THE NON-APPOINTMENT OF THE NATIONAL PROCUREMENT COMMISSION MAY BE A BLESSING IN DISGUISE

Oct 20, 2012 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

 

The Procurement Commission is in deep freeze. It cannot be defrosted because its activation requires the support of two-thirds of the elected members of the National Assembly, something that cannot be achieved in the existing political environment.
Perhaps had the political parties in the National Assembly not been as obsessed with control, the new dispensation that was achieved on November 28 last, could have led to agreement in appointing the members of the Procurement Commission.
However, the opposition has spurned and wasted the opportunity to have political accommodation with the government. Excited and carried away by having achieved the near impossible, a one-seat majority in the National Assembly, the opposition became obsessed with demonstrating the power of its majority of one and with flexing political muscles.
It has failed to be reasonable and has consistently tried to outmuscle the government both within and outside the parliament. The political aggression shown by the opposition has effectively neutralized any prospects of political cooperation.
The two sides are geared and ready for another round of combat when the new parliament convenes. Already the exchanges between the opposition and the government have been extremely hostile. There is no basis for political accommodation and once there is no basis for this then the Procurement Commission cannot be activated.
The Procurement Commission is established by Article 212 WW of the Constitution of Guyana. The stated purpose of the Commission is to monitor public procurement and the procedures of procurement in order to ensure that the purchasing of goods and services and the execution of works are carried out in a fair, equitable, transparent, competitive and cost effective manner and with due regard to the laws of the country.
The functions of the Commission as provided for under the Constitution includes the monitoring and review of the procurement systems to ensure that they are in accordance with the laws, the approval of the procedures for public procurement and the dissemination of such information, the power to recommend  modification of these procedures, the power to investigate complaints from suppliers, contractors and public entities and the power to initiate investigations to facilitate the effective functioning of public procurement.
The Constitution also provides for laws to make provision for other functions of the Commission. If this Commission ever comes into being it will end up being a super- bureaucracy, especially in relation to the large number of value of contracts awarded by the government at central, ministerial and local government levels. It will require hundreds of employees to be effective and its Budget is going to be in the long run, unsustainable.
Guyana can do without such a monstrous bureaucracy and it may thus be a blessing in disguise that the Constitution virtually makes it impossible at this stage for the Procurement Commission to be activated.
Article 212 X of the Constitution provides that the Commission should consist of five members experienced and with expertise in procurement, legal, financial and administrative matters.  These five members are appointed by the President after they have been nominated by the Public Accounts Committee and approved by not less than two-thirds of the elected members of the National Assembly.
This is where the problem arises.
Finding five members with the requisite qualifications should not be difficult, but finding five persons who will find approval of two-thirds of the National Assembly is a near impossibility, not given the confrontational political climate that presently exists.
In effect, the constitution demands that in order to appoint the Procurement Commission what is needed is the same majority that is required to change certain provisions of the Constitution.
There is however no vacuum created. In the absence of the Procurement Commission, the law makes provision for the operation of a National Procurement Board which reports to the Minister of Finance.
There is no reason why this body cannot be improved upon. There is no reason why fairness, greater equity, competiveness and value for money cannot be improved under the National Procurement Board.
But that requires strong leadership and it is up to the government to ensure that the system attracts greater public confidence.
Instead, therefore, of having half measures and occasional initiatives to improve the operations of the National Procurement Board, the President should give serious consideration to revamping the members of the Board and appointing persons so as to allow this body which is supposed to be interim body to enjoy greater confidence.
In fact, instead of being an interim body, this Procurement Board will most likely be with us for many, many years to come since the constitutional requirements to bring into being the National Procurement Commission will not be achieved given the fractious political environment that exists.

---

---