The Tribune

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

The Opposition’s leader yesterday blamed the Davis administration for squandering $7m of the Bahamian people’s money by failing to complete the land purchase for a liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal.

Michael Pintard, confirming that the deal was for the Clifton Pier-based LNG regasification terminal proposed under the Minnis administration’s energy reforms, told Tribune Business that the failure to either close the acquisition or recover the funds paid-out “lies at the feet” of the current government.

Asserting that he was “amazed” that the Davis administration would both seek to raise the controversy and blame it on the former administration, he reiterated his stance that it was the one that “messed up” and effectively gave a private landowner a $7m windfall for doing nothing at the expense of the Bahamian people - either as taxpayers or BPL customers.

Mr Pintard, while revealing there were two Clifton Pier landowners involved in the LNG terminal deal, declined to name them. Well-placed sources, speaking on condition of anonymity, suggested one was The Source River, the entity founded by the late former Cabinet minister, Tennyson Wells, and the other either Arawak Homes or Sunshine Holdings. Mr Wells’ entity, which owned 12 of the 14 acres sought, kept the $7m.

The row over the failed land purchase erupted in the House of Assembly on Wednesday, when Jobeth Coleby-Davis, minister of energy and transport, accused the Minnis administration of entering a $14m deal to acquire land on BPL’s behalf for an unspecified purpose. She asserted that the Government never received the land while paying out $7m, or 50 percent, of a purchase price it cannot now recover.

“One thing I want to say about their plan, if they want to call it a plan,” Mrs Coleby-Davis said of the Minnis administration’s proposed energy reforms that were never implemented. “When I got BPL under my portfolio, I picked up on plans that were on the table, but one thing that I did was I looked at the entire concept.

“BPL is financially strapped. If the FNM had looked at the entire transformation of BPL, they would not have entered into a land purchasing deal and paid $7m out of BPL’s already cash-strapped bank book to a company who was selling land and never closed the deal.

“The cost was $14m. They paid $7m and we got no land. The person is still holding the land. We paid $7m. The deal never closed, and this was a part of their energy reform plan.” The Prime Minister’s Office later doubled down on Mrs Coleby-Davis’ accusations, stating: “A $7m deposit was paid to a landowner for BPL to acquire land, but the balance was unpaid, so the landowner kept the $7m and the land.”

Few details were provided, but both Mr Pintard and well-placed contacts, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the deal was initiated to acquire the Clifton Pier site that would house the terminal responsible for converting LNG from its liquid form back to gas when it was transferred from ship to shore. It is unclear if the same property will be required for the LNG terminal contemplated by the Davis administration’s reforms.

“The bottom line was that land was being acquired for the planned LNG regasification terminal facility that BPL would have been responsible for building. That was being bought. The Davis administration was made well aware of that deal and what the requirements were for closing that deal. Just like the fuel hedging, the ball was dropped,” one contact, backing Mr Pintard, confirmed.

“It was something that both governments were well aware of. The first one signed off on it, and the incoming administration was made aware of the deal and the obligations. It was just a transition failure.” The Clifton Pier land deal was thus already initiated, and in motion, when the Davis administration was elected to office in mid-September 2021, making it a transaction that it inherited.

“That is correct,” Mr Pintard confirmed, when asked if the transaction involved acquiring the Clifton Pier LNG terminal site. “A portion of the funds - half - were already paid, and this is the $7m that the Government is referring to. The deadline for that particular contract was December 31, 2021, and if the Government needed an extension before it completed the acquisition of the land, then it had the option to seek an extension.

“The Government messed up the acquisition because they went incommunicado. They were simply not communicating with the attorneys or owners in order to close the deal or arrange what those final payments were going to be. It was amazing to me that they were jumping up and down when they knew what the facts were.... It was under the PLP, not the FNM. We initiated the process and they messed up.”

Of the deal itself, Mr Pintard added: “We know there are at least two different owners. One owner had two acres, and the other - who had the majority - was who the $7m was paid to. It wasn’t paid in a lump sum. It was agreed what the terms were per acre and continued payments resulted in $7m being turned over.

“The Government, they know the facts, and I call on them to lay the documents and to also answer whether or not they continued the payment in terms of the land or did they go missing in terms of communication? If they don’t have the land or the money in hand, it’s at their feet. They are responsible.” Alfred Sears KC, who was originally works and utilities minister, would have been responsible for BPL at the time.

Mr Wells and The Source River are understood to have owned the 12-acre majority balance of the 14-acre LNG terminal site. Asked to confirm the two owners’ identities, Mr Pintard simply said: “Let’s just this. They are two owners, both of whom the Government knows well; very, very well. I’m going to leave it there.”