By SANCHESKA BROWN Tribune Staff Reporter sbrown@tribunemedia.net A HEATED row broke out in the House of Assembly yesterday after Public Accounts Committee chairman Dr Bernard Nottage claimed the pace and operation of the New Providence Infrastructure Improvement Project was affected by political considerations. While presenting the committee's review of the NPIIP and related government spending in the House of Assembly, Dr Nottage said evidence showed the contractor was directed by the Ministry of Works and Transport (MOWT) to complete the west route by August 31, 2010 for "political and public relations" reasons. "In a Dispute Board Meeting, the Permanent Secretary of the MOWT expressed the government's concerns about the negative effect the project might have on the General Elections scheduled for mid-2012. Indeed, the pressure was brought to bear for the public to be reassured 'the end was in sight' when it was clear this was not the case," he said. "Furthermore, the Cabinet made a concerted decision to open construction on additional fronts recognising there would be a significant cost increase as well as a significant inconvenience and disruption to lives of Bahamians. Your committee concluded that these directives by the government were taken for purely political considerations." Dr Nottage said the committee spent a considerable time reviewing the NPIIP because of the concern expressed by the Auditor General in his 2009 report and because of the many complaints expressed publicity by thousands of road users. After three months of interviews, he said the committee found a gross amount of issues that caused delays in the project that were avoidable and a direct result of negligence, including poor co-ordination of utilities, poor quality of work, failure to comply with financial obligations in contract, traffic mismanagement, cost overruns and political influence. Chaos erupted after Dr Nottage tabled the PAC findings and Pinderidge MP Kawsi Thompson attempted to present an additional minority report. Opposition members contended, under the rules of the House, there were no provisions made for a separate minority report to be tabled. Dr Nottage said, while the opposition has no objection to the minority report, the government was going about it "in the wrong way". Mr Thompson contended, that the opposition was "afraid of the findings", a charge Dr Nottage denied.