Flow manager blames lack of funds for failure to relocate infrastructure during MDIP
Published:Thursday | November 9, 2023 | 10:18 AMTanesha Mundle/Staff Reporter -
A senior manager at Flow Jamaica has said that the National Works Agency (NWA) failed to provide the company with funds to assist in relocating its infrastructure during the Major Infrastructure Development Programme (MIDP) in 2016 along several roadways in Kingston, resulting in massive damage to the company’s infrastructure.
The telecommunication firm is suing the Government and China Harbour Engineering Company (CHEC) to recover millions for damage allegedly done to its infrastructure during the implementation of the programme.
The company is also seeking to recover monies that were rebated to customers when the system was down as a result of the infrastructural damage.
The NWA is named as the first defendant, the Attorney General of Jamaica is second, with the engineering company being the third.
According to Maurice Simpson, civil works manager at Flow, the company was forced to fork out $124. 1 million to lay new conduits and to repair the damaged cable networks along the various roads.
Yesterday, during the start of the trial in the Supreme Court, Simpson admitted that the NWA’s Keith Born, manager for major projects, had made constant appeals for a representative to provide manpower and resources for the identification and relocation of the conduits.
But at the same time, he said, “We can't work without the necessary funds, and we were expecting the Government to provide the necessary funding.”
He disagreed, however, with Brown’s evidence that the completion of the Constant Spring leg of the project suffered significant delay as a result of Cable and Wireless's failure to act swiftly.
According to him, several factors, such as the lack of funding and issues with land acquisition for Flow to move its infrastructure, hampered the project.
Noting that Flow has multiple conduits along the roadways and pointing out that based on the scope of work that would be required to relocate the infrastructure, an overnight relocation or short notice would be impossible, during his testimony, Simpson also disagreed with Brown’s evidence that he had persuaded the contractors to be mindful of Flow’s infrastructure.
“My observation on the ground is that no regard was given for anything other than what CHEC was contracted to do. They would say something is in the way. They ripped it out because it was in the way not to apply some effort to have some relocation done and whatever adjustment made.
“They would use massive excavators in areas that require just a little back hoe … . There was no consideration for our infrastructure or anybody else's infrastructure,” Simpson testified.
He also rebutted Brown’s claim that the company only provided representatives in the initial stage of the project on the different sites to mark where their infrastructure was.
According to him, Flow had a team of eight persons who worked on the ground “24/7, night and day”.
He also disagreed with Brown's evidence that the company had failed to provide the NWA and CHEC with drawings to show where their infrastructure was located.
Brown, in his affidavit, said that in the absence of drawings or representatives from the company, he was able to identify manholes belonging to the company and informed contractors that the presence of manholes meant that conduits could be present underground.
The telecommunications company is contending that the Government and or its agent, along with the contractor, had a duty of care to take reasonable steps to inspect and ascertain the existence of latent risks/dangers that were reasonably suspected to exist.
It also alleged that as a result of the defendants’ failure to provide 24-48 hours' notice of works, it sustained significant damage to infrastructure located along various segments of the MIDP.
Additionally, Cable and Wireless claims that the defendants were all notified about the challenges it was facing and that they had a duty of care to act reasonably and within a reasonable time when executing the works.
The trial continues today.