Dr. Oburu Odinga

All parliamentary appearances

Entries 1271 to 1280 of 1641.

• 3 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the transfer of that tender to another procurement agency was done after KEMSA had attempted to procure. One of the people who tendered complained to the Public Procurement Oversight Authority that there were irregularities. Some of the irregularities that were noted in the original tender which was floated by KEMSA were:- view
• 3 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: (a) The procuring entity failed to conduct proper evaluation of the technical and financial proposals as was in the tender document. view
• 3 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: (b) The procuring entity did not visit any of the reference sites furnished by the applicant, contrary to the terms of the request proposal. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, because of that, it appeared that KEMSA did not have the capacity and that is why the tender was cancelled by the Public Procurement Oversight Authority (PPOA). That is when it was thought necessary to change the procurement from KEMSA to another procurement entity. Besides that, there were also reports from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and other Government oversight organizations which had issued some questions about the capacity ... view
• 3 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, it is not true that they tendered for 110 million only. If you look at the documents which were tabled here, the tender for construction and installation was for Kshs110,485,740. There was the element of recurrent expenditure. The recurrent cost was Kshs8,300,800. The total recurrent cost was Kshs24,902,400. That is what totalled to Kshs135,308,140. That was the recurrent costs over a period of five years. That is what the documents say. view
• 3 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, maybe, I can have a look at that document, including the minutes that the hon. Member said were not signed. The amount of money which was awarded was Kshs135,308,000. The difference is the recurrent expenditure which was included in all the bids which were there. If you check carefully, all of them view
• 3 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Authority which was given the responsibility to award the tender is the one which awarded the tender. But the Minister for Medical Services was before this House on this particular tender. Ours, as the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and Ministry of Finance, was to deal with the reasons as to why the matter was transferred back. But every Ministry has its own tendering unit and carries out the process itself. view
• 3 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I have answered why that difference is there. view
• 3 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the difference is because of the recurrent expenditure which was included in all the tenders, including the one which they are referring to. view
• 3 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, it was included in the tender for a period of five years. There was a tender--- view
• 3 Dec 2009 in National Assembly: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, there are tenders even for consultancy and there are others for various services. When you tender, the consultancy expenditure is included in the tender. It can only be wrong if it is not included in the tender documents. But for this particular one, it was included in the tender documents and all the people who tendered included this particular expenditure; and it is in the document which was tabled here. view