By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

The Opposition’s leader yesterday voiced optimism that the Government’s financial watchdog will “look closely” at what he alleged is nearly $400m worth of public sector contracts awarded without competitive bidding.

Michael Pintard told Tribune Business he was “hopeful” that Brenda Neeley, the acting auditor general, will “dedicate resources and a team” to probe and audit some 621 contracts, valued at $396.79m, that were purportedly issues using the so-called direct award, or single source, procurement method between December 2023 and January 2025.

And he asserted that Carl Oliver, the Government’s acting chief procurement officer, testified that some public officials have “just accepted not to comply” with the Public Procurement Act and its accompanying regulations during an appearance before Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) on Tuesday.

Mr Pintard, who heads the Opposition-controlled spending watchdog, told this newspaper that numerous government entities - especially multiple state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and even the Ministry of Tourism, Investments and Aviation - are non-compliant with the Act because they are not issuing contract tenders via the online Bonfire procurement portal or publishing details of awards and winners on their websites.

Setting out his concerns in a May, 7, 2025 letter to Ms Neeley, the Opposition leader acknowledged that the constitutional independence of the Auditor General’s Office means no entity or person can direct or influence its work. However, he reiterated oft-voiced concerns over whether the Government is complying with the very same reformed Public Procurement Act that it passed into law in 2023.

Referring specifically to the Government’s own reports on contracts awarded between December 2023 and January 2025, Mr Pintard said: “These reports indicate that in total the Government has awarded some 621 contracts via the direct award (single source) method totalling $396.79m.

“Of these, some 33 contracts totalling $386.887m were over the $100,000 contract value threshold. Except for limited prescribed exceptions, contracts of this size require a competitive bidding method to be undertaken by the Government. It is our ongoing concern that there is no justification in the law for the award of many of these contracts by the direct award method.”

The Public Procurement Act requires all proposed contract awards worth between $400,000 and $2.5m to be approved by the Government’s Procurement Board, with those valued at more than the latter figure requiring Cabinet consideration and sign-off.

Mr Pintard asserted “that it is critical to have an audit review” to determine whether these thresholds are being complied with, and the necessary reviews and approvals forthcoming from the relevant body. He added that, between December 2023 and January 2025, some 39 contracts exceeded $400,000 and required Procurement Board sign-off, with five awards over $2.5m and needing Cabinet approval.

“Note in particular that there has been testimony by senior public officers at hearings before the Public Accounts Committee where some officers were unclear as to whether all contract awards have been comported to the provisions that require statutory provisions,” Mr Pintard told the auditor general.

He called for an investigation into whether the Cabinet has overriden any Procurement Board recommendations, arguing that this is not allowed by law, and added: “We note that many, if not most of the state-owned enterprises, are in breach of section five of the Act and its requirement that procurement rules and material procurement awards (over $25,000) be listed on the website of the respective entities.”

The Opposition leader also asserted that the annual procurement report has not yet been disclosed by the Government, as he blasted its “utter disregard for the procurement law”. Such charges have been vehemently rejected by Prime Minister Philip Davis KC and other Cabinet ministers, who have repeatedly argued that the initial Act left by the Minnis administration was too cumbersome and overly-bureaucratic.

Mr Pintard, in his letter to the acting auditor general, voiced hope that her office’s plans “would include a thorough review” of whether the Ministry of Finance, Public Procurement Department, and all agencies and state-owned enterprises are complying with procurement laws.

He subsequently told Tribune Business that the letter was designed to “formalise the concerns that we have, and encourage that they [the Auditor General’s Office] look at what the Government seeks to provide as justification for the award of many of those contracts as direct awards given that we could not identify any conditions that permit direct awards”.

The current Public Procurement Act, passed by Parliament under the Davis administration, sets out the grounds under which this method can be used. These include that the contract value is less than $100,000; that no suitable bids were received in a competitive tendering process; “reasons of extreme urgency”, such as a natural disaster; and other factors.

An absence of competitive bidding also raises questions about whether Bahamian taxpayers are receiving the best value for money, and the people obtaining the best deal, if a project is priced and given technical specifications by just one company.

Disclosing that the Public Accounts Committee recently provided the Public Procurement Department with a copy of the public-private partnerships (PPP) policy introduced by the Minnis administration, and seemingly left in place unchanged by its predecessor, Mr Pintard said ‘single source’ awards were only supposed to occur if the private sector entity brought something “unique” to the arrangement.

Arguing that such qualities were not present in many of the PPP contracts awarded by the Davis administration, the Opposition leader added: “We are hopeful that the Auditor General will dedicate resources and a team to look closely at these arrangements.”

And he also asserted that the Government’s failure to disclose more details on these PPPs, such as the roadworks projects with Bahamas Striping and its affiliates on Exuma and Eleuthera, meant Bahamians are forced “to take their word” about the financing costs - interest rates - associated these contracts and the ultimate burden this imposes on taxpayers.

“The Bahamian public are entitled to know how much they are on the hook for in these arrangements. Are they normal commercial interest rates, or is it a lot more?” Mr Pintard challenged. And, based on the PAC’s meeting with Mr Oliver, he said the Procurement Department at the Ministry of Finance has conducted training for both civil servants and SOEs on using the Bonfire portal and compliance with the law.

The Davis administration has frequently complained that, when it took office in September 2021, the initial Public Procurement Act had not been properly implemented as the systems, appointees and training necessary for its smooth functioning and administration had yet to happen. Mr Pintard, though, said the Public Accounts Committee was told these hindrances are no longer a factor.

The Opposition leader said that, when asked directly whether these challenges still exist and are causing non-compliance with the Act, Mr Oliver replied that “persons have just accepted not to comply with the law”. And that, when the Procurement Department contacted those involved on this, “they have still been non-compliant”.

“That was from yesterday’s interview,” Mr Pintard said. “We thought he [Mr Oliver] was very candid and forthright, and we appreciated that.”