A vital sanitary drainage project in north and central of Jeddah, work on which began in 2005, has been marred by financial and administrative irregularities due to which the SR988 million project is still far from finished despite the passage of its deadline, says a report. The report has been released by the General Control Bureau (GCB) after a thorough assessment of the project and a series of meetings with the project's consultant, contractor and the officials concerned of Jeddah's water department. It said that the inordinate delay in the completion of the project incurred huge losses to the national exchequer. Citing the incompetence of the project contractor as one of the major factors that delayed the project, the report also pointed out that the extension in the project deadline from the Ministry of Water was not based on legal grounds. Besides, the authorities concerned also failed to impose the delay punitive clause, it added. The GCB report also quoted findings of the project consultant's report, which attributed the delay to shortage of manpower and supplies. As per the GCB's findings, the contractor in question was not capable of handling such a huge project. It would be pertinent to mention that the contractor tried to put the blame on the Jeddah Mayoralty for the procedures governing the issuance of the project's permit. However, the GCB in its report, rejecting the contractor's claim stated that the Kingdom's laws make it mandatory for all the contracting companies to obtain the necessary permits. The GCB report stressed that the delay was not caused by the work permits issue. Highlighting the Ministry of Water decision of extending the contract for 13 months on the contractor's request, the report described it a legal violation that cost the national exchequer SR18 million. The report said the contractor's delay was not due to any additional work or a new task assigned to him pointing that the extension of the contract constitutes a flagrant violation of Article 9, which stipulates that a minister or head of agency should not extend a period of any contract unless the delay results from the government's assigning the contractor with a new task or if an administrative authority orders the stoppage of the work for reasons the contractors have nothing to do with. The report said none of these reasons were applicable to the contractor in question even though the period of his contract was extended a matter that contradicts the monthly achievement reports submitted by the consultant. The report criticized the stand of the Ministry of Water, which rejected the proposal made by the Ministry of Finance before the signing of the contract that the execution period would be five years due to the size of the project but the Water Ministry insisted that the execution period would be three years on the grounds that the company is the most efficient in the area of the execution of the sanitary drainage projects. It also said that the delay also cost the Kingdom hundreds of millions of riyals annually due to the rise in the level of the groundwater, which damages land and building services. The GCB recommended review of the rules and procedures on the basis of which the Water Ministry had ordered the extension in the contract and also called for the setting up of a committee from the Ministry of Electricity and Water and the General Directorate of Water in Makkah to probe into the matter. It also recommends formation of another technical committee from the Ministry of Electricity and Water to evaluate all the contracts, which have been extended. The GCB also called for the accountability of the contractor.
