Roopnaraine must come clean on role in Homestretch Development Inc.

Nov 28, 2016 News

---

 – WPA member

Urging him not to “hide behind” explanations given by President David Granger, Executive Working People’s Alliance Member Dr. David Hinds is calling on Minister of Education, Dr. Rupert Roopnaraine to tell the nation what exactly was his role in the controversial Homestretch Development Inc. (HDI).
The outspoken columnist made this comment, among others, after what he said was “a careful study” of the statements from the President, and those of the Opposition about the special purpose company, HDI.
During a taping of his show, “The Public Interest” the Head of State gave his views on the D’ Urban Park Project and the reason for a special company being established in the first place.
Granger said that HDI had several directors, one of whom was Minister of Education, Dr. Rupert Roopnaraine.
“Dr. Rupert Roopnaraine has not committed any error. In fact, he was a representative on the company that was formerly established. We have not concealed the company. He represented the government’s interest because the celebrations which we had aimed at, at that time of the establishment of the company, concerned largely the 50th anniversary celebrations. So please don’t attach any blame or any fault to him.”
But Dr. Hinds said that given Roopnaraine’s own political tradition and culture, he should speak for himself by explaining to the public his role in the company and why he was party to keeping that information secret.
“My thinking is this matter will not go away tomorrow and I implore my leader, colleague and friend not to hide behind the President’s explanations, but to speak for himself. I do not believe that Dr. Roopnarine has engaged in any impropriety, but when his integrity is called into question, he owes his party and the country an explanation. Dr. Roopnarine has a history, political legacy and tradition to uphold.”
Additionally, the President had insisted that HDI was not a secret company, and that the National Assembly was notified.

The President said that when the coalition entered office in May last year, there were some ad hoc measures in place to rehabilitate the Independence Monument which had been neglected for several decades. Those measures were also in place with regard to the inauguration parade at the National Stadium. However, since no budgetary allocations had been made for the construction of a stadium, it soon became clear that it was necessary to establish a short-term company to complete the project on schedule.
The Head of State said that when the purpose of the company came to an end, particularly with regard to the D’Urban Park Project, its role was transferred to the Ministry of Public Infrastructure.
But this explanation does not satisfy Dr. Hinds.
The WPA Executive Member questioned why the creation of the government or quasi-government company was not made public.
“I am not charging any wrongdoing on the part of the company because what is in the public domain does not suggest any such thing. What I am suggesting is that government’s openness is a central aspect of accountable and democratic governance and the government did not observe this practice.”
“It took the PPP, which has the worst record of being accountable when it comes to governance, to draw this information out of the government. I don’t think the president’s statement or explanation has addressed this central question.”
The columnist said that the government should have revealed this information on its own and let the country judge whether it was prudent for the administration to create a company to oversee the project.
He commented that there was not universal support for the project in the first place. As such, Dr. Hinds said that it was incumbent upon the government to ensure that there was instant disclosure.
“If there is nothing to hide—and I believe there was nothing sinister—then why not make the information public? Like many of the problems this government has created for itself, this one speaks to a culture that privileges secrecy when openness is the wiser and politically sensible way to go,” expressed the political analyst.
He said that in the final analysis, government must have respect for the citizens and be guided by political morality. Dr. Hinds said that mistakes would be made, but a responsible government should not put itself in a position whereby its motives are constantly questioned and projected as sinister.
Finally, Dr. Hinds said that it is worrying that the government continues to get itself into these tangles which suggest that it has something to hide.
He opined that these accumulated mistakes help to provide space for the PPP to project itself as the defender of political virtue. But equally important, the political analyst said that it saps the energy of its supporters which in the long run could dampen their enthusiasm for the government.

---

---