Madam Chair, like other parties, the National Democratic Convention, Nadeco, sees the similarity between the circumstances of the two institutions that seek additional funding. The similarity concerns their viability, and therefore whether the additional appropriations are justifiable.
Concerning Denel, with no real competitive advantage in a tough international market, it has found it difficult to succeed. The arms-deal- related work gave it something like a reprieve, but this is insufficient and unlikely to last. We note that British Aerospace recently decided against buying a substantial share of Denel pertaining to questions of commercial viability, and we therefore ask: "Is Denel's latest turnaround plan sound enough to justify an additional R2 billion?"
Then there is the Road Accident Fund, which has long been problematic. There have been too many failed rescue plans to remember over this period. Seemingly, a lack of management and an inability to do what it takes to make the fund viable remain. Solutions concerning the scope, nature and integrity of the claims allowed against the fund have yet to be introduced. So, here too, are we just pouring money into a bottomless pit?
Nadeco, however, supports the appropriations on the understanding that the Ministers for Public Enterprise and of Transport will now be taking a far more rigorous approach towards dealing with the problems of these two institutions.