Management of New Speed Cameras: Police Evicted in Favor of Proguard Ltd
20 Mai 2013 - The Défi Media Group
Reduced role of the Traffic Branch police in the operation of new surveillance cameras on our roads. The Ministry of Public Infrastructure and Land Transport has entrusted its management to a private company Proguard Ltd..
Amazing! More than one had thought that the project of the new Speed Cameras would be placed under the responsibility of the police force. This for an obvious reason: it has the resources, skills and experience. Besides it is an inescapable authority.
However, the Ministry of Public Infrastructure and Land Transport has decided otherwise. It keeps the project under his jealously by building a Photographic Enforcement Unit to Traffic Management Road Safety Unit (TMRSU). Suddenly, the TMRSU had to move to a larger building with a revised upward rent. Moreover, during the committee stage of the budget expenditure, in December 2012, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Infrastructure and Land Transport, Anil Bachoo, justified the increase by Rs 1 million budget rent of his ministry.
" The increase is due to TMRSU to move to a new building this year and, at the same time, with the speed cameras that we are having, we need a special place to monitor from one centralised place. This is the reason why it has gone up and we have moved to a different building, "he responds to MP Mahen Seeruttun. The TMRSU left Cast Metal Building for Samlo Building.
Lacking skills and resources, the Ministry of Public Infrastructure and Land Transport has used the private sector. Following a tender exercise, a 3-year contract, totaling Rs172 161 111.10 was allocated to Proguard Ltd.. The staff of the company, registered in 1997, is given a prominent role in the Photographic Enforcement Unit.
The server stores the images taken by the cameras is under the control of Proguard Ltd and not the police. Thus, employees assigned to Photographic Enforcement Unit have access to images flashed vehicles have rolled over the limit. These employees transmit the data to the police cell, led by Sergeant Anauth, the TMRSU. Specifically a Photographic Enforcement Penalty Notice which indicates the number of km / h above the limit, the number of penalty points and a fine to pay.
Subsequently, the police engage procedures to inform the offender of the offense. It is informed within a maximum of four days after the date of offense by mail. While recognizing the wrongs he has 21 days to go to a district court to pay the fine of Rs 2000 and scoop 4 penalty points. In case of dispute, in 14 days, he must go to the central barracks to make a claim against a payment of Rs 100. There will be a visit to the Photographic Enforcement Unit to view the picture. If there is still no agreement, it will be up to the court to decide.
In the middle of the police, more than one fails to understand the motivations of the Ministry of Public Infrastructure to put this very important server under the responsibility of a private company.
"If this project had been assigned to the police force, the state has not had to spend up to Rs 172 million. We have people trained for this task. Our IT Unit is a guarantee of safety, "says a senior.
That the self sow panic
Came into operation on Friday, at the weekend, Speed Cameras gave a scare motorists were flashed even though they operate at speeds below the allowed limit.
"I was driving 55 km / h when the limit is 60 km / h. I was scared seeing me flashed "says Nazir Junghee, president of Van Lékol Committee which was flashed on the road Saturday night Bamboo to Flic-en-Flac. Monday, Standard Radio Plus has literally exploded in a flurry of calls from motorists worried about being punished unfairly. Speeding is punishable by 2 or 4 penalty points and a fine of Rs 2000.
Dev Nathoo, the deputy director of the Traffic Management & Road Safety Unit (TMRSU) allayed the tension by giving the assurance that no motorist will be unfairly penalized. He explained that these cameras brand Truvelo South Africa went off during the self-test. "The cameras automatically perform 'imaging tests." These images are sent to us to demonstrate the effectiveness of the devices. If the motorist drives by the authorized limits and is flashed, it should not take that into consideration. "The account TMRSU avoid the panic in the future by opting for manual testing. "You can see if the test can be done manually. Thus, officers will go on site to inspect the appliance so that there is more automatic flash. "
2012 balance sheet - Proguard Ltd. filed a wrong account
This week Proguard Ltd. shall cause the Registrar of Companies an inaccurate account for the 2012 financial year. She posted a profit before tax of Rs 43,994,558 and a profit after tax of Rs 3,784,025.
On Tuesday morning, the record contained Ltd. Proguard its financial results between 1997 and 2009. Thereafter, through the Cabinet Servansingh Associate, she lay 'Financial Summary' and not 'Financial Statement' for 2010, 2011 and 2012.
By analyzing its accounts Defi Plus falls on an error for 2012. The company reported a profit before tax of Rs 43,994,558 and profit after tax of Rs 3,784,025. However, provisions of Rs 844,240 were made for taxation. Everything suggests that Rs 43,994,558 represent the total expenditure of the company for that financial year. Following this logic, profit before tax would have been of the order of Rs 4,628,265.
The turnover of Proguard Ltd. has evolved gradually between 1997 and 2006, from Rs 470,000 to Rs 6,000,000. However, there has been a dramatic jump in 2007 to Rs 17.3 million, taking into account the new contracts. It increased to Rs 19.9 million in 2008 and Rs 20 million in 2009. Before doubled to Rs 42.8 million in 2010, Rs 46.2 million in 2011 and Rs 48.6 million in 2012.
This error does not help matters for the company which is in the crosshairs of the Opposition. The contract Proguard will be next Tuesday, a parliamentary question. The MMM MP Joe Lesjongard ask the Prime Minister Navin Ramgoolam to provide details on the contract awarded to Proguard Ltd. to manage the network Speed Cameras. He also wants the Prime Minister revealed the procedures established by Proguard Ltd and Photographic Enforcement Unit (PEU) and the identity of those involved in the Vetting Process for contraventions.
Proguard Ltd. was founded on February 5, 1997 by Naresh Kumar Tirthraj Parmessur, then sergeant of police, and his wife Indumatee Parmessur born Gopal. They each hold 500 shares. The activities of the company revolve around the sale of equipment, especially alarm systems: "To trade and deal in electric / electronic appliances and equipments derived, namely alarm systems and devices and the doing of business activities Such as May Be Conducive to the attainment of the above object. "
Initially, the company had three directors, namely Indumatee Parmessur, Gowree Parmessur born Chureetur and Tirthraj Naresh Kumar Parmessur. The two last named act as Alternate Directors. Gowree Parmessur died on 2 May 2000. In May 2010, the two directors of the company make the decision to purchase a plot of 1339 square meters in Palma for the sum of Rs 5 million Camizard Ltd..
In 2003, Proguard Ltd gets his license security guards service. With a database of intruder alarm growing customers, Proguard Limited decided to launch the service monitoring and intervention. It created an operational control room 24 hours 24. To date, it has more than 2500 clients. In addition, it launched a service train-of-funds.
Proguard Limited has won several major contracts:
(A) The CCTV system at the detention center Barracks
(B) The system of safety management system (video surveillance, access control system and sound system) at Vacoas Detention Centre and a police station
(C) the seat of J. Kalachand & Co., its subsidiaries and its repair, installation of burglar and fire alarms and CCTV systems alarms
(D) Central management security system including video surveillance systems to SICOM.
(E) Monitoring video Jeetoo hospital
2012 financial year
Turnover Rs 48,622,823
Administrative Costs Rs 39,893,212
Other Expenses Rs 2,756,119
Financial Costs Rs 1,345,227
Profit before taxation Rs 43,994,558
Tax Expenses 844 Rs 240
Profit for the year Rs 3,784,025
The financial statements
Year Income (Rs) Profit / (Loss)
1997 470,000 24647
1998 1150000 59941
1999 1572000 65414
2000 2278907 84899
2001 2788125 93688
2002 2984191 96881
2003 4889907 (210 162)
2004 4942591 71402
2005 5634612 2865
2006 6036094 (317,244)
2007 17373305 1173850
2008 19900232 1552225
2009 20191295 (2254444)
2010 42808413 3438481
2011 46208270 4400820
2012 48622823 ??