AFC compromises on Cabinet’s no objection clause for PPC
The Alliance for Change has announced a compromise with respect to Government having no powers to object to contracts in the Public Procurement Commission, an entity which the AFC has called to be established before the party supports the passage of the Anti Money Laundering Bill.
AFC Executive General Secretary David Patterson
The party during a press conference yesterday said that it is prepared to work with the government to set in motion systems that will see Guyana being able to give a satisfactory report to the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force on February 28.
According to AFC Executive Member, David Patterson, the report will be able to present a road map for passage of the Anti Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Amendments Act of 2013 before Guyana’s next review in May 2014.
The party said that “this should cause the government to set aside inflexible positions and meaningfully engage the political opposition.”
The AFC has said that it is willing to support the Anti Money Laundering and Countering Terrorism Amendment Bill provided the Public Procurement Commission (PPC) is established. “We understand that the government has reservations about setting up the commission. We have indicated our willingness to compromise and reach a mutually agreeable position that best satisfies the needs of the nation.”
According to Patterson as a compromise and in an effort to move this process forward, “the AFC has prepared draft amendments to section 54 of the Procurement Act which we have already shared with the relevant stakeholders.
“These amendments further enshrine the right of all complainants including Cabinet to object to the award of any contract in the interest of ensuring Guyana benefits from both a working Public Procurement Commission and an amended Anti Money Laundering Bill. The AFC extends the office of compromise; we believe that the Guyanese people deserve no less.”
He explained that government said that it would like Cabinet to have a time period to review tenders “so we have prepared a draft which allows all complainants, Cabinet or anybody 21 days between the announcement of the award and the actual finalization. If Cabinet has any objections or any other interested person make those objections to the PPC, in all of it the PPC is the final arbiter.”
According to the leader of the AFC, Khemraj Ramjattan, in addition to the 21 days “we are also giving them authority to be a complainant against what the National Tender Board has awarded or to the person of corporate entity that might have won the award, but the complainant must go to the Procurement Commission.
So similarly, if a bidder is vexed about Mr. X winning, that bidder can go the Procurement Commission. The public entity that didn’t like the bidder that won as was ordered by the National Tender Board can now go to the Procurement Commission. It is a give and take we are trying to work out, a compromise to satisfy all.”
Ramjattan said that what Cabinet wanted however is that it must even have a no objection against the Procurement Commission. “That is not something that we are going to negotiate away. The Procurement Commission shall lie at the apex of the hierarchy.
Cabinet, if it feels vexed about a certain award going to a certain person or corporate entity, can complain to the Procurement Commission and whatever decision the commission makes is binding.” He said that the Court is available should anyone not be satisfied with the decision of the PPC.
The party outlined that given the attention that has been placed on the establishment of the Procurement Commission Government must have given thought to who would be their nominees to staff the PPC.
As such the AFC said it is calling for the submission with haste of the names of those person whom the government shortlisted so the Public Accounts Committee of the Parliament can begin its work to identify the five most suitable candidates from among all the nominees submitted by the political parties and civil society.