Reason for buying rice at higher prices from Vietnam must be explained

Although the government claims that Bangladesh is self-sufficient in food, a significant amount of rice and wheat have to be imported every year. But, why do the food minister and the secretary along with four other officials have to go on three-nation foreign tours to buy rice? And, why does the minister himself have to go to discuss the procurement of rice? That too held at such a time when the country is going through a severe reserve and dollar crisis.
According to a newspaper report, a six-member delegation headed by the food minister made a twelve-day visit to Thailand, Vietnam and Cambodia from November 22, though the government in a notification issued by the finance department of the finance ministry last month stopped foreign travels by all state-owned officials and employees at the expense of their respective organisations. Reportedly, the government made this decision with a view to reducing the pressure on the foreign exchange reserves due to the continuing dollar crisis in the country.
However, the report mentioned that the cost of the minister, secretary and other officials’ visit to Vietnam was borne by the government of that country. The cost of the Cambodia and Thailand tours was borne by the Bangladesh government. There is a deep mystery behind the Vietnam tour as that country bore the cost of Bangladesh delegation’s travelling there. Bangladesh has made a contract of buying 230,000 tonnes of rice from Vietnam at a cost of USD 521 per tonne of parboiled rice and USD 494 for per tonne of ‘atap’ rice. But this rice could have been bought for a price lower than that from Thailand, Cambodia, Myanmar, India and Pakistan.
Since the Vietnam government has paid for the Bangladesh delegation’s tour, it is quite normal to raise questions about what was the driving force behind buying rice at a higher price from there. While the price for per tonne of rice in the five mentioned countries is more or less USD 400, what can be the logic behind purchasing rice from Vietnam paying about USD 100 more on per tonne. Bearing the cost of visit doesn’t mean that we have to buy rice from them at a higher price than the international market price. There are scopes of bargaining about the price as there are several sources to import rice. But, why did the minister and the secretary buy rice at a higher price from Vietnam without utilising other options? Is this the repayment of travelling to Vietnam for free?
When there is a strict restriction on government officials going abroad, why should the common people of the country take the liability of their pleasure trips? We demand explanations from the minister and the secretary in this respect.