Public finance, the bedrock of stability for every nation, comprises the art of generating, custody of, spending and controlling public money. A part of the money generated goes into procurement of goods and services. Government procurement managers face a unique set of challenges. Firstly, speed and efficiency to deliver service are difficult to achieve because financial transactions must be fully documented and audited. Secondly, financial managers on a daily basis endeavour to adapt to new legislation and improved processes, all within the constraints of a limited workforce caused by retirements and transfers of employees. These challenges tend to slow the procurement and contracting process significantly. The result is that services are delayed and state departments encounter the phenomenon of under-expenditure. Legislation on procurement aims at empowering the disadvantaged, and provides flexibility to individual public institutions to facilitate efficient service delivery. Yet, these laudable legislative objectives are grossly undermined by incidents of lack of accountability and under-spending. These challenges solicit critique on the public sector that departments are inherently inefficient and border on loose ethical and accountability milieu. This paper posits accountability as conceptual framework to analyze the process of procurement. Legislative implications on procurement are evaluated, and their practices, exposing attendant loopholes that frustrate efficient service delivery. Recommendations are offered to improve procurement.