The Department of Budget and Management-Procurement Service (PS-DBM) seemed to have inquired about laptops for the Department of Education (DepEd) prior to the approval of the Bayanihan 2 law, which provided the funds for the purchase, Senator Francis Tolentino said Thursday, citing a letter.
The letter was presented during the continuation of the Senate blue ribbon committee’s hearing on the allegedly overpriced laptops procured by DepEd through PS-DBM last year.
Bayanihan 2, or the Bayanihan to Recover as One Act, was signed in September 2020 amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
During the continuation of the probe, Tolentino, who chairs the blue ribbon panel, showed a June 21, 2021 letter addressed to then-PS-DBM officer-in-charge Jasonmer Uayan responding to an inquiry on the specifications of Dell Latitude 3420 notebook.
The letter sent by PS-DBM to inquire about the laptop was dated July 2, 2020, according to Tolentino.
Uayan said he wrote the letter to compare specifications of candidate laptops.
“I just wanted to confirm if the chip set is superior or not with respect to the overall functions,” Uayan said.
Tolentino then questioned the dates of the letters related to the PS-DBM’s inquiry, noting that the letter sent by Uayan was dated July 2, 2020.
“‘Yung letter ninyo ay July 2, 2020. Ang sagot sa inyo ng Dell, June 21, 2021, ang pondo ng pondo nitong transakyong pinag-uisanan natin ay Bayanihan 2, ‘yung Bayanihan 2 ay September 2020,” Tolentino pointed out.
“Wala pang source ng pondo, nagatanong na kayo. Papaano po nangyari ‘yon? Hindi pa namin inaapitat ‘yung Bayanihan 2 ay inunahan niyo na kami… Bakit niyo alam na maga-approve kami ng Bayanihan 2, hindi pa kami nagmi- meeting? Hindi pa kami nagse-session. Wala pang niwat na special session noon ang pangulo,” he went on.
Uayan said the date is a typographical error, adding he joined the PS-DBM as a procurement division chief and he “could not have [written] the letter on the year indicated therein.”
The former PS-DBM official also said that he does not know about the measures of Congress with regards to the Bayanihan law.
Uayan then said that the date of the letter that he sent to the laptop company can be verified through the PS-DBM Office of the Executive Director’s email address, which he said he used when he made the inquiry.
“I believe the email address used is the OED email. That would corroborate the fact that although the date indicated 2020, it’s actually 2021, and it’s mere inadvertence on my part not to check the date,” Uayan said.
Tolentino then asked to retrieve the email thread on the inquiry that Uayan made with the laptop company.
“Without violating the Data Privacy Act, can you retrieve that email communication you advertised to a while ago? Nandon lang ‘yan, mate-trace ‘yan kung 2021 nga or 2022< kung meron talagang typographical error," he said.
“This is very vital. I just mentioned a while ago this will be outcome determinative, itong date na ‘to, naunahan niyo pa ang Bayanihan 2,” he added.
Since the PS-DBM is headed now by Atty. Dennis Santiago, Wayan said he can no longer access the official email of the Office of Executive Director.
Santiago, who is present in the hearing, said he can disclose the information requested by the Senate panel.
Repeat orders
Senator Jinggoy Estrada during the hearing questioned DepEd’s repeat orders of laptop units and other information technology requirements procured from only five suppliers.
The lawmaker said five companies have cornered billions of pesos in procurement deals since 2013.
“In the case of these suppliers, why did we not just bid for the goods in a single lot? Was there lack of planning here or was the DepEd deliberately dividing the contract so that it can use repeat orders as an alternative mode of procurement? ” Estrada asked DepEd Director Abram Abanil.
“Does that not circumvent the law against splitting of contracts?” Estrada added.
The DepEd official explained that the decision to divide the lots in the procurement deals was made by their Bids and Awards Committee as they were “worried” that other bidders might not comply with the requirements.
Under Section 51 of Republic Act 9184 or the Government Procurement Reform Act, repeat orders as a method or procurement is allowed, provided that these “will not result in splitting of contracts, requisitions, or purchase orders.”
Estrada also raised that the intention of public biddings is to open up government contracts to more suppliers and to level the playing field.
“In other words, the more suppliers are able to participate, the better it would be for the government? And by that same reasoning, you will agree that it would not be in the best interest of the government if we limit competition?” Estrada said.
Abanil agreed with Estrada’s position.
He then raised the possibility of “sourgraping” of other firms given that they were not able to “bag the DepEd contract.”
In response, Abanil said “it is possible.”
The lawmaker pointed out that the government should be “more welcoming of new players.”
He said singling out certain companies might discourage them from taking part in the government bidding processes.
He then mentioned that one of the usual suppliers of DepEd, “whose value of its accumulated contracts has amounted to billions,” has been supplying DepEd since 2013 but has never been under scrutiny by the Commission on Audit (COA) or any other government agency . –KBK, GMA News
.