Cabinet on the right track, but more required
Raenette Taljaard:
This week the Zuma administration took an important step on the path to fighting corruption in South Africa.
The Cabinet’s announcement of the creation of an “anti-corruption, inter-ministerial” committee to deal with corruption in the public service must be welcomed in principle, although it remains to be seen whether the Cabinet can muster the requisite political will in practice; follow-through for similar-sounding sentiments has often been lacking in the past.
There can be no debate: any siphoning off of public funds ought to be regarded as a wilful act of violence against the people of South Africa and our Constitution. Attempts to enrich a few dishonest individuals at the expense of the public purse and the interests of the many – thereby risking the very essence of social stability – cannot be tolerated.
The new inter-ministerial task team would do well do take at least three immediate steps – one of which it explicitly stated as its mandate.
First, review the various annual reports of the Public Service Commission on the state of the public service to see whether any of the recommendations it has made concerning conflicts of interest – and the employment of staff with a criminal record in the public service – have been attended to.
Second, it might be necessary for a review of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act [Act No. 12 of 2004] to determine whether the criminal offences it codified serve as an adequate deterrent against corruption in the public and private sectors.
Third, it is necessary to review, and amend where required, the relevant provisions of the Public Finance Management Act, the Municipal Finance Management Act and Treasury Regulation to ensure that they are up to the task of limiting the scope of “discretion” where public funds are concerned.
A sound balance needs to be struck between flexible provisions that ensure that public spending is not caught up in bottlenecks, and discretionary provisions – which must be tightened to limit any wiggle room in which corruption could flourish.
In addition, Parliament should convene a hearing with the auditor-general in order to look at non-compliance with the PFMA as well as determine whether the new Public Audit Act is functioning optimally, or whether the auditor-general’s office requires any additional powers to ensure full compliance with its findings and recommendations.
The sad reality, however, is that no amount of institutional reform alone will be able to save South Africa from the scourge of corruption.