Admin
01 Apr, 2015
UDM letter to the Public Protector Thuli Madonsela: Request for a forensic audit on Inkandla non-security expenditure
The Public Protector Hillcrest Office Park 175 Lunnon Street Pretoria 0001 Dear Advocate Madonsela REQUEST FOR A FORENSIC AUDIT ON INKANDLA NON-SECURITY EXPENDITURE Following the release of your report on the Nkandla Security Upgrades as well as the Report of the President to the National Assembly; the National Assembly appointed an Ad-Hoc Committee which made the following recommendation with respect to non-security upgrades: “the Committee recommends that the matter of what constitutes security and non-security upgrades at the President’s private residence be referred back to Cabinet for determination by the relevant security experts in line with the Cabinet Memorandum of 2003. Cabinet must report back to Parliament on the steps taken to give effect on this recommendation within three months”. This recommendation was adopted by the National Assembly through a majority vote. On the 18th and 19th of March 2015, the Speaker of the National Assembly convened a meeting of the Leaders of the Parties represented in the National Assembly. The purpose of the meeting was to first advise the party leaders that the Minister of Police has indicated his readiness to present the report on the non-security expenditure on Nkandla. Secondly, it was to secure the support of the party leaders that they be briefed by the Minister of Police on the contents of the Nkandla non-security upgrade report, and in turn for them to agree to blackout what she referred to as sensitive areas, all this was to be done before the same report is presented to the National Assembly. However, during the meeting, I personal asked the Speaker; whether the report is based on the report of the Public Protector or the report of the President and or that of the Ad-Hoc Committee. This question was not answered and it remains not responded to. The above question is critical and at the centre of what I wish to bring to your attention for a possible action. The report of the Public Protector says with regard to the matter at hand: “The President is to: take steps, with the assistance of the National Treasury and the SAPS, to determine the reasonable cost of the measures implemented by the DPW at his private residence that do not relate to security, and which include Visitors’ Centre, the amphitheatre, the cattle kraal and chicken run, the swimming pool. Pay a reasonable percentage of the cost of the measures as determined with the assistance of National Treasury, also considering the DPW apportionment document”. The President in his response to the Speaker said with respect to this matter: “the Minister of Police as the designated Minister under the National Key Points Act, to report to Cabinet on a determination to whether the President is liable for any contribution in respect of the security upgrades having regard to the legislation, past practices, culture and findings contained in the respective reports”. What is interesting in both the report of the Ad-Hoc Committee and that of the President, is the omission of the critical role of the National Treasury. In my understanding, amongst other reasons that the report of the Public Protector would have seen a role for the National Treasury, was the internal expertise within that department in handling matters of this nature. Whilst I have not seen the report, I am unable to see how a determination on this matter could be arrived at, without forensic auditing as I believe that the same methodology could help to verify how much the then architect and contractors at Nkandla could be liable for. It is my humbly request that your good office cause the National Treasury to conduct a forensic audit in order to determine the actual amounts that constitute what is non-security upgrade in Nkandla. I do not see how best this can be done without such scientific process being followed. The President has, during the last question session in the National Assembly, emphasised the need for quantification of costs to be paid by him, if any. He protested, how can, he be expected to pay monies that are not determined and that he does not know. This clearly calls for this methodology to be considered for the finalisation of the matter. I look forward to your excellent guidance on this matter. Kind regards Mr Bantu Holomisa, MP President of the United Democratic Movement
Admin
08 Sep, 2014
Distasteful Claims that Madonsela is a CIA plant
Statement issued by Mr Bongani Msomi, UDM Secretary General The barrage of attacks, both on the person and office, of the Public Protector are becoming more and more creative. The United Democratic Movement (UDM) has noted the claims that she is on the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) payroll and we find it distasteful. The sounds coming from the peanut gallery are a desperate attempt at discrediting a constitutional body that is doing its job properly. These statements, such as what Deputy-Minister Kebby Maphatsoe made at the weekend, is a clumsy attempt to protect President Zuma at all cost – even at the expense of our august Parliament and the credibility of the ruling party. For a Cabinet Minister to make such a statement is unbecoming. The UDM would ask the Deputy-Minister, should he have irrefutable truth that indeed Advocate Madonsela is on the CIA’s payroll, he should share that with the public. The UDM also noted that the ruling party had stopped at nothing to defend former Electoral Commission Chairperson Pansy Tlakula. The fact President Zuma’s office and his party has said nothing in defence of the Public Protector is extremely ironic.
Admin
24 Oct, 2013
Speech: Annual Black Management Forum conference Debate: Can Good Governance increase trust amongst Government, Civil Society, Labour and Business?
by Mr Bantu Holomisa at Gallagher Convention Centre Ladies and Gentlemen, Thank you for the opportunity to interact with you today; I’m honoured to address this forum on the importance of good governance in engendering trust among the various stakeholders in society. Let me state from the outset that the answer to this question is an emphatic YES! Yesterday the Public Protector, Thuli Madonsela in this conference gave a candid and concise assessment of poor state of governance in the public sector in South Africa. She called on people to refrain from using their connections as a means to access tenders. Even though much has been said and written about corruption in South Africa and many laws have been passed to fight corruption, corruption remains a serious problem in our country. Far too often, many top government officials and politicians have been caught with their hands in the cookie jar. In addition, when allegations of corruption engulf once revered institutions, such as the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) and the Presidency, they weaken our ability to successfully crackdown on corruption. In the process they affect our international ratings. It would, however, be mischievous and dishonest to suggest that corruption in government only started during the Zuma regime. Many of you will recall that some of the most devastating corruption scandals go back as far as the Sarafina-2, Arms Deal, Oil Gate, Travel Gate, Chancellor House/Hitachi and Eskom Deal. The latter deal being a classical example of an institutionalised corruption. Efforts have been made to determine the possible causes of corruption in South Africa. While we admit that there are many possible causes of corruption, we believe that at the heart of the problem is the tender system. In particular, it is the usurpation of the powers of accounting officers by politicians in this system. Since the advent of democracy we have seen an increasing number of political directives given to accounting officers on how to allocate tenders and to whom. To make matters worse, in many instances tenders are awarded to incompetent people, who either do shoddy work or leave it unfinished. A case in point, not long ago former Human Settlements Minister, Tokyo Sexwale stated publicly that his Department was planning to demolish thousands of RDP houses that were not built properly and are a health hazard. The Medupi tender was awarded to the ruling party investment arm without being subjected to an open to tender system. This means that in this deal the ruling party became both player and referee. After this scandal was revealed they had the nerve to tell the public that they have a right to do this. These occur despite people being aware that they go against the principles of good governance. We need to reverse this trend, Ladies and Gentlemen. We need to restore the power to make administrative decisions back to the accounting officers, and that politicians should confine themselves to do oversight work. What is also of grave concern is that when the media and the Public Protector expose incidents of corruption, nothing serious is done about it. Instead, the culprits get rewarded with redeployments and or promotions, which firmly entrenches the culture of corruption and impunity. For examples one has to look no further than former Minister of Communications, Dina Pule and those who were found guilty in the Travel Gate scandal. This altogether necessitates a review of the programs and some of the governance systems we have been using. Put more accurately, we need to change the software. We need to move towards a mixed electoral system that draws from the strengths of both the proportional and constituency based electoral systems. In addition, our people should be allowed to directly elect their president. In addition the cabinet which has been nominated by that president should be a subject of scrutiny by the Parliament’s Ethics Committee before they are sworn in. Such a system will among other things make sure that the cabinet represents the population or at least the geographical spread of South Africa and that such individuals understand the field they are to enter. A directly elected president would have no motivation to fill the cabinet with people from his/her home province, as is currently the case. This is a recipe for prompting ethnicity and unfair distribution of resources. These steps would, among others, help improve accountability. If the civil society and the public in general is going to fold their arms while these hyenas and predators continue to loot this country’s resources with impunity, they must know that our children will inherit an empty shell in the future. I thank you.
Admin
18 Oct, 2013
Follow-up letter on suspected irregularities: IEC lease agreements
Open letter to the Public Protector, Adv T Madonsela, from Mr Bantu Holomisa, MP (UDM President), regarding: Follow-up letter on suspected irregularities: IEC lease agreements (21 February 2012) Dear Advocate Madonsela The abovementioned matter has reference. On the 3rd of October 2011, I wrote a letter requesting the office of the Public Protector to investigate suspected irregularities in the lease agreements of the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC). I again wrote on 14 March 2012, almost a year ago, to make follow on the request. Some time thereafter we met at your offices in Pretoria, on 9 July 2012, to discuss progress. You sensitised us about your workload, but had undertaken to expedite the process. On 8 October 2012 you wrote to explain that your investigation team had been in the process of verifying information and investigating matters with other relevant role-players. The report was not ready. The delays in finalising this investigation raises concern; as it stands the matter has been with the Public Protector’s office for more than a year. Would you please give an indication of when you expect to finalise this investigation and publish your report. Yours sincerely Banmtu Holomisa, MP President of the United Democratic Movement
