This comes in the wake of government’s recent decision to prioritize procurement of government printing work to state agencies; Vision Group and Uganda Printing and Publishing Corporation (UPPC). In effect, the decision eliminates competitive bidding and creates a duopoly of government’s printing, publishing and packaging work.
DEMANDS
In their February 13 petition to government, UPPA is seeking interpretation of the directive given that government is the biggest client in the sub-sector.
“For example, should we participate no more in public bidding and tendering processes since only two players are being favoured?” wonders UPPA chairperson Archy Kiwanuka.
UPPA is also seeking answers from government regarding the state of the sub-sector.
“What should we do with the investments such as machinery and structures worth over $500 million that has been injected into our economy?”
UPPA further reasons that implementation of the government decision is destined to derail economic progress.
“This decision is discriminatory and contrary the law and best practices that govern public procurements in Uganda. We seek your urgent indulgence in availing guidance on the treatment of printing services,” reads the petition.
GENESIS
At the request of Vision Group board, President Museveni on September 28, 2021 wrote to the prime minister directing her to prioritize procurement of government printing work to the Vision Group and UPPC.
“I recently met the board members and management of the Vision Group and they sought my help in securing printing work from government ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs). They indicated to me that they have, over the years, invested over Shs 45 billion in three state-of-the-art printing presses, making them one of the biggest printers in the region,” reads part of the letter.
“However, they notified me that, whereas, MDAs spend over Shs 50 billion annually on printing work alone, very little of this work, goes to them and UPPC…It is important that government supports them. I am, therefore, directing you to communicate MDAs to ensure that all their printing works are given to the Vision Group and UPPC.”
CONCERNS
However, UPPA notes that about 38,000 jobs are at stake if the other players in the industry are not considered by government. In the petition, UPPA notes that its membership has invested more than $380 million in the business and has potential to attract an additional $120 million investment to fully optimize the sub-sector’s potential.
The printing sector’s contribution to Uganda’s economy is so immense that government business cannot be limited to a few players at the expense of fair competition.
“It is very clear that the most significant investment into the printing sector is actually not by Vision Group and UPPC but rather, a collective effort of various players, of different sizes,” reads the petition.
“Therefore, it is imperative that all players in the printing sector have the same treatment before the current procurement regime that is mainstreaming local content, subject to the law, reservation guidelines or regulations as the case may be.”
UPPA strongly feels that the president was misguided and his letter contravenes the procurement laws and regulations in Uganda that require competitiveness and non-discrimination.
“Furthermore, the directive undermines the reservation /preference schemes that are part of the law but were premised on fair and free competition within sectors in line with the Buy Uganda Build Uganda Policy (Bubu) that was issued in 2014.”
UPPA further notes that it has extensively worked with the Uganda Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets (PPDA) to address the historic distortions in the printing and packaging sector.
“In fact, the regulations under development attest to this in so far, they address the growth and development of printing at a sectoral level. It is only fair that this imperative is sustained.”
Kiwanuka contends that whereas the president has every right to avail strategic direction for the country’s development, the PPDA Act provides for a competitive dialogue method of evaluation ostensibly to cater for all stakeholders’ interests.
inarticle} inarticle}