…says same standard should apply for all parties
Public Infrastructure Minister David Patterson has reportedly submitted documents, including a written statement, to the Special Organised Crime Unit (SOCU) as part of investigations into the contract award of the controversial feasibility study for a new bridge over the Demerara River, but calls are being made for him to officially visit the offices of SOCU.
Opposition Member of Parliament (MP) Juan Edghill told Guyana Times on Sunday that the minister should not be given any special treatment, but must be made to face the proverbial music for his actions. He expressed concerns that Patterson is yet to appear before investigators at SOCU, whereas members of the former People’s Progressive Party (PPP) Cabinet were called in there for questioning in regard to the sale of land at Sparendaam (Pardoville 2), East Coast Demerara.
“It’s not that I want to see people go to jail, or this person become a criminal or be charged or convicted; I want to ensure that there is accountability and transparency, and the same rule that you are using against the previous Administration must also be used for you. The same measure (with which) you judge others you must also be judged. So Minister Patterson should not be escaping or sending in a statement; he must face the music,” the MP asserted.
The contract in question was awarded to Dutch company LievenseCSO for a feasibility study into the new Demerara River Bridge. The Opposition had requested that the Public Procurement Commission (PPC) investigate the award of the $148 million sole-sourced contract.
In its report on the matter, the PPC had flagged Patterson for requesting from Cabinet that the contract be sole-sourced, instead of being processed through the Procurement Board as the law says should be done. It was subsequently announced that SOCU would be investigating.
“Mr Patterson cannot be sitting in his office and dealing with the Police; Mr Patterson must be made to go down to SOCU as well! The cabinet, including President (David) Granger who presided at that illegal decision, must go down…because it was an unsolicited bid that the cabinet approved, (whereas) the cabinet has no power of approval of contracts that were offered to the contractors to do the feasibility study; so it was corruption from the beginning,” Edghill explained.










