Recently\nthere has been a new round of discussions about public works, focusing on the\ncause of specific issues, such as delays, direct or indirect reinvoicing,\ndefective and even unsafe construction. However, it seems that these\ndiscussions do not address the primary reasons for this dismal situation, but\ninstead address issues of minor importance. It seems as if these discussions\nare directed towards finding an alibi and providing justification for the\nincompetence of those who undertake to carry out public works on the state\u2019s\nbehalf. This ineffectiveness is observed in all stages, from the allocation of\nfunds to the completion and delivery of the public works.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Ineffectiveness\nand lack of transparency as far as public works are concerned have reached new heights. It seems that our country holds the record in\nthis area, while the reasons for this predicament are many and hard to\ndefine. In the paragraphs below, we will\nattempt to examine in hierarchical order not only the actions, but also the\nomissions of those who manage all stages of public works (legislation,\ninvitations to tender, completion and delivery), as well as their\naccountability for the negative results that are observed and recorded by the\ngeneral public of the areas where they occur. There are four (4) categories of\npeople who should be held accountable for this deplorable situation, as\ndescribed below.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
First,\ncentral government politicians. Since they have the jurisdiction to legislate,\nthey can define firm and rigid regulations regarding the development of public\nconstruction projects, from planning to completion. It is necessary that a rigid framework also\nallows for healthy competition between the civil engineering companies that\nwill study and carry out each construction project. Healthy competition should be based on a\ndetailed statutory system,<\/p>\n\n\n\n
which\nregulates the technical description of each project as well as the requirements\nand conditions of the tender.It often happens that during the course of a\nparticular project, situations arise that can only be solved in court. A\nclearly and precisely identified framework with tight deadlines for these court\ncases and with strict legal consequences for those who do not abide with this\nframework is also necessay. The\nidentification as highly punishable \u201cspecific criminal offences\u201d of\ntransgressions and collaboration between guilds that have formed cliques during\nthe course of a public construction project would have a dissuasive effect on\nthis type of wrongdoing, which has become quite common.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Second, the\nmunicipal politicians and officials appointed by the local politicians. Since\nthis group is politically responsible for the planning and completion of\ntechnical projects in their area, they should also be responsible for the\ndetailed technical and financial study of each project as well as for the\nclearly defined conditions of the tender. There are many advisors in the\nmunicipal governments who can provide\nreliable information regarding the specific requirements and characteristics of\neach category of technical projects.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Third, the\ntechnical staff who examine and supervise the public construction projects.\nThis group is supposed to support the work of the municipal politicians and\nofficials of the previous paragraph and make sure that the regulations for the\ntechnical description of each project as well as the requirements and\nconditions of the tender are respected and closely followed. This is the group\nthat comes into direct regular contact with the people who carry out\nconstructions projects, watch every step of the works at the constructions\nsites, verify the quality of materials, check<\/p>\n\n\n\n
the work\ndone behind the scenes and ultimately decide whether the project meets the\nsafety standards.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Last, the\ncontractors. They are a likeable group, which has acquired a bad reputation\nbecause of many unsafe and substandard technical public projects that they have\nundertaken. Construction deficiencies are usually reported by citizens of the\narea and also sometimes exposed by adverse climatic events. The quest for\nprofit is not in itself reproachable, as long as it is compatible with the\nquest for safety. Before accepting a public project, contractors should make\nsure that they are actually able to deliver the services as promised and at the\nagreedupon price, without compromising the materials or the construction\nstandards and within the agreed upon time-limits. If the contractors are simply\nafter the highest profit, then they will make dubious political and financial\ndeals, as well as compromises in many areas. They are the ones who will take\nall the blame for the inefficiencies, because it is the contractors that the\npublic sees at the building sites\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Any time\nthat the above-mentioned four groups of people do not abide by the rules, they\nare guilty of conflict of interest in the best scenario and guilty of fraud,\nmisappropriation of funds and corruption in the worst scenario. No matter how\nbig the efforts to cover a misdeed are, Econometrics has shown time and again\nthat there is a very heavy price to pay for defective construction of public\nworks: it is a huge monetary loss for the country, which negatively affects the\nnational growth expectations and the \nliving standard of the citizens. This is of particular importance in\nareas like Mani, which receives very limited subsidies for public work contract<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Recently there has been a new round of discussions about public works, focusing on the cause of specific issues, such as delays, direct or indirect reinvoicing, defective and even unsafe construction. However, it seems that these discussions do not address the primary reasons for this dismal situation, but instead address issues of minor importance. It … \u03a3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 PUBLIC WORKS: PRIORITISING COMPETENCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THEIR IMPLEMENTATION<\/span>