[OSGeo Africa] Help prevent DRDLR and other government entities from deviously renewing their ESRI ELAs

[Sindile Bidla]

Maybe as a starting point, Section 217 of the Constitution provides for the
following, I quote "*When an organ of state in the national, provincial or
local sphere of government, or any other institution identified in national
legislation, contracts for goods or services, it must do so in accordance
with a system which is fair, equitable, transparent, competitive and
cost-effective*."
Consequently I think we could do the following:
1. Write to the National Treasury (Chief Procurement Office) and CFO of the
Department bringing this to their attention and seeking clarity whether
this is inline with Section 217
I also agree that the way the TORs are crafted are done in a way that
ensures a particular service provider gets the work for example:
"Unlimited GIS software license distribution for a period of three (3)
years including all extensions and add-on software." No other product uses
this type of wording
"Service provider must show proof of registration/certification as an
authorized enterprise implementation partner of their respective Original
Equipment Manufacturer (OEM)."
"In case the bidder does not meet condition 7.1.1., then the bidder must
subcontract to an EME or QSE which is at least 51% owned by black people as
per the following estimated total bid values and percentages (Provide proof
of subcontracting
arrangement which may include a subcontracting agreement between main
tenderer and subcontractor)." Circumventing the pre-qualification criteria
as per the new preferential procurement regulations.

Regards,
Sindile Bidla

On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 at 13:45, Gavin Fleming <gavinjfleming at gmail.com> wrote:

> If you have the time and energy, I invite you to help do something about
> this thinly veiled attempt at renewing the DRDLR ESRI ELA, when they are
> expressly not allowed to. They are supposed to go to open tender and
> consider alternatives and in particular, FOSS alternatives.
>
> This is one of many attempts by government entities to bypass official
> procurement procedures and simply renew their ESRI ELAs (Same goes for
> Oracle and other proprietary vendors). Most I’ve come across, like
> Drakenstein municipality and Ekurhuleni and Joburg Metros, are finding or
> have found means to do this without even tendering (for example by invoking
> sole supplier status or abusing the SITA ‘framework agreement’) . In this
> case DRDLR is going out to tender, but it is hardly open nor fair (just
> read it!)
>
> Then you get municipalities like Molemole illegally requesting named
> products in tenders and worse, giving the market minimal time to respond:
>
> "COR 8/1/1/09: Molemole Municipality is hereby inviting quotations from
> service providers to render a service of supply, delivery, installation and
> configuration of ArcGIS licenses. Specifications: 1. Level 2 Term License;
> 5 user Pack; 2. Level 1 Term License; 10 User Pack; 3. Service Credits; 1
> Block (1000 Credits); 4. Map (1); Drone 2 Map for ArcGIS Term License.
> Please note that this quotation was published late.”
>
> Or Mandeni:
>
> "13/19/20: Quotations are hereby invited from suitably service providers
> to supply and deliver of Software Licenses as per the following
> specification: • ... • ESRI Software maintenance renewal End User No:
> 307570"
>
> SAGI, CSI, SITA, GISSA, Practitioners, Competition commission? Why are we
> allowing this anticompetitive and unaffordable practice to continue,
> especially in light of the current economic and political climate in SA?
>
> Gavin
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Africa mailing list
> Africa at lists.osgeo.org
> You can UNSUBSCRIBE at https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/africa
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/africa/attachments/20190912/c7aeefcf/attachment.html>