The Democratic Alliance (DA) welcomes the action taken by Transnet against two senior security managers who have been dismissed for their role in tender irregularities at the parastatal.
The managers were reportedly dismissed for manipulating a tender worth R55 million awarded to General Nyanda Security Risk Advisory Services (GNS), a company in which Communications Minister Siphiwe Nyanda is reported to have a 50 percent stake.
Minister Nyanda has in the past also strongly voiced his support for Transnet Freight Rail CEO Siyabonga Gama who was suspended last year due to discrepancies in the granting of the very same security tender to GNS in November 2007.
It is logical, then, to question the degree to which Minister Nyanda - as a significant share holder - was aware that his company had tendered for these contracts, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the degree to which, if any, the Minister was privy to information or able to use his position in government to influence that decision. Likewise, it is reasonable to assume, in an environment where tenders are regularly manipulated to benefit those connected to the ruling party, to enquire why it is that these two people rigged this particular tender in favour of Minister Nyanda's company, as opposed to any other.
And so two things are required: First, Minister Nyanda, as a senior public official, needs to satisfy the public that he played no part in this episode; second Transnet, which has done the right thing in acting so decisively on this matter, needs to investigate the purpose behind this scheme: tender manipulation is designed to secure benefits for an undeserving party - which party was this and what benefits were promised? To this end, the DA will be requesting the chairperson of the portfolio committee to call Transnet before it, to explain in full the details of any investigation it has carried out and what further steps it is taking in this regard.
Transnet must be commended for taking action against the managers involved in corrupt activities, but the dismissals, announced yesterday, can not be allowed to divert attention away from the involvement of those at the top.
The parastatal also initially refused to divulge the details of its contracted security companies. A reply to a DA parliamentary question on the level of cable theft to Transnet last year - specifically asking which security companies have been tasked with protecting Transnet's cable assets, reads as follows:
"The protection of copper cables is outsourced in order to enhance the existing physical conventional guarding and other security measures in place. Names of companies that are providing security services at Transnet cannot be made public for commercial reasons and to protect the companies involved and their modus operandi from the crime syndicates which operate in South Africa."
Surprisingly, when the exact same question was posed to Eskom, the parastatal did in fact answer the question - surely there is no difference between the type of criminal organisation involved with cable theft (and therefore risks involved in divulging information) from Eskom or Transnet? Why then the incongruity? This is especially problematic since the Minister of Public Enterprises, Barbara Hogan, was responsible for answering both sets of questions in one document (Reply available on request).
The reason for the refusal is clear; Transnet and Hogan attempted to hide the fact that there were tender irregularities going on - and now that they have confirmed that it did indeed take place, the obvious step is to investigate the parties involved.
Statement by Pieter van Dalen, MP Democratic Alliance deputy shadow minister of public enterprises, March 18 2010
Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter
