[DEBATE] : (Fwd) Valli unveiled

[Patrick Bond]

www.mg.co.za

Moosa in R38-billion tender conflict
By Stefaans Brümmer and Sam Sole 8 February 2007

Eskom board chair Valli Moosa presided over the parastatal giving 
contracts worth billions to African National Congress (ANC) funding 
company Chancellor House -- while also serving on the ANC’s fundraising 
committee.

Eskom would not say this week whether Moosa had declared a conflict of 
interest or recused himself when his board decided on the contracts. 
Moosa did not return calls.

The board made crucial decisions about the award of two contracts, 
together worth R38,5-billion, to a consortium that includes the ANC 
­company.

The two contracts combined dwarf all separate parts that make up the 
-­controversial arms deal and may be the largest procurement in South 
African history.

The ANC-linked consortium will supply six giant boilers for each of two 
new power stations Eskom is building to ramp up generating capacity.

Now Moosa, a former Cabinet minister, must explain how he reconciled his 
duties chairing the Eskom board, which answers to government and should 
serve the public at large, with his role as ANC fundraiser.

The committee
Moosa has served on the ANC’s national finance committee since at least 
the party’s Stellenbosch national conference in December 2002. He 
appears central to the committee’s workings -- he was the only one of 
six members to be reappointed following the change of guard at the ANC’s 
Polokwane national conference in ­December.

The committee, a substructure of the ANC national executive committee, 
is chaired by the party’s ­treasurer general. The ANC constitution 
states that the treasurer general and the committee are “responsible … 
for working out and executing plans for fundraising”.

The company
Reporting to the Polokwane conference, outgoing treasurer general Mendi 
Msimang described how at the time of the Stellenbosch conference five 
years earlier “the movement was going through the most difficult period 
in its financial life … It was important that we establish a platform of 
our own to be self-sufficient.”

Msimang said his office then “inspired the creation of investment 
mechanism [sic] that will ensure funding the movement on a sustainable 
basis”. He added that “the national finance committee of the ANC is 
proud to report that we have achieved a sound financial position. To 
build a sound portfolio of investments has taken us a long time to put 
together. But it has been worthwhile.”

Msimang appears to have been talking mainly about the Chancellor House 
group Chancellor House Holdings, the main company, was established 
within three months of the Stellenbosch conference.

The Mail & Guardian and the Institute for Security Studies corruption 
and governance programme revealed in 2006 that Chancellor House was set 
up with the sole purpose of funding the ANC, through the Chancellor 
House Trust.

Former North West premier Popo Molefe is one of two Chancellor House 
trustees.

He served alongside Moosa on the ANC finance committee after 
Stellenbosch and is also Moosa’s private sector business partner in 
Lereko Investments, a prominent BEE firm.

This left Moosa conflicted on two counts when the Eskom board made 
decisions affecting Chancellor House: As a member of the ANC finance 
committee he was custodian of the party’s interest in Chancellor; and as 
Molefe’s business partner there was a personal connection one step 
removed from Chancellor.

The contracts
Eskom’s board gave the go-ahead for the construction of Medupi, the 
para­statal’s new coal-fired power station in Limpopo, in December 2005 
­-- four months after Moosa became the ­utility’s chairperson.

Engineering company Hitachi Power Africa concluded its “empowerment” 
transaction with Chancellor House in the same month, company 
registration records show. Chancellor acquired 25%.

The tender process for Medupi’s boilers started in March 2006, and 
Hitachi Power Africa and Hitachi Power Europe formed a consortium to bid.

Last November Eskom announced the contract, for six boilers, had been 
awarded to the Hitachi consortium. In December, Eskom contracted with 
Hitachi for a second set of six boilers, this time for its yet-unnamed 
“Project Bravo” power station in Mpumalanga, without a further tender.

The two boiler contracts are worth R38,5-billion, of which Chancellor 
House has an estimated R5,8-billion stake through its 25% shareholding 
in Hitachi Power Africa and the latter’s 60% stake in the Hitachi 
consortium.

The controversy
In a detailed statement after the M&G first raised the alarm late last 
year, Eskom said consultants Deloitte had confirmed the process “to be 
fair, transparent, equitable, cost-effective and competitive and not 
biased towards any predetermined outcome”.

It said a consortium of engineering firms, Alstom and Steinmüller, had 
originally outscored Hitachi, and that the board had approved the award 
to them. Only after Alstom-Steinmüller hiked its price following a 
difference of opinion over the scope of the work were negotiations 
reopened with Hitachi -- which then “emerged as the preferred bidder on 
an objective basis”.

The Eskom board confirmed the award to Hitachi. It also approved the 
negotiation and conclusion of the Project Bravo boiler contract with 
Hitachi, even though this was not part of the original tender, based on 
the advantages of a “fleet strategy”.

Large questions about this process include:

# Why did Hitachi Power Africa empower party vehicle Chancellor House, 
rather than an ordinary BEE firm, as the tender process presided over by 
Moosa was about to start?


# Eskom says the Deloitte reports confirming the integrity of the 
process found no conflicts involving Eskom employees, executives or 
board members. The reports presented to the board also considered the 
involvement of Chancellor House but found “no evidence of any political 
influence”. Why did Deloitte miss Moosa’s obvious conflict of interest? 
And did Moosa, in response, own up?


# Was it correct to revert to Hitachi after Alstom-Steinmüller raised 
its price, and were apples compared with apples? The M&G understands 
Hitachi interpreted the scope of the work in the same way as 
Alstom-Steinmüller. Did its contract price not also increase?


# Was it correct to contract with Hitachi to supply the Project Bravo 
boilers, almost doubling the contract price, without a further tender or 
giving Alstom-Steinmüller an equal chance to negotiate?


# What role did Moosa play in the eventual awards to Hitachi? There is 
no evidence he recused himself when the board confirmed both contract 
awards to Hitachi.


Eskom policy states that conflicts must be declared and “where there is 
a conflict of interest, that person is required to recuse 
himself/herself from the tender process”.
www.mg.co.za