PPC rejected complaint over contract for Fort Wellington school extension
Guyana
The Public Procurement Commission (PPC) last December rejected a complaint by a bidder over the award of a project for the extension of the Fort Wellington Secondary School but the procuring entity, the Ministry of Local Government never provided any of the requested information for the investigation.
Bickram Motiram trading as Motiram Construction wrote a letter of complaint dated September 1, 2003 which was received by the PPC on September 6, 2003.
According to the PPC’s Summary of Findings dated December 29, 2023, Motiram alleged that at the tender opening, his bid was the lowest and that he had fulfilled all administrative requirements. He further submitted that he was “a well rounded and seasoned contractor with vast experience and resources which were all demonstrated and attached with [his] bid document.”
Motiram further acknowledged in the letter that he was cognizant that the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board (NPTAB) does not always award the lowest bidder but expressed frustration that his bid was overlooked for a higher bid and requested the reasons for this.
The commission said it reviewed the tender proceedings to determine whether there was any irregularity in the award of the tender.
In accordance with Article 212DD of the constitution, the commission on September 13, 2023, requested that the NPTAB submit to the commission within five days –
i. a copy of the record of the tender proceedings, including the Evaluation Report;
ii. confirmation as to whether the tender was awarded and if so, the date of publication on NPTAB’s website in accordance with S. 11 of the Procure-ment Act. If awarded but not published, the reason for not so doing;
iii. whether a copy of the Evaluation Report had been sent to the procuring entity for compliance with S. 39(3) of the Procurement Act, Cap. 73:05.
The Ministry of Local Government & Regional Development was similarly asked to submit-
i. a copy of the tender proceedings and Evaluation Report. If not in the possession of the procuring entity, why not.
ii. whether the procuring entity complied with S. 39(3) of the Pro-curement Act, Cap. 73:05, and it not, why not;
iii. confirmation as to whether the tender has been awarded;
iv. if the tender has been awarded, confirmation as to whether the contract had been entered into and if so, a copy thereof;
v. if the contract had been entered into, confirmation of whether the tender award decision was published on NPTAB’s website prior to entry into the contract;
image: pexels-dariabuntaria