The Western Cape Education Department (WCED) maintains there were no grounds to set aside a controversial IT tender that was recommended by the State Information Technology Agency (Sita) after it found some irregularities in its awarding.
The Western Cape Education Department (WCED) maintains there were no grounds to set aside a controversial IT tender that was recommended by the State Information Technology Agency (Sita) after it found some irregularities in its awarding.
This happened when fissures in the board of directors of Sita played out in the open again during the meeting of the basic education portfolio committee when the contract was discussed.
The WCED had requested Sita, as a government procurement entity, to procure Local Area Network (LAN) services for the province’s schools.
The department’s officials had served on the Sita bid specification and bid evaluation committees and Sita subsequently recommended that WCED award the contract to Blue Networks Consortium (BNC).
The department’s legal adviser, Ian Steyn, said the contract remained in place and was honoured by both the department and BNC.
“WCED was not aware of any irregularities when making the award,” Steyn said.
However, Sita had advised the department of allegations of irregularities in its procurement process and Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyer (CDH) was appointed to conduct a forensic investigation.
The investigation found BNC submitted two pricing options for the contract, in a move that made the tender process unfair, and that another company was unfairly disqualified, among other things.
Steyn said his department had agreed to assist with the investigation and their officials were interviewed.
He said after the investigation was concluded WCED made a request for a copy of the CDH report.
“It was of utmost importance for Western Cape (Education Department) to receive the report. It is ultimately its contract with BNC that was a subject of the investigation.”
Steyn also said Sita had indicated that it will review and set aside the IT contract but did not proceed with the application.
He said the department wrote to Sita informing it that the legal advice it obtained was that the conclusions in the CDH report were unfounded and the facts don’t demonstrate grounds to review the contract.
“WCED does not accept the findings and recommendations made in the CDH report,” Steyn said.
However, during the presentation by the members of the board, there were differing views on the contract, which pointed to deep-seated tensions within the board over the status of the investigation by CDH.
Board chairperson Makano Mosidi told the committee that the CDH investigation had not been concluded as they were furnished with a draft report.
“We took a resolution as the board to appoint a legal team to review and look at missing gaps and conclude the investigation. We thought it would be done quickly but completeness was critical to us,” Mosidi said.
Board member Luvuyo Keyise said he and three other board members were in disagreement with the report given by Mosidi as it was not discussed by the board. Keyise insisted that the board received a final report in October last year and shared it with the Department of Communications and Digital Technologies.
He said anyone who did not accept the CDH report should challenge it in court and suggested that the IT tender be referred to the SIU for investigation.
During their presentation, CDH representatives told MPs that their investigation was complete and took them through the irregularities.
ActionSA MP Lerato Ngobeni said it was curious the WCED insisted on going ahead with the tender despite the alleged irregularities.
She raised concerns that there were not publicly available details about the owners of BNC.
“We must follow this matter to the logical conclusion,” she said, adding that the SIU should be roped in.
“It is high time in our county that any matter of corruption be dealt with the strictest and harshest hand that is possible,” Ngobeni said.
ANC MP David Louw questioned whether the board had tried to ratify the CDH investigation that uncovered irregularities.
Louw also said the WCED had been briefed about the irregularities but insisted there was no law binding it to cancel the tender.
He accused some of the conflicted board members of covering their tracks.
“The role of the officials must be probed. Send the matter to SIU and Hawks so that we get to the bottom of the matter,” Louw said.
DA MP Delmaine Christians said the CDH forensic investigation did not implicate WCED in fraudulent and corrupt activities.
“It seems there is internal strife in Sita and that would have compromised the CDH investigation,” she said before asking how the irregularities materially affected the procurement.
MK Party MP Pinky Ncube noted with concern that Sita came to the meeting not speaking with one voice as some distanced themselves from the report that was presented by the board.
Committee chairperson Joy Maimela also took issue with the conduct of the board at the meeting, saying: “If you disagree with the findings, why not take them to court? It is just your actions to cover yourselves.”
Cape Times
Related Topics: