THE Alliance for Change (AFC), following the announcement that Guyana has been referred to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) yesterday, contends that the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) Amendment Bill, whose enactment could have prevented the country’s international blacklisting, can be passed in 72 hours.
The AFC is now willing to compromise, by amending Section 54 of the Procurement Act so that Cabinet’s right to raise an objection on the award of contracts is enshrined, something it had previously objected to.
The Procurement (Amendment) Bill 2013 was read the first time in the National Assembly last November, and aims to amend the 2003 principal Procurement Act by making changes to section 54 by deleting subsection six – effectively restoring Cabinet’s no-objection role.
Section 54 deals with Cabinet’s involvement in reviewing the award of procurement contracts and the phasing out of its functions with the establishment of a Public Procurement Commission (PPC), in the interest of decentralising the procurement process.
Currently, the procurement process is decentralised at the level of Ministry, Regions, District Tender Boards and the Ministry of Finance’s Tender Board. Contracts above the $15M mark are taken to Cabinet for its no-objection statement.
Sub-section Six states that: “Cabinet’s involvement shall cease upon the establishment of the Public Procurement Commission except in relation to those matters referred to in subsection one which are pending.”
Without the Procurement (Amendment) Bill 2013, once the PPC is established, Cabinet’s no-objection role will no longer be effective.
Government’s position is that if Cabinet is clothed with the responsibility to be accountable to the National Assembly for public spending and to be held accountable, the Cabinet must have a role in the procurement process.
The AFC had premised its support for the enactment of the critically important AML/CFT Bill on the establishment of the PPC, which the Government agreed to, provided that Subsection 54 was amended to maintain Cabinet’s no-objection role, but for over 12 months the latter was rejected by the Party.
Additionally, the AFC had endorsed the many conditions of A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) and neither Opposition party budged on its positions leading to a political stalemate that resulted in the non-enactment of the AML/CFT Bill, which languished in the Parliamentary Special Select Committee that was reviewing the legislation.
FAST-TRACK
The AFC, in a statement yesterday, now proposes a road map to fast-track the operationalisation of the PPC, and the passage of the AML/CFT Amendment Bill.
The Party said: “The AFC proposes that a process to fast-track the operationalisation of the Public Procurement Commission (PPC) be implemented with the government naming two nominees to the Procurement Commission, APNU naming two, and the AFC will name one.
“These five names would be submitted to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) to ensure they meet the criteria for the Procurement Commission. This could be done within 24 hours.
“The next stage of the process would see the National Assembly approving the nominees. Given the Government’s demand for Cabinet to retain a role in the award of contracts, the Alliance For Change has already indicated its willingness to compromise by amending Section 54 of the Procurement Act so that Cabinet’s right to raise an objection on the award of contracts is enshrined.
“Once the House approves the nominees they could be sworn in. Following this the Alliance For Change would have no hesitation in giving its support for the passage of the AML/CFT Bill. The Party believes that this can be accomplished within 72 hours. It is time to cut the rhetoric and let us move things along. The people of Guyana demand no less of their leaders.”
TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE
Asked by the Guyana Chronicle yesterday to comment on this latest development, Finance Minister, Dr. Ashni Singh expressed his dissatisfaction at the timing of the proposal by the Alliance for Change.
“The AFC’s offer is too little too late,” he said, before going on to explain that the AFC’s proposal is an impossibility in the time-frame stipulated, since the Procurement (Amendment) Bill 2013, which ensures Cabinet’s no-objection role, has to be passed in the National Assembly; after which the nominations by each Party have to be approved by the PAC.
More importantly, he said, even if the proposal was to be seriously considered, the establishment of the PPC requires a two-thirds majority in the National Assembly, and the AFC and the ruling party only constitute a 60 per cent majority.
As for Attorney-General (AG) and Minister of Legal Affairs, Mr. Anil Nandlall, his initial response was to question the timing of the position change.
“This is a tragedy whose consequences are yet to be assessed,” he said. “Certainly the financial climate and environment in Guyana will be different; certainly financial transactions across borders will be severely affected.
“Ultimately, it will result in added economic and financial burdens to every citizen of Guyana.
“Those in the Opposition and other cynics, who accused us in the Government of engaging in scaremongering tactics, should now be called upon to answer for their irresponsible and utterly foolish assertions.
“Significantly, this disaster has been brought about upon the people singularly by the arrogance, stubbornness and greed of the combined Opposition for political power.
“They (the combined Opposition) should now take a bow because this is what they have delivered to Guyana and its people as a 48th independence anniversary gift, blacklisting as our country’s birthday gift. I hope they feel a sense of fulfillment.”