Nelson Mandela Bay’s political leadership is expecting the MBDA to provide detailed information requested by the National Treasury after the department questioned Anele Qaba’s appointment as chief executive three months after he signed a settlement agreement to leave the municipality.
The National Treasury advised the municipality to suspend Qaba’s appointment and also threatened to withhold grant funding if the metro did not provide the requested information.
But in a twist, almost R600m in equitable share funding due earlier this month has already been withheld.
In a strongly worded letter dated June 26, the Treasury’s deputy director-general of intergovernment relations, Malijeng Ngqaleni, said the city was advised to suspend Qaba’s appointment until specific information was provided.
This, she said, must be done to avoid any penalty of withholding conditional grants allocated in terms of the Division of Revenue Act.
It could result in no new roads being tarred and the halting of cemetery upgrades and the electrification of state-subsidised houses.
The municipality was given 14 days to respond to the request for information, which ended on Friday.
But mayor Gary van Niekerk said the municipality was in constant communication with the Treasury and was waiting for the MBDA to respond.
The MBDA’s members’ representative committee — chaired by deputy mayor Babalwa Lobishe — met on Friday to discuss the correspondence from the Treasury and a way forward.
Van Niekerk, who was part of the meeting, said it had been resolved that internal processes to obtain the required information should be done so that a proper response could be sent to the Treasury this week.
“We responded to the Treasury and informed them we were still working on getting the information they requested and they gave us a further seven days,” he said.
“The internal process is to source the relevant information through the MBDA members’ representative committee which communicates with the MBDA.
“We expect a response on Tuesday.”
Van Niekerk said he believed the most suitable person politically to answer why the city had signed a settlement with Qaba was former mayor and DA councillor Retief Odendaal.
“I’m sure you’ve seen the outcome of the disciplinary board which highlighted the issue about Qaba’s appointment and I don’t understand why all of a sudden this is pinned on me.”
Odendaal held a media briefing on Friday where he accused Van Niekerk of influencing Qaba’s appointment.
“The previous mayor [Odendaal] initiated the settlement and led negotiation with the city manager, but now he’s the first to question the appointment when he knows exactly what the clauses of the agreement is.”
Van Niekerk said there was nothing in the settlement agreement between Qaba and the city that said he could no longer be employed by the city.
“He must answer as to why there was no clause stipulating that Qaba should not work with the city.”
Van Niekerk said he had spoken to the MBDA about Qaba’s appointment and had been referred to legislation that validated them as the appointing authority of the chief executive.
“When I engage Treasury this week about the information they requested I will also inquire about the fact that we have no authority to suspend Qaba’s appointment as advised in their letter because the agency makes the appointment.”
According to Section 93(J) of the Act, the appointment of a chief executive of a municipal entity rests with the board and the chief executive is accountable to the board of directors.
This means appointing a chief executive is under the direct authority of the MBDA board, which determines the composition of the selection panel.
The MBDA board faced a backlash for hiring Qaba on June 21, just three months after he agreed to a golden handshake, to the tune of about R3m, to vacate his municipal post.
Qaba was suspended after he was accused of signing a deviation that ultimately led to a company being hand-picked as a middleman between the municipality and SMMEs.
He has always rubbished the allegations, and the municipality’s disciplinary board cleared him.
However, the board’s decision was later disputed by PwC, which carried out a forensic probe into the contract.
Municipal spokesperson Kupido Barron, who was sent a list of five questions, said the municipality viewed the withholding of funds in a serious light as it adversely affected its ability to implement service delivery.
“We, therefore, informed Treasury that we started an internal process with our development agency as led by the MBDA members’ representative committee, and within the time frame stipulated by them.
“In the interim, we are engaging with Treasury regarding the release of the funding, as we are fully co-operating with them.”
He said they were waiting for an outcome from the internal process regarding the way forward.
HeraldLIVE