A bundle of documents from the files of the Ministry of Tourism reveals that Minister of Tourism Vincent Vanderpool-Wallace was in a war with the most senior officials of his ministry, as he ignored their advice to terminate a lucrative marketing contract to a company he allegedly brought to the ministry.

In a press statement issued late yesterday, the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) questioned why the minister fought against the termination even after advice from the government's lawyers that it was not in the ministry's best interest.  But the Free National Movement (FNM) struck back last night, saying, "It is clear that the PLP has decided that since they cannot address the significant growth in tourism that The Bahamas is currently experiencing, nor can they deny the significant loss of air arrivals that came as a result of their ineptitude, they are now grasping at straws to attack the bearer of the facts."

The agreement for marketing services is signed and dated by the permanent secretary.  The ministry entered into the marketing contract with the American company in August 2010.  The contract called for the ministry to pay the firm $1.65 million between September 2010 and June 2013.  Strained relations with the minister and his staff became evident after Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Tourism Hyacinth Pratt became suspicious about whether the company would be able to live up to its end of the agreement.

The advice to the government from foreign law firm Hogan Lovells was that the ministry had good grounds to rescind the agreement and to request the repayment of funds.  This was also the position of the Office of the Attorney General.  The documents show that the minister met with the permanent secretary ad the director general of tourism to discuss the matter of rescindment.  The minister at the time reportedly advised that the marketing firm be given a hearing, as it appeared the permanent secretary had "a vendetta" against the company.

The permanent secretary also wrote that she informed the minister that she had brought the matter to the attention of Cabinet Secretary Anita Bernard.  "You accuse me of investigating the matter without your knowledge," Pratt wrote to the minister.  "It is not unusual for a permanent secretary to do research and thereafter bring it to the minister's attention."  The permanent secretary wrote that on March 27, she informed the minister of a directive from the secretary to the Cabinet, handed down a day earlier, that the agreement be terminated in accordance with legal advice.

The permanent secretary wrote to the minister:  "In a very short meeting with you, the director general [and myself] you indicated that I did not inform you about the research that was done and accused the director general and I of backstabbing you as you had brought [the marketing company] to the ministry...."

She wrote that she viewed the termination of the contract "as saving yourself and the rest of the executive committee and the ministry in general from an embarrassing situation..."
The documents show that senior staff eventually kept Vanderpool-Wallace out the loop as they investigated the firm, after he reportedly fought efforts to rescind the contract.  The permanent secretary sought legal advice from the Office of the Attorney General, which concluded that the contract was not in the ministry's best interest.

The PLP said, "It is clear from the record in this matter that the ministry officials simply did not trust him to be brought into the loop until they had gathered all the facts. This was understandable since it was the minister who had fixed [the company] up with the contract in the first place."  However, the FNM responded, saying, "These last minute accusations from the PLP are just a continuation of their strategy of disseminating overblown accusations or outright falsehoods."  The permanent secretary also raised concerns about a draft contract to provide for online bookings.  The PLP referred to this in its press statement yesterday, alleging that last October, the minister got the ministry to enter into the contract with a company incorporated in Florida just three days before that contract was signed.

The contract provided for "comprehensive online booking solutions".  But the FNM said in a statement last night that there is no agreement with this particular company.  The agreement -- a copy of which was obtained by The Nassau Guardian -- is dated October 21, 2011.  While it is signed by a company representative, the space for a signature from the Ministry of Tourism remains blank.

Minister's concerns
Vanderpool-Wallace wrote in a recent communication that he spoke with the government's U.S. lawyer about an attempt to terminate the marketing agreement with the company.  "I am confident that this action is a direct result of the work of my director general, Mr. David Johnson, to neutralize my attempt to install proper management of our marketing resources...  This action is completely and entirely without my sanction."

The minister also wrote: "There is ample evidence of the complete collapse of proper marketing services management within my ministry over the last few years that can be documented."
He wrote that the company provided a "full marketing plan" to the director general with little response.  According to the minister, the company set up monthly meetings with the director general but he was often unavailable.  The minister also expressed concerns that his director general was traveling too frequently and thus has been unavailable for meetings, even with the minister.

Vanderpool-Wallace said that without question his director general "is the most traveled director general in history and has thereby managed to avoid the tough decisions involved in establishing a succession plan and a senior executive team that has the talent to take tourism forward".
The minister also wrote that a senior tourism official assigned to Grand Bahama spends little time on that island "and since his engagement, we have managed to run increasingly more expensive visitor acquisition programs for Grand Bahama.  "This latest request that initiated this note is growing evidence of the management catastrophe that looms in Grand Bahama."  The minister also wrote: "We are now experiencing the lowest level of Bahamas advertising in memory, if not history."

In response to the minister on April 24, the permanent secretary defended the director general's performance and reminded the minister that the decision to act on legal advice the government received on the matter came through the secretary to the Cabinet.  Johnson himself expressed concerns about the marketing contract in question.  On January 13, 2012, the director general wrote legal counsel Alva Coakley, saying that quite some time ago, he drafted concerns relating to the contract and invited the marketing firm "to renegotiate out that which was not being delivered and to negotiate in that which we needed that was not being supplied".

According to Johnson, the position of the company's principal was that any additions would have to result in the marketing firm sourcing such talent at additional fees and compensation to the ministry.  Johnson said he determined there was no value in paying the firm to "do with less competence that which we could do at lower cost to taxpayers and even more importantly, when we retain the executives they work for the Bahamas Ministry of Tourism but when recruited by [the marketing company] they would be working to advance [that company's] business agenda that could very well be a conflict with the [ministry's] while we fund their pursuit in any case".

The permanent secretary wrote to the secretary to the Cabinet on February 29 advising that a payment was due to the company the following day and the minister's refusal to support her recommendation to terminate the contract meant that he would not allow it to be brought to Cabinet.  While there is documentation that the minister requested a meeting with the prime minister on this whole matter, there is no confirmation that meeting ever took place.

As far back as January, the permanent secretary urged action on the matter, saying, "We need to ensure that we act correctly". She warned senior officials that if it was discovered that they knew the contract was not in the ministry's best interest and did nothing about it, "the responsibility would rest on our shoulder and any consequent adverse actions would be well deserved".
"Our names are not now tarnished," Pratt said, "and I would like for them to remain that way".
She advised, "We have good grounds to rescind the contract immediately and to request repayment of our monies if we are so minded".

The documents confirm that the company was already paid $825,000, plus out of pocket expenses, before the contract was finally terminated.0

Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian