Chairperson, this question is about the Public Service Commission and financial misconduct. There was a parliamentary question in this regard. Now, the allegations were made of inflated prices of land purchase for restitution purposes in Mpumalanga when there was awareness on the part of the restitution commission and the Ministry of these allegations.
There were two investigations ordered by the Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs; one by forensic auditors and one by a private evaluator. The forensic auditors actually did not indicate particular potential losses. That is not where the amount of R20 million comes from.
The private evaluator expressed an opinion in respect of prices paid, to the extent that they were inflated by about R20 million more than the market value of the relevant properties. Payment was stopped for those projects which were still in progress and the actual loss therefore was not R20 million - that just comes from that evaluator's report.
Misconduct charges were brought against the official and there was severe pressure to charge the responsible commissioner. He went to the Labour Court to force the department to charge him and to reinstate him, and eventually an order was made to charge him before a certain date. He was then formally charged. By that time, the auditor's report was out but the private evaluator only issued the preliminary report of another evaluator.
An amount of R20 million was not mentioned in the charge sheet. He was charged with 13 charges and alternatives to each. He was found guilty on three main charges or alternatives and given a chance by the then Minister, on the recommendation of the chairperson, to resign or be dismissed. He subsequently resigned.
The department sought the advice of the state attorney and senior counsel on the matter of possible recovery of the money. The advice indicated that the department will not be successful with any such claim unless the police investigation uncovered evidence of fraud or corruption relating to the R20 million. To date the police investigation has failed to uncover any such evidence. If new evidence comes to light, the department will obviously seek new advice and reconsider its position. I thank you.
Voorsitter, dit is 'n baie ingewikkelde verduideliking, maar baie dankie. Ek is nou so 'n bietjie meer op hoogte. Met ander woorde, die departement het die ding opgegee vir die Staatsdienskommissie, terwyl hulle nog net van die eerste gedeelte bewus was. Daarom het hulle nou die R20 miljoen aangedui en dit terwyl daar niks is nie. Gaan die departement probeer om die geld terug te kry? Dankie.
[Mr A H NEL: Chairperson, that is a very complicated explanation, but thank you anyway. I am a bit more informed now. In other words, the department gave it to the Public Service Commission, whilst they were only aware of the first part thereof. They have thus indicated R20 million and that while there is nothing of the sort. Will the department try to get the money returned to them? Thank you.]
Yes, as I've said, that depends on the police investigation. Dit hang af van die polisie-ondersoeke. As daar bewyse van bedrog of korrupsie gekry word, sal daar voortgegaan word met die klagtes, maar ons moet op advies van die Staatsprokureur en senior advokaat optree in hierdie verband. Mens moet maar luister na die regsadvies wat jy kry. Hul advies was dat ons nie suksesvol gaan wees nie, tensy die polisie vir ons getuienis kan bring oor korrupsie en bedrog nie. Die R20 miljoen was net 'n bedrag wat 'n privaat waardeerder genoem het. Dit is nie 'n ... al die transaksies gestop in daardie verband is toe al gestop. So, jy kan nie s dit is R20 miljoen wat verlore is nie. Dit is juis die probleem. Dankie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[It depends on the police investigations. If proof of fraud or corruption are uncovered, the charges will be proceeded with, but we must act on the advice of the state attorney and senior advocate in this regard. One should listen to the legal advice that one gets. Their advice was that we will not be successful unless the police bring us proof of corruption and fraud. The R20 million was just an amount that was mentioned by a private evaluator. It is not a ... all the transactions stopped in this regard had been stopped by then. So you cannot say that it is R20 million that is lost. This is precisely the problem. Thank you.]
Inkomu eka wena Mutshaviseki Mutshami wa xitulu. [Thank you, hon Chairperson.]
Order! Hon member, let's get the hearing device working. Are you connected, hon member? You may proceed, hon member.
Hon Deputy Minister, having listened attentively to your response, I would like to commend the Ministry and the department for the steps taken in this regard in ensuring that clean and good governance is upheld. Hon Deputy Minister, what mechanisms do you have in place or do you intend to put in place to ensure that such incidences do not reoccur?
Thank you Madam, through you, Chairperson, for the compliments to the department. The Ministry is very strict about this matter and different forensic audits are being conducted. In the end, you have the forensic audits; you have controls through your Chief Commissioner of Land Claims and the restitution commission and you have training and supervisory schemes in the offices of the Restitution Commission, as well as Land Affairs and everywhere else, of course.
The problem is to keep the pressure up that under no circumstances will anything be tolerated which smells of corruption. Now, with regard to these evaluations, we have decisions of the Land Claims Court as well as the Constitutional Court which say that it's an extremely relative matter and that you will have one evaluator saying it is six million while another evaluator will come and say it is ten million. That is why the market value is such an uncertain factor to base land reform and restitution on.
In fact, if you closely read the Constitution, especially section 25 (4), you will see that market value actually is not the guide for land reform and restitution and we will certainly keep it under close control and as this has been proven we will certainly follow up any possible allegations of fraud or corruption. Thank you.
That concludes the time allocated for questions. Before I proceed to the next Order, I want to recognise the Minister of Finance who is going to provide further clarity on question number 325.
Thank you very much, Chairperson for your indulgence. In responding to one of the supplementary questions asked by the hon Gibson in respect of Question 325, I said I thought that the facility the Zimbabwean government has with the Reserve Bank is around R90 million. I just like to confirm for the record that the figure is R75 million, that it has been there since 1 March 1990 at that level and that it is drawn down to the value of R73,2 million as at 31 July 2007. Thank you.
See also QUESTIONS AND REPLIES.