Years after a decision was taken to relocate the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission’s offices (GGMC) to the controversial building at High and Princes streets in Werk-en-Rust, Georgetown, rehabilitation has commenced in preparation for this, Minister of Natural Resources Vickram Bharrat has confirmed.
Stabroek News understands that the GGMC started work on retrofitting the building in the latter half of 2022. There was no announcement and the relevant authorities are tightlipped on the sum to be spent on the remedial work.
Bharrat, while responding to questions from this newspaper on the sidelines of the International Energy Conference last week, said there was a commitment to follow through with the 2012 PPP/C government cabinet’s decision. He noted that the agency had outgrown its office space at Brickdam, Georgetown, and had been forced to rent properties around the city to house departments of the minerals extracting regulatory body.
“The building is being completed now by GGMC for GGMC. This [new] building is large and has good enough space,” he said.
When completed, given its size, the subject minister said, the Guyana Gold Board will also be located on the property. He explained the objective was to have all the services of the GGMC in one strategic and central location.
The building, which was originally built at a cost of $600 million for the government in 2008, has been shrouded in controversy. It was never occupied because of a series of construction-related problems.
The 65,000-square ft facility was initially intended to house the Ministry of Labour, whose offices are also scattered throughout the city. A former construction worker had said that the building was more than 70 percent completed when work stalled; interior finishes and general painting being among the final things to be done.
“I know we heard a whole host of comments about white elephant and waste of money,” Bharrat said, “but the building is structurally sound because we did all of that test…”
Asked what type of construction was being carried out, Bharrat explained, “The flooring is [replaced with a] steel flooring. One of the issues people had was the design in which it was casted there wasn’t much beam or post. I was told by the engineer it wasn’t a mistake, it was a design but we are not accustomed to seeing…”
He added that they had to retrofit the ceiling because when the channels and conduits for the air-conditioning were installed there was little headspace between the floor and ceiling.
A source had publicly stated in 2013 that the building’s foundation contained sub-standard material and that the contractor, Kishan Bacchus Construction Company, had carried out work on the foundation and on the interior of the building that were in excess of contractual specifications.
It was also said that the ceiling of the building was improperly designed and as a result the placement of air vents and roofing would have resulted in limited vertical space and the situation would need to be rectified. It should be noted, however, that Kishan Bacchus Construction Company only secured the contract after the initial contractor had backed out of the project. It is unclear if anyone has ever been penalised for the substandard work done.
The complex, which is constructed on a plot of land that housed the former Guyana Broadcasting Corporation, was halted during the first quarter of 2011, three years after construction had commenced.
Authorities had decided to place the centralised services of the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA) at the building and the body was expected to take up occupancy of the complex in September 2010. This was never followed through and GRA went on to occupy the former CLICO building on Camp Street.
In 2014, subsequent to the announcement by cabinet that GGMC would take up residence in the building, the project was put on hold due to contention over the award of the contract for the completion of the building.
This newspaper had reported a source saying there had been many objections after the GGMC recently awarded the contract to a company with links to the firm that had allegedly produced substandard work on the building and which had its contract terminated. After a series of complaints, the GGMC board made a decision to put the contract on hold and review it.
A forensic audit into the National Industrial and Commercial Investments Limited (NICIL) had found that $350 million in public funds was spent on the construction of the building.
NICIL’s former executive director Winston Brassington, subsequently stated that no law was broken in the entity’s funding of the ill-fated project. The funding for the project was approved at the parliamentary level.
Rickford Vieira, former commissioner of the GGMC, in August 2015 had told this publication that no decision was taken on the building.
After the APNU+AFC coalition assumed the reins of government in 2015, a team headed by then minister of Public Infrastructure David Patterson was scheduled to visit and investigate the defects in construction. The visit was a part of a ministerial assessment of government properties.
Following the visit, that ministry set about examining ways to make the complex safe for occupation, then Minister of Natural Resources, Raphael Trotman, had said in 2016.
Trotman had said the structure “stands out as an embarrassment” for the past administration because over $700 million was spent and the building was no closer to being occupied.
He said the Guyana Forestry Commis-sion and the GGMC had together put over $400 million into the building, with an expectation that they would be able to occupy it.
In January 2017, the APNU+AFC government had announced that the Ministry of Social Protection would spend over $1 billion on repairs to the building. No work was ever undertaken, however. The ministry had planned to relocate all of its offices to that building in 2018 and as such had earmarked $1 billion in the 2017 Budget for repairs.
As of June 2017, the Ministry of Social Protection invited qualified contractors to tender for the completion of the administrative building at an estimated cost of $750 million and the construction of revetments, parking area, and driveway for the office building at an estimated cost of $130 million.
It is unclear what occurred after the invitation for bids was issued as no work was ever undertaken.
