A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Saturday, September 30, 2017
Scam in Tab purchase tender - To education minister’s attention!
After
the present government took office, secretaries and other top officials
of the ministries were changed. Accordingly, a new secretary was
appointed to the education ministry and it was special that the
presidential secretariat sent him to the ministry as a supervising
officer before his posting.
After he assumed duties, most top positions in the ministry changed
according to his wishes. S.P. Jayatunga, the seniormost officer in the
Sri Lanka administrative service and did a commendable job for a long
period as the additional secretary (procurement and construction) was
transferred to another institution. The new appointee was Anuradha
Wijekoon, who previously worked in a project of the Department of Motor
Traffic, and a close friend of the secretary.
He is new to the procurement subject, and was directly involved in fraud
and corruption in the issuance of driving licenses at the Department.
However, he told the staff of the ministry that he was a very benevolent
public servant and will be bound to perform his duties very
transparently. But, officers in the division came to know within days
that his ulterior motive was quite the contrary. Experienced officers
were transferred and novices to the procurement field were integrated.
As a result, the efficient, impartial and proper planning of the
division collapsed, and its assistant secretary came to be regularly
criticized by the suppliers and the secretary.
The procurement division became worse by the day, but the new additional
secretary took no heed and spent most of his time to achieve his
ulterior motives. For that, he brought down a supplier to the education
ministry with whom he has been having links.
A case in point is the tender to provide Tabs for GCE A/L students as
per a 2017 budget proposal. On 05 June 2017, the ministry published an
advertisement calling for prices to buy 195,148 Tabs. Cabinet approved
procurement and technical evaluation committees were appointed. The
latter comprised seven members, including a professor of the IT division
of the Sri Jayewardenepura University, an ICTA representative, and
finance and education ministry officials. That was sanctioned by the
procurement committee consisting of two ministry secretaries, an
accountant and a commissioner. With approval by the subject minister and
the ministry secretary, the technical evaluation committee prepared the
specifications. Bidders were allowed from the date of the advertisement
to buy procurement document at the payment of a non-refundable deposit
of Rs. 500,000.
A pre-bid meeting was arranged at the ministry on 15 June 2017. It was
attended by members of the technical committee, the additional secretary
and other officials of the ministry’s procurement division. Also in
attendance were more than 50 bidders, and several agents of their parent
companies. That meeting lasted several hours and faults in the bid and
the specifications came under discussion. With unanimous agreement, the
ministry’s additional secretary promised to submit the corrections soon.
The ministry then corrected the minor faults in the bids and the
specifications and handed over to the bidders. The closing date to
accept bids was extended by two weeks, until 12 July 2017. Ten bidders
readied their deposits and waited for the date. However, the ministry
published a newspaper advertisement on the penultimate day and further
extended the closing date until 31 July 2017. All the bidders were
surprised by that and despite their repeated inquiries, the ministry’s
procurement division failed to give a clear answer. They suspected foul
play, persisted with their inquiries and found out the following.
The extension was to gain time to start the entire process again after
the technical evaluation committee refused documents prepared by ICTA’s
CEO Muhunthan Canagey to be advantageous to a certain chosen party.
Also, the Windows operating system and the Office package which could
have been obtained by the ministry for a fee of just two dollars from
Microsoft have been replaced with the insecure Android system.
The procurement officers were in a dilemma as the hierarchy continued to
work in support of the additional secretary’s unilateral decision and
to serve the needs of the ICTA CEO. Then, the closing date was extended
through a newspaper advertisement further by three weeks until 22 August
2017. Finally, the tender was opened on that day to find 10 well known
companies having submitted bids. The values of the bids were between Rs.
4.1 billion to Rs. 10 billion. Thereafter, the ministry gave time for
the bidders to submit sample Tabs until 07 September 2017. The seven
lowest bidders met that deadline. Then, the technical evaluation
committee got to work. Watching all these closely, the additional
secretary made a plan, as discussed with Metropolitan company with which
he has had connections since his Motor Traffic Department days, to
remove other bidders from the technical evaluation report. The result
was the introduction of a new specification that all the bidders should
obtain a certificate from the US Federal Commission. The additional
secretary got the chairman of the committee to join their plot.
The bidders were quite surprised by the new specification, and submitted
an explanation together with the certificates they were having.
Subsequently, it came to light that only Metropolitan has the
certificate requested. Thereafter, the seven lowest bidders were out of
the competition and the eighth placed company that made a bid of Rs. 7.4
billion has been chosen and plans are being made to hand over the
tender to this company.
It is clear that the additional secretary Anuradha Wijekoon is
continuing with his habitual swindling in collaboration with
Metropolitan company. If it is given the tender, the state will incur a
loss of more than Rs. 3.2 billion. It is a question as to whether the
ministry secretary too, is a partner of this plan at swindling after
misleading the subject minister as there exists a government that came
to power with a promise to eliminate fraud and corruption.