Factors contributing to transgressions in the procurement practices of state-owned entities (SOES): Eskom and Transnet

Abstract

Public procurement is a vital process for governments and state-owned enterprises (SOEs) to procure essential goods and services. However, state capture and unethical practices have plagued it. The State Capture Commission Report highlighted issues such as poor governance, unethical conduct, and insufficient internal control systems. This has led to financial and operational challenges for SOEs, which heavily rely on state guarantees and bailouts. In South Africa, the government spends around R1 trillion annually on procurement, which represent 12% of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) (National Research Foundation, n.d.). The Auditor General (AG) report for the 2020/21 financial year reported that most SOEs had high balances of irregular expenditures. Transnet had the highest irregular expenditure, totalling R14.1 billion, followed by Eskom with R11.6 billion (Maeko, 2021). This study aimed to identify the underlying governance factors contributing to transgressions in SOE procurement practices and to provide remedial actions to prevent recurrence. Agency Theory was used to examine the identified issues, and a comprehensive literature review was conducted to investigate the underlying factors. The study found that failure to address these governance issues could lead to qualified audit opinions, issues of going concerns for SOEs as well as impact investments and public confidence. The study also revealed that the slow implementation of consequence management could foster a culture of noncompliance and accountability. The current South African public procurement system ca is characterised by political interference and cadre deployment, which undermines transparency, accountability, and good governance. Political appointments and cadre deployment in critical positions encourage wasteful spending, undermine governance, and promote dictatorship. Politicised boards and management in SOEs has led to an increasing prevalence of corruption. The AG, Standing Committee of Public Accounts (SCOPA), National Treasury (NT), Department of Public Enterprises (DPE), and the respective SOEs’ boards have been unable to conduct their oversight functions effectively due to their unwillingness to do the right thing and failure to establish robust preventative controls. The state's approach to board nomination lacks transparency, operates in an ad hoc manner, and is excessively politicised. iii Remedial actions to address these issues require a dedicated commitment from top leadership, fast implementation of corrective measures, and periodic monitoring and evaluation processes. Limiting political interference in the administration of remedial actions can enhance the effectiveness, fairness, and integrity of the anti-corruption process.