The more information made available on the Government’s construction programme, the more confusing the situation becomes. So too do the explanations surrounding the escalation in costs become wondrous to those sitting on the sidelines, perhaps unaware as the Government and its construction driver, Udecott, continue merrily ahead.

Let us start with the National Academy for the Performing Arts, the north facility that is. At the opening ceremony for the facility, Prime Minister Patrick Manning announced proudly that the academy had been completed within budget and on time. However, on Tuesday this week, Planning Minister Dick-Forde went to the Senate and said the original completion date for the academy (north) was December 2008, which means the facility was a full 11 months behind schedule. The minister also announced that the original cost of the academy was US$60 million—approximately $378 million. However, Prime Minister Manning’s figure worked out to be approximately $500 million. Unfortunately, Minister Dick-Forde did not offer information about the varying costs and dates to explain the major discrepancies. However, the minister did give a few reasons for minor cost escalation. With regard to the Port-of-Spain academy, she listed demolition and replacement of the old tennis courts from the site to the King George V Park. Now this is a quite baffling explanation which raises further questions. Was it that the original plan was to simply flatten the tennis courts and not replace them? If the answer is “yes,” then is it that the Government was completely unconcerned for sporting facilities, including netball and hockey, used by thousands of people?

But if the answer is “no,” then what incompetence on the part of the planners and those who developed the cost package to construct the academy. How could they have not budgeted for the destruction and restoration of those very visible sporting facilities? With regard to the south academy, there is also the unexplained variation in projected costs and actual costs. The Prime Minister, speaking at the launch, said that this facility would cost approximately $320 million compared to the approximately $240 million figure given by the minister. There is also the significant shift in the completion time by over 12 months. Here again we are faced with a few incredible items which were not originally catered for, among them the relocation of a sewer line. How could the designers have drawn up plans and not catered for the removal of such a line? Also, what has not been given by either the Prime Minister or his Planning Minister is a breakdown indicating change in plans, additions to original designs and other factors which would explain why the cost escalation and time overruns on both projects.

This information is important because the Government and Udecott have damned the local construction industry for similar kinds of overruns of time and escalation in prices when a number of the local contractors have blamed the delays and cost escalation on the Government for changing designs and adding to the size of the projects. Clarification on these matters has to be made as the Government comes before the bar of public opinion to argue its case for its preference of foreign contractors. This is undoubtedly the largest and most expensive construction programme ever engaged in this country. The resources are part of the patrimony of the country, and not merely for this generation and those living at the moment, but of those generations to come. There has to be a proper accounting for the resources expended, the hundreds of millions that are being expatriated and the thousands of jobs that have not gone to nationals.