Cayman Islands
The long-awaited East-West Arterial extension is moving to the next phase as the National Roads Authority invited bids from firms to conduct an environmental impact assessment for the project.
The NRA, according to a request for proposals posted on the government procurement Bonfire portal on Friday, is seeking a qualified environmental firm to perform the EIA for the extension, from Woodland Drive to Frank Sound Road (sections 2 and 3 of the East-West Arterial – see image below).
Last month, NRA managing director Edward Howard announced that the project was moving to the next stage as he addressed a Prospect constituency meeting organised by Prospect MP and Health Minister Sabrina Turner.
The request for proposals, the NRA said through its tender, has been issued to select one professional environmental consultant to perform all requisite technical studies and analyses to complete an EIA for the extension.
The bidding exercise will be open until 5pm on 14 April 2022.
Issues to be considered
The scoping opinion for the EIA for the project, dated November 2021, which aims to provide much-needed traffic-congestion relief for the eastern districts, was carried out by the Environmental Assessment Board – a subcommittee of the National Conservation Council chaired by Department of Environment Director Gina Ebanks-Petrie.
Back in 2016, the National Conservation Council required an EIA for the proposed 10-mile-long road as it would “traverse a substantial area of wetland habitat along the entire length of the southern perimeter of the Central Mangrove Wetland.
“As the ecological heart of Grand Cayman, the wetland is critical to many important natural processes which are vital to the long-term wellbeing of the residents of the Cayman Islands,” it had stated.
According to the scoping opinion, the NRA, as project proponent, is proposing the construction of a 160-foot-wide, multi-lane highway from Woodland Drive to Frank Sound Road.
At its eastern end, the proposed route includes an 80-foot-wide southern connector road.
“The footprint of the proposed road will result in the removal of 174 acres of undisturbed terrestrial habitat,” it added.
The EIA will look at the route alignment and assessment of alternatives.
A key objective of the EIA, the scoping opinion said, is to ensure that the selected road design offers the best outcome for the environment as well as for surrounding communities, saying the assessment shall “appropriately assess and compare the environmental effects of relevant options for routes, engineering techniques, mitigation, construction management and operational management”.
The terms of reference, the scoping opinion said, shall set out what options for the corridor have been considered to date and which is the preferred choice, outlining the reasons for its selection.
The assessment will also look at the environmental impacts of the road, for which the scoping opinion states “there are likely to be significant environmental effects in the following key areas: Hydrology and Drainage; Terrestrial Ecology (Wetlands); Terrestrial Ecology (Mastic Reserve); Cultural and Natural Heritage; and Greenhouse Gas Emissions”.
The scoping opinion also suggested that socio-economic considerations, including the “need” and rationale for the road, should have been taken into account by way of a strategic environmental assessment prior to the gazettal of the road corridor.
“Unfortunately, the utility of an assessment of the ‘need’ for the road extension and its socioeconomic impacts will be of limited value now given that the corridor has been gazetted since 2005 and development applications subsequently approved along parts of the route have, to a degree, fixed its alignment,” it said.
Changes to route suggested
The scoping opinion said the Environmental Assessment Board consulted with the National Trust given the severing of Trust lands, including the Mastic Reserve, by the proposed route.
A meeting was held on 1 Nov. 2021 with the director of the National Trust and members of the Trust’s Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC).
“EAC members expressed their concerns regarding the alignment of the eastern end of the route and its likely major significant negative effects on the Mastic Reserve, both in terms of its ecology and visitor experience. The current alignment severs the Trail head from the remainder of the forest, requiring visitors to the Reserve to cross a multi-lane highway,” it stated.
The National Trust recommended the road should be moved south in order to ensure it does not traverse Trust-owned properties in the Central Mangrove Wetland; and the proposed roundabout repositioned to a “more ideal location” along the red line on the map, thereby avoiding the Mastic Trail and Reserve.
The proposed road acts as a physical barrier between the higher and lower elevations, and could act as a dam.
It said the Central Mangrove Wetland could be deprived of water and “there may be ecological consequences”.
By changing the balance and patterns of water movement, there could be significant adverse effects on both residential populations and the Central Mangrove Wetland, and an EIA is required to investigate those impacts so that they can be appropriately avoided, minimised or mitigated.
It also said the EIA needs to ensure that climate change resilience is built into the road design.
Next steps for project
The next stage of the process, following completion of the tenders, is for the NRA to provide the Environmental Assessment Board with details of up-to-three suitably qualified consultancy firms to carry out the EIA based upon the requirements outlined in the scoping opinion.
The EAB will then review submissions, confirm the bidders have the necessary expertise and select a consultant(s) to undertake the project, the scoping opinion stated.
The Environmental Assessment Board will then meet with the NRA and its environmental impact assessment consultancy team to discuss the development of the draft terms of reference for the EIA, based on the scoping opinion.
The draft terms of reference will then head to public consultation, including discussion in at least one public meeting, for a period of 21 consecutive days. It will be finalised, once the public input is taken into account.
More
Image: pexels-singkham
Read more
The Caribbean Development Bank (CDB) and CCRIF SPC will host the 2022 Caribbean Regional Risk Conference on April 6 & 7, to provide a forum for policymakers, senior technocrats, and other stakeholders to explore country risk management and risk governance.
Under the theme, “Introducing Country Risk Management to Advance Sustainable Development”, the event will address the myriad of risks facing Caribbean countries, taking the discussion beyond natural hazard risks and climate change, to explore economic, geopolitical, environmental, societal, and technological risks, which continue to impact the region’s development prospects. Already confirmed speakers and presenters are from several regional and international organizations, including the World Economic Forum, the United Nations, The World Bank, Swiss Re, The University of the West Indies, and PriceWaterhouseCoopers, among others.
The conference will highlight the role of integrated risk management frameworks at the country level in enabling policymakers to better anticipate, identify and manage both climate and non-climate risks. Participants also will be exposed to cutting-edge tools, processes, and governance structures, necessary for operationalizing country risk management and developing all-hazards policy frameworks.
President of the CDB, Dr. Hyginus “Gene” Leon said, “In the wake of the global pandemic and the growing threat of climate change, this conference takes on special significance as it sets the stage for us to explore country risk management through a wider lens and build much-needed capacity amongst key stakeholders. We will leverage the experience of both CDB and CCRIF along with recognized experts to stimulate new policy direction and action.”
The Caribbean Regional Risk Conference is part of the Integrated Country Risk Management in the Caribbean Project, launched by the CDB and CCRIF SPC in 2017 to support the development of a regional risk platform for Caribbean governments.
In commenting on the conference and the wider country risk management project, CCRIF’s CEO, Mr. Isaac Anthony said, “As we seek to build forward stronger post-COVID and achieve the SDGs, country risk management and integrated risk governance must be seen as a key strategy for Caribbean sustainable development. This initiative will req uire action by a range of partners whose mandates focus on areas outside of natural catastrophe risks – mandates related to economic and financial risks as well as social and other humanity-related risks – to make it a resounding success for the small island and coastal states of the region.”
The conference will be held virtually and is open to the public. The programme will cater to several target groups including the public and private sectors, civil society organizations, development organizations, academia, and the media.
At the end of the conference, CCRIF, CDB and the Caribbean Centre for Development Administration (CARICAD) will launch the Caribbean Integrated Risk Management Training Programme for the Public Sector.
To register for the conference, interested persons can contact CDB at CaribbeanRiskConference@caribank.org or CCRIF at caribbeanriskconference@ccrif.org
more
image: pexels-skitterphoto
Read more
Bahamas
The Bahamas is “struggling with the execution” of anti-corruption safeguards, governance reformers are warning, with accountability and transparency “aspirational” rather than real concepts.
Matt Aubry, the Organisation for Responsible Governance’s (ORG) principal, told Tribune Business in a recent interview that The Bahamas lacks an “integrated anti-corruption” strategy that pulls all such legislative and regulatory reforms together in a co-ordinated package capable of combating graft.
Chester Cooper, deputy prime minister and minister of tourism, investments and aviation, and some of his Cabinet colleagues have foreshadowed changes to the Public Disclosure Act but this law – which focuses on declarations of wealth, income and assets by ministers, MPs and top civil servants – is viewed by Mr Aubry as not wide enough to capture the low level, every day corruption that most Bahamians have to deal with.
Speaking after the US government, in its recent International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, urged The Bahamas to move forward with long-planned governance reforms, the ORG executive said: “Accountability and transparency continue to be aspirational terms. They have to be actual terms, and it’s in the execution where we’re struggling.
“We have the language out, but have to understand what it means for the day-to-day person, small business owner or person struggling with the delivery of public services. We’ve made advances, but it’s important to make sure they are enhanced and understood, and it has to be a whole society effort.
“It’s not just the Government changing and reforming, and putting practices in place for good governance, but citizens finding a way to participate and businesses being able to use publicly-available information to develop strategies and grow. This is a continuum that we’ve started, and it doesn’t necessarily help if we don’t see it all the way through.”
The Davis administration had promised to pass a comprehensive package of anti-corruption legislation during its first 100 days in office, including the Integrity Commission and Ombudsman Bills that stalled under its predecessor, but that period has past with little visible progress made.
In addition to Mr Cooper, Michael Halkitis, minister of economic affairs, and Ryan Pinder, the attorney general, have also publicly referred to reforming the Public Disclosure Act. Mr Aubry said campaigners were benchmarking this Act, and determining whether it could be extended to cover other corruption-related issues, but he indicated the early results were not promising on this.
Referring to the Integrity Commission Bill, which would create a politically-independent body to receive and investigate corruption allegations, the ORG chief said: “From what I understand that Bill did not make the legislative agenda.
“When you think about establishment of an independent agency that receives and vets any allegations of corruption, and is charged with identifying opportunities across government where we can improve corruption perceptions or reduce instances of corruption through technology and training, I don’t see where the Public Disclosure Act provides for that.
“The Public Disclosure Act, in its main interpretation, targets those MPs and elected officials, but every-day corruption that people experience daily will not be handled through that legislation.”
While multiple legislative initiatives have been spoken of to aid the fight against graft, Mr Aubry said: “None of it speaks to an integrated anti-corruption strategy; a strategy that brings these things together to their greatest effect.”
The US, in its narcotics report, said: “Since 2017, The Bahamas has enacted, but not fully brought into force, a range of laws to fight official corruption. Draft laws presented by the prior administration to establish an ombudsman’s office and an anti-corruption agency, focused on public corruption, had not yet been taken up in October by the new administration.
“In May 2021, the first information commissioner and deputy commissioner were appointed under the Freedom of Information Act to support public access to government records. Parliament has not yet brought into force clauses of the same Act, however, that define a process for the public to obtain information.
“It is important The Bahamas follow through with plans to fully bring into force transparency and accountability legislation to prevent and address corruption, and preserve public confidence.”
Mr Aubry, referring to a recent Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) report that found trust in government in Latin America and the Caribbean was lower than anywhere else in the world, said such trends made societies more prone to corruption because people felt they will not be treated fairly by institutions and the existing system.
“I think that there is a lot of intent and focus, and we have a lot of discussion relating to accountability and transparency, but it is a shifting culture and we are struggling with execution,” he added. “It’s the pace of execution we have to look at as we move forward with these things.”
The Bahamas was “behind the times” in fully enacting its Freedom of Information Act, Mr Aubry said, and has “yet to see the publication” of all contract awards made by public entities as required by the Public Procurement Act since it took effect in September 2021.
The Davis administration has argued that multiple mechanisms and personnel must first be appointed before that Act can be implemented, especially the identification of a chief procurement officer. Without this person, it has argued contract award details cannot be published.
However, Michael Pintard told Tribune Business earlier this year that having a chief procurement officer in place was “not a prerequisite to fulfilling your obligations” under the law, and publishing details of all government contracts awarded between September 1 and November 7 last year, based on his reading of the Public Procurement Act.
He spoke out after Simon Wilson, the Ministry of Finance’s financial secretary, told a media briefing by the Prime Minister’s Office that the Minnis administration’s failure to follow the necessary public service protocols and appoint a chief procurement officer meant it was impossible for the Government to reveal these contract details as required by law.
Mr Pintard, who previously accused the Davis administration of violating the law on this issue, said the Act did not specify that a chief procurement officer must be in place for information on all government contracts to be released “within 60 days” of their award to the successful bidder.
This newspaper’s analysis of the Act appeared to back the Opposition leader’s assessment, as clause 61 on “contract award notice” puts the disclosure burden squarely on the “procuring entity” – meaning the government ministry, department, agency or state-owned enterprise (SOE) issuing the tender – to publish the bidding outcome.
And, even if the chief procurement officer’s appointment was required first by the Act, and he had read it wrong, Mr Pintard argued that there is no legal impediment to publishing contract award details before this happens. Doing so, he argued, would demonstrate the Government’s commitment to procurement transparency and accountability, and taxpayer value for money.
more
image: pexels-rodnae-productions
Read more
Guyana
Only one company has submitted a bid for consultancy services for cost recovery audit validation of the Government of Guyana’s profit oil share and it has tendered at over $340 million for the project.
When the tenders for the Ministry of Natural Resources’ project were opened last Tuesday, only Eclisar Financial & Professional Services (EFP) had submitted a tender.
That bid was pegged at $340.7 million.
On the matter of cost recovery auditing from 2017 to 2020, Minister of Natural Resources Vickram Bharrat had stated during the 2022 Budget debate and in a written response that monies for this project had been appropriated this year and to the tune of some US$250,000 ($52m).
That sum is nowhere close to the bid submitted on Tuesday.
EFP is located at 169 Charlotte Street, in Georgetown and was established in 2012. It provides accounting, forensic and financial services plus advisory to domestic and foreign clients.
“Over the years, Eclisar has built an outstanding reputation for client representation in taxation and auditing and is proud to have successfully represented clients to the Guyana Revenue Authority and National Insurance Scheme,” the website further states.
“… at Eclisar, we pride ourselves in providing financial services and solutions for organizations in all industry sectors. We are always forging global partnerships to better serve and enhance our clients’ interests.”
According to the company’s website, Eclisar’s staff is managed by its founder and Managing Director, Azzar Haniff. He is listed as “a chartered and forensic accountant with over seventeen years’ experience in accounting, auditing, taxation, fraud investigations and financial management. Azzar has worked in Trinidad and Barbados and has a large network of business associates in Trinidad and other Caribbean Territories.”
In November last year, Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo announced that ExxonMobil’s post-2017 expenditure for the Liza-1 and Liza-2 wells would not be audited as government was not able to select a strong local group to undertake it. This statement was at odds with the fact that the government had advertised this year for foreign firms.
The comments had seen a string of criticisms from the public with many emphasising the need for the sums to be professionally scrutinised. It was compounded by the fact that it was over one year since the audit of the US$460 million by United Kingdom firm IHS Markit. That report is yet to be seen.
Noted too was that the statutory two-year period for the 2017-2019 auditing had expired and there was a concern that the company might object to its books being audited after the contracted time had elapsed.
But government has stressed that the auditing of the over US$9 billion sum can still be undertaken and as such there is no need to request an extension from ExxonMobil. Former APNU+AFC minister, David Patterson, had questioned if the Ministry of Natural Resources or any other agency with oversight of the oil & gas sector had approached ExxonMobil for an extension of the deadline for auditing the expenses.
The Minister of Natural Resources had offered assurances. “We have a commitment from Exxon. There is no such [objection], they are not against us doing it [later],” Bharrat had stated.
ExxonMobil has told this newspaper that it is confident of its bookkeeping matters and transparency of the company. It added that it has never shied away from audit requests and that it submits periodic reports on its spending to a number of government agencies here.
“ExxonMobil Guyana considers audits a normal part of our operations and cooperates with the government so it can fulfill its obligations. We are fully transparent with the Government on our budgets and cost banks for each block and have implemented extensive cost controls across our business in line with our contracts and the laws of the country,” ExxonMobil spokesperson Janelle Persaud had said in response to questions from the Stabroek News.
“Audits are just one part of a comprehensive framework of controls established by the government. These include setting annual budgets for each block we operate which are reviewed by the Ministry of Natural Resources, and reporting actual spend against these on a monthly basis to the Ministry. We also steward and report costs for each project that is approved and each well that we drill,” she added.
The latest update on auditing was given by Bharrat who said that government was in discussions with local auditors so as to have them be a part of the process, in keeping with local content initiatives here.
more
image: audit-g8faaf0f23
Read more
Guyana
A data entry error resulted in the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board (NPTAB) listing only one of the three companies in a consortium that bid to audit Guyana’s cost oil and the agency’s website has since made a correction to reflect all the companies involved.
Following concerns raised by a consortium of local accounting and auditing firms that NPTAB’s files only showed only one firm listed as submitting the tender, an executive of the agency explained to Stabroek News that it was a minor glitch in the logging entry.
When checked yesterday, NPTAB’s website did indeed reflect the change in name from Eclisar to RHVE Consortium.
This newspaper reported on Sunday that according to NPTAB, only one company – Eclisar – had submitted a tender to audit Guyana’s cost oil. No sooner than the article was published, the consortium expressed concern saying that Eclisar was one of three companies in the RHVE consortium that had bid.
“A consortium of firms submitted [a tender] but we see it reported and stated on the website of NPTAB as only one company,” a representative of the consortium had told this newspaper.
The consortium had originally consisted of the firms: Ram and McRae, Haynes and Ramdihal, Vitality Consulting, and Eclisar Financial & Professional Services (EFP).
It is now only Ramdihal and Haynes, Vitality Consulting, and Eclisar Financial & Professional Services (EFP).
Ram and McRae Managing Partner, Christopher Ram, told this newspaper yesterday that the firm is no longer a part of the consortium.
When the tenders for the Ministry of Natural Resources project – consultancy services for cost recovery audit validation of the Government of Guyana’s profit oil share – were opened last Tuesday, it was stated that only EFP had submitted a tender, according to NPTAB records.
That bid was pegged at $340.7 million.
The contract to audit the US$460 million pre-contract costs had been awarded to the United Kingdom firm IHS Markit and it had cost Guyana US$300,000.
RHVE said that it responded to a request for proposals for the project and when it submitted its tender document the cover letter had all of the companies listed.
On the matter of cost recovery auditing from 2017 to 2020, Minister of Natural Resources Vickram Bharrat, had stated during the 2022 Budget debate and in a written response that monies for this project had been appropriated this year to the tune of some US$250,000 ($52 million).
In November last year, Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo had announced that ExxonMobil’s post-2017 expenditure for the Liza-1 and Liza-2 wells would not be audited as government was not able to select a strong local group to undertake it. This statement was at odds with the fact that the government had advertised last year for foreign firms.
The comments resulted in a string of criticisms from the public with many emphasising the need for the sums to be professionally scrutinised. It was compounded by the fact that it was over one year since the audit of the US$460 million. That report is yet to be seen.
Noted too was that the statutory two-year period for the 2017-2019 auditing had expired and there was a concern that the company might object to its books being audited after the contracted time had elapsed.
But government has stressed that the auditing of the over US$9 billion sum can still be undertaken and as such there is no need to request an extension from ExxonMobil. Former APNU+AFC minister, David Patterson, had questioned if the Ministry of Natural Resources or any other agency with oversight of the oil & gas sector had approached ExxonMobil for an extension of the deadline for auditing the expenses.
more
Image: pexels-vie-studio
Read more
