A probe carried out by the Office of the Contractor General (OCG) into the Government’s controversial islandwide $606-million de-bushing and drain-cleaning programme, has concluded that the contracting process went against established procurement guidelines.
Contractor General Dirk Harrison said the process, which led to Cabinet’s selection of the five contractors to carry out the programme, lacked transparency and accountability, based primarily on the anomaly which exists between statements submitted to the OCG by Everton G Hunter, head of the National Works Agency (NWA) — which implemented the works — and those from Minister without Portfolio in the Ministry of Economic Growth and Job Creation Dr Horace Chang.
Harrison pointed out that Dr Chang, in his response to the OCG earlier this month, had advised that the “contractors are recommended to the Cabinet by the NWA”, while the NWA’s head, EG Hunter, had advised that “Cabinet’s decision instructed me to enter into contract with a select group of contractors to do work in a specified amount”.
“Notwithstanding the fact that subcontracting was prohibited without the permission and authorisation of the NWA, subcontracting of the works was undertaken by five contractors without the permission and authorisation of the NWA. This amounts to a breach of clause 4.4 of the contracts executed by the NWA with the five contractors,” the report stated.
The contractor general further said that Hunter had indicated that the contractors were selected by the Cabinet utilising the Contracting under Emergency Circumstances procurement methodology. But Harrison stressed that there was no adherence to the strict procedures outlined for the use of this procurement method.
The probe was prompted by an email from then deputy general secretary of the Opposition People’s National Party (PNP) Julian Robinson, in November 2016, as discontent grew over the programme, which the PNP felt had been initiated to secure votes in the local government elections.
On Wednesday, after the report was tabled in Parliament, in a release sent from the offices of the Jamaica Labour Party, Dr Chang — who is the party’s general secretary — insisted that it had in fact disproved assertions that the mitigation programme was used as a political ploy. He said the public should note that the OCG had not uncovered any corruption in the programme.
Meanwhile, the contractor general made it clear that his office disagreed with “the apparent justification” for the bypassing of the National Contracts Committee (NCC) in the procurement process, as well as Hunter’s statement that the “Cabinet has unfettered power to contract under emergency circumstances”.
He noted that the NCC was “merely notified” of the award of contracts above $100 million weeks after the contracts were executed, and that the approval of the head of the implementing agency for contracts under $100 million was also bypassed.
Harrison asserted that while the Cabinet has unbridled power to provide general direction and control over the affairs of the Government, the Cabinet does not, however, fall within the scope of either a public body or a procuring entity.
“In this regard, the Cabinet cannot in and of itself enter into a contract for the procurement of goods, services and/or works,” he maintained.
Furthermore, Harrison said: “The contracts which were entered into between the named contractors were executed by the NWA, which is both a public body and the procuring entity, thereby requiring full compliance with the provisions of the GPPH (Government of Jamaica Handbook of Public Sector Procurement Procedures) on the part of the NWA.”
The NWA was also criticised for insufficient due diligence in the supervision and oversight of the works under the contracts.
“The de-bushing and drain-cleaning works were executed by labourers engaged by subcontractors and in some instances ‘facilitators’ with little or no supervision from the main contractors in the majority of instances,” the report said.
The OCG concluded too that the contractors realised profits in excess of 15 per cent of the contract value, with the highest profit margin of 76.44 per cent as at June 9 – excluding overheads.