Admin
10 Nov, 2025
Report back: R3.5 trillion at risk: the Public Investment Corporation’s governance collapse in the Lanseria Airport Holdings deal and other governance issues
Mr Nqabayomzi Kwankwa, MP UDM Deputy President and Leader in Parliament PO Box 15 Cape Town 8000 and Ms Thandi Nontenja, MP UDM National Treasurer and Chief Whip in the National Assembly Member of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts PO Box 15 Cape Town 8000 Dear Mr Kwankwa and Ms Nontenja Report back: R3.5 trillion at risk: the Public Investment Corporation’s governance collapse in the Lanseria Airport Holdings deal and other governance issues 1. I hereby request that you prepare the United Democratic Movement’s (UDM) parliamentary operations to address the issues outlined in this letter, with particular focus on the Party’s participation in the Standing Committee on Public Accounts (SCOPA) and the Standing Committee on Finance, and to begin gathering relevant information. I have already instructed Attorney Eric Mabuza of Mabuza Attorneys to obtain key information from Mr Patrick Dlamini, Chief Executive Officer of the Public Investment Corporation (PIC), as reflected in the attached correspondence. 2. On 29 October 2025, the UDM addressed a detailed letter to the President of the Republic, Mr Cyril Ramaphosa, and the SCOPA Chairperson, Mr Songezo Zibi, MP, under the subject “R3.5 trillion at risk: the Public Investment Corporation’s governance collapse demands action.” In that correspondence, I highlighted the grave risks posed by a series of recent and questionable transactions undertaken by the PIC, which endanger more than R3.5 trillion in pensioners’ funds, alongside widespread governance, ethical, and oversight failures within the institution. As you are aware, the UDM has already proposed several urgent interventions in that letter to address these systemic failures. 3. On 5 November 2025, the PIC Corporate Affairs Division, in the name of the PIC Board Chairperson and Deputy Minister of Finance, Dr David Masondo, issued a statement appeared designed to undermine the UDM’s position. 4. As a matter of interest, Deputy Minister Masondo contacted me, on the same day, personally after the statement was issued, distancing himself from its content and expressing concern about the manner in which the PIC had treated me. It appears that the statement was drafted within the PIC as a deliberate smokescreen and an attempt to deflect public attention from the Lanseria Airport Holdings deal by going on the offensive. Yet, in doing so, the PIC conceded that “…a legal review on the arbitration proceedings is underway…,” which only reinforces the view that where there is smoke, there is indeed fire. Why attack the UDM and me personally instead of providing a substantive response to each of the issues we raised in our letter of 29 October 2025? 5. On 8 November 2025, I again wrote to President Ramaphosa and SCOPA Chairperson Songezo Zibi, specifically concerning: 5.1. A letter from Werksmans Attorneys to Mabotja Attorneys titled: “PUBLIC INVESTMENT CORPORATION SOC LIMITED // ACAPULCO TRADE AND INVEST 164(RF) (PTY) LTD” dated 6 November 2025 and 5.2. Mabotja Attorneys’ response to the above entitled.: “LANSERIA AND RELATED MATTERS” of 7 November 2025. 5.3. In its correspondence, Werksmans Attorneys, acting on behalf of the PIC, wrote to Mabotja Attorneys, who represent Acapulco Trade and Invest 164 (Pty) Ltd, concerning the aftermath of an arbitration award in favour of Acapulco dated 17 September 2025, amounting to R411 282 264.44. The letter indicates that the PIC intends to review or challenge the award and has requested that the funds already deposited in Mabotja Attorneys’ trust account be frozen pending the outcome of that review. 5.4. In reply, Mabotja Attorneys issued a strongly worded and defensive response aimed at discrediting Werksmans Attorneys’ letter on behalf of the PIC and portraying Acapulco as the aggrieved party. The exchange highlights growing tension between Acapulco, Mr Patrick Dlamini, and Harith General Partners and its founder, Mr Tshepo Mahloele, who appears to be a key figure at the centre of the dispute. 6. What prompted Mr Dlamini to act so suddenly? Was it his own initiative, or did the PIC Board finally intervene in a last-minute attempt to salvage what remains of the institution’s credibility and reputation? 7. There appears to be a significant fallout between the PIC and Acapulco Trade and Invest 164 (Pty) Ltd, the BEE partner in the Lanseria Airport Holdings deal. Despite Acapulco having defaulted on a R333 million loan, which grew to approximately R600 million with interest, the PIC nevertheless proceeded to pay just over R411 million to Acapulco after an arbitration process upheld a contested valuation conducted by Crowe, a so-called external valuer. This payout has reportedly angered the PIC Board, which has since moved to freeze the funds and is said to be considering legal action. These developments point to growing internal discord within the PIC and raise serious concerns about a potential governance collapse within the institution. Why did the Mr Dlamini and his executive team approve this transaction in the first place if they are now raising alarm after the fact? 8. Mr Dlamini’s professional history continues to raise serious governance concerns. In Mabotja Attorneys’ letter of 7 November 2025, it is alleged that he has maintained a close personal and professional relationship with Mr Mahloele and Harith General Partners, including attending a celebratory gathering at Mr Mahloele’s Bryanston home shortly after his appointment as PIC CEO. This allegation adds to a pattern first documented during his tenure as CEO of the Development Bank of Southern Africa, when serious accusations of mismanagement, maladministration and possible corruption the UDM brought to the attention of SCOPA in October 2020. At that time, concerns were raised about his association with Mr Mahloele and Harith, particularly around the Poseidon funding matter and other questionable transactions that appeared to benefit politically connected entities. Now, as head of the PIC, the same allegations of conflict of interest, irregular investment decisions and weak governance have resurfaced, most notably in the Lanseria Airport Holdings and FlySafair dealings involving Harith-linked interests. This recurring pattern points to an entrenched network of influence between public finance institutions and private business interests that requires urgent and independent investigation. 9. In its letter of 29 October 2025, the UDM made two key recommendations: 9.1. That SCOPA convene urgent public hearings with the PIC Board, the Chief Executive Officer, and the Government Employees Pension Fund (GEPF) to account for ongoing governance failures, ethical breaches, and poor investment decisions. 9.2. That the Auditor-General and the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) conduct a forensic audit of the Isibaya Fund and the Unlisted Investments Division, with a particular focus on politically connected transactions, loss-making projects, and compliance with the recommendations of the Mpati Commission. The Lanseria transaction, which was initiated in 2013, must be included in the scope of investigation as this appears to be where the shenanigans first began. Questions remain about the servicing of the loan through dividends. Were any ever declared by the Government Employees Pension Fund, the PIC, Acapulco, or Harith General Partners? 10. Equally concerning is the reported involvement of Harith General Partners in raising funds to acquire a stake in FlySafair. It is important to recall that the UDM previously intervened to stop the South African Airways (SAA) transaction after informing President Ramaphosa and then Minister of Public Enterprises Pravin Gordhan, following Gordhan’s 11 June 2021 announcement that the Takatso Consortium, led in part by Harith General Partners owned by Mr Tshepo Mahloele, had been selected as the preferred bidder to acquire a 51% stake in SAA for R51. 11. A further and deeply troubling conflict of interest arises from the fact that Mr Dlamini previously served as Chairperson of the Lanseria Airport Holdings Board while simultaneously holding senior public office. According to the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC) website, he still remains listed as a Non-Executive Director of Lanseria Holdings (K2012204048), Lanseria Airport 1993 (M1993004101), Lanseria Airport Investments (M2002025907) and Lanseria International Airport (M1991001749). His continued association with these entities, which have direct financial dealings with the PIC, raises serious questions about the independence and propriety of decisions taken under his leadership. This dual involvement suggests that Mr Dlamini may have had access to privileged information regarding the airport’s operations and valuation, both before and after the disputed PIC investment. When considered alongside the issues raised in Mabotja Attorneys’ letter concerning his relationship with Harith General Partners and its founder, Mr Tshepo Mahloele, this overlap of roles points to a possible conflict of interest that warrants urgent scrutiny by the relevant oversight bodies. Now, the same players appear to be seeking to use public funds for private investment ventures. We have not forgotten the Mpati Commission’s damning findings against these entities. 12. The Auditor-General, acting under the auspices of SCOPA, remains the only credible authority capable of conducting a comprehensive review of the Lanseria deal and related transactions, given that public money is once again at stake. 13. The UDM should maintain its position that safeguarding public pension funds is a matter of national importance. It is imperative that decisive intervention takes place to ensure the PIC is never exploited as a vehicle for political patronage, and that the more than R3 trillion in assets under its management are administered with the highest levels of integrity, professionalism, and accountability. Yours sincerely Deputy Minister Bantu Holomisa, MP President of the United Democratic Movement Copied to: • Mr Matamela Cyril Ramaphosa – President of the Republic of South Africa • Mr Enoch Godongwana, MP - Minister of Finance • Dr David Masondo, MP - Deputy Minister of Finance and Chairperson of the Board of the Public Investment Corporation • Ms Thoko Didiza, MP - Speaker of the National Assembly of South Africa • Mr Songezo Zibi, MP - Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts • Dr Mkhacani Maswanganyi, MP - Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Finance • Mr Patrick Dlamini - Chief Executive Officer, Public Investment Corporation • Mr Musa Mabesa - Principal Executive Officer, Government Employees Pension Fund • Ms Tsakani Maluleke - Auditor-General of South Africa • Adv Andy Mothibi - Head of the Special Investigating Unit • Mr Eric Mabuza – Mabuza Attorneys
Admin
08 Nov, 2025
Renewed concerns over probable governance irregularities and conflicts of interest at the Public Investment Corporation: the PIC’s confused(ing) rhetoric regarding the Lanseria and FlySafair deals
Mr MC Ramaphosa President of the Republic of South Africa Private Bag X1000 Pretoria 0001 and Mr Songezo Zibi, MP Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts PO Box 15 Cape Town 8000 Dear Mister President and Chairperson Zibi Renewed concerns over probable governance irregularities and conflicts of interest at the Public Investment Corporation: the PIC’s confused(ing) rhetoric regarding the Lanseria and FlySafair deals 1. I refer to my correspondence dated 29 October 2025, titled “R3.5 trillion at risk: the Public Investment Corporation’s governance collapse demands action.” In that letter, I outlined the serious risks arising from several recent and questionable transactions undertaken by the Public Investment Corporation (PIC), which place over R3.5 trillion in pensioners’ funds in jeopardy, as well as broader governance and ethical failures within the institution. 2. “The PIC’s records in respect of Harith’s (or a party related to Harith) application/request for funding to acquire all or portion of the shares in FlySafair, directly or indirectly.” This is a direct quote from the letter referred to in Paragraph 4.2, wherein the PIC is asked to preserve “records, minutes, notes, guest lists, recordings and resolutions and/or other material” relating to Harith General Partners’ acquisition of shares in FlySafair. One must ask: who is fooling whom? 3. On 5 November 2025, the PIC Board Chairperson and Deputy Minister of Finance, Dr David Masondo, launched a scathing and aggressive attack on me personally and made a weak attempt to tarnish my reputation, question my credentials, and cast aspersions on the information the UDM provided in its letter of 29 October 2025. In this regard, I wish to make the following observations: 3.1. While the PIC provides impressive financial statistics, it fails to meaningfully address the core governance concerns raised by the UDM, namely valuation manipulation, political interference, and weak board oversight. 3.2. The PIC attempts to project transparency by citing asset growth and external audits yet simultaneously hides behind claims of legal confidentiality in the Lanseria Holdings matter. This contradiction severely undermines its credibility. 3.3. Although claiming to respect Parliament, the PIC’s statement labels a Member of Parliament’s formal correspondence as “nefarious i.e. language that may be interpreted as contemptuous of democratic oversight and to which I take strong personal exception. 3.4. Furthermore, while denying wrongdoing, the PIC’s statement acknowledges that a review of the arbitration proceedings is underway, implicitly conceding that there may indeed be irregularities in the transaction. This is clearly evidenced by the correspondence referred to in Paragraph 4.14.1, which confirms that the matter remains under internal scrutiny. Yet, instead of welcoming the alert and taking proactive corrective measures, the PIC chose to attack me personally, rather than expressing gratitude for having brought this concerning deal to its attention. 3.5. Why issue the statement in the first place? The PIC went to great lengths to adopt a defensive posture, using offensive language directed at me, while at the same time conceding through its own actions that there is indeed something fishy about the Lanseria transaction. 4. To provide further context to this entire matter, I have attached two pieces of critical correspondence which demonstrate that Dr Masondo, in the name of the PIC, “doth protest too much”: 4.1. A letter from Werksmans Attorneys to Mabotja Attorneys titled: “PUBLIC INVESTMENT CORPORATION SOC LIMITED // ACAPULCO TRADE AND INVEST 164(RF) (PTY) LTD” dated 6 November 2025. 4.2. Mabotja Attorneys’ response to the above entitled.: “LANSERIA AND RELATED MATTERS” of 7 November 2025. 4.3. Werksmans Attorneys, acting on behalf of the PIC, addressed a letter to Mabotja Attorneys, who represent Acapulco Trade and Invest 164 (Pty) Ltd, regarding the aftermath of an arbitration award in favour of Acapulco, dated 17 September 2025 in the amount of R411 282 264.44. The correspondence indicates that the PIC intends to review or challenge the arbitration award and seeks to freeze the funds already deposited in Mabotja Attorneys’ trust account pending the outcome of that review. 4.4. In response, Mabotja Attorneys issued a combative and defensive reply, aimed at discrediting Werksmans Attorneys’ correspondence on behalf of the PIC and portraying Acapulco as the aggrieved party. The exchange suggests escalating tension between Acapulco and the PIC, its Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Mr Patrick Dlamini, as well as Harith General Partners and its founder, Mr Mahloele, who appears to be a central figure of contention. 4.5. The revelation that Mr Mahloele hosted a “celebratory gathering” in Bryanston to mark Mr Dlamini’s appointment as PIC CEO is particularly concerning in the broader context of potential conflicts of interest and governance integrity within the PIC. 5. Clearly, the Lanseria transaction and the PIC’s dealings in the FlySafair matter, both linked to Mr Tshepo Mahloele, appear increasingly suspect in light of the aforementioned context. The Lanseria deal has been unfolding for over twelve years, and it is now imperative that SCOPA asks even more probing questions than it did before my letter of 29 October 2025. 6. The key question for the UDM therefore remains: how many other transactions of this nature the PIC has entered into, in violation of its own governance protocols, and in the process placing at risk the R3.5 trillion in pensioners’ funds managed through the Government Employees Pension Fund (GEPF), notwithstanding Dr Masondo’s protestations to the contrary. 7. Ultimately, the PIC is a state-owned enterprise, and Parliamentary oversight is a cornerstone of ensuring that such institutions are managed ethically and transparently. Yet, the PIC appears determined to avoid public scrutiny and to continue operating in secrecy, contrary to the principles of accountability and public trust. 8. The UDM reiterates that the protection of public pension funds is a matter of national importance. Urgent intervention is required to ensure that the PIC is not used as a vehicle for political patronage and that the R3.5 trillion in assets under its management are handled with the highest standards of integrity, professionalism, and accountability. 9. We are in for a jolly period, to say the least, consider this my early Christmas gift to the public. The truth is finally coming to light. Yours sincerely Deputy Minister Bantu Holomisa, MP President of the United Democratic Movement Copied to: • Mr Enoch Godongwana, MP - Minister of Finance • Dr David Masondo, MP - Deputy Minister of Finance and Chairperson of the Board of the Public Investment Corporation • Ms Thoko Didiza, MP - Speaker of the National Assembly of South Africa • Mr Patrick Dlamini - Chief Executive Officer, Public Investment Corporation • Mr Musa Mabesa - Principal Executive Officer, Government Employees Pension Fund • Ms Tsakani Maluleke - Auditor-General of South Africa • Adv Andy Mothibi - Head of the Special Investigating Unit
Admin
23 Jun, 2020
DBSA approval of Poseidon water project grant/loan: CEO Sandile Sokhela seems to be economical with the truth
Mr Enoch Godongwana Chairman of the Board of Directors Development Bank of Southern Africa PO Box 1234 Halfway House 1685 Dear Mr Godongwana DBSA APPROVAL OF POSEIDON WATER PROJECT GRANT/LOAN: CEO SANDILE SOKHELA SEEMS TO BE ECONOMICAL WITH THE TRUTH 1. I write to your good office regarding a grant/loan application submitted to the Development Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA) by Poseidon Pty Ltd (‘Poseidon’). 2. According to the information at my disposal, the DBSA had on 26 March 2020 approved funding for Poseidon to the tune of R50 million to conduct feasibility studies, for some kind of water project/s, in South Africa and other Southern African countries. Another R300 million is apparently still to be disbursed for the implementation of Poseidon’s project. 3. In terms of the DBSA’s March approval, Poseidon’s shareholding is as follows: 4. As I understand it, Harith General Partners invested in Crede Power and Infrastructure Investments (‘Crede’) via a capitalisation of R25 million over a four-year period to fund continued operational and other costs. Harith invested in Crede with an objective to capacitate an emerging fund manager that would complement the activities of Harith as a fund manager to the Pan African Infrastructure Development Funds (PAIDF I and II). To date Crede has drawn down R12 million of these funds. 5. My information shows that the DBSA Compliance Unit undertook Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs) checks on Poseidon’s shareholder and group companies and various directors were identified as PEPs by virtue of them being board members of various state-owned entities. Amongst others, the following is identified as a PEP: • Mr Tshepo Mahloele who is a non-executive director in the Crede was identified as a PEP by virtue of him being a former board member of Telkom SA in 2008; his PEP status is inactive as of 2008. Mr Mahloele is the CEO of HGP and sits on Crede’s board. 6. As you are aware, I recently wrote to the President of the Republic (letter attached for your ease of reference) to register my concern over what seems to be another attempt to loot state resources, as had occurred at the Public Investment Corporation, but this time at your organisation, using Poseidon as a vehicle. I had sourced some of my information from their websites, but I have since discovered that both Crede Capital Partners and Crede Power and Infrastructure Investments’ websites (https://credecapital.co.za/ and http://credepower.co.za/ respectively) have been discontinued/are no longer visible. Would one be wrong in surmising that someone is trying to cover their tracks? 7. In particular, during my initial search, Crede Power and Infrastructure Investments’ website proudly shared that Mr Tshepo Mahloele was its director, but I was recently confronted with a letter from Crede/Poseidon’s lawyers (also attached) categorically stating that Mr Mahloele has never been its director. What is however extremely odd is that, Mr Mahloele himself, in his written submission on 15 April 2019, to the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into allegations of impropriety at the Public Investment Corporation (‘Mpati Commission’) declared in Paragraph 3.3 that: “In addition to the positions already referred to, I also serve on the boards of NOVO Energy, Anergi, Lanseria International Airport, Rainfin, 4 Africa Exchange, Crede Power & Infrastructure Investments and Dark Fibre Africa, amongst others.” One is forced to ask whether Mr Mahloele had then lied to the Mpati Commission, or whether Mr Sandile Sokhela, Crede’s Chief Executive Officer, is lying now (or has lied in his grant/loan application to the DBSA). Someone is definitely lying, and one is worried that public entities, such as the DBSA, are doing business with people of this ilk. 8. I have instructed my attorney, Mr Eric T Mabuza, of Mabuza Attorneys, to submit a Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) application to the DBSA to obtain the attending documentation of Poseidon’s DBSA loan/funding application e.g. the application itself, information on the DBSA’s due diligence, relevant minutes of DBSA meetings, contracts, and any other pertinent information. I implore you to cooperate with our PAIA application, not only because it is to the DBSA’s advantage, but also because it is in the public’s interest that the truth comes to light. 9. Given that the DBSA board has already approved Poseidon’s grant/loan it might be advisable that you immediately suspend any disbursement/s to that company until the matter is satisfactorily addressed by the President and/or the courts. I am at your disposal and look forward to engaging with you. Yours sincerely Mr Bantu Holomisa, MP UDM President Copied to: President of the Republic of South Africa, Mr Cyril Ramaphosa Minister of Finance, Mr Tito Mboweni PIC Chairperson, Dr Reuel Khoza DBSA Company Secretary, Ms Bathobile Sowazi Mabuza Attorneys, Attorney ET Mabuza
Admin
29 Dec, 2017
#ZumaImpeachment: ConCourt tells National Assembly to do its work
The longsuffering people of South Africa, and indeed all people trusting our country will be in the presence of good governance, have been waiting since early September – after hours and hours of argument before the Constitutional Court – to hear if the end of the disastrous Zuma-era may be quickened. The Constitutional Court today, in its continuing affirmation of the Constitution, provided for this quickening. The ball is now in the Speaker’s and the Parliamentary Rules Committee’s court to make rules, in the National Assembly, regulating removal of a president in terms of Section 89, Sub 1 of the Constitution. The ruling party’s elective conference has come and gone, and South African’s will be watching the “new African National Congress” like hawks in 2018; especially in Parliament. Even if the ruling party’s new president represents a distinct and expectant power shift, the proof will be in the pudding. Strengthened by today’s CC ruling our urgent and continuing battle to have Zuma removed will be accelerated. The United Democratic Movement, in tandem with any and all parties unified by a honest desire for the very best for our country, will redouble its efforts to rid government of the single most destructive occupation since our hard-fought freedom, and perhaps, even ever. To modify one of Churchill’s famous lines… this is not the end. It is, however, perhaps, more than simply the end of the beginning. And it may well be the beginning of the end. South Africans shall overcome. Issued by: Mr Bantu Holomisa, MP and UDM President
Admin
29 Nov, 2017
#HighLevelPanel Report: UDM welcomes the High-Level Panel Report on the assessment of key legislation and the acceleration of fundamental change
The United Democratic Movement (UDM) welcomes the report presented in Parliament today by the High-Level Panel led by former President Kgalema Motlanthe. Some of the findings and recommendations of the Panel vindicates UDM policies and positions that we have consistently advanced in Parliament. We welcome the following concrete recommendations amongst others that: 1. The Land Framework Bill in order to provide a comprehensive ‘catch-all’ response to problems besetting land reform. This bill contains important recommendations, in particular, given that the 30% redistribution of and restitution of land is far from being realised, thus creating serious socio-economic challenges for our country. The UDM believes that the issue of land is more than urgent. Government’s failure to redistribute land can no longer be tolerated. 2. The fact that Parliament has encouraged to take maximum advantage of the provisions of Section 25 of the Constitution, to effect restitution and redistribution of land, to benefit the historically dispossessed individuals and communities is welcomed. 3. The UDM have made numerous calls for an integrated and seamless education system from Early Childhood Development (ECD) to the job market. Such a system should be tailormade to the demands of the job market, but most urgent and important, it must produce entrepreneurs. The recommendation of the Panel regarding the removal of the ECD from social development to basic education is a step in the right direction. 4. The Panel paid serious and elaborate consideration to spatial inequality and the UDM agrees that there should be no land set aside for special people and that spatial planning should result in integrated communities and contribute towards building one nation. The UDM will with vigour participate in all subsequent Parliamentary processes that will be taking the Report forward. Statement issued by: Mr Bantu Holomisa, MP and UDM President
Admin
30 May, 2017
Debate on Budget Vote 02 – Parliament by Mr Lennox Gaehler, MP
Honourable Chairperson and Members The Presiding Officers of this 5th Democratic Parliament, in the foreword of the Strategic Plan 2014-19, said, “Parliament exist to represent people and to ensure their involvement in government processes”. In this regard, and in the context of celebrating its twenty years of existence, we would recommend that this house, deliberately creates more mechanisms for citizens to have access to all the laws made by Parliament. We must move towards a deliberative participatory model of democracy anchored by an aggressive civic education. It is through knowledge that the people can understand and appreciate their responsibilities and rights in a democracy. Participation is an essential part of development; it develops self-confidence, pride, initiative, creativity, responsibility, cooperation and sharing and working together. Without meaningful participation development will lack and all development efforts and alleviation of poverty will be immensely difficult, if not impossible. People must be enabled to take charge of their lives and solve their problems whilst government and other development agencies are creating conducive environment and are facilitating. Secondly, the relationship between the parliamentary management and the staff has to be addressed with speed. It cannot be correct that each financial year we face possible labour action, because the management and the workers’ representatives are unable to dialogue effectively. The current dispute on salary increase and the alleged threat of retrenchments do not augur well for the effective functioning of this institution and has to be resolved with speed. Lastly, the outsourced function of cleaning, requires a reconsideration in order to safeguard jobs. The employees have proposed that they be insourced as Parliamentary staff. Given that their service is inherently part of the work of Parliament, we support the proposal for insourcing. We propose that the Presiding Officers prioritise the resolution of this matter. The United Democratic Movement supports the policy debate on Budget Vote 2. I thank you. Address by Mr LB Gaehler, MP in the UDM Eastern Cape Representative in the National Council of Provinces
Admin
27 Mar, 2017
The People’s Parliament must get its priorities right: Parliamentary oversight visits are not properly resourced
Letter written to the Speaker of the National Assembly, Ms Baleka Mbete, from Mr N Kwankwa, MP (UDM Chief Whip in the National Assembly) Dear Madam Speaker THE PEOPLE’S PARLIAMENT MUST GET ITS PRIORITIES RIGHT: PARLIAMENTARY OVERSIGHT VISITS ARE NOT PROPERLY RESOURCED This matter has reference. Last week, the Parliamentary Portfolio Committees on Public Enterprises and Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, went to Johannesburg for an oversight visit. The visit pertained to the resolution of a conflict between Eskom and Soweto residents (particularly in Diepkloof, Orlando East and Soweto pensioners) regarding installation of prepaid meters in the area. We were on site for several days; arriving on Tuesday, 21 March staying until Friday, 24 March 2017. Our programme consisted of meeting sessions with the aggrieved community members, aged persons, from 10:00 to 16:30 – which means that we were continuously engaged for six and a half hours per day. Absolutely zero provision was made to ensure our basic comfort; there was not even a jug of water available. Madam Speaker, I am not talking about luxuries here! Just a simple thing, like keeping us hydrated during the course of our work, was seemingly too much to expect. On one occasion, the Members of Parliament went on a hunt, on foot, to find a decent eating establishment in a shopping mall; this was not a productive use of our time. On another occasion, I had slipped out (in the rain) of the consultation session to buy something to eat and drink, since I could no longer concentrate. I hurried to minimise the time spent outside that session. The only available shopping spot was a spaza shop, where the selection was so limited, I out of desperation, bought a packet of biscuits. As I slipped back with the open packet of biscuits, a queue of elderly people started to form in search of something to eat. I shared my meagre proviant, not only with them, but also with my colleagues (a packet of biscuits only went so far). The seniors complained bitterly. They asked what kind of Parliament, forces the elderly to engage with it, for hours at a time over several days, without any light refreshment, whilst we as representatives of Parliament, knew that they were elderly and that many suffered from diabetes. I, to my horror, later discovered that the packet of biscuits had expired. Having bought it at a spaza shop might explain that, but keep in mind that aside from eating them myself, I shared these biscuits with the pensioners and colleagues. The repercussions of possible food poising would have been devastating. In the end, should that have happened, it would have made me personally responsible for such a dire consequence. The whole situation was embarrassing for me as a Member of Parliament, because I was forced to leave a meeting, which was disrespectful, and could have led me to missing important information. It reflected badly on Parliament, and I certainly felt beleaguered. When I raised my dissatisfaction about the situation with the committees’ leadership, they explained that this situation arose because of budget cuts on oversight work. Madam Speaker, we are constantly reminded that Parliament must cut back on its expenses; and especially eliminate frivolous ones. The United Democratic Movement (UDM) wholeheartedly agrees with the instruction of National Treasury that we should tighten our belts, but I have two problems with what happened last week: 1) Providing water (at the very least) would not have broken the bank and it would have ensured a basic level of comfort for the Members of Parliament, as well as the elderly members of the public, during hours’ worth of consultation time with the affected communities. It requires sustenance and stamina to keep mentally engaged and physically able to do such work. 2) Secondly, any contention that there is no money to provide for, even the basics, is preposterous. This is because, as late as December last year, Parliament’s Secretary was defended on the official parliamentary Twitter account following an exposé in City Press that revealed Mr Gengezi Mgidlana spent over R40 000 on being chauffeur-driven in a Mercedes-Benz on a so-called study visit in Budapest in July 2016. We also read that an extra R1020 was incurred for a taxi trip to the airport. To add further insult, this was not the first time that his lavish travel style has been on South Africans’ dime. Earlier reports revealed that he, together with senior parliamentary staff, spent millions of Rands on so-called benchmarking trips last year. Flying business class and staying in five-star hotels in the United Kingdom and Turkey. While in London, we heard, Mr Mgidlana stayed in a R14 050-per-night (at that time, R42 150 for three nights) room at the luxurious Conrad London St James Hotel. In another instance, he had also incurred a bill of R52 638 for six nights at the Michelangelo Hotel in Sandton earlier in 2016. What makes matters worse, is your past condonation of this abuse of public money by the Parliamentary officials in question. Madame Speaker, it is clear that something is wrong with the running of Parliament’s business. How is it possible, never mind justifiable, that the Secretary of Parliament can literally blow millions of Rands, but a few thousand Rands can’t be made available to facilitate our work as public representatives. Lastly, as part of the cost saving measures, Members of Parliament had been told that we are provided with a subsistence and travel allowance and we should spend this money on sustenance during the day. That is all fine and well, but I had left work on Friday and was only refunded the food expenses I incurred that evening. This lackadaisical administrative approach creates concern about Parliament’s administration and its finances. Given the Secretary of Parliament’s (and other officials) reckless spending and clearly frivolous joy-rides, the call for us to tighten our belts rings hollow. Madam Speaker, Government does not have its priorities right. To my mind, it is clearly more important to ensure the quality of our work in service of the People’s Parliament (by providing at least some basic sustenance to Members of Parliament – as well as the public – on oversight visits) than having Parliament’s officials romping around the world in the most expensive way possible. The UDM calls on your office to review Parliament’s budget, especially the allocation of travel expenses to officials, as well as the allocation of resources to ensure that one of the core functions of Parliament, i.e. oversight visits, are adequately resourced to maximise the positive impact our work must have on the daily lives of South Africans. Yours sincerely Mr Nqabayomzi Kwankwa, MP UDM Chief Whip
