There is a great need to have all the public procurement processes monitored by independent bodies. It is the duty of these monitoring bodies to ensure that the processes done during the procurement processes are fair and unbiased in any way. The monitoring bodies should never be connected with the bodies they are assigned to monitor since this may compromise the integrity of the monitoring process. As we shall shortly see, the need for monitoring public procurement processes is manifold.
First, monitoring the processes will guarantee the one fact that all the stakeholders in the tendering and the bidding processes are exposed to a transparent system. 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. The only way trust in such organization can be fostered is therefore by ensuring that all the processes are free from corruption of any kind.
Also, equitable distribution of opportunities would be impossible without having oversight processes in such organizations. 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.
Also to ensure that there is satisfactory accountability for every budgetary allocation made, monitoring services may be needed. Without having procurement monitoring in place, the staff involved with the outsourcing have a high chance of embezzling public funds and this may lead to inefficient service delivery to the public.
Accountability has the effect of making it possible for organizations to make proper judgement on its future budgetary allocations. 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. Correct judgment on budgetary allocations by the donors will, in turn, ensure that there is no superfluity and constraints for any sector that is allocated some funds.
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.