In its first week of hearings, Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has made it clear that the era of routine explanations for costly government failures may be coming to an end.
The committee’s referral of the Gabane Infrastructure Project to the Directorate on Corruption and Economic Crime (DCEC), along with its decision to subpoena current and former officials involved in projects marked by cost overruns, governance issues, and questionable decisions, represents one of Parliament’s most forceful efforts to turn Auditor General findings into real accountability.
For years, Auditor General reports have documented a familiar pattern: poor project preparation, weak contract management, insufficient oversight, and soaring costs. Despite these recurring findings, consequences have often been minimal. PAC now appears intent on breaking this cycle.
The committee’s early focus on the Gabane Infrastructure Project, the Kanye Water and Sanitation Project, and the Education Infrastructure and Management Company (EIMC) reveals a deeper concern: whether the government is equipped to plan, procure, and manage increasingly complex infrastructure programs.
The Gabane project became PAC’s first formal referral to the DCEC. Evidence presented revealed construction began before designs were finalized— a decision that contributed to cost overruns exceeding P107 million.
Initially awarded at more than P214 million, including contingency funds, the project later escalated to P285 million, resulting in direct overruns of P70.9 million. Additional costs included roughly P6.5 million in consultancy fees, about P27 million in under-claims related to delays, and P5.8 million paid to the contractor for insufficient cover.
By referring the matter to the DCEC and planning subpoenas for those involved, PAC signaled it views this not as mere administrative missteps but as a matter requiring further investigation.
PAC’s scrutiny of the Kanye Water and Sanitation Project raises a different, but equally troubling, set of questions. Originally awarded at more than P700 million, the project’s cost has since surged to over P3 billion.
Accounting officers attributed the increase largely to inadequate geotechnical investigations before construction began. PAC heard that the original design estimated rock excavation at just eight percent of the project area. Later assessments revealed rock content in some sections as high as 95 percent.
This discrepancy was reportedly identified in 2018. Committee members questioned why the project was allowed to proceed despite what appeared to be a material change in scope.
Under standard procurement principles, projects with significant changes in cost, design, or technical requirements are typically halted and re-tendered to ensure value for money and maintain competitive fairness. That did not happen. Instead, the project continued under the existing contract, exposing the government to substantial financial risk. The committee has indicated it will subpoena former and current officials involved in those decisions.
Meanwhile, the planned special session on the Education Infrastructure and Management Company reflects growing parliamentary unease over the use of special purpose vehicles to deliver public services. Established to transform Botswana’s education infrastructure, EIMC has already been allocated P66 million despite its operational model still being under review.
Although the Ministry of Child Welfare and Basic Education insists the funds have not yet been spent, PAC members questioned the rationale for allocating public resources before finalizing the company’s governance and operational framework.
The committee also sought clarity on the company’s ownership structure, board appointments, the role of private investors, and whether board members have the expertise needed to fulfill the entity’s mandate.
Beyond the individual projects, PAC’s opening week exposed what seems to be a recurring weakness across government: inadequate preparation before implementation.
For a committee that has historically struggled to convert findings into accountability, the coming weeks will test whether PAC can sustain its early momentum. Its willingness to issue subpoenas and involve law enforcement suggests Parliament is moving beyond oversight by observation toward oversight with consequences.
PAC flags Gabane project for corruption probe after over P107 Million overrun
What began as a flagship infrastructure project under the government’s Economic Stimulus Programme (ESP) has become the subject of a corruption probe.
The Public Accounts Committee has referred the controversial Gabane infrastructure project to the Directorate on Corruption and Economic Crime after explosive testimony revealed construction began without completed designs — a decision that contributed to cost overruns exceeding P107 million.
The referral marks a dramatic escalation in a case raising serious questions about public sector accountability, project management, and whether Botswana taxpayers received value for money.
At the heart of the controversy lies a simple but troubling question: who authorized construction of a multi-million pula project before essential planning was complete?
Evidence presented by senior officials from the Ministry of Local Government and Traditional Affairs suggests critical planning steps were bypassed in a rush to meet deadlines under the ESP, a program introduced to stimulate economic activity and create jobs through accelerated infrastructure spending.
The Auditor General’s report, which brought the project to PAC’s attention, paints a troubling picture.
Initially awarded at over P214 million, including contingency funds, the Gabane project ballooned to P285 million, resulting in a direct cost overrun of P70,899,227.
But the financial burden didn’t end there. The committee heard consultancy fees amounted to approximately P6.5 million, under-claims from project delays totaled about P27 million, and the contractor received P5.8 million for insufficient cover. Together, these costs pushed the total overrun beyond P107 million.
PAC has tasked the DCEC with determining whether these escalating costs were simply the result of poor planning and weak oversight or whether corruption, negligence, misconduct, or procurement irregularities warrant criminal investigation.
The decision followed a tense hearing in which Acting Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Local Government and Traditional Affairs, Tshepo Kebakile, admitted the project proceeded before all designs were finalized.
Under questioning from Members of Parliament, Kebakile attributed the escalating costs to additional work emerging after construction began. Pressed on whether such a decision met professional standards expected in public infrastructure delivery, Kebakile responded bluntly: “It was unprofessional.”
The ministry’s Deputy Permanent Secretary for Development, Mpho Morapedi, described a government system under intense pressure to deliver quickly. According to Morapedi, ministries were given just three years to complete projects under the ESP framework, creating urgency that sometimes came at the expense of proper planning.
He told the committee technical teams warned that finalizing project designs would take several months. However, officials were instructed to adapt existing designs from other locations to fast-track implementation.
The problem, Morapedi explained, was that Gabane’s terrain and landscape differed significantly from those for which the original designs were developed. The result was a series of changes to the project scope after work had begun; a scenario almost certain to cause delays, contract variations, disputes, and rising costs.
For PAC members, the testimony raised troubling questions about government decision-making and whether technical advice was ignored in favor of political and administrative deadlines.
Committee members repeatedly asked who authorized construction without finalized designs and whether established procurement and project management procedures were followed.
Member of Parliament for Gamalete, Boniface Mabeo, urged the committee to subpoena officials directly responsible for approving and overseeing the project, arguing those who made key decisions should be held accountable for the financial fallout.
The Gabane project has become a symbol of broader concerns repeatedly highlighted in Auditor General reports.
Year after year, these reports have pointed to persistent weaknesses across ministries: poor planning, inadequate oversight, weak contract management, and failure to follow established procedures.
For PAC, the debate has moved beyond why costs escalated. The question now is whether the P107 million overrun was the result of administrative failure; or something far more serious. That answer now rests with investigators.