Removing Cabinet’s role from contracts illogical ...if held responsible for expenditure of funds, it inevitably must have a say - AG

Written by Gary Eleazar Tuesday, 04 June 2013 00:58

GOVERNMENT wants the role of its Cabinet preserved and it must be allowed to issue ‘objections’ or ‘no-objections’ to contracts that would be processed by the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board. If not, this would leave Cabinet in a “politically imprudent” position. alt Attorney General Anil Nandlall This was the argument proffered by Attorney General, Anil Nandlall, who yesterday said that Cabinet is currently preparing a detailed response to calls to having the establishment of the Public Procurement Commission in the current legal framework. Nandlall was at the time addressing the media at the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C’s) weekly briefing at Freedom House on Robb Street. According to the Procurement Act of 2003, with the establishment of the Public Procurement Commission, the role of Cabinet in the issuance of government contracts will be phased out completely. But according to Nandlall, should the role be severed, then it would leave government in an “illogical” position. The minister was adamant that even with the commission in place, it will have an oversight obligation on the role of Cabinet. alt Winston Murray The minister explained that the decision to have the phasing out of Cabinet was actually an amendment made from the floor of the National Assembly during the debate at the time, and did not benefit from, nor was in the Procurement Bill supplied by the then Cabinet. Nandlall explained that government’s current insistence to have the role of Cabinet preserved lies in the fact that the Executive will remain accountable to the people of the country and the electorate of the land for the infrastructure, and expenditure of public funds. The Executive, he stressed, bears responsibility to the electorate, and 99 per cent of infrastructural works undertaken in Guyana is linked directly to the procurement process. “If Cabinet is to be held responsible for the expenditure of funds, then it inevitably must have a role…the role of Cabinet, as we have repeatedly stated, is one of an observer rather than active participant.” Nandlall said also that even if Cabinet offers an objection to a particular award of a contract, then it still does not make the decision handing the alt Desmond Hoyte contract to another of the bidders, but rather the entire contract is handed back to the procurement process. Cabinet’s position to have its role preserved in the process of the issuance of contracts is based in principle and not the “ridiculous argument that it wants a role to play because it has some sinister motives.” With the removal of the role of Cabinet, Nandlall stressed it will find itself in a position where it will have responsibility over a project but will have no influence. Nandlall said he believes that government’s position on the role of Cabinet in contracts is reasonable, and they will be working with the combined Opposition to have the clause removed from the current law. The Guyana Chronicle was informed that the decision to have the clause in place that removes the role of Cabinet, was done through a deal with the then finance spokesperson for the Peoples National Congress/Reform (PNC/R) the late Winston Murray, former Attorney General, Doodnauth Singh and then Speaker of the National Assembly, Ralph Ramkarran. The amendment was made at the time of the passage of the Procurement Bill and was not included in the bill that government had drafted and Cabinet sent to the House for approval. In his bid to explain government’s position on the matter, Nandlall was adamant the Public Procurement Commission is an oversight body and its oversight function will also extend to the minimal role of Cabinet in the process. “It is not that Cabinet will be immune from review and oversight by the commission,” he said. Nandlall was adamant that the PPP/C is committed to the establishment of the commission, adding that it is the party currently in administration that revolutionised public procurement. Procurement under the PNC administration, according to Nandlall, was not a public process but rather undertaken by a number of agencies in a “deeply veiled process.” In that process of procurement under the PNC administration, Nandlall said that the key players included the permanent secretaries as well as the confidential secretary of former President Desmond Hoyte. He said during that era of public procurement, it was unknown what state properties were being sold and under what conditions. “It was a deeply veiled process, we have removed it from that process and we have said that it is a public process…Cabinet has a singular role and that is of no objections.” Under the current system of procurement, procuring entities such as ministries would invite bids that are then submitted to the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board which would undertake an evaluation of the bids supplied. Nandlall reminded that at the level of the Tender Board, the bids are publicly opened and the minutes of the meeting are also published on the entity’s website. Following the evaluation process, the Tender Board would submit its report to Cabinet, which would in turn either give an ‘objection’ or a ‘no objection’ to the award of the contract.