Independent monitoring bodies need to monitor all procurement processes in the public sector. The monitoring bodies have the mandate of ensuring that the procurement processes are transparent and in the interest of the public. The fact that the monitoring bodies ought to offer unbiased services indicates that these bodies ought to be of high integrity and should not have any links with the firms to be monitored. The reasons for carrying out monitoring of public procurement processes are manifold as we shall see shortly.
First, monitoring of public procurement processes ensures that there is transparency in the tendering and the bidding processes by different vendors. Without the oversight of the monitoring bodies, chances are those rogue employees within an organization setup could single source for vendors who are ready to share the profits with them. Owing to this fact, therefore, monitoring will ensure that the processes are less or corrupt free for the vendors and this promotes trust for such organizations.
The other reason for monitoring public procurements is to ensure that there is an equitable distribution of opportunities to the public. If there is no monitoring in place for such organizations, chances are that these opportunities would be distributed to only specific classes of people due to nepotism and other forms of corruption. Monitoring ensures that every supplier has an equal chance of winning the tender and those who lose or win should do so only on the basis of merit or demerit.
The monitoring processes also ensure that accountability within public institutions is upheld and that every coin allocated to a procurement process doesn’t go down the drain. When there is no oversight over the procurement processes, chances of employees embezzling public funds are usually high and this will, in the long run, impair the delivery of services to the public.
Also, where there is accountability of public funds, planning for future projects becomes easier. Given the fact that the processes are transparent to all from start to end, stakeholders are better placed to clearly see the trends in the public expenditure and are thus better positioned to supplement or extend their support to areas that could be experiencing insufficient funding. When there is proper decision making, sectors will be saved from having to have too little or too much in terms of budgetary allocations.
In conclusion, the masses can only be assured of their well being, being taken care of by those institutions only when monitoring of the procurement processes is in place. More often than not, the public is usually uncertain of the spending patterns in the governmental institutions. This skepticism can only be dispelled where there is an oversight over the procurement processes.