Mass transit system
The Trinidad Guardian
Port
Spain
Petroleumworldtt.com
01 07 07
Association
of Professional Engineers of Trinidad and Tobago
(Apett) has no intention of resorting to attacking
personalities, in its war with Works Minister Colm
Imbert over the manner in which he is approaching
the monorail project.
Instead,
according to Apett President Marc Francois, they
will continue to hammer away at the minister’s
procedural errors, such as pursuing the multi-billion
dollar project without a detailed feasibility study.
Q:
Mr Francois, if we are to believe your group of
professionals, the Ministry of Works is going ahead
with this monorail project, not knowing what they
are doing?
A:
[In the open air porch of his St Ann’s mountainside
home last Wednesday]. Well, I think they have ideas
of what they are getting into, but you don’t
embark on spending upwards of $15 billion of taxpayers’
money without a specific feasibility study of the
particular project.
Are
you saying, or suggesting, that the ministry, more
so the minister, did not carry out such a basic
exercise?
No
specific feasibility study for the mass transit
system.
None
whatsoever?
None
whatsoever.
I
find this hard to believe; and are you sure you
have all your information correct?
What
we do know is that there have been various reports
done. For instance, a Canadian did one on the East-West
Corridor...
The
minister said successive administrations had reports
dealing with this matter and...
They
have things like this, [displaying a pile of documents
in a file folder] a concept paper. This is the most
recent prepared by an Indian firm, Rites Ltd, and
we have no idea who commissioned it.
Did
it just drop from the sky?
[Half
smiling]. We do not know where it dropped from,
and this is the report the minister recently quoted
from. It was done by the Indian government in 2003,
and was submitted here as a rapid rail system for
Trinidad. But this, [quickly thumbing through it]
is not a feasibility study.
To
the uninitiated, can you
describe
what this
feasibility
study should reveal?
The
traffic routes, how many passengers would be moving
in particular areas at any given time, the cost
benefits, land acquisition. When the passengers
get into Port-of-Spain, how do they get to their
final destination?
As
a professional body, we know when you intend to
spend this vast sum of money, you should have this
study to be presented at a stakeholders’ consultation,
where the population can understand how this large
expenditure is going to benefit them.
Mr
Francois, can you briefly give Apett’s fundamental
objection to the rail system?
I
want to say, Clevon, we are not objecting to a rail
system at all. What we are objecting to is going
forward to procure an entire planning, design construction
train supply project without doing the feasibility
study.
You
need to look at the whole picture in terms of options
before you procure the contractor to build this
monorail system.
What
are some of the dangers you foresee, if such a project
should become a reality?
Well,
again, the biggest problem that we see is the huge
capital expenditure and the recurrent expenditure;
whether it is sustainable, if we are going to get
the people to use the rail. You have a lot of maxi-taxi
operators who are going to be affected; you have
a lot more private cars since the foreign used market
was opened up.
And
what is going to force those people to leave their
cars at home when they have to drop their kids at
various destinations? What is going to convince
them to use any form of mass transit rather than
their own vehicles?
Didn’t
the minister say the country would be recovering
the capital expenditure over a period of years?
[Eyes
lit up and sipping ginger beer in the humid mid-morning
atmosphere]. Wow! I would love to see the feasibility
study that says that. Please, Mr
Minister,
let us see it, please. [Laughs].
We
come back to this wretched feasibility question,
and are you accusing the minster of talking pie
in the sky stuff here?
I
am not accusing the minister of anything other than
not following the directions of his Prime Minister,
our recommendations and the recommendations of the
Rites report that he is quoting from.
This
says in part: “The economic rate of returns
for a rapid rail transit system is worked out using
discounted cash flow techniques?
“For
the Trinidad light rail transit system, the economic
analysis has not been carried out.”
This
is the last report, [pointing to the document] before
the draft national transportation plan, which nobody,
except, perhaps, the Prime Minister and a few others,
has seen.
Mr
Francois, do you really believe the Minister of
Works can act independently of the Prime Minister
on such an important project; and doesn’t
Imbert have the tacit support of his boss?
I
don’t know. I am not a politician. I don’t
understand how it works, and I don’t understand
their process. My major concern is that they do
exactly what is recommended in the Rites report,
which is that you do a detailed feasibility study.
Somebody
else raised this important issue of transparency
and the fact that...
[Interrupting].
That is largely being handled by the Joint Consultative
Council (JCC), and we at Apett have taken a position
that the JCC is more technically capable of dealing
with the Government on that extremely important
issue.
To
the average layman, transparency conjures up things
like bobol and corruption. Is this being factored
into your concerns about the lack of a feasibility
study?
What
I want to say is that Apett has chosen to deal with
the issue of the feasibility study and the issues
of transparency, and the procurement that is underway
is being attacked by the JCC who, I have been informed,
is getting a legal opinion on the procurement process.
The
minister indicated that 90 per cent of the people
want the rail system. I interpret that to mean all
you too dam farse to interfere...?
[Folding
up carefully the file]. Well, I think 90 per cent
of the people want a safe country, a good mass transit
system.
I
like that... a safe country... continue?
A
good health system, good education. Ninety per cent
of the country would absolutely want that; whether
90 per cent of the population has evaluated whether
rail will bring us the fastest relief in traffic
that we can afford and sustain in the days that
oil and gas may not be king.
Have
we looked at that?
Do
90 per cent of the country know that at the end
of the day how much of their money is being spent,
and if there are alternatives that may be more cost-effective?
From
your vantage point, Mr Francois, what sort of pitfalls
we are heading for if the Government goes ahead
with the project without the feasibility study?
One
major pitfall is that we are committing to something
without evaluating; that must have pitfalls in it.
Huge financial expenditure and a lack of understanding
of the number of people that will use it.
We
don’t even know where the line will be put
down; which in itself is another major consideration.
Finally,
Mr Francois, based on the minister’s position,
is Apett optimistic the Government would accede
to what sounds to be a reasonably request?
I
wouldn’t say the minister’s statements,
but the Prime Minister should be listening to the
views of the population...
How
could you simply dismiss the minister just like
that?
[Smiling].
I do not think the minister intends to change his
mind on this one, and we will just continue to say
what we think is right.
What
if you are proven wrong?
If
we are proven wrong, we will be happy, but what
is happening now is not the correct process in arriving
at the right track.
And
as far as I know, Apett has no intention to discontinue
speaking to the public on this very crucial matter.
The
Trinidad Guardian
Sunday 31st, December, 2006
Copyright©2005-2006
Trinidad Publishing Company Limited.
All Rights Reserved.
