Former National Irrigation Board (NIB) chief executive Daniel Barasa has shifted blame for the award of 15 irregular tenders for projects in Turkana County worth Sh953 million to the agency’s tender committee.
Mr Barasa, who had been threatened with arrest for failing to appear before a parliamentary probe committee, said that he was not involved in procuring the projects and that the blame should rest with the tender committee.
“Under the former Procurement Act the accounting officer was merely a rubber stamp,” Mr Barasa told the Public Investment Committee chaired by Eldas MP Adan Keynan.
The Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (PPOA) in a report to Parliament said NIB was in breach of procurement laws, including revising contract costs, issuing restricted tenders beyond the Sh20 million limit and tenders committee meetings proceeding without quorum.
Other breaches include revising the evaluation of bids to favour targeted firms, shortening the procurement stages and issuing contracts without set documents like performance bonds.
NIB has been racing to use River Turkwel, River Kerio and Lake Turkana to irrigate the semi-arid Turkana and neighbouring counties to make food secure and wean its residents from relying on state-funded relief food for their dietary needs.
Mr Barasa had been given an ultimatum to appear before PIC by Thursday or face arrest. His session with the committee Thursday lasted five hours.
In majority of the cases, the NIB has been accused of awarding the contracts despite the absence of preliminary, technical and evaluation criteria applied to approve tenders.
For instance, NIB issued two contracts worth Sh130.6 million to Tosha At General Construction and Turkana Salama Enterprises under restricted tendering beyond the set limit.
The law limits restricted tenders to contracts worth below Sh20 million.
Another company, Lumbe Agencies, was issued two tenders worth Sh123.8 million, but evaluation of both tenders was done by committees that had no quorum.
The NIB evaluation committee was also accused of not using a standard evaluation criteria and in some instances revising the measurement methods in what was aimed at favouring specific firms.
The PPRA noted that a number of the projects were complete, but not operational because of poor workmanship that saw walls washed away, blocked canals and gabions swept by waters.
PAYE Tax Calculator
Note: The results are not exact but very close to the actual.
