'Shine A Light': Transparency In Question

Some construction companies made money from rebuilding schools damaged by Tropical Cyclone Winston in 2016 because of the urgency to complete the projects on time.

The Construction Implementation Unit (CIU), through the evaluation and assistance of the lead consultants, awarded 213 tenders to 21 contractors.

Contractors included construction arms of hardware merchants, a lead consultant, general contractors, and small maintenance companies.

Several contractors were established just a few years before TC Winston struck Fiji, thus lacked the expertise, and only had experience in carrying out small construction and maintenance work.

One of the contractors, Kartika Construction Plumbing Services Limited, was awarded the tender in 2018 to carry out work on the $80 million Fiji National University Campus, which lay in ruins in Labasa.

(This article was covered in the Shine a Light column on April 2, 2022, titled "$80million Structure Far from Over'?.

In the construction industry, three factors are taken into consideration in a project - time, cost, and quality. If there is an urgent need to complete task at a certain period, then client (Government) is expected to pay more.

However, this should not impede the mandatory checks and balances when it comes to public funds.

Government spent $234.5 million in the construction phase of the rehabilitation of schools. In addition to this, $18.5 million was for the lead consultants fee claims.

The $234.5 million includes cost of new school structures that were not damaged by TC Winston.

Some of the small contractors we interviewed said they were still owed money, and lead consultants were to sign off on their payment certificates before it was released by CIU.

Construction Industry Council president Gordon Jenkins said there was no cost control, and some were overpaid.

Queen Victoria School in Tailevu suffered severe structural damage from TC Winston in February 2016.

He said the degree of transparency for all the project was questionable.

"That's what it should be. If it was all transparent, there wouldn't be a builder charging twice as much," he said.

Some of the small contractors we interviewed say their profit margin was little, compared to the volume and scope of work they were required to complete.

Mr Jenkins said during the project, there was a problem with getting suitable contractors onto some of the sites.

"There may be costs of working in remote areas, but not extra profit," he said.

"I know some people made some big money out of it, but it might've been because they were more efficient than anyone else."

SUBCONTRACTING

Ghandi Bhawan Memorial School manager Nilesh Chand said contractors made money without doing any work.

Mr Chand questioned the awarding of tenders to contractors that did not have the complete in-house expertise.

"The subcontracting of works was done without the main contractor carrying out any work," he said.

Vinod Patel and Works was the contractor for Ghandi Bhawan Memorial School.

Mr Chand was in disbelief when told about some of the cost of work for schools in the Western Division, saying that the damage only required remedial works, but there was a lot of variation work.

"The initial plan they did was just for the damaged main structures - steel works. When City Builders came to inspect, design included the structures that were not damaged by Winston - so this was the variation, and the engineers approved," he said.

Subcontractor, Lautoka-based City Builders, carried out work for Vinod Patel and Works on several projects in the Western Division.

City Builders owner Pravin Kumar said his company received $300,000 for Tavarau Bhartiya School; more than $130,000 for Ghandi Bhawan Memorial School; and more than $200,000 for Saru MGM Primary School.

"We were paid less than what we worked for. About $54,000 was deducted from our total contract sum for the three schools. We are unsure about how much the principal contractor received," Mr Kumar said.

"The late completion of the project was not our fault because we were handed the project late, and we were expected to finish the project within three weeks or risk not getting paid."

Hardware materials were purchased from Vinod Patel Company Limited for all the projects carried out by City Builders. Major hardware suppliers were also RC Manubhai, and Kasabias.

Roofing and Profiles (Fiji) Pte Limited, a subsidiary of RC Manubhai, was also awarded several tenders to carry out construction.

WHY SO MANY DAMAGED SCHOOLS?

TC Winston revealed the vulnerability of the school structures around Fiji. Schools were not built to withstand a Category five cyclone.

There were no engineers certificate recorded, nor were there any designs filed prior to 2016.

The FijiFirst Government's initial objective was for schools to withstand Category five cyclones - a costly exercise. But this was not the case as schools were designed to withstand Category three and four cyclones.

Mr Chand said no engineers certificate was issued to the schools upon completion of the work. Several school heads and managers we reached out to said they had no record of a completion or engineers' certificate.

It is understood that engineers' certificates were issued to the client (Government).

Permanent Secretary for Education Selina Kuruleca said information about schools were updated and kept with the ministry.

CONTRACTORS

Super Construction and Civil Works Pte Limited, and Golden Point Resort owner, Sunil Mishra, said they were still owed $60,000 for one of the projects they had completed.

Mr Mishra said they had approached the lead consultant, HLK Jacob, owned by Sanjay Kaba, but no payment was made.

"When we ask for payment, they say some works need to be done, but our retention period is only  six months, they were supposed to come to us within six months after the project completion, and not a f ter three t o four years," M r Mishra said.

"There problems with the designs done in the office resulting in changes, and some lead consultants were never on site until there's a progress payment claim."

Like some other contractors, Mr Mishra said they did not make much profit.

He said for some projects they would make five per cent profit and others two per cent or three per cent. Menon Construction Limited staff member Ashneel Chandra said contractors had to make money, but no that much.

Ram's Maintenance owner Dhani Ram said processes needed to be more transparent.

"Some places we quoted, the work was more than the money, resulting in some projects making little profit," Mr Ram said.

Ram's Maintenance was established in 2013 as a general construction company and maintenance work.

Executive member of Arjun Naidu Building Works Limited, Irene Chand, said they did not make much profit because they had to repay loans.

"Profit was not that much because from all the project because quality materials were required. I have seen profits in other projects, but not during Winston," Ms Chand said.

Chief executive officer for Basic Industries Ritesh Dass said the branch of Basic Industries that was awarded the tender was no longer in operation.

"Personnel affiliated with that division are no longer with Basic Industries. Please note, Basic Homes was not formed specifically for school rehab projects, but a general construction entity within Basic Industries," Mr Dass said.

These contractors carried out the work and only subcontracted when needed to and in other some instances employ more labourers.

PUBLIC MONEY

Mr Jenkins said public funds were spent without proper checks.

Millions of dollars in aid and public money were spent by the previous Government in rebuilding schools.

Mr Chand said some of the cost of the schools in the Western Division was exorbitant because there was not much damage, except for the roofing structures and windows.

NEXT WEEK: In our final edition of the TC Winston series next week, we will publish in full detail the initial approved amount of all projects, variations, and the revised amount.

Feedback: ivamere.nataro@fijisun.com.fj