Are MPs interfering with the procurement process?

It started with the Laptop project; then the Standard Gauge Railway project; we then moved to the Security Surveillance Project. Now, Parliament has blocked the new Mombasa-Nairobi pipeline project.

All these projects, despite the immense benefits that they point to, are now all lagging behind as unending “investigations” on the procurement process are initiated.

These projects are needed to help us deal with the challenges we face such as insecurity and the high cost of  fuel. These are projects that will propel the development of other sectors of the economy.

The delay will also drag the country’s momentum to achieving Vision 2030 which is supposed to elevate the country to a middle-income status. We cannot allow a few individuals, who may be out to make money, to delay the country’s development.

What is common with all these projects is that they are all worth billions of shillings and have attracted major international investors. But the growing obsession by MPs to block the projects then give them a clean bill of health later is not only suspect but disturbing.

Are MPs out to sabotage the country’s development or are they too overzealous with their oversight role? Why do they keep blocking these projects yet they know the country’s needs and their contribution to meeting them?

The country has elaborate procurement processes that have proven to be cumbersome but effective. Why are MPs only pouncing on public tenders just when they have been awarded while they can look at them from the initial stages? Have parliamentary committees provided MPs with an opportunity to make money and blackmail the Government and its suppliers? Are MPs becoming guns for hire and allowing rival companies to use them to fight their own battles?

There have been allegations that some MPs have used these committees to enrich themselves. These allegations, even if not proven, raise the question as to whether MPs have the best interests of the country at heart.

Often we have seen MPs question the procurement processes on flimsy grounds.

When questions were raised over the railway project, we had two committees of the National Assembly “investigating” the matter. The move by MPs raises the question on whether this is a prudent way of spending tax-payers’ money and parliament’s time.

MPs have been using these committee “investigations” to get extra earnings through sitting allowances and foreign trips ostensibly to conduct case studies. Some of this information is actually available from the procurement committees.

Was it not possible for the two committees to work together and have joint sittings on the matter? At the end, the Transport Committee and the Public Investments Committee came up with the same verdict – that the project should proceed.

We are seeing the same with the Pipeline project. The PIC has raised issues with the project just as the National Assembly Committee on Energy has. Remember, the courts and Procurement Oversight Authority (PPOA) have already cleared the project.

We must agree that we have procedures that guide the procurement process and there is need to ensure we respect the oversight institutions that exist. Instead of MPs interfering with the procurement processes, they should allow the PPOA, a creation of Parliament, to handle issues arising.

Granted, mega projects have in the past been mired in corruption, but this does not warrant excessive bureaucracy. We must trust our vetting institutions  to do their work without interference. Any procurement process has stages that see various committees vet the process. MPs should, therefore, not purport to have more credence and standing in society to throw doubt at every process.