Going to North Pole for help

THE EDITOR: Yet another incongruous situation appears to have arrived on our shores! Our Licensing Authority Records are in shambles and are in urgent need of computerisation. It is in fact, a National Scandal. Ten years of planning have up to now yielded, sweet nothing! The UNDP has been involved in the evaluation of submitted tenders in order to select the company considered best suited to implement such a system. An alarming cover story (Sunday Newsday June 5, 2005) and now an Editorial dated June 30, 2005 have identified what would appear to be interference with the tendering/ award procedure. The UNDP would appear to have gone well beyond its authorised boundaries. The UNDP (Newsday Thursday June 9, 2005) however, “denies interference in licensing contract” and later says “don’t blame us, we did our part.”

But, Is That So? These appear to be the facts: Foreign company “A” appears to have “lost out” to Company “B” which is the selected and preferred bidder by a majority vote five to two. Company “B”, a joint venture between a local company and “an internationally recognised and experienced outfit.” The local partner, are trained University (IT) graduates. Company “A” is a firm allegedly based in Iceland (a country with a population of 290,000). The local arm of the UNDP is accused of applying “improper pressure” to secure hopefully, favourable consideration of Company “A”, despite the acceptance of Company “B” as the preferred provider. Newspaper reports indicate that the UNDP proceeded to bypass the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Works, he having advised that the majority decision in favour of Company “B” the front runner, should stand.

The UNDP approached the minister directly, in breach of all accepted tendering procedures, as laid down by the UNDP itself! Newspaper reports also suggest that there were veiled threats, that “the UNDP Contracts Review Committee in New York would not likely accept a company other than that of the local UNDP’s choice” — and all of this for a bid that was obviously grossly undervalued, ie for one million dollars US versus the more realistic figure of four million dollars — as estimated by Ernst and Young). Is this a case of “bid below cost, secure the contract, then bawl for more?” (a well known bidding trick.) Alternatively, is this “continuing colonisation” whereby we are at the mercy of the “big outside agencies” that still dominate us? Or are we to be merely “taken for fools?” By the way, is the local arm of the UNDP so powerful — and does it carry so much clout — that it can foist upon us, an unknown and outvoted foreign company?

Is there the utmost transparency here — as would be expected, nay, required, from an agency bred in the bowels of the United Nations? There would appear to be a lot of unanswered questions here — all of this over a project that is sorely needed by, and is actually being financed by the taxpayers of Trinidad and Tobago, ie for a computerised system which would, hopefully, replace the outdated archaic and chaotic excuse for a system that we, from time immemorial, have had to endure. One would have imagined that agencies like the UNDP, were meant to advise and protect us — not compete against us. Finally, what about Technology Exchange? Can we expect assistance from Iceland (as close to the North Pole as we can go) for technical support, equipment maintenance, including dealing with sudden breakdowns, and even for collateral IT support? God help us if we now have to go the North Pole for help!

DEODATH
JULIPSINGH
Penal