The paper quoted the minister say the PATT is losing $100 million annually, a cost that is underwritten by taxpayers.
"It is costing taxpayers $100 million and that cannot be underscored enough. The port has been running at a loss. The port is not run as an economically viable port; it is heavily subsidised," Maharaj said.
"One of the mandates the new board has been given is to develop strategies so we are at least breaking even in the shortest possible time. I have encouraged them to include the various stakeholders including the unions, the hauliers and the business community," he explained.
"We have to revisit the port economics. The port has been running at a loss and managed in a way not to benefit the country in any substantial manner. We cannot afford to continue doing business like that and of course this industrial action did not help the situation," he said.
"We cannot continue to run like this. We have to try to return to the days when the port was economically viable and move away from the decade of decadence under the last administration," Maharaj said.
"People have become addicted to cash without productivity and performance. We would be exploring all options to make the port viable including looking at the rates to make sure it's in line with international and regional standards. Looking at the operations and where there is a heavy layer of fat," he said.
Michael Annisette, president of the Seamen and Waterfront Workers Trade Union (SWWTU), disagreed with the minister and disputed the heavy losses.
He told the Express, "I think the minister was misinformed. After you deduct the periphery costs, it is really about $30 or $40 million," he said.
The Express cited a Government source which it provided data on the true level of losses from 2007-2011.
- For 2007: outgoing payments $229 million
- For 2008, outgoing payments just over $259 million
- For 2009, outgoing payments $273.4 million
- For 2010 and 2011, outgoing payments close to $300 million each year
No comments:
Post a Comment