-says New GPC not fly-by-night company
New GPC’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Dr Ranjisinghi Ramroop has attacked a report in yesterday’s Stabroek News headlined `New GPC mum on quotation for malaria drugs supply’ charging that the article was malicious and aimed at destabilizing his company.
In an invited comment last evening Stabroek News Editor-in-Chief Anand Persaud said that Ramroop’s allegation was ludicrous and that SN would continue to press NGPC for answers on all matters that required clarification particularly in the arena of drug procurement.
A release from NGPC noted that the article adverted to a difference of over $228M between the two bidders for the supply of anti-malarial drugs: New GPC Inc and the International Pharmaceutical Agency (IPA). New GPC’s bid was $261, 568, 442 while IPA’s was $32, 730, 400.
Ramroop said he was contacted by a Stabroek News reporter at approximately 18:22h on Tuesday. He said “The reporter, incredibly, demanded information on why the Company’s bid was so much higher than IPA’s. He informed the reporter that at the time (Tuesday night) he was not in a position to respond to the questions posed and that a call should be returned to him the following day.“
Ramroop added in the release that the tender for the provision of anti-malarial drugs was closed earlier on Tuesday after which evaluations would have to be done, and then submitted to Cabinet for its no-objection. He stated that the tender was advertised for 10 anti-malarial products and New GPC tendered its bid within the designated time frame.
“The tender was specific, requesting a specific type and quantity of items. The company was guided by the specificity of products requested and outlined in the bid document”, he added.
He went on to say that it is highly unusual for a newspaper to call and question a bidder or its representative after working hours on the day of a bid submission and added that “At this juncture the bidder cannot and should not comment on the bid since it is in the domain of the National Tender Board. In any event, there is no way the bidder would know of the particulars of a competing bid and hence cannot comment on any pricing discrepancy or any other pertinent matter.”
He charged that the reporter was just trying to “sensationalise an otherwise rather humdrum report. Why drag me in to …compare my bid to another I couldn’t possibly know about?”
Ramroop said that he also believes that his company is being singled out for “vindictive attacks” by both Stabroek News and Kaieteur News. His release said since his establishment of the Guyana Times newspaper in 2008 the two companies had “persistently and viciously attacked his company.”
Ramroop said that representatives of his company were present at the opening of the bid and observed 23 tenders being opened but none of the others received prominent coverage in the SN report as New GPC’s did. “There were variations in the other categories of bids…but NEW GPC was singled out, why?, he asked.”
He added that “New GPC is not some fly-by-night company. We conduct our business professionally and we will not be goaded to undermine the bidding process”.
In response, the SN Editor-in-Chief said he was surprised that Ramroop would suggest that it is highly unusual for a newspaper to call a bidder after working hours. Having by his own admission established the Guyana Times, Persaud said that Ramroop should have by now known that reporters frequently call for information of all types after working hours. As long as this is politely done with the necessary apologies for the late hour there is no problem with this at all. Indeed, Persaud said Ramroop himself acknowledged that there was nothing unreasonable about this as he told the reporter that she could call the following day as he was not in a position to respond at that time. The newspaper was quite prepared to call the next day but Persaud noted that it was Ramroop who called the newspaper shortly afterwards, insulted the reporter and levelled a series of abominable allegations. Persaud said Ramroop’s behaviour was completely out of order.
The SN Editor-in-Chief said that since the bids are publicly opened, comparative information is usually available to the other bidders and this was what the newspaper was hoping to elicit from NGPC given the vast disparity in bids. Persaud said that Ramroop could not be unaware that there have been numerous concerns over a number of years about contracts awarded to New GPC for the supply of drugs to the Ministry of Health and more recently about the prices being charged by the company. In this light, Persaud said that there was every reason to immediately seek clarification from New GPC.
Persaud said that there was focus on New GPC’s contract as opposed to others because of the recent controversies that have been swirling around its contracts. Persaud said it was this type of vigilance by the newspaper that unmasked the government’s tendering for pirated textbooks in September. The reporter had stayed at the procurement process late into the night to glean information on the very important textbook contract.
Persaud said that the claim that Stabroek News was on a campaign to destabilise his company was a figment of Ramroop’s imagination. Persaud said there were three legitimate areas that SN had focused on in recent years as it related to NGPC and its affiliates and these were tax concessions announced for the group which were not catered for by law, discrimination by the government over the placement of state advertising and the award of billions of dollars in drug supply contracts to New GPC.
Ramroop also said that “Anand Persaud, Editor in Chief of Stabroek News, knows personally about the bidding process. He also owns David Persaud Investment Company. Why doesn’t he comment on bids even before they are evaluated”?
Persaud said he was baffled at this allegation as he is not the owner of David Persaud Investment Company and has no personal knowledge of the bidding process.
