Voorsitter, met die opening van die Parlement vanjaar het president Zuma nie na die Eskom-krisis verwys nie. Die Minister van Finansies het ook nie met die nasionale begrotingstoespraak na die Eskom- krisis verwys nie. Gelukkig spreek die portefeuljekomitee se verslag sy kommer uit oor die swak finansile toestand en die onderbenutting van infrastruktuur van sekere openbare entiteite wat die afgelope vier jaar R240 miljard uit die belastingbetaler ontvang het.
Minister, of dit nou gekry is of dit nou geborg is, ons kan dit nie met mooi woorde wegwens nie. Dit word ook waardeer dat u, Minister, vanjaar aangekondig het dat daar oor openbare ondernemings se bestaan herbesin moet word. Ons is bly dat u nou uiteindelik luister wat die DA al sedert 2004 gevra het en dat u nou uiteindelik DA-beleid verkondig.
Minister, waaroor u egter tot en met vandag nog nooit gepraat het nie, is die ho vergoedingspakkette van die direksie en bestuurslede van openbare ondernemings, waarna u vandag verwys het. Kom ons kyk byvoorbeeld na die omstrede SAL. Mnr Khaya Nqula, voormalige hoof uitvoerende beampte van SAL, het met R8 miljoen geloop. Mnr Coleman Andrews, voormalige hoof uitvoerende beampte, is met R232 miljoen weg. [Tussenwerpsels.]
Voorsitter, in Transnet se geval het net vier direksielede alleen R68 miljoen huis toe geneem. 'n Groot deel daarvan was bonusse wat gebaseer was op die verbetering van Transnet se balansstaat. Om dit reg te kry, het Transnet onder meer sy finansile verpligting teenoor sy pensionarisse van die tweede vastevoordeelpensioenfonds verminder.
Hierdie 80 000 pensioenfondslede kry slegs 'n verhoging van 2% per jaar in pensioen en 'n mediese bydrae van slegs R213 per maand. Hierdie pensioenfondslede - swart, bruin en wit - wat Transnet se infrastruktuur oor jare opgebou het, veg nou vir oorlewing, terwyl Transnet se direksielede in weelde leef. Voorsitter, dit is die moeder van alle skandes!
Wat Eskom betref, ontvang die topbestuur nou R56 miljoen se bonusaandele, terwyl Eskom Suid-Afrika se ramp van die eeu is en die regering se Gear- strategie en die Asgisa-groeiprogram van die tafel afgevee het. Eskom het allerlei verskonings aangebied vir sy verval. Byvoorbeeld, in Januarie 2008 het Eskom die ho vlak van energieverbruik as die rede vir die kragonderbrekings uitgelig. In November 2009 het Eskom die skuld op 'n bestuursprobleem gepak toe hulle van mnr Maroga ontslae geraak het. In Januarie 2010 het Eskom aan die Parlement vertel dat laekwaliteit steenkool die problem is. Tog het steenkoolmyne op dieselfde vergadering in die Parlement daarop gewys dat Eskom die Parlement mislei het.
Nou s Eskom dat die privaatsektor traag is om die elektrisiteitsmark te betree, maar dit is Eskom wat sloer om kontrakte aan die maatskappye te voorsien. Verder het Eskom ook valse redes aangevoer vir sy dilemma, soos byvoorbeeld dat die krisis as gevolg van nat weer met nat steenkool ontstaan het, maar waar is Eskom se risikobestuur van opberging dan?
Eskom s ook dat Nersa nie tariefverhogings in 2000 wou toestaan nie, maar hoekom het Eskom tot met 2008 nie daarop aangedring nie? Verder beweer Eskom dat die ekonomie vinniger gegroei het as wat hulle gedink het, maar tog erken Eskom dat hy sedert 2000 geweet het dat kragonderbrekings in 2008 sal voorkom. Nou s Eskom dat lae kragpryse vanaf 2000 die oorsaak is, maar Eskom het sedert 2000 en die begin van die eeu stewige winste getoon wat hy in investering kon terugploeg het.
Voorsitter, die werklike rede vir Eskom se verval is die volgende: Eerstens, die ANC-regering se monopolistiese beleid tot 2009 het Eskom, as die alleenkoper en verspreider van krag, die privaatsektor uit die mark gehou. Gelukkig het president Zuma, net soos minister Hogan, ook weer na die DA-beleid geluister om daarvan af te sien en het president Zuma aangekondig dat Eskom voortaan nie meer die koper van krag deur private produsente sal wees nie.
Tweedens, die regering se Witskrif oor Energie het in 1998 teen die uitbreiding van Eskom besluit. President Mbeki het ons voorheen om verskoning gevra daarvoor. Derdens, Nersa was sedert 2000 'n slapende organisasie. Nersa is veronderstel om die energiebronne te moniteer en te reguleer maar waar was Nersa die afgelope sewe jaar?
Vierdens, die regering is 'n onbevoegde eienaar van staatsondernemings. Daar was geen beplanning deur die Kabinet vir die instandhouding van Eskom nie en in 2001 het die Kabinet Eskom amptelik verbied om meer kragsentrales te bou. Voorsitter, wat 'n ironie. In daardie tyd het die ANC-regering nie vir Eskom geld gegee nie en noudat Eskom in die internasionale Wreldbank 'n lening bekom het, nou moet ons hoor dat die ANC deur Chancellor House Eskom se geld gaan vat.
Vyfdens, daar is tot nou toe 'n tekort aan kapasiteit by die staat as die alleen-aandeelhouer om met die privaatsektor te kontrakteer. Sesdens, ons sien onbevoedgde leierskap by die raad van Eskom wat nie sy aandeelhouer, naamlik die staat, se belange beskerm nie. Daar word ook nie voldoende geskoolde arbeid aangestel nie en vir nege jaar lank is daar swak gekommunikeer met die verbruikers oor die nood om nuwe kragsentrales te bou.
Voorsitter, Eskom se finansile bestuur is net so power. Eskom is besig om drie nuwe kragsentrales te bou: Medupi in Limpopo, Kusile in Mpumalanga en Ngula in die Drakensberg. Twee jaar gelede was Kusile se kostebeplanning R80 miljard. Nou is dit skielik R142 miljard, terwyl die internasionale boukoste norm vir die opwekkingsvermo van steenkoolkragsentrales $1 600 per kilowatt beloop. Kusile behoort dus net R58 miljard te kos.
Minister, waar gaan al die ander miljarde rande heen? Is hier grootskaalse korrupsie aan die gang? Hoekom ken Eskom kontrakte vir Kusile toe sonder om tenders te vra, soos wat voor Nersa getuig is? Dit sal daartoe lei dat Eskom kan vergeet om 'n beplande 50% van Kusile aan die privaatsektor te verkoop. Daar sal nie belangstelling in korrupsie wees nie. Eskom kan nie met openbare geld vertrou word nie en daarom het die DA alreeds lankal gevra dat 'n forensiese ondersoek na Eskom se geldsake gedoen word.
Wat die potensiaal van Eskom betref, tans lewer die 22 operasionele kragsentrales 31 000 MW met 'n 6 000 MW reserwe. Eskom voorspel dat die winter en die sokkertoernooi die verbruik tot 37 000 MW sal verhoog. Die vraag is of daar nog steeds 'n reserwe gaan wees? Verder verkondig die Departement van Kommunikasie in sy dokument, Vuk'uzenzele van Januarie 2010, dat Medupi, wat 4 800 MW sal produseer, binne twee jaar voltooi sal wees. Minister, dit sal nie gebeur nie. Ek was op 12 Maart vanjaar by die Medupi-perseel in Lephalale en het daar met kontrakteurs gepraat. Ek het ook foto's geneem en ek gee graag, Minister, vir u 'n afskrif van hierdie foto's. Al wat ek daar gesien het, was 'n klomp hyskrane en 'n paar pilare wat gebou is.
Volgens die kontrakteurs sal slegs een van die stoomketels moontlik oor twee jaar in werking kom, terwyl die Medupi-kragsentrale nog baie langer as vyf jaar sal neem om gefinaliseer te word. Die rede daarvoor is omdat fondasies eers verkeerd gegooi was en dat daar nou voortdurende stakings van werkers is.
Minister, is u daarvan bewus dat werkers byna elke tweede of derde dag tot twaalfuur in die middag staak? En dat werkers dan nie verder werk nie omdat die wette van die regering van hierdie land waarvan u deel is, Minister, bepaal dat daar 'n vier uur afkoelperiode moet verloop. So, teen vieruur die middag het hulle nog nie gewerk nie en dan is die werksdag verby.
Minister, dit is tyd dat u in u parlementre motor klim en Medupi gaan besoek en met kontrakteurs praat. En u moet dit nie doen met afsprake nie, u moet ook nie 'n afspraak met Eskom maak nie, want dan word matte vir u uitgerol en gaan u ge-'sweet-talk' word. Voorsitter, die DA s dat Eskom 'n beleidsraamwerk vir die bepaling van tariefverhogings moet saamstel. Eskom se bestaande aannames vir tariefverhogings is bloot op spekulasies van alternatiewe energiebronne en privaatsektor belangstelling gebaseer. Eskom moet ook 'n finansieringsmodel kry om groei in Eskom te stimuleer. Prysstygings kan nie uitgawes voortdurend finansier nie. Eskom moet ook 'n tenderbeleid instel om te voorkom dat kontrakte sonder tenders toegestaan word en dat ongeveer 67 van sy kontrakte aan klein onvemoende kontrakteurs toegestaan word wat nie oor kapasiteit beskik nie.
Verder s die DA ook dat elektrisiteitsprysverhogings onvermydelik is. Dis 'n gegewe. Ons moet dit aanvaar. Eerstens is dit nodig om die privaatsektor te lok en tweedens om Eskom in 'n finansile onafhanklike bedryfbare posisie te plaas teenoor die huidige 2% opbrengs in verhouding tot die waarde van Eskom se bates. Die DA maan egter dat prysverhogings nie buitensporig inflasionisties moet wees nie.
Voorsitter, Eskom benodig R460 miljard oor vyf jaar vir sy investeringsprogram. Die DA s dat die staat as aandeelhouer verantwoordelikheid moet aanvaar om stygende kragtariewe te subsidieer. Dit kan gedoen word deur langtermyn internasionale lenings as teenvoeter van te ho kragprysstygings te waarborg, binne die staat se fiskale vermo natuurlik.
Tweedens kan die staat belastingaansporings aan verbruikers toestaan vir die verbruik van alternatiewe energiebronne en vir die gebruik van arbeidsintensiewe in plaas van kapitaal-elektrisiteitsintensiewe produksieprosesse. Derdens is ons ook van mening dat verbruikers se aankoop en aanbringkoste van alternatiewe energiebronne teen belasting afgeskryf behoort te word om besparing van Eskom-krag te bevorder.
Mnr Tito Mboweni, voormalige president van die Reserwebank, het 'n eenmalige belastingverhoging voorgestel om geld vir Eskom te bekom. Die DA kan nie daarmee saamstem nie omdat die las sou neerkom op onder andere net 8% individuele belastingbetalers wat die oorgrote individuele belasting betaal. Korporatiewe belastingverhoging sal ook buitelandse beleggings ontmoedig en hul produksie inkort en werkloosheid verhoog.
Tans is daar te min betalers van elektrisiteit en te veel parasiete wat help om krag te verbruik. Voorsitter, hier praat ons van mense wat krag deur middel van onwettige konneksies steel. Steel is steel: amptenare wat Eskom se geld steel deur wanadministrasie van voorafbetaalde kragstelsels en sekere sektore in die mynbou wat krag tot nou toe teen 'n baie lae tarief bekom het.
Kragdiefstal en ondoeltreffende kragverbruik is tans gelyk aan die uitset van twee kragsentrales van 7 200 MW. Mnr Maboe Mphaka, senior bestuurder by Eskom s dat Eskom in sy sentrale verspreidingsarea tot 30% krag as gevolg van residensile kragdiefstal verloor. Eskom s ook dat tot 40% van residensile krag in Soweto gesteelde krag is. Volgens munisipaliteite gebruik tot 43 000 informele nedersettings per metropool onwettige kragkonneksies. Verder het Suid-Afrika ook 8 miljoen onwettige immigrante wat op een of ander wyse verbruikers van elektrisiteit is.
Al hierdie onwettige verbruikers betaal nie vir Eskom-krag nie en hulle betaal ook nie vir 'n verhoging in Eskom-krag nie. As die DA aan bewind kom, sal ons sorg dat hierdie onwettige kragverbruik gestaak word en dat dit gemoniteer word sodat almal wat krag verbruik ook 'n bydrae maak om dit te genereer.
Eskom kan ook geld bekom deur sy agterstallige munisipale skuld van R174 miljoen by die munisipaliteite in te vorder. Eskom moet ook sy kontrakte met die groot smelters en maatskappye hersien wat elektrisiteit tans teen 'n laer prys bekom as die koste daarvan om dit op te wek.
Voorsitter, die strategiese en administratiewe posisie van Eskom laat ook veel te wense oor. Tans moet Eskom met sy onbevoegde bestuur binne die operasionele raamwerk van ANC-kaderontplooiing funksioneer en dan binne die beleidsraamwerk van die Departement van Minerale Energie aan die Departement van Openbare Ondernemings verslag doen en verder dividende binne die prysraamwerk van Nersa aan die Tesourie betaal, soos deur die ANC se Chancellor House voorgeskryf word.
Eskom is dus vasgevang in 'n 'entangled red-tape struggle'. En om dit nog verder te vererger, dikteer die staat as aandeelhouer strategie aan Eskom. Die staat stel ook direkteure en die voorsitter aan wat nie noodwendig die insig het om 'n industrile onderneming te bestuur nie. Verder beperk die staat ook Eskom se raad tot slegs operasionele bestuur sonder om hul vryheid van besluitneming en implementering te gee.
Daar is 'n moontlikheid dat die Wreldbank, benewens die lening van R28 miljard, ook 'n tweede lening van R19 miljard aan Eskom kan toestaan. Dit sal beteken dat die ANC se Chancellor House dan R1,6 miljard met sy aandele in Hitachi sal bekom. U ontken dit vandag, mev die Minister, maar hoekom openbaar Eskom nie sy kontrakte nie? [Tussenwerpsels.] Hulle wil dit nie eers in die Parlement openbaar nie.
Net soos wat mnr Julius Malema vir president Zuma en adjunkpresident Motlanthe voorskryf en vir hulle s net wat hy wil, net so regeer Chancellor House se Mamatho Netsianda vir mnr Matthews Phosa. [Tussenwerpsels.] Mnr Matthews Phosa s dat die ANC hom uit Hitachi gaan ontrrek, maar Netsianda s dat die ANC dit nie gaan doen nie.
Minister, die ANC moet vir ons s wat hulle van plan is om te doen. Die DA sal egter daarop aandring dat Eskom, wat 'n openbare onderneming is, sy inligting oor sy steenkoolkontrakte en ander kontrakte met Hitachi, asook ooreenkomste met die Wreldbank op sy webwerf openbaar. Ons sal in die Parlement daarop aandring dat hierdie inligting aan die publiek beskikbaar gestel word, want dit is van openbare belang.
Voorsitter, die feit dat die Departement van Openbare Ondernemings nie daarin slaag om die prestasies van openbare ondernemings te moniteer en te verbeter nie, laat die vraag ontstaan of die departement nie eerder moet ontbind nie. Eskom kan dan by die Departement van Minerale en Energie inskakel en Transnet by die Departement van Vervoer om sodoende konflik van beleid uit te skakel. [Tussenwerpsels.]
Die res van die sewe oorblywende openbare ondernemings wat nie ekonomies funksioneer nie kan, in plaas daarvan om bakhand te staan, uitgefaseer en/of gelikwideer word, en die ander wat wel ekonomies onafhanklik funksioneer, kan dan geprivatiseer word.
Ter afsluiting vra die DA, deur die Parlement, weer eens vir die aanwysing van 'n multidissiplinre taakspan bestaande uit lede van politieke partye, die staat, Eskom en die privaatsektor om die oorsake van Suid-Afrika se kragkrisis te evalueer en om dan met voorstelle na minister Manuel se beplanningskomitee te gaan om sodoende 'n bydrae te lewer om die elektrisiteitskrisis te verlig. Ek dank u. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)
[Dr S M VAN DYK: Chairperson, at the opening of Parliament this year President Zuma did not refer to the Eskom crisis. The Minister of Finance did not refer to the Eskom crisis in the national Budget Speech either. Fortunately the portfolio committee's report expresses concern regarding the poor financial state and underutilisation of the infrastructure of certain public entities which over the past four years have received R240 billion from the taxpayer.
Minister, whether that was received or sponsored, we cannot wish it away with fine-sounding words. It is also appreciated that you, Minister, announced this year that the continued existence of public enterprises should be reconsidered. We are pleased that you are finally listening to what the DA has been asking for since 2004 and that you are finally expounding DA policy.
However, Minister, up to and including today what you have never touched on is the soaring remuneration packages of the directorates and board members of public enterprises, to which you have now referred. Let us look at the controversial SAA, for example. Mr Khaya Nqula, former chief executive officer of the SAA, walked off with R8 million. Mr Coleman Andrews, former chief executive officer, left with R232 million. [Interjections.] Chairperson, in the case of Transnet four board members alone took home R68 million. A big part of that comprised bonuses based on the improvement in Transnet's balance sheet. In order to achieve this, Transnet had to, amongst other things, reduce its financial obligations to the pensioners of its second defined benefit fund.
These 80 000 pensioners will now get an increase in their pension of only 2% per year and a medical contribution of only R213 per month. These pension fund members - black, brown and white - who built up Transnet's infrastructure over the years, are now fighting for survival while Transnet's board members are living in luxury. Chairperson, this is the mother of all infamy!
As regards Eskom, top management is now receiving bonus shares worth R56 million while Eskom has become South Africa's disaster of the century, wiping the government's Gear strategy and the Asgisa growth programme off the table.
Eskom has offered all manner of excuses for its decline. For instance, in January 2008 Eskom singled out the high level of energy usage as the cause of the power cuts. In November 2009 Eskom put the blame on a management problem when they got rid of Mr Maroga. In January 2010 Eskom told Parliament that low-grade coal was the problem. Yet at the same meeting at Parliament the coal mines pointed out that Eskom was misleading Parliament.
Now Eskom is saying that the private sector is slow in entering the electricity market, yet it is Eskom which is dawdling with the provision of contracts to these companies. Furthermore, Eskom has also advanced false reasons for its dilemma, such as that the crisis developed because of inclement weather and wet coal, but then where is Eskom's storage risk management?
Eskom has also said that Nersa did not want to grant tariff increases in 2000, but why did Eskom not insist on this right up to 2008? Furthermore, Eskom has claimed that the economy has grown faster than they had anticipated, but still Eskom has admitted that they already knew in 2000 that power cuts would occur in 2008. Now Eskom is saying that low electricity prices since 2000 are the cause, but Eskom has shown substantial profits since 2000 and the start of the century, which it could have ploughed back into investment.
Chairperson, the real reason for Eskom's decline is as follows: Firstly, the ANC government's monopolistic policy until 2009 has kept Eskom in the market as the sole buyer and distributor of electricity and has kept the private sector out. Fortunately President Zuma, just like Minister Hogan, has again heeded DA policy and has abandoned this and President Zuma has announced that in future Eskom will no longer be the buyer of electricity generated by private producers.
Secondly, in 1998 the government's White Paper on Energy decided against the expansion of Eskom. President Mbeki has already apologised to us for this. Thirdly, since 2000 Nersa has been a lethargic organisation. Nersa is supposed to monitor and regulate energy resources, but where has Nersa been over the past seven years?
Fourthly, the government is an incompetent owner of state enterprises. There was no planning by Cabinet regarding Eskom's maintenance and in 2001 Cabinet officially prohibited Eskom from building further power stations. Chairperson, what an irony. At that time the ANC government did not give Eskom money and now that Eskom has acquired a loan through the international World Bank, we are hearing that the ANC will be taking Eskom's money through Chancellor House.
Fifthly, up to now the state has displayed a lack of capacity as the sole shareholder to contract with the private sector. Sixthly, we see incompetent leadership by the board of Eskom which is not protecting the interests of its shareholder, namely the state. Insufficient skilled labour is being appointed as well and for nine years there was poor communication with the consumers regarding the necessity of building new power stations.
Chairperson, Eskom's financial management is just as poor. Eskom is currently building three new power stations: Medupi in Limpopo, Kusile in Mpumalanga en Ngula in the Drakensberg. Two years ago Kusile's planned cost was R80 billion. Now it is suddenly R142 billion, while the international building cost norm for the generation capacity of coal power stations $1 600 per kilowatt. So Kusile should only cost R58 billion.
Minister, where are all the other billions of rands going? Is large-scale corruption taking place here? Why is Eskom allocating contracts for Kusile without asking for tenders, as has been testified before Nersa? This will mean that Eskom having can forget about selling a planned 50% of Kusile to the private sector. There will be no interest in corruption. Eskom cannot be trusted with public money, which is why the DA asked long ago for a forensic investigation into Eskom's financial affairs.
As regards Eskom's potential, the 22 operational power stations are at present delivering 31 000 MW with a 6 000 MW reserve. Eskom predicts that the winter and the soccer tournament will increase consumption to 37 000 MW. The question is whether there will still be a reserve.
Furthermore, the Department of Communication has stated in its document, Vukuzenzele of January 2010, that Medupi, which will produce 4 800 MW, will be completed within two years. Minister, this will not happen. I was at the Medupi site in Lephalale on 12 March of this year and I spoke to some of the contractors. I also took some photos, Minister, and I would like to give you copies of these photos. The only thing I could see there was a bunch of cranes and a few pillars that had been built.
According to these contractors only one of the steam kettles will possibly be operational in two years' time, while the Medupi power station will take much longer than five years to be completed. The reason for this is that the foundations were first cast incorrectly and that there are now ongoing strikes by workers.
Minister, are you aware that workers are striking until 12 noon almost every second or third day? The workers do not then go back to work because the laws of the government of this country, of which you are a part, Minister, provide that there must be a four-hour cooling off period. So, by four o'clock in the afternoon they have not worked yet and by then the workday has passed.
Minister, it is time you got into your parliamentary vehicle and visited Medupi and spoke to the contractors. And you should not do this by way of an appointment, and don't make an appointment with Eskom either, because then the red carpet will be rolled out for you and you will be sweet talked.
Chairperson, the DA is saying that Eskom should put together a policy framework for fixing tariff increases. Eskom's current assumptions for tariff increases are based purely on speculation regarding alternative energy sources and private sector interest. Eskom should also acquire a financing model in order to stimulate growth within Eskom. Price increases cannot keep on financing expenditure. Eskom should also establish a tender policy to prevent contracts from being awarded without a tender and about 67 of its contracts being awarded to small, financially insecure contractors that lack capacity.
The DA also believes that electricity price increases are inevitable. That is a given. We must accept it. Firstly, it is necessary to attract the private sector and, secondly, to place Eskom in a financially independent, manageable position as opposed to the current 2% revenue in relation to the value of Eskom's assets. However, the DA is warning that price increases should not be excessively inflationary.
Chairperson, Eskom requires R460 billion over five years for its investment programme. The DA is saying that the state as shareholder should accept responsibility for subsidising rising electricity tariffs. This can be done, within the state's fiscal abilities, of course, by guaranteeing long- term international loans as a counter to electricity price increases that are too high.
Secondly, the state can allocate tax incentives to consumers who utilise alternative energy sources and for the use of labour-intensive production processes instead of capital electricity-intensive ones. Thirdly, we are also of the opinion that consumers' acquisition and installation costs of alternative energy sources ought to be written off against tax in order to promote savings of Eskom power.
Mr Tito Mboweni, former governor of the Reserve Bank, proposed a one-off tax increase to obtain money for Eskom. The DA cannot agree to this because the burden would rest, inter alia, on only 8% of individual taxpayers who are paying the greater part of individual tax. Corporate tax increases would also discourage foreign investors and curtail their production while increasing unemployment.
At present too few people are paying for electricity and too many parasites are helping to consume electricity. Chairperson, we are talking here about people who are stealing electricity through illegal connections. Stealing is stealing: officials who are stealing Eskom's money through maladministration of prepaid electricity systems and certain sectors in the mining industry that up to now have obtained electricity at a very low tariff.
The theft of electricity and inefficient utilisation of electricity are currently equal to the output of two power stations of 7 200 MW. Mr Maboe Mphaka, senior manager at Eskom, says that in its central distribution area Eskom is losing up to 30% of electricity as a result of residential electricity theft. Eskom also says that up to 40% of residential electricity in Soweto is stolen electricity. According to municipalities up to 43 000 informal dwellings per metropole are using illegal electrical connections. Furthermore, South Africa also has 8 million illegal immigrants who in some way or another are consumers of electricity.
All of these illegal consumers are not paying for Eskom power and they don't pay for an increase in Eskom power either. When the DA comes into power, we will see to it that this illegal consumption of electricity is stopped and that it is monitored so that everyone who consumes electricity will also make a contribution towards generating it.
Eskom can also obtain money by collecting its overdue municipal debt of R174 million from the municipalities. Eskom should also revise its contracts with the big smelters and companies that are currently obtaining electricity at a lower price than it costs to generate it.
Chairperson, the strategic and administrative position of Eskom also leaves much to be desired. At present Eskom, with its incompetent management, has to function within the operational framework of ANC cadre deployment and then, within the policy framework of the Department of Energy, report to the Department of Public Enterprises and furthermore pay dividends to Treasury within the framework of Nersa, as prescribed by the ANC's Chancellor House.
Eskom is therefore caught up in an entangled red-tape struggle. And to make matters worse, the state as shareholder is dictating strategy to Eskom. The state also appoints directors and the chairperson, who do not necessarily have the insight to manage an industrial undertaking. Besides that, the state is also restricting Eskom's board to operational management only without giving them the freedom of decision-taking and implementation.
There's a possibility that the World Bank will, apart from the loan of R28 billion, also approve a second loan of R19 billion to Eskom. This would mean that the ANC's Chancellor House would then get R1,6 billion with its shares in Hitachi. You are denying this today, madam Minister, but why doesn't Eskom disclose its contracts? [Interjections.] They don't even want to disclose them in Parliament.
In the same way that Mr Julius Malema is prescribing to President Zuma and Deputy President Motlanthe, and is saying whatever he pleases to them, Chancellor House's Mamatho Netsianda is controlling Mr Matthews Phosa. [Interjections.] Mr Matthews Phosa says that the ANC will be severing its links with Hitachi, but Netsianda says that the ANC will not be doing that.
Minister, the ANC must tell us what they are planning to do. But the DA will insist that Eskom, which is a public enterprise, must disclose on its website all information regarding its coal contracts, and other contracts with Hitachi, as well as its agreements with the World Bank. We will insist in Parliament that this information is made available to the public, because it is in the public interest.
Chairperson, the fact that the Department of Public Enterprises is not succeeding in monitoring and improving the performances of public enterprises brings us to the question as to whether this department should not rather be dissolved. Eskom could then slot in with the Department of Minerals and Energy and Transnet with the Department of Transport, so as to eliminate conflicts regarding policy. [Interjections.]
The remaining seven public enterprises, those that are not functioning economically can then, instead of having to beg, be phased out and/or liquidated, while those that are functioning independently can then be privatised.
In conclusion, the DA is again asking through Parliament for the appointment of a multidisciplinary task team consisting of members of political parties, the state, Eskom and the private sector to evaluate the causes of South Africa's electricity crisis and then to approach Minister Manuel's planning committee with recommendations in order to make a contribution towards relieving the electricity crisis. I thank you. [Applause.]]