The Government is defending proposed changes to the public procurement system, arguing they will speed up project implementation while maintaining safeguards and accountability.
The position was outlined by Minister in the Ministry of Finance Kennedy Swaratsingh during debate on the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Property (Amendment) Bill, 2026, in the Senate on Monday.
During the debate he defended the proposed changes to the procurement standstill period.
“Recommending this standstill period, we believe provides enough time to permit meaningful review and challenges on the part of contractors but is not lengthy enough to create unnecessary delays regarding government programmes, capital projects, essential services, and contractual obligations. And I want to reiterate that point, Mr President, because I listened to a radio programme today when they said that we’re removing the standstill period. We are not. We are reducing it from a minimum of 10 to a maximum of 15 to a minimum of five maximum of 10.”
He also argued that procurement is directly linked to implementation, affecting contractors, suppliers, employment and the timely delivery of public projects.
“Procurement affects people. It affects whether a contractor can keep workers employed, whether suppliers can keep businesses open. It has an impact on the timeliness of public projects, and ultimately it affects whether taxpayers receive value for every dollar entrusted to the State by ensuring a more efficient and responsive procurement system.”
On the issue of safeguards, the Minister maintains that the proposed changes will not remove safeguards but will provide greater flexibility based on the urgency, risk and strategic importance of individual transactions.
“The aim is to reduce procedural burdens on specific procurement transactions, taking into account these transactions’ nature, urgency, risk, and strategic importance. The amendments, Mr President, before us, are to support strong oversight where risk requires it, appropriate flexibility where circumstances demand it, clear accountability for decision makers, and a procurement system capable of responding to the needs of a modern State.”
The amendments are also intended to strengthen emergency preparedness by allowing the Government to procure critical goods and services more quickly during crises.
Also contributing to the debate, Minister in the Ministry of Housing Phillip Alexander alleged that millions of dollars in contracts were awarded in breach of procurement rules.
He told the Senate that some contractors were not properly registered and accused the former administration of breaching procurement regulations, alleging that millions of dollars were paid out through contracts for maintenance services between 2024 and 2025.
“For the provision of services, waste disposal services, to the tune of $4,537,625. Grass cutting services: $1,799,323. Drainage maintenance services: $2,212,000. A total of $8,549,000 paid to friends of the PNM.”
He also defended the Government’s decision to award $3.4 billion in housing contracts to 11 contractors, rejecting criticism over the procurement process and project delays.
“The stall that went on for months, that Senator Rose says is a fast 20 days. It’s not true. It’s a constant request for information. Anybody could have walked in off the road and said, ‘I raise an objection’ and the plan was obvious and clear to stall the Housing Development Corporation so that we could not deliver houses.”