-following Tepui scandal
The opposition APNU+AFC yesterday called for a probe of the national tender board and the procurement system in the wake of the scandalous award of the Belle Vue Pump Station contract to Tepui Inc.
In a statement, it said that the findings of the Public Procurement Com-mission (PPC) on the Tepui contract for the construction of the Belle Vue pump station have outraged Guyanese across the political spectrum.
“We, in the Opposition, firmly believe that the Tepui contract scandal is only the tip of a large iceberg. Indeed, NPTAB was barefaced enough to inform the PPC that it awarded similar pump station contracts to others who also did not have the experience and prerequisites. We are convinced that breaches of the procurement laws and the award of contracts to the friends, families and favorites of the PPP government occur regularly and are in the tens of billions of dollars.
“We, therefore, believe that calls for only a criminal investigation of the Evaluation Committee for the Tepui contract or the revocation of the contract fail to recognise the magnitude of the mismanagement, corruption, and political interference in the contract award system under the PPP. Nothing short of radical overhaul and total cleansing is needed. Guyanese must note that the government’s entire capital budget is processed through the public procurement system. We are dealing with hundreds of billions of dollars annually. In 2023, the capital budget was G$388B. In 2024, it is a galloping $666B, approximately 58% of the entire national budget”, the opposition said.
It noted that the award of government contracts was a “Herdmanston issue.” – meaning that in the aftermath of the 1997 election and public protests, the award of contracts was explicitly identified by all stakeholders as a matter of central importance for race relations, social justice, and equal opportunity in Guyana.
It added that the 1999 Constitution Reform Com-mission (CRC) agreed, therefore, to establish the Public Procurement Com-mission as a body with constitutional powers to address this national problem.
The opposition charged that the PPP/C, during its previous term in office, thwarted both the establishment and the functioning of the procurement commission.
“Given the PPP’s track record, it is no wonder that the government’s only response on the Tepui contact scandal was to say, through its Minister for Finance, that it wishes “to assure the Guyanese public that this PPP/C government, led by His Excellency President Dr. Irfaan Ali, remains firmly and unwaveringly committed to good governance and accountability, including through the maintenance and preservation of public bodies that can withstand scrutiny.” Sheer platitudes! Sheer hypo-crisy! The government evidently regards Guyanese as either blind or fools”, the opposition thundered.
Stating that the Tepui contract award and the other such dubious awards are merely the tip of the iceberg, the opposition said that it was calling for:
1. A full and thorough investigation of NPTAB and the public procurement system.
2. The enactment of legislation to give the PPC clear-cut powers to revoke contracts and impose penalties whenever breaches, non-compliance, and fraud are discovered.
3. The urgent drafting and enforcement of regulations by the PPC using its powers under the current procurement act.
4. The termination of the Tepui contract in keeping with the position of former Public Procurement Commission Chair Carol Corbin’s position. The opposition reported her as saying that the Commis-sion should “recommend” to the procuring entity that they terminate this contract.
“What we want to emphasize, in closing, is that what we are facing with the PPP is a total lack of political will to stamp out corruption and cronyism. They have deliberately decided not to enforce the law, to empower only a narrow section of elite society, and as a result even the changes we recommend must be met with political change. Other-wise, we will continue to hear idle talk and no action. Guyanese must use their vote to ensure the PPP is prevented from further undermining our government and its institutions”, the opposition said.
More than six months after a complaint was lodged by APNU+AFC MP David Patterson about a pump station contract award to Tepui Inc, the procurement commission found major breaches in the evaluation process but said it could do nothing about it as a contract has already been concluded.
The PPC on April 16 issued a summary of findings since Patterson was not an aggrieved party and only entitled to recommendations on the way forward.
The PPC said “…on the entry into a contract, privity of contract issues arise. There is nothing within the statutory framework which permits the commission to revoke, rescind, recall and or in any way alter, suspend or stop the contract once entered”.
The award of the $865m Belle Vue Pump Station to Tepui Inc had raised questions from the outset as its key principal Mikhail Rodrigues was not involved in construction but was known to be a confidant of Vice-President Bharrat Jagdeo and with ready access to government.
In its 35-page summary, the PPC elicited answers from the NPTAB – whose evaluation committee made the choice of Tepui – and the procuring agency, the National Drainage and Irrigation Authority (NDIA). Not only were both tardy in answering the PPC, they only provided some of the documents requested.
Tepui was required to have had the experience of having completed one project of a similar nature within the past five years. Similar projects “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.
When the PPC asked the NPTAB and the NDIA to justify their decision, they cited what they described as similar-type of works which Tepui had done for other clients. They also admitted that two other tenderers for pump stations were similarly not qualified but that “lenience” was showed.
The summary of findings said that Tepui itself submitted as part of its tender, a letter addressed to the NDIA and dated June 13th, 2023, under the hand of “Winston Martindale, Director” captioned “Record of Past Work Experience” in which it is 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 also 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.
The PPC made a series of proposals for changes to legislation and then submitted its findings to the NPTAB and the NDIA for commentary after which it released the document on April 16.
