Exclusive: In Depth Interview with Dr. Willibrod Slaa - Feb 28, 2011

[Mr.Professional]

Mwenye masikio haambiwi sikia na mwenye macho haambiwi ona! Kwa mara ya kwanza nafikiri tangu uhuru watz tumeamka na tupo tayari kwa ukombozi

 

[Kobello]

je wanajamii kuna mtu ana data kuwa dowans inatucharge 400mil$ kwa mwezi?Ithink he lied on that one,unless he accidentally bit his tongue

 

[Kobello]

I did not intend to embarass the opposition camp,neither am I sponsored by anybody.I wanted to start a deep dialogue on DR's interview.Does that make me an enemy of the state?
My point is,the relevance of wanting to know who owns Dowans has nothing to do with their perfomance,or the legality of their contract with Tanesco.To have a legal company or corporation you dont need to have a building or a "management team with a well organised chart",thats just absurd.I can run a multimillion company with just an iPhone!
And personally,I agree with Felister that government can play a regulatory role on free market to escape econiomic failure,but that can be done by controlling the financial system through legislations that aims at reducing fraudulent behaviours like excessive interests on loans,hiding or discouraging importation of goods and services by local businessmen,money laundering,establishing a tax system that will benefit the nation without discouraging investment,etc.
I also think the government itself can own companies(as in the case with parastatals),can also allow local government authorities(LGAs) to own and operate businesses as well.But private companies should never be left behind,I think what Dr Slaa and Chadema has shown is their tight grip on private multinationals operating in Tanzania.The Dowans case was a failure on the government side since according to Tanzania contract laws,failure to determine suppliers weakness prior to signing the contract does not automatically nullify that contract.
When people say that so and so is a fake company,that doesnt mean that they are not legally required to be in contract with any public or private entity.And if you really wanna go deep, we can start by looking at the public procurement acts of 2001 and 2004 from when they were still bills in the parliament,those acts are poorly drafted and they got sooo many loopholes and every member of the parliament who voted for it(Including Dr.Slaa) should be held responsible.
If we want to review our procurement policies and how they were drafted and came about to be Acts,we need to start a whole new thread! without disrespecting each other,then we will really know who got us here!

 

[Mzee Mwanakijiji]

I did not intend to embarass the opposition camp,neither am I sponsored by anybody.I wanted to start a deep dialogue on DR's interview.Does that make me an enemy of the state?
My point is,the relevance of wanting to know who owns Dowans has nothing to do with their perfomance,or the legality of their contract with Tanesco.To have a legal company or corporation you dont need to have a building or a "management team with a well organised chart",thats just absurd.I can run a multimillion company with just an iPhone!
And personally,I agree with Felister that government can play a regulatory role on free market to escape econiomic failure,but that can be done by controlling the financial system through legislations that aims at reducing fraudulent behaviours like excessive interests on loans,hiding or discouraging importation of goods and services by local businessmen,money laundering,establishing a tax system that will benefit the nation without discouraging investment,etc.
I also think the government itself can own companies(as in the case with parastatals),can also allow local government authorities(LGAs) to own and operate businesses as well.But private companies should never be left behind,I think what Dr Slaa and Chadema has shown is their tight grip on private multinationals operating in Tanzania.The Dowans case was a failure on the government side since according to Tanzania contract laws,failure to determine suppliers weakness prior to signing the contract does not automatically nullify that contract.
When people say that so and so is a fake company,that doesnt mean that they are not legally required to be in contract with any public or private entity.And if you really wanna go deep, we can start by looking at the public procurement acts of 2001 and 2004 from when they were still bills in the parliament,those acts are poorly drafted and they got sooo many loopholes and every member of the parliament who voted for it(Including Dr.Slaa) should be held responsible.
If we want to review our procurement policies and how they were drafted and came about to be Acts,we need to start a whole new thread! without disrespecting each other,then we will really know who got us here!

If the contract says that it can be assigned to a third party without the other party's written consent should the company (a person which can enter contracts) follow that or it can choose to reassign its contract because it can - regardless of the terms of the contract?