Annual general report of the controller and - Parliament of Tanzania

Annual general report of the controller and - Parliament of Tanzania Annual general report of the controller and - Parliament of Tanzania

parliament.go.tz
from parliament.go.tz More from this publisher
29.01.2013 Views

starting tendering procedures while the contract has already been signed and payments made since 1/11/2007. The other bidders were disqualified on the grounds of high prices; however, the price paid to P Squared was higher than those quoted by some other bidders. 7.2.5 Tanzania Ports Authority (TPA) Tender for construction of container staking yard at ex- TANESCO using consolidated system - Shs. 4,165,666,875 The audit tests on the contract between TPA and a joint venture between M/S Tangerm LTD of Dar es Salaam and M/S Techno Combine Construction LTD for the construction of container staking yard at ex-TANESCO using consolidated system at a cost of Shs. 4,165,666,875 revealed the following irregularities S/N Item Irregularities 1. Leveling contract 2. Joint venture arrangements -The work of leveling EX-PCMC and EX-TANESCO yards was contracted to CHICO the connection of which could not be linked to the main project of - construction of container staking yard at ex-TANESCO -Original contract sum was adjusted by 56.74% i.e from TZS.245,850,000 to TZS.385,319,000 following the actual BOQ verification of total quantity of excavation of 49,923 from 20,800 The evaluation committee recommended the work to be done on joint venture between M/S Tangerm LTD of Dar es salaam and M/S Techno Combine Construction LTD for a total cost of Shs. 2,184,046,000 (Excluding ___________________________________________________________ Office of the Controller and Auditor General PA&oBs 2007/08 134

VAT). How the Joint venture came about was unexplained to us. 3. Completion time Although the project completion period (45 days) was mentioned to contribute to single source and above limit procurement, the same was extended for 45 days from 29/5/08 to 18/7/08 and latter extended for further 43 days to 25/9/08 hence a 4. Status of the project and Value for Money total of 133 days. The site visit made on 9/10/2008 saw the contractor at site yet to finish the work which implies that the contractor was working without properly approved extended contract time. Further, value for money and the relationship between the nature of the project and the contract price of about 4.17 billion could not be measured as it needs special investigation. I am of opinion that the Authority was not given an opportunity to get better price and competency for the said project through competitive tendering. In order to be satisfied that the project costs represent the best price that could have been secured by the Authority, the management is urged to evaluate the project and or commission an investigative technical audit to ascertain and report on the fair value of the project. Further, failure by the contractor to execute the project within agreed time frame, the contract should be evaluated to establish liquidated damages suffered by the Authority and the same should be claimed from the contractor. ___________________________________________________________ Office of the Controller and Auditor General PA&oBs 2007/08 135

VAT). How <strong>the</strong> Joint venture came<br />

about was unexplained to us.<br />

3. Completion time Although <strong>the</strong> project completion<br />

period (45 days) was mentioned to<br />

contribute to single source <strong>and</strong> above<br />

limit procurement, <strong>the</strong> same was<br />

extended for 45 days from 29/5/08 to<br />

18/7/08 <strong>and</strong> latter extended for<br />

fur<strong>the</strong>r 43 days to 25/9/08 hence a<br />

4. Status <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

project <strong>and</strong><br />

Value for Money<br />

total <strong>of</strong> 133 days.<br />

The site visit made on 9/10/2008 saw<br />

<strong>the</strong> contractor at site yet to finish <strong>the</strong><br />

work which implies that <strong>the</strong><br />

contractor was working without<br />

properly approved extended contract<br />

time. Fur<strong>the</strong>r, value for money <strong>and</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> relationship between <strong>the</strong> nature<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> contract price<br />

<strong>of</strong> about 4.17 billion could not be<br />

measured as it needs special<br />

investigation.<br />

I am <strong>of</strong> opinion that <strong>the</strong> Authority was not given an<br />

opportunity to get better price <strong>and</strong> competency for <strong>the</strong><br />

said project through competitive tendering.<br />

In order to be satisfied that <strong>the</strong> project costs represent <strong>the</strong><br />

best price that could have been secured by <strong>the</strong> Authority,<br />

<strong>the</strong> management is urged to evaluate <strong>the</strong> project <strong>and</strong> or<br />

commission an investigative technical audit to ascertain<br />

<strong>and</strong> <strong>report</strong> on <strong>the</strong> fair value <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project. Fur<strong>the</strong>r, failure<br />

by <strong>the</strong> contractor to execute <strong>the</strong> project within agreed<br />

time frame, <strong>the</strong> contract should be evaluated to establish<br />

liquidated damages suffered by <strong>the</strong> Authority <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> same<br />

should be claimed from <strong>the</strong> contractor.<br />

___________________________________________________________<br />

Office <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Controller <strong>and</strong> Auditor General PA&oBs 2007/08 135

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!