Dear Standing Committee on Public Accounts (SCOPA),

Given that procurement is one of the risk areas for corruption, would it be possible for SCOPA to establish:

- What steps have been taken since the then Chief Procurement Officer gave testimony on the first day of the state capture commission in August 2018 that the OCPO does not have full line of sight of procurement information to rectify that? If not, what are the reasons?

- Since the new audit category, material irregularities was implemented, what has been the value per year of financial losses due to material irregularities?

- For the past ten years, what has the spend per year of the state been on consultants, goods & services and personnel (salaries) as a percentage of total expenditure? Can this be provided at a consolidated level and also per department/entity?

- What options for recourse are there when accounting officers, CFOs and SCM officials do not ensure that the Auditor General's recommendations are implemented? And are there examples where such recourse has been made use of?

- Are there any court proceedings which have resulted in a supplier being placed on the tender defaulters register?

- Is the onus on the courts to communicate to National Treasury should there be a ruling which affects the tender defaulters register? Is this line of communication established through recognised processes and procedures?

If possible to obtain answers to the above questions, it can provide useful insights into how the culture of accountability can be improved.

Many thanks
Kirsten

Kirsten Pearson
Project Specialist
Corruption Watch (RF) NPC
www.corruptionwatch.org.za
8th Floor, South Point Corner Building,
87 De Korte Street, Braamfontein, 2001 Johannesburg
PO Box 30630 Braamfontein 2017