First District Representative Andrew Fahie and Premier Dr. Orlando Smith both implied during the House of Assembly meeting last Thursday that “contract splitting” isn’t a good practice.
But then they disagreed about the term’s definition and whether Dr. Smith’s government deliberately broke up about $4 million worth of recent spending on capital projects into multiple petty contracts in order to avoid the tender process.
Mr. Fahie used the HOA’s question-and-answer segment to press Dr. Smith on the issue more than a dozen times.
He inquired whether the procurement process for the Waterfront Drive parking lot, the Crafts Alive Village remodeling, the Manse Road widening, the construction of a new home for the elderly at Spooners Estate, or any other capital project, could be considered contract splitting.
Dr. Smith said no each time, adding that none of the projects named were tendered. The premier asserted that the definition depends on the reason for splitting up the contract.
“Contract splitting can be defined as subdivision of a project or task into multiple phases or contracts in order to avoid exceeding the applicable limits of a petty contract in order to avoid the rigour and scrutiny of the tender process,” Dr. Smith said, offering what he said was a definition used by the United Kingdom’s Treasury Department.
See the May 2, 2013 edition for full coverage.
{fcomment}