Procurement commission could be seriously affected by PAC gridlock
The reluctance of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) chair, Mr David Patterson, to step down from that position, or end the gridlock, is putting at risk the continued employment of staff at the PPC (Public Procurement Commission) whose contracts are coming to an end. The staff cannot be on the job after the expiration of their contracts, as it is only the Commission that can authorize the renewal of those contracts. It would be illegal for anyone else to usurp this authority.
It would also be a huge waste ($ millions) of taxpayers’ money to have a PPC Secretariat staff without a functioning Commission. When the costs for rental, security, utilities and other services are added, the amount of wastage soars. The gridlock at the PAC should, therefore, not be allowed to derail the appointment and work of the PPC as well as put the jobs of the 20+ employees at risk, and undermining the foundational principles of transparency and accountability in the procurement and contracting process where billions of dollars are allocated annually.
The term of the last Public Procurement Commission that was set in motion in 2016, expired on October 27, 2019; but 2 Commissioners were each granted a one-year extension (until October 2020) in accordance with the constitution. Thus, from October 2020, there has been no oversight in the contracting process. In the circumstances, the challenge to transparency and accountability has become formidable.
The PPC, citing Article 212 AA of the Guyana constitution, indicates that its purpose “is to monitor public procurement to ensure ….fairness, equity, transparency, value for money and competition….(and) that the procedures of public procurement are executed in accordance with the Laws of Guyana.” While the PPC has no enforcement authority, it could make recommendations to Parliament for corrective measures, including the application of sanctions. Two cases involving malfeasance highlight the significance of the PPC’s role in contract administration.
In 2016 the Minister of Public Infrastructure David Patterson awarded the “Demerara Harbour Bridge Feasibility Study” contract in the sum of $161.5 million to an unsolicited vendor, LievenseCSO Engineering Contracting BV. The first Expressions of Interest for that feasibility study did not result in any vendor being selected. The Ministry was required to re-tender the solicitation but did not do so. Instead, it accepted the unsolicited proposal from the Dutch Company, LievenseCSO, and awarded the contract accordingly. The PPC investigated the contract process and found that it was awarded in the contravention of the Procurement Act. Minister Patterson and Rawlston Adams (of the Demerara Harbour Bridge) were recently indicted for this aberration.
Another well-known case arose in 2017 when the Georgetown Public Hospital Corporation (GPHC) awarded a contract to ANSA McAL for $605 million on a sole-source basis for the purchase of “emergency drugs.” The PPC investigated the contract award process and found breaches in the procurement rules. However, no one was sanctioned for those breaches.
image: pexels-sora-shimazaki