Information about whether the Berg Water Project developed housing in Stellenbosch and whether the Vaal River Eastern Sub-System Augmentation Project created employment in local communities.

(1) Request related to the Berg Water Project (BWP)

A section of your website (http://www.tcta.co.za/bwp.aspx) describes the Berg Water Project (BWP). It states:

“The R30-million La Motte Village made available 80 houses for service providers involved in the project. Emerging contractors from the project area were awarded contracts to build 40 houses. At the conclusion of the project, the village was transferred to the Stellenbosch Municipality. Proceeds from the sale of the houses are used to fund further housing development in the area.”

We request records, policies, procedures, directives, documents, or other information related to:

a) How the 80 houses were “made available” (Were they rented? Bought? Leased?);
b) How much was paid for the houses;
c) The contracts awarded to build 40 houses (Who received the contracts? How much was paid for them? Did the contractors deliver on their contract to build 40 houses?);
d) Who the houses were sold to;
e) The prices paid for the houses;
f) What “further housing development in the area” was funded by the proceeds from the sale of the houses.

(2)  Request related to the Vaal River Eastern Sub-System Augmentation Project (VRESAP)

A section of your website (http://www.tcta.co.za/vresap.aspx) describes the Vaal River Eastern Sub-System Augmentation Project (VRESAP). It states:

“TCTA created an excellent track record of local community empowerment. Where possible, employment and training opportunities were offered to communities along the pipeline route. Contract conditions state that the principle contractors recruit 45% of their total workforce from local communities of which 75% should be historically disadvantaged individuals.”

We request records, policies, procedures, directives, documents, or other information related to:

a) What employment and training opportunities were offered to communities;
b) Which communities received these offers;
c) Whether the contract condition that “principle contractors recruit 45% of their total workforce from local communities of which 75% should be historically disadvantaged individuals” was actually fulfilled;
d) The criteria used to determine whether a community was “historically disadvantaged;”