Latest update May 4th, 2026 12:35 AM
Latest News
- Foreign gold company pays Guyanese US$5M to earn up to 70% interest in 73,000 acres gold project
- Resource curse has taken root in Guyana – Ram warns
- OPEC+ agrees third oil output quota hike since closure of Strait of Hormuz
- Hamilton Green warns of ‘crumbs’ for citizens, pushes national unity to protect oil wealth
- EPA did not greenlight financial study on impact of oil spill – Exxon consultant
More on the tender for pharmaceuticals
Dear Editor,
Based on the letter published in the Kaieteur News dated Saturday, 30 January 2016 from Mr. Dyal (KN –”This tender of pharmaceuticals needs a probe.”), here is my take that may be useful. A “lot” normally has certain categories of goods that share similar properties and does not necessarily have to have goods that are supplied by a single manufacturer.
Possible reasons to tender using “lots” are to facilitate competition by allowing small and medium sized enterprises to develop their capacities and capabilities, especially in a sector that used sole sourcing in the past to acquire drugs. It also allows for risk mitigation, since, if a particular lot is unsuccessful the contracting authority would only have to re-tender the unsuccessful lots.
To allow bidders to only bid for selected items in a specific lot will not optimize value for money due to the high administrative cost in the evaluation exercise. The tender cannot be segmented further than the identified lots. The requirement for quality assurance and control should be indicated within the tender document (technical specification) and means for verification can include ISO certification and satisfying other regulatory requirements.
Most of the clarification regarding the administration of the tender should be available in the instruction to tender or a letter could have been sent to the contracting authority seeking clarification. The contracting authority is obligated to respond once the clarification is requested within the stipulated period stated in the instruction to tender. If the product is not banned I don’t see anything unusual with the process.
On the other hand, if the product is banned this would be unfortunate and a simple clarification from Mr. Dyal to the contracting authority could have addressed this issue prior to the tender opening session. A documented business case should precede all procurement.
This would have provided the opportunity for current research on the product and highlighted whether the product is in use, or banned, the benefits and cost compared to alternative products on the market. Sometimes, procurement documents are just duplicated without consideration being given to changes and challenges in the market.
Collin Lord
Share this:
Discover more from Kaieteur News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.