The report of Greg Christie, the Contractor General, tabled in Parliament on Tuesday, is a scathing indictment of irregularities which took place in the planning and construction of the Sandals Whitehouse hotel in Westmoreland. It specifically highlights flagrant breaches of procurement procedures and the awarding of consultancy contracts in connection with the Whitehouse project.
Even more to be deplored, the report demonstrates a patent conflict of interest which, regardless of specific rules, should never have been countenanced by the principal players.
It should be recalled that Sandals Whitehouse, as a real estate development, is a joint venture between two government agencies, the Urban Development Corporation (UDC) and the National Investment Bank of Jamaica (NIBJ) as well as Gorstew, the private holding company of Mr. Gordon 'Butch' Stewart, the owner of the Sandals and Beaches hotels chains. The hotel is separately managed by the Sandals chain.
But the Whitehouse project has been mired in controversy over disagreement about who is responsible for a US$40 million overrun on the hotel's initial cost of US$70 million. Gorstew claimed mismanagement and corruption on the part of the UDC, which had responsibility for the construction. Gorstew claimed that it was kept in the dark about many of the undertakings of the UDC which, at the time, was headed by the politically-powerful, Dr. Vin Lawrence. Gorstew's claims have been championed in Parliament by the Opposition Jamaica Labour Party, led by its general secretary, Karl Samuda.
On the other hand, the UDC insisted that much of the increased cost of the project was because of changes to the project asked for by Gorstew. Mr. Christie said he found evidence to suggest that this was significantly the case, a point that is likely to be strongly disputed by Gorstew.
What cannot be in dispute in Mr. Christie's findings is that the principal players in this saga appeared to have been comfortable with the fact that while they operated in the public weal their private companies enjoyed lucrative consultancies and supply contracts on the Whitehouse project. There was no public tender for the services. Rather, the suppliers were hand-picked prior to their engagement.
It matters naught if, as Mr. Christie suggested, these firms gave value for money. The behaviour represents a conflict of interest and the potential for all that's bad that can flow from such situations.
This pitiful lack of ethical sensibility, so endemic in Jamaican society, has little to do with the strict legalities involved on which we make no comment except to say that ordinary Jamaicans may find it strange that Mr. Christie in his report found it necessary to recommend the enactment of new legislation to ensure that public bodies and public officials can be held accountable for breaching procurement procedures.
Given the facts of the Whitehouse scandal, ordinary Jamaicans could not be blamed for believing that the existing codex of laws for the protection of society and the public purse would cover the irregularities brought to light in the Christie report, laws covering unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary obligation as a director, breach of public trust. And if existing law does not cover such cases, the question must be asked why not?
With such a long history of corruption one would have thought that the loopholes would long ago have been closed.
THE OPINIONS ON THIS PAGE, EXCEPT FOR THE ABOVE, DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE GLEANER.
