Dear Editor,
Since the PPP/C demitted office, the present regime has conducted several forensic audits, using firms and individuals that have expressed political opposition to the PPP/C, and even hostility. Despite the fact that these auditors have found no evidence of corruption, the media continues to spread disinformation.
The Stabroek News editorial of September 26, in its first paragraph said that under the PPP/C government “…there was a heavy veil drawn across the huge procurement sector.” This statement is untrue and completely unfounded.
We need to reflect on what the PPP/C inherited when it assumed office in 1992. The PNC, which now leads the APNU+AFC regime, had no tendering process. Contracts for projects, goods and services were given to their cronies and party financiers. The PPP/C administration not only changed that system, they introduced an open bidding process and implemented systems to establish and enforce transparency. These included inviting members of the media and representatives of the tenderers to the opening of the bids. Persons/companies that tendered for the job and they amount they bid were announced to those present and by extension to the public.
The media, therefore, clearly played a role in this process and yet the Stabroek News editorial speaks about a “heavy veil,” which shows either ignorance or anti-PPP/C bias and an intention to revise history.
The PPP/C was the first government in the entire region, and probably still is, whose Cabinet gave up its right to award contracts and only kept a “no objection” for contracts valued at more than $15M. It was the PPP/Civic that not only suggested the establishment of a Public Procurement Commission (PPC), but also passed the necessary legislation for its establishment.
Why it was not passed is the question that has been frequently asked and answered many times. Yet some sections of the media continue to ignore the explanation given and continue to repeat the half-truths and lies of the APNU+AFC.
It was not put in place because of the intransigence of the then APNU and AFC opposition.
At the level of the Public Accounts Committee, the then opposition attempted to take over by trying to appoint the majority of members of the PPC. They even proposed, unofficially, that they appoint the chairperson. They wanted to control the PPC.
In 2011, when the combined opposition got a one seat majority in the Parliament, they became more belligerent. They wanted to appoint all members and to remove the Cabinet’s no-objection role. APNU and the AFC were doing their utmost to bring the country to a halt. This was evident in their actions when the first Budget of the 10th Parliament was presented to Parliament. APNU and the AFC cut important developmental projects from that first budget. They also cut subsequent budgets.
Moreover, they opposed the Amaila Falls Hydro Power Project, the Marriot Hotel, the Specialty Hospital, the Anti-Money Laundering Bill, etc. These are but a few important projects designed to advance the social and economic development of our country.
Despite this negative position of the APNU and AFC in opposition, the PPP/C was ready to establish the PPC. However, after clearly seeing the intentions of the opposition, the PPP/C proposed the establishment of the PPC, but that the Cabinet retain the right to give its “no objection.” The opposition even refused to make this concession. Clearly, the establishment of the commission in such circumstances would have brought the country to a standstill. That was not an option.
It is apposite to note that the two parties now in government have adopted the same formula to establish the commission that they rejected while in opposition. Moreover, the reason that the PPC is not yet operational is because the regime is trying to subvert it. They claimed that they are recruiting the staff for the PP/C. Staff recruitment is a function of the commission itself and not the government. Clearly, they want to saddle the PPC with PNC support staff. Through this mechanism, they hope to tighten their grip on the PPC.
The abovementioned editorial is high in praise of the regime establishing a Bid Protest Committee, (BPC). Implicit in the leader is that under the PPP/C government this did not exist and that no appeal was tolerated. That is not true. Under the PPP/C, a bid review committee was set up to examine complaints and appeals whenever they were made. This comprised technical persons from the Ministry of Finance and the ministry/agency concerned. True, it was not a permanent committee, but was established as the need arose. This Bid Process Committee is just another job for the boys/girls scam.
The PPP/C administration has done more than any other in this country and the region to ensure and enforce transparency and accountability in government. The regime’s forensic audits and the fact that the head of the National Tender Board (NTB), who served under the former administration, has been retained and also has a senior position in this regime, is testimony to the fact that the regime and sections of the media intend to smear the PPP/C’s record without regard for the facts.
The Stabroek News editorial writer needs to get the facts instead of repeating, parrot like, lies, distortions and half-truths that have been answered time and time again. This newspaper, like all others, has a responsibility to present facts and fair comment to the public at large.
Yours faithfully,
Donald Ramotar