Tourism continues to suffer as R2.9 billion Suikersbosrand Nature Reserve is in a state of disrepair

The Suikerbosrand Nature Reserve at some point in the past was functional and attracted tourists. It was valued at R2,9 billion in 2009.

After years of missteps and mismanagement by the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, the reserve today has no tourism activity besides a few day visitors.

Failed projects to install water pipelines managed by the Department of Infrastructure Development resulted in the reserve closing its doors because of the fire risk. At some point, without water, the reserve opened its doors again and the risk of fire seemed to fall off the table.

Other bulk services such as electricity and sewerage are also problematic in terms of deteriorating infrastructure. The total estimated cost of restoring the bulk services is estimated at approximately R117 million.

Another risk to the future of this reserve as a tourist attraction is the poor security situation that exists. The fences are often damaged or stolen, the animals are sometimes poached, and all the while the performance of the security company hired to protect the reserve is questioned. Maybe some lessons could be learned from the Kruger National Park as to how to apply resources to protect visitors and wildlife.

The Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, which is responsible for the reserves, has admitted that it does not have the expertise to encourage and manage tourism in Gauteng. Instead, they have employed a private transaction advisor to make recommendations as to how to commercialise the property. They estimate that a further R90 million would be required to attract a private partner via a Public Private Partnership.

When it was suggested that because of a lack of expertise, in order not to throw good money after bad, the reserve should be sold off to the private sector, members of the ruling party objected to the DA’s proposal.

There is a price to pay for a lack of expertise and competence. It is most unfortunate that the taxpayers of Gauteng are the ones to pay the premium for the government’s inability to manage professionally.

 

How Gauteng subsistence farmers are paying for the SAA bailout

The Democratic Alliance (DA) in Gauteng has learnt that critical funding is being taken away from the Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development in order to fund the bailout of SAA.

This information was revealed in a presentation from Parliament to the Gauteng Provincial Legislature on the Division of Revenue Amendment Bill.

The following conditional grants will be affected:

• Comprehensive Agricultural Support Programme Grant
• Ilima/Letsema Project
• Land Care Programme Grant: Poverty Relief and Infrastructure Grant

According to the presentation, reductions amounting to R1.3 billion have been made in support of the R10.5 billion required for SAA in terms of the Business Rescue Plan. Reductions in provincial conditional grants are made proportionately across provinces.

The Land Care Programme Grant: Poverty Relief and Infrastructure Grant are intended for a favourable and supportive agricultural services environment for the farming community, in particular subsistence and smallholder farmers within strategically identified grain, livestock and horticulture production areas.

The Ilima/Letsema Project provides assistance to vulnerable South African communities to achieve an increase in agricultural production within strategically identified grain, livestock, horticulture and aquaculture production areas.

The Comprehensive Agricultural Support Programme Grant provides effective support services, and promotes and facilitates agriculture development by targeting beneficiaries of land reform, restitution and redistribution, and other black producers who have acquired land through private means and are engaged in value-adding enterprises domestically, or involved in export.

These programmes will have their funding cut by the following amounts:

• Comprehensive Agricultural Support Programme Grant – a reduction of R911 000 from R82.6 million to R81.7 million for 2020/21;
• Ilima/Letsema Project Grant – a reduction of R306 000 from R25.7 million to R25.4 million for 2020/21;
• Land Care Programme Grant: Poverty Relief and Infrastructure Grant – a reduction of R57 000 from R4.8 million to R4.7 million for 2020/21;

It is worrying that subsistence farmers will now have to forego the opportunity to acquire piggery or poultry structures, plant crops and contributions to sustainable land care to the tune of nearly R1.4 million rand. This is a slap in the face of Gauteng farmers who are already struggling with climate change, food insecurity, crime and inequality.

These farmers will in all likelihood never be able to afford a plane ticket, yet they are helping to bail out SAA. It is clear that government is not thinking about how these bailouts will affect the lives of the poor and the vulnerable is South Africa- their lives are made a little harder so that the ANC can fund their vanity projects.

Farming contributes enormously to the GDP and there is a need to ensure that farmers are provided with the necessary funding they deserve. Choosing SAA over farming clearly means that the ANC government cares little about growing a sustainable economy.

I will be tabling further questions in the Gauteng Provincial Legislature to ascertain exactly how government will be helping farmers considering the reduced funding in conditional grants.

Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development neglects rural farmers’ safety

The Democratic Alliance (DA) in Gauteng has learnt that the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development has no plans in place to assist farmers with safety in rural areas.

This was revealed to me by the MEC for Agriculture and Rural Development, Winifred Mosupyoe, in a reply to my written questions tabled in the Gauteng Provincial Legislature (GPL).

According to the MEC, the department is not directly responsible for rural safety, and that it is a joint responsibility of the Department of Community Safety and the South African Police Service (SAPS).

Furthermore, the MEC said the department does not have any intention to amend its extension services, so that they can assist the agriculture sector with rural safety and technology innovation around rural safety. In addition, the extension and advisory service officials are not trained on matters of safety and crime issues.

It is disappointing that this department which has a core mandate of ensuring the growth of agriculture and rural development in this province cares little about the safety of its key stakeholders, namely farmers.

Despite the fact that its officials are not trained to deal with matters of safety and crime, this department must have a focus on the critical issue of rural safety which has a direct impact on the security of food supply in our province.

SAPS and the Department of Community Safety won’t be able to understand the safety requirements of the farmers without the assistance of the department that has a responsibility to cater for the needs of farmers.

Where we govern in the Western Cape, the provincial Department of Agriculture has a plan for ensuring rural safety. It is engaging with district municipalities regarding their safety plans with a view to funding projects that focus on innovation, partnerships and technology yet in Gauteng not much has been done in these areas.

The same applies in the DA-led Midvaal Municipality, which has procured 25 thermal FLIR Handheld Cameras that were distributed to farmers to assist with rural safety. One control room has been made available to assist with radio communications to all Community CPFs, Neighbourhood Watches, community forums and Farmers’ Associations. 150 surveillance cameras are being monitored, and 2000 community members have been trained and equipped to assist in night patrols. Midvaal also supports 250 CPFs, 80 farm watches and over 1000 members of the fire protection association.

We call on MEC Mosupyoe to do things differently by implementing what the DA is doing where we govern in order to ensure rural safety.  We also urge South Africans to sign our petition: https://petitions.da.org.za/p/ruralcommunities

GDARD fails to create work opportunities

The Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development only managed to create 188 out of the targeted 675 work opportunities for the first quarter of the 2019/2020 financial year.

This was revealed in the department’s first quarterly report for the 2019/2020 financial year. These jobs were supposed to be created through the Tshepo 1 Million programme.

According to the report, the target set was based on the previous financial year’s plans of executing the Tshepo 1 Million programme through a tender process. But this was subsequently cancelled due to the shifting of funds later in the financial year.

This meant that no budget was set aside for the creation of sustainable job opportunities for youth, women, persons with disabilities and beneficiaries of military veterans.

This programme is critical as it plays an important role in contributing towards economic transformation in the province.

The department will now be integrating this programme with the BKB and green jobs programmes as no separate budget has been allocated for the Tshepo 1 Million programme for this year.

I will be closely monitoring this project to ensure that the department does indeed meet all the targets set in terms of job creation.

Ramaphosa ignores Esidimeni victims

The Democratic Alliance notes that ANC president Cyril Ramaphosa made no reference in his Manifesto speech on Saturday to the Life Esidimeni tragedy even though many victims have still not received the promised compensation.

Ramaphosa steered clear of acknowledging and apologizing for what has been described as the worst human rights abuse since apartheid, with 144 deaths of the most vulnerable people in our society.

Recompense for the tragedy is still incomplete as there are delays in paying about 200 victims monetary compensation as determined by Justice Dikgang Moseneke’s arbitration award.

Furthermore, 21 former Esidimeni patients are still missing, many of whom are probably dead in an unmarked grave.

The ongoing tragedy is that mental health patients in Gauteng and other provinces continue to receive sub-standard care in poor facilities, and waiting lists are long.

It is yet another example of the failing ANC’s dire failure to provide quality health care even as doubtful promises are made to improve in future.

The failing ANC is killing our people. The power to bring change and build One South Africa for All that ensures that all our people are treated with dignity lies in the hands of voters.

Rooipoort Landfill site a toxic shock, DA lays charges

Despite assurances to the Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (GDARD) the Rooipoort landfill site in Merafong has not been upgraded by the Merafong Municipality to comply with the license it was granted.

The DA will lay a charge with the Green Scorpions against Merafong Acting Municipal Manager, Romeo Mohaudi in terms of Section 68 of the National Environmental Management Waste Act.

In April this year, GDARD audited the site and found the following non-compliance issues:

  • Violation of the Occupational Health and Safety Act;
    • No qualified staff or supervision at the site;
    • No security;
    • Non-functioning weighbridge;
    • Ponding of water due to no storm water diversion methods;
    • Squatting of reclaimers on site;
    • No fence around the site; and
    • No structure to negate environmental damage.

Yesterday, the DA visited the site and found that none of the above issues have been attended to by the municipality.

Click here, here, and here to view photos.

None of the waste at the site is portioned off into structures that would decrease environmental damage. Fires burn sporadically across the site – some lit by criminals who mix in with reclaimers to strip stolen copper cables.

There are now more than 200 people living on the site who are exposed to stagnant water, toxic fumes and unhealthy living conditions.

GDARD must urgently intervene in this situation as the impact on human life and the environment is dire.

Gauteng Service Delivery Dealt A Blow By Slow Release Of Funds

Gauteng Provincial Government – National Treasury

Five major Gauteng Provincial Government (GPG) departments have yet to receive their allotted budget for the second quarter of this financial year due to the slow transfer of funds from National Treasury.

The departments of Roads and Transport, Community Safety, Agriculture and Rural Development, E-Government and Infrastructure Development, which should by now have received 50% or more of their equitable share from National Treasury are all low in the 40% region.

Of notable concern is the department of E-Governance, which to date has only received 40.8% of its allocated funding. This department is the nerve centre of government business in Gauteng. If it fails to fulfil its mandate due to financial constraints, it will have dire consequences for the other GPG departments.

Premier David Makhura’s Transformation, Modernisation and Re-Industrialisation Plan

In an effort to restructure the economy of Gauteng, Premier David Makhura’s Transformation, Modernisation and Re-Industrialisation (TMR) plan hinges on departments like Infrastructure and Agriculture for its success. However, without funding, it will be impossible for these departments to make in-roads to address economic growth and job creation.

As the country’s most populace province, it is imperative that these funds are made available to departments as soon as possible so that residents of Gauteng receive the service they deserve.

It is at this stage unclear as to why these funds have yet to be made available.

Premier David Makhura must engage his counterparts in national government to speed up the payment process as he has done with the issues surrounding monies owed to the Gauteng Department of Health.

Province’s Financial Obligations

If the process is delayed due to departments failing to comply with legislation, swift action must be taken against accounting officers in departments.

The DA will continue to ensure that the province’s financial obligations are met and that service delivery is not hampered.

 

 

Media Enquiries:

Adriana Randall MPL

DA Gauteng Shadow MEC on Finance

060 556 4342

DA Debates 2016/17 Gauteng Department Of Agriculture And Rural Development Budget

Speech by: Ina Cilliers MPL

“Modernisation of agricultural budget sorely required”

  • The major concern is that in spite of the strategic imperative of “agriarian reform” and all the “radical” imperatives, the bulk of the budget does not speak to the needs of farmers.
  • Agriculture’s total contribution to the GDP in Gauteng is only 0.5% even though half of all the agro-processing in SA takes place in Gauteng. The department does not have to be happy with this- it suggests that the GDARD is still positioning itself as a social development driver, and not an economic development driver.
  • Your budget should not be spent on food parcels, vegetable gardens and handing out seed packets and garden hoses. Leave that to the department of social development. You should be supporting the individual entrepreneurship of existing farmers, helping them to succeed commercially by tapping in to modern trends.

The full speech can be obtained here.

 

Speech by: Janho Engelbrecht MPL

“Government negligence laying waste to Gauteng’s environment”

  • Across the province developments are being approved in contravention of the National Environmental Management Act.
  • How is it possible that environmentally degrading developments can be approved after receiving the green light from GDARD in the form of EIA’s, when it is in direct contravention of National Legislation?
  • We are busy creating a situation where the legacy we leave our children would be a toxic wasteland all in the name of economic progress, something which, by the way, this administration is not very good at.

The full statement can be obtained here.

 

Media enquiries:

Ina Cilliers MPL

DA Gauteng Spokesperson on Agriculture

060 556 4344

 

Janho Engelbrecht MPL

DA Gauteng Spokesperson on Environmental Affairs

060 556 4343

[Image source]

Gauteng Drought Relief Funding Not Enough To Stop Food Shortages

National Disaster

The R20 million drought relief set aside by Gauteng Finance MEC, Barbara Creecy, in her 2016/17 budget will offer small relief to the agricultural sector in the province when at least a R140 million is required to mitigate the impact the drought has had.

This drought, the worst in 104 years, has had a tremendous impact on the 720 smallholders and 500 commercial farmers in the province that there has been an increase in the number of unemployed farm workers, increased food prices, food insecurity among the poorest of the poor and will see many farmers going out of business.

The DA calls on Gauteng Premier David Makhura and his cabinet to push to have an agricultural drought declared in Gauteng, in support of the declaration of a National Disaster.

Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development

Premier Makhura must also ensure that the drought relief includes support in the commercial sector such as farm worker wage subsidies, providing soft production loans for farmers in severe distress, rigorously introducing conservation agriculture principles in all Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development activities, and providing interest rate subsidies to commercial farmers in distress for the winter planting season.

If these steps are not followed immediately, Gauteng will not only face an agricultural drought, but also a socio-economic drought where physical water shortages will directly affect the health and daily prospects of the people of Gauteng.

 

Media enquiries:

Ina Cilliers MPL

DA Gauteng Spokesperson on Agriculture

060 556 4344

[Image source]

Gauteng Cabinet Report Card: The Cracks Are Showing

Gauteng ANC Premier David Makhura and his cabinet have steered through another year in office, and it is becoming increasingly clear that “Team Gauteng” is not living up to its promise since taking office in June 2014.

Members of the Executive Council (MECs) are embroiled in investigations, entities have gone bankrupt, and programmes are failing, while Gauteng’s people are crying out for more bang for their buck.

While the premier continues to insist the opposite, allegations and counter-allegations abound that the move was designed to protect officials connected to former MEC Lebogang Maile.

MEC Bopape has been appointed MEC for Social Development, while MEC Faith Mazibuko has replaced her.

For the purpose of this report card, the two will be rated on their performance in their former portfolios.

The DA Cabinet scorecard is an analysis based on individual MECs’ grasp of their portfolio demands, leadership skills, approachability, and willingness to appear before oversight committees.

Premier David Makhura
Since the 2014 report card, the Premier’s score has dropped.

Despite being the first to acknowledge ANC arrogance in the implementation of e-tolls, he swiftly back-tracked and succumbed to political pressure from above, and in the process abandoned the people of Gauteng by not scrapping the project in its entirety.

And now, the provincial government has been forced to pay just over R120 million to keep e-tolls afloat.

There are more pressing needs in Gauteng than spending money on failed projects.

His ambitious talk of Transformation, Modernisation and Re-industrialisation of Gauteng are at risk of not getting off the ground during his term of office – evidenced by the fact that there has been an 18% increase in the use of consultants.

Without the necessary skills in his office, the premier will have a hard time to deliver.

His administration has failed to make any visible strides in the revitalisation of the Township economy – which is one of the key components of his ten pillar plan.

Equally the Premier has been vague on employment opportunities supposedly created by his flagship Tshepo 500 000 program.

To date, little tangible evidence of real jobs has been forthcoming, and replies to questions continue to be vague.

While action has been taken regarding alleged corruption in G-Fleet, and a forensic audit has been instituted in the Department of Sports, Heritage, Arts and Culture – only 3% of all government officials investigated for financial wrongdoing have been criminally prosecuted.

In a surprise move, Premier Makhura removed MEC Molebatsi Bopape from Sports, Heritage, Recreation, Arts and Culture (SHRAC), instituting an investigation into her tenure as MEC relating to corruption within the department.

The truth is that the “People’s Premier” who promised an activist government remain long on ambitious promises, but short on delivery.

Score: 6/10
Finance – MEC Barbara Creecy
During the past year, MEC Creecy has appeared to immerse herself in ICT and now speaks with the confidence of a subject expert.

However, on further probing, one discovers that the confidence lacks the technical detail.

She has had an acting HOD for the last year and only recently had her old Education HOD join her – someone who, despite management experience, also lacks the technical detail on a department completely related to ICT.

The department itself seems to be slowly picking up, meeting some targets and missing others.

The Gauteng Broadband Network is not the silver bullet it promised to be, with many centres not yet connected, and where facilities are connected, they have not switched over from their private service providers.

Problems with SAP upgrades meant that suppliers to government were not paid for a month this year.

The work of the DAV Centre still seems to be shrouded in secrecy despite its costs. So far, all we know is the failed Gauteng Online systems were open source and built by the DAV Centre.

However, the department does seem to be slowly shaping up into something resembling an ICT shared services department, but it still seems to be characterised by internal staff lethargy.

On aspects of accountability, responses to questions are deliberately vague, PAIA applications are frequently declined and avoidance still seems to be the order of the day.

Most alarmingly, officials in the department will not even assist with the most basic of information and won’t entertain entering into correspondence, out of fear of incurring the wrath of the MEC.

Score: 6/10
Social Development – MEC Faith Mazibuko
MEC Mazibuko has failed vulnerable members of society, and hopefully MEC Molebatsi Bopape will attack her new portfolio with vigour.

The Department, in its quarterly reports, do not show proper finances and shortcomings, they only indicate targets and what has been achieved.

The quality of the reports remains shoddy which severely hampers efforts by committee members to perform oversight and hold officials to account.

Many NGOs dependent on government grants are paid late, which compromises their ability to do their work, which is more often the work of the department.

With the rise in unemployment, the department is not doing enough to move people from welfare to working or sustainable livelihoods – especially among women and youth.

As was the case in 2014, there is still no relief and proper plans for people with disabilities, the elderly, and those who struggle with substance abuse.

Equally concerning is that there are no proper plans aimed at capacitating the growing number of non-compliant Early Childhood Development centres in the province.

The MEC has also failed to collect monies owing to the department from other departments and entities.

Score: 4/10
Health – Qedani Mahlangu
This department has shown some improvement in financial management, but still received a qualified report from the Auditor General.

Senior management posts have now been filled, including a competent new Head of Department.

According to the 2014/15 Annual Report, only 86 out of 160 targets were met (54%), and there has been little improvement in meeting targets this year.

Only one hospital (Steve Biko Academic) and only one clinic meet the required high standards set by the national health department.

Medico-legal claims now exceed R10 billion, and the department will pay about R200 million this year in court-ordered payments for hospital negligence.

Some building projects are still way beyond schedule, including the Randgate clinic in Randfontein, which was supposed to be completed in July last year, and the psychiatric ward at Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Hospital, which should have been completed four years ago.

Many patients still face long queues and waiting times for operations.

The much-vaunted “turn-around” of this department is very slow and has a long way to go.
Score: 3/10
Education – MEC Panyaza Lesufi
The MEC has done well in terms of school admission. Learners were successfully placed to schools at the beginning of the year, and Gauteng retained the number one position in terms of the 2014 Grade 12 pass rate.

The recognition of the best performing learners from disadvantaged schools by awarding bursaries to the top three is a great initiative.

This year saw the introduction of paperless classrooms as an innovative way to teach and learn, but connectivity and security of these assets remain a concern.

The MEC is open to allow Members of the Legislature to visit schools and is always approachable and ready to intervene where necessary.

The MEC is willing to listen to different views and respond immediately. He regularly conducts oversight visits to schools to see challenges for himself.

However, there are challenges that remain.

The MEC hasn’t dealt with corruption in an unequivocal manner – he made commitments to follow up on cases of corruption, but no follow-ups have been reported.

Overcrowded classrooms and high lerner/teacher ratios in historically disadvantaged schools remain a concern.

The MEC must realign districts and head offices to ensure sustainable support to schools, such as school furniture, sports, nutrition, scholar transport, intervention programmes, teacher development and school renovations.

School infrastructure still needs a proper project management

The department and the MEC at times remain vague at question time, providing unverified information on the number of schools, the supply of tablets, school upgrades, and school closures.

Score: 7/10

Community Safety and Security – MEC Sizakele Nkosi-Malobane
The MEC has done little to curb the continuing high rate of accruals which impacts negatively on the service delivery of the department.

For the past 4 years there have been the same matters of emphasis from the Auditor General which indicates poor financial management – again, the MEC has not taken the initiative to turn the tide and improve the situation.

There is an overall lack of impact on the high levels of crime in Gauteng which affects residents on a daily basis – particularly the marginalised.

The department is not focusing on its constitutional mandate of oversight of the SAPS. This is highlighted by the fact that the majority of SAPS key performance indicators were not met over the past 12 months.

Another failing of the MEC is that even though the she knew the previous HOD was leaving the department prior to April this year, it has taken more than seven months to appoint a new HOD.

Corrupt practice around the logging of overtime is still rife and has not been addressed by the MEC.

Score: 3/10
Cooperative Governance, traditional affairs and human settlements – MEC Jacob Mamabolo

The department has, during the current administration, been unable to administer, roll out or effectively monitor its purpose and function as provided for in the constitution and the Housing Act – which is the provision of housing for the poor, and the establishment, development and maintenance of economically viable communities.

The MEC continues to refuse to implement conditions of court orders, such as the directive to provide accommodation for the residents of the N12 informal settlement in Ekurhuleni.

A commitment was made to carry out a transparent audit of housing lists and the allocation of houses.

To date no information has been received and the MEC has to provide answers in this regard.

The department incurred irregular expenditure of R2,6 billion for the 2014/15 financial year, little political will has been shown to rectify this.

Score: 2.5/10
Economic Development, Environment, Agriculture and Rural Development – MEC Lebogang Maile

Jobs still remain the number one priority for the Province, but the department seems unable or unwilling to set targets in this regard – and escapes having to produce tangible results.

There are many wonderful schemes but not much visible action.

An example would be the Ekurhuleni Aerotropolis, which has been punted for many years, but the sod turning only occurred in the latter half of this year.

Other job creation hubs remain plans on paper or very poorly developed.

The major disappointment of the year was the declared bankruptcy of the Gauteng Enterprise Propeller, with an outstanding debt in unresolved loans of R100 million over the last 10 years.

The MEC did the right thing by placing a moratorium on any further loans but it should never have gotten to this point.

The MEC seems to lack any understanding of the importance of agriculture to job creation in this province

He appears to have little technical knowledge of his portfolio, and knows nothing noteworthy about agriculture and environmental matters.

Agriculture is still not seen as a key job driver and economic sector on its own.

This is evidenced by the results achieved in the annual report which has no impact whatsoever on the province’s economy.

Responses to oversight tools such as oral and written questions are dismal. The MEC reads from a script – he seems not to have an understanding of the answers written for him by departmental staff.

The way the department deals with the environmental impact of specifically water losses and mine tailings in the province is shockingly inadequate, and officials are happy to pass the buck on to the Blue Scorpions and Department of Mineral Resources, without playing any significant role.

The impact of the drought on the agricultural sector in Gauteng was expected in June this year but no contingency plans were put in place

MEC Maile clearly has no vision for Gauteng’s economic future and no plans to fix anything.

Score: 3.5/10

 

Infrastructure Development – MEC Nandi Mayathula-Khoza
The Department of Infrastructure Development continues to perform poorly.

It is unable to complete, on average, 40% of its annual targets. The result is that projects are not completed on time and within budget.

MEC Mayathula-Khoza is not prepared to publicly admit to the department’s poor performance, and aided and abetted by the Premier, spins and whitewashes reports of dysfunctionality.

During the financial year under review, the MEC allowed conditions of no consequences for poor performance to flourish.

Management failures on her watch include underspending on projects of client departments, inability to recruit professional staff and a lack of project management expertise.
Score: 4/10
Roads and Transport – MEC Ismail Vadi
MEC Ismail Vadi started out his tenure in office promisingly.

However, during the past 12 months the department has failed to live up to the grand expectations set by the MEC.

MEC Vadi is often vague and evasive about projects and programmes that are run by the department. He is non-committal and open-ended when answering pertinent questions in the house.

Once frank about e-tolls, the MEC has followed Premier Makhura and has now become complicit in foisting this unjust system on the citizens of Gauteng.

G-Fleet, the department’s vehicle rental entity, has gone from bad to worse under the MEC’s tenure, and is the worst performing entity in the Gauteng Provincial Government.
Score: 5/10
Sports, Heritage Recreation, Arts and Culture – MEC Molebatsi Bopape

Premier Makhura’s dissatisfaction with MEC Bopape’s performance says it all, but it is doubtful whether MEC Mazibuko, with her poor track record over the years, will have any positive impact on the department.

The Department’s annual performance has regressed from last year, with more findings being made by the Auditor General. Poor planning has resulted in targets constantly being reprioritised throughout the year.

The department failed to complete all planned library construction in the 2014/15 financial year, nor did it manage to maintain functioning community sports/creative hubs.

Poor financial controls have seen the department incur irregular expenditure to the tune of R88.4 million with one tender alone amounting to R68 million.

Instead of aligning the department’s priorities to deliver services, MEC Bopape rather enjoyed utilising the department’s budget to host events and take lavish trips overseas.

Score: 2/10
The Gauteng Cabinet report card shows how after its first full year in office, the public is looking for answers and want to see results.

By now Premier Makhura has certainly realised that grand plans and announcements require follow through.

While he and his executive are quick to announce grand schemes, a lack of political willpower, and in some instances, technical know-how, keeps Gauteng’s residents in the lurch.

As long as the premier does not walk his activist government talk, his promise of a Gauteng government that delivers will remain distant if he does not steer his executive in that direction.

Media enquiries:
John Moodey MPL
DA Gauteng Provincial Leader
082 960 3843
 
Willie Venter
Director: Communications and research
DA Gauteng
060 963 8260

[Image source]