The sudden change in the scope of a project to construct a concrete bridge rather than a timber one at Yeovil, West Coast Berbice, at nearly twice the value of the original contract, and the failure to have the amended project retendered, was brought into question at the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of Parliament meeting on Monday.
The original project to construct a greenheart bridge was awarded to a contractor at a value of $2.674 million, the highest of eleven bids. It was noted in the auditor general’s report that no reasons were given as to why the lowest bidders were not considered for the contract. It was also stated that it was “in contravention of the Procurement Act” that the new contract was not retendered to give other bidders a fair chance to succeed in having the contract awarded. The new contract carries a value of $4.716 million.
Regional Executive Officer (REO) of Region 5 Ovid Morrison termed the lack of initiative to have the project retendered a “fundamental error,” and he, who it should be noted is the Chairman of the Tender Board, stated that no action was taken as regards the breach but it was made clear that it was “incorrect and a violation” and should not happen again under his watch.
Morrison also stated that he did not become aware of the breach until after the AG’s report on the matter and that he was unaware of any recurrence since.
In relation to the change in design, Morrison told the PAC that the contract to build the greenheart timber bridge was likely signed in the last quarter of 2015, and based on technical advice, just a few months later on December 28, the design was changed to a concrete structure.
He stated that the technical advice came in response to the structure’s durability and the width of the canal it was expected to cover. Regional engineer Dhanpaul Sukha, however, noted that the original design had been based on the funds available to the region at the time, and as funds became available from the savings of other projects, a concrete structure became affordable.
“Are we in Region 5 designing projects for use of our residents based on savings or are we doing it based on the need for these projects?” PAC member Nigel Dharamlall enquired.
Sukha assured that the design was done based on residents’ needs, explaining that the information reaching them from the NDC was that a footpath bridge was needed. He said later investigations revealed that that was in fact the case, but that they also took note of other important considerations.
“…Upon inspection we did recognize that they needed a footpath bridge because it was for the benefit of schoolchildren. However, after the design was done, based on subsequent inspection of the site we found that there were residents that were crossing cows very close to where the bridge is and such there was severe erosion on both approaches of the bridge,” Sooka stated.
Dharamlall, in response to what appears to be haphazard planning as far as regional projects are concerned commented, “Our engineering department, public works department, have to spend more time when they design projects…rather than sit and wait…I’ve had this experience before where agencies or residents come and make requests and engineers do not go out and visit and end up with projects that are of no use, we need funding extended and our budget is no better off, and our country suffers as a result.”
