So many questions: Midvaal mayor Timothy Nast

The public protector has slammed the DA-led Midvaal council for its business dealings with a former DA constituency chairman, Andre Odendaal. Chris Barron asks Midvaal mayor Timothy Nast ...

There's nothing new about the allegations. Why didn't you act on them sooner?

In 2007 and 2008 this council told the municipal manager and four heads of departments to pack their bags and leave.

Weren't they the people who blew the whistle on what was going on in the first place?

No. And currently two of them are the subject of a criminal investigation and also a civil claim.

The public protector's report is still highly critical of what's been going on over the years. Yes, but it acknowledges that steps were taken in order to remedy the situation at the time.

But you continued to employ Andre Odendaal's company although there was a conflict of interest?

We acknowledged the conflict of interest.

Why did you continue to employ his company?

We've said we support the public protector's call to clearly legislate that political office bearers cannot do business with the state.

But for many years you did business with him while he was a DA office bearer. How do you explain that?

He's been a political office bearer since 2007, and, now following this, Midvaal will adopt the Western Cape government's policies [that political office bearers can't do business with the state] here.

Only because of the public outcry?

The public protector is clear that the municipal manager at the time failed to identify the conflict of interest when the tender was awarded. And she has therefore requested the council to investigate why the municipal manager did not do so, and to put steps in place to ensure that the tender system makes provision for that.

Almost three years ago the information on which the public protector based her findings was sent to Helen Zille. A month later the person who sent her this information was suspended and later fired. Is this how you treat whistle-blowers?

The individual concerned, for a period of 18 consecutive months, owed the municipality outstanding rates and taxes on 14 different properties. And disciplinary action was not instituted by Helen Zille or requested by her office. It was requested by the then mayor, who removed him from the mayoral committee as a result of the nonpayment of his rates and taxes.

What happened with his information?

The municipality instituted two forensic audits based on the allegations, and those forensic audits are acknowledged in the public protector's report.

Is the municipality still doing business with Odendaal?

Yes, in terms of debt collections.

What about the conflict of interest?

Currently he is no longer the constituency chair.

But his position as chairman would have given him access to information his competitors for the tender didn't enjoy?

This is exactly what the public protector has asked me to investigate.

Why wait for the public protector?

 Internally an investigation was done into whether or not any influence may have been obtained over the tender process. There was no influence found.

Surely the point is his position at the time gave him access to privileged information his competitors did not have access to?

That is exactly why we are going to adopt the Western Cape policy on that now.

Didn't a DA hearing several years ago find that the relationship between Odendaal and the municipality was problematic?

That was precisely why the municipality put in place stricter tender regulations for 2009.

In spite of which, and although he was under investigation, he was awarded the tender?

The committee awards tenders on a points system. We've always said that the investigation by the law society needs to take place and heads may roll based on their findings.