Bad plans, reversal of decisions shows ‘government is not listening’

With government backtracking on two major decisions relating to Eskom, the question is would the exemptions and national state of disaster have worked, says an analyst.

The decision by Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana to shelve Eskom’s reporting on irregular expenditure and Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs Thembi Nkadimeng’s cancellation of the state of disaster were widely greeted with relief.

Nkadimeng said the state of disaster was a necessary response to the impact of critical levels of load shedding on the economy and vulnerable sectors such as health and small businesses.

Is state of disaster useful?

Energy specialist and economist Lungile Mashele said the state of disaster on its own was not going to end load shedding. Mashele said it required an implementation plan which was what the minister of electricity was doing through the electricity action plan.

“The government itself relied on the constitution to give powers to the minister of electricity; they didn’t rely on the state of disaster, leading to questions about its usefulness,” she said.

ALSO READ: ‘Eskom is complicated’: Godongwana denies PFMA exemption meant to protect politicians

Godongwana said the exemption was withdrawn for now to consider all comments made and how this would affect the auditor-general’s (AG) work.

He gazetted the move yesterday, which would have exempted Eskom from complying with part of the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) until 2025, limiting transparency on irregular, wasteful and fruitless expenditure in the entity’s annual financial statements. Godongwana refuted claims the exemption was granted to shield Eskom from accountability.

Mashele said the mistake made by National Treasury was not to include all relevant stakeholders and the omission of the AG in the exemption process would have rendered them irrelevant.

“It is the AG’s responsibility to audit state-owned enterprises and determine findings related to fruitless and wasteful expenditure, as well as corruption.

“The requirement of the exemption as it was initially phrased was an admission of guilt and would no doubt raise eyebrows,” Mashele said.

“Fruitless and wasteful expenditure does not always indicate corruption. It is sometimes related to deviations from the PFMA in terms of procurement guidelines. For example, procuring from an original equipment manufacturer instead of the cheapest quote.

ALSO READ: ‘Whoever advised you, misled you minister’: MPs want Eskom exemption withdrawn permanently

“The aim of the exemption was to provide leeway to Eskom in such a way that it would not cause harm to their credit worthiness. This Gazette, however, was poorly worded and gave blanket powers of limited disclosure to Eskom.”

Members of parliament (MPs) posed questions to Godongwana about the time frames for the possible reconsideration of the exemption.

ANC MP Bheki Hadebe said Eskom had received qualified reports for the past five years, which were mainly on wasteful expenditure.

“We are glad sanity has prevailed and the exemption is withdrawn,” he said.

Government ‘not listening’

Political analyst Goodenough Mashego said these moves made it clear government was not listening.

“If government was listening, it would listen to both the public and business, and also to energy experts who have, for some time, been very clear that the problems with Eskom are not really that it cannot provide electricity, “It is that Eskom cannot provide electricity based on the current model,” he said.

ALSO READ: Eskom’s PFMA exemption and minister’s corruption denialism a worrisome combo

“For some time experts have been calling for a mixed basket of energy sources and the fact that government has not really gone into such sectors means it’s not listening to anyone.”

Mashego said it was an interesting coincidence that the state of emergency was being ended now and that over the past weekend, Godongwana had gazetted exemptions for Eskom.

“It is a win for those who actually want to see things happen,” he said.

Mashego added that the introduction of such bad plans and then the reversal of decisions made it clear government was getting little advice.

The rollback of such decisions included the SA “monumental flag” deal where the department of sport, arts and culture was first criticised for its plans to erect a monumental 100m South African flag in Pretoria, not forgetting Jacob Zuma’s finance minister appointee Des van Rooyen, who lasted only four days in office.

ALSO READ: Eskom’s accounting exemptions will come back to bite us, exacerbate corruption

Mashego said one started to wonder whether plans were tabled under Cabinet before decisions were taken.

“It also shows the planning of ministers. They need to understand their oversight role and the department they’re heading,” he said.

– lungas@citizen.co.za