Transnet questioned over pricey purchase of marquees

The SA Transport and Allied Workers Union (Satawu) has questioned the rationale behind the purchase of two marquees for R6m by the Transnet National Ports Authority (TNPA).

This comes in the wake of an ongoing battle between TNPA chief executive Pepi Silinga and the union.

The purchase of the marquees, bought through an auction, forms part of a list of complaints Satawu sent to the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) requesting an official investigation.

The list contained 17 projects it said needed to be investigated. The Hawks have confirmed that they are evaluating the complaints.

Transnet spokesperson Ayanda Shezi told The Herald the procurement of the marquees formed part of an independent investigation launched by TNPA into the claims by Satawu.

Shezi declined to comment further, saying it would be premature.

The previous owner of the two marquees is the Coega Development Corporation (CDC) — another point of contention for Satawu.

In a statement, Satawu accused Silinga of flouting supply chain management processes and creating projects that would allegedly benefit him and the CDC — his former employer.

“Satawu is not against changes and development of Transnet, or the country as a whole.

“The only thing that Satawu is against is a deliberate breach of SCM regulated processes, and violation of the public finance management act for the purpose of passing tender transactions to their close friends who are disguising themselves as Transnet service providers while discriminating [against] other interested companies,” the union alleged.

A leaked TNPA memo written on September 6 by commercial services general manager Anthony Ngcezula, titled “request for approval of single source confinement for the acquisition of PVC and glass panel marquees”, states that occupancy at the Mendi Building at the Port of Ngqura — the current TNPA headquarters — exceeds the building’s capacity.

“The building was originally designed to accommodate a total of 344 employees.

“The occupancy status of the building as of July 30 indicates that the building currently accommodates 525 personnel, exceeding the prescribed building capacity by 181 personnel.

“The building was initially designed and constructed to accommodate personnel for the Port of Ngqura.

“However, in early 2021, a decision was taken to relocate the TNPA head office from Johannesburg (Parktown) and Durban (Kingsmead) to the Port of Ngqura (Mendi Building).”

Ngcezula wrote that the building had already exceeded its space limit and future hires would result in contravention of the National Building Regulations Act 103 of 1977.

Ngcezula said due to renovations at the Mendi Building, TNPA was under pressure to secure an alternative meeting venue similar to the size of one of their boardrooms which was being renovated.

In a separate document to the Transnet board chair, Silinga wrote that because the procurement method was an auction, there would have been no tender document to the auctioneer due to its impracticality and the way auctions were facilitated.

“The only determination for securing the purchase was through confinement and to ensure that the bidding price did not exceed the approved amount.”

Silinga wrote that the TNPA received value for money to accommodate the state-owned enterprise’s needs.

“According to Section 4.8 of the Transnet Delegation of Authority Framework, all bids above R2m are required to be adjudicated and awarded by the relevant bid adjudicating committee.

“This requirement includes bids which followed a competitive process as well as bids procured through other means [single source confinement].

“Immediate compliance to Section 4.8 of the Transnet Delegation of Authority Framework was found to be impractical, as TNPA could not obtain approval from the divisional bid adjudication committee (DBAC).

“The nature of the auctioneering process is that the invoice is issued once the bid is accepted by the auctioneer, and as such the process dictated that the invoice date was prior to the purchase order date and the approval date by DBAC.

“The payment process was expedited and prior approval from the DBAC could not be obtained due to the urgent nature of the auction transaction.”

In the absence of prior approval, retrospective approval would be requested and was sought, Silinga wrote.

Coega spokesperson Ayanda Vilakazi confirmed they had appointed an auction house to execute the sale of the marquee tents at a market-related price.

“Coega, as part of its business diversification strategy, branched into event management services complementary to its subsidiaries, the Bluewater Bay Sunrise Hotel, and the Coega Vulindlela Accommodation and Conference Centre.

“This expansion was underpinned by the overarching objective to contribute to Coega’s financial sustainability, and furthermore, the socioeconomic development outputs of the organisation,” Vilakazi said.

Due to the impact of Covid19 and a lack of market uptake, Coega took swift action to abort the business, he said.

The tents were sold alongside a wider entertainment setup including a mobile stage.

The purchase of the marquees forms part of a list of complaints Satawu sent to the SIU requesting an official investigation