Whenever challenged about its longstanding nemesis, corruption, the preferred refrain from the ruling PPP/C is always for the claimant to present the evidence. That ruse has been employed as the PPP/C has been well aware that such evidence is difficult to come by and that many who could speak are too spineless or intimidated. Forty-four months into the life of this administration evidence is certainly now available in the report of the Public Procurement Commission’s (PPC) summary of findings based on a complaint lodged by APNU+AFC Member of Parliament David Patterson.
It has taken six months for the PPC to complete its task but its Summary of Findings, Tender No. 166/2023/21 should be required reading for President Irfaan Ali. In it he will find stark evidence of how the evaluation committee of the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board (NPTAB) violated many of the guidelines attached to the invitation for bids for the Belle Vue Pump Station so that the award could be made to Tepui Inc, one of whose principals is Mikhail Rodrigues better known as Guyanese Critic.
Tepui was required to have had the experience of having completed one project of a similar nature within the past five years. Similar projects, the relevant guideline said, “shall include pump stations, sluices and drainage structures”. Having been incorporated less than a year before, Tepui did not have these qualifications, yet the evaluation committee of the NPTAB found its bid to be responsive.
The summary of findings said that Tepui itself submitted as part of its tender, a letter addressed to the procuring agency, National Drainage and Irrigation Authority dated June 13th, 2023, under the hand of “Winston Martindale, Director” captioned “Record of Past Work Experience” in which it stated – “Our company was registered in August 2022 and has now commenced the process of bidding for projects, hence we do not have any past work experience but our team of personnel have years of experience under upgrading and rehabilitation of roads as indicated on their respective resumes.”
Tepui also did not provide a bank line of credit. It provided a line of credit issued by Puran Bros. Later a letter of credit issued by Caricom General Insurance Company appeared but this also was ineligible.
Tepui did not submit – as required – an audited financial statement as it was not in existence for a year.
In terms of equipment requirements, Tepui, the summary of findings said, did not show evidence of three pieces of equipment. It also fell short of its bid security requirement.
In any other well-ordered jurisdiction, Tepui’s bid would be immediately ruled out. One wonders how that bid was let in but many others rejected.
Why would an evaluation committee of the NPTAB favour Tepui and Mr Rodrigues? That answer probably lies in the fact that Mr Rodrigues has presented himself to the public as somebody well-connected to the government and perhaps the government wants him to have a contract. In several editorials and news items about the farcical award of the pump station contract to Tepui this newspaper has pointed out Mr Rodrigues’ ease of access to Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo and other signs of his connectedness to officialdom. So if an evaluation committee improperly favoured Mr Rodrigues it would likely be on signals from those in authority.
In its response to the PPC’s questions, the NPTAB also introduced the artifice of “leniency” in consideration of bids in utter contravention of the extant guidelines.
“The decisions regarding bid evaluation were consistent with past practices, where leniency was extended to bidders lacking direct pump station construction experience but demonstrating proficiency in similar projects”, said the NPTAB which then added most unbelievably, “Upholding principles of fairness, transparency, and accountability, NPTAB assures of its commitment to maintaining integrity and professionalism in procurement processes”.
No further evidence is needed of corruption under this government as it relates to the massive public expenditure programme that is administrated by the NPTAB. There should be a criminal investigation of the conduct of the evaluation committee, an immediate pulling of the files associated with this tender so that the police can probe the circumstances under which other bids were disallowed and the board of the NPTAB and its senior leadership should be removed immediately, a task that would be left to the President and/or the Ministry of Finance. Needless to say, the Tepui contract should be immediately cancelled.
It was not only Tepui that was favourably looked at even though unqualified. The NPTAB had the gumption to advise the PPC that a precedent had been set by the award of similar pump station contracts to others who also did not have the requisite experience. It cited the construction of a pump station at Devonshire Castle, Region Two which was awarded to Samaroo Investments and the Den Amstel pump station in Region Three to JR Ranch Inc. J/V GSK Excavation Services. The Pouderoyen pump station also falls into this category although there was no mention of this by the NPTAB.
So let us hear it loud and clear from President Ali. Is his government condoning the award of huge contracts on the public purse to unqualified contractors? If not then there needs to be immediate rectification.
People’s Progressive Party/Civic governments have had a long history of malign awards including the infamous Fip Motilall road and the recent Bamia school contract award to entertainers and football promoters. They have not learnt their lesson.
Following the issuing of the PPC’s Summary of Findings on Tuesday, the Ministry of Finance immediately released a statement which reflected no recognition of the transgressions at the NPTAB but ended this way: “The Government reaffirms its commitment to ensuring good governance, accountability and transparency in this and all other matters in relation to the procurement, awarding and implementation of projects throughout the country as it continues its accelerated development agenda”. The public waits to see how this will be manifested in this instance.
As it relates to the PPC’s disposition of the matter, that requires separate treatment.
