Probitiy

The Probitiy report on TMPD-1 did not identify any shortcomings related to document control and found no irregularities.

“the Probity report of TMPD-1 did not identify any shortcomings of that nature. That then, of course, gives me assurance that for TMPD-1, there were no shortcomings, documents were validated to be under lock and key, and there were no instances of irregularity that were picked up.”

There is no suggestion that documents were tampered with before going to Probitiy.

“There is no suggestion that documents were tampered.”

Probitiy uses several systems to evaluate documents and probably has mechanisms to detect amendments or tampering.

“Probitiy utilises a number of systems when they do their work. Within that, they evaluate documents as well. Within that, they could probably have systems to see whether there has been an amendment or a tamper of a document that was there.”

Material irregularities identified by Probitiy were due to the pricing schedule issued as an addendum, requiring the pricing schedule to be completed in full with no blanks.

“The material irregularities identified by Probity were due to the pricing schedule, which was issued as an addendum. In regard to the interpretations of the addendum, it stipulated that the pricing schedule must be completed in full, with no blank spaces.”

BEC interpretation was that the pricing schedule need not have blank spaces, differing from Probitiy's requirement that blanks be filled with numerical figures, resulting in potential selective evaluation and unjustified disqualification of bidders.

“The BEC interpretation is that the pricing schedule need not to have blank spaces. According to Probity report, which its recommendation have changed the initial BEC recommendation, states that blank spaces must be completed with numerical figures. This resulted in potential selective evaluation of bidders and the potential unjustified disqualified bidders.”

Matters raised in isolation within the BAC report are additional matters not noted in the Probitiy report and the BAC wants to emphasize these.

“matters that are raised in isolation within the BAC report are additional matters that the BAC wants to emphasise on one or that the BAC did not take note of within the Probity report.”

There was no consensus or agreement between Probitiy and BEC on the findings, rendering the matter unresolved.

“There is no consensus. ... There is no agreement. This matter could not be resolved.”

Procurement process does not require consensus between Probitiy and BEC; Probitiy submits a report which is considered by BEC but consensus is not mandated by City supply chain policy.

“It is not required in terms of the City's supply chain management policy ... It is not what I meant.”

There was a dispute between BEC and Probitiy on pricing schedule requirements: BEc allows blanks with lines while Probitiy requires blanks to be completed with numerical figures zeros.

“There is a dispute as to what the requirements are between BEC and Probity. Probity say you have got to fill in a zero when your pricing on a certain matter is zero. BEC say provided you do not leave blank spaces, for instance by just drawing a line through the space where you have nothing to price, that is compliant.”

The findings in the Probitiy report were accepted by the BEC, but the irregularities were not cured and the tender needed to be cancelled.

“The findings were accepted, and that is what we are raising. ... The findings stand. The findings were not cured. This tender is irregular. It must be cancelled.”