Independent monitoring bodies need to monitor all procurement processes in the public sector. 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. Given the fact that these bodies are tasked with such an important role, it is paramount that they should not have any links whatsoever with the firms they are assigned the monitoring roles. The reasons for carrying out monitoring of public procurement processes are manifold as we shall see shortly.
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 monitoring process in place, the tendering and the bidding processes can be manipulated by the employees to only suit certain vendors and this is inappropriate at all costs. Instances as this are not rare and that is why it is so crucial that procurements are monitored from start to end so that instances of corruption are mitigated or stopped altogether.
Also, equitable distribution of opportunities would be impossible without having oversight processes in such organizations. With the rising cases of nepotism and other manifestations of corruption, it is not uncommon to have all the opportunities being let open to only a certain class of people. 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. To ensure that there is no impairment of service delivery to the public due to embezzlement of funds by the employees in such organizations, it is important, therefore, to have monitoring processes in place.
Planning for future projects is also impossible unless there is accountability in the public sector. The donors to the projects stand to make very informed decisions regarding which areas may need more allocations or which may need less in the future given the fact that the processes are transparent for them to make such judgements. When there is proper decision making, sectors will be saved from having to have too little or too much in terms of budgetary allocations.
Finally, monitoring processes give the masses the confidence in public institutions and how these institutions do their spending. 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.