Warwick Bruce Chapman

The Speaker – eThekwini Council
Councillor James Nxumalo
City Hall
DURBAN

12 November 2009

Dear Mr Speaker

QUESTION IN TERMS OF SECTION 17 OF THE RULES OF ORDER

During the last questions on the issue of the R6.5 million fifaworldcup.durban.gov.za information portal at the July 2009 council meeting, Cllr Peer answered in respect of the first question that “in May 2008 the Municipality advertised for the appointment of a panel of consultants to assist the information services section to deliver on its various projects. From this panel, a quote system was used to obtain services for various projects, including the preparation of a new website.”

In respect of the provisions of the eThekwini Supply Chain Management Policy:

1. Can it be confirmed that the “quote system” mentioned above refers to the procedures outlined in sections 16-18 relating to procurement through quotations; and
1a. if not, which legal provisions were utilised to select and appoint the service provider?

17 (a) makes a mandatory provision requiring that “quotations must be obtained in writing from at least three different providers whose names appear on the list of accredited prospective providers of the municipality” and 17 (b) allows for quotations to be “obtained from providers not listed, provided that such providers meet the listing”.

2. If the quote system was used, were quotations received from at least three different providers as required in 17 (a); and
2a. if so, can a report be provided in terms of the records required by 17(d) showing all the “potential providers and their written quotations”?
2b. if not, in terms of 17(c) what were the reasons approved by the chief financial officer for not securing the required three quotations?

18 (a) stipulates that all requirements in excess of R30000 are “advertised for at least seven days on the website and an official notice board of the municipality”.

2c. was the required advertising as described above done in respect of this project?

18 (b) requires that “when using the list of accredited prospective providers the accounting officer must promote ongoing competition amongst providers by inviting providers to submit quotations on a rotation basis”

2d. what were the reasons for using the same provider of web development services used by the City previously instead of rotating as required above?

19 (1) requires that for “goods and services above a transaction value of R200 000 (VAT included) and long term contracts may only be procured through a competitive bidding process”

3. If the quote system was indeed used, then considering the mandatory provision outlined above, why was the quote system used to select the service provider for a project with a value of R6.5 million?

4. Was the scope of work upon which bidding companies prepared their quotation formally defined; and
4a. if so, then can the original scope documentation be provided to me?
4b. if not, why not?

Yours faithfully,

Councillor Warwick Chapman
Democratic Alliance

City Press covered this article on Sunday 16 August, 2009:

Moneyweb have covered this issue here: http://www.moneyweb.co.za/mw/view/mw/en/page295027?oid=312210&sn=2009%20Detail&pid=287226

A contact in the media has passed me the document pack which Adapt-IT has had produced in consultation with a Johannesburg-based PR Agency to “clear their name” with respect to the rapidly spiralling, R6.5m Durban FIFA 2010 Web Portal issue (Portalgate?).  I have it on authority from both the CEO, Sbu Shabalala, and another Director of Adapt-IT that they are desperately trying to clear the name of Adapt-IT in the public sector as it is affecting their ability to tender for projects, particularly in the City of Johannesburg.

The media release pack from Adapt-IT includes the following documents, and all I have done is convert them to screen readable PDF:

The Official Story

Durban 2010 Portal Progress Report

eThekwini 2010 Portal Costs

Spokesperson Contact List

Spokesperson Profiles

My take on this

If one considers the answers provided by the ANC-led City Government to my questions posed to them at the last full sitting of the eThekwini Council on 30 July, 2009, one will see that:

1. The responses relating to tender procedures and budget allocation do nothing more than highlight the need for answers as to how this large sum could be awarded without following the normal procedures.  Owing to the lack of transparency on this matter by the City, investigating the legalities of the awarding of this tender is proving difficult.
2. The last question was sidestepped altogether.  It was  posed specifically with respect to the decision to switch platforms from the current standards compliant platform in which at least R8.1M has been invested in the last 3 years, to a new Microsoft-based platform which is potentially not compliant with Government policy covering such systems.  The answer provided speaks of user experience, the website “standing out from the rest” and most interestingly, avoiding the sort of problems experienced during the “re-evaluation process”.  If the “re-evaluation process” mentioned in this answer refers to the hugely criticised rates valuation process, then it appears the City is throwing money and technology at problems which are instead caused by skewed policy, divisive leadership and poor management.
3. The first time any meaningful insight into the scope and scale of the website development has been provided is now, through the Adapt-IT media release pack and not via the City.  Why is it that the City has not laid out all the cards and provided open access to the information relating to this development.  In particular, I believe the City needs to make public the following:

• The technical report which justifies objectively the choice to switch platforms, despite the signficant future expense to the taxpayer relative to the R8.1m investment already made in the current platform.
• The project plan for the entire portal development from stage 1 through stage 3 and onward as the City has stated they intend this new platform eclipsing and replace the current www.durban.gov.za information portal.
• The breakdown on tenders, contractors and service providers involved in the project and the scope of work and/or services provided by each.

Media coverage of the contents of the media pack have resulted in articles from:

MyBroadband – http://mybroadband.co.za/news/Business/9186.html

ITWeb has covered this here: http://www.itweb.co.za/sections/internet/2009/0908141100.asp

My Questions on behalf of the Democtratic Alliance:

I tabled the following questions in terms of Section 17 of the Rules of Order at the 30 July Council Meeting:

1. Was there a tender process entered into for the preparation of the new website?
2. From which budget allocation was the funding for the new website sourced?
3. Was the cost of R6.5 million made known to the relevant Council Committees prior to the launch and the resultant media exposure?
4. How much money has been invested in the existing www.durban.gov.za website and platform since it was deployed on the open source Plone system?
5. Why did the City decide to develop the new website using expensive Microsoft technologies instead of sticking with the existing open source, standards compliant platform?

Answers from the City:

Councillor Fawzia Peer (ANC), in her capacity as Chief Whip provided the following respective responses:

1. Yes, in May 2008 the Municipality advertised for the appointment of a panel of consultants to assist the information services section to deliver on its various projects. From this panel, a quote system was used to obtain services for various projects, including the preparation of a new website.
2. 2010 IT budget.
3. IT budgets for 2010 were confirmed very late, due to late clarification from the LOC and FIFA companies as to what the Municipality is expected to fund for 2010 IT Projects and 08/09 year this budget was R7.5 million.
4. Budgeted figures are:

06/07 – R2.7 million;
07/08 – R2.7 million;
08/09 – R2.7 million.

5. We needed a very dynamic and robust website that would:

● Allow citizens and visitors alike to have an exciting experience when visiting the website,
● For the website to stand out from the rest and
● Cater for the volumes of people visiting the website.
● Ensure we don’t end up with the difficulties experienced during the re-evaluation process.

My thoughts

I am concerned that question 1’s answer suggests due process was not followed but am not familiar enough about what the process is, especially considering answer to question 2. and 3.? I will be finding out about this.

Answer to question 4. shows that deploying and managing the Plone-based current website for the past 3 years has cost R8.1m – only R1.6m more than the budgeted cost to build the new site.

Answer to question 5. is totally avoiding the question and the policy requirements.

PLEASE NOTE: The R6.5 million referred to below is the amount budgeted for the entire 3 phases of the site to be completed.  Currently, after over R1 million, the site is in phase 2.  For details on the City’s plans for the site, refer to this duban.gov.za press statement (envelope).

UPDATE (21 July, 2009): ITWeb called me this morning and quizzed me on this issue afterwhich they wrote this: “Durban 2010 backlash intensifies”

–

The Speaker – eThekwini Council
Councillor James Nxumalo
City Hall
DURBAN

12th July 2009

Dear Mr Speaker

QUESTION IN TERMS OF SECTION 17 OF THE RULES OF ORDER

Recently the fifaworldcup.durban.gov.za information portal was launched. The launch was accompanied by much media coverage and subsequent alarm expressed at the R6.5 million spent by the City for this website.

In defense of the expenditure, the 2010 ICT Programme Manager stated “The 2010 website will form part of other legacy projects. It will evolve into an information portal which will incorporate the current www.durban.gov.za website and the use of the functionalities (Silverlight, Photosynth and Sharepoint) and content from the 2010 website.”

The “Policy on Free and Open Source Software Use for South African Government“, approved by Cabinet in 2007 requires arms of Government to make use of Open Source and Open Standards compliant software where it exists as a capable alternative to expensive commercial proprietary software.

Additionally, at least, but not limited to paragraphs 2.5.21, 2.9.3 and 2.5.31 of the “Minimum Interoperability Standards (MIOS) for Information Systems in Government v4.1” signed by the Minister of Public Service and Administration brings into question the implementation of Microsoft Sharepoint based products as they are often not standards complaint.

It is contended that the existing www.durban.gov.za website already provides both a technically capable and policy compliant platform upon which to have developed the new Durban FIFA 2010 website and that the expenditure on the new site which intends to replace it is thus wasted.

Against this background I pose the following questions:

1. Was there a tender process entered into for the preparation of the new website?
2. From which budget allocation was the funding for the new website sourced?
3. Was the cost of R6.5 million made known to the relevant council committees prior to the launch and the resultant media exposure?
4. How much money has been invested in the existing www.durban.gov.za website and platform since it was deployed on the open source Plone system?
5. Why did the City decide to develop the new website using expensive Microsoft technologies instead of sticking with the existing open source, standards compliant platform?

Yours faithfully,
Councillor Warwick Chapman