JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Wednesday, August 13, 2025

Former minister, ex-Nidco boss defend roles played in OAS project

by

1175 days ago
20220525
Former Minister of Works and Transport Dr Surujrattan Rambachan.

Former Minister of Works and Transport Dr Surujrattan Rambachan.

OFFICE OF THE PARLIAMENT

For­mer Peo­ple’s Part­ner­ship Min­is­ter of Works and Trans­port Dr Su­ruj Ram­bachan has said the change of a clause in the con­tract with OAS Con­stru­to­ra on the Point Fortin High­way would have been a de­ci­sion tak­en by the Na­tion­al In­fra­struc­ture De­vel­op­ment Com­pa­ny (Nid­co), based on the ad­vice of US firm AE­COM, which was work­ing with Nid­co on the project.

For­mer Nid­co pres­i­dent Dr Car­son Charles al­so said yes­ter­day that AE­COM’s scope in­clud­ed rec­om­mend­ing what should be done in any ad­den­dum. He said AE­COM was hired for the project by the pre­vi­ous Peo­ple’s Na­tion­al Move­ment ad­min­is­tra­tion.

“I’m tired of point­ing out, we just con­tin­ued the PNM’s project,” Charles said.

Both spoke to Guardian Me­dia yes­ter­day af­ter Prime Min­is­ter Dr Kei­th Row­ley, at a Peo­ple’s Na­tion­al Move­ment meet­ing in Ari­ma on Tues­day night, con­firmed the Gov­ern­ment has to pay OAS TT$852 mil­lion af­ter the de­ci­sion by the ar­bi­tra­tor on the is­sue be­tween OAS and Gov­ern­ment.

It was stat­ed that Nid­co wasn’t en­ti­tled to ter­mi­nate the con­tract un­der clause 15(2).

Row­ley said Nid­co had waived such right due to an ad­den­dum to the con­tract, adding the ad­den­dum was en­tered in­to by the par­ties on Sep­tem­ber 4, 2015—three days be­fore the 2015 gen­er­al elec­tion.

Row­ley called for the Po­lice Com­mis­sion­er to en­ter Nid­co and find out by what au­thor­i­ty and un­der whose au­thor­i­ty that clause “which pro­tect­ed T&T’s in­ter­est” was re­moved from the con­tract, not­ing this was what ul­ti­mate­ly made Nid­co li­able in the mat­ter.

Yes­ter­day, how­ev­er, Ram­bachan, who was Works Min­is­ter in Sep­tem­ber 2015, said he had to as­cer­tain what the change was, as he didn’t have the doc­u­ment.

Former Nidco president Dr Carson Charles

Former Nidco president Dr Carson Charles

Charles, how­ev­er, ex­plained that while he was at Nid­co, two ad­den­dums were done. He said he be­lieved one was in 2012 and the oth­er in 2015.

He said ad­den­dums ba­si­cal­ly have to do with the set­tle­ment of claims with­in the con­tract and are used to set­tle this while work is in progress.

He said if more mon­ey had to be paid, one could set­tle claims by mak­ing ad­just­ments to the work.

He said, “We met the Amer­i­can AE­COM en­gi­neers on the project when we be­gan work.”

Charles said AE­COM, as the project en­gi­neer, had the pow­er to eval­u­ate and set­tle the con­trac­tor’s claims, make ad­just­ments to the work and had the pow­er to rec­om­mend what should be done on an ad­den­dum.

He didn’t have the ad­den­dum, so couldn’t com­ment fur­ther on that. But Charles said the ad­den­dum was not a mat­ter for the then-Cab­i­net and would have been sanc­tioned by the board and man­age­ment of the con­tract­ing com­pa­ny—Nid­co.

He said the min­istry would have been in­formed but added that there wasn’t “re­al­ly dis­cus­sion” on it, since it was a (Nid­co) man­age­ment is­sue.

Charles said Nid­co had a big con­tract to man­age and was do­ing it with­out call­ing on tax­pay­ers to pay more mon­ey, in the face of le­git­i­mate claims by the con­trac­tor.

He re­called there was an is­sue of con­tention with the de­ci­sion on whether that gov­ern­ment should have ter­mi­nat­ed OAS when it filed for bank­rupt­cy pro­tec­tion but he said OAS was nev­er de­clared bank­rupt.

“The cur­rent is­sue has more to do with the ap­proach Nid­co took af­ter ter­mi­na­tion of the con­tract with OAS. This $852 mil­lion isn’t mon­ey they’re los­ing to OAS, it’s OAS’ mon­ey they took and the ar­bi­tra­tor is say­ing, give it back to OAS,” Charles added.

CLICK FOR MORE NEWS


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored