The prime minister yesterday seemingly threatened to disclose personnel file details on a former government employee who wrote an article challenging the administration\u2019s procurement reform implementation.<\/p>\n
Dr Hubert Minnis, while closing the budget debate in the House of Assembly, blasted Daniel Ferguson as \u201can angry man\u201d in response to a June 10, 2021, article published in Tribune Business where the latter warned that the \u201ctrue intent and value\u201d of the Public Procurement Act was in danger of being lost due to flaws in its execution.<\/p>\n
Daniel Ferguson<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
An irate Dr Minnis, asserting that Mr Ferguson as an ex-government contractor had \u201cbreached confidentiality\u201d with the article\u2019s contents, also suggested the latter\u00a0would have difficulty finding new employment or work as he asserted: \u201cWho would hire such an individual moving forward?\u201d<\/p>\n
This came just after the prime minister, in thinly-veiled references to Mr Ferguson\u2019s past career at both the Royal Bahamas Defence Force (RBDF) and Ministry of Health, indicated he might reveal details from the\u00a0ex-contractor\u2019s personnel files held by the government if the public procurement issue continues to be raised. \u201cIf you push me enough, I will,\u201d he warned.<\/p>\n
Dr Minnis was responding to Glenys Hanna Martin, the opposition MP for Englerston, who sparked the furore when she tabled Mr Ferguson\u2019s Tribune Business article some days earlier as part of the 2021-2022 budget debate.<\/p>\n
The prime minister sought to portray Mr Ferguson as a disgruntled former employee with a grudge, variously describing the article as \u201cmisguided\u201d and \u201cmisleading and inaccurate\u201d, but without explaining why or rebutting any of the details contained in the piece.<\/p>\n
The only specifics challenged by Dr Minnis were the September 1, 2021, date for implementing the Public Procurement Act, which he denied had been chosen for \u201cpolitical expediency\u201d so that the government could award multiple contracts prior to the new system being implemented.<\/p>\n
\u201cI read that opinion piece, which was riddled with inaccuracies and misleading statements,\u201d Dr Minnis said. \u201cI intended to ignore it, as I question the motivation of the writer.\u00a0But given that the member opposite [Mrs Hanna-Martin] brought it up in Parliament, I will briefly respond.\u201d<\/p>\n
Instead of directly addressing Mr Ferguson\u2019s concerns, the Prime Minister instead blasted the procurement practices of the former Christie administration in what some observers will likely view as an attempt to deflect attention from the issues surrounding his government.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhen we came to office, we found contracts for any number of vendors that did not go to the Tenders Board as required,\u201d Dr Minnis said. \u201cWe found contracts that did not go to Cabinet as required.\u00a0Months and months into our term there were people coming forward with contracts that were signed outside of any procurement process.\u201d<\/p>\n
Slamming what he branded as \u201cslack processes\u201d, the Prime Minister added that the Christie administration had promised public procurement reform but had failed to deliver, leaving the present government to instead complete the job with an Act that takes effect on September 1 this year.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt is an Act that is among the most progressive in the Caribbean, embracing all elements of global leading practices.\u00a0It will require publication of all contracts,\u201d he said<\/p>\n
Dr Minnis\u00a0argued that it was \u201cstrange\u201d for\u00a0Mr Ferguson to argue that the Government should have followed the Public Procurement Act\u2019s procedures because it has yet to become law, yet this is not what the article actually said.<\/p>\n
Mr Ferguson instead questioned whether contracts issued by the Ministry of Education had been tendered via the digital supplier registry, which is where Bahamian companies interested in bidding on government contracts can register, obtain information on tenders and submit bids.<\/p>\n
\u201cDuring his budget debate contribution on Wednesday, June 2, Jeff Lloyd, minister of education, practically bragged that nearly $40m was spent by the government on school repairs and that an additional $20m will be added for their continuation. Were these contracts tendered via the e-procurement supplier registry or the print media? Who were these contractors? The public presently has no idea,\u201d Mr Ferguson wrote.<\/p>\n
Referring to the Ministry of Education contracts, Dr Minnis said: \u201cThe existing policy and legal framework for procurement has been adhered to in the award of these contracts.\u00a0These were the same policies the side opposite ignored regularly.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhere appropriate, the contracts went to the Tenders Board or to the Cabinet for consideration.\u00a0Even though they used to ignore the guidelines regularly, this administration is using the same guidelines and procedures for procurement that the side opposite left in place.\u00a0They are the same guidelines and procedures that have been in place under successive administrations for decades.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe Ministry of Finance is busy putting in place the processes, procedures, rules and training to ensure that the September timeline is met comfortably.\u201d Dr Minnis then went off-script, adding: \u201cWe will abide by the law and related regulations.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe truth is that the operational leadership of the Ministry of Finance recommended to myself and the minister of state [Senator Kwasi Thompson] that the timeline be pushed back to September because of the complexities of the Act and the significant changes that are required.\u201d<\/p>\n
Dr Minnis\u2019 ire, though, was sparked by a further challenge from Mrs Hanna Martin, who argued that the Prime Minister was using the September 1 deadline as a smokescreen to distract attention from Mr Ferguson\u2019s concerns as to whether the e-procurement supplier registry \u2013 which has 763 registered firms \u2013 had been used to bid the contracts.<\/p>\n