Ezulwini: The costs associated with the ICC/FISH project continue to astonish, particularly with the recent revelation that the earthworks alone surged from an initial E80 million to an astonishing E567 million.
This information was presented to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) during a session in the House of Assembly, prompting outrage among Members of Parliament (MPs) who deemed the cost increases unjustifiable. PAC members argued that the massive expenditure was uncalled for, as the money did not even result in visible structures but was solely based on groundwork.
“How is it possible that groundwork fees can escalate to half a billion?” asked Matsanjeni South MP Sabelo Ndlangamandla.
If anything is to go by, the costs have exceeded the original E300 million budget allocated for the entire structure before any foundation work had begun.
In the initial construction stages, earthworks involve preparing the land prior to building, which includes moving, adding, or removing soil and rock to create a stable foundation. This process encompasses excavation for foundations or trenches, raising ground levels through filling, grading for surface shaping, soil compaction for strength, and drainage management for water control. Essentially, earthworks reshape the land to ensure it is safe, stable, and ready for construction.
According to the Auditor General’s (AG) Compliance Audit Report, the increase in bulk earthworks costs was not supported by variation orders to justify and authenticate the expenditure. The AG stressed that detailed designs, which should have guided the scope of work, were already prepared at the beginning of the project, making such drastic escalations questionable.
The Ministry of Economic Planning and Development responded by stating that the high costs were caused by underground water which had to be diverted away from the structure, leading to unexpected expenses.
However, Kubuta MP Mzwandile Mamba expressed shock, saying the ministry seemed to be “getting away with too much” and questioned whether poor planning was to blame.
At the same time, scrutiny has also been raised over project management services for the ICC/FISH. The Auditor General, Timothy Matsebula, reported that a joint venture (Manyatsi-Nhleko/Aurecon) was irregularly engaged for project management at a cost of E16.3 million. The AG revealed that the local partner, Manyatsi-Nhleko Quantity Surveyors, had no prior experience in providing project management services, having previously only rendered quantity surveying work.
Despite this, the firm was hand-picked as part of the joint venture after the original Bicon/Aurecon partnership faced challenges. The AG highlighted that the lack of transparency and justification for appointing Manyatsi-Nhleko raised concerns, yet the E16.3 million cost remained unchanged even after the new partner was brought in.
PAC Chairperson Madala Mhlanga criticised the appointment, pointing out that the company was relatively new in the construction sector, having only obtained its Construction Industry Council (CIC) certificate in 2016, before being awarded a multi-million project the following year.
In defence, the Millennium Projects Unit explained that the inclusion of Manyatsi-Nhleko was prompted by CIC legislation, which required the engagement of a local partner when foreign firms were involved. The unit argued that this was largely a skills-transfer arrangement to meet regulatory requirements.
Nonetheless, lawmakers maintained that both the ballooning project costs and questionable procurement practices highlighted serious flaws in the management of the ICC/FISH project.
Discussion about this post