This is my interview on the Invaders’ Bay issues with Rennie Bishop on 107.7FM on Sunday, 27 November 2016 on the radio programme Brunch. Video courtesy TTRN -Trinidad and Tobago Radio Network Limited.
I did an excellent radio show with some vibrant young colleagues from TTTI on the morning of Sunday, 13 November 2016 on Boom Champions 94.1FM. The topic of discusson was “Sweet T&T or corrupt nation?: Revealing the truths on a corrupt state of affairs. Audio courtesy Boom Champions 94.1 FM
Parts 1-5
This my interview with Vernon O’Reilly Ramesar on ‘One on One’ on IETV Wednesday 23rd November 2016 to discuss Invaders’ Bay and the CL Financial bailout fiasco. Video courtesy ieTV.
This is a short interview I did with SKY 99.5FM on Tuesday 22nd November 2016 with Jessie-May Ventour and Edison Carr to discuss the Invaders’ Bay developments. Audio courtesy Sky 99.5 FM
The HDC launched its first housing Public Private Partnership (PPP) on 3 November 2016 at Mahogany Court, a 160-apartment complex at Eastern Main Road, Mount Hope. It is being designed, financed and built, at a cost of $145M, by NH International, led by my erstwhile friend and colleague, Emile Elias, with completion due in December 2018.
The PPP approach to public procurement is one in which the private sector assumes the risks and constructs a project with repayment of that investment taking place over a period of time, usually from the State’s recurrent expenditure. This a controversial public procurement method, with the detailed reviews of completed projects being heavily criticised for the fact that the private sector has not actually taken much risk. It seems that these contracts often contain provisions which shield the private sector from serious risks. The introduction of PPP into our public housing program therefore deserves careful scrutiny, if we are to avoid the serious losses experienced in more advanced jurisdictions.
This PPP uses no Public Money, the State’s only investment being the value of the land, which was not mentioned thus far. The approach was outlined at pg 31 of the 2017 budget as being one in which the contractor will provide short-term finance to design and construct new homes, which will then be purchased by approved applicants on the HDC’s waiting-list. Those purchases will be funded by TTMF and the purchase prices will be used to repay the contractor. Continue reading “Property Matters – Examining the PPP”
This is my video update on the continued suppression of details on the CL Financial fiasco. Where is the Colman Report? Will the Government ever release the details of this $25 BILLION bailout? Who got paid?
Programme Date: 15 November 2016
Programme Length: 08:30
Further details on property tax are needed to understand the process and possibilities arising from its implementation. The 2010 estimate of revenue from that tax was $325M, as against a 2017 estimate of $503M, so it seems that there has been some allowance for inflation and new properties.
The innate effectiveness of this tax is that property is an immovable asset, so those persons and companies which are now evading other taxes will be unable to escape this new tax on the various properties in their ownership.
Property owners will be required to provide details of their properties to the Ministry of Finance so that the valuation process can be started. Owners who fail to provide details will have their properties valued without their input. The only efficient method of completing that number of valuations is by a mass-valuation approach which uses software to analyse details from owners, along with transaction details, to estimate the correct figures. Continue reading “Property Matters – Tax Facts part two”
Are our Rulers taking us for a Ride?
You decide…
Do our Rulers have things to Hide?
You decide…
Is the Upholder worse than the Thief?
That is an old-fashioned belief…
Programme Date: 31 October 2016
Programme Length: 07:19
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
Civil Appeal No. P-200 of 2014
Between
THE MINISTER OF PLANNING AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Appellants
And
THE JOINT CONSULTATIVE COUNCIL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
Respondents
Today the Appeal Court delivered its majority ruling upholding the decision of Justice Frank Seepersad on 14th July 2014 to order publication of the legal opinions on which the Ministry had been relying.
This case began in 2013, when the JCC sought a judicial review of the refusal of the Ministry of Planning & Sustainable Development to publish legal opinions which the Ministry claimed supported its Request for Proposals (RFP) process in the proposed development of Invaders’ Bay. The JCC contended that the RFP process was being conducted in breach of the Central Tenders Board Act, but the Ministry claimed to have legal advice that its actions conformed to the CTB Act. It was that advice which the Ministry refused to publish.
Today’s Appeal Court ruling was a significant one in that it gave greater weight to the mandatory ‘Public Interest Test’ under the Freedom of Information Act, as against the Ministry’s reasons for its refusal on the grounds of legal professional privilege. The previous practice allowed the State to have discretion as to whether legal advice can be released. Had that practice been upheld at the Appeal we would have been facing a future in which any questionable project or policy could be concealed behind the screen of legal professional privilege. This ruling therefore significantly fortifies the Public Interest.
I now expect swift publication of the formal instructions and legal opinions on which the Ministry was relying in this highly-questionable matter. What is more, substantial sums of Public Money were spent in efforts to conceal these details and I am therefore taking the opportunity to ask for the details of those payments of legal fees to now be published – How much Public Money was spent on legal fees and to exactly whom did those monies go?
Another important aspect of this matter is that the Ministry’s official reason for its refusal to publish was changed during the litigation to legal professional privilege, but in this ruling the Court did not condone that change.
<–END RELEASE–>
The controversial property tax is now expected to be implemented in the fiscal year 2017 and is estimated to raise $503 million. That is a mere 1.7% of the total revenue estimate of $29.93 Bn from taxation. So why is it so controversial? How will it be implemented? How much can we expect to pay?
The property tax being proposed will tax the fixed assets and income streams of persons who are currently avoiding any payments of tax to our Treasury. It is relatively tiny in size, yet it can unlock disproportionate benefits in the public interest.
Our taxation system has done a poor job at levying on the self-employed and companies, as stated so often in the past. The proposed implementation of the Trinidad & Tobago Revenue Authority (TTRA) is expected to create a structure which can effectively tackle this widespread pattern of tax evasion. The previous attempt, during 2009, met with stiff opposition, so it remains to be seen if the current economic downturn will foster a different reaction. Continue reading “Property Matters – Tax Facts”
AfraRaymond.net 