Admin
16 Mar, 2026
Remarks by the President of the United Democratic Movement and Deputy Minister of Defence and Military Veterans, Maj. Gen. (Ret.) Bantu Holomisa at the Courtesy Meeting with USA Ambassador to South Africa, H.E. L Brent Bozell III
Check against delivery Remarks by the President of the United Democratic Movement and Deputy Minister of Defence and Military Veterans, Maj. Gen. (Ret.) Bantu Holomisa at the Courtesy Meeting with USA Ambassador to South Africa, H.E. L Brent Bozell III Your Excellency, On behalf of the United Democratic Movement, allow me to begin by expressing our sincere appreciation for the invitation to this engagement. We have also taken note of the consultations you have been undertaking with a range of stakeholders across South Africa, including political parties and civil society. These engagements are important in developing a deeper understanding of the lay of the land in our country, and we commend you for taking the time to listen and engage broadly. You arrive in South Africa at a time when relations between our two countries are experiencing a measure of strain. Yet it is precisely during such moments that dialogue becomes even more important. South Africans were taken aback by accusations of genocide and uncompensated land grabs, all purportedly carried out by our government, which spread widely within the international community. As you embark on this programme of engaging with South Africans, you have the advantage of directly verifying the authenticity of these allegations. In that regard, we wish to acknowledge and thank the South African delegation that continues to engage constructively with the United States on key matters of mutual interest, particularly the discussions around the African Growth and Opportunity Act. These engagements, led by our Minister of Trade, Industry and Competition, the Honourable Parks Tau, are vital for maintaining strong economic cooperation between our nations. The United Democratic Movement encourages such bilateral discussions and constructive dialogue. The relationship between the United States and South Africa has historically been a strong one, grounded in shared values and mutual respect. Indeed, the United States played an important role in the global effort to bring an end to apartheid. Through sanctions and engagement in international forums, including the United Nations, the international community, with the United States as a key actor, stood alongside the people of South Africa in the struggle for freedom. In 1994, South Africa emerged from a painful history marked by racism and division. Yet, through the leadership of figures such as President Nelson Mandela and Oliver Tambo, and through negotiations with the then National Party government, our country chose a peaceful resolution to conflict. That decision spared our nation and many others the tragedy of further bloodshed. On a personal note, I had the opportunity to witness the role played by lawmakers in the United States during the late 1980’s. In 1988, I visited the Transkei Government offices on Eye Street, where arrangements were made for engagements with American lawmakers and institutions. I had the privilege of addressing several institutions and meeting with senators and members of Congress. These engagements helped to build bridges of understanding at a critical time in our history. Later, in 1992, I accompanied President Mandela when we addressed the United Nations Security Council on the need to send violence monitors to South Africa, and again in 1993 when discussions were underway regarding the lifting of sanctions against South Africa. Following these developments, the United States quickly became one of South Africa’s major trading partners, opening many opportunities for cooperation, particularly in areas such as education, environmental management, and technology. It is therefore our sincere wish that these relations continue to be strengthened. Where there may be challenges or misunderstandings between our countries, we believe they should be addressed frankly and without delay. One possible way to strengthen relations could be to revive or reimagine structured bilateral mechanisms of a scale and depth in a similar scale to the Al-Gore–Mbeki Binational Commission. I had the privilege of participating in that process, and it proved highly effective in addressing outstanding issues between our countries. Through its various subcommittees, matters could be thoroughly examined and resolved, while both Presidents and their respective cabinets remained fully informed of progress. Turning briefly to international developments, the ongoing conflict in the Middle East remains a matter of deep concern. The UDM does not see a sustainable solution to the conflict between Israel and Palestine other than through dialogue and negotiations around the table. In this regard, we believe that countries such as South Africa and the United States can play an important role in encouraging peaceful engagement between the leadership of Israel, Palestine, and the broader Middle East. The UDM believes that the way people from conflict-affected nations live together in South Africa and the United States offers a compelling lesson for the world: despite coming from countries at war, roughly 4% of South Africa’s population are migrants from dozens of regions, who coexist peacefully, trade, and engage in shared economic activity. This daily interaction in markets, businesses, and communities demonstrates that with dignity, dialogue, and opportunity, peaceful coexistence is achievable, providing a practical example that could guide international efforts to broker peace and foster dialogue between parties in conflict. South Africa’s own experience demonstrates that people with deep historical divisions can find ways to coexist peacefully and work together as economic partners. This is a model that can offer hope to many parts of the world. President Mandela once initiated efforts to bring Jewish and Palestinian leaders together for dialogue, and although those efforts were not sustained, the principle behind them remains valuable. Any agreements that emerge from sincere dialogue can serve as examples for the broader international community. The continuation of the conflict in the Middle East has far-reaching consequences beyond the region itself. Its economic and humanitarian impacts are being felt globally, particularly by developing economies such as ours. The reality is that many of our citizens are still striving to achieve full economic empowerment. For this reason, we believe there are also opportunities for deeper cooperation between the United States and South Africa in supporting inclusive economic growth. We would encourage further partnerships between American and South African businesses as we collectively pursue the vision articulated by President Mandela, a world that is more equal, more just, and more free. All parties engaged in the current conflict must commit decisively to a ceasefire and pursue a durable, negotiated solution that safeguards civilian lives, restores peace, and lays the foundation for lasting stability and reconciliation. Ambassador, we thank you once again for this engagement and look forward to a constructive and fruitful discussion. I thank you.
Admin
12 Mar, 2026
Request for Parliament to accord appropriate recognition due to the late Mr Mosiuoa
12 March 2026 Ms Thokozile Didiza, MP Speaker of the National Assembly Parliament of the Republic of South Africa PO Box 15 Cape Town 8000 Dear Speaker Request for Parliament to accord appropriate recognition due to the late Mr Mosiuoa Lekota 1. I write to you on behalf of the United Democratic Movement (UDM) regarding the passing of the late Mr Mosiuoa Lekota, a veteran of the liberation struggle and a public servant whose contribution to South Africa’s democratic Parliament is beyond dispute. 2. Mr Lekota served this country with distinction across several decades of public life. Of particular relevance to the Parliament of the Republic of South Africa (Parliament), he served as the inaugural Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) following the establishment of that institution under the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. In that capacity he presided over the second house of Parliament during the formative years of our democratic order and played a meaningful role in shaping the institutional culture and procedures of the NCOP. 3. His broader record of service also includes his tenure as Premier of the Free State and later as Minister of Defence. Across these roles Mr Lekota remained a prominent figure in South African public life and a participant in the difficult work of building democratic institutions in the post-apartheid era. 4. As you are aware, I raised the question of appropriate recognition by Parliament for the late Mr Lekota through the proper parliamentary forums. Unfortunately, the proposal that Parliament formally recognise his contribution was not supported. 5. This outcome is difficult to reconcile with the precedent recently established when Parliament accorded significant institutional recognition to the late Dr Frene Ginwala, former Speaker of the National Assembly. Dr Ginwala was rightly honoured for the historic role she played as the presiding officer of the first democratically elected National Assembly during the formative years of South Africa’s constitutional democracy. 6. In this regard, Mr Lekota’s position in the institutional history of Parliament is directly comparable. As the inaugural Chairperson of the NCOP, he presided over the second house of Parliament during the same foundational period of the first democratic administration. In institutional terms, the role he performed for the NCOP is equivalent to the role performed by Dr Ginwala in the National Assembly. It would therefore be difficult to justify why Parliament would recognise the contribution of one foundational presiding officer while declining to recognise the other. 7. It would therefore be difficult to justify why a leader of Mr Lekota’s stature would not receive comparable institutional recognition. Any perception that recognition is withheld because he later occupied the opposition benches would be deeply unfortunate and would risk creating the impression that Parliament honours former leaders selectively. 8. Parliament is an institution that must stand above party political divisions when recognising those who have contributed to the democratic project. Mr Lekota’s record of service to South Africa, and to Parliament itself, warrants acknowledgement in keeping with the precedent that has already been established. 9. With the funeral of Mr Lekota scheduled to take place this coming Saturday, 14 March 2026 and I respectfully urge your office to reconsider this matter as a matter of urgency so that Parliament may act in a manner that reflects both institutional consistency and respect for the democratic legacy of the late Mr Lekota. Yours sincerely Mr NLS Kwankwa, MP Deputy President of the United Democratic Movement Party Leader in Parliament
Admin
10 Mar, 2026
Eastern Cape UDM demands transparency and accountability as IEC probes Buffalo City mayor allegations
Statement by Bulelani Bobotyane, Provincial Secretary of the UDM in the Eastern Cape The United Democratic Movement (UDM) in the Eastern Cape has taken note of media reports indicating that the Executive Mayor of Buffalo City Metropolitan Municipality, Princess Faku, is allegedly the subject of a matter currently under consideration by the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) relating to allegations of misrepresentation and the potential misuse of municipal resources for electoral purposes. The UDM in the Eastern Cape believes that the integrity of South Africa’s democratic and electoral systems must remain beyond reproach. Allegations suggesting the possible use of public resources, municipal programmes, or state platforms to advance partisan political interests are matters that require careful and transparent scrutiny. At the same time, the UDM in the Eastern Cape wishes to emphasise that South Africa’s constitutional framework is founded on the principle that every person is presumed innocent until proven otherwise. It is therefore important that the IEC be allowed to conduct its processes independently, fairly, and without interference so that the facts of the matter may be properly established and the public properly informed. This process must also serve as an opportunity to address persistent concerns about governance and the use of public resources within Buffalo City Metropolitan Municipality and, where wrongdoing is found, to ensure that accountability is finally enforced. Public institutions and municipal resources exist to serve communities impartially and in accordance with the law. Any situation that creates the perception that public resources may be used for electoral advantage risks undermining public confidence in governance and in the fairness of democratic competition. These allegations also reinforce longstanding concerns about governance and the use of public resources within Buffalo City Metropolitan Municipality, concerns that communities and opposition parties have raised repeatedly over time. In such circumstances it is particularly important that public representatives demonstrate the highest standards of ethical leadership, transparency, and accountability. The UDM in the Eastern Cape will continue to monitor this matter closely and supports all lawful and appropriate oversight processes to ensure that accountability is upheld and that the integrity of South Africa’s electoral framework is protected. The people of Buffalo City deserve governance that is transparent, responsible, and firmly grounded in the rule of law.
Admin
09 Mar, 2026
Request for parliamentary oversight regarding the handling of the UDM complaint to the SAHRC concerning SAFA and Coach Hugo Broos
Ms Thokozile Didiza, MP Speaker of the National Assembly Parliament of the Republic of South Africa PO Box 15 Cape Town 8000 Dear Madam Speaker Request for parliamentary oversight regarding the handling of the UDM complaint to the SAHRC concerning SAFA and Coach Hugo Broos 1. I write to bring to your attention a matter that the United Democratic Movement (UDM) has formally referred to the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC), and which has subsequently involved the Commission for Gender Equality (CGE). The matter raises issues that fall within Parliament’s oversight responsibilities. 2. In December 2025, the UDM lodged a complaint with the SAHRC concerning public utterances made by the Bafana Bafana coach, Mr Hugo Broos, as well as the institutional response of the South African Football Association (SAFA). The complaint concerns statements that raise allegations of racial and gender discrimination and therefore implicates constitutional rights protected under the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act (PEPUDA). 3. On or about 10 or 11 December 2025, during a media engagement ahead of the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations tournament, Mr Broos made remarks which were widely interpreted as racially and sexually insensitive. The comments prompted significant public concern and raised questions about equality, dignity and representation in South African sport. On 11 December 2025, the UDM formally lodged a complaint with the SAHRC citing both Mr Broos and SAFA as respondents. 4. Subsequent to the public controversy, Mr Broos issued an apology on 15 December 2025, which the UDM accepted in good faith. However, the complaint lodged with the SAHRC was never confined to the conduct of one individual. It also raised broader concerns regarding the institutional response of SAFA and the absence of clear safeguards within sporting structures to address racism and sexism. The acceptance of an apology cannot substitute for institutional accountability where constitutional rights and systemic safeguards are concerned. For that reason, the UDM has consistently maintained that the matter requires consideration of systemic and policy reforms rather than being treated merely as an isolated incident. 5. The complaint was initially raised by UDM Councillor Yongama Zigebe and was formally processed through the Office of the Acting Secretary General (ASG) of the UDM. During engagements in January 2026, the SAHRC informed the UDM that the CGE had also received related complaints and that the two institutions would coordinate their handling of the matter and pursue an independent mediation process as contemplated in PEPUDA. 6. During that engagement and in subsequent written correspondence, the UDM requested clarity on several procedural issues, including whether a prima facie determination had been made that the conduct complained of falls within the ambit of PEPUDA, the anticipated timeline for the proposed mediation process, and the investigative steps undertaken by the SAHRC and CGE. 7. Regrettably, follow up correspondence addressed to the SAHRC and CGE has not received any response. The continued absence of even a basic procedural update or acknowledgement is deeply concerning in a matter involving alleged violations of constitutional rights by a prominent national figure and questions of institutional accountability by a national sporting body. 8. The UDM recognises that Chapter Nine institutions operate under significant resource and budgetary constraints. It is precisely because we respect their constitutional mandates and the important role they play in protecting fundamental rights that we have sought to allow the matter to proceed through the processes contemplated under PEPUDA. 9. However, continued procedural uncertainty cannot be allowed to persist indefinitely. Where a complaint of this nature remains without visible procedural advancement or communication from the responsible institutions, it raises serious concerns regarding the responsiveness of the processes intended to safeguard constitutional rights. 10. Should the situation remain unresolved, the UDM will have no option but to consider appropriate legal avenues to secure procedural clarity and advancement. Such a course would impose additional legal and financial burdens on all parties involved, including the SAHRC and CGE themselves. It is our sincere preference to avoid such an outcome and to allow the matter to be resolved within the existing constitutional framework. 11. It has been suggested in some quarters that the UDM’s complaint was misplaced, that it risked undermining team morale, or that matters of equality should not be raised in the context of national sport. The UDM rejects this characterisation. The complaint was never directed at the Bafana Bafana team or its performance. It concerns statements made in a public capacity and the institutional response to those statements. Issues of equality, dignity and non-discrimination apply across all spheres of public life, including sport. Upholding these principles strengthens the integrity of our institutions and ensures that national teams represent the values of the Constitution as well as the pride of the country. 12. In light of the procedural concerns outlined above, the UDM believes that parliamentary oversight is now both necessary and appropriate. 13. Given the nature of the issues raised, the mandates of several parliamentary committees are directly engaged, namely: 13.1. the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development, which exercises oversight over the SAHRC; 13.2. the Portfolio Committee on Sport, Arts and Culture, which exercises oversight over SAFA; 13.3. the Portfolio Committee on Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities which exercises oversight over the CGE. 14. The issues raised concern, among others, the protection of equality and dignity in public life, the responsiveness and functioning of Chapter Nine institutions tasked with safeguarding constitutional rights, and the governance and accountability standards expected of national sporting bodies that represent the country internationally. 15. In the ordinary course of parliamentary oversight, the aforementioned committees may wish to satisfy themselves that the relevant constitutional institutions and entities have acted with the necessary responsiveness and procedural clarity in matters implicating equality, dignity and non-discrimination. 16. In light of the above, we respectfully request that your Office take the following steps so that Parliament may exercise its oversight responsibilities: 16.1. refer this matter to the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development for consideration of the procedural handling of the complaint by the SAHRC; 16.2. refer the matter to the Portfolio Committee on Sport, Arts and Culture for consideration of governance and accountability issues relating to the response of the SAFA; and 16.3. refer the matter to the Portfolio Committee on Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities for consideration of the gender equality dimensions raised in the complaint and the role of the Commission for Gender Equality (CGE). Given the seriousness of the issues involved and the continuing absence of procedural clarity from the SAHRC and the CGE, we urge that this matter be treated with the urgency it warrants. 17. The UDM stands ready to cooperate fully with your Office and with the relevant portfolio committees should Parliament consider it appropriate to engage further on this matter. Upon request, we would be willing to make available the correspondence exchanged with the SAHRC and the CGE, as well as any related documentation, so that the committees may be fully apprised of the procedural history of the complaint. 18. The UDM remains committed to resolving this matter through lawful and constructive processes that uphold the Constitution and protect the dignity and equality of all South Africans. We are equally committed to the preservation and strengthening of our sporting codes and to the national pride that South Africans across race and gender place in our national teams. These are not competing ideals, but complementary ones that should guide the institutions entrusted with representing the nation. Yours sincerely Mr NLS Kwankwa, MP Deputy President of the United Democratic Movement Party Leader in Parliament Copied to: • Mr Xola Nqola, Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development • Mr Joseph McGluwa, Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Sport, Arts and Culture • Ms Liezl van der Merwe, Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities • Mr Tsietsi Shuping, Head of Department: Legal Services, Commission of Gender Equality • Ms Zamantungwa Mbeki, Provincial Manager, South African Human Rights Commission • Deputy Minister Bantu Holomisa, MP and UDM President • Ms Zandile Phiri, UDM Acting Secretary General • Ms Thandi Nontenja, MP, UDM National Treasurer and Chief Whip in the National Assembly • Cllr Yongama Zigebe, originator of the HSRC complaint • Ms Khazimla Ngalwa, Parliamentary Assistant to Mr Nqabayomzi Kwankwa, MP
Admin
04 Mar, 2026
The UDM and President Holomisa mourns the passing of Ntate Mosiuoa Lekota
Statement by President of the United Democratic Movement, Deputy Minister Bantu Holomisa, MP I have received with deep sadness the news of the passing of Ntate Mosiuoa Lekota, a veteran of our liberation struggle and a steadfast servant of the people of South Africa. His life mirrors the difficult but determined journey of our nation towards freedom and democracy. In the period leading to our democratic breakthrough in 1994, Ntate Lekota played a significant leadership role within the liberation movement, particularly through his involvement in the United Democratic Front. Following the advent of democracy in 1994, he served as Premier of the Free State, helping to stabilise governance structures in a newly liberated South Africa. Of course, Lekota later had differences with the African National Congress (ANC). I recall when he remarked that he had “served the divorce papers” to the ANC. When he left the ANC, the Congress of the People (COPE) was formed, which was welcomed news to those of us on the opposition benches. At the time I observed that the advantage of COPE was that it was comprised of people who understood the history and passage of the struggle. Their contribution in Parliament would therefore be significant, as they would remind South Africans that the project of the struggle had been hijacked by unscrupulous elements within the ruling party. Indeed, the commissions of inquiry that followed later confirmed many of those concerns. Throughout his political life, Mosiuoa Lekota remained a firm believer in constitutionalism, accountability and open democratic discourse. On behalf of the United Democratic Movement, I extend our sincere condolences to Ntate Lekota’s family, his friends and his comrades. May they find strength and comfort during this difficult time. May his soul rest in peace.
Admin
02 Mar, 2026
Parliamentary submission on Mtentu River Bridge procurement irregularities
Mr Songezo Zibi, MP Chairperson: Standing Committee on Public Accounts Parliament of the Republic of South Africa Cape Town 8000 Mr Chairperson Formal Parliamentary submission on identified procurement, governance and contractual irregularities relating to subcontract adjudication and awards under the Mtentu River Bridge project (N2 Wild Coast Toll Road) 1. Introduction 1.1. I address this correspondence in the broader interest of constitutional governance, public financial accountability, and the protection of public resources. 1.2. This letter constitutes a formal parliamentary submission to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts (SCOPA), placing on record a series of material, systemic and recurring irregularities identified in the adjudication and award of subcontract packages under the Mtentu River Bridge Project, forming part of the N2 Wild Coast Toll Road Programme. 1.3. The purpose of this submission is not merely to catalogue administrative shortcomings, but to alert Parliament to substantive deviations from lawful procurement practice, which, if left unexamined, may give rise to irregular expenditure, contractual disputes, audit qualifications, and erosion of public trust in State-funded infrastructure delivery. 2. Strategic and policy context of the project 2.1. The Mtentu River Bridge Project is one of the most significant infrastructure investments undertaken by the State in the Eastern Cape, both in scale and symbolic importance. It is intended not only to enhance national logistics connectivity, but also to stimulate inclusive economic development, local enterprise participation, and community empowerment in historically marginalised areas. 2.2. The project is implemented under South African National Roads Agency SOC Limited (SANRAL) Contract No. N.002-201-2023/1C through a Main Contractor Joint Venture. As such, all procurement activities associated with the project are conducted within the public finance environment, notwithstanding subcontracting arrangements. 2.3. Accordingly, the entire procurement chain is governed by: 2.3.1. Section 217 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. 2.3.2. The Public Finance Management Act, 1999 (PFMA). 2.3.3. Treasury Regulations issued in terms of the PFMA. 2.3.4. National Treasury Supply Chain Management prescripts. 2.3.5. Auditor-General of South Africa (AGSA) audit standards relating to irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure. 2.4. It is against this framework that the matters raised herein must be assessed. 3. Basis and methodology of review 3.1. This submission arises from a careful, document-by-document scrutiny of official procurement records generated by the implementing agents. The review focused on: 3.1.1. Consistency of application of mandatory requirements. 3.1.2. Alignment between advertised evaluation criteria and final decisions. 3.1.3. Integrity of price, preference and scoring processes. 3.1.4. Contractual certainty and enforceability. 3.1.5. Internal controls relating to bid submission, correction and acceptance. 3.2. The following documents form the factual foundation of this submission and are attached as annexures: 3.2.1. Adjudication Report: Subcontract Package 2 - Bulala Access Road. 3.2.2. Adjudication Report: Subcontract Package 5 - Crushing and Screening of Aggregates. 3.2.3. Appointment Letter: Subcontract Package 5 - Sourcing of Wearing Course Materials from State-Owned Borrow Pits. 4. Detailed account of identified irregularities 4.1. Selective and inconsistent enforcement of mandatory requirements: 4.1.1. A central and recurring concern across the reviewed packages is the uneven application of mandatory compliance requirements. 4.1.2. In Subcontract Package 2, a bidder was disqualified on the basis of a procedural defect relating to clarification briefing attendance documentation, which was characterised in the adjudication report as fraudulent. The disqualification was immediate and final. 4.1.3. By contrast, in Subcontract Package 5, a bidder who failed to submit a mandatory statutory requirement, specifically a valid Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) mining permit, was nonetheless deemed compliant and recommended for award. 4.1.4. Mandatory requirements, by definition, are not discretionary. Their selective enforcement constitutes a breach of the principles of fairness, equity, transparency and competitiveness, and is inconsistent with Treasury Regulations governing supply chain management. 4.2. Deviation from advertised evaluation criteria after final scoring: 4.2.1. In Subcontract Package 5 (crushing and screening), the adjudication process applied a 90/10 price and preference scoring system, as prescribed in the tender documentation. 4.2.2. The highest-scoring bidder under this system was subsequently excluded after completion of the scoring process, based on concerns relating to operational capacity and prior performance on other projects. 4.2.3. While capacity and performance considerations may be relevant, they were not disclosed as pre-qualification criteria or evaluation factors in the Request for Quotation. Their introduction after scoring constitutes a material deviation from the rules of the competition as advertised to bidders. 4.2.4. This practice undermines the legality and defensibility of the adjudication outcome and exposes the process to review under administrative law principles. 4.3. Post-adjudication negotiation of prices 4.3.1. The adjudication documentation further records an explicit intention by the main contractor to negotiate further rate reductions with the recommended bidder after the adjudication process had concluded. 4.3.2. Post-adjudication price negotiations compromise the integrity of competitive procurement. They alter outcomes outside the transparent scoring framework, disadvantage other bidders, and undermine price certainty. 4.3.3. Such practices are incompatible with PFMA requirements and raise the risk of irregular expenditure. 4.4. Conditional appointment presented as a concluded award 4.4.1. The appointment letter issued in respect of Subcontract Package 5 records a stated contract value and anticipates immediate commencement of works. However, it simultaneously makes the appointment subject to multiple unresolved conditions, including: 4.4.1.1. Agreement on rates. 4.4.1.2. Finalisation of borrow pit locations. 4.4.1.3. Laboratory testing and approvals. 4.4.1.4. Engineer’s instructions. 4.4.1.5. Execution of a formal subcontract agreement. 4.4.2. This creates a situation where a document styled as an appointment lacks the legal certainty of a concluded contract yet purports to trigger performance obligations. 4.4.3. Such ambiguity exposes the State to contractual disputes, audit findings, and the risk that expenditure incurred may later be classified as irregular. 4.5. Internal contradictions regarding commencement of works 4.5.1. The same appointment letter states that commencement shall be immediate upon signature, while also indicating that commencement is contingent upon technical approvals and preparatory works. 4.5.2. These positions are mutually inconsistent and render the commencement provisions legally unclear and operationally impractical. 4.6. Weaknesses in bid control and arithmetic governance 4.6.1. Across the reviewed packages, several control deficiencies are evident: 4.6.1.1. Significant arithmetic corrections applied to bids without documented bidder acceptance. 4.6.1.2. Submission of outdated, duplicate or incomplete bills of quantities by multiple bidders. 4.6.1.3. Lack of evidence of robust bid submission screening prior to opening 4.6.1.4. These weaknesses point to systemic deficiencies in bid management and internal control, increasing the risk of dispute, error, and audit qualification. 5. Cumulative PFMA and AGSA risk implications 5.1. Individually, each of the issues outlined above raises concern. Taken cumulatively, they point to systemic governance weaknesses that fall squarely within the oversight mandate of SCOPA. 5.2. The risks include: 5.2.1. Non-compliance with the PFMA and Treasury Regulations, 5.2.2. Exposure to irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure, 5.2.3. Breakdown of internal control and accountability mechanisms, 5.2.4. Legal vulnerability of adjudication and award decisions, 5.2.5. Undermining of developmental and community-based procurement objectives, 5.2.6. These are precisely the categories of risk that Parliament and the AGSA are constitutionally mandated to interrogate. 6. Request for parliamentary oversight intervention 6.1. In light of the seriousness, scale and systemic nature of the concerns raised, I respectfully request that SCOPA: 6.1.1. Calls upon SANRAL and the relevant implementing agents to account in detail for the adjudication and award processes. 6.1.2. Examines whether the identified practices comply with PFMA, Treasury Regulations and supply chain management prescripts. 6.1.3. Considers referral of the matter to the AGSA for further investigation or special audit attention. 6.1.4. Recommends appropriate corrective, remedial and consequence-management measures. 7. Annexure index 7.1. The following annexures accompany this submission: 7.1.1. Annexure A: Adjudication Report - Subcontract Package 2 (Bulala Access Road). 7.1.2. Annexure B: Adjudication Report - Subcontract Package 5 (Crushing and Screening of Aggregates). 7.1.3. Annexure C: Appointment Letter - Subcontract Package 5 (Wearing Course Materials / Borrow Pits). 8. Conclusion 8.1. The matters raised in this submission are substantive, factual, and grounded in official documentation. They are not advanced lightly, nor for any purpose other than to uphold constitutional governance, lawful procurement, and responsible stewardship of public funds. 8.2. I trust that SCOPA will give this submission the thorough and deliberate consideration it warrants in the execution of its oversight mandate. Yours sincerely Maj Gen (Ret) BH Holomisa President of the United Democratic Movement Deputy Minister of Defence and Military Veterans For information: Office of the SANRAL CEO Chief Executive Officer Information Officer
Admin
26 Feb, 2026
Eastern Cape SOPA2026: Mabuyane’s leadership on trial after year 7
Statement by Bulelani Bobotyane, Provincial Secretary of the UDM in the Eastern Cape The United Democratic Movement (UDM) in the Eastern Cape notes that on 27 February 2026, Premier Oscar Mabuyane will address the province in his seventh year at the helm. Across towns and villages, one hears a recurring sentiment: there was a period in this region’s history when executive authority translated into visible administrative discipline, when decisions were implemented with consistency and consequence management was not optional. That period existed within a different constitutional dispensation and must be understood in its proper historical context. It was not beyond criticism. In this province, what endures in public memory is not nostalgia for past structures, but the perception that governance was firm, coherent and enforceable. After nearly seven years in office, the current African National Congress (ANC) administration cannot dismiss that comparison. It must answer it. Seven years into the Mabuyane administration, the issue is no longer vision. The province has had vision documents, master plans, stimulus funds, growth frontiers and 2030 targets. The issue is executive control and institutional discipline. When the same sectors are re-announced year after year, when projected multipliers are pushed further into the future, and when governance reform deadlines quietly fade from the public record, the pattern reveals not a shortage of ideas, but a shortage of consolidation. After 32 years of uninterrupted ANC governance in this province, fragmentation cannot be blamed on transition or inheritance. It reflects a governing culture that accumulates initiatives faster than it stabilises systems. The Eastern Cape does not lack policy. It lacks conversion. It does not lack plans. It lacks enforcement. Seven years is sufficient time to entrench systems, discipline departments and impose consequence management. When plans multiply but structural indicators remain stubborn, it signals not complexity, but weak executive control. The ANC governs this province, with Premier Mabuyane at its helm. They cannot continue to govern through perpetual projection and recycled ambition. If the plans are sound on paper yet outcomes remain inconsistent, the question is no longer about design. It is about leadership. As the province approaches the 2026 Local Government Elections, SOPA 2026 must do more than defend a record. It must demonstrate that governance is stabilising where citizens experience the state most directly: in municipalities. Voters will not judge performance by presentation in the Chamber, but by functioning taps, maintained roads, disciplined finances and reliable services. In this election cycle, credibility will be earned on the ground. Accountability and delivery The UDM in the Eastern Cape will demand that SOPA2026 move beyond ambition and provide clear evidence of delivery. The people of the Eastern Cape have heard commitments on roads, water infrastructure, housing, health facilities and economic expansion before. This year’s address must account for what has been completed, what remains delayed and what has stalled. The public deserves measurable progress, not repetition. Municipal governance Municipal instability must be confronted honestly. If municipalities required intervention in the past year, the province must report whether those interventions worked. Financial stability, revenue collection, professional administration and consequence management determine whether communities receive services and whether local government can be trusted. Water security Access targets extending toward 2030 cannot substitute for consistent supply today. Communities experience governance through functioning taps, maintained infrastructure and effective wastewater systems. If these remain unreliable, explanations are no longer sufficient. Infrastructure maintenance Development cannot be credible if roads, stormwater systems and municipal assets deteriorate while new projects are announced. Maintenance is not secondary to growth. It is foundational to it. Economic reform and employment Sustainable job creation depends on stable municipalities, reliable infrastructure, clean procurement systems and a predictable regulatory environment. Temporary public employment programmes may offer short-term relief, but they do not replace structural reform. The province must demonstrate that institutional foundations for long-term economic expansion are being strengthened year by year. The National Development Plan’s 2030 horizon does not excuse weak implementation in the present. Governance and accountability Ethics frameworks and oversight mechanisms must translate into visible consequences. Clean governance, professional administration and disciplined public finance management are essential if public trust is to be restored. In 2020, this administration undertook to implement lifestyle audit guidelines by 2022. That deadline has passed. The province has yet to see consistent, transparent reporting on the outcomes of those audits or the consequences that followed. Anti-corruption cannot be rhetorical. It must be enforceable. With the 2026 Local Government Elections fast approaching, this address will be measured not by tone, but by evidence. The people of this province are demanding functional municipalities, reliable services and accountable leadership. In 2026, the UDM in the Eastern Cape will present a credible alternative grounded in administrative discipline, clean governance and service delivery that is felt in every municipality we contest.
Admin
18 Feb, 2026
State of the Nation Address 2026 debate in the NCOP
Speech for Mr MM Peter, MP and Member of the NCOP for the United Democratic Movement at the State of the Nation Address 2026 debate CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY Honourable Speaker Honourable Members The United Democratic Movement (UDM) supports the State of the Nation Address as tabled by His Excellency, President Ramaphosa. But support does not mean silence. In the true interest of serving the people of South Africa, we rise to sharpen, strengthen and submit proposals that move this nation from promise to performance. 1. No country survives without law Mr President, on the issue of illegal immigrants, the UDM wishes to comment as follows - no country can function if its laws are optional, and anyone who comes to this country legally must be prepared to abide by the law or they will be shipped out. Fellow South Africans, you deserve a state that works, systems that speak to each other, and early warning mechanisms that stop crime before it spreads. Without accurate Financial Intelligence Centre Act (FICA) registration, South African Revenue Service (SARS) cannot collect revenue from all traders operating in our economy. Furthermore, law enforcement cannot properly trace or dismantle criminal syndicates operating in the underworld. South Africa urgently needs a coordinated security response plan with time frames and the strengthening of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) as to be functional. South Africa’s liberation history teaches us solidarity. But protection must be credible and enforceable. If a person is granted asylum yet voluntarily returns to the very country they claim to be fleeing during holiday season, that status must be reviewed. You cannot be in danger today and on holiday tomorrow. Accountability is not hostility. It is fairness. It is security. It is sovereignty. 2. Skills development: from training to productivity We welcome the review of the Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs) as a corrective measure to ensure that skills funding delivers measurable results. Within the Department of Defence, the South African National Service Institute (SANSI) recently passed out over 500 young people. Mr President, do consider ring-fencing and redirecting SETA funding towards: • Funding into structured, outcome-based programmes such as SANSI. • Standardised study guides in mathematics, languages, accounting and entrepreneurship. • Mandatory practical and technical skill components. In 2001, Deputy Minister Holomisa, Matt Matthys, a maths teacher, Chantel Mulder, then Chief Executive Officer of the South African Institute of Chartered Accountants (SAICA), and the then President of SAICA, Ignatius Sehoole spearheaded the Thuthuka Project, providing English, Mathematics, and Accounting study guides for Grades 9 to 12. Today, that project has produced over 2,000 Black Chartered Accountants. We may need to have a tailor made, or similar setup into skills development. 3. Public Investment Corporation: Mr President, in 2023 you called on the Minister of Finance to address the pension queries of former civil servants. The affected community is still waiting for feedback and progress reports. People are dying while the system drags its feet, and each day of delay is a day of injustice. It is even more painful to see that the funds meant to secure these pensions are being looted by the elite through the Isibaya Fund at the Public Investment Corporation (PIC). Resources meant for ordinary South Africans are being diverted to enrich a few, deepening inequality and betraying public trust. How we wish that money could instead be invested in South Africa’s infrastructure, generating real returns for the country and creating jobs. This is a guaranteed investment in the nation, not in private greed. The people deserve accountability and action, not corruption. I thank you.
- 01
- 02
- 03
- 04
- 05
- 06
- 07
- 08
- 09
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 72
- 73
- 74
- 75
- 76
- 77
- 78
- 79
- 80
- 81
- 82
- 83
- 84
- 85
- 86
- 87
- 88
- 89
- 90
- 91
- 92
- 93
- 94
- 95
- 96
- 97
- 98
- 99
- 100
- 101
- 102
- 103
- 104
- 105
- 106
- 107
- 108
- 109
- 110
- 111
- 112
- 113
- 114
- 115
- 116
- 117
- 118
- 119
- 120
- 121
- 122
- 123
- 124
- 125
- 126
- 127
- 128
- 129
- 130
- 131
- 132
