We don't usually give an interviewee two bites at the cherry, so to speak. But we have to do so tonight for UDP Chairman Mike Peyrefitte. And that's because David Gegg, the Director of Portico - which is the parent company for the Port of Magical Belize - made some very specific allegations against him last week. He alleged that Peyrefitte had actually consulted on the Definitive Agreement for the Port of Magical - and that Peyrefittee actually gave recommendations on how to improve it to his law partner - David Morales - who is the attorney of record for the project.
This is the same Definitive Agreement that Peyrefitte had previously said in a letter that he had not seen, and had not passed his desk as the former Attorney General. But now Gegg wrote that he basically vetted it.
So, which is it? We asked Peyrefitte today and he was only too eager to rebut Gegg's claim:
Jules Vasquez
"Will you act responsibly by retracting the unfounded and unsubstatiated statemements."
Mike Peyrefitte, Former UDP AG
"It would be irresponsible for me to withdraw the statement that I made and I double down, triple down, quadruple down, quintuple down - I don't know the 6th one, but I am planning to print a million copies and send it out. Let me just say that I have never been less afraid in my life than when he said that."
"In the beginning he tries to sully my name to try and muddy the waters and then he ends up saying something that he shouldn't say. This is what I said in my letter towards the end: I can say categorically that no time during my tenure any definitive agreement was recommended by the investment committee, approved by the cabinet or finally vetted by my office between the then government and port of magic Belize Portico. He has not disputed that. He has actually admitted to trying to circumvent that. He sent me a letter saying that in February of 2020, Morales Peyrefitte sent me a draft definitive agreement and then he says your partner at the time had several discourses with you as the attorney general and member of the investment committee regarding the terms and I talk about some rules of arbitration. That's an absolute lie. That's absolute rubbish. Months later, indeed an email comes stating that this a new definitive agreement."
"Yes, he is correct. I totally ignored it, because I told them don't sent anything to me and why would I look at the definitive agreement when no environmental clearance has been given, nothing has been done to get there and then not even the investment committee has look at it, recommended it to cabinet, nor cabinet has said lets so this. So why would I even pay attention to that?"
"Now he says that when he didn't get through or get his way with myself or Tracy, he went to another minister, a ranking minister as he calls it, who he is possibly assuming that advice from me and therefore made adjustments. No sir, no such thing happened. He is admitting that he couldn't get his way with me or Tracy, so he went to another minister. A minister who was not even a member of the investment committee. So if he has a definitive agreement signed quite possibly to use his word by that minister, then he is admitting that he frauded - he went around the policy of the government that he knew existed. Then that is him saying that he circumvented the process and he's being called out on it."
Jules Vasquez
"But I want to return to the first thing you said, when Portico retained the services of your law firm and he says in here you vetted the agreement and advise actually, advise your own law partner that the arbitration clause had to be amended as there was no way that your government would agree to the application of the whatever international chamber of commerce rules of arbitration. So he's making a very specific allegation that you were directly involved in shaping this investment agreement in concert with your law partner."
Mike Peyrefitte, Former UDP AG
"I already said that's absolute rubbish."
Jules Vasquez
"So that's untrue?"
Mike Peyrefitte, Former UDP AG
"That's untrue. I never gave them any advice as to anything."
Jules Vasquez
"He is saying that neither you nor Hon. Tracy Taegar Panton as members of cabinet and the investment committee can therefore deny that the committee and cabinet did not have constructive notice, if not actual notice of the agreement. Did you not sir, have constructive notice of the agreement since it was sent by email dated 1st June, 2020 from your own law firm?"
Mike Peyrefitte, Former UDP AG
"I know that it was sent to me. Now remember that email that came in June was after I specifically said don't send those documents to me, send those to the chairman. But I can say that when I got it, I ignored it the second time, because I told them you cannot send these document directly to me, send it to the chairman and I knew for a fact that whilst they had an MOU, we were not at the stage where any definitive agreement could be of any fruitful discussion."
Jules Vasquez
"Why would your own law partner or former law partner not obey your directive when you say "no send it to me."?
Mike Peyrefitte, Former UDP AG
"That's a question for him. Maybe that is why you use the word former."
Jules Vasquez
"However, he still does have a definitive agreement. In 2022 Mr Gegg made a cruise presentation at BTIA where he spoke about the definitive agreement and you can see there a picture of a definitive agreement. You were aware of how important the document is. So then if your ministerial colleague signed it, what would you say about that?"
Mike Peyrefitte, Former UDP AG
"I would say that was wrong. He should not have signed that."
Jules Vasquez
"So, Minister Erwin, you believe should not have signed that?"
Mike Peyrefitte, Former UDP AG
"I dont know. I havent seen the document. I don't know if he has signed it."
Jules Vasquez
"It says in here that he did."
Mike Peyrefitte, Former UDP AG
"Well, you want me to take the word of David Gegg? I have to see the document."
Jules Vasquez
"But if he did signed it?"
Mike Peyrefitte, Former UDP AG
"Then he is wrong."
And if Erwin Contreras is wrong, might Peyrefitte also be wrong to be so publicly playing favourites with the Port Coral project being developed by the Feinstein Group? For that, he had no apologies:
Jules Vasquez
"A conclusion that any sober observer might make is that you di sweat fever fi Mr. Feinstein. You are one of the signatories that a cluster of you all rushed to sign Mr. Feinstein investment agreement in 2017 - Tracy Taegar Panton, Patrick Faber and yourself. It was a three-star affair. You are doing this, you sent out your letter just to sweat fever for Mr. Feinstein."
Mike Peyrefitte, Former UDP AG
"That's another red herring, because contrary to what he has try to imply that I am sympathetic to the Stakebank project, I'm not sympathetic to the Stakebank project. I've been 100% full support of the Stakebank project. I've never made that private. I've always said that publicly. I've said that in cabinet, I've said that to the investment committee - to everybody that in my opinion that's the best project for the country and I maintained that opinion. However, when Mr. Gegg got his MOU and it went through the proper channel and I was outvoted, it went through the proper channel. No problem. When Waterloo got their documentation and it went through the proper channel. I didn't agree with it, but it went through the proper channel. If David Gegg's Portico had gone to the investment committee and even If I had objected, but it passed, went to cabinet and I had objected, but it passed. The prime minister instructed me to prepare the definitive agreement and they signed and that was the agreement of the government, then I wouldn't have any issue with that."
