VECO And The Barbados Connection Uncovered~Barbados Free Press Is On Your Scent!

Thursday, December 14th, 2006…12:29 pm

Piggy Reference In Post Strikes A Nerve: Pierhead Project Investors Inc.

All we asked was “Who Has Shares In Barbados ‘Pierhead Project Investors Inc.’ ?” and the hits went wild. Out of the millions of posts and comments written yesterday on over half a million blogs – our post “Who Has Shares In Barbados ‘Pierhead Project Investors Inc.’ ?” stands at the #66th most viewed post! ( Top Posts stats here)

And we can see where those hits are coming from. Somebody out there a little worried? Did a few people in government jobs develop a little bit of perspiration on that upper lip as they read the post? Why should such a nothing little post cause sooooooo much excitement in Bridgetown? Don’t worry folks – everything gonna be just fine! Isn’t that the way things have always been on this island?

Oink Oink!

Related Story

Whew! Over here at BU we cannot but admire the tenacity which Barbados Free Press continues to demonstrate on this VECO story. There is an old saying that where there is smoke some fire must be close. Keep going BFP we can smell something real stink!

BU as usual want to add its two pence by commenting on the Pier Head project. We hope that BFP with its army of sources can polish-up this story for us. A major part of the Bridgetown Redevelopment Plan is the development of the Pier Head, which is majority if not wholly owned by Barbados Shipping & Trading, soon to be Neal & Massy Barbados Shipping & Trading. A Google has tossed up that CB Richard Ellis Hotels Limited has signed an agreement with Pier Head Investment Inc to operate a 5 Star 200 room hotel on the Pier Head to be completed by 2010. The development will also include apartments, marina, maritime museum, duty free shops and much more.

Our source who is well positioned and we know to be very reliable has told us is that there was a bid process held recently to determine the company to do the redevelopment work on the Pier Head. The process had to be scrapped when the VECO news broke recently about high ranking officials who were indicted in Alaska. VECO was one of the bidders!

The big question is why no similar sanction on the New Prison project Mr. Dale Marshall? After all you have given VECO and their involvement on the building of the prison a clean bill of health. Again BU ask why the double standards on this one Mr. Attorney General?

21 thoughts on “VECO And The Barbados Connection Uncovered~Barbados Free Press Is On Your Scent!

  1. ‘a maritime museum’ … hmmmmmm … at least we know where Nelson will be going. BTW, why don’t they give him to Nelsons Dockyard in Antigua…. they’d LOVE to have him…..

  2. Pingback: Attorney General Dale Marshall Needs To Clear The Air About The VECO Barbados Relationship « Barbados Underground

  3. This is all about nasty short Glyne Bannister. This runt needs to be exposed for the RAT that he is. He and all like him need to understand that “time longer than twine”. I feel he goin need some Jail Time.

  4. From Williams Industries Annual Report 2005…. (link in Adrian L’s post above)

    “We also started evaluating an investment in an Ammonia and Urea plant in Trinidad and WE PLAYED A KEY ROLE IN HAVING THE FLYOVER PROJECT FOR BARBADOS APPROVED BY GOVERNMENT IN 2005”

    Why don’t they play a ‘key role’ in answering some of the many questions that Bajans have about the project now….?

    How did they facilitate this approval?
    What was the process used?
    When were bids invited?
    When were final plans drawn up?
    How did they manage to get the PM and minister to be so co-operative?
    What gives Williams Industries the POWER to influence our Government so decisively???

    What ‘Massa day done’ what?!?

  5. David…

    I am questioning EVERYTHING!

    Has the Memorandum of Understanding replaced a tendering process?

    Did the public know that Williams Industries Inc, was a partner in the Pierhead Project?

    Who are the Directors and Shareholders in Pierhead Project Inc and Pierhead Investors group?


    BS&T’s, CEO, Anthony King’s statement ‘most of the the project plans were on HOLD while Government completed the marina portion being handled by Barbados Tourism Investment Corporation’.
    Published 10/8/07 Nation

    Why would the PM be threatening to take the project away from BS&T, if it really the BTII (Government) holding it up?

  6. Adrian L we hear you and we think some more information needs to find its way in the public arena. The BTII is one of many entities which can contract business on behalf of government away from the usual public scrutiny which other government departments must endure. Having said that the fact that a MOU is in place between Williams Industries and BTII does not mean that a tender process was not engaged. We are doing a David Ellis here by putting the other side 🙂

    Now to Bush Tea!

    Why would Bizzy feels like he has to come out and tell anybody anything? If the company was able to persuade the government on the flyover project why would you want them to answer questions? It is the government politicians/technocrats who should make the ‘Letter of Justification’ available to the public of Barbados. Within the LOJ it should explain the why decisions were made.

  7. A call to Tony Ellis may reveal many things!!!
    He knows what his instructions from Owing were to seek a BOLT arrangement for this project.

  8. Interesting information about this Pierhead Project, it look as though the way forward for governments to shun its financial position is to use a Memorandum of Understanding that replace any tendering process. We are bypassing the usual lenders and working with BOLT arrangements that has a hidden formula where a financier will put up the money and OPERATE the project, no wonder tendering process are becoming obsolete. The Government will then LEASE it from THE FINANCIER until the given period of the MOU and presto, it will be TRANSFER to the people of Barbados. We will not have that massive capital to offset our Balance of Payment, thus no questions from the IMF or Standards and Poor’s. I wonder if this will be standard when we plan to improve our standard of living. I hope these people do not bolt from the country and leave us to pasture.

  9. There are pros and cons to using BOLTS. The key is to examine how they fit into our national strategy as far as financing goes. It is a way for government to access private sector funds and therefore remove the pressure from central government. The concern we have has more to do with the requirement by government to have to put in place guarantees for debt on behalf of companies which the government has to establish usually outside the eagle eye of parliament. It would be interesting to know the debt which the government has guaranteed for projects like the prison, flyovers, coast guard facility and others.

  10. Remember, the Government will not be responsible for the guaranteeing of any funds for such projects since the loaner will be using their own guarantor for the loan, this guarantor must have assets to cover such a loan, this is where a conglomerate like Clico comes in since you must have a functionable asset base. You must also have a profitable Insurance company to protect that investment in case of Litigation. That is the reason for Government and Private Sector marriages. The Government will have a beautiful short-term report card whilst the private sector will show a compulsory long term assets. A new way of divestment in the private sector.

  11. Frankology we are not sure if you have seen the BOLT agreements on the various projects i.e. Prison, ABC Project, Coast Guard etc. We are not sure that you are in a position to conclusively state that the government will not be responsible for guaranteeing funds for such projects. Research shows that it depends on how the deal is structured. It is possible that the government may be asked to underwrite part or all of the deal. The BOLT works perfectly we would imagine when the private entity is in a position to operate the entity in a way to realize a reasonable return on investment by charging fees. In the case of the prison, coast guard facility, ABC etc, how will the private entities make a profit?
    More importantly who guaranteed the financing with these projects?

  12. David, You hit the bullseye. Surely, no investor would undertake any entity that can bankrupt them. Operations like the Bolt, must be planned with strong financial and insurance backings. This is my same suggestions when you quote “…..BOLT works perfectly we would imagine when the private entity is in a position to operate the entity in a way to realize a reasonable return on investment by charging fees. This charging of fees are really a lease agreement when the lessee have to repay the lessor an agreed yearly sum. We don’t know if the Government will have to pay a blanket payment at the end of the lease.

    Just wondering, would Government be the sole decider in the awarding of such a contract when you have private funding?

  13. People, BOLTs are attractive because they are adaptable to many various “uses”.

    There is hardly any external scrutiny, no need for transparency, things can be kept ‘within the family’ and they can bypass all normal public service and parliamentary controls.

    Can you imagine the opportunities?

    Even if the project FAILS COMPLETELY, you can be assured that the various ‘consultants’ and other ‘specialists’ will have long reaped their rewards.
    Thus you see an ongoing procession of FAILED BOLTS being executed….(Bridgetown Mariner next…)

    David, you seem to be suggesting that the ‘investors’ can have the option to ‘lease’ the project as a last resort…. Hmmmmm

    First of all, the decision makers are generally EMPLOYEES of the investing bodies and will not personally be hurt….especially if they have ‘consulting’ experience.

    What if a new Government challenges the MOU and refuses to honour the agreement?
    …or if they is a major project disaster with significant liability for the ‘owners’?

    What will BNB do? seize the ABC highway? Have the T&T army attack Barbados? or declare losses?

    BOLTs are the con man’s dream come true. the only losers are the public and the big institutions – something like the fancy titled SCAM that has devastated the housing sector in the USA and mortgage and banking institutions across the world.

    A ‘construction Pyramid’

  14. We need to see the terms and condition of this BOLT arrangement NOW.

    I just realise the Opposition have three engineers as candidates. John Boyce, Richard Sealy and Taan Abed, yet we are not hearing them speak about the Highway fiasco. Ain’t this surprising when we have commenters like Bush Tea, Waterboy, BU and BFP, Jerome Hinds and my sparing partner WIV fighting morning, noon and night enlightening the public about these flyovers and these three professionals remaining silent.

  15. frankology
    In fairness to Richard Sealy he addressed the issue in his speech at Deacons Road I assume that you did not attend it.

  16. Maybe these three gentlemen are fat and lazy in their professions and see no need to be functioning on all cylinders while doing the people’s business. You see Frankolgy is just might be a case of misplaced priorities.

  17. Can anyone explain to me the reason behind this VECO group of crooks having the massive sum of over a MILLION dollars sitting in a bank account at a local bank ?

    Is this part of the bribe money that was misplaced to our former politicians and they have been held up in their attempts to get it into offshore bank accounts in the Cayman Islands etc??

    Is this the share that Hallam NIcholls, Glyne Bannister and Owing Arthur were awaiting???

    Do not take my word for it, ask those at First Caribbean about this massive amount that is sitting and waiting to be shared.

Leave a comment, join the discussion.