On 10 May 2010, the Malta Information Technology Agency (MITA) informed companies that had answered a call for expression of interest for a strategic partnership for the provision of an e-Learning solution for local schools, that it “has decided to cancel this procurement process.”
On the eve of the last general election, the government launched a national e-learning strategy for 2008-2010 aimed at blending information and communications technology with traditional teaching systems for a new generation of adults skilled in creativity, independent learning and critical thinking.
The strategy, costing €22 million, would help the government “achieve its target of making the country a centre of excellence in IT by 2015.”
Each school would be connected to the government’s fibre optic network with wi-fi accessibility. Each class would have its own website where parents, teachers and students could integrate. In short, this e-Learning strategy is intended to push local schools into the 21st century.
We are nearly halfway through the last year of the strategic action plan 2008-2010. The biggest flaw in this strategy is that something so vital for our education system and which is going to have far reaching consequences for our schools is being controlled by a minister who is not responsible for education. This is totally unacceptable and does not make sense except for those who stand to gain from lucrative contracts.
Since last November a technical evaluation team had worked hard to screen the submissions of the companies that expressed interest in providing Malta’s education system with an e-Learning platform. These are the companies, in alphabetical order: Benchmark, Blackboard, elp+, Fronter, HP, IBM, IX, Siveco and Young Digital Planet.
By February the team had finished its work, shortlisted the companies, ranked them on their merits and compiled a report for MITA – the Malta IT Agency – which falls within the fiefdom controlled by Minister Austin Gatt. MITA sat on this report for three months and then decided to announce the cancellation of the procurement process six days ago.
MITA has informed the nine companies “that another open call for tenders for the provision of an e-Learning Solution will be issued in the near future.” The companies were not told why the procurement process was aborted. I asked Minister Gatt in parliament a number of questions to explain what is going on. Arrogant as ever, he did not deign to answer my parliamentary questions. But this will not deter me from trying, inside parliament and outside it, to find out why the procurement process has been cancelled.
Some sources in MITA say that the foreign consultant, Thomas McMullan, who was paid at least €80,000 to oversee the process, has links to one of the companies participating in this tender, and so he has a conflict of interest which jeopardizes the integrity of the process. As far as I know, McMullan was very open with his business links when he was chosen by MITA as a consultant. Why is it only now that his conflict of interest has emerged or why is it now that MITA has decided to notice it? A competing interpretation is that MITA did not like the shortlist and the ranking of the technical evaluation team, and has decided to cancel the procurement process to give a preferred bidder another chance.
Whatever the reason for this cancellation, most of the companies who have taken part in this tender have reacted with shock and disbelief. Here are some of their initial comments: “Is this the way you guys work in Malta? You issue an international tender and then cancel it and issue it again? We smell a rat here – no wonder perception of corruption in your country continues to gain ground! I can now understand why you guys find it easy to deal with certain neighbouring countries because you have the same culture when it comes to such tenders and projects.”
These companies have visited Malta a number of times and attended briefing sessions organised by MITA and so they incurred a lot of expenses. Their main worry is that they have provided all technical and financial information in their proposal, which obviously is now in the hands of a number of people. They feel that this would put them at a great disadvantage when another call is issued. They were annoyed that no reason was mentioned for the tender cancellation, but at the same time were asked whether they want to appeal against a hefty fee of €58,000. Some of them asked sarcastically: appeal against what and against whom?
They find it as totally unfair that new bidders are going to be allowed to submit a proposal when a new open call is issued. Some of them are asking: maybe the tender was cancelled due to pressure coming from companies which did not submit their offer for some reason or another, or who have come to know that they have not placed well in the ranking by the technical team?
The fact that the tender was issued directly by MITA and not by the Department of Contracts is troubling them a lot as MITA, although a government organisation, is a commercial entity and provides services to other organisations and other governments. Some of the bidders are troubled by this fact as the confidential information they have submitted can fall in the wrong hands. They are now questioning the seriousness and integrity of the procurement process and the government and Malta in general.
They are not convinced at all that a conflict of interest is the main reason behind the tender cancellation. Thomas McMullan must have provided them with his CV and it is assumed that his CV was verified, references checked and thoroughly interviewed by MITA. When was this so called conflict of interest discovered? What was his role during the adjudication process? Who prepared the tender document? Is there anything in the tender document which is advantageous to particular bidders? Is it true that short listing was done? Is it true that the short listing might not have pleased everybody in the government or at MITA?
Some of the bidders are extremely angry and now have a very bad impression of Malta. They are saying that this was an international tender and there were bidders from various different countries and it is a shame for Minister Gatt’s MITA and the Maltese government to behave like this.
Any comments?
If you wish your comments to be published in our Letters pages please click button below. Please write a contact number and a postal address where you may be contacted.
Search:
MALTATODAY
BUSINESSTODAY
Download MaltaToday Sunday issue front page in pdf file format
