It is surprising to note that the Economic Coordination Committee (ECC) approved the procurement of the 400,000 tablets on April 15 at the cost of 25.33 billion rupees and the import cost of the detachable tablet was approved to be $414 each, said the statement issued by the TIP.
Chairman HEC Dr Mukhtar Ahmed asked the TIP to provide the information about the detachable tablet with specification costing less than Rs10,000, as reported in the Transparency International Pakistan’s letter to the prime minister, it added.
According to the statement, the TIP provided listed price from website of Walmart USA which is comparatively lower than the approved price.
It also stated that in case the specifications of the ECC requires Window tablet which TIP is sure that rack price of $179 at Walmart can be imported in Pakistan at cost less than Rs10,000 from the manufacturer and in case the quantity is 500,000 it is certain that the tablet can be imported at less than Rs7,000 each.
Moreover, the HEC responded that specifications will be fixed for the first year for procurement of 100,000 laptops. For specification for subsequent years, it will be reviewed by the HEC for any possible revision/modifications by the technical committee.
However, the TIP did not agree with the ECC decision to award the contract with variable specification for four years, without knowing the specifications for the second, third and fourth year, the statement said.
This approach, according to the TIP, is a serious violation of Public Procurement Rules (PPR) 2004, which requires exact specification to be provided to bidder.
It added that the TIP feels that the four year supply to be ordered in the first year amounts to be a collusive practice under the PPR. And if the HEC proceed with the ECC decision to make procurement for four years, the procurement will invite mis-procurement charge under Rule No.50.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 5th, 2015.
COMMENTS (3)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ