SanParks' Tender Irregularities

[iNdlovu]

Mon Feb 06, 2012

As per Sprocs' post in Hot News, has SanParks been transparent enough on this issue to give a Media release on their Forum?

[Lisbeth]

Hi
If this is what you meanit can be found on the home page of the sanparks site
http://www.sanparks.org/about/news/default.php?id=1808

Thanks for that link gijs, but let me post the full response here for our members that don't visit their home page.

Date: 6th February 2012

The South African National Parks (SANParks) notes the article on the Auditor General report in today’s (Sunday, February 05, 2012), City Press with great concern. SANParks refutes the statement made in the article which claims that SANParks awarded tenders worth R3,5 million to its officials or close relatives.

SANParks would like to state that the information stated in the media article contradicts the final report as presented to SANParks by the office of the Auditor General after proper submissions were made to that esteemed office. SANParks will be contacting the office of the Auditor General to ascertain the validity of the statements made in the media report.

The Chief Financial Officer of SANParks, Themba Mabilane, said that the information presented to the office of the Auditor General by SANParks stated that the R3,5 million irregular expenditure as highlighted by the Auditor General report arose due to the organisation entering into contracts with suppliers in the last three years with an accumulated value of R500 000.00 on a three quotations request instead of going on open tender.

SANParks also wishes to put it on record that none of those companies or entities are owned by either SANParks employees nor their close families. Therefore the recent report published in the City Press is incorrect.

SANParks prides itself on producing non-qualified audit reports for the last 10 years, said Mr Mabilane.

Issued by: Reynold “Rey” Thakhuli, General Manager: Media Liaison and Stakeholder Relations
Tel: 012 426 5203 /073 373 4999,
E:mail: rey.thakhuli@sanparks.org

For media enquiries: wanda mkutshulwa, Head of Communications
Tel: 012 426 5170 / 082 908 2692
E-mail: wanda.mkutshulwa@sanparks.org

The key word is owned

I would prefer “no affiliation”

The Chief Financial Officer of SANParks, Themba Mabilane, said that the information presented to the office of the Auditor General by SANParks stated that the R3,5 million irregular expenditure as highlighted by the Auditor General report arose due to the organisation entering into contracts with suppliers in the last three years with an accumulated value of R500 000.00 on a three quotations request instead of going on open tender.

So? The report has to do with nepotism (family connections) not technicalities.

So are they saying that the "esteemed office" of the Auditor General is talking ess eich 1 tee? Hmmm based on past records I know who I believe.

This is the latest headlines....

Mathale's govt must collapse - Cosatu

Now watch what comes of this, speculation yes, but I am almost sure that there will be a connection.

http://mg.co.za/article/2012-02-17-sanp ... ers-probed

Media Release: Statement by board of SANParks on media allegations of corruption

Back to all news
Date: 20th February 2012

The Board of South African National Parks (SANParks) refutes corruption allegations made in the media against senior members of the organisation.

"The Board notes with concern the allegations made in the M&G, purportedly from a disgruntled former employee who had turned into a "self-styled" whistle-blower, as these allegations were appropriately dealt with by the Board of SANParks. The Board cleared the names of those who were accused of inappropriate conduct," said the Chairperson of the Board of SANParks, Mr Kuseni Dlamini.

Dlamini said that in January 2011 SANParks received an inquiry from the office of the Public Protector in Nelspruit which stated that a number of companies contracted to the Kruger National Park (KNP) were alleged to be owned by family, friends or associates of senior officials in the KNP. SANParks is unaware of investigation by the Public Protector referred to in the Mail & Guardian.

SANParks launched an investigation, as a result of this, which led to most of the accused being cleared on the allegations made except for one who was eventually dismissed.

The same allegations were brought to the attention of the office of the Auditor General (AG), with an added allegation against the Chief Executive, Dr David Mabunda. The office of the AG then extended its audit to include these allegations specifically. The findings of the office of the AG were that no evidence in support of these claims could be found. However, the report of the office of the AG indicated some areas in which controls needed to be tightened, to which SANParks obliged.

The Board of SANParks took a decision to appoint the services of a forensic auditing firm in order to satisfy itself that indeed there was no wrong doing on the part of the individuals involved. The appointed auditing firm, SizweNtsalubaGobodo, following a thorough investigation, did not find any evidence of corruption linking the individuals to the companies stated. The report was presented to the Audit and Risk Committee of the Board of SANParks.

"Following the investigation by the AG and the further investigation conducted by the forensic unit of SizweNtsalubaGobodo, the Audit and Risk Committee of the Board and I are confident that there has been no manipulation of tenders in the Kruger National Park”, said Dlamini.

"Because of the strict control measures in place, I am confident that no individual official at SANParks can influence or allocate tenders outside of the Supply Chain Management process”, said Dlamini.

The Board wants to state its support for the CEO and the Executive Management of SANParks, said Dlamini.

Issued by:
Board of South African National Parks (SANParks)

Media enquiries:
wanda mkutshulwa – Head of Communications, South African National Parks (SANParks)
Tel: 012 426 5201 Cell: 082 908 2692 Email: wandam@sanparks.org

I must say, I have never heard of the said Forensic Auditor mentioned above. Maybe a few Google checks on that outfit could be interesting.

Correct!

Sanparks have had their own auditors for years now? :?

The following are from the "Hot News" forum and have been archived together with the comments. If you want your comments to appear here too, please send me a PM.

(6.02.2012)

This makes for some interesting reading. It was "speculated" a while back already.

Johannesburg - More than 190 government officials and 18 close relatives of the officials were awarded state tenders to the value of R113m in the past financial year.

This startling revelation is revealed in Auditor General Terence Nombembe’s national ¬audit outcomes report for 2010/11.

Nombembe told City Press it was becoming more difficult to detect conflicts of interest because government officials ¬rarely shared surnames with their relatives.

The AG’s report reveals:
»R36m in tenders were awarded to 59 officials and 14 close family members of the department of defence;

»R32m worth of tenders were given to seven officials of the SA Revenue Service (Sars);

»A R30m tender was awarded to an official in the National Home Builders Registration Council;

»Home affairs gave tenders worth R9.7m to 48 staff members; and

»The State Information Technology Agency (R4.6m), SANparks (R3.5m), the transport department (R3.1m), the Passenger Rail Agency of SA (R2.3m) and the police (R1.4m) also awarded ¬tenders to officials or their family.

The AG’s report blames political leaders and accounting officers for not ensuring that officials were ¬declaring their financial interests.

Loopholes

In some instances, the report found that departments were not able to determine whether decisions to award tenders were not “unlawfully and improperly” influenced by business interests.

In their defence, government ¬departments said in most instances officials who did business with the state were not senior managers who are required to disclose their financial interests. These “junior” officials were using ¬loopholes that only seniors used to declare their ¬interests.

The defence ministry’s Siphiwe Dlamini said an investigation was under way to determine whether any of the implicated 59 officials had violated policies when they were awarded the tenders.

He said: “The names of these ¬officials, who are not senior ¬managers, are being investigated and if they are found to have violated ¬procurement policies, they will face disciplinary action.”

Dlamini added that most of these ¬officials were in lower ranks that are not required to disclose their financial interests.

The receiver challenged the AG’s findings.

Spokesperson Adrian Lackay said the seven officials had permission to serve on the board of Sars’ customs subsidiary, ¬Clidet, without any remuneration.
- City Press

SANParks tenders probed
FIONA MACLEOD - Feb 17 2012 00:00


The public protector's office is investigating accusations that officials in strategic positions at South African National Parks (SANParks) manipulated tender procedures to benefit friends and family, circumvented supply-chain processes and created artificial disguises to prevent auditors from detecting malpractices.

The Democratic Alliance this week also initiated a parliamentary inquiry into charges by a whistle-blower that SANParks management had squandered millions of rands in dodgy deals.

The self-styled whistle-blower -- a former Kruger Park employee who asked not to be named -- accused SANParks management and the Kruger administration of "milking the national heritage dry through widespread corruption, maladministration and poor corporate governance".

His accusations of nepotism included the awarding of a contract for security services worth at least R25-million to a company that had a close association with SANParks chief executive, David Mabunda.

"This entity had an appalling service delivery record in the Kruger, including poor access control at the entrance gates, collusion with poachers and taking bribes," said the whistle-blower.

"In 2007 some of their security personnel were involved in a robbery within the Kruger. It was also discovered that armed poachers were gaining access into the park through the entrance gates under the watch of its security personnel."

The security company that replaced this outfit in November had close personal links to the Kruger Park's executive manager, Abe Sibiya, and its finance manager, he said.

The company had immediately escalated the tender conditions and charged for vehicles it had not supplied.

The whistle-blower said during the period covered by his "secret investigation", rangers in the Kruger National Park had been subjected to cost-cutting measures and rhino poaching had increased drastically.

The public protector's office is investigating accusations that officials in strategic positions at South African National Parks (SANParks) manipulated tender procedures to benefit friends and family, circumvented supply-chain processes and created artificial disguises to prevent auditors from detecting malpractices.

The Democratic Alliance this week also initiated a parliamentary inquiry into charges by a whistle-blower that SANParks management had squandered millions of rands in dodgy deals.

The self-styled whistle-blower -- a former Kruger Park employee who asked not to be named -- accused SANParks management and the Kruger administration of "milking the national heritage dry through widespread corruption, maladministration and poor corporate governance".

His accusations of nepotism included the awarding of a contract for security services worth at least R25-million to a company that had a close association with SANParks chief executive, David Mabunda.

"This entity had an appalling service delivery record in the Kruger, including poor access control at the entrance gates, collusion with poachers and taking bribes," said the whistle-blower.

"In 2007 some of their security personnel were involved in a robbery within the Kruger. It was also discovered that armed poachers were gaining access into the park through the entrance gates under the watch of its security personnel."

The security company that replaced this outfit in November had close personal links to the Kruger Park's executive manager, Abe Sibiya, and its finance manager, he said.

The company had immediately escalated the tender conditions and charged for vehicles it had not supplied.

The whistle-blower said during the period covered by his "secret investigation", rangers in the Kruger National Park had been subjected to cost-cutting measures and rhino poaching had increased drastically.

CONTINUES BELOW



"In 2008 … management imposed strict restrictions on poaching-combating operations under the pretext of cost curtailment," he said.

Overtime for rangers and protection services was cut to a bare minimum, which meant most rangers could not work extended hours, or on Sundays and public holidays. A travelling threshold of 1 500km a month was also imposed on patrol vehicles for rangers and 2 000km a month for protection services.


He sent his accusations to the public protector's office, but they were leaked to the SANParks chief executive in January 2011 and were quashed, he said. As a result he was fired last June.

Kgalalelo Masibi, spokesperson for the public protector, this week verified that his complaint had been received and said the allegations were being investigated.

National auditor general Terence Nombembe's audit report for 2010-2011 found that tenders worth R3.585-million had been awarded to SANParks employees with an interest in service providers.

"The entire figure does not necessarily constitute irregular expenditure. Only R322 000 of this figure resulted in non-compliance due to officials not declaring their interest," the auditor general's head of communications, Jeanny Morulane, said this week.

The DA's Gareth Morgan said he had submitted 15 questions about procurement practices in the Kruger to the minister of environmental affairs, Edna Molewa. "If even a quarter of the allegations that were raised [by the whistle-blower] are true, it points to widespread and systemic irregularities in the park. The questions will drag the minister directly into this matter and force her to confront the issues," he said.

SANParks's 2010-2011 annual report identified procurement transactions worth R5.8-million as irregular expenditure. It said R5.3-million related to goods and services that were not part of a competitive bidding process.

SANParks's communications head Wanda Mkutshulwa this week denied the whistle-blower's accusations, saying they were fabricated by a disgruntled former manager of safety and security who was fired because of maladministration and dishonesty.

She denied any members of the executive management had interests in material contracts undertaken by SANParks. She also denied that they had personal relationships with any of the contractors mentioned by the whistle-blower.

Auditors SizweNtsaluba Gobodo examined the accusations last year and "they found no wrongdoing on the part of the individuals implicated and the organisation", she said.

Asked whether rangers had been subjected to cost-cutting measures, Mkutshulwa said: "SANParks, like any other organisation, is employing cost-curtailment measures in order to improve efficiencies and financial management."

SANParks had increased the budget for ranger equipment from about R280-million to R450-million.

It had also bought additional vehicles and aircraft, as well as new equipment such as night-vision goggles. Fifty more rangers were appointed in 2010 and this year another 150 would be appointed, to take the number to about 650 in the Kruger Park.


Rhinos killed as rangers strike
Rangers in the Kruger National Park have been on strike for two weeks, demanding that apparent disparities in salaries be cleared up. During this time, eight rhinos have been poached.

The strikers’ representative, Richard Ndlovu, said some general field rangers were earning R26 000 a year, whereas others were earning R120 000. He said rangers who had been working there for decades were earning less than newcomers.

Danger pay was also a problem: the rangers received about R200 a month, Ndlovu said, but other SANParks employees, who only visited the park, got R320 a month while they were there. When the rangers slept in the veld during anti-poaching operations, they received a “sleeping allowance” of R25 a night, but someone from head office would get R288 a night for staying in the safety of a camp such as Lower Sabie. Ndlovu said the absence of the rangers had already led to people sneaking into the park to chop wood and kill impala and other animals. Although the park was in the process of hiring 150 more rangers, a step the department of environmental affairs had encouraged, they would have nobody to train them in field craft. The use of retired rangers was also problematic because they did not have the skills to wage the “modern” battle with poachers, Ndlovu said.

But park spokesperson William Mabasa said the timing of the strike was tantamount to “blackmail”. He said the workers had waited until the week the park launched its new anti-poaching initiative -- involving the army, police and rangers — to go on strike, even though they had been given permission to strike in November. “They calculated it very well,” he said. Mabasa accused Ndlovu of “mixing things up” and “lying”. He said employees received R280 a day each whenever they had to travel from their base of operations. The only other stipend was for rangers and was the sleep-out allowance of R25 a night, he said. The unions working in the park had explained this to the workers, but they decided “to do their own thing”.

Despite the deaths of the rhinos, Mabasa said the new anti-poaching system was working well, but he admitted that it would be “much more effective” if the rangers returned. The new rangers would start training at the end of the month and it would take them six weeks of basic training before they went into the field for experiential learning, Mabasa said. -- Sipho Kings McDermott

[Lisbeth]

Media Release: Statement by board of SANParks on media allegations of corruption

Back to all news
Date: 20th February 2012

The Board of South African National Parks (SANParks) refutes corruption allegations made in the media against senior members of the organisation.

"The Board notes with concern the allegations made in the M&G, purportedly from a disgruntled former employee who had turned into a "self-styled" whistle-blower, as these allegations were appropriately dealt with by the Board of SANParks. The Board cleared the names of those who were accused of inappropriate conduct," said the Chairperson of the Board of SANParks, Mr Kuseni Dlamini.

Dlamini said that in January 2011 SANParks received an inquiry from the office of the Public Protector in Nelspruit which stated that a number of companies contracted to the Kruger National Park (KNP) were alleged to be owned by family, friends or associates of senior officials in the KNP. SANParks is unaware of investigation by the Public Protector referred to in the Mail & Guardian.

SANParks launched an investigation, as a result of this, which led to most of the accused being cleared on the allegations made except for one who was eventually dismissed.

The same allegations were brought to the attention of the office of the Auditor General (AG), with an added allegation against the Chief Executive, Dr David Mabunda. The office of the AG then extended its audit to include these allegations specifically. The findings of the office of the AG were that no evidence in support of these claims could be found. However, the report of the office of the AG indicated some areas in which controls needed to be tightened, to which SANParks obliged.

The Board of SANParks took a decision to appoint the services of a forensic auditing firm in order to satisfy itself that indeed there was no wrong doing on the part of the individuals involved. The appointed auditing firm, SizweNtsalubaGobodo, following a thorough investigation, did not find any evidence of corruption linking the individuals to the companies stated. The report was presented to the Audit and Risk Committee of the Board of SANParks.

"Following the investigation by the AG and the further investigation conducted by the forensic unit of SizweNtsalubaGobodo, the Audit and Risk Committee of the Board and I are confident that there has been no manipulation of tenders in the Kruger National Park”, said Dlamini.

"Because of the strict control measures in place, I am confident that no individual official at SANParks can influence or allocate tenders outside of the Supply Chain Management process”, said Dlamini.

The Board wants to state its support for the CEO and the Executive Management of SANParks, said Dlamini.

Issued by:
Board of South African National Parks (SANParks)

Media enquiries:
wanda mkutshulwa – Head of Communications, South African National Parks (SANParks)
Tel: 012 426 5201 Cell: 082 908 2692 Email: wandam@sanparks.org

[Lisbeth]

It seems Sanparks audits were done by the Auditor-General in the past.

Anyone with the knowhow may try and sift through the details here: http://www.sanparks.org/about/annual/

Today's Lowvelder:



SANParks' top brass insists they are clean

Mr David Mabunda, SANParks CEO, with the ...show more executive mayor of Mbombela, Cllr Cathy Dlamini. ...show less
This despite media reports and complaints to the Public Protector to the contrary.

24 February 2012 | Nicolene Smalman

.
SKUKUZA - Senior officials at SANParks and the Kruger National Park (KNP) insist that their current management is above board amid media reports, complaints to the public protector and nameless slandering, accusing them of tender fraud and nepotism.

The CEO of SANParks, Dr David Mabunda, believes that these allegations are being made by a "former disgruntled employee" and he has described it as "sabotage".

Mabunda’s name and that of managing executive, Mr Abe Sibiya, are just two of a list of about six high-ranking SANParks officials who sources claim to have close ties with companies which have been appointed as service providers.

Mabunda said that they have been cleared of all of these allegations by the Auditor General’s office and an auditor’s firm. However, the public protector, Ms Thuli Madonsela, has now also instigated an investi-gation into the matter. Although her spokes-man, Ms Kgalalelo Masibi, did not respond to Lowvelder’s questions, she indicated to other media that Madonsela’s office was investigating the allegations.

Three heads of security services within the Kruger National Park have been given the boot since 2006, including Messrs Prego Reddy, David Nonthononda and Bheki Nsibande.

It is alleged that Reddy questioned Renaissance’s poor service delivery after which he was unfairly dismissed. He turned to the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) for help and was compensated. "This was an issue between the KNP director and his employee. When you win a case, you are reinstated, but Reddy wasn’t," Mabunda said.

Nothononda was fired in September 2010, after he was allegedly suspected of covertly investigating and leaking maladministration information about Sibiya and Mr Victor Makhubedu, finance manager in the KNP.

"He was subsequently framed, he fell for the trap and was dismissed," the source said. Mabunda denied this and added that Nothononda was dismissed after a disciplinary investigation which arose from dishonesty of accepting bribes from a service provider which happened to be Nsibande’s younger brother, Mr Caleb Nsibande.

The initial contract with Renaissance expired in May 2008, but it was extended on a month-to-month basis until September 2010. "For more than two years, efforts to get a process to procure a tender bid process, were overruled by Mabunda’s directives. It was not until Nsibande threatened to report this matter to treasury that a tender bid was undertaken which culminated in the appointment of yet another suspect entity, Batho-Pele," the source added.

Mabunda retorted that the Kruger security tender was handled by the KNP tender committee under the leadership of Dr Bandile Mkhize, from start to finish. The extension was also handled by the same committee, including the dismissed Nsibande. "At no stage did I or my office discuss the security tender. I had also the left the KNP to assume my duties as CEO for almost two years. Tenders are not part of my job description."

Batho-Pele Security is servicing the park to this day and sources allege that its general manager, Mr Ahmed Nkosi, is Sibiya’s brother-in-law. "Nkosi didn’t have any previous security management experience, yet he was awarded the tender. He then instructed that it be escalated by an additional R100 000 per month," the source claimed.

"These allegations formed part of the extended audit by the Auditor General and were also investigated by Sizwentsalubago-bodo audit firm. The findings proved the allegations to be wrong," according to Mabunda.

Other high-ranking officials whose names surfaced in the allegations were Mr Frank Ngcobo, procurement officer; Mr Johnson Khoza, senior manager of logistics and Mr Sthembile Mhlophe, general manager.

They are being accused of having personal ties with numerous services providers. "Cipro checks were done in all instances and both the Auditor General’s and forensic reports dismissed these allegations," Mabunda continued.

Mabunda is convinced that it is Nsibande who approached Mail & Guardian and Lowvelder with the allegations.

"I have been with SANParks for 14 years and there have been huge tenders of concessionaires running into hundreds of millions. I have never dipped my hand in the cookie jar. Why would I start now? Credible institutions, the auditor general’s office and a leading black audit firm with large government contracts, have investigated the allegations and found them baseless. Why do the media believe allegations of a disgruntled dismissed individual rather than the oppinion of the Auditor General and a top audit firm? Nsibande was with SANParks for three years as a security manager, not an auditor. The media is looking for evil where there is none. I have confidence in the Kruger management, the Auditor General and the independent audit opinion."
• In the meantime, Facebook is buzzing with comments made by Kelogs Mabundy, a blogger who claims he is an "anti-corruption fighter at conservation". He refers to Mabunda and the rest of the management as "hyenas".

Some of his comments include (sic):

• Big lies are being told about Kelogs in order to confuse PPL... on the other hand a political propaganda front is being propagated. Let me correct-no 1. Kelogs is ex-employee who was fired? not true i work for this jungle at national level not a park but i do get info from all ,ex-employees included. no 2. Kelogs is a white person disguised as black? red herring again ..im as black as coal , i speak 4 of the SA languages fluently. no 3. Kelogs is deployed by opposition to undermine comrades.bullsh*t ..i was part of the struggle but i dont boast about it. i'm member of the rulin party..but i dont tolerate corruption. i also admire many friends in the opposition...thats good for South Africa..this is democratic state! I accept that not everyone thinks the same!

• Everything has suddenly become frantic here, hyenas are sweating hell & doing all in their quest to stop the inevitable investigation. nothing is being spared, tender docs were removed on Fridy...only the devil knows to were. a rain of terror ,intimidation & patronage is dished out to suspect staff. terror undercover agents disguised as IT specialists snoop & sniff into every staff private communique. staff being censored from associating with this forum, propaganda machinery to wade off bad publicity,spin facts & do damage control is also activated. senior managers ar pulled from their core responsibilities & instructed to work on moderating Kelogs.

Found his page on FB - makes for very interesting reading. :? This is the latest comment:

This chief hyena, one wonders whether it is still willing to accept the gift of its long awaited Range Rover given the sudden attention from all angles. We shall be watching..but knowing this has no conscience or regret , it is full of entitlement , i predict the new delivery will be accepted without whims!

And another one:

VERBATIM QUOTE FROM ABRAHAM MANZI "Kelogs by comparison , if these hyenas earn on average 850,000 per annum , this translates to about more than R70,000 per month. So their monthly salary is more than a ranger's yearly salary of R50000 per /annum. What a shocking disparity!how can anyone expect equity here?"...its survival of the toughest out there broe...rangers & all other low end workesr ar treated as insignificants while this elite continues to enrich itself at the expecnse of nature conservation.

Yikes, some interesting reading there.

Maybe the old Selati railway line is in use again with the gravy train running through KNP? Who knows, time will tell i suppose. :roll:

I have a couple of questions:

1. Why has the Auditor General now again been included as a second auditor, not mentioned in earlier releases? In fact, why are there two auditors? (With the BEE one presumably costing Sanparks a small fortune in fees?)


2.

"I have been with SANParks for 14 years and there have been huge tenders of concessionaires running into hundreds of millions. I have never dipped my hand in the cookie jar. Why would I start now? ]

Why on earth make such a statement as CEO of a large parastatal? Are we meant to say "thankyou" that he didn't steal earlier?

I think the "Kelogs" character is largely fictional, and is indeed a disgruntled white ex-employee passing on snippets gained from the many whistleblowers all over Sanparks.

That does not mean the info is to be taken lightly! 8)

Today's Lowvelder:

I had also the left the KNP to assume my duties as CEO for almost two years. Tenders are not part of my job description."

Say what??!!, Doc??!! Since when is a CEO not responsible?

Your annual report for 2009 inter alia states as follows:

EFFECTIVE BUDGET MANAGEMENT
Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Annual Target (As per Business Plan) Performance (Relative to Target)
M1 – Budget Variance Income Budget Variance = 10% 1,0% below budget
Expenditure Budget Variance = 10% 4,7% over budget
Performance Analysis A break-even position has been achieved for the year. However, the Income Budget Variance was 1% lower than budget, while the Expenditure Budget
Variance was 4,7% over budget. This can be attributed to the recent global and local economic downturn, and the resulting higher than expected rate
of inflation.
It is worth noting that, even though the economic situation had not been favourable for the year, budget variances were contained within the targeted
10% range for both income and expenditure.
Planned Improvement (Corrective Actions) Effective budget management and monitoring has been elevated as a strategic priority across all organisational operations. The strategic intention in
this regard is to frequently measure coverage of income over expenditure – hence enabling ongoing monitoring of financial sustainability.
M2 – Income to Cost Ratio 80,0% 80,7%
Performance Analysis Income to Cost Ratio is slightly better than the planned target of 80% for the year. Performance in this measure has been generally above planned
quarterly targets throughout the year. This is a good performance irrespective of the unexpected decline in tourism revenue, which came as a result
of the recent global economic downturn, ultimately leading to a further decline in overseas visitor numbers.
The annual tourism tariff increase for the year was less than the inflationary impact, leading to organisational inability to recoup equivalent revenue
that would cover the 2% of inflation-induced over-expenditure. Growth in expenses as well as an expanding mandate, have added to the cost structure
of the entire organisation.
Planned Improvement (Corrective Actions) Effective budget and cost management and monitoring have been prioritised, while there are continuous efforts to identify other revenue streams.


(My underlining and bold)


Ai-jai-jai-jai-jai.

Ja Pops, this not the first time Mabunda has said that things are not a part of his job. It's not a good sign when a CEO of an organization repeatedly announces disclaimers that this or that is not his job. Doesn't he yet know that ultimately he is responsible for every single thing that goes on in SanParks. :roll: :roll:

iNdeed, iNd, iNdeed.


Could this excerpt from KD Dlamini (Chairperson of Sanpark's Board) in the 2011 Annual Report perhaps be another paradox of note?


"... South Africa is a developmental state that has the challenge of reversing years of bad financial management ..."


...The members of the Board of SANParks are satisfied that the Board has performed according to its expectations and the expectations of its stakeholders, exercising its fiduciary responsibilities
efficiently during this past financial year. An unqualified audit report has been obtained by the organization once again. The Board thanks the Management of SANParks for continuing to exercise
exemplary leadership to the organization and all dedicated SANParks employees for their significant contributions to the success of SANParks."

The "buck" stops with you, Dr Mabunda! As CEO of a parastatal and at your level (including salary) I think the SA public should expect nothing less.

[Lisbeth]

Media Release: Minister comments on alleged tender corruption and maladministration in KNP

Date: 9th March 2012

Statement by the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs, Minister Edna Molewa on parliamentary questions on alleged tender corruption and maladministration in the Kruger National Park.

On 17th February 2012 the Democratic Alliance opposition party sent me 15 parliamentary questions (PQs) alleging widespread tender corruption and maladministration at the Kruger National Park. The PQs raised accusations of "personal connections" or "close associations" between certain senior SANParks officials with service-providers bidding for tenders. Unfortunately the "personal connections" or "close associations" were undefined, and appeared to be speculative and spurious.

On closer examination I noticed that the said allegations bear a striking resemblance to a "dossier" I received last year from the Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Water and Environmental Affairs, Hon Adv Johnny De Lange (MP), who had received it from one official who claimed to have been dismissed from his position as security manager in the Kruger National Park for exposing tender corruption and maladministration. It later transpired, thereafter, that the said official was dismissed in June 2011 for corrupt activities and abuse of SANParks property. It was said he was dismissed for circumventing the Supply Chain Management Policy and awarding contracts for the acquisition and maintenance of CCTV equipment to companies in which his younger brother and his friend, were directors. Other companies that are alleged to have benefitted from the said official’s “generosity" included names given as encapsulated in Annexure A. These companies had never traded with the Kruger National Park before the said official’s appointment in 2008. His modus operandi was to split amounts to levels below the R500 000 Treasury Regulations’ threshold which would have compelled him to go for a full tender process. The total amount involved was R 4 760 098. 00. It is interesting to note that in his “dossier of tender corruption” that he submitted as complaints to a number of parties, the said official conveniently omitted to mention the companies associated with his name.

Furthermore the said official was also found guilty for unauthorized use of a SANParks vehicle Registration FLF 918 MP, failure to comply with existing rules governing the use of official vehicles and for exceeding the speed limits while driving inside and outside the park (vehicles are fitted with Tracker and can show speed travelled). Needless to say the said official did not survive both the corruption and abuse of property disciplinary hearings. He was summarily dismissed in June 2011. He appealed the dismissals for the two cases, one subsequent to the other but was unsuccessful. It is further alleged that soon after his dismissal he tried to lobby the CEO of SANParks, through an anonymous email from an untraceable email address, knpmabundana@hotmail.com, telling him to set aside the disciplinary results against said official in order to avoid a media exposure on tender irregularities and maladministration which he claimed had reached epidemic levels. The CEO of SANParks, tells me that he refused to bargain with guilty employees and so did not attend to this email. The matter of the said official’s dismissal then went to the CCMA and deadlocked. It was referred for arbitration and it is now awaiting a trial date at the Labour Court.

While the above processes were underway, the said official began what can only be called a dirty-tricks campaign. It is said he delivered a “dossier of evidence of tender corruption” to the Auditor-General’s Office, City Press newspaper and the Public Protector simultaneously. The AG decided to extend the scope of SANParks annual audit to include the allegations. The results are reflected in a special section of the SANParks annual audit report for 2011/12 and did not find evidence of fraud, irregularities and non-compliance with supply chain management policy. The companies involved in this extended audit are listed in Annexure B. It found administrative gaps which needed to be strengthened around Treasury Practice Notes (4 and 8) in particular to which SANParks has obliged. City Press did not publish the story. The Public Protector has not yet concluded her investigation.

The SANParks Board, as an accounting authority, instituted a forensic investigation on the allegations of unethical relationships between its officials and certain service-providers. SizweNtsalubaGobodo audit firm was appointed to conduct a forensic investigation. The forensic report was completed in December 2011 and its recommendations were accepted by the Audit and Risk Committee of the Board at its January 2012 meeting. The forensic investigation exonerates the accused officials on allegations of corrupt relationships. The Audit and Risk Committee will be recommending the adoption of the forensic findings to the full Board at its next meeting scheduled for 20th March 2012.

In January 2012, I was alerted to the existence of a vitriolic and scathing Facebook Profile by one "Knp Mabundana/ Kelogs Mabundana/Kelogs Mabundanai/Kelogs Mabundy" which was and still is spewing bile and launching scathing attacks on SANParks and its officials for corruption and maladministration using aliases. The faceless blogger, whom we suspect to be the said official, is derogatory referring to my officials as “corrupt baboons and hyenas who have no morals”. The names of the companies that the DA alleges in its PQs to have gotten tenders through nepotism and corruption are named and shamed. Among these are listed in Annexure C It is my hope that the Honorable Members of Parliament are not aiding the trial by the media campaign orchestrated by the said official against SANParks and its officials, thereby aiding in the undermining of a state institution.

In conclusion I would also like to make reference to the recent Mail & Guardian (17.02.2012) story on the same subject. I have no doubt that the said official was behind the story and the M&G used our elected representatives’ comments to give credence to his uncorroborated and wild accusations. SANParks has since approached the South Gauteng High Court, to seek relief from these unprecedented attacks on itself, systems and officials. Charges have also been laid with the police and other relevant state authorities. The smear campaign is not just causing reputational damage to SANParks and its officials, it is also sowing public distrust in the institution affecting its relations with financiers and donors and instilling disobedience among staff thus making it difficult for managers to maintain discipline.

It is in the above context that the responses to the parliamentary questions should be understood.

ISSUED ON BEHALF OF THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ON 9 MARCH 2012

[Lisbeth]

Thank you Flutterby! This throws a new light on the "Mail and Guardian" article.

aiding the trial by the media campaign orchestrated by the said official against SANParks and its officials, thereby aiding in the undermining of a state institution.

Blaming the media is the normal response once a Department has been caught out...over the past decade or so.

The minister has no clue, and is responding to what the CEO of Sanparks has told her...end of story.

The Public Protector has not yet concluded her investigation.

This is the only relevant part here!

aiding the trial by the media campaign orchestrated by the said official against SANParks and its officials, thereby aiding in the undermining of a state institution.

Blaming the media is the normal response once a Department has been caught out...over the past decade or so.

The minister has no clue, and is responding to what the CEO of Sanparks has told her...end of story.

Agreed RP, this is the way things happen unfortunately

It could also be the truth though

SANParks has since approached the South Gauteng High Court, to seek relief from these unprecedented attacks on itself, systems and officials. Charges have also been laid with the police and other relevant state authorities.

This is absolute rubbish! And a blatant lie! It MAY pertain only to the M&G article, nothing else, and is a scare tactic!

. The smear campaign is ... also sowing public distrust in the institution ... and instilling disobedience among staff thus making it difficult for managers to maintain discipline.

You must be joking!? So the staff are naughty, not because of your humungous and regular screw-ups and mismanagement, but because someone else complained!?

Crazy!!!!

The smear campaign is not just causing reputational damage to SANParks and its officials, it is also sowing public distrust in the institution affecting its relations with financiers and donors

This is the best news of all!

So the hotel builders are not as stupid as they thought! :idea:

8-)

The "buck" stops with you, Dr Mabunda! As CEO of a parastatal and at your level (including salary) I think the SA public should expect nothing less.

Just another interesting aside point. Public officials are exactly that: Public officials. They are paid by the fiscuss which means in essence, OUR TAXES.

This means that he is a public servant working for all of us. Oh, wait, that probably isn't in his job description either.

TJOP!!!!!

In any other country in the western world, a public servant who so embarrassed himself or the party would resign. It seems here in good ol R. S of A, they get promoted. And there is no such thing as accountability.