Government yesterday hit back at claims that it was delaying the arbitration process over the termination of Pro-Active Management System's contract to build the new senior secondary school.

Government a spokeswoman said Pro-Active adviser Julian Hall's claim that the company is no longer responsible to its sub-contractors as a result of the termination is "simply wrong".

Pro-Active's contract was terminated last summer, and the claim of wrongful termination as well as other outstanding issues are due to go to arbitration.

However Pro-Active adviser Julian Hall told The Royal Gazette on Wednesday night that Government was dragging its feet over the arbitration. The company had agreed to all Government's terms for the arbitration three weeks ago, he said, yet Government was still delaying the process ? a move he suggested was intended to force the company into liquidation before the arbitration can be held.

"There is no basis for the claim that Government has been delaying the arbitration," the Government spokeswoman stated yesterday.

"(Law firm) Conyers, Dill and Pearman, acting for the Government, wrote to Mr. Julian Hall, consultant for Pro-Active, on October 18, 2004 setting out detailed proposals as to the constitution and the conduct of the arbitration.

"We did not hear from either Pro-Active or Mr. Hall for nearly three months."

Mr. Hall replied to the proposals on January 4, 2005, she said, and CD&P responded again on January 19.

Mr. Hall then wrote again on February 4, 2005, and CD&P expected to respond to him shortly, the spokeswoman said. The "reminder" letter Mr. Hall said he sent to CD&P this week was not mentioned.

"Pro-Active could have moved the arbitration process further if Mr. Hall had replied to the October 18 letter promptly, not three months later," a Government press release stated.

The spokeswoman also took issue with Mr. Hall's arguments that sub-contractors still owed money for their work on the site from before the termination should apply to Government for that money, not Pro-Active.

Mr. Hall said the terms of the contract showed that should the contract be terminated, Government would take over that responsibility, not Pro-Active.

"Government has been advised by the lawyers that this is simply wrong," the Government spokeswoman said. "The only party responsible to the sub-contractors is Pro-Active, and the arbitration between Government and Pro-Active will not affect this."