Jun 04 - Mena Denies Using Financial Secretary Position To Secure MidTown Parking Advantage
Albert Mena has denied that he used his position as Financial Secretary to secure any advantage in respect of the parking he purchased at the MidTown car park. In statement issued to the press, Mr Mena explains that the size of his parking - and that of around 40 others - increased following a design change but that they still sold for the original price. He also expresses his sadness at Roy Clinton’s “unfounded and serious allegations” against him.
Mr Mena said:
“I am issuing this personal statement to repudiate the inaccurate and biased statement issued against me by the Hon Roy Clinton MP.
“It is indeed correct that I bought a parking at Midtown. However the allegation that I used my position, as Financial Secretary, to seek any advantage in respect of that parking is untrue and not substantiated by the facts. The parkings were not delineated by me. Mr Clinton’s allegation that similar parkings to mine were sold for a higher price at the time when I bought mine is entirely false.
“I reserved one of the parkings, which was larger than the standard size, at 3.2 metres wide, and agreed to pay the stated price. A design change to the building increased the size of my parking as well as the size of many other parkings. If Mr Clinton had bothered to look at the original plans, particularly the one at the reservation stage, he would see that that was the case. The redesign of the building resulted in the release of fallow space (namely spaces that otherwise would not be accessible and could not be used) next to what I had already bought. Around 40 parkings also have fallow spaces and despite these design changes were all sold for the original reservation price. All those persons who bought parkings at the same time as I did and which had fallow spaces paid exactly the same price that I did. This gives the lie to Mr Clinton’s accusations. All fallow spaces were unilaterally allocated by the Developer.
“I am truly saddened that a Member of Parliament who has been a professional colleague of mine for many years should make such unfounded and serious allegations against me, a Government Official who is not involved in politics. Mr Clinton has done this without the courtesy of affording me the opportunity to explain or discuss the matter with him, either personally or over the phone. This shows a lack of good faith on his part. Whatever Mr Clinton’s motives he has not had any regard whatsoever for the potential damage to my reputation. I therefore have no choice but to reserve my rights in respect of this defamation.
“I hope that on reflection Mr Clinton will retract his unworthy statement.”
{fcomment}
