A report faulting government financing of the Heritage Wharf project in Dockyard has been welcomed by Ray Charlton, the chairman of West End Development Corporation.

Meanwhile, the contractor behind the cruise ship pier has released figures showing that the increase in costs for the project were only marginally higher than “normal” project overruns.

The report by Heather Jacobs Matthews, tabled during last Friday’s House of Assembly, criticised the Progressive Labour Party government of the day for delegating the West End pier project to the Cabinet Office and the Ministry of Tourism and Transport.

According to the Auditor-General, the Ministry of Works and Engineering alone should have been given responsibility for such a significant capital development project.

Mr Charlton, a longstanding critic of the Government’s handling of Heritage Wharf, said the report could serve as a “catalyst for change”.

He added that he had been encouraged by the release of an engineer’s investigation into the project, which was acquired by The Royal Gazette under public access to information laws.

“I am happy that the engineering report is out there in the public domain now, and happy as well to see that the Auditor-General has commented,” Mr Charlton said. “It has taken a long time.

“It has been my intent to seek answers on this project for close to four years.

“I hope that with the Auditor-General’s report being out there, as well as the engineering report, that we have a positive outcome, and that somewhere along the line justice will prevail. I can’t see this as business as normal.”

The Auditor-General has accused the Government of “blatant disregard” for the rules on the spending of public funds and recommended that sanctions be applied, including appearing before the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).

“There is evidence of financial irregularity as well as shoddy design,” Mr Charlton said. “The public deserves to learn what went on. Minimally, the Government should seek civil comprensation through the courts.

“But I don’t believe that this matter should rest here, and I don’t have faith in the PAC, based on previous experiences where problems have been identified, where they become a topic of conversation for a week or maybe a month and nothing else happens.

“I have no confidence. The PAC has no teeth and I’m not sure that the Auditor-General has the tools she needs to follow the money trail. This should be a catalyst for change, where finally the taxpayers of Bermuda can get answers, and we can possibly recover some of the money that was spent. They say that justice delayed is justice denied; we have already been delayed.”

The report by Ms Jacobs Matthews faulted “cost overruns and subsequent spending on the $60 million project”. However, according to documents provided by Correia Construction, the company awarded the contract, the often cited original cost of $35 million came from prelimary drawings only.

That figure had been based on drawings provided by the overseas engineering company Bermello Ajamil. In a statement to this newspaper, the company described the early drafts as “very much preliminary”, adding: “Despite only having preliminary drawings, we needed to commence the project so it gave us a real chance of achieving the completion date of April 2009. This was stressed to the Government.

“A revised cost of $47.8 million was submitted on September 22, 2007. We commenced the project on September 5, 2007 ... the total contract amount by the end of the project totalled $54.27 million. This is a 13 per cent increase from the number submitted in September 2007. Please note that project overruns normally run at approximately 10 per cent.”