Stuart Young Warns Procurement Bill Could Weaken OPR Powers Opposition MP Stuart Young has strongly criticised proposed changes to Trinidad and Tobago’s public procurement legislation, describing the amendments as “Section 34 on steroids” and alleging that they would weaken the powers of the Office of Procurement Regulation. Young made the claims in a video ahead of debate on amendments to the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Property Act. Local reporting confirms that Young and fellow Opposition MP Dominic Romain have raised concerns about the proposed amendments and their potential effect on procurement oversight.
Young claimed the proposed changes would restrict the OPR’s ability to intervene in procurement proceedings, including its powers relating to the suspension of processes and the handling of complaints. He also alleged that the legislation would broaden exemptions from the procurement framework and reduce existing standstill periods. Young was particularly critical of proposed changes involving public-private arrangements, arguing that the amendments could place certain arrangements involving the financing, construction, operation or management of public property outside the existing procurement framework. He went further, accusing the UNC Government of pursuing the amendments to facilitate corruption and benefit political financiers. These are allegations made by Young and have not been established as fact. Comparing the proposed legislation with the controversial Section 34 issue, Young described the bill as “Section 34 on steroids” and accused the Government of dismantling safeguards intended to protect public money. “They are setting about to go after the Treasury,” Young warned, before adding, “We will remember.” The controversy comes against a long history of changes to Trinidad and Tobago’s procurement framework. Parliament’s records show that the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Property Act has undergone several amendments since the original legislation was enacted in 2015, including significant amendments passed in 2020 and fully proclaimed in 2023.
Young’s claims represent the Opposition’s position on the proposed changes. The Government’s justification for the amendments and its response to the specific allegations should also be considered as the legislation moves through Parliament.
