CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the study
Since the return to civil rule in 1999, the federal government has moved to address the nagging issue of corruption in the public service. The first concrete action it took to address this was the submission of an Executive Bill to the National Assembly, which led to the enactment in 2000, of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission Act. In the realization that failures in the procurement process contribute to corruption in governance and in order to identify the loopholes of procurement process, the first step was to introduce acceptable international standard practices in the regulation of public procurement in Nigeria, the federal government invited the World Bank to work with it to first conduct a nationwide assessment of the public procurement law and practice. The result of that assessment carried out in conjunction with a national task force, Country Procurement Assessment Report (CPAR) 2000, formed the basis of the Public Procurement Bill later sent to the National Assembly, revised and enacted into law in 2007 as the Public Procurement Act, 2007. The CPAR was a detailed diagnosis of the Nigerian procurement system and included both findings and recommendations (Ekpenkhio, 2003).
Consequent upon the country procurement assessment report, and prior to preparation of a bill for procurement reforms, the federal government moved to implement the recommendations of CPAR, to the extent possible prior to legislative reforms. The government set up the Budget Monitoring and Price Intelligence Unit (BMPIU) in June
2003 as an operationally independent body headed by a Senior Special Assistant to the
President. Although thinly staffed, its personnel comprised experts with a bias for project management, construction, and procurement. The Unit was the clearing-house for all federal government contracts and procurements of goods and services, and functions, until commencement of implementation of the Public Procurement Act 2007 (Ekpenkhio, 2003).
The Bureau for Monitoring Price Intelligence Unit (BMPIU) operated under clear goals, objectives, and strategies. Its goal was to put in place and ensure full compliance with laid down guidelines and procedures (produced by it) for the procurement of capital and minor projects as well as associated goods and services. Its objectives were to:
- harmonize existing government policies/practices and update same on public procurement
- Determine whether or not Due Process has been observed in the procurement of services and contracts
- Introduce more honesty, accountability and transparency into the procurement process
- Establish and update pricing standards and benchmarks for all supplies to Government Monitor the implementation of projects during execution with a view
- to providing information on performance, output and compliance with specifications and targets
- Ensure that only projects which have been budgeted for are accepted for execution. The strategies of the BMPIU revolved primarily around: regulatory, certification, Monitoring, training and advisory Functions.
After the enactment of the Public Procurement Act, 2007, the Federal Government established the Bureau of Public Procurement to take over the functions of BMPIU and implement the provisions of the Act. The Bureau also inherited the staff and physical structures of the BMPIU.
1.2 Statement of the problem
Public resources and assets around the world are subject to manipulation, misappropriation, mismanagement and apparent diversion for selfish ends. Public resources and assets are getting depleted day in day out due to the fact that the demand for these resources are growing in geometric progression, while the efforts required to utilize them is growing in arithmetic progression. This circumstance has resulted into a situation of unpopular or non-achieving political actors who are collectively charged with the responsibility of how such resources are allocated, managed and maximized to ensure value for money. Governments all over the world perceive the danger that goes with this attitudinal behavior towards public assets and resources. They see collectively and/or individually the need to bring about radical attitudinal change over how government resources are accumulated and utilized toward the betterment of the citizens and to ensure good governance (Ndubuisi,2006).
Despite the importance of Public Procurement Act and the important achievements it has recorded at the federal level, no research attention to the best of our knowledge has been conducted on the Construction industry. In spite of a number of studies conducted on Public Procurement on some federal Ministries, departments and Agencies (MDAs) in Nigeria, none of these studies specifically focused on the challenges and prospects in the implementation of the Public Procurement Act with specific reference to Construction industry. This study is out to bridge this gap by evaluating the challenges and prospects in the implementation of Public Procurement Act in Projects with specific reference to Abuja millennium tower, as a case study.
1.3 Research questions
In line, with the statement of the problem above, the research wishes to provide answers to the following questions:
- What is the impact of Public Procurement Act in the execution of projects in Millennium tower?
- What is the relationship between budgetary appropriation and actual funding for the implementation of public procurement in Millennium tower?
- What are the challenges and prospects of public procurement Act in the implementation of projects in Millennium tower?
1.4 Objectives of the study
In line, with the statement of the problem above, the major objectives of this research are hereby stated:
- To determine the impact of public procurement Act in the execution of projects in Millennium tower.
- To determine the relationship between budgetary appropriation and actual funding for the implementation of public procurement in Construction industry.
- To identify challenges and prospects of public procurement implementation in
Millennium tower.
1.5 Hypotheses
The following research hypotheses have been formulated for testing in the course of this study:
- H01: The Implementation of public procurement Act has not made any significant impact on the execution of projects in AhmaduBelloUniversity.
- H02: There is no significant relationship between budgetary appropriation and actual funding for the implementation of public procurement in Millennium tower.
1.6 Significance of the study
As we have pointed out earlier not much studies have been conducted to assess the impact of the implementation of public procurement process with specific reference to the construction industry in spite of a number of studies conducted in other areas of public service in Nigeria. To the best of our knowledge, none of these studies specifically dwelt on the challenges that lie ahead on the implementation of public procurement process mechanism with specific reference to the construction industry. Hence, this study will be significant to the sustenance of the construction industry as it will focus largely on the implications the implementation of public procurement process mechanism will have on the funding and performance of the construction industry as a whole.
1.7 Scope of the study
This study is limited to five years thus; 2010-2014. This is because the implementation started around that period and it is expected that within this period a lot could have taken place to justify this study.
The major limitations of this study include the following:
- The reluctance of respondents in filling and returning the questionnaire and in releasing some official vital documents for use by the researched posed serious limitation to the study. Some staff were even afraid to fill the questionnaire for fear of being quoted despite all assurances to the contrary.
- Fear of Espionage: This is one limiting factor faced by the researcher in carrying out the research work. Some senior management staff were reluctant to give accurate information and facts regarding the implementation of projects in the university, because they see the researcher as a spy who mainly came to steal knowledge in their operations.
Do you need help? Talk to us right now: (+234) 08060082010, 08107932631 (Call/WhatsApp). Email: [email protected].
IF YOU CAN'T FIND YOUR TOPIC, CLICK HERE TO HIRE A WRITER»