Calls me naïve and gives an example that reeks of naïve. :crylaugh: You should really move out of Lala Land.Your solution is incredibly naive. Let us say that IBM is the best provider of widgets. The city needs widgets. Must it not get widgets from IBM because the manager in charge of sourcing widgets is friends with the director of IBM?
No, he documents the requirements of the city and the guidelines for procurement, documents his conflict of interest, and makes the best decision for the city. For each rejected service provider, he documents why they were not selected.
Should the manager with the best knowledge of widgets recuse himself because of his relationship? No - remember he is not a judge. He can recuse himself, if he wants to, but that is not always possible. Mashaba for instance probably sometimes cannot recuse himself - because no one else in the world will have the same legal authority that he does.
Yeah, maturity. You give a knee jerk reaction saying that personal conflicts of interest must be avoided at all cost - something clearly impossible. The solution, according to what I have studied, is called fair dealing, where no client is given special treatment. Either favourable special treatment or unfavourable special treatment. Everyone must be treated equally.