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.

The article Auditor-General delivers new blow to Angie published in The Times on Tuesday, 2 October refers. The Department of Basic Education has the right to respond to the factual inaccuracies, allegations and sensationalised journalism demonstrated in the article published in The Times on Tuesday 2 October 2012.

It is important to distinguish between the national department and provincial departments in terms of the devolution of powers as defined in the South African Constitution. Mr Bobby Soobrayan is the Director-General of the Department of Basic Education – the national department- and as such is the Accounting Officer of that department. Provinces have their own Accounting Officers whom are appointed by the Premier of that province. Procurement in provinces is the responsibility of the Accounting Officer of that Department within the Province.

In the case of Limpopo, since the implementation of Section 100(1)(b) intervention, the Accounting Officer of Education in that province is the Administrator. Mr Soobrayan has never been, nor has he acted as the Accounting Officer of the Limpopo Education Department.

It is unfortunate that there is no attempt in the article in The Times to distinguish between the national department and the Limpopo Education Department. The financial difficulties of the Limpopo Education Department amongst others, has been widely reported in the media and these challenges resulted in the declaration by Cabinet of the Section 100(1)(b) intervention in December 2011, and a qualified audit report is not unexpected.

It is both inaccurate and mischievous therefore to claim that Mr Soobrayan himself is responsible for goods and services of R500 000 being procured without the required price quotations (competitive bids as required by treasury regulations) when in fact the Auditor-General was referring to the Limpopo Education Department. Further, your journalist again attempts to lay the blame at the door of Mr Soobrayan by assuming that he was the accounting officer who did not prepare financial statements in accordance (as) prescribed.

While the financial problems of the Limpopo Education Department since 2011 are being addressed since the section 100(1)((b) intervention and the deployment of the Administrator, the issues of past financial mismanagement in that province cannot be laid at the door of Mr Soobrayan.

In fact, it must be strongly stated that since the inception of the Department of Basic Education in April 2010, for which Mr Soobrayan is responsible, the department has received an unqualified audit report from the Auditor-General for financial years 2010 to 2011 and 2011 to 2012, for which Mr Soobrayan should be applauded.

We expect that The Times will ensure that the inaccuracies are corrected and that an equally prominent apology is carried by that newspaper.