Trinidad and Tobago<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
THE brother-in-law of a senior Cabinet minister received a huge chunk of the questionable multi-million-dollar contracts awarded by the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service (TTPS) under the tenure of former commissioner of police Gary Griffith.<\/p>\n
Checks by the Express revealed that, prior to 2018, the minister\u2019s relative was never on the pre-qualified listing of contractors\/ goods and service providers to the TTPS.<\/p>\n
Based on the findings by the Ministry of Finance Central Audit Committee \u2014 Final Report on the Audit of Procurement of Goods and Services and the Hiring of the Staff on Contract by the TTPS, the company in question benefited heavily from contracts being \u201cbroken up\u201d .<\/p>\n
The Audit raised red flags over the manner in which multi-million-dollar contracts were deliberately broken up to bypass oversight and scrutiny in the awarding of contracts. Instead, by breaking up the contracts various businessmen were facilitated and both the Ministerial Tenders Committee and the Central Tenders Board overlooked, the report stated.<\/p>\n
\u201cThese procurements were done internally by TTPS despite the fact that the values exceeded the CoP\u2019s limit. As such they were neither forwarded to the Special Tenders Committee and the Central Tenders Board for approval. This process is an abuse of the TTPS\u2019 policy as it is a direct contravention of the delegation of authority for the procurement of Goods and Services outlined in the Procurement Policy\u201d, the Report stated.<\/p>\n
In addition, concern was raised by the Audit Committee that several contractors on the pre-qualification listing, inclusive of the minister\u2019s relative, did not have valid statutory documents, yet the contracts were awarded to them.<\/p>\n
The three documents submitted which were not valid were Income Tax Clearance Certificate, Valid National Insurance Board Compliance Certificate and Value Added Tax Clearance Certificate.<\/p>\n
Various instances of financial mismanagement were unearthed, with the Report noting that the then-commissioner did not have the authority to sign off on contracts over $1 million to procure goods and services.<\/p>\n
According to the Report submitted earlier this month to the Finance Ministry, \u201cThe significant risks identified by Central Authority for consideration during the audit engagement were as follows:<\/p>\n
Collusion and\/or conflict of interest among stakeholders<\/p>\n
*Fraud and irregularities leading to financial losses and reputation damage<\/p>\n
* Breaches of internal controls<\/p>\n
* Weak control environment<\/p>\n
* Procurement non-compliance with legal and regulatory requirements<\/p>\n
* Unauthorised expenditure and payments<\/p>\n
* The non-achievement of Value for money and Financial losses.<\/p>\n
TTPS Sporting<\/p>\n
facilities \u2014$7.3 million facelift<\/p>\n
The Audit Committee in its Report noted that works undertaken by the TTPS to refurbish and renovate its football, cricket and hockey fields at the Police Training Academy in St James, cost taxpayers a little over $7.3 million.<\/p>\n
\u201cAll projects were tendered using selective tendering, inviting firms pre-qualified by the TTPS. Based on the project files presented, the combined contract awarded totalled over $7.3 million\u201d<\/p>\n
UK-based Lavender Consultants Ltd (LAVCON) was selected by the TTPS to supply artificial grass for the hockey field at a cost of $772,127.78.<\/p>\n
Additionally, the Central Audit team enquired into the date the turf was ordered \u201cbut was only provided with a memorandum dated July 28, 2020, from Lavender Consultants Ltd thanking the Head Planning, Research Project Implementation UNit (PRPIU) for the opportunity to order the artificial grass pitch.<\/p>\n
\u201cAs such, no documents were provided to the Central Audit to verify how Lavender Consultants Ltd was chosen for the award of contract for the supply of the artificial grass pitch which was valued at $772,127.78,\u201d the report stated.<\/p>\n
Recommendations<\/p>\n
Based on its findings, the Audit Committee recommended that the TTPS conduct due diligence when awarding and tendering for contracts. Some of the recommendations are:<\/p>\n
* The Planning, Research Project Implementation Unit (PRPIU) must immediately refrain from authorising payments and certifying works as completed prior to the completion of the procurement contract<\/p>\n
* The TTPS should ensure compliance with all Request For Proposals (RFP) required documentation to accurately support and reflect the proponent\u2019s responsiveness before being recommending for award.<\/p>\n
* The Tenders Evaluation Committee (TEC) must ensure consistent application of these requirements during the evaluation process to ensure fairness and transparency.<\/p>\n
* The TTPS should ensure that there is proper documentary evidence to support all decisions relating to the tendering process and ensure this evidence is available for third party reviews and auditing purposes<\/p>\n
* The TTPS should develop a formal system governing the selection of contractors from the pre-qualified list of contractors. This will strengthen the integrity of the process and mitigate against subjectivity and bias.<\/p>\n
* Effective immediately, the TTPS should conduct a pre-qualification exercise for contractors and suppliers. This should ensure the pre-qualified vendor list comprises:<\/p>\n
Legitimate companies that have fulfilled their obligations to pay all required taxes and statutory contributions; and have the necessary competence, personnel, financial resources and equipment capable of performing the procurement contract at competitive prices.<\/p>\n
* Furthermore the TTPS must immediately undertake competitive tendering via open tendering for the lease\/rental of vehicles to ensure competitive prices.<\/p>\n
* The TTPS must ensure that all payments to contractors are made only upon successful completion of contracted works and services and in accordance with the contract agreements to ensure there are no inappropriate payments for services that are not performed satisfactorily.<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n