The new Demerara River bridge’s life cycle should, as a priority, be contractually guaranteed

Recently the Minister of Public Works announced that negotiations are still ongoing between the Guyana government and China State Construction Engineering Corporation (CSCEC), which is the contractor selected to construct the US$256.6 million new bridge across the Demerara River. (SN of Jan. 8, 2022). Readers were reminded that CSCEC has won a procurement process with a bridge proposal that it will design, finance, and build the structure. Guyana would have to operate the crossing. The Minister reports that current discussions are centred on financial payment options, final design of the bridge, and delivery of work, among others, thus leaving aside environmental and planning issues, and notwithstanding government intention to finalise design now, the current price-tag of US$256.6 million for design, finance and building the bridge will not be the final bill.

For starters, the government’s much publicised stipulation that the design should accommodate a twolane dual (four-lane) carriageway, hybrid cable-stayed centre-span bridge with “a life span of at least 50 years”, and direction for a two-year “non-negotiable” completion date, constitute only an employer’s initial requirements. Government now needs to engage appropriately qualified consultants, to conduct an evaluation procedure during the contract, when design-development and construction stages will overlap. It is essential that those engaged, focus on the strength and longevity of the final product, and that the construction costs to be borne by the government and people of Guyana, are resolved contemporaneously. It is not unknown that a design-build contractor can leave behind protracted glitches for eventual operators of a project, precipitated by the mode of design or nature of construction. Then disputes which arise between the government and CSCEC, both as to design-development and construction as well as to specific costs, should also be resolved during the course of construction.

This aspect needs adherence to dispute settlement procedures, and the consultants must have truly independent standing to render assistance to government in this regard. Both issues (that is: design and costs, and disputes) demand written, contractually embedded protocols, as indeed the two issues are integrated. Hence firm arrangements must be put in place to monitor and evaluate design completion, and so ensure that the bridge is of satisfactory value over its life-cycle. Though final construction costs may not be known, financial management appropriate for the project’s nature and scale must be assured, all with minimal disruption due to disputes, if the two-year completion period is to ever materialise.