Signs of the times - NWA grilled on costly road signs
Published:Sunday | June 19, 2011 | 12:00 AM
Erica Virtue, Senior Gleaner Writer
China Harbour, the contracting firm at the centre of controversy for its role in road works under the Jamaica Infrastructure Development Programme (JDIP), has shelled out $30 million to secure 433 roads signs to be placed strategically along roadways undergoing repairs throughout Jamaica.
But the signs do not come cheap.
Parliament's Public Administration and Appropriations Committee (PAAC) was told by officials from the National Works Agency (NWA) and the Ministry of Transportation and Works (MTW) that the signs were secured at an average cost of $69,284,06, and an average of two signs are designated for each road.
On Wednesday, PAAC Chairman Dr Wykeham McNeill asked Patrick Wong, NWA's chief executive officer, to explain the expenditure on road signs by the contractors.
"To date, China Harbour in procuring 433 signs has spent a total of $30 million," he said.
The PAAC chairman then asked if contractors were fixing 433 roads, to which Wong replied "No."
McNeill argued that two signs per roadway would mean that 216-and-a-half roads were being worked on. However, Wong explained that in some instances, for example, where a retaining wall was being constructed, only one sign would be erected.
taxpayers disadvantaged
Committee member Fitz Jackson queried who paid for the signs, to which Wong explained that the contractors bore the cost. McNeill said the Jamaica taxpayers would bear the cost in the end.
Quizzed as to whether the signs' suppliers adhered to a tender process and whether value was received for the signs' cost, Permanent Secretary Dr Alwyn Hayles offered the following explanation:
"Mr Chairman, the pricing of the signs by the contractors is very similar to the way they deal with their subcontractors. The provider of the sign is actually a sub-contractor to China Harbour, so when the pricing comes in that is when China Harbour negotiates the rates for all the various bill items with the works agency," Hayles said.
Continuing, he said: "We normally do checks on these work orders before they go out, that is why we believe that the engagement of the independent consultant will also add some objectivity of the exercise."
Hayles said the NWA had done checks and determined that the cost per square foot is within market range.
"The only way to reduce the cost is to reduce the size of the signs or reduce the numbers, but the cost per square foot is within market range," he added.
coming under pressure
Meanwhile, the committee members told the representatives of the NWA and MTW it was important that the signs be erected in a timely manner because members of parliament were coming under pressure when signs were erected and no work was being done.
"I think the point was made rather strongly about putting up signs in a timely fashion when work is going to be done, rather than do it as some sort of public relations thing," he suggested.
According to McNeill, constituents were anticipating that roads would be repaired once signs were erected. Wong assured the committee that signs would be removed for projects that were not part of the year-one or year-two programmes.
"What we are going to do is put a year one or year two over the signs, and if that project goes into year three (because it's a five-year programme, you know), it will be noted," Wong said.
He said the commitment was there, but it was the timing of the work.
McNeill said the signs should not be erected if the repair work would not be done.
Wong assured the PAAC that projects that were being implemented would be the only ones with signs in the future.
Committee member Tarn Peralto asked the NWA to include year dates when they are erected which would suggest the year of work. The committee asked for greater communication between overseeing agencies and the constituencies so that the expectations of constituents can be met.