AI-assisted research summary: An organ of state must set and apply its preferential procurement policy under a preference point system.
1. In this Act, unless the context indicates otherwise— (i) “acceptable tender” means any tender which, in all respects, complies with the specifications and conditions of tender as set out in the tender document; (i) (ii) “Minister” means the Minister of Finance; (iii) (iii) ., “organ of state” means— (a) - a national or provincial dep~ment as defined in the Public Finance (b) (c) (d) (e) m Management Act, 1999 (Ac; No. 1 of 1999); a municipality as contemplated in the Constitution; a constitutional institution defined in the Public Finance Management Act, 1999 (Act No. 1 of 1999); Parliament; a provincial legislature; any other institution or category of institutions included in the definition of “organ of state” in section 239 of the Constitution and recognised by the Minister by notice in the Governrnent Gazette as an institution or category of institutions to which this Act applies; (iv) (iv) “preferential procurement policy” means a procurement policy contemplated in section 217(2) of the Constitution; (vi) (v) “prescribed” means prescribed by regulation made under section 5; (v) (vi) “this Act” includes any regulations made under section 5. (ii) Framework for implemen~tion of preferential procurement policy 2. (1) An organ of state must determine its preferential procurement policy and implement it within the following framework: (a) A Preference point system must be followed; (b) (ij for contracts with a Rand value above a prescribed amount a maximum of 10 points may be allocated for specific gods as contemplated in paragraph (d) provided that the lowest acceptable tender scores 90 points for price; for contracts with a Rand value equal to or below a prescribed amount a maximum of 20 points may be allocated for specific gods as contemplated in paragraph (d) provided that the lowest acceptable tender scores 80 points for price; other acceptable tenders which are higher in price must score fewer (ii) (c) a ny 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 4 N(). 20854 ,\ct N(). 5, 20(M) G()\’ERNMENT G,% ZETTE. 3 FEBRII.4RY 2000 PREFERENTIAL PROCUREMENT POI.ICY FRAh~EWORK ACT points, on a I)ro I(IIC( basis, ctilculated on their tender prices in relation to the Iowestacccptable tender, inaccordance with a prescribed formula; (d) thespecific ~oa!smayinclude— (i) contracting withpersons,o rcategorieso fpersons,h istoricallyd isadvan- tagedby unfair discrimination onthebasis of race, &endcr or disability; 5 (ii) implementing the progr~mmes of the Reconstruction and Development Progratnme as published in Go]’er/z/?ze~zf Ga~erre No. 16085 dated 23 November 1994; (t’) any specific goal for which a point maybe awarded, must be clearly specified in the in~itation to submit a tender; 10 (f) the contract must be awarded to the tenderer who scores the highest points, unless objective criteria in addition to those contemplated in paragraphs (d) and (e) justify the award to another tenderer; and (g) any contract awarded on account of false information furnished by the tenderer in order to secure preference in terms of this Act, maybe cancel led at 15 the sole discretion of the organ of state without prejudice to any other remedies the organ of state may have. (2) Any goals contemplated in subsection 1(e) must be measurable, quantifiable and monitored for compliance. Exemption