This, he said, was something his party faced in the 2015 period as well \u201cwhen they tried to characterize the People\u2019s Progressive Party as being corrupt and so they are at it again.\u201d<\/p>\n
Noting the contents of the Stabroek News editorial, Jagdeo said that he had never seen such a strong position under APNU+AFC\u2019s five years \u201cwhen there was practically no public tender, when ministers were directly involved in their ministries in giving themselves contracts, there were no public tenders, there was no document to evaluate, there was no evaluation, there was no paper trail so you can\u2019t investigate anything.\u201d<\/p>\n
However, he pointed out that for the contracts being highlighted now there is a paper trail, process, and documents to support \u201cevery single one of them.\u201d<\/p>\n
Notwithstanding this, Jagdeo said that the last thing he would do is put his \u201cneck on the block for evaluators or the probity of every contract in this country\u201d, stressing that \u201cwe remain open to ensuring that the process grows in terms of transparency and that we can weed out people who are engaged in corrupt practices.\u201d<\/p>\n
According to him, this was done on \u201cseveral occasions\u201d where they have seen the growth of the system.<\/p>\n
Stabroek News\u2019 editorial had noted that one of the tender board\u2019s evaluation committees was found to have awarded a $2.1b Guyana Defence Force (GDF) project to Kares Engineering Inc over a better bidder.<\/p>\n
NPTAB<\/strong><\/p>\n Facing criticism over the award of the GDF project to Kares Inc, the NPTAB yesterday said that the evaluation criterion at the centre of the dispute had been \u201cdiscontinued years ago\u201d although nobody seemed to have been aware of this.<\/p>\n In recent months, the NPTAB\u00a0 and its evaluation committees have come under close scrutiny over a series\u00a0 of irregular practices which raised concerns about corruption.<\/p>\n After\u00a0 a complaint by Correia and Correia, the Public Procurement Commission (PPC) investigated the natter and found that the award to Kares Inc did not indeed go to the lowest responsive bidder. It also said that the evaluation committee was bound to follow the structure that no bidder below 80% of the engineer\u2019s estimate should be deemed responsive. Despite this, Kares was deemed the winner though the bids of Correia and Correia\u00a0 and S Jagmohan were better.<\/p>\n NPTAB in its statement yesterday said that it had noted the Stabroek News report `GDF $2.1b wharf contract improperly awarded to Kares\u201d dated June 23rd, 2024.<\/p>\n It said that \u201cThe Guyana Defence Force advertised for the construction of a Coast Guard reinforced concrete wharf at Ruimveldt and bids were received via public tendering in November 2023. Subsequently bids were evaluated by an independent evaluation committee. The evaluators recommended the lowest responsive bidder and an award was made in December 2023. The contract award for the aforementioned project was published in January 2024 and the Government of Guyana entered into a contract in February 2024, with the bidder who submitted the lowest evaluated bid, which is also the lowest overall bid.\u201d<\/p>\n According to the NPTAB , in March 2024, Correia & Correia Ltd\u00a0 submitted a request for review citing \u201cAny bidder whose bid is less than 80 percent of the engineer\u2019s estimate will be non-responsive\u201d.<\/p>\n The NPTAB said, that it must be noted \u201cthat this Engineer\u2019s Estimate was never published or given to the bidders prior to the opening of bids. It must be noted that the criteria cited was discontinued years ago and is not included in the numbered criteria in the approved Standard Bidding Document. Further, any modifications to the criteria in the Standard Bidding Document require prior approval from NPTAB in accordance with Section 23 (3) of the Procurement Act 2003. Additionally, please be advised that the complaint does not align with Section 52 of the Procurement Act 2003.\u201d<\/p>\n It seems that NPTAB is the only party in the process who is aware that this 80% benchmark has been discontinued.<\/p>\n (Table of bids from the Department of Public Information)<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/s1.stabroeknews.com\/images\/2024\/06\/bebi-kares-1.jpg?ssl=1\")
<\/a><\/p>\n