Eskom’s Singh angers MPs with last-second paperwork

Suspended Eskom CFO Anoj Singh raised the ire of MPs in the Eskom inquiry by submitting the documents required for his testimony at the eleventh hour.

Singh submitted 400 pages of documents at 11pm on Monday night‚ not leaving any time for the pages to be printed and MPs to read them before questioning him.

MPs were not happy with what they saw as an attempt at stalling their work.

Chairing the inquiry‚ Zukiswa Rantho said Singh was supposed to testify late last month‚ but had written to ask for an extension‚ as he and his legal team were not ready. He was then invited to appear on Tuesday afternoon.

Singh’s legal team have been attending the inquiry regularly.

Rantho said Singh would have to account to parliament at a later date‚ but parliament would not be paying for flights again‚ and he would need to take responsibility for this.

“We are not like Eskom‚ where if we feel it necessary to give our friends a certain amount‚ we just give that amount. We account to the public of South Africa‚” she reminded him pointedly.

ANC MP Zukile Luyenge revealed that the committee had made the request for documentation in July‚ but the documents had only been received hours before Singh was due to testify.

African Christian Democratic Party MP Steve Swart said this was a “delaying tactic”‚ and another attempt – like the death threats and legal threats previously received – to delay the work of the committee.

DA MP Natasha Mazzone said the tactic was “not wise and it is not clever”‚ and added that the delay would give her time to read the documents over the December holidays “not once‚ not twice‚ not three times‚ [but] four times”.

Economic Freedom Fighters MP Marshall Dlamini said that “Mr Singh and his buddies” had undermined parliament‚ and should take a message back to those still to testify that the committee would do its work.

“We are not your friends‚” he said.

The inquiry went ahead‚ with current Eskom board interim chairperson Zethembe Khoza reading out a 44-page statement that covered many of the matters already covered in the inquiry‚ including the Trillian and Tegeta payments‚ the suspension of four Eskom executives‚ and former Eskom CEO Brian Molefe’s pension payout.

Khoza denied that Eskom had been involved in helping Tegeta buy Optimum coal holdings‚ and said pre-payments such as the one made to Tegeta by Eskom were “common commercial practice” in the industry.

Earlier in the day‚ the committee heard from the head of executive support at Eskom‚ Anton Minaar‚ that Molefe did not have a contract with Eskom for several months after he started working there.

Minaar told the committee that Molefe‚ who started working at Eskom in October 2015‚ only received a finalised contract in March 2016.

Asked how he had been paid during this time‚ Minaar said Molefe had been paid on the advice of public enterprises minister Lynne Brown.

Minaar also insisted that despite Molefe receiving a five-year contract‚ he was a “permanent employee with a term”‚ thereby making him eligible for an Eskom pension.

“We were of the understanding that he was permanently employed‚” he said.

Molefe's initial contract had not had a term affixed to it‚ but Brown had indicated that the contract be changed in line with a cabinet-approved practice that executives in state-owned entities be employed on fixed-term contracts.

Minaar‚ however‚ said he had been against five-year fixed-term contracts as they were a major risk‚ were not best practice‚ and could expose the organisation to large claims – such as the R200-million golden handshake paid to former South African Airways CEO Coleman Andrews in 2001.