Can We Afford to Waste Money on Tender Battles?

A Decision by the Central Procurement Board of Namibia (CPBN) to cancel a competitive tender to erect a veterinary cordon fence at a cost of N$126 million as Namibia seeks to combat foot-and-mouth disease has raised more than a few eyebrows. The tender had previously been awarded to a successful bidder. While protecting farmers and one of Namibia’s most critical exports deserves praise, cancelling the tender a mere two weeks after awarding it – and then hand-picking another bidder, one who came second in the original bidding process just a week later – is cause for concern. Transparency in Namibia’s procurement systems cannot be left to chance. It is imperative. It cannot be treated as an afterthought under the guise of emergency procurement. Millions in taxpayer funds are on the line.

Equally worrying is the fact that abrupt and unplanned cancellations of tenders such as these have a tendency to expose the state to unnecessary and costly litigation. The CPBN already faces legal action after cancelling a N$540-million school hostel food tender on the instructions of former president Hifikepunye Pohamba. In that case, the president reportedly ordered the education ministry to “use alternative procurement”. In both cases, the CPBN cancelled the tenders “because the procurement process did not create or achieve the expected outcome”. One is left wondering if this forms part of the government’s vision to “enhance measures and increase accountability to prevent corruption in government offices, ministries, and agencies, public enterprises, regional councils, local and traditional authorities, and the private sector” as outlined in the ruling party Swapo’s manifesto. The same manifesto commits the party to improving “the law-making process and procedures to increase turnover…