DA Members’ Statement in Parliament 6 March 2019
SOUTH AFRICAN AIRWAYS TECHNICAL BOLLORE CONTACT MALFEASANCE
The Democratic Alliance has submitted a parliamentary question to Pravin Gordhan, the Minister of Public Enterprises, to obtain details of the action taken against SAA Technical (SAAT) staff and executives who were named in the Open Water report on the forensic investigation into the award of a long-term contract to Bollore Africa Logistics S A (Bollore).
In 2016 SAAT awarded Bollore a five-year logistics and warehousing contract that was worth close to R 1,0 billion.
The Open Water report revealed that in order to obtain the SAAT contract Bollore forged its credentials by using fictitious shareholders and black people as fronts. In addition Bollore apparently employed the daughter of a SAAT manager involved in the awarding of the contract to Bollore.
According to the Open Water report, Bollore;
Engaged in misleading practices that amounted to fronting. The BEE certificate submitted by Bollore claimed 32% black female ownership which was not supported by the share certificates submitted.
Misrepresenting its operational capacity and infrastructure,
Failed to submit critical documents including financial statements.
The Open Water report states that SAAT should consider the conduct of employees who were responsible for awarding the contract to Bollore in violation of the Public Finance Management Act. The DA has been informed that no action has to date been taken against those SAAT employees named in the report and that at least two of these employees remain employed by SAAT and have even been promoted.
* Question as submitted to Minister of Public Enterprises.
Whether any action will be or has been taken by South African Airways Technical and/or South African Airways against (a) Bollore Africa Logistics SA and (b) the South African Airways Technical employees named as having acted improperly in the Open Water report on the SA Airways Technical Forensic Investigation into the award of Long-Term Contracts SAAT001/15 Logistic services, dated 28 August 2017; if not, what are the detailed reasons for not taking action; if so, what are the relevant details in each case?