GET /api/v0.1/hansard/entries/522799/?format=api
HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 522799,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/522799/?format=api",
"text_counter": 207,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Hon. Mwaita",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": {
"id": 100,
"legal_name": "Sammy Sila Komen Mwaita",
"slug": "sammy-mwaita"
},
"content": "Thank you, hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, I will only take one- and-a-half minutes because I obey advice from the Chair. One point I wanted to raise in support of this Bill is that in procurement, the major problem has always been the evaluation committees. It is not the tender committee. The tender committee prepares and opens the tender having been processed by the procurement managers and when they form evaluation committees, this is where Accounting Officers manipulate the procurement process by appointing cronies to those evaluation committees. Clause 46(1) says that an Accounting Officer shall appoint, ad hoc - ad hoc is the operative word - evaluation committee comprising of experts; people with expertise among the members of staff within the procuring entity. This is the snake which I would hope before this Bill is finalized, an amendment is brought so that this is made very explicit that the evaluation committee will have certain criteria. I note also that the Bill talks about regulations on how that can be done. Secondly, because I do not want to take a lot of time, is that the Bill should also stress about the procurement audit; how audit can be done for the whole process in order to safeguard public funds. Finally is the tenure; the time it will take for a tender committee. It should be strictly two years; less than the three years for that review board. Review board takes three years but for tender committees it should be strictly two years and no more. That way the question of procurement, loss and pilferage will be overcome. Thank you and I support."
}