The Tribune

By Fay Simmons

Tribune Business Reporter

jsimmons@tribunemedia.net

Opposition leader Michael Pintard has pressed the government on its relationship with air freight management firm JDL and if it has been contracted at Lynden Pindling International Airport (LPIA).

In a letter to the Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis, he said: “You would be aware of the questions raised in the House of Assembly, as well as the press reports in respect to the alleged arrangement with a company known as JDL for airfreight management that either has been executed or is being contemplated by your administration.

“There are many elements of this reported arrangement that create significant concerns for the Opposition. We ask therefore that you confirm whether or not any arrangement related to the management or handling of airfreight coming into any port of The Bahamas has been executed or is being contemplated by the government involving this JDL Company or any other interested parties?”

JDL is rumoured to be involved with the public-private partnership (PPP) outsourcing of the LPIA air freight terminal, an agreement that would see a $25m transformation of the terminal and increase the cost of imported goods by placing a 40 cents per pound fee for cargo x-rays.

Simon Wilson, the Ministry of Finance’s financial secretary, previously told this newspaper that JDL’s fees have yet to be finalised and the government is “hoping it will be less than 40 cents”. He argued that whatever fee is selected will have “a very minimal” impact on import costs, and said claims to the contrary by the courier industry and Opposition were “disingenuous”.

Mr Pintard, however, requested a “full breakdown” of the government’s arrangement with JDL inclusive of financial and contractual commitments, the names of beneficial owners and the company’s history in providing this service as well as the fees that will be imposed on the public.

He said: “Would you provide a full breakdown of the elements any such arrangement as currently contemplated or agreed, including any financial, administrative and contractual commitments or considerations, as well as copies of documents related to same?

“Would you provide the names of the beneficial owners of JDL and an outline of the track record of this company in providing this type of service?

“Would you indicate what specific additional mandatory fees and charges to shippers, if any, are being contemplated or have been approved, and also provide the legal provisions that would enforce any such charge?”

Mr Pintard said that the Opposition “objects in the strongest terms”’ to the potential arrangement and questioned whether the firm went through the bidding process, subject to the Procurement Act, whether a third-party agent will conflict with the duties and responsibilities outlined in the Customs Management Act and when the arrangement will commence.

He said: “Given that the Public Procurement Act 2023 requires all public works and services - with limited and prescribed exceptions - to be subject to competitive bidding, would you provide the information on the bidding process for this arrangement, including when the matter went out to bid and how many bids were received?

“Would you indicate how the reported plans for this company to handle and manage landed goods comport with the provisions of the Customs Management Act and the responsibilities of the Customs Department as the agent for landed goods into the country?

“Would you indicate the date that this arrangement is supposed to commence and provide an outline of all public announcements and public education efforts undertaken to date regarding same?”

JDL is speculated to begin managing cargo this month and Mr Pintard said that it was ‘preposterous’ since the government has not made an announcement to the public or offered an explanation of how the arrangement will work.

He said: “It has been reported that this arrangement is to commence in January 2024 which would be preposterous given that as far as we know, your government has made no formal announcement regarding this arrangement, nor undertaken any significant public education and outreach. Given the incredible expansion in public relations and communications staff and resources undertaken by your administration, the failure to inform the public on this reported initiative must, in our view, be deliberate.”