The Tribune

By NEIL HARTNELL Tribune Business Editor MANY smaller Bahamian contractors do not support the Bahamian Contractors Association (BCA) or its push for legislation to regulate the industry, the latter's president telling Tribune Business they are quite happy to exploit lax laws to "manipulate the system". Suggesting that many small 'one man band' players, "don't want the industry to be regulated", BCA chief Godfrey Forbes said the absence of the legislative framework/regulations contained in the proposed Contractors Bill meant many of the problems experienced by the government-funded housing programme were likely to reoccur. Commenting on the Value for Money report's highly critical assessment of the Government-sponsored housing programme between 2000-2008, Mr Forbes told Tribune Business that it was "sad" that political patronage and interference still appeared to be at work when it came to many government-related contract awards. And he "agreed 100 per cent" that a more private sector approach should be introduced to remedy the housing programme's deficiencies, as had been suggested by the Value for Money report's authors, UK-based Crown Agents. Noting the report's comments on "patronage" influencing the award of government housing project-related work to contractors, Mr Forbes told this newspaper: "I believe and understand that kind of thing does happen. Many times there is always some kind of political interference....... "It's sad that we're still at this stage in our development as a nation, but it speaks to how much work we have to do as an industry, and shows why we need to go ahead and agitate for the Contractors Bill to go into law. "It will bring about the necessary regulation - it will ensure regulations are put in that the industry has to comply with. Without them, everyone can do whatever they want to do whenever they want to do it." Mr Forbes also acknowledged another fact identified by the Value for Money report, namely that the larger contractors were disincentivised from participating because profit margins and work volumes were held artificially low by the Ministry/Department of Housing. "I must admit it is an area we have not participated much in, as it relates to small contracts for government homes," Mr Forbes added. "We realise there's a greater degree of deficiency when it comes to that aspect of the construction industry, smaller contractors and dealing with government projects. "We don't have any true, effective system in place to deal with the construction quality of contractors as it relates to government homes. Because of that, I do agree that in the absence of increased planning there's some degree of abuse that will take place. "A lot of contractors selected to carry out this work are selected on the basis of political affiliation, and you find patronage is very much at work in this area." Confirming that "nine out of 10" contractors who worked on government home construction were not BCA members, Mr Forbes told Tribune Business: "The reality is that many of that nine out of 10 are not interested in becoming a member, because the things the BCA is trying to do, they are quite satisfied with the way things are because they can manipulate the system....... "They don't want the industry to be regulated to any extent, as they are not up to speed and not up to par to satisfy those requirements. Many of that nine out of 10 do not wish for that to happen." Backing many of the Value for Money audit's recommendations, Mr Forbes agreed that the Government-run housing programme would generate better efficiencies and economies of scale, translating into better prices and quality for homeowners, if greater numbers of homes were allocated to fewer contractors. Pointing out that contractors would obtain better pricing on plywood for 10 homes, rather than just one, due to volume discounts, the BCA president told Tribune Business: "It would definitely be better doing it that kind of way than trying to do 100 homes with 100 contractors. "They say they are spreading the work around, giving people something to do, but you find 25-30 per cent of contractors are not qualified to participate in that." Mr Forbes added that, inevitably, private sector home construction, especially if a commercial bank or other lending institution was involved, was far better and tighter managed than a government-related project. When it came to the latter, the attitude often was that it was "my government, my MP and representative who, through party links, assisted in getting me a couple of those contracts. I don't have to go ahead and do all the things I have to do if I had to deal with the bank". Agreeing with the more private sector-led approach recommended by Crown Agents, the BCA president also called for all government construction contracts to go through an open, competitive tendering process, plus pre-qualification exercise to ensure bidders were suitably equipped for the job in question. Mr Forbes added that the Government "should not be so much involved when it comes to the construction of residential homes", suggesting it should instead facilitate their development - possibly by private developers - and regulate them via the various building inspections processes. And the BCA chief also backed calls for government home construction costs to be price-based, dependent on factors such as labour and raw material costs. He pointed out that no two homes, even if they were of the same model and design, cost exactly the same to construct, due to differences such as the structure of the underlying land.