Barbadian Queen’s Council to conduct the investigation. Both Dr Rowley and contractor Emile Elias have replied to the charges, stating the relations between the Tobago projects in which the construction firm of NH International Ltd, owned by Elias, is engaged. According to the Minister, the Mason Hall development undertaken by his family is being handled by the Tobago contracting firm of  Warner Construction which has subcontracted Elias’ company to do a small part of the project. As a result, he had no relationship with NHI and no responsibility to account for any material from the hospital site.

In his turn, Mr Elias explained that for security purposes the material his company brings into Tobago to be used in projects on the island is kept on the hospital site and taken to the others as the need arises. This material belongs to NHI, it is not the Government’s as NHI is paid by the client not for material but for the finished product according to assessments made by the client’s quantity surveyors. So the charge of siphoning off Government material and labour from the hospital site to a private project simply does not apply, said Mr Elias. Whether we accept their explanation or not, the fact is that the charges against a Government minister have been made by the Chief Opposition Whip in the nation’s parliament and, as a result, have become a national issue that can only be properly and satisfactorily settled by way of  an official investigation. Our concern is that it be done quickly and impartially, so the irrefutable truth will be known.