The Tribune

By KHRISNA VIRGIL

Deputy Chief Reporter

kvirgil@tribunemedia.net

BAHAMIANS who owned and held shop leases and concessions in the Baha Mar project were permitted by the China Export Import Bank (CEXIM) and the preferred purchaser to continue to hold them under the existing terms and conditions, according to the newly unsealed heads of terms for the West Bay Street project, tabled in Parliament last night.

The agreement further allowed for up to 1,200 work permits to be issued to China Construction America (CCA) and 30 work permits for all necessary staff of the asset special purpose vehicle (SPV) during the remobilisation and construction phase.

The project was also to benefit from exemptions of value added tax and import taxes of goods and services for completion.

The document was approved for release by the Supreme Court last Thursday, Prime Minister Dr Hubert Minnis announced last night before he tabled the agreement, which he said fulfilled a campaign promise by the governing Free National Movement (FNM). However, he added that other “sensitive” documents relating to the sale remain under a court seal.

However, its release seemed to fall flat as many of its details were already in the public domain and were not shocking as was intimated by the FNM when it was in opposition and on the campaign trail.

Dr Minnis said: “In concluding debate on the budget, I now update this House on certain developments related to Baha Mar. This government campaigned on a platform to promote greater transparency and accountability by government. We pledged to disclose the details of the heads of terms signed August 22, 2016 by the former government with the Import-Export Bank of China (CEXIM) relating to the Baha Mar resort project.

“I am therefore pleased to announce that on Thursday, June 15, 2017, pursuant to an application made by the Office of the Attorney General, the Supreme Court of the Bahamas granted its sanction and approval for the disclosure and release of the heads of terms. This was with the consent of the other stakeholders to the agreement.

“As promised during our campaign, we have unsealed the deal.”

He continued: “While it is the case that the previous government did not specifically make an application to the court for the sealing of any of the Baha Mar documents, the heads were requested to be linked to an affidavit and suite of documents which were ordered sealed on an application made by lawyers for the CEXIM Bank.

“Those documents contained sensitive commercial material relating to the process for the advertising, bidding and sale of the Baha Mar assets, and remain sealed.

“I now have the honour and pleasure to table in this Honourable House the following document, the heads of terms dated August 22, 2016, as well as a short amendment made to it by a side letter dated April 25, 2017.

“Mr Speaker, I will also like to table the agreement made on April 25, 2017, between the government of the Bahamas and CTF BM Holding Ltd and CTF BM Operations Ltd.

“I should indicate at the outset that the main effect of the amendment was to basically extend the timeline for the purchaser to complete the purchase, which was stated in the heads to be the end of November 2016, subject to a 10-day extension,” Dr Minnis also said.

Heads of Terms

The document tabled last night again raises questions about conflicts of interest and whether former Attorney General Allyson Maynard-Gibson was too closely connected to negotiations to get the shuttered resort open.

In 2015, she revealed that her husband Maxwell Gibson owns the retail jewellery store chain that had been granted storefront leases in Baha Mar. At the time, she rejected accusations that she had a conflict of interest due to her role as government negotiator for the stalled resort.

Mrs Maynard-Gibson’s revelation came in a statement released four days after she initially said her two daughters, 28 and 30, had leases to operate stores in Baha Mar while she was a guest on the More 94 FM talk show “Real Talk Live”. Mrs Maynard-Gibson revealed her daughters’ connection to the resort and Prime Minister Perry Christie’s knowledge of the matter.

However, earlier this year, she and former Education Minister Jerome Fitzgerald dismissed tabloid accusations of abuse of power and conflict of interest as election season smear tactics.

Both former ministers were alleged by a tabloid to have forged secret “sweetheart” deals connected to the mega-resort and its new buyer Chow Tai Fook Enterprises (CTFE) that would see them allegedly net “unlawful private profits” in the millions.

The heads of terms noted: “Further, the government expects that Bahamian citizens owning and holding shop leases and concession in the project will be permitted by CEXIM and the proposed purchaser to continue to hold them on the same terms and conditions as currently exists.

“The asset SPV agrees to enter into new lease agreements on terms of the shop leases held by said Bahamian citizens no less favourable than the existing leases.

“Further CEXIM agreed to encourage the proposed purchaser to support and honour those said Bahamian citizens owning and holding such shop leases provided by the BML companies, their related entities and affiliates shall not be entitled to participate in the process referred to herein.”

Regarding construction concessions, the agreement said the government was to waive stamp duty and VAT on the transfer of assets from the BML companies to the SPV group - including any stamp duty or VAT that would otherwise be payable by CEXIM and/or any member of the SPV group on the creation, enforcement, settlement, waiver and/or release of any security – and on the funding arrangements for the SPV group and on the creation, enforcement, waiver and/or release of related security.

“The government will not require CEXIM, claims SPV or asset SPV to pay any of the BML companies outstanding real property taxes or gaming taxes – relating to Crystal Palace Casino. The government will retain its claims against the relevant BML companies for these sums,” the document read.

Also If CEXIM failed to provide the government with the identity of the proposed purchaser by September 23, 2016 or the extended period and failed to provide the identity of the proposed operator by November 20, 2016 or the extended period, the government could withdraw the concessions.

This among other things was outlined in the heads of terms for withdrawal.