Government is yet to assess what work remains to be done on the new senior secondary school at Berkeley, and how and when the project will be completed, it was revealed yesterday.

And it will not be meeting ProActive Management System?s severance pay obligations to its workers who suddenly found themselves out of a job on Tuesday.

?Government is not going to be paying severance ? not at this point. No.?

But they have agreed to pay the workers directly for a one week period from August 16 ? with 40 out of 50 workers having already received their pay cheques.

The ten workers who did not pick up their pay are advised to do so after 9 a.m. on Monday, August 30, at the Ministry of Works and Engineering headquarters on the third floor of the Post Office Building, Hamilton.

And a confrontation between former ProActive and subcontractor workers and Government is heating up over its decision to terminate the company?s contract and involve Somers Construction in the Berkeley project.

Government is also expecting a massive and complex period of litigation or arbitration to resolve outstanding disputes and what ProActive will be claiming as wrongful termination.

At a promised press conference yesterday, Works Minister Ashfield DeVent declined to answer any questions in relation to the dispute between ProActive and Government saying there was a possibility of litigation.

Premier Alex Scott ? the former Works Minister ? was not in attendance.

Mr. Devent said Government had no choice but to terminate the contract because it became clear that ProActive could not finish the project within the deadline.

?We were thus left with one choice. Terminate the contract, re-assess the status of the project and develop an alternative strategy to complete it,? he said.

Mr. DeVent said that Government had exercised its options under the contract and gave ProActive and its surety, Union Asset Holdings, seven days? termination notice.

He added that he had not yet met with Union Assets Holdings but planned to do so when arrangements to resume site activities are in place.

And Mr. DeVent said that Government will not be in a position to call upon UAH?s completion bond until the full costs of the project is known when the work is finished.

?We are in discussions with Somers Construction Ltd. to conduct a full assessment of the project, to advise us of the most expeditious way to complete the project,? he said.

?They will be working to establish a realistic completion date, but given their recent involvement it will be a little time before this will be known. This will require that the site will be closed for a short period, but every effort is being made to minimise the downtime and to remobilise the site as soon as possible.?

Mr. DeVent said that Somers had been asked to contact the project subcontractors to determine their interest in staying on the project.

?When the Construction Managers submit their report, we will be able to advise when construction will resume and indicate the new schedule.?

He said the turn of events were a ?great disappointment? to Government. ?It is even more disappointing to the students who will have to wait longer to go into this new purpose built facility.

?We have to accept it and do all we can to make up for lost time and move quickly to complete the school. Both parties entered into this contract in good faith, fully expecting a successful project delivery by an upcoming Bermudian construction company. Unfortunately, this has not happened.?

He said he stood by Government?s decision to award the contract to ProActive in the first place.

?They were the most responsive of the firms tendering on the project. The decision to select a small contractor was part of this Government?s commitment, when elected, to provide opportunities for small businesses that were not available to them in the past.

?There was, and is, nothing wrong with this concept. It is the execution which has run into problems.?

He said Ministry staff had ?worked diligently... and remain committed to do so?.

?Their goal, as is Government?s is to see a successful project delivered to the client. There has been a lot of misinformation about this project. This will be corrected in time.?

Mr. DeVent?s statement included a list of questions and answers deemed to be of interest to the public.

Details on the factors leading up to the termination were not provided however. ?Once Government realised that the project would definitely not be completed within the extended Contract period and by September 30.

?Government felt it had no choice but to take the steps it has taken.?

He said the Ministry?s consultant who had helped to hammer out the February extension agreement had agreed to the termination.

As to how far behind the project is, he said the answer to that question would come when the assessment was done.

And he said that all funds due to ProActive under the February agreement had been paid. The February agreement was hammered out after ProActive submitted claims resulting from the Ministry?s design, work order and other changes.

The two parties agreed to increase the contract value by $13 million and extend the deadline by one year. Finally, Mr. DeVent stressed that the contract value was $81 million, including the $13 million added in February.

?The Total Allocated Funds for the project currently stand at $102 million, but this sum includes not just the building work but all other costs associated with the project? including the cost of land, preliminary site works, tree transplanting and expenses involved in moving the ?Haven? to Bayview in Happy Valley Road ?which in itself involved a separate building project of over $2 million?.

The TAF also include consultants fees, Ministry staff time, a sewage pumping station and a contingency amount.

?The actual final cost for the building can only be determined after we now complete the project under the new circumstances.?

At question time he stressed that Government was simply in talks with Somers Construction, which has already been reported to be Government?s take over contractor, and it had only been agreed that they would conduct an assessment of the work to be done.

He could not say what percentage of the work had been completed, but did say that Government had handed over to ProActive about $64.5 million.

He said ProActive was being co-operative with the transition arrangements, when asked.

And in answer to another question he said he had taken into consideration the impact of termination on the workers and the union before making his decision.

?But at the end of the day, I?m also responsible for taxpayers? dollars. And it wasn?t a decision that was made by myself alone, it was a decision that was taken with the support of the Cabinet.?

Asked why it had taken so long to determine that the project was not going to be finished on time when it was obvious to the casual observer, he said it just wasn?t that simple.

?We had legal obligations so we had to go through a process to be sure. And again it was not something that we really wanted to do.?

Asked why the Ministry did not make an assessment of the work to be done and the implications of terminating the contract before making the decision, he said: ?Because at the end of the day, someone who is going to build it has to determine what they see at the site. For us to determine it is pointless.?

He said it was not necessarily the case that the new contract will be put out to tender once the assessment is done. ?Tendering is a long drawn out process and at the end of the day we just need to get the school finished.?

Asked whether he would agree to a public inquiry into the history of the project if ProActive requested it, Mr. DeVent said:?I am not prepared to address ?ifs? not at this point.?

The Minister was flanked by his Permanent Secretary Russell Wade and Acting Attorney General Michael Scott. None of the three could say how long it would take to build the school?s sewage facility, which was tendered separately by Government just months ago.

?I think the Government did all that it could,? Mr. DeVent said when asked if the company had received enough support given their well known problems obtaining credit.

He later defended his staff from allegations that they had been sabotaging the project and acknowledged that he was aware of such concerns. ?I probably said that it had been reported to me that that was the case. But personally I haven?t seen it,? he said.

?That has been reported to me from the other side. But from the time I took over the Ministry I have felt that the staff at the Ministry are committed. These are technical and professional people... and the longer this takes ? it reflects on them professionally as well.?