Public Works

The way public works contracts in Anguilla are awarded.  The Anguilla Government is in the process of awarding contracts for the construction of a 500 metre “Runway End Safety Area” or “RESA” at Wallblake Airport.  The cost of constructing this safety area is expected to be in the range of EC$10,000,000.00 and upwards. 

I have learned that there will be no ‘bidding’ or ‘tendering’ for any of the contracts.  Instead, the Ministry of Infrastructure has divided the project up into several separate contracts, and proposes to share them out “equitably and without regard to politics” according to who’s got the required equipment.  Junior Fleming is on the list, but so is Greig Hughes.  That is supposed to mean that the process is fair and equitable!

As I understand it, the Ministry of Infrastructure will carve up the RESA project into, say, for the purposes of this discussion, 5 equal separate contracts, allocating prices to each of them.  As I understand the proposed “fair and equitable” award procedure, a Ministry of Infrastructure agent will go to Contractor A and say, “We have decided to award you Contract A for $2 million.  That is your fair share of the RESA project.  Do, you accept it?”  Contractor A does his sums.  Let us say he realises he will make a 50% profit.  Of course he says “Yes”.  The same happens with Contractors B, C, D and E.  Everybody is happy!

Now, let us look at how the tenders procedure was supposed to work.  Suppose that there are several Anguillian contractors, all equally competent and qualified.  Suppose they are all interested in one or more of those 5 separate contracts.  Say, Contractor A studies the tender documents for one of the contracts, and thinks he could do it for $2 million, and make his profit.  Contractor B might have fewer overheads than Contractor A, and concludes that he could do it for $1.8 million.  Unknown to them both, Contractor C is prepared to shave his profits down, and he puts in his bid at $1.5 million.  All qualified Anguillian contractors put in their various bids.  Their bids are opened by the Tenders Board.  The Board awards the contract to the most competitive bidder, in this case Contractor C. 

Public works contracts are not supposed to be awarded by government officials to chosen recipients at a price determined on a Heaven-alone-knows-what basis.  Government contracts are supposed to be bid on competitively.  The correct and proper process is called ‘tendering’ for government contracts.  The mandate of the Tenders Board is to protect the public purse in the award of public works contracts.  The independence and procedure of the Tenders Board is meant to be guaranteed by a statute.  The Tenders Board is not expected to act like anybody’s pet poodle.  They are not supposed to award contracts on the basis of whether they will get government the most favourable publicity and popularity.  Their duty is to select the bid that will be in the best interests of the people. 

Tendering is the only known and proven way for government to be transparent and accountable in the award of public works contracts.  Tendering for public works contracts happens in every Commonwealth Caribbean country, except Anguilla. 

In my view, the procedure that government intends to follow in awarding these major pre-election airport contracts is the opposite of fair, transparent and accountable.  The award procedure may be politically safe and popular with the contractors.  But, it is not fair to the consumer, that is, to you and me.  It is a system of pre-selecting contractors that must by its nature and effect be the opposite of fair, transparent and accountable.  If you want all 5 contractors to have a fair chance at each of the 5 contracts, let them bid on each one of them.  Let the best bid win in each case.  That is fair, transparent and accountable.

Let the contractors do what they are supposed to do.  Let them compete for public works contracts.  Award each contract to the one with the best offer.  The present system reminds me of a dog-owner handing out treats to his pets.  It is a contemptible failure of a system. 

The procedure proposed for the award of the RESA contracts rewards the inefficient.  It punishes the public by failing to ensure the best bang for the buck.  No doubt, it has evolved partly out of ignorance of the proper procedure.  It has also evolved partly to ensure that the party in power is popular among all the contractors who are invited to do public works contracts.  They each control a lot of votes.  In the case of the RESA project, no one notices that $10 million is going to be paid out for contracts that may really only be worth $7 million. 

Consider this.  Not all public works projects are this big.  Not every project can be divided up into separate contracts and shared out to several contractors.  There have been hundreds of smaller contracts over the years that have been awarded to pre-selected contractors.  Tell me why this should not be described as an intrinsically corrupt system.

Consider this also, how many of our politicians have brothers, sons, and campaign managers who are either building contractors or heavy equipment contractors?  How many Anguillian politicians have shares in construction companies?  Do these politicians allow Public Works to treat their companies in the same way as all other Anguillian contractors in the award of public works contracts?  They would have to be all angels for that to have happened!

And, yes, the procurement process, even when protected by statute, can be corrupted by crooked contractors, public servants and politicians.  At least then we know who to prosecute.  Under our present weak and inefficient system, no one commits a crime while doing the same thieving and wasting of public funds.

Meanwhile, may the public see a copy of the Medium-Term Air Transport Sector Plan 2004-2008 done in connection with EDF9?

Related posts:

RESA - 18 October 2009

Construction - 13 October 2009

FCO Response - 2 October 2009

Airport - 23 August 2009

PAC - 28 May 2009

Airport News - 24 May 2009

Airport Costs - 21 May 2009

RESA

The extension to be constructed at the east of the Wallblake Airport is called a “Runway End Safety Area”.  The safety regulators have banned small jet aircraft from landing in Anguilla until the required RESA has been put in place.  Many of Anguilla’s richest visitors arrive for their vacations in such small jets.  The upcoming Christmas tourism season will be adversely impacted if we do not complete this construction in time.

Wikipedia has a good explanation what a RESA is all about. 

Government is quite desperate to have the RESA built in time for the upcoming tourism season.  They are not even waiting until it is announced that the British Government has agreed to the necessary borrowing of funds to finance the project.  Word came to me that Government has already begun awarding the contracts for the construction to heavy-equipment operators. 

Someone sent me some photographs of the work that has begun.  The photos were taken today, Sunday.  They give some idea of the extent of the work that will have to be done, and what has been started so far.

Photo of the eastern end of the runway, indicating the steep drop-off that will have to be filled and graded

Another photo of the eastern end of the runway showing the steep drop-off

Someone has started to move a lot of heavy equipment on site.

More heavy equipment

Yet more heavy equipment

The bush east of the runway is being cleared

Land is being cleared and holes are being dug to extract marl and boulders

Huge amounts of fill will have to be moved from higher up the hillside to create the safety area lower down

Holes are being dug in several places, and the marl piled up

Rumour has it that Government expects to fill in the steep drop-off to the east of the airport for the sum of EC$10 million. 

It looks to me like it will cost much more than that.

FCO Response

Minister Chris Bryant has responded.  Over the past six months we have been looking at our Government’s response to the international financial crisis that we find ourselves embroiled in.  Common sense dictates that we should be doing two things. 

One, Government should be seriously reducing expenses, not increasing them.  

Second, Government should be enabling and enforcing its tax collection. 

The first is a given.  The second is the problem.  Most taxes in Anguilla are treated by politicians, business persons and the general citizenry as optional or voluntary.  Smuggling is rife.  Payment of tax is generally considered a favour to government, not an obligation.  Avoidance and outright evasion is not just a citizen’s right, but a national sport. 

The question has frequently been asked why is the government so hesitant to prosecute delinquent tax payers and enforce the law.  The answer has always been that the government has no desire to ‘criminalise’ citizens for such activities.  In the case of water bills, it has been publicly stated that up to 70% of the water is either being lost through breaks in the pipes or it is being stolen through illegal connections.  Up to this date, never in the history of Anguilla has any water thief ever been prosecuted.  There are a score of other examples that could be given of our lax attitude to tax collection. 

In conclusion, tax collection in Anguilla is inconceivably lax.

Over the past year, government has used up all of its credit balances at the banks.  The public accounts now stand overdrawn and over spent to an extent that exceeds our borrowing guidelines agreed with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office some years ago. 

During that time, Government has repeatedly applied to the FCO for a relaxing of the guidelines to permit us to borrow and spend our way out of the crisis.  The FCO has been digging in its heels.  They have responded to Government that they cannot give an open-ended consent to permit us to increase borrowing in three or four different specific loan amounts to an aggregate of nearly $100 million.  One of the proposed loans has been for an amount of $49 million.  Another is for an amount of about $10 million to extend the airport. 

The British have responded that they will agree to relax the borrowing guidelines only if the Government of Anguilla meets two conditions: 

One, Government must present a plan for reducing expenditure to meet revenue. 

Two, Government must indicate how it proposes to increase revenue to meet the increased proposed borrowing. 

From what I understand, Government has been pretending not to understand these two conditions.  In each renewed application it has merely repeated its request with more and more reasons why it needs the money. 

Then, two weeks ago, Government made gave the FCO an ultimatum, either let us borrow or else!  We have not been shown the contents of this letter.  We have been waiting with baited breath to see what the FCO response will be.  Now, a correspondent has sent me a transcript of yesterday’s letter from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to the Government of Anguilla in response to our request to relax the borrowing guidelines.  It reads [I don’t guarantee the accuracy of the re-typing]:

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

Hon Chief Minister
Anguilla

ANGUILLA: PUBLIC FINANCES

Thank you for your letters of 14 September and 21 September which followed up your telephone conversation with Colin Roberts.

I appreciate the efforts your government is making to address the issues I outlined in my letter of 27 July. I assure you that I consider each Territory's requests very much on an individual and case by case basis. However, I must act prudently when considering your request for additional borrowing at this time when Anguilla is already in breach of the agreed UK/Anguilla borrowing guidelines.

I welcome the commitment you have made towards cutting public expenditure, including a Public Service pay cut. However, there has been less progress in plans to broaden Anguilla's revenue base. Is the absence of such plans, including details on how existing and any further debt will be paid back over the next 3-5 years and your planned changes to Anguilla's taxation policy, I cannot agree to your entire borrowing request.

I am however, prepared to agree, exceptionally, to the government of Anguilla borrowing EC$20m to cover the recurrent deficit over the next six months, providing that you commit now to the introduction of new revenue measures, no later than the beginning of FY 2010-2011, to broaden your revenue base as identified by an independent study to analyse the impact on public finances of a range of new taxes and/or initiatives. This study will be funded by the FCO with the Terms of Reference agreed jointly by the Government of Anguilla and the FCO with a view to having consultants in Anguilla as soon as possible.

I am ready to consider further borrowing requests once we have discussed the findings of this study.

However, given the particular circumstances of your requests to include provision to finance a proposed runway extension at Wallblake Airport I would be happy to consider that separately, once I have received a comprehensive business case which makes clear the impact of the reduction in the declared runway length and any consequent loss of revenue to Anguilla.

I look forward to your confirmation that these conditions are acceptable to your Government.

Yours sincerely

Chris Bryant

What do we take away from a reading of this letter? 

One, the application to borrow the full amount of $49 million is turned down. 

Two, only an amount of $20 million will be permitted, and only if we can meet the condition imposed.  That condition is that the government commit now to new revenue measures to be imposed on the Anguillian taxpayer no later than in the upcoming financial year.  That is, starting in January, three months from now.  That is, three months before the constitutionally due general elections.  Further, these new tax measures will not be decided on by the Anguilla government or House of Assembly. They will be decided on by an independent consultant who has the unlimited power to identify the new revenue measures. 

Three, even the application to borrow a sum of money to extend the airport is refused for the time being.  We will remember that we are required to have the airport extended by some 500 feet.  This has been laid down by new safety regulations imposed by the new regulatory body headquartered in Tortola.  Many private jets land in Anguilla during the Christmas season.  The movie stars arrive for their vacations.  Without this extension, jets will be prevented from landing, thus delivering a blow to Anguilla’s tourism industry.  The letter says that the proposed borrowing will be permitted only if Government presents a comprehensive business case making clear the impact of the reduction in the airport length and the consequent loss of revenue to Anguilla.

One would have thought that the need to include such basic information in the application to borrow would have been apparent to Government from the beginning.  Can you imagine going to your bank with an application to borrow millions of dollars without presenting the bank with your business plan showing the state of the business and how you propose to use the additional money?

Somebody calling himself “Anguilla Express” claims this is a major victory for the Government Ministers.

In my humble opinion, all these fellows are jokers.

Airport

Who is going to get blamed over the airport report? The announcement from the Minister of Finance came like a thunderbolt out of a clear sky. He told us on Tuesday that Anguilla’s lone airport had been disqualified “with immediate effect” for use by 80% of the private jets presently using it. Many of our Sillermans and other up-market visitors arrive in their own or hired jets. Some of them have already been diverted to St Maarten, and made to commute to Anguilla like any common man on the street. They must all be very upset with us.

Then, I get an e-mail. It reads [after some minor amendments]:

This runway extension matter is a real crisis. Government knew about it five years ago, told the civil aviation people they'd take care of it, then did nothing. CAA or whatever it's called said OK, we'll waive the requirement for the extra 500 feet for now. (This affects 70% of the private jets that land here.)

Now CAA has come back and said you promised to fix the problem but you've done nothing, so we're enforcing the regulations starting with immediate effect. And GOA have somehow found $12 million to do the job. PWD will coordinate it. God help Anguilla.

So the geniuses at PWD are going to play "Project Engineer." It's a disaster waiting to happen.

So they are out looking for marl, a LOT of it. There is extremely little left at the crown land at Corito so one genius wants to truck it in from West End. The cost, dirt, dust, traffic and noise would be horrendous.

I read the e-mail with alarm. The real story in it is whether it is true that this emergency is not something unexpected, but something we were warned about years ago when the airport was being extended. If so, were we careless about complying with the relevant airport authority regulations? If so, who is to blame?

Another important implication is whether our leaders will now say that it is such an emergency that there is no time to go through the normal tendering process designed to ensure there is no graft. Would they then hand out contracts to friends and supporters, leaving out of the process the likes of Grieg Hughes?

My concern is that procurement remains one of the soft spots in any West Indian government’s vulnerable underbelly of transparency and integrity.

I have checked these questions with the Department of Infrastructure. They assure me that the Department will follow GoA policies and procedures for the procurement of services, labour and material for this project. They promise they will review and approve the procurement methodologies to ensure integrity. They assure me that they take pride in ensuring that the project will be able to stand up to national and international scrutiny from a technical, engineering, financial, and management perspectives.

I hope so. It will be a fresh start. After all, they have not always done it before. There are no accounts and no reports published for the now 4-year old airport extension. No member of the public knows who got the tens of millions spent on that project.

Ask the Hon Edison Baird if you don’t believe me.

What is this about $12 million? I thought we were brokes!

And, do we have any confidence that the up-to-now secret GoA policies and procedures for tendering services, labour and materials have any integrity?

Related Posts:

26 February 2008 - Procurement

PAC

What else could Hon Edison Baird have done to get the Airport accounts? In late 2003 the government of Anguilla budgeted $60 million to extend the Wallblake airport. Fritz Smith, recently appointed Treasurer of the governing United Front political party, and nephew of the Hon Chief Minister, was the Project Manager.

Fritz Smith

With the expansion of the airport, several houses at both ends of the extended runway were condemned. Negotiations with the owners were happily concluded. New houses were said to have been built elsewhere on the island for some of the owners. Some people got land, others got money, and yet others got house and land.

In August 2008, Eddie Baird applied in the House of Assembly by way of a question to the Minister of Finance for an accounting of the expenditure on these replacement houses. The Minister promised to present it to him shortly. The accounts were not forthcoming.

Victor Banks, Minister of Finance

At a sitting of the House on 10 February 2009, Mr Baird complained to the Speaker that he still had not received the answer to the question he had asked.

A month later, responding to another question from Mr Baird in the House on 19 March 2009, Mr Banks put off producing the information until mid-July at the earliest.

Subsequently, in an open letter to the Chief Minister published in The Anguillian newspaper on 14 April, Brent Davis, leader of the Anguilla Progressive Party, demanded the same information. His first four questions give the flavour of the issues that are agitating the public:

“1) What was the initial estimated cost of the Wallblake expansion project?

2) How many individual payments were made to persons for properties such as dwelling houses, other buildings and lands?

3) Were there exchanges of Government lands with any individuals associated with the project?

4) How many persons are still in possession of their original properties, although they have already benefited monetarily or received lands in what should have been an exchange?”

We already know that a Freedom of Information Act would make all this delaying by the Minister impossible. If we had such an Act, Mr Davis would be able to demand the information. The relevant government officers would not be able to fob him off. If they tried to stall, a court would make the necessary order. The civil servant or politician refusing to comply would face imprisonment for contempt. Are there any additional tools available to members of the House of Assembly? What about the Public Accounts Committee?

The Legislative Assembly (Procedure) Rules 1976 are the rules and regulations that govern the House of Assembly. They provide for a PAC. Rule 66A explains that this is a Standing Committee of the House. It is supposed to be established at the beginning of each session of the House, and it continues through adjournments. The Rule says it consists of at least 3 and not more than 5 members. It is drawn from both sides of the House. Its chairperson is the Leader of the Opposition. It requires a resolution of the Minister of Finance to set it up, and the resolution must be approved by the House. That is not an obstacle. It would take a very careless Minister of Finance to reject a proposal by the Opposition to appoint the members of the PAC. If the Opposition does not demand a PAC, the Minister is probably not going to go out of his way to establish a watchdog to check on how he is performing his duties. So, it is up to the Opposition to take the first step, and demand the setting up of the PAC. They have never done so. There has never in the history of Anguilla been a Public Accounts Committee established to oversee the government’s expenditure of public funds.

The Committee has work to do. It is supposed to check that the funds spent by government have been spent for the purposes prescribed by the House. It has the mandate to look out for any expenditure that has not been authorised. It can demand to know what savings have been made elsewhere to enable over-expenditure in any area of the budget. It is mandated to make “an effective examination” of the public accounts. It can summon any civil servant to give information on any expenditure by any Department of Government. The Rules contemplate that the Committee may demand office space and secretarial help in carrying out its functions.

Rule 68 provides that any witness before the Committee may be examined in the same way as a witness before the Supreme Court. The Committee may hire an attorney to do the cross-examining if they wish. The witness is sworn to tell the truth. You know what that means? Any witness telling a lie is likely to face a perjury charge. The last time I checked, the maximum penalty for perjury was ten years imprisonment. Which civil servant who knows about some wrongful expenditure is gong to hide it and risk ten years imprisonment?

The House of Assembly is supposed to be the guardian of the public funds. The fact that it does not function at all suggests to me that members of the House have abdicated this responsibility that they owe to the public.

Edison Baird, Member of the House of Assembly

If the Opposition had done its job and demanded that the Minister call for the setting up of the PAC, Eddie Baird would not have to be begging the Minister for these figures. He would be able to summon Fritz Smith before a sitting of the Committee and grill him on what exactly was spent on whom.

Airport News

With a Freedom of Information Act, Hon Edison Baird would long ago have been able to get the information he has been asking for. The purpose of an FOI Act is to ensure transparency and integrity in public life. So long as public servants and ministers can keep official government business hidden from view, corruption and waste is encouraged. If we had such a law in Anguilla, opposition member of the Anguilla House of Assembly, Eddie Baird, would not have to be pleading with the Minister of Finance to share with us the figures on how much money government has spent on re-housing the people displaced by the airport expansion project. The Minister would not be able to keep stalling from handing over the information, and copies of all the documents related to and supporting the information.

We have all been following the recent debacle in the British House of Commons. I wonder how many of us have recognised the important part that the Freedom of Information Act played in exposing the shenanigans of those parliamentarians?

In the UK, Members of Parliament are expected to live in or near London. If they come from a far-away constituency that means renting or purchasing a second home near Parliament. They are permitted to claim for the expense. A journalist, Heather Brooke, requested of the Speaker’s office copies of “second homes expenses” claimed by Members of Parliament.

Heather Brooke

The Speaker refused to give her the copies of the expense claim forms that she was asking for.

House of Commons

So, she took the case to court under the Freedom of Information Act. She won the case. The court ordered the Speaker’s Office to hand over the information. Before it could be officially handed over, someone leaked the information to the Daily Telegraph Newspaper. The newspaper has gleefully been publishing all the outrageous claims for expenses made by members of all three major parties.

• Elliot Morley, a former Labour Environment Minister, claimed ₤16,000.00 in mortgage interest for more than 18 months after paying off the loan.

• Fabian Hamilton declared his mother’s London house as his main residence, allowing him to claim allowance for his real home.

• John Maples, deputy chairman of the Tory party, declared a room in his private members’ club in Pall Mall has his main home, allowing him to claim allowances on his real home.

Some MPs have been so embarrassed by these revelations that they have announced they will not run again in the next elections. Others have been forced to resign from official positions. The police are investigating to see if any crimes have been committed.

The press and public were up in arms at the efforts of the Speaker, Michael Martin, to suppress the information. Now, even he has announced that he will resign his office, the first Speaker in 300 years to be forced from office.

Hon Michael Martin

The Prime Minister has concluded that Parliament must no longer be permitted to run its own financial affairs. These matters will in future be handled by independent regulators. They will determine even what salary Members of Parliament will be paid.

In future, no sleazy UK politician will be safe from the details of his corruption being revealed to the public.

It is not an exaggeration to say that this scandal has created a revolution in how the British are governed.

All because of the Freedom of Information Act.

Who says we do not need such a law in Anguilla?

Related posts:

12 May 2009: Airport Costs

21 July 2008: Barbados

19 July 2008: FOI Act

4 April 2007: Freedom of Information

Airport Costs

How can we ever find out before the next elections what money the government paid out in airport expenses? A couple of days ago, I heard Edison Baird on radio again. He was complaining that for the past several months he had been requesting information in the House of Assembly of Victor Banks, the Minister of Finance. He wanted an accounting of how much money the government had spent on re-housing the persons who had been displaced by the airport expansion project of a couple of years ago. I have heard him ask for this information several times in the House of Assembly. Each time, the Minister promises him that it will be forthcoming shortly. A couple of months pass, and Mr Baird complains again. Mr Baird has now explained why he wants this information. He has reason to believe that some favoured home-owners have been paid much more in compensation than their houses were worth. He is suggesting that there was corruption, or at least favouritism, in the way government largesse was dispensed in the airport expansion project.

You may well ask if this is the way the country is supposed to be run. Is it proper for a Member of the House of Assembly to be denied this information? No, of course not. But, what is equally sad, it seems to me, is that no one is discussing how this information is supposed to be got. This information concerns public funds. How public funds are spent is not confidential or secret information. It is supposed to be public knowledge. Mr Baird should not have to be begging the Minister to do him the favour of sharing this information with him. Mr Baird is not only entitled to this information, there ought to be the tools in place available for him to get it when the Minister stalls him. These tools are well known. They are (1) the Public Accounts Committee; and (2) the Freedom of Information Act.

This duet of tools is designed to ensure that how government spends public funds is published. The first is available only to members of the House of Assembly. The second is supposed to be available to all of us members of the public. We don’t seem seriously interested in putting these tools in place in Anguilla. To get a Public Accounts Committee, all that is necessary is for the members of the House to take the necessary steps to have the Speaker establish the Committee. To get a FOI Act passed, all that is necessary is for a Bill to be produced and passed into law. If the government won’t introduce a Bill, any member can do so.

Why do we not have these two instruments at work in Anguilla? Could it be because our elected politicians are not really interested in good governance? Is it that they are not really concerned whether or not public funds are being mis-spent? Am I just being cynical to think that their concern is that they are not the ones in power mis-spending public funds. In other words, might it be just that they wish that they could have been the ones with their hands on the levers of public expenditure?

If that is so, then Mr Baird will be quite content to continue to raise the question ineffectually. He will repeatedly suggest that there was some questionable expenditure. He won’t actually need an answer to his question. It is a political tactic, of ancient West Indian heritage, to suggest by innuendo that government has mis-spent public funds. It helps if the Minister adds fuel to the fire by not producing the information requested in a prompt and through manner. The idea is not to bring information out into the public. The real intent is to sow suspicion about the honesty and integrity of your political foes in order to gain a political advantage with discontented voters.

I would prefer it if the matter was dealt with seriously.

It is the political party that promises a Freedom of Information Act within 100 days of coming to power that I will support. It is the party that espouses an Integrity in Public Life Act and a Register of Interests for members of the House of Assembly, that I am looking for. It is the party that promises to establish the Public Accounts Committee to check on the way in which they spend public funds that will demonstrate their worthiness to govern this country. I suspect that it is only the Anguilla Progressive Party that will seriously place these on the agenda. None of the other political parties have expressed any interest in this issue.

These laws and procedures are in place all over the Commonwealth. It will take no time at all to produce suitable versions for Anguilla. A competent legal draughtsman, of whom we have several, could produce Anguillian drafts in weeks if not days.

Access Tsar

Hon Donna Banks “Access Tsar” of Anguilla. There was much hoopla when we read in the 12 January edition of The Anguillian: “If all goes well, as planned, there will be a solution in the near future to the difficulty of full airlift from Puerto Rico into Wallblake Airport, Anguilla.” Great news.

But then I read on: “Hon Banks spoke about certain guarantees which the Anguilla Government were expected to meet in accordance with the new flight arrangements to the island.” Oh-oh – this sounds expensive, I thought.

I continued to read: “Replying to a question, Ms Banks said that the start of the service was being promoted for February 14 and it was hoped that Kirby Hodge would be in a position to secure the necessary finances for the aircraft. It is understood that such a 1900 D Turboprop Beechcraft would cost in the region of three million US dollars.”

Now the article really had my attention – How was Mr. Hodge going to find financing in today’s current economic climate? And, US$3 million for a turboprop plane? Sounds pretty expensive to me. And, service starting in one month when there is no financing, FAA clearance, insurance – not even a plane?

I thought I’d better investigate.

It turns out that the press release was only what the public was being told – there was actually a “secret” committee sending out “secret” emails that told a totally different story. At a board meeting on 13 January, after suitable prayers for direction by Anguilla’s Access Tsar, the Hon Donna Banks, an Air Services Development Programme was agreed by those present. It was decided to call a general meeting of the members of the Anguilla Hotel and Tourism Association for 21 January to try to persuade them to agree on the funding of the purchase of this aeroplane. It was also agreed to recommend funding of US$4.3 million for operating costs, with US$3.87 million, or US$322,500 per month, guaranteed by the government of Anguilla.

According to the plan, Cap Juluca, CuisinArt, Viceroy, and Island Dream Properties will pay the lion’s share of financing this private airline. But, restaurants and “allied members” will too.

It is appropriate for a number of questions to be asked in these very difficult times. Aircraft are being repossessed left and right. What is the great urgency in grabbing this wonderful offer before someone else does? Why the pressure for an instant decision? Why not just lease an aircraft instead of purchasing one?

Anguilla does not usually issue contracts of this size without competitive bidding. There are several Anguillians who can operate air services. Have they been invited to put in a bid? Is the Anguilla Tourism Board not required by law to use the Tenders Board before they can give out contracts to whoever smiles at them and talks sweetly?

And, why give this "no bid" contract and revenue to a Charlotte Amalie company? Would it not be better for all of us to give the contract to a locally based business? That would keep the revenue as well as all the ancillary support business for ourselves.

Even if Rainbow is a great option, should not the members of the AHTA be given the opportunity to explore all options before the Access Tsar presents them with a fait accomplis and literally hands them the pen to sign on the dotted line?

Why try to mortgage all the little hotels in Anguilla? Just so we can have what amounts to a national airline? Do these people not know the history of national airlines in the West Indies? Have they already forgotten the enormous deficits they have incurred for the governments and people that have guaranteed their expenses?

How is Kirby Hodge going to get financing for a venture like this when no one else is getting financing for anything? How is he going to get the ‘plane purchased, insured, FAA clearances, and landing and gate clearances in 30 days for a February 14 start up? If they are lucky, by the time this is all set up, the season will be over.

And, what happens when in one month’s time American Eagle says, “We are adding two more flights to Anguilla”, and drops the fare? Does this fellow get a free ‘plane when the service goes bankrupt?

Does the Tourist Board think that setting up a service like this is like buying a used car? You just get a licence and off you go? What have they been smoking?

Even if it was a private enterprise, with no backing from anyone, these ventures take years to show a profit. Does Donna really think there will be 38 people just waiting to get on this ‘plane’s two flights? And, that the same thing will be repeated every day, for ever? And, Anguilla is expected to guarantee Mr Hodge US$8,000.00 per trip, or US$16,000.00 per day?

Has ExCo already approved this initiative?

Is there pressure to announce the service, which does not yet exist, at the upcoming New York marketing meeting?

Posts on various Anguilla forums indicate that the Rainbow International service was formally “announced” before Christmas. It has already reached an international audience.

Two postings on Anguilla Guide indicate that at least they are not taking people’s money. So, Islander posts, “Has anyone actually booked seats on Rainbow at the above rates? I am hearing conflicting stories about the reality of this new service?” Then, Beach Court Villa posts, “With great anticipation, I contacted Rainbow International Airways to purchase seats for the SJU-AXA legs. To my great disappointment, the hoped-for start date of around February 12, 2009 will not be realised. No one there would venture to estimate a new start date, which leads me to fear that it is quite some way off. What a shame for the owners and for all of us whose schedules have been so disrupted by AA and AE.”

All I can say is, this seems to me like a disaster waiting to happen.

But, according to Ms Banks, this is all secret. It is not for “public consumptions [sic]” by persons other than those designated to be on the committee.

Maybe, this will all come out when we get our new Freedom of Information Act?