/ MEDIA STATEMENT / The content on this page is not written by Polity.org.za, but is supplied by third parties. This content does not constitute news reporting by Polity.org.za.

Parliament rejects as baseless, incomprehensible and unfair an insinuation of abuse of public funds in a Sunday newspaper report titled “the good life of Mr and Mrs Mgidlana.”

The publication approached Parliament to inquire about its travel policy in relation to official engagements of the Secretary to Parliament. In a detailed response, Parliament confirmed that all the services which were provided to the Secretary to Parliament were above board.

What followed in today’s report is a muckraking story about the personal lives of Mr and Mrs Mgidlana which have nothing to do with Parliament, nor with the questions sent to the institution for reply.

It is only fair for Mr and Mrs Mgidlana to be approached, instead of Parliament, about matters relating to their family lives and where information from Mrs Mgidlana’s social media accounts and personal photos are the main elements of the story.

To use Parliament’s reply to specific questions to legitimise such an article is unfair and tantamount to abuse of journalistic access.

It is not the first time that the publication writes about the issues which are rehashed in the article. In previous similar inquiries, Parliament provided detailed responses regarding its travel policy and how the various categories of its employees are provided for, including the Secretary to Parliament.

Parliament previously indicated to the publication that the Secretary to Parliament never asked for blue lights to be installed and/or operated in one of the pool cars which are used from time to time to transport parliamentary officials.

The article also alleges that the Secretary to Parliament “paid himself a R71 000 bonus.” It is not clear how the Secretary achieved this feat without the approval and authorisation of the Executive Authority of Parliament as required by the Financial Management of Parliament and Provincial Legislatures Act.

The Speaker of the National Assembly and Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces are, by law, the Executive Authority and treasury of Parliament.  It is only the executive authority who instructs the accounting officer and who can authorise any deviation.  This function cannot be performed by ordinary staff members who appoint themselves to this role.

Nowhere in the article is there any reference to breach of policy. This however did not stop the journalist from a single-minded pursuit to vilify and project the Secretary to Parliament as dishonest, greedy and unethical.

The travel policy of Parliament, alongside all other institutional policies, are not a creation of the incumbent Secretary to Parliament. These policies have been in existence since 2009 and were approved by the Presiding Officers in the fourth Parliament.

The Secretary to Parliament is the Accounting Officer and Parliament’s top administrator. This role places critical obligations and responsibilities on him and entitles him to certain facilities. These are spelled out in policy and regulations.

This, however, do not make him a rock star, a president, or a Presiding Officer. It only means that all protocols as specified in policy and applicable regulations are availed to the incumbent.

Parliament has consistently stated that the administration is open to constructive engagement on all matters, including cost cutting measures which the institution has been implementing for a while.

The transformation of Parliamentary administration into an effective institution is not only imperative but also not negotiable as Parliamentarians and citizens expect.

All staff are expected to contribute positively in building a strong and effective legislature within the bounds of the values of the institution and the constitution. No amount of under-handedness will derail this project. Information peddlers among our staff should desist from conduct which is aimed at subverting institutional transformation and change.

Whistle blowing is a prescribed process in the relevant act. This is encouraged as a protected way to expose improper conduct. Taking documents and leaking them to media is however not whistle blowing.

The author of the report was, until very recently, a caucus staff member for one of the parties in Parliament and should be expected to understand policy.

It has clearly become standard practice for some journalists at Parliament to rely entirely on leaked documents and unauthorised information supplied at regular intervals by internal sources with an axe to grind.

Parliament re-iterates its position that all the services which its officials, including the Secretary to Parliament, are afforded are in accordance with approved Parliament policies and designed to optimise performance and effectiveness. This was the case in relation to the Secretary’s travel.

Issued by Parliament of RSA