You are currently viewing our desktop site, do you want to download our app instead?
Moneyweb Android App Moneyweb iOS App Moneyweb Mobile Web App

NEW SENS search and JSE share prices

More about the app

Bidding for a fair shake

National Treasury hopes its mooted Public Procurement Bill will end graft.
Tender fraud and corruption is rife in SA because government procurement has not been professionalised. Image: Shutterstock

There’s an old joke about a man who kept praying to the good lord to do him the great favour of allowing him to win the lottery. Despite the fervour of his prayers, his wish was never granted.

One night, instead of pleading to win, he asked why his prayers were never answered. To his shock, an answer came to him in a dream in which his irate deity said: “I would have let you win if you had bought a ticket … ”

Whether it’s worth the effort to ‘buy the ticket’ is the conundrum businesses faces when it comes to doing business with government.

It can take an enormous amount of time, energy and incurred costs to prepare a tender submission, and they must summon up the courage long before dropping off their tender applications in a wooden box in the foyer of some or other state institution.

They must then wait to hear the outcome. For a business that has now become financially and emotionally invested in work they may or may not get, this can be a stressful time.

They may know in their hearts that the ‘fix’ is probably in, but if they don’t apply, there is no chance of them winning anything.

Desperate precautions

So, to improve their odds, they take some precautions. One of the clever ones is heat-binding their tender documents; this means that if a page goes missing (usually the tax clearance certificate), making the bid ineligible, there will be a noticeable tear in the application.

It also helps to number each page of the bid documents.

Another precaution is to submit the bid as late as possible. Usually minutes before the deadline.

This is to prevent competitors from somehow getting their hands on their application and coming in with a lower bid. A late submission also prevents the entire process from being halted and the criteria redrawn on less favourable terms.

Aside from submitting late, it’s also good to take a picture of the bid’s entry on the tender submissions register. Some will even wait to see who is collecting the documents and, if possible, find out who they are.

This is a lot of effort to go to ensure they get a fair shake. So why don’t state institutions do away with the tender box and introduce a system that is less prone to corruption?

Yes, I know. Silly question.

A new law

Seriously though – why does this still happen? Especially when there are company boards, internal and external audits, and about 20 laws in some or other way all intent on preventing tender fraud from happening?

The simple answer is that procurement has not been professionalised in government. There are no national regulations, there is no controlling procurement body, and there is no unified recourse for those who feel they have been wronged.

It’s difficult to hold people to account without universal codes of conduct and regulations.

All of this means that government and state entities are spending about R800 billion a year – and National Treasury effectively has no control over it.

Treasury is now hoping that the introduction of the Public Procurement Bill will change this.

A procurement regulator

The bill not only sets out a broad legislative framework for supply chain management, it also sets up a public procurement regulator within National Treasury. The procurement regulator will have the authority to enforce this new law, assist state institutions on the setting up of mandatory procurement units, and maintain a database of bidders.

The regulator will also have the power to “issue a directive to declare certain procurement practices as undesirable”.

Losing bidders will also have clear recourse under this law, as they will be able to take their disputes to the public procurement tribunal, which will have the power to review actions taken by a provincial treasury and even the regulator.

Clarity

The proposed law also makes it clear that any ”public office bearer” who interferes with those involved in the procurement process will be doing so illegally, unless they make their objectives in writing.

‘Public office bearer’ means any:

  • Member of cabinet or deputy minister
  • Member of the national assembly
  • Permanent delegate to the national council of provinces
  • Premier or member of an executive council
  • Member of a provincial legislature
  • Member of a municipal council
  • Member of the national house of traditional leaders
  • Member of a provincial house of traditional leaders.

This essentially means that a minister ‘thinking out loud’ in front of an official about who should get a contract could be viewed as committing a criminal act.

The bill is a positive move. It covers the legislative blind spots regarding procurement in laws such as the Public Finance Management Act, and gives National Treasury, through the establishment of the regulator, more control of SA’s purse strings.

Even though it is a move in the right direction, the real test will be whether losing bidders feel they no longer have to heat-bind their tender documents, number each page, and submit them late to get a fair shake.

Please consider contributing as little as R20 in appreciation of our quality independent financial journalism.

AUTHOR PROFILE

COMMENTS   5

Sort by:
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Top voted

You must be signed in to comment.

SIGN IN SIGN UP

So many SA companies have folded due to bidding in an in just, corrupt 6BEE rigged tendering environment. Either by winning them or wasting money trying.

There is also another trick: officials having the preferred bidder write the tender in such a way that nobody else can possibly win it. This is apparently a technique used by a notorious firm of consultants in KZN, to the point that no others even bother bidding.

Yesterday my husband, a medical doctor, got an email invite from the DOH to tender for 40200 masks. He has never tendered for or sold anything, let alone PPE’s. Three days to respond. Did this go to all medical personnel in the country, so that they can pretend they cast a wide net?

The way those Phony tenders work ( Masks and Sanitizer machines) with Specific Part numbers, is not with the submission of the tender but where the unsuspecting person purchases the goods from. Those companies insist on immediate payment to secure a scarce resource. Then they disappear and even though they have websites and addresses they are all fake.
Beware when a tender to supply has a supplier address in the E Cape.

Thank you Francis01. As my husband is male, white and not a South African citizen nor tenderpreneur, I did not read through the whole document. I have now and it does appear as if some paragraphs are copied-and-pasted onto what might have been an original bidding form of the DOH. And as you say, somebody may fall for it.

End of comments.

LATEST CURRENCIES  

USD / ZAR
GBP / ZAR
EUR / ZAR
BTC / USD

Podcasts

INSIDER SUBSCRIPTIONS APP VIDEOS RADIO / LISTEN LIVE SHOP OFFERS WEBINARS NEWSLETTERS TRENDING PORTFOLIO TOOL CPD HUB

Follow us: