Sitting of the Senate| Friday, March 14, 2025 [Jamaica]

As the chairman of the Cabinet Infrastructure Committee, I'm particularly pleased to be leading this debate on the amendment to the Procurement Act. Mr. President, the Procurement Act, which was passed in 2015, was brought into effect by appointed day notice along with the Public Procurement Amendment Act, 2018, on April 1, 2019. This rather complex piece of legislation has had a quite long and circuitous route through an extensive gestation period to eventual promulgation. Also promulgated were the public procurement regulations, the Public Procurement Review and Reconsideration Regulation, and the Public Procurement Registration and Classification of Suppliers Regulation.

Mr. President, the bringing into effect of these pieces of legislation, amendments and regulations, marked a significant milestone in the public procurement landscape in Jamaica. These amended laws and regulations in a multifaceted tool, or rather is a multifaceted tool, which anchors and enables the reform of public procurement in this country. Essentially, Mr. President, an outdated and fragmented legislative framework work was replaced with this eventually updated and comprehensive law that contains provisions reflective of current policy thinking and good practice.

The law established a new institutional framework with respective powers and scope of authority to bolster the attainment of the fairness objective and serve as a source of corruption deterrence. It also promotes economic development through transparent and efficient procedures that enable increased participation and the upholding of value for money in public expenditure. Mr. President, the Procurement Act, which came into being in 2015, has proven to be a difficult piece of legislation to navigate in procuring products and services for government entities, even if in concept it was necessary.

Many have complained quite bitterly, vociferously, publicly and very often that it appears that the Procurement Act of 2015 seemed to have been based on the premise that all Jamaicans are not honest while waving the banner of value for money and transparency. Mr. President, on a recent morning radio program, I listened to the announcer name the 14 steps listed in a public procurement handbook that have to be followed to complete a procurement exercise. The list ranged from preparing the procurement plan to listing of conflict of interest situations, vetting devaluation criteria, to record keeping.

It's a formidable and long process, Mr. President. Many Jamaicans make the argument that this really quite draconian procurement process, draconian to their view, that was passed into law has been as much an hindrance to the procurement and development process as it has been useful in securing value for money. Again, Mr. President, many Jamaicans cite our period of bad public governance and the lack of prudence which preceded and strongly influenced the Procurement Act of 2015.

Public Procurement Amendment Bill 2025. Mr. President, the preamble of the bill sets out the statutory context within which we're seeking to promulgate the bill. We then come to the enacting provision, Mr. President, and move on to Clause 1, which sets out the name of the bill.

Clause 2, Mr. President, has reconciled definitions for key terms used in the bill according to the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, UNCITRAL, Model Law on Public Procurement and Usual Procurement Practice. These terms are bid, bidding document, call-off contract, competition threshold, level of competition, open international competition, open national competition, restricted competition, and solicitation document. Consequent, Mr. President, we have deleted the definitions for bid, bidding documents, international competitive bidding, invitation to bid, national competitive bidding, open bidding, procurement method threshold, sector committee, and standard bidding document.

Clause 3, Mr. President, speaks to the amendment of Section 4, Subsection 3 of the Act, which essentially removes procuring entities unnecessary administrative requirements of obtaining the prior approval of the chief public procurement policy officer to negotiate and execute the procurement of goods, services, or works exempted from the procurement methods and processes, services or works falling within the first schedule. Clause 4 sets out that Section 7, Subsection 1E of the Principal Act is amended to reflect the new nomenclature for bidding document.

The term bidding should, as far as possible, be confined to procurement methods such as restricted bidding and open bidding. As there are other methods, the documents that are used are collectively described as solicitation documents. The Office of Public Procurement Policy is therefore responsible for developing solicitation documents, standard forms of contracts, prequalification documents, and any other public procurement-related documents for use by procurement entities.

Clause 5, Mr. President, provides that Section 11, Subsection 1 of the Principal Act is amended to reflect that the Public Procurement Commission, the PPC, as one of its functions, approves and endorses the award of contracts of a value above the Tier 1 limit. We have deleted Paragraph G, which requires the PPC to establish, maintain, and register the sector committee's activities and to examine and consider their recommendations. With this deletion, Mr. President, Paragraphs H and I have been renumbered to Paragraphs G and H. So, Mr. President, we wish to abolish effectively sector committees in keeping with the Cabinet Infrastructure Committee's recommendation.

And I must tell you, Mr. President, as Chairman of that Cabinet Subcommittee, I have to, at this point, give some substantial credit to former Minister Everald Warmington, who constantly, constantly worked on making sure that the procurement exercise that we follow becomes efficient while, at the same time, protecting the value for money proposition and providing good governance. So, the removal of the sector committee, which we, he and us in the committees, didn't see as adding anything much of value, is a good development. Recall, Mr. President, that sector committees were established by the PPC to assist in the review of contract award recommendations and have, over time, evolved into specialist committees.

The Commission has now grown in respect of its technical experience and competence to review the related subjects, and in an effort to reduce regulatory duplication, which is what was happening, I think, with the sector committee, it is prudent for us to repeal Section 13, Sections, rather, 13 and 14 of the Act, which enable the PPC to establish sector committees to assist in the examination of tender reports for certain contracts. Clauses 6 and 7 treat with this repeal of sector committees. Clause 8, Mr. Speaker, speaks to deleting particular words in Section 15, Subsection 1 and Subsection 3 of the Principal Act and substituting them with the proper terms of art relevant to procurement practice.

In particular, we wish to use the phrase, submit bids instead of present bids, in Section 15, Section 1, or rather, Section 15, Subsection 1, and in Subsection 3, we wish to use the term open international competition instead of international competitive bidding under Section 23, and competition threshold instead of procurement method threshold. Open international competition is a new concept that refers to unrestricted solicitation that commences with the publication of a notice of procurement opportunities in the international and local media. Similarly, Mr. President, competition threshold is a new concept which enables a toolbox approach of effecting procurement which ensures that multiple methods of procurement are available in all circumstances.

That is, Mr. President, regardless of the method of procurement for efficiency, a procuring entity may derogate from the highest level of competition and restrict participation to particular supplies that are selected in non-discriminatory manner. Clause 9, Mr. President, provides for the deletion of the heading Part 3, Methods of Public Procurement, and insertion of new Sections 22A and 22B in the Principal Act. The related Part 3, Method of Public Procurement and Levels of Competition, sets out open bidding, restricted bidding, single source procurement, request for proposals without negotiation, request for proposals with consecutive negotiations, and request for quotations as a range of procurement methods that can be deployed by procuring entities.

Clause 11, Mr. President, deals with amendment of Section 24 of the Principal Act. Throughout this section, all references to restricted bidding are replaced with restricted competition. Restricted competition refers to solicitation that is limited to the participation of a selected supplier or selected suppliers which are selected in a non-discriminatory manner.

Clause 12 proposes, Mr. President, amendments to Section 25 by inserting the requirements that single-source procurement is to be used by a procuring entity that is desirous of procuring goods, services, and works from another procuring entity. Mr. President, Section 25F, which treats with framework agreement, is amended by renumbering and inserting subsections 2 to 4, as stated in Clause 13. While the current legislation now provides for the use of open and closed framework agreements, it is silent on the mechanism for approval of framework agreements and call-offs made thereunder.

This results in uncertainty over whether it is the framework agreement, Mr. President, itself, or individual contracts that are to be approved by Tier 2 or Tier 3 approving authorities. In this regard, Section 25F is amended to enable the procuring entity to make a reasonable projection of the aggregate estimated value of anticipated call-offs contracts to be raised under the contemplated framework agreement. Thereafter, Mr. President, where the estimated value of these call-offs contracts exceed the Tier 1 limit, approval must be sought from the Tier 2 or Tier 3 approval authorities, as the case may be, prior to admitting any supplier to such a framework.

It would, therefore, be disallowed for a procuring entity to exceed the limits of the framework agreement. Practically speaking, Mr. President, projection of the aggregate estimated value of anticipated call-offs should, therefore, be done at the planning and approval stages and must contemplate the entire value of these contracts over the life of the framework agreement. Mr. President, participation in procurement proceedings as set out in Section 31 of the Principal Act is amended by deleting and substituting with subsections 31.1 and 2, which a. prohibit a procuring entity from limiting the participation of persons, firms, or entities in procurement proceedings that are discriminatory unless authorized by the Procurement Act, its regulations or any other law. And b. allows for the application of prescribed special and differential treatment measures. 

Mr. President, Clauses 15 and 16 outline amendments to Sections 34 and 41 of the Principal Act by replacing all references to presenting or presented bids with submitting or submitted bids. This coheres with procurement terms of art. 

Mr. President, I wish to advise that this Honorable Senate that the amendment of Section 43 is intended to properly situate the application of the standstill provision. The standstill provision, Mr. President, is a period of time during which an aggrieved bidder will be given an opportunity to make an application for review of the final decision of a procuring entity. It is meant to further objectify, no, objectify of fairness that is enshrined within the law.

However, Mr. President, its current application in the law is all contracts, all contracts, regardless of the value, poses a challenge to procurement efficiency. That efficiency is now placed into consideration. While a bidder, in other words, in the past, ah, we'd go for value for money, make sure we follow the rules, fill 14 or 15 of them, we're now making sure that, yeah, you follow the rules, we might cut them down from 14 to something else, but you must make sure it's efficient.

While a bidder has a constitutional right to fair, equitable, and humane treatment by public authority in the exercise of any functions, it is not clear that the obligation of fair, equitable treatment requires a standstill, Mr. President. All procedures and rules related to treatment of bidders are already, are already properly balanced to achieve those objectives. Additionally, the legislation now allows procuring entities the opportunity to proceed without standstill, suggesting that bidders do not have to benefit from standstill in all circumstances.

The standstill is therefore to be regarded as a failsafe and to this end only needs to be applied proportionately and in a manner that makes the legislation pragmatic and workable. Mr. President, to apply standstill invariably to contract regardless of value results in undue and unnecessary administrative burden and delay, the very things we're trying to wipe out of the procurement arrangements in this country. In this regard, Mr. President, Section 43 and 44 are amended to require the application of the standstill only to contracts above the low dollar value threshold and to make modifications to the point at which standstill would apply.

In the case of Tier 1 limit, standstill applies upon the procuring entity's determination of a successful bidder and the case of the Tier 2 limit or Tier 3 limit, standstill will now apply where the procuring entity has determined a successful bidder and the commission has approved or endorsed the award of contracts. Further, Mr. President, Section 44 is amended to provide expressly that if a bidder's request for reconsideration of review of results in exchange of the successful bidder, then the procuring entity must issue a new standstill period and the recommendation for award of the successful bidder must again be submitted for approval in accordance with the act. This amendment, Mr. President, is outlined in Clause 18.

With regards to the supplementary provisions relating to the review board proceedings, Clause 19 sets out that Section 53 of the act is amended to primarily reflect that procurement review board must give notice to any person it determines entitled to participate in review proceedings along with the applicant and the PPC. Mr. President, Clause 20 sets out that Section 61, Roman numeral 1, is amended to ensure consistency of the terms of solicitation documents and the standard forms of contracts and that the Minister of Finance has powers under the act to make regulations treating with these procurement-related documents. That gives the Minister the power to do what adds to efficiency while making sure we stay within the rules.

Mr. President, the first schedule of the principal act has been repealed and replaced with a current and updated listing of certain exempt goods, works, and services from the procurement methods and processes. Parts 3 and 5, that's Roman numeral 3 and Roman numeral 5, do not apply to the following goods, works, and services. A, non-governmental organization under the conditions specified in Part B of the schedule. B, land or any immovable property or rights in relation thereto. C, works of art, cultural performances, products, or services associated with creative expression. D, Mr. President, goods, works, and services relating to the staging of productions in support of or associated with creative expression and cultural events, including but not limited to Roman numeral 1. Artistic coordination, direction, and management. Roman numeral 2, the management of artistic works or events. Roman numeral 3, the management of intellectual property rights. Roman numeral 4, venue rental. Number 5, Roman numeral 5, infrastructure and technical effects. Roman numeral 6, design and technical director of cultural performances. Roman numeral 7, Mr. President, engagement of artists and performers.

And then we go to Section E, medical services. F, legal services. G, medallions and insignias for use pursuant to the National Honors and Awards Act. H, Mr. President, goods, works, and services of a sensitive nature for use in or acquisition for the purposes of national defense or national security. Mr. President, also included will be I, services, travel services, and hotel accommodations or facilities. J, Mr. President, contracts for broadcasting time. K, program material intended for broadcasting by broadcasters. L, Mr. President, goods, works, services on the multilateral or bilateral agreements to which Jamaica is a party or an agreement between Jamaica and an international organization providing for an alternative system of procurement than that which is provided under the Act. M, Mr. President, educational instruction and training programs. N, goods, works, or services relating to or connected with the operations of Jamaican diplomatic missions or consulates. O, Mr. President, co-sponsorship arrangements, trade, travel, and road shows and cooperative advertisement. P, Mr. President, the procurement of bank notes and coins for issue by the Bank of Jamaica. 

Q, the implementation of the Bank of Jamaica of monetary policy and foreign exchange policy through financial contracts. R, Mr. President, is financial advisory services procured from the International Finance Corporation in respect of road development projects in Jamaica. S, Mr. President, says for technical cooperation and assistance for the provision of goods, works, and services pursuant to any agreement between the Government of Jamaica through Jamaica Special Economic Zone Authority, the Government of the Republic of Singapore through the Singapore Cooperation Enterprise related to or connected with the implementation of Jamaica Logistics Hub Initiative.

T, Mr. President, says group life insurance or group health insurance. U, goods, works, and services required during a situation of emergency or extreme urgency. Notice in relation to the acquisition of which is published in accordance with Paragraph 3. Mr. President, V says fiscal agency or depository services. And W says services related to the sale, redemption, and distribution of public debt. X, Mr. President, denotes national level financial transactions. Y, the employment in the public service pursuant to a contract of service or contract for services. And Z, Mr. President, goods, works, or services provided by a foreign government or any foreign organization declared by the minister to be a government or organization providing technical assistance to Jamaica. 

So, Mr. President, the first schedule also included definitions for specific terms used in the bill such as broadcasting, international, finance cooperation, Jamaica Logistics Hub Initiative, and travel services. The first schedule, Mr. President, is amended to provide for procurement during situations of emergency or extreme urgency, which necessitates the award of a procurement contract referred to as an emergency contract.

The procuring entity is required to give a detailed notice to the public of all emergency contracts awarded by that entity. The amendments, Mr. President, to the emergency provisions also recognize that emergency procurement procedures will apply upon a declaration of a state of disaster under any law or a period of public emergency. Such declaration, Mr. President, will allow for the formation of procurement contracts to ensure the preservation of life and public property.

Mr. President, Part B of the Schedule B is amended to reconcile the conditions for exemption of goods, works, and services donated to the government of Jamaica by a non-governmental organization under Part A. The second schedule of the Principal Act, Mr. President, is amended to reflect a revision in the Constitution of the Public Procurement Commission and its Chairman's tenure of Office. Mr. President, I would like to reiterate the importance the government attaches to amend the Public Procurement Act. It is necessary to A, correct conceptual and fundamental deficiencies in the Act. B, to clarify the law with respect to methods of public procurement, approvals, and value limits established under the Act. C, it's to repeal provisions pertaining to sector committees. D, introduce the concept of levels of competition in public procurement. And, Mr. President, E, provide for additional works, goods, and services to be exempt from the generally applicable public procurement processes under the Act.

Naturally, Mr. President, we live in a dynamic world. Commerce is dynamic, trade is dynamic, and it will clearly. There will be new amendments in due course. That will happen. But for now, Mr. President, the promulgation of the Public Procurement Amendment Bill will significantly advance this government's reform agenda and transform very positively the public procurement landscape in Jamaica. I, therefore, ask that this Honorable Senate pass this bill, if it pleases you, Mr. President.

There are two amendments that I will read into the record, Mr. President. The first one is in Clause 2, Paragraph B, delete the new definition, open national competition, which I referred to in the submission I made. But here it is in the amendment, open national competition, and substitute, therefore, the following.

Open national competition means procurement opportunity for participation by any approved registered suppliers or approved unregistered suppliers that are tax compliant in Jamaica at the time of the bid submission deadlines. Clause 21, Mr. President, in Paragraph 2, Subsection 2A of Part capital A of the new first schedule. Item A, the subparagraph in Roman numeral 2, delete the word 'or', and in B, in subparagraph Roman numeral 3, delete the word 'and', and substitute, therefore, the word 'or', and in C, Mr. President, insert 'next' after the subparagraph Roman numeral 3, the following subparagraph Roman numeral 4, and Roman numeral 4 now reads, a disaster or an emergency declared by the minister with responsibility for promoting or rather for procuring entity by notice published in the Gazette after consultation with the head of that procuring entity. And the quotation is closed at and. Those are the suggested amendments, Mr. President, if it pleases you.

Senator Hill, you need not worry, I won't detain you long. You will be able to quickly get to, to that second reading. But I just, just a few remarks, Mr. President.

Um, it, it's not often that I find myself agreeing with Senator Hill on issues around, um, bills, but in, as both of us come from similar private sector backgrounds, I very much appreciate the damage that unnecessary bureaucratic delays and administrative bottlenecks, um, does to the productivity of our economy and in, um, particularly although we're speaking to regulations and laws and rules relating to the public sector, it impacts the private sector. And so I have, it is impatient of debate that anything that we can do to expedite and streamline this process, um, is worthy of support.

Just last week or the week before, I believe it was, we had bipartisan agreement at the level of the Joint Select Committee reviewing the Integrity Commission Act that one of the best things that you can do to ensure, well, to promote probity in, uh, public life and procurement in particular is transparency, publishing all the contracts and, um, approvals and so on that are issued by the public sector, um, on a regular basis on a easily accessible, uh, vehicle such as a website. And the Contractor General or the Office of the Contractor General used to do that. I believe it was either on a monthly or quarterly basis and based on what I think was a rather restrictive interpretation of the Integrity Commission Act.

The Integrity Commission, which incorporated  the whole Office of the Contractor General, decided that this, this clause, a particular clause prevented them from doing that. And I was encouraged that we had bipartisan support at the Joint Select Committee. We said this was never the intention of the bill.

It wasn't the understanding of either side when the, when the debate was taking place in the House or when the bill was being drafted that that should be, that should prevent the publication in the normal course of business, just administrative publication of contracts and approvals awarded by, uh, government. Now, the area of public procurement is ripe for partisan attacks. But as a courtesy to my friend and new senator, I, I can assure I will restrain myself at this sitting.

Because I would not like that to be her first experience of, of the Senate. And in any event, I am not one of those who are, who use the absolute privilege of Parliament to make potentially defamatory attacks. Any criticism I am prepared to make here, I am prepared to make on the political platform.

And there will be many opportunities over the next few months on the political platform for us to do that. So I'm really continuing in the spirit of cooperation this morning, um, Senate leader. And, um, going to, going to, I have often been a lone voice on an issue of principle, whether or not I have support.

But, but careful, you don't draw me tongue, you know, careful, careful, because, you know, I am, but the, as I said earlier, it's, it's impatient of debate that we need to remove as much of the bureaucratic delays and administrative bottlenecks as we can from the whole government administrative system, not, not simply procurement. And I would tell you, Senator Hill, it goes way back before, it didn't start at the Public Procurement Act of 2015. These attempts at putting, as you said, I think you referred to, you know, the regulations treat everyone as if they're a criminal or assumes that they have some kind of dishonest intent.

And, and I think that is an attitude that we've taken in our public service going back decades. And I recall one of my first, my first interaction with, what was it called, public sector transformation, not in the current dispensation. This was actually started under Prime Minister Edward Seaga, I believe, in the 80s.

And I met with former Auditor General Edwards at the time who had been, who had now retired and had been put in charge of the, the, the reform or leading that reform process or reviewing it. And he had exactly the same remarks to me that you had. This was in the late 80s.

So it's not something new. The, you know, but unfortunately, from time to time, incidents emerge that suggest that we, we need a fairly rigorous system to prevent abuse. The, the shadow minister of finance or opposition spokesman for finance yesterday mentioned, I believe, that almost every year the capital budget is unspent.

I think he said it was something like $19 billion not spent in the, or not expected to be spent in the current financial year. And a lot of that is just the project management, trying to get through all the various regulations and procedures in, in time. The, you mentioned, or the bill mentioned that one of the objectives, this is in the memorandum of objects and reasons, was to introduce a concept of levels of competition in public procurement.

And this is something I support a hundred percent, not just in terms of administrative efficiency, but I think we also want to do it to level the playing field, promote competition, allow small and medium players to become medium and large players over time. Whereas if we have a system that is so prohibitive or so restrictive by whatever means, whether by regulation or by edict, that it is only the entrenched players in the system who can meet the requirements, whether by the size of the bid bond or the performance bond or so on. And so it is important with, this is a very important object.

And again, the, one of the areas, of course, that I am familiar with is the financial sector. And I recall going back to my first stint in the House of Representatives in 1993 to 97, I recall asking a question of the then Minister of Finance, what was the average balance of the consolidated fund in a non-interest bearing account at a particular financial institution? And when we got, when the question was finally answered, this was asking, I was on the government side then and I was asking the government, my own party's Minister of Finance. And when they gave me the figure and we multiplied that non-interest bearing balance in a consolidated fund account by the average treasury bill rate, it accounted for 100% of the profit of that particular commercial bond.

If they did nothing else, if they just operated one, one current account, the government's consolidated fund account, they would make the profit that they were making at the time. And, you know, you would appreciate that also having been in the sector, that the government is a big player. And if the government acts to consolidate and maintain duopoly or oligopoly, chances are it will remain.

If the government deliberately tries to encourage competition and expand the market and lift up the small and medium players and ensure that you get, instead of oligopolistic or duopolistic competition, which is not real competition, you move closer to true competition where you have many competent players of a reasonable size. So that ultimately the consumer will benefit from efficient pricing and nobody will make extraordinary returns or above average returns consistently over time. So with those observations and without commenting in detail on any of the issues, and I don't pretend to be a procurement specialist.

When I was in cabinet, a lot of the procurement for my ministry were exempt because of some of the same issues that you're talking about here. Generally speaking, national security does not tender publicly for a lot of the specialized equipment and so on. So I will accept you have been chairing it for some time and you have experience and the principle of reducing bureaucracy, the principle of encouraging competition, principle of improving transparency and oversight.

To help do that, we need to strengthen the e-procurement systems where a lot of this becomes online and can facilitate much more rapid and transparent bidding processes. All these we have no problem with and we encourage the government to implement it so soon as possible for a more efficient and a growth economy rather than a 'Probox' economy. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President, our students in sixth form, in much the way that those of us who would have studied economics back in high school would have had it back then, as well as our university students as they get introduced to, a course, macroeconomics, usually after you take a semester in microeconomics. Those students, like many of us this morning, would have been taught that nominal gross domestic product, nominal GDP, Mr. President, is defined as or the formula is expressed as C plus I plus G Plus NX or X minus M if you may. In this expression, Mr. President, C denotes consumer spending. I denotes investments by businesses. G speaks to government spending and NX, of course, denotes net exports. Essentially, exports minus imports.

Public procurement, Mr. President, is about government spending. And as such, public procurement is one of the critical ways in which government impacts the national economy. I start here, Mr. President, because the public procurement amendment bill that is before us is not merely about the regime of rules governing procurement by the Jamaican state.

But more importantly, the bill before us represents a critical pillar in the government's push to promote and enable more robust, accelerated, and sustained levels of economic growth. The Jamaican economy at present, sir, is stable. It may be described as being strong.

And quite commendably, the Jamaican economy is resilient. Several key macroeconomic indicators are encouraging. Tax revenues are performing, so you can consider us as being buoyant in terms of revenues.

Unemployment stands at record lows. Inflation is at the lower end of the targeted 4 to 6 percent band, the central bank target, that is. The Jamaican dollar is stable.

We have record high foreign reserves. The benchmark interest rate is trending down, albeit not precipitously enough. Business and consumer confidence are high, and more money is in this year's budget to undertake programs as a result of lower interest payments on the debt.

Notwithstanding our contraction in economic output, Mr. President, as a result of the passage of Hurricane Beryl and Tropical Storm Rafael, last year, Jamaica's economy is projected to return to growth in the first quarter of calendar year 2025. We have attained macroeconomic stability and fiscal discipline. And based on the presentation we saw in the House on Tuesday, the driver and the team he leads with the finance minister in the mix will not be stopping at all as it relates to fiscal discipline.

With Jamaica's stock of debt moving from just over 120 percent, that being the ratio prevailing at the time when the Andrew Holness-led administration took office in March 2016, to the 68 percent we are programmed to end fiscal year 2024-2025 on, it is evident that we have done well to manage the numerator, the debt. What we are seeking to improve now, Mr. President, indeed, the subject of even more focused attention has to be the denominator. The denominator, of course, being gross domestic product, GDP.

Mr. President, I stand this morning in support of this critical piece of legislation, which reflects some proposed amendments to the Public Procurement Act of 2015 in a bid to create the Public Procurement Amendment Act of 2025. Mr. President, this bill is timely, relevant, and consequential. It is of considerable moment.

It is of considerable moment because it represents an important advance to a more accommodating, applicable, modern, fit-for-purpose, and growth-enabling and inducing regime governing public procurement, essentially the spending of taxpayers' money. Mr. President, I have taken particular note of the Memorandum of Objects and Reasons, especially the intent, as set out in the bill, to correct conceptual and fundamental deficiencies in the Public Procurement Act 2015. Also, the intent to introduce the concept of levels of competition and provide for exemption of additional works, goods, and services from the generally applicable public procurement processes under the Act.

Mr. President, on Tuesday, the 18th of November, 2024, the Prime Minister, Dr. The Most Honorable Andrew Holness, presented in the reception area, the lobby of the Office of the Prime Minister, a highly profound and timely policy statement in which he shared his administration's outlook on the next chapter in Jamaica's development, and he used that occasion, Mr. President, to telegraph that his administration is pivoting to promote and enable more robust, accelerated, and sustained economic growth. As many will recall, the acronym ASPIRE constitutes, represents the framework within which that pivot toward increased levels of economic growth is taking place. It is to be noted that the R in ASPIRE, Mr. President, speaks to reform of the bureaucracy.

The bill before us this morning is part and parcel of that broader thrust and effort on the part of government to get out of the way even more, to roll out the red carpet even more, and do away with the red tape even more, as we seek to reform bureaucracy and usher in conditions that will foster and bring about increased levels of economic growth in this country. So, Mr. President, I made mention of Tuesday, 18th November, 2024. A couple days after that, Thursday, 20th November, 2024, the Prime Minister attended upon the Kingston Western Constituency Conference on the grounds of the Tivoli Gardens High School, and in lamenting the frustrating experiences associated with a low-income housing development in what is called Rasta City, a development conceptualized back in 2017, but was just essentially coming on stream in 2024 due to procurement and project implementation, bureaucratic red tape, and hurdles.

Of course, we know that bureaucratic red tape and inefficiencies retard the pace of economic activity, and it serves to undermine growth. In his address, Mr. President, to the hundreds of party supporters gathered at the Kingston Western Constituency Conference, Prime Minister Holness, in reference to Jamaica, said, among other things, the following, "What is happening to us is that the laws that we create as a government to deal with issues of corruption promote transparency. They are now becoming a constraint on the speed at which government can implement the projects which are funded from the dividends of good economic fiscal management of the country.

So even though our good fiscal management is generating the revenues, you have a big capital budget, but you are not seeing the impact of that budget quickly enough. The next chapter of Jamaica must be to tackle this monster of bureaucracy, which we have created, that is standing in the way of the quick utilization of the capital resources, the capital budget execution, and we cannot allow that to continue. We need to start to do business at the speed of thought.

When we think about it, get it done. Right now, the thinking is, if it don't take long, it wasn't properly done. So in the next chapter, we are going to tackle bureaucracy.

We are going to make the bureaucracy more efficient. And there are those who are thinking in the back of their mind that if you remove, streamline some of these laws, then what you're doing is facilitating corruption. The greatest error that we have made in this country is to believe that by fighting corruption, we increase efficiency.

What we should have been doing is fighting inefficiency, and that will reduce corruption. So in our next phase, it is about getting our country efficient. It is about getting our country productive.

And the bureaucracy is something that we must deal with." End of quote. Mr. President, the Prime Minister was speaking back in November 2024 as I indicated earlier.

We are in March 2025 with this very important Public Procurement Amendment Act, or bill rather, before us. The bill being before us this morning, having been passed, of course, in the lower house, is the clearest indication yet that Jamaica is now well and truly in its next phase. Better days are coming by and by.

And if there was any doubt, Mr. President, as to whether the Andrew Holness-led government was serious about tackling Jamaica's unwieldy, frustrating, and debilitating bureaucracy, the Prime Minister, speaking at the Jamaica Stock Exchange Investments and Capital Markets Conference on Tuesday 21st January 2025, announced the establishment of the new Speed Task Force. The Speed Task Force, as I understand it anyway, will essentially serve as an efficiency program oversight committee. The Speed Task Force aims to reduce bureaucracy and enhance efficiency in the public sector.

The acronym SPEED means Streamlining Processes for Efficiency and Economic Development. Quoting the Prime Minister yet again, Mr. President, he said in his remarks to the attendees at the event, and I quote, "We are determined to end the outdated notion that efficiency compromises quality." End quote.

The Speed Task Force will focus on identifying bottlenecks within existing processes, recommending actionable solutions, and delivering tangible outcomes within specified timelines. Mr. President, those of us who track the developments in the governance of the country and in the management of the nation's affairs will note, as did Senator Bunting moments ago, that for quite some time, we have had the repatriation of billions of dollars to the Consolidated Fund, which were previously earmarked for capital expenditure in a given fiscal year. Historically, this phenomenon has plagued both sides, as it has been the bane of the existence of successive political administrations over the years.

As one who has served on a number of public, a number board rather, of public bodies, I know all too well just how debilitating bureaucratic red tape can be for project implementation. Pre-procurement activities are extremely important, Mr. President. Sequencing of actions is advisable.

Conventional wisdom, of course, is that if you queue up your activities and get all your proverbial ducks in a row vis-a-vis procurement, the public procurement process tends to be much more seamless and efficient. And so, in many respects, some of that quantum of funds that end up being repatriated to the Consol Fund, because they were not essentially expended as intended in a given fiscal year, because for various reasons, for various challenges having to do with inefficiency, intended procurement, indeed, intended projects, were not implemented, or at least the pace at which they were expected or envisaged to have been implemented did not quite materialize. This bill, Mr. President, will make PIMSEC function and attain the impact it was actually envisaged to have when it was conceptualized and created.

Capacity building at both the operational level and the policy level are also vital. The critical importance of corporate governance, Mr. President, and public procurement training cannot be overemphasized, especially for newly constituted boards, particularly the boards of public bodies. New board members and, indeed, officers at the various ministries, departments, and agencies across government would do well with exposure to corporate governance training, with the appropriate levels of sensitization, and, of course, public procurement training as well.

I must use the platform this morning, Mr. President, to commend and stand in solidarity with the Ministry of Finance and the Public Service and several other entities which have distinguished themselves over the years in the provision of corporate governance training and public procurement training to help build capacity, to help ensure that boards, certainly directors of our public body boards, and officers, functionaries at the various ministries, departments, and agencies are imbued with the skill sets and with the knowledge that would help them to be more diligent and faithful as stewards as they superintend procurement activities, as they superintend projects, particularly projects that are consequential and meaningful in terms of the national development agenda. Persons functioning at both the policy and operational levels at our ministries, departments, and agencies across government need to understand that we move from a strategic corporate plan to a budget and from a budget to a procurement plan. In far too many instances, Mr. President, we have glitches where these things are concerned, and auditors, including the Auditor General, have had to flag some public bodies, and even ministries, I dare say, in relation to this particular deficiency.

So we need to make systems articulate and ensure, Mr. President, that we do not put the proverbial cart before the horse. That is how people get themselves in trouble and run into difficulties in undertaking procurement and or implementing projects. Mr. President, I am not oblivious to the extremely competitive nature of our politics in this country.

I would like to throw out a caution to those who exhibit a propensity to and have a tendency of impugning the professionals in the public service in their bid to take swipes at their political adversaries. Mr. President, speaking at the PNP Divisional Conference in Junction St. Elizabeth on Sunday, 16th June 2024, Senator Peter Bunting, in launching a spurious and baseless broadside against the government and the SPARK program, described the much-vaunted project as a quote-unquote con business.

He said, and I quote, That is the financing for the Labour Party in the upcoming election. Corruption. You mark my word. The JLP a guh nyam out most a that money.

How vulgar, Mr. President. How low. How desperate.

Sometimes when people speak, you know, Mr. President, what they are actually doing is projecting. And it is such a pity that Senator Saphire is not in the chamber just now. But just to be clear, and it bears repeating, sometimes when folks speak, what they are actually doing is projecting.

You are a false prophet, man. Be quiet.

You are a false prophet, man. Be quiet.

Mr. President, Bunting is a former PNP General Secretary. His immediate successor, Paul Burke, made reference to and made some clear intimations in relations to agents fees ack in 2016 following the PNP's defeat at the polls. And the then unravelling PNP stolen campaign money scandal. To those, Mr. President, who live in a glass house, I commend the words immortalized in song by the late, great Peter Tosh. Don't throw stones.

Mr. President, as Senator Bunting is fully aware, members of the political directorate do not have superintendents over the public procurement process, including, of course, the evaluation of bids, the selection of preferred bidders, and the awarding of contracts. Indeed, members of the political directorate would have erred and would be in serious trouble if they meddle and interfere with the public procurement process.

Mr. President, there are appropriate mechanisms to ferret out interference and corruption on the part of members of the political directorate, and applicable, indeed appropriate, sanctions are available as remedy and should be imposed where interference and corruption are established. Applicable and appropriate sanctions may be legal in nature, they may be in the realm of the administrative, or indeed they may be political. The cases of Phillip Paulwell and the EWI scandal, as well as Richard Azan and the Spalding's market scandal, are examples that readily come to mind. Interference in corruption processes, Senator Bunting.

When certain politicians, Mr. President, in their vulgar and desperate pursuit of political one-upmanship, launch an assault and speak in reckless and disparaging ways regarding procurement and project implementation without supporting evidence, it should be understood that it is the professional men and women employed across the various ministries, departments, and agencies throughout government that are being impugned and ridiculed. I'm going to repeat that because it bears repeating.

When misguided politicians, in their vulgar and desperate pursuit of political one-upmanship, launch an assault and speak in reckless and disparaging ways regarding procurement and project implementation without supporting evidence, it should be understood, Mr. President, that it is the professional men and women employed to the various ministries, departments, and agencies across government who are being impugned and ridiculed. It is they who are being sullied. It is their professionalism and integrity that are being brought into question.

We on this side, Mr. President, are pleased. We are pleased with and we are proud of the unprecedented pace at which the SPARK  program transitioned from being conceptualized by Prime Minister in collaboration with the then Finance Minister, Dr. Nigel Clark, to being packaged and then taken at an admirable pace through the public investment management and procurement processes, culminating, of course, in the award of contract to the enterprise contractor. What obtained in the case of SPARK, Mr. President, demonstrates, and it demonstrates in no uncertain terms, that we have the requisite capacity to undertake procurement procedures and deliver projects in a reasonable timeframe once we muster up the resolve and fixity of purpose so to do.

And so, Mr. President, I take note of some concerns that were expressed in the media just yesterday by one of our operators in business, and on this side, Mr. President, we are about collaboration, not confrontation. We're about helping all Jamaicans through policies that invariably constitute substance. We're not about arrogance. And so, we are mindful that in our national economy, you will have divergent perspectives. You may have experiences that people, consumers, or the operators of businesses alike have that may cause them to feel that they are not existing in auspicious circumstances. But as I said a while ago, Mr. President...

Thank you, Mr. President, and let me thank the Senator opposite for his kind indulgence. Mr. President, as I said before, on this side, we understand and appreciate that persons' experiences and their lived realities will inform their perspectives and observations and so, we respect that. We equally know that views do not always converge. We are not a monolith here in Jamaica.

But what I would say to the former president of the Jamaica Manufacturers and Exporters Association, and indeed other business persons and interests, is that the government duly notes concerns that are expressed, but the government would wish to remind that in a concerted, conscientious, and well-thought-out way, the affairs of the Jamaican state are being managed in such a way as to inure to their betterment as operators in the business community. The indicators speak to that and support that in very clear terms. I would say to business operators, Mr. President, that to the extent that the administration has just presented its ninth consecutive budget with no new taxes, that does a great deal to avert any anxiety or unease on the part of the business community. They have a degree of certainty in which they can plan and look forward to their operations, and of course, operate here in the country.

With unemployment being at 3.5%, more people are employed, and what that means is that more people have disposable income, and people's disposable income is used essentially, yes, to support business operations, including that of the former JMEA president. So unemployment at 3.5% is extremely commendable, certainly when you juxtapose that with the 15% at which unemployment stood in October of 2013. Under the auspices of the independent central bank, Mr. President, inflation as of January 2025 was in the order of 4.2%. Essentially, the lower end in the 4% to 6% targeted band.

Inflation as we know it, Mr. President, is a tax on consumers, and it is also a tax on businesses, because businesses also suffer the vagaries of inflation. And when you juxtapose inflation that stands at 4.2% in January against the 30% inflation that we had in this country in 1973, the 50% inflation that we had in 1977, and the 80% inflation that we had in 1991, it gives you a clear sense as to how moderate price increases have been in the country in recent times. And we wish to have it kept in that vein. Again, to close out that point, inflation is a tax on businesses in as much as it is a tax on consumers.

$1.1 billion, Mr. President, has been made available to the Ministry of Labour and Social Security to provide individual grants of $20,000. That money will be spent amongst the members of the business community. So when individuals here in Jamaica receive their $20,000 in much the same way as persons who earned under $3 million last year received $20,000 by way of a reverse income tax credit, that money is not necessarily placed under a mattress or put in the butchery. That money is largely spent in the national economy and the operators of business enterprises like that operated by Mr. Omar Azan benefit from that injection, that expansionary use of fiscal policy, Mr. President. The $2 billion that has been made available through the Development Bank of Jamaica's Venture Capital Program to support MSMEs to facilitate sustainable growth of startups and MSMEs through the Boosting Innovation, Growth and Entrepreneurship Ecosystems Project and continue to support women-led initiatives, entrepreneurship training, including digital skills boot camps are also expansionary fiscal policy at work and it will enure to the benefit of the constituents of the Manufacturing and Exporters Association, Mr. Azan's colleagues.

And so, Mr. President, the finance minister has also signaled that she, along with her colleague minister, the Minister of Industry, Investment and Commerce, will be collaborating even more closely with the MSME sector to alleviate the burden and vexing issue of interest rates that have still not come down far enough, notwithstanding the reduction, the successive reductions by the central bank in that regard. And of course, Mr. President, the business of opening bank accounts is also a vexing issue and I am particularly heartened that the discussions and collaboration with the MSME sector will be had in that regard. So, as I wrap up, Mr. President, the exemption, I believe, of certain works, goods and services from the generally applicable public procurement processes hold vistas to the business sector in the country.

It will help them to more easily transact business with government and more seamlessly transact business with government and a number of the hurdles, the bureaucratic hurdles that they would prior to have to confront and navigate would have essentially been removed. And with those words, Mr. President, and with the announcements that we saw on Tuesday, not least the establishment to come of a microstock exchange, capital equipment incentives, reduction in the bond to members of the motor industry from 100 percent to 20 percent and, of course, increase in the GCT threshold from 10 million to 15 million, all these things, including the increase in the personal income tax threshold, which over the life of this government has moved from $592,000 to $1.7 million at present and will move subsequently, as announced on Tuesday, from $1.7 million to $2 million. Make no mistake, Mr. President, that represents, I gather, a 230 percent increase over the life of the government when you consider $592,000 to $2 million.

And I also understand that that's a saving, cumulative saving of $42,000 per month to Jamaican workers who are benefiting from this reduction. So, with those few words, Mr. President, with that brief intervention, I commend this bill and, of course, support its passage. Thank you, Mr. President.

May it please you.