BY MBONGENI NDLELA
MBABANE – A shocking report from Auditor General Timothy Matsebula (AG) has revealed that government may have been severely overcharged for firefighting boots that turned out to be of substandard quality, raising serious concerns over procurement practices and financial accountability.
In March 2024, government spent E988 000 on 260 pairs of firefighting boots, each costing an astonishing E3 800.
However, an independent investigation by this publication found that high-quality, heavy-duty firefighting boots can cost as little as E1 700, with some options priced as low as E400.
This suggests that the supplier may have inflated prices, costing taxpayers nearly double or triple the market price for what should have been durable and fire-resistant protective gear.
Wasteful and fruitless expenditure exposed
According to the AG’s report, which was presented in Parliament last Friday during the National Budget Speech by Minister of Finance Neal Rijkenberg, the boots began wearing out within eight months of use, rendering them a health hazard to firefighters.
The very nature of firefighting requires equipment that can withstand extreme conditions, yet these boots failed in less than a year, raising red flags about the procurement process.
The AG’s report further noted that some firefighting boots purchased over three years ago were in better condition than these newly acquired ones. This revelation suggests that government not only overpaid for the boots but also received substandard products that endangered frontline emergency responders.
The purchase invoice (No. 45) was processed by the Fire and Emergency Services on March 20, 2024, with payment made just two days later. Yet, by December 2024, less than nine months after distribution, reports of torn and unusable boots emerged.
A violation of public procurement standards?
The Public Finance Management (PFM) Act of 2017 requires Principal Secretaries to prevent wasteful expenditure and protect public resources, yet this procurement deal raises serious concerns about financial oversight.
Furthermore, international safety standards, such as ISO 45001, require protective gear to comply with rigorous safety standards to prevent workplace injuries. The failure of these boots to meet durability expectations could expose firefighters to injury, adding extra financial burdens on government in medical costs and replacements.
Supplier and department in dispute over quality claims
Despite the overwhelming evidence, the Fire and Emergency Services Department denied the boots were of low quality, arguing that they matched the samples approved before procurement. However, firefighters who received the boots reported severe wear and tear in an alarmingly short period.
The AG’s report remains unresolved, as the procurement specifications that should confirm whether the boots adhered to ISO safety standards have yet to be made available. Until then, concerns linger over whether due diligence was followed in this procurement process.
Who will be held accountable?
With nearly E1 million spent on low-quality firefighting gear, the public demands accountability. Were government officials aware of the overpricing? Was there collusion between the supplier and procurement officers?
As the AG continues investigations, calls for transparency in government tenders grow louder. Moving forward, government must ensure that all procurement follows strict quality control measures and that public funds are protected from wasteful expenditure.
With public safety at stake, the question remains: Who will be held accountable for this costly mistake?
