Cape Town - As the DA-led City of Cape Town meets on Thursday to consider a progressive open data policy that will contribute to transparency, opposition parties are outraged that they have been blocked from asking questions about a controversial beach-cleaning tender.
“We’ve been fobbed off. Why are they withholding information?” said Demetrius Dudley, of the ACDP, one of eight parties that submitted questions to the mayor about the tender.
In an unprecedented move, the ANC as the official opposition as well as the ACDP, Cope, Freedom Front Plus, UDF, NP, Africa Muslim Party and Cape Muslim Congress, have joined forces against the city’s decision to disallow questions in the meeting about the beach-clean tender.
“The ruling party prides itself on clean governance and transparency, but this project shows the underbelly of this (administration). Why are we (the city) not implementing a simple court decision?” said Jerimia Thuynsma, of the ANC.
The stonewalling of opposition councillors on the same day as the release of an open data policy, made a “farce” of what should be the city’s progressive initiative, said Dudley.
“How much will the DA allow the public to know? We have to deal with the arrogance of the leadership. They decide what information can be shared.”
He said the city had also withheld the findings of a forensic probe by KPMG that pointed to possible misconduct by the officials involved in awarding the tender.
Others pointed to the city’s reluctance to award the full tender, despite two court judgments, which could put the status of the city’s Blue Flag beaches at risk.
“It’s a cover-up to mislead the ratepayers of Cape Town. The beaches have not been in pristine condition since litigation started,” said Cope’s JC Krynauw.
The parties each submitted questions about the tender, only to be informed by Speaker Dirk Smit in a general e-mail that the questions had been referred back to his office in terms of rule 22.1.1.
“The questions have not been included in the council agenda for September 25 and will be tabled at a future date, after further clarity and information have been obtained,” said Johan Kilian of the Speaker’s office.
”It should also be noted that certain questions pertaining to privileged or confidential matters have been disallowed by the Speaker.”
Smit said on Wednesday that the findings of the KPMG report had yet to be tested, and that it was now with the city manager. “I can’t allow politicians to ask questions if the report has not gone through the full process yet.” Any councillors who spoke about the report could find themselves in contravention of the city’s code of conduct. He was protecting councillors from this risk.
But opposition councillors have accused the city’s leadership of a cover-up.
They want to know why Beach Clean SA, which has more than 14 years’ experience in mechanical beach cleaning, has not been awarded its full R5 million tender as set down in two high court judgments.
And they want to know why the city has not released the KPMG report which referred to “probable” maladministration.
Beach Clean SA was dropped from the initial bidding process in 2012, because it had failed to include all the pricing information.
There was evidence that the successful bidder, the Port Elizabeth-based Khazimla Gardening and Cleaning Services, may have copied Beach Clean SA’s confidential pricing information. Beach Clean’s Rogerio Viana challenged the city and asked officials to probe the way the tender was awarded.
But the city said there was no evidence of wrongdoing. Viana went to court and Judge Andre Blignault ruled the city should set aside Khazimla’s tender so that Beach Clean could resubmit the full pricing schedule. The city then cancelled the whole tender.
Viana again took legal action and in the second court case Judge Karrisha Pillay said the city’s decision should be set aside to re-evaluate Beach Clean SA’s tender.
She said in her judgment: “I am satisfied that the city committed a mistake of law and/or failed to take all relevant considerations into account and or failed to act in accordance with the principle of legality.” The city lost both cases, with costs.
Meanwhile the city had extended Beach Clean’s tender period to 2016 because of litigation delays, but the value has dropped from just over R5m to R750 000 this financial year and a further R750 000 for the next year.
The city said operational budgets were not carried over and the department could not make more funding available for this work.
Beach Clean is supposed to start cleaning the city’s beaches, including those with Blue Flag status, from next month. But without the full tender, Viana cannot pay for the equipment and staff he needs.
Krynauw said he had inspected the city’s mechanical beach-cleaning machine two years ago when the dispute started, and found that it was not roadworthy and could not match the level of cleaning which Beach Clean’s equipment could provide.
The city was now liable for those beaches that had not been properly cleaned for the past 24 months.
Viana, financially depleted and therefore unable to go for round three against the city in the high court, has lodged a complaint with the public protector. The Hawks are also investigating.
This is not the first time that questions about the city’s beaches and this tender have been silenced.
Freedom Front Plus councillor Andre Fourie was told to withhold his questions on the matter during a utility services portfolio committee meeting earlier this month.
Cape Argus