‘Bits and pieces’ on broadband regrettable

THE Eastern Cape provincial government (ECPG) understands that broadband is an economic gateway that provides rural and urban communities access to tools they need to attract new businesses, educational opportunities, jobs and business owners, and link them to key institutions such as schools, libraries, hospitals, public safety buildings and other community centres.

That is why in 2016 the ECPG launched a telecommunications position paper endorsed and supported by the executive council to make the development of a robust and affordable high-speed telecommunications infrastructure a priority and demonstrate how the province can benefit from the expansion of broadband by quickly introducing access to high-speed internet services to the way government delivers its services to communities.

The ECPG has noted with serious concern and disappointment the manner in which Daily Dispatch (“Cables paint picture of mismanagement”, February 3 2018 and “Uproar over broadband project,” February 7 2018”), and its named and unnamed “sources” manipulated the facts in an attempt to paint the provincial government as wasteful and tolerating shoddy work.

Reporting can be factual and accurate but still be misleading by the omission of relevant information. It is highly regrettable and unprofessional, if not unethical, for a newspaper to publish bits and pieces without context.

In many cases, when context is not included in a report these limiting factors not only distort the news report, but impose a view contrary to what actually happened with the rollout of broadband across the Eastern Cape.

The media reports failed to put into context the alleged “shoddy” workmanship and the R218-million, R171-million, R57million and R15.9-million amounts associated with the broadband project.

So, has the Eastern Cape spent money without approval from National Treasury? No. Treasury Regulation 16A.6.6 allows the accounting officer, on behalf of a department, to participate in any contract arranged by means of a competitive bidding process by any organ of state, subject to the written approval of such organ of state and the relevant contractors.

In this instance, consent had been obtained from the relevant organs of state – the State Information Technology Agency (Sita) and the Western Cape provincial government (WCPG) – and the relevant contractor. The regulatory prescript does not require National Treasury approval.

With these consents, the ECPG piggybacked on the WCPG’s broadband project.

This came after delays spanning 10 months demonstrated that Sita was incapable of proper planning and execution of the broadband rollout on behalf of the Eastern Cape province.

Also, to piggyback on the WCPG project, the province invoked Sita’s own regulation, which stated that “if compliance with procurement requirements in terms of regulations is not possible or practical because the delivery of services earlier than in the normal course of procurement is of critical importance ... the relevant department may acquire the information technology goods in any manner which is the best interest of the state.”

A cost-benefit analysis showed that the WCPG Master Services Agreement (MSA) was more affordable than what Sita proposed the ECPG should pay for the broadband rollout.

The Sita’s proposal worked against the principle of “affordability” enshrined into the South African Broadband Policy Vision Statement.

We remain dumbfounded s to why Sita advised us to get into a contractual obligation that is more than twice that which was afforded to the Western Cape government by the same state-owned enterprise that is supposed to safeguard the public purse.

It is a pity that to date, Sita has not presented the ECPG with an affordable proposal, despite the ECPG indicating to that organisation that its current proposal is too expensive and does not meet the strategic requirements of the province.

In the 23 months since the ECPG approached Sita to begin broadband connectivity in the province, Sita has yet to present duly authorised and delegated officials of the province with a proposal that comes close to the contract that it helped the Western Cape to conclude in 2014. Why is that?

It is a pity that while National Treasury also stated they were concerned about the Sita delays, they never advised on the way forward.

While it is not nice to take another government agency to task, Sita has contributed to the misinformation and twisting of facts.

Questions remain, however, on why Sita refuses to – or cannot – do for the Eastern Cape what it did for the Western Cape.

Why was Sita able to assist the Western Cape conclude its tender within a reasonable time, but in more than 23 months it has been unable to produce a relevant specification that would serve the Eastern Cape in meeting its strategic objectives, let alone assist the province connect even one site?

Is the Eastern Cape too rural? Are its people undeserving?

Is the constituency too irrelevant to be afforded the same cost-effective professionalism, support and cooperation that was afforded to the Western Cape? Does Sita believe that poor people are also mentally poor?

Sita’s lethargy and non-response has undermined the province’s vision to fulfil its aim of being a fully effective and efficient public service through modernisation, and thus enhance service delivery to the citizens of the province.

While national and provincial strategic goals and objectives have been our preimminent concerns, the ECPG faces monthto-month operational paralysis due to an aging, poorly maintained and poorly designed provincial wide-area network.

Another piece of misinformation has been that R218-million was paid for services not rendered. That is in incorrect. Only R15.9-million has been paid for services rendered. R218-million was the 2017/18 budget for the broadband rollout including operational costs such as travel and staffing.

Also, did the premier’s office make two payments, one of R171-million and one of R57-million? No. R57-million was an allocation set aside from which the above R15.9-million was paid.

I wonder what evidence the Daily Dispatch has supposedly seen to support payments that were never made?

Had Daily Dispatch not chosen to believe unnamed sources and leaked draft government correspondence, I could have informed the paper that indeed, we did raise a purchase order of R171-million preparing to make tranche payments in line with the available budget of R218-millio as is the practice done in the Western Cape broadband project, as well as throughout government.

Upon further consideration, this purchase order was amended and split against the different deliverables. So far only R15.9million from the R57-million has been paid.

A false impression has been created that the Eastern Cape government paid for shoddy workmanship as evidenced by optic cables for the project lying on the side of the road unattended.

The ECPG did not pay for rollout of infrastructure, but for services. Also the provincial government did not pay for incomplete work but for work which has been completed and verified/authenticated.

In this case the R15.9-million paid was for services rendered in the provision of broadband connectivity to government, not for infrastructure rollout.

Access to high-speed internet offers a wealth of entertainment options.

But for rural Eastern Cape, broadband connectivity can bring government services on par with the world.

For rural residents, high-speed broadband connectivity is not just about pastimes; more importantly, it is about a chance to a better life.

For that to happen, it is imperative that policymakers consider the scope of investment necessary to bring broadband connectivity to rural communities.

Despite the misleading and wrong information published across media outlets, the ECPG is committed to making broadband connectivity and internet access the universal catalyst that lifts our province out of poverty and delivers efficient access to social services such as healthcare, education, finance, banking and other sectors, bringing them in reach of all.