Miffed by the continued refusal of the Negros Oriental 2 Electric Cooperative to appear before the City Council to answer questions related to the controversial order for concrete electric poles from China, the City Council has given its questions to the media, hoping to get answers from the electric cooperative.
A one-page statement signed by nine out of the 12 councilors and Vice Mayor Alan Gel Cordova listed 10 questions for Noreco 2.
The statement said that the City Council has repeatedly invited the Noreco 2 Board to shed light into the P 52.1 million loan agreement entered into by the Noreco 2 in April 2008 with a Chinese provider of concrete poles, Su-Mai International, Inc for 5,564 concrete poles.
The amount was to have been payable until March 2015, with interest, but the Noreco 2 paid the amount in full last December 2011 without discount.
The Council pointed out that of the 5,564 concrete poles paid for by Noreco 2, only 266 poles have been delivered and that Su-Mai could no longer be found.
The Noreco 2 Board has repeatedly declined invitations from the City Council, citing various grounds ranging from voiding allegedly grandstanding Council members, to it being a non-issue as they have already explained to the media, the statement said. The latest excuse, the Council added, is that the records are so voluminous.
The Council said they decided to pose the questions through the media because “Noreco 2 is comfortable with the media as a fora for discussion.”
The questions are:
1. Did Noreco 2 conduct a due diligence inquiry or plant site inspection on Su-Mai before it entered into a Commodity Loan Agreement? Who made the inquiry and when was it made?
2. Did the Noreco 2 General Assembly approve the Su-Mai deal? When? Is this on record?
3. When the deal was allegedly amended twice, was it approved by the Board? If so, did the management inform the General Assembly of such amendments? What was the decision of the General Assembly?
4. Considering that the deal was to be paid over several years, how much has Noreco 2 paid Su-Mai already? If Noreco 2 paid in full, why? Was it approved by the Board and who paid the full amount?
5. How many concrete poles have been delivered? Where are these now?
6. How many of the delivered poles have been used by Noreco 2 and where are they located? Do they require additional devices to be functional? If so, are those devices part of the agreement with Su-Mai?
7. Of the poles delivered, Noreco 2 paid 3.8 million for delivery from Cebu. Was this ever contemplated during the contract negotiation phase in 2008? Why?
8. Was the purchase of concrete poles consistent with any existing law as well as Noreco 2 policies?
9. Has Su-Mai been faithful in delivering its obligations as per agreement? If no, why not? What does Noreco 2 management intend to do?
10. In case Su-Mai failed to deliver all the concrete poles, who will bear the loss — the cooperative or consumers?
