Council teeters
2007-03-01
THE relationship between the ANC and the ID in the Drakenstein municipal council was in tatters this week, and for the second time in three months the ID sided with the DA opposition to overrule the ruling party.
Tuesday’s Council meeting was tension-filled from early on and it took all the wits of Speaker Pele Mgajo to keep the ANC in control. In a meeting that crept along at a snail’s pace, the DA put two amendments to the vote, and won both times with the support of the ID members in Council.
Since a similar vote in November, rumours of a possible take-over of the ANC-led Council by the DA and ID, have been rife.
The delay in an official take-over has been blamed by informed sources on disagreement at provincial level, over which party (DA or ID) will get the mayorship.
The first bone of contention on Tuesday was the report from the Auditor General on the results of performance measurement (PM) at Drakenstein Municipality.
Clr JT Basson (ANC) moved that the criticism in the report be noted and the PM plan be approved.
Clr Koos Louw (DA) objected, citing some of the comments of the Auditor General, such as: “Evidence could not be provided that the audit committee reviewed the performance management system of the municipality and made recommendations in this regard.”
Louw asked for an amendment in which the implementation was approved, but the audit committee disbanded and replaced by members “with the necessary performance management skills”.
The DA won the vote, with support from the other opposition parties (ID, the WCC, the ACDP and the Freedom Front Plus).
When the second report by the Auditor General, this time on the financial statements for the year ended 30 June, landed on the table, it was clear it was going to be another hot potato.
Louw asked for an amendment to the motion that the report be noted, requesting that the replies of the financial department be sent back as inadequate and that the alleged fraud of former employee Ian Kenned be reported to the SAPS for investigation.
This opened a can of worms, and especially the issue about Kenned led to a lot of questions.
A financial settlement between Kenned (the former deputy treasurer) and the Municipality was reached recently, concerning the payment of R102 003 in overtime without authorisation. The matter was never reported to the police.
Official André Marais explained that the Mayoral Committee had decided, on legal advice, to reach a private settlement on repayment of the debt.
Clr Louw replied: “It is not a civil case and we must report it.”
Assured Arthob Petersen (ANC mayoral committee member: “The decision was not taken lightly. We thought it prudent to go this route after obtaining a legal opinion.”
Jean Smit (DA) remarked that Council did not have to decide on the guilt or innocence of Kenned: “The authorities will decide.”
At this stage official Khaya Mrali interrupted to ask, through the Speaker, what the recommendation of the Auditor General’s representative (present in the Chamber) was. He confirmed that according to the law, the matter should have been reported.
When, to a question of the Speaker, acting chief financial officer Calvin Pietersen explained that Council could not vote on the financial statements, Deetlefs du Toit (DA) wanted to know why they were playing with words, instead of voting on the amendment.
Dan Kotzé (ANC) then took the floor, arguing that the DA’s disagreement should be noted, but that there could be no vote on the matter.
He suggested that the DA could write a letter to the Municipal Manager and ask for the subject to be discussed at the next meeting.
Further debate followed, with Louw stating that according to the rules of conduct, no discussion should be allowed after a councillor had asked for a vote. The Speaker hoped that the issue could be resolved without a vote but Louw insisted, “We are used to losing, we want to vote.”
The Speaker allowed further debate, and Jean Smit (DA) pointed out that councillors were only allowed one turn each to speak on a specific point and no longer than five minutes.
He pointed out that Petersen had spoken four times on the issue and Kotze three times and asked the Speaker to stick to the rules.
Petersen accused him of selective memory and shortly after this Chief Whip Claud Julies (ID) asked the Speaker to make a ruling.
The Speaker acknowledged that the matter should be wrapped up, but also accused the DA of delaying tactics, at which Louw for the fifth time requested that the matter be brought to a vote.
A disgusted Deetlefs du Toit (DA): “Our democratic rights are being trampled into the mud. If we can’t vote, we are leaving the Chamber.”
As DA members packed their belongings and started to leave the Chamber, the Speaker called them back and annouced a five minute recess, attributing the request to Petersen.
After the recess and more debate, deputy mayor Matthys Nothnagel (ID) asked for clarity on what the motion consisted of as councillors were confused.
Once again Louw stated his amendment, at which Petersen wanted to know whether Council would be liable to any legal redress, should Kenned be found innocent.
Koos le Roux (DA) explained that as fraud was a criminal matter, prosecution will be at the discretion of the Department of Justice, with no come-back to Council.
Rassie van Zyl (DA) then entered the debate, asking the Speaker whether he was prepared to take the matter to its democratic conclusion.
He described the meeting as unsavoury and the handling thereof as “clumsy”.
Finally, nearly three hours after the start of the debate, a vote was called and the DA’s amendment was carried by 29 votes to 25.
The matter was concluded with Mayor Charmaine Manuel stating her personal objection to the amendment, followed by the rest of the ANC members supported by Sharon Davids of the FD.
- Susan Botha
More
News
|
