Question NW2787 to the Minister of Public Works:

Lekota, Mr M to ask the Minister of Public Works:

(1) Whether, with reference to his presentation and responses on 29 July 2015 to the Ad Hoc Committee on Security Upgrades at the Private Residence of the President at Nkandla, he has, upon assuming responsibilities as the Minister of Public Works and in view of the tremendous publicity given to expenditure at Nkandla, instructed his department to do a minute and detailed examination into the expenditure on construction work at President J G Zuma’s private residence at Nkandla; if so, what are the relevant details; (2) whether his examination of such expenditure found that (a) each of the houses in the police barracks was costing in excess of R6 million and (b) this price was grossly inflated; if not, why not; if so, (3) has he (a) taken immediate steps to discover who was responsible for that and (b) thereupon taken appropriate legal action against the specified persons to institute charges and to recover state resources; if not, why not in each case; if so, what are the relevant details of the steps he has taken in keeping with his fiduciary and political responsibilities? MINISTRY PUBLIC WORKS REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA Department of Public Works l Central Government Offices l 256 Madiba Street l Pretoria l Contact: +27 (0)12 406 2034 l +27 (0)12 406 1224 Private Bag X9155 l CAPE TOWN, 8001 l RSA 4th Floor Parliament Building l 120 Plain Street l CAPE TOWN l Tel: +27 21 468 6900 Fax: +27 21 462 4592 www.publicworks.gov.za NATIONAL ASSEMBLY WRITTEN REPLY QUESTION NUMBER: 2787 [NW3256E] INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: No. 28 of 2015 DATE OF PUBLICATION: 07 AUGUST 2015 DATE OF REPLY: 07 SEPTEMBER 2015 Mr M G P Lekota (Cope) asked the Minister of Public Works: (1) Whether, with reference to his presentation and responses on 29 July 2015 to the Ad Hoc Committee on Security Upgrades at the Private Residence of the President at Nkandla, he has, upon assuming responsibilities as the Minister of Public Works and in view of the tremendous publicity given to expenditure at Nkandla, instructed his department to do a minute and detailed examination into the expenditure on construction work at President J G Zuma’s private residence at Nkandla; if so, what are the relevant details; (2) whether his examination of such expenditure found that (a) each of the houses in the police barracks was costing in excess of R6 million and (b) this price was grossly inflated; if not, why not; if so, (3) has he (a) taken immediate steps to discover who was responsible for that and (b) thereupon taken appropriate legal action against the specified persons to institute charges and to recover state resources; if not, why not in each case; if so, what are the relevant details of the steps he has taken in keeping with his fiduciary and political responsibilities? NW3256E ______________________________________________________________________ REPLY: The Minister of Public Works (1)In October 2012, as the Minister of Public Works I ordered an investigation into the conduct and management of security upgrades implemented by the Department of Public Works (DPW) at the President’s residence in Nkandla, KwaZulu-Natal. The Task Team responsible for this investigation submitted their Report in January 2013 and made a number of recommendations that have a bearing on DPW. The Task Team, among other things, recommended that their report be referred to the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) for further investigation. As a result, the President issued Proclamation R59 of 2013 on 20 December 2013, to mandate the SIU to conduct an investigation into the affairs of the Department with respect to the security upgrades. (2)(a)The Task Team’s Report did not make reference to the cost of individual houses in the police barracks. However, the investigation found that that the total cost of the South African Police Service (SAPS) and Department of Defence (DOD) needs, which includes accommodation, the Clinic, Park Homes, Helipads, etc., amounted to approximately R125 000 000.00. The cost of R6 million per individual house is not the result of an official departmental cost apportionment, and the department is also not aware how this amount was arrived at. (2)(b)The finding was that the price for the mentioned items was probably inflated. (3)(a)Steps have been taken to determine who was responsible for the irregularities, including the costs. (3)(b)The officials who did not comply with Supply Chain Management (SCM) prescripts in the appointment of the contractors have been charged with misconduct and the disciplinary hearings are pending. The loss as a result of the over-design of the facilities/inflation of the price is claimed by the SIU from the architect, Mr. Minenhle Makhanya. The civil matter for the recovery is pending in the High Court.