I hereby give notice that I shall move:
That the House-
(1) noting that -
(a) Ms Gloria Serobe was one of the 12 candidates recommended by the House on Thursday, 13 September 2007, for appointment by the President to the SABC Board;
(b) when interviewed by the Portfolio Committee on Communications and asked whether she knew the person who had nominated her for appointment, a Mr Louis du Plooy, who gave his address as P O Box 2012, Groenkloof 0027, she replied that she did not know him but it was "nice" of him to have done so;
(c) according to a report in the Sunday Times of 16 September 2007 Mr du Plooy "... revealed yesterday that he had discussed Serobe's nomination with her (emphasis added) 'as I had to get a CV from her to submit with the nomination form'"; and
(d) Mr du Plooy is the Chief Director for Ministerial Services in the Ministry in the Presidency but did not reveal this important information in nominating Ms Serobe;
(2) resolves -
(a) to appoint a committee to conduct a preliminary investigation into whether Ms Serobe, in informing the Portfolio Committee that she did not know Mr du Plooy, wilfully furnished the Portfolio Committee with false or misleading information and thereby committed the offence of breach of parliamentary privilege in terms of section 17(2)(e) of the Powers, Privileges and Immunities of Parliament and Provincial Legislatures Act 4 of 2004 (possibly in an attempt to conceal from the Portfolio Committee Mr du Plooy's direct link with the Minister in the Presidency, Dr Essop Pahad), the investigation to be conducted with a view to establishing whether the matter warrants formal referral to the National Director of Public Prosecutions for prosecution under the Act; (b) that the committee may exercise those powers in Rule 138 that may assist it in carrying out its task;
(c) that the committee reports to the House within 15 working days; and
(d) that the President be informed immediately of the decision of the House to investigate whether Ms Serobe may have committed a breach of parliamentary privilege.
Madam Deputy Speaker, the issue with regard to Ms Gloria Serobe's interview with the Portfolio Committee on Communications for the position on the SABC Board is quite clear.
It is more than obvious when one examines the verbatim transcript of her interview and her letter to Madam Speaker about this matter; that Ms Serobe apparently tried to hide the fact that the person who nominated her, Mr Louis du Plooy, works for Dr Essop Pahad in the Ministry in the Presidency. He is in fact the Chief Director in the Ministry of the Presidency.
The same Mr Du Plooy has a P O Box number in Groenkloof and it was this box number that he used for his letter to Parliament nominating Ms Serobe.
In her words, Ms Serobe appears to have chosen to be devious and purported to the committee when asked that she did not know Mr Du Plooy at all. She now says that she knows Mr Du Plooy who works in the Presidency, but she doesn't know the same Mr Du Plooy who has a Groenkloof P O Box number.
This is obviously complete and utter nonsense. It is quite simply contemptuous of the intelligence of the hon members of this House. If this is so then quite frankly this is patently wrong. I submit that we cannot sanction the appointment of a person to the SABC Board who believes that she can treat Parliament in this manner.
I am therefore respectfully requesting that this House proceeds with appointing a committee to conduct an investigation into whether Ms Serobe wilfully furnished the committee with false or misleading information and in so doing committed a breach of parliamentary privilege.
There was nothing wrong in law with Mr Du Plooy nominating her. So, why did she try to hide it? Mr Du Plooy is a citizen of the Republic and could have nominated Ms Serobe and openly stated his title and his work address; Ministry in the Presidency. He chose, instead, to give a somewhat anonymous P O Box number.
Conclusions can, of course, be drawn about this; but this is not the nub of the matter today. Whether an official and an appointing authority of the Presidency should use subterfuge to insert a candidate or candidates into a parliamentary process can be the subject of an entirely different debate, but not today.
At the time of her interview, the Chairperson of the Communication's Committee asked Ms Serobe directly in these exact words, I quote: "Who nominated you? Mr Du Plooy? Is he any organisation or is he just an independent person?" Ms Serobe answered, I quote: "I actually don't know and I never found out who that is and finally it was very sweet of him. I must call him or her."
It is my contention which I would like the committee to investigate that by saying this, Ms Serobe wilfully furnished the portfolio committee with false or misleading information. She knew Mr Du Plooy; she'd spoken to him. She knew exactly who he was!
Ms Serobe is now trying to say in her letter to the Speaker that the chairperson referred to Mr Du Plooy of Groenkloof and that she doesn't know a Mr Du Plooy of Groenkloof. This is sheer sophistry.
It is clear in the verbatim transcript of her interview that the Chairperson did not refer to a Mr du Plooy of Groenkloof, but merely asked about Mr du Plooy. Ms Serobe is, therefore, blatantly continuing her misleading conduct by adding the words "Groenkloof" in her letter to the Speaker.
She is now admitting that she was telephoned by Mr du Plooy of the Office of the Presidency asking whether she would agree to a nomination to the SABC Board. So, why didn't she tell us that she knew precisely who this particular Mr Du Plooy is? Because hon members, that would appear that she recklessly chose to mislead the Committee.
This is why the IFP believes that there is serious doubt as to her integrity. Surely given the facts to hand, she cannot be honoured by a statutory appointment to the SABC Board - approved by the President of the Republic - until this hon House appoints the committees as requested and investigate her conduct. Thank you.