I am not yet aware of the number of actions which might have been taken as a result of the Act. I am sure we can find that information and make it available to you. It is correct that the Constitution does provide for the Minister and the National Treasury to act, but I would to insist that the first line of defence is the council itself and its political leadership; that is number one.
Number two, we have the Public Finance Management Act and the Municipal Finance Management Act to which I made mention of. Therefore, non-adherence to these two laws in particular, should mean that indeed there should be what our colleague here has referred to as consequences. And I am happy that he pronounced it properly, he didn't say /kwens? kwens? s/
So, the matter is correct. I think the Auditor-General will be following through all of this. But what I am trying to guard against is the "oog klappe" [eye-catching] approach. An "oog klappe" [eye- catching] approach which says, the Constitution empowers me after all, therefore I am going to go to the issue and ignore the other component of the Constitution which says we should work together, consult together with a common purpose.
What I have learnt in post 1994 government is that, if you take unilateral actions, no matter how empowered you think you are; the consequences might be negative. Therefore working together with the three spheres, we should be able to find solutions. I am afraid that yesterday I was informed that out of the difficulty that we had a couple of weeks ago with 100 municipalities, the figures jumped now to 127.
So we have more work that we have to do to fix the municipalities. But I think we have an opportunity as well because very soon we will be going to local government elections. These presents an opportunity for political parties to make sure that their selection of candidates is of such a nature that they give us the best that they can - the most reliable non corrupt people. It is an opportunity to start again. Thank you. [Applause.]
Question 222: