Blame Sharing – Procurement system in crisis

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
NOVEMBER 13, 2024

Blame Sharing – Procurement system in crisis

It is well established that the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board (NPTAB)
along with the pool of evaluators are under immense criticism for recommendations to procuring
entities, of contract awards to questionable contractors. The team of evaluators have been blamed
publicly for using arbitrary evaluation criteria in the determination of contract awards. In some
instances, the lowest evaluated bidders are not even recommended for contract awards.

The President in his infamous 5:30 am, meeting yesterday sought to assign blame to the
permanent secretaries, engineers and contractors for incomplete projects. The hypocrisy is
perverse, ironic and mind blowing as it is the government’s institutional system which facilitated
the award of these contracts that the President so laments are incomplete; and now blames public
servants rather than his subject ministers.

Is this a misguided attempt to save his government face from allegations of corruption through
the national procurement system, now that 2025 elections looms?

A perusal of contract awards recommended by NPTAB demonstrates an inequitable distribution
of same in an already fractured society – unequal income gap, marginalised businesses (perceived
as non- supporters of the current administration) and limited practise of procuring goods and
services in rural communities.

These practices are fostering the inequality of opportunities for the population in construction
and services in oil rich Guyana, where billions are expended for procurement, most notably in
construction projects. And it is clear that a small percentage of the chosen elite benefit from
government procurement- the lion share is concentrated and allocated to the few while the
masses are given the crumbs in manual labour contracts. Are all groups benefiting equally from
Guyana’s oil revenues?

Government procurement which is also referred to public procurement or public tendering is the
procurement of goods and services on behalf of a public authority, such as a government agency.

Research has shown that in countries with high levels of corruption (Guyana CPI score is 40)
less money is spent on welfare such as health and education but massive investments are made
on infrastructure spending which offer a greater potential for bribery and minimise the risk of
subsequent auditing.

Is in now an established norm that public procurement contract awards are failing to start at
stipulated time, sub-standard or incomplete work along with those contracts which have been
recalled by the Ministry of Public Works. One of the most infamous contract awards to Tepui

Group Inc for the construction of the Belle Vue pump station failed most of the evaluation
criteria and has failed the project timelines with the mobilisation fund of $160.8 m. This has even
engaged the attention of the Auditor General. Yet, Tepui Group Inc has been awarded another
multi-million contract from the Central Housing and Planning Authority (CHPA) and as revealed
in the infamous 5:30am meeting, this project is also more than four months delayed.

It is no secret that Tepui’s principal, Mikhail Rodrigues known as Guyanese Critics is closely
affiliated with the Vice President. Some Evaluators have refused to sign off on contract awards
and some have resigned when such questionable and controversial contract awards
recommendations are made to procuring entities.

The Alliance of Change has observed that public servants have been thrown in the deep end and
publicly shamed and blamed for breaches in the procurement system while NPTAB sits on the
sidelines. In this context, the AFC would like to encourage public servants that their
responsiveness to the government of the day has limits.

The principle of constrained partisanship places limitation on responsiveness. Public servants are
career bureaucrats and are expected to serve alternate governments with equal loyalty and
responsiveness as – ‘apolitical.’ An obvious slant of partisanship to one government can
undermine confidence to serve a subsequent government. The AFC reminds that if there is a
crisis of obligation between the conflicting demands of ministers and their higher loyalty to
parliament and the public interest, the latter is above the interest of the government of the day.

The AFC supports the principle of integrity in public office which obligates public servants to
act professionally and not politically. Reject and if not possible document all acts which you
regard as either illegal or unethical. It is documentation which will ultimately protect and save
you. Integrity goes beyond what is required in the law and includes professional judgment in
procedural values of fairness, honesty and accountability in government institutions such as,
fairness in handling a public tender or accuracy in framing public information.

The AFC encourages all public servants to be fearless in executing their functions. Your loyalty
is to the Country not the unethical and or illegal requests of the politicians. END