Postponed:SABC 2021/22 Annual Report & related matters hearing; with Deputy Minister

Public Accounts (SCOPA)

01 March 2023
Chairperson: Mr M Hlengwa (IFP)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

Video

SABC

The Committee convened to receive a briefing from the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) on their annual report and financial statements for the financial year 2021/22, all investigations, as well as irregular, fruitless, and wasteful expenditure.

Members expressed their dissatisfaction with the Minister’s failure to attend the meeting, given that it was of critical importance.

Due to the vagueness around the designation of the Group Chief Executive Officer and his current status, the meeting could not proceed. The Chairperson and the Members expressed their dissatisfaction with the whole situation. They questioned the validity of the Department of Communications and Digital Technologies and the SABC. There was a lack of urgency, accountability, and leadership within the Department and the SABC.

Members raised their questions on why the Group CEO had not accepted his position yet, and why the process was being delayed. The Committee expressed concern that the SABC had been without an accounting authority for six months. This was unacceptable. Members lamented that they could not mention and discuss critical issues.

The Chairperson said that the Committee would like a progress report on the status of the designation by Friday, for them to then be able to plan on how they should take the matters, going forward. He stressed that the presence of the Minister was not going to be optional at the next meeting, and that she was going to be subpoenaed if need be. 

Meeting report

Opening Remarks by the Chairperson

The Chairperson opened the meeting, welcoming everyone in attendance. He indicated that the Committee had received an apology from the Minister, but remarked that the Minister has never been available for any meeting or oversight meeting. Even in her previous capacity, she was never available. Given the seriousness of the meeting, this was unacceptable. Everyone in the meeting made an effort to be present, and the Minister was always just unavailable.

The Chairperson asked to be excused from the meeting at noon, as he had a meeting with the House Chairpersons he had to attend. This was communicated to the Committee beforehand.

Ms N Tolashe (ANC) commented on the unavailability of the Minister. She said that it was unacceptable. It was time for Parliament to be taken seriously. She must be subpoenaed if the Minister fails to attend the next meeting.

Ms V Mente (EFF) expressed her dissatisfaction with the absence of the Minister and said that it was important for the Committee Members to express their feelings about the Minister’s absence, saying that it was disrespectful. It was disrespectful towards Parliament, and it was a deliberate action.

Mr B Hadebe (ANC) asked to be excused at 11:00 am because he was expected to return to Africa House. As far as he was aware, the Minister was abroad and not undermining Parliament, as the other Members alluded to. However, as Members of the Parliament, they had to exercise their rights to hold the Executive accountable and to scrutinise its powers.

The Chairperson said that the Minister was expected to attend the SCOPA meetings.

Mr A Lees (DA) asked for clarity on whether any SABC board members were present. To his knowledge, the Board did not exist yet.

The Chairperson said that Mr Philly Mapulane, Deputy Minister of Communications & Digital Technologies, was going to address the Committee to give them updates on the matter.

The Chairperson asked the Deputy Minister to make opening remarks before handing over to the SABC delegation for its presentation.

Deputy Minister’s Remarks

Deputy Minister Mapulane thanked the Chairperson and greeted all the Committee Members and guest delegates.

He said that the Chairperson was correct, and indicated that the SABC Board was not present the previous time they met. At that time, they were waiting for the appointment process to be finalised by the National Assembly. Since then, the National Assembly has finalised the process and submitted names to the President, who was the appointing authority. As of date, the matter has not been finalised yet. The President wanted some clarity on a matter by the Speaker of the National Assembly. Correspondence has been exchanged but they were unaware of what exactly had been said. They hoped that the matters would be clarified and the President would finalise the appointment.

In the interim, the Group CEO was designated as the accounting authority, and the process was finalised the previous month. They were waiting for the President to finalise the process soon, given that it was an urgent matter. There was litigation on this matter by one of the media monitoring organisations. There was a press release by the Presidency, where they stated that they were going to respond to the matter. To answer the question, the SABC did not have a board yet.

The Chairperson made light-hearted comments.

Input by the South African Broadcasting Commission

Mr Madoda Mxakwe, Group Chief Executive Officer, SABC, said that he received a letter on 23 February 2023 on his designation as the accounting authority. When he received the letter, there was a paragraph that concerned him.

He read the paragraph out to the Committee.

The problem with the paragraph was that all the SABC business plans were commercial and that some financial commitments were required. Considering all the factors, they asked for paragraph four to be reviewed and removed.

The Chairperson asked whether the ‘major financial commitments’ sentence in the paragraph was quantified.

Mr Mxakwe said that it was not quantified.

Mr Omega Shelembe, Deputy Director-General: ICT Enterprise and Public Entity Oversight, Department of Communications and Digital Technologies (DCDT), corrected the GCEO in that the letter communicating the designation of the GCEO was dated 15 February. They had a meeting subsequent to that, where the GCEO and his team alerted them to the issue they had with paragraph 4.1 that stated that he [GCEO] was not allowed to enter into any significant and long-term financial commitments. The Department consulted with National Treasury after this and National Treasury advised that the paragraph was not prescriptive but rather advisory to the GCEO to avoid entering such contracts.

The Chairperson said that it sounded like it was all about semantics now.

Discussion

Mr Lees noted that the GCEO did not introduce himself, and apologised if he (GCEO) did but he (Mr Lees) did not get his name. He indicated that he received the letter and confirmed that the GCEO was not the accounting officer yet. Therefore, the SABC did not have an accounting authority. He said that this whole situation was absurd, and there were conflicts of interest in this whole situation. The Deputy Minister said that the delays were caused by the Presidency, but there were no further details on the whole status of the process, or what caused the delays.

He asked if the GCEO was the accounting authority, as he was sitting here. If he (GCEO) was or intended to accept the offer, there had to be a certain conflict of interest in the decisions he had to make or still had to make.

Mr S Somyo (ANC) asked whether the GCEO has accepted a position to temporarily act as an accounting authority for the SABC. There had to be a sense of urgency to act and finalise the Board to avoid the various risks that were accompanied by the absence of a Board.

Mr Hadebe asked whether the GCEO has accepted the delegated authority.

Mr Mxakwe responded that he had accepted conditionally, with the said paragraph being removed. There had been engagements between him and the Department. The paragraph has not been removed because it was advisory and not prescriptive, and subject to interpretation.

Mr Hadebe asked for a direct response and not a technical one. He said the previous meeting was postponed due to this matter, and the Committee deserved a direct answer. As per section 49 of the Public of Financial Management Act (PFMA), if the public entity did not have a Board, the CEO or the person in charge of the entity was the accounting authority. They were at the meeting because they thought the SABC had an accounting authority. The Committee had to know whether they had an accounting authority or not, and if Mr Mxakwe had accepted his responsibilities. If not, they were unable to proceed with the meeting.

The Chairperson said that he would have the letter forwarded to Members. The Chairperson said that, on the day that the meeting was postponed in November, they were informed that the appointment of a GCEO was in process. If the GCEO only received his letter on 23 February 2023, there was a five-month gap with no accounting authority. The Chairperson said there were many technicalities and no sense of urgency from the Department or the SABC. The whole situation was ambiguous and vague. He asked what the status of Mr Mxakwe’s appointment was. The Committee was not aware that his appointment was contested because the meeting was confirmed on the basis that the appointment was made.

Mr Mxakwe said he was not the accounting authority yet, as the matter has not been responded to.

Ms Tolashe said that the Committee was unable to proceed with the meeting. Members must excuse the Department and SABC, and discuss amongst themselves what they are going to do next.

Mr Hadebe said that this was disturbing and disappointing. The experience they had at their previous meeting could have been easily avoided if all the necessary delegation of authority had been informed. This was an example of fruitless and wasteful expenditure [as this was a physical meeting]. He asked the delegation to ensure their plans were clear for future engagements.

He asked whether the DDG was aware of the fact that, despite the response from National Treasury, the GCEO did not accept his appointment. Why were they here if there was no accounting authority? Why was the issue not resolved before the meeting? They could have used the time to address critical and serious issues. They were now dealing with administrative issues. He said that it was unacceptable. No one was taking responsibility for accountability. He stressed the importance of getting things done correctly. People travelled from across the country to attend the meeting, and now they were unable to address and discuss the issues. Members were responsible for holding the Executive accountable, including the President, and they had to use this, as it impacted other factors.

Ms Mente asked what the SABC’s plan was when they came to the meeting. The main purpose of this meeting was to take the advice from the Committee and implement them. Without a GCEO, they were going to be unable to implement whatever was going to be discussed during the meeting. She said that it seemed like a systematic approach by the Department to destroy the SABC. The executive and the SABC do not know where they stand. She asked what the plan was when the Executive and the Department came to the meeting.

Mr Lees said that the letter was not from National Treasury but only from the Department to the SABC. There was a lot of ambiguity around Section 4, without having seen a letter from National Treasury.

On 23 November 2023, the Deputy Minister reported to the Committee that they were waiting for vetting results from SAA. He asked whether they had received the results.

The Chairperson said that the vetting was uprooted by Parliament, and Parliament was delayed by SAA.

He pointed out that the key issue was that SABC had no accounting authority for five months. It was as if they were repeating what happened in November 2022.

He said that chaos in government departments, whether organised or not, created a conducive and enabling environment for collapse and corruption because there were no checks and balances. The SABC was in trouble. With a leadership vacuum, the centre does not hold.

He pointed out to the Committee that they met on the basis that the accounting authority was in place. He was required to postpone the previous meeting because of the same issue. They have gathered again yet the accounting authority was still not appointed.

Mr Somyo asked what the GCEO’s capacity was in the meeting.

He asked the Deputy Minister if he was aware of all the issues listed during the meeting.

Mr Hadebe pointed out in the letter that they had from the Department stated ‘please find attached approval from National Treasury’. He requested the attachment from the Department or the SABC. He wanted clarity as to whether the same limitations contained in the letter from the Department were in the letter from National Treasury. It appeared that there was confusion between the different entities.

The Chairperson said that they needed clarity on this.

The Deputy Minister (DM) said that the letter from National Treasury should be available to the Committee if it was not shared with the Committee already.

When they met last year, he requested the Minister of Finance to do the designation. Later, he was informed that it was not the Minister’s responsibility to do that but National Treasury’s, through the Director-General. The Director-General then wrote to the GCEO. The DM acknowledged that the process was taking longer than they expected.

He said he was unaware of the GCEO’s reservations about the designation. He understood that the matter was handled and the process was finalised. The Board should have been finalised by now, but the matter was out of their hands.

Mr Mxakwe said that he was going to try and respond to the questions. They sent a letter to the Chairperson of the Committee, asking whether they still had to appear before the Committee because there was no Board.

On the issue of the designation of the accounting authority, he said that the issue of the paragraph was not resolved yet.

On what his role was here, he replied that he was here as the accounting officer, not the accounting authority.

The Chairperson said that they were not aware that there were issues with the designation of the accounting authority. He recounted that the Deputy Minister, in his opening remarks, said that a designation was done but the GCEO spoke to other issues. The meeting would have never happened if the designation was not done. The laissez-faire attitude of the Department and the SABC in dealing with serious matters was collapsing the entity. It was a waste of resources and time, and it was unacceptable that excuses were constantly being made to cover up for inadequate leadership and accountability. They have gone six months without a Board, and the matter has still not been resolved. If the GCEO was not able to accept the role of the accounting authority, why did they not appoint someone else? There was no clear communication between the entities.

Ms Thulisile Manzini, Acting Deputy-General, DCDT, took note of the serious issues that were raised by the Committee. When National Treasury wrote the letter, the GCEO responded to the letter on the paragraph he was uncomfortable with. Then the Acting Director-General responded to the letter and said that it was merely advice for National Treasury. However, they were unaware that the GCEO wrote to the Acting Deputy-General, stating that he was still uncomfortable with the designation.

Mr Mlindi Mashologu, Deputy Director-General (DDG): ICT Information Society and Capacity Development, DCDT, said they do not have written correspondence from the SABC that the GCEO was uncomfortable with the designation.

The Chairperson said that there was a heightened contestation of power that was hinged on money and finances. That was the SABC’s dilemma. The SABC has acclimatised to the reality that the taxpayers provided financial solutions to non-financial problems. Processes did not matter, and they had a lifeline – the taxpayer. They were unable to get their plan in order at an operational level. They assured the Committee that the matter was being resolved in November 2022 and they misled the Committee. He pointed out that it was a serious indictment. The list of issues was endless. The Department and SABC have wasted their time and it was unacceptable. In the absence of an accounting authority, they were unable to proceed with the meeting.

Mr Hadebe asked the accounting officer what the cost implication of them not having had an accounting authority was, and what the extent of the damage was.

Mr Mxakwe said that it was quite a loaded question and that it would take days to answer. They could send the Committee documentation to go through in their own time. He said that the SABC was caught in a perfect storm. They were dealing with other external issues as well as internal issues.

He pointed out that, from a governance point of view, they cracked the whip on poor performance in revenue generation. Whether you looked at the poor performance of audience ratings or from a revenue point of view and based on this, they developed mitigating plans on various levels. They needed the Board’s approval, and they could therefore not be implemented yet. The fact that they did not have a Board was crippling the SABC.

The Chairperson said that the Committee would like a progress report on the status of the designation by Friday, for them to then be able to plan on how they should take the matters, going forward. He stressed that the presence of the Minister was not going to be optional at the next meeting, and that she was going to be subpoenaed if need be.

The Deputy Minister expressed his apologies on behalf of the Department and SABC, and to the Chairperson and the Committee for the time that has been wasted.

The meeting was adjourned.

 

 

 

 

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: