PPP declares no confidence in Procurement Commission

…says lukewarm commitment made to investigate scandals

In September, the parliamentary Opposition had written to the Public Procurement Commission (PPC) to investigate the award of a contract to Dutch company, LievenseCSO, for a feasibility study into the new Demerara River bridge.
It had also sought an investigation into the D’Urban Park Project and the Government’s rental of a “bond” at Sussex Street for drug storage. However, according to the People’s Progressive Party, in separate responses, the Commission has said it will investigate all three matters.

But the Opposition has little confidence in a thorough probe being done, Opposition Chief Whip Gail Teixeira declared on Saturday at a press conference. According to Teixeira, this is due to the fact that while Chairperson Carol Corbin promised to look into the matters raised with the relevant entities, she also wrote that this would be done “within the confines of (the Commission’s) work programme and available resources.”
On Saturday, the Opposition party expressed concern about the Commission’s response, noting that the law mandates it has to investigate complaints. Teixeira, who wrote requesting the probe of the feasibility contract, even described the Commission’s response as scary, when its responsibilities are considered.
“The issue to flag is that phrase, within the confines of our work programme and available resources. Now the Constitution makes it absolutely clear that once there is a complaint, the PPC has to investigate it.”
“It cannot say, well we have a work programme and we have these 10 items, we have to do these first. Or we don’t have enough resources. This is unacceptable, this is a constitutional body,” Teixeira expressed.
Teixeira bluntly stated that she had no confidence the Commission would do an investigation.

Accountable agencies
Meanwhile, former Attorney General Anil Nandlall sought to stress that even constitutional agencies can be held accountable. He noted that since the Commission spends millions in taxpayers’ money, it is accountable to the people.
“All (such) institutions must understand that (they) are accountable, though they are the beacon of accountability and perhaps one of the chief scrutinisers of public spending. With the intent of deciphering accountability and bringing about transparency, it must understand that it must be acceptable and transparent. And it is being run with a lot of public funds. Check the salary of those people. And the rental they are paying.”
“Their functions and mandates are outlined in the Constitution. So it’s not a capricious or whimsical schedule that they can construct. They have to have a work programme that is within their constitutional mandate. And the matters requested in the letter are matters that ought to find priority within their constitutional mandate. I can’t understand (them) having anything more important to do than investigations and make recommendations. That is the substance of their function,” Nandlall continued.

D’Urban Park and Sussex St ‘bond’
This publication made contact with Opposition parliamentarian Juan Edghill, who confirmed that the Commission also responded in similar fashion to his request for probes into the D’Urban Park Project and the Sussex Street bond.
In a letter to Procurement Commission Chairperson Corbin, Edghill identified aspects of the D’Urban Park Project the party is most concerned about. Edghill, a member of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), noted that despite promises to the contrary, no account of donations received between September 2015 and January, 2016 was made public. It therefore queried the procurement process used for works on the project; as well as the scope a private company has to engage contractors and receive funding for a public project. The party queried the budgeted and actual cost throughout the project, as well as the final cost. In addition, the party demanded information on what payments were made to individuals and contractors up to June.
In the case of the Sussex Street bond, Edghill also approached the PPC to call for an investigation into the contract inked between the Public Health Ministry and a known financier of the coalition Administration.
Edghill had also indicated that the political Opposition was demanding “a definitive pronouncement specifically addressing if this award was done in a fair, equitable, transparent, competitive and cost-effective manner according to our procurement laws.”

http://guyanatimesgy.com/ppp-d...curement-commission/