To
Portfolio Committee on Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment
From
Adrian Van Noie
Subject
Sabotage of Waste Tyre Transportation Industry in the Western Cape : Waste Bureau bid WB E 108
Date
5 November 2022 7:02 p.m.
Dear Portfolio Committee on Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment,

I want to report suspicious procurement activities and unfair treatment by the Waste Bureau in relation to bid WB E 108. The Waste Bureau is infamous for its suspicious activities and ill-treatment towards service providers. This has been made clear on numerous occasions, such as in the case of October 2020, when more than 8 officials were suspended for allegedly irregularly awarding tenders. To protect themselves, the officials from the Waste Bureau end up behaving like bullies towards service providers who dare to question their actions or speak out about what is happening on the ground. Our company is one of the service providers who has been a victim of the Waste Bureau for more than two years for these reasons. As the one representing the Western Cape Waste Tyre Transportation Industry, it seems as if we have been targeted and singled out to silence us and keep us out of the industry for them as Waste Bureau to hold the industry hostage and do as they please.

In 2020, our company was issued a notice of alleged fraud, which consequently led to a forensic investigation that we welcomed by all means. More than two years later, the investigation has supposedly concluded; however, the Waste Bureau is not forthcoming with its finding, despite denying us payment since this allegation in 2020. Instead, we are being bullied further by being denied the opportunity to be awarded a contract despite our company satisfying all the predetermined standards and making it as far as the induction session (which was only meant for those who qualified) and receiving a pre-award letter during the procurement process.

The request to tender for bid WB E 108 stipulated that the number of transporters required was 53 primary transporters and 20 secondary transporters nationally. According to the list of contracts awarded for bid WB E 108, only 30 transporters were selected nationally. This includes both primary and secondary transporters. Of these 30, only 3 primary transporters were chosen to service a total of 508 dealers across the whole Western Cape. No secondary transporters who reside within the Western Cape were selected. This is despite the fact that the request to bid indicated that 10 primary transporters were required from the Western Cape and 3 secondary transporters from the Western Cape.

It is my understanding that the nature of the Waste Tyre project is to empower people within the geographical location of its operations by creating employment as well as business opportunities. However, this does not seem true for the Western Cape. I would therefore like to request that this matter be brought before the parliamentary committee as soon as possible as the contract is only meant for 18 months, of which it has been in operation for 2 months already. If possible, it would be appreciated if this matter could be investigated to understand the logic for appointing 3 out of 10 transporters in the Western Cape, leaving them to split 508 dealers and no secondary transporters. Unless this is not the final list and they have the intention of contracting with service providers through an ad-hoc process which might include our company. And if so, they should provide the details.

I want to thank you for taking the time read my message. I trust that this committee will provide acting in the best interest of the voting South African citizen and that they may provide us with fruitful results.

Kind regards,

Adrian Van Noie