Saeed Al-Suraihi
Okaz
The General Director of the Directorate of Roads and Transportation in Taif has made accusations against the companies contracted to improve roads in the area by saying that there are too few of them, that they are using unsuitable or old equipment, and that they are unqualified. These accusations have been made to explain the delay in a number of projects.
When we hear these accusations, we can understand the reasons for the failure of projects in many cities and governorates. The question now arises as to how the Directorate of Roads and Transportation in Taif was able to issue contracts to such poor and ill-equipped companies.
How can they blame these companies for the failure of these projects when they were the ones who issued them with the contracts in the first place?
These accusations, instead of explaining the failure of projects, actually raise far more questions about the General Director and his Directorate.
What is strange is that when the General Director first liaised with these companies and offered them a contract, he must have set dates, schedules and deadlines. He must have also assessed the contractors. These assessments must have been considered at the beginning and would have formed part of the initial project. These issues should have been dealt with at the beginning, not toward the end when the project is being delayed.
