Without wishing to preempt the outcomes of investigations or lawsuits around the campaign, initial indications are that there are, at the very least, concerns about procurement processes in the campaign, and at the most, palpable signs of maladministration. Whenever national treasury releases a bounty of short-term spending, such as is the case with the BOT50 campaign and the Economic Stimulus Programme (ESP), it is natural that the stampede for allocations by the tender-hungry, will result in some injuries and complaints.
The Gaborone Youth Games in 2014 are a case in point, where at some point, preparations nearly came to a halt after conflict over the preferred supplier of performance services for the opening and closing ceremonies. Ultimately, the fight is over resources and their allocation. The role of the procurer, which in the case of BOT50 is the Youth, Sport and Culture ministry, is to ensure that the laid down, approved and known procurement processes are adhered to. These processes are not guidelines; they are inviolable rules that must be followed before a single thebe of the public purse is given to any entity. The Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Board (PPADP) has empowered ministerial tender committees in this regard, as has the DCEC, through the establishment of ministerial anti-corruption units. However, as the revelations in the ongoing Public Accounts Committee (PAC) hearings show, procurement in the public sector continues to be a penny-wise, pound-foolish affair. In public offices, to varying extents, processes around smaller expenditure, such as travel and subsistence accounting and petty cash have been refined and are accountable. The larger budget items are, however, a different matter.
