Tourism minister Patricia de Lille has locked horns with members of the South African Tourism board and MPs, taking a swipe at those who claimed she had dissolved the board unlawfully.
The showdown took place in parliament on Tuesday, after the Portfolio Committee on Tourism summoned the minister to explain the reasons for the resignation of the chairperson of the South African Tourism board, why she had dissolved the board, and an update on the appointment of new board members.
The committee gave the minister a tongue-lashing at the beginning of the sitting for not adequately updating parliament on her decision to dissolve the board.
De Lille dissolved the board with immediate effect after accusing it of holding an illegal meeting at the beginning of last month, where the board placed South African Tourism CEO Nombulelo Guliwe on precautionary suspension for being part of a team that authorised an unlawful R4.1m prepayment to a supplier, who did not deliver services paid for.
Guliwe was also accused of unlawfully suspending South African Tourism's company secretary, a role that reports to the board, and removing the chief marketing officer. An independent forensic investigation recommended that disciplinary action be instituted against Guliwe over the prepayment.
The board has expressed frustration about the then-chair Gregory Davids’ unwillingness to act against Guliwe following a Special Investigating Unit report into South African Tourism and Guliwe’s conduct as CEO, which the office of auditor-general also flagged. The board said it was of the view that De Lille was protecting Guliwe.
The minister argued that the board did not act in line with procedure when it held multiple meetings, including one where Lawson Naidoo was chosen as a “board representative”. De Lille told MPs that in July, she reminded the board on multiple occasions to assist the minister in stabilising South African Tourism, warning them against convening “unprocedural” meetings.
“The AG’s (auditor-general’s) report reminds us that I, as the executive authority, must monitor the implementation of planned actions, including the recovery of financial loss and the institution of consequence management.
“In the meeting of July 14 and the letter dated July 13 ... I cautioned the board against convening meetings that are unprocedural. In my letter, I said to the board that ... it has come to my attention that special and ordinary meetings are being called without due process being followed. This undermines the integrity of the board and renders any outcomes from such a meeting procedurally invalid. Moreover, the absence of properly constituted meetings with clear resolutions is unacceptable.”
The minister pushed back against anyone implying that she acted unlawfully or sought to conceal corruption when she dissolved the board.
“When exercising legislative authority, parliament is only bound by the constitution and must act within the limits outlined in the constitution. If anybody has got any evidence that I am protecting corruption, I would advise anyone to take this evidence to the Hawks and the police.”
We then wrote to the minister the next day, Friday August 15, requesting an urgent meeting to discuss her understanding of these provisions. We received her acknowledgment days later, but no substantive agreement. Then we received a letter advising us of the dissolution of the board.”
— Lawson Naidoo, member of the now-dissolved SA Tourism board
She said it was after Davids' resignation that the board held a round robin meeting in which Naidoo, a member of the now-dissolved board, emerged as a “representative of the board”.
Members of the now-dissolved board, who were also present at the meeting, said the minister kneecapped their ability to manage the institution. She countered that the dissolved board was mired in factional battles and inappropriate decisions.
She said she has since appointed “six South Africans” to continue the work of South African Tourism in line with the South African Tourism Growth Partnership Plan. She said if President Cyril Ramaphosa believes she overstepped, she will gladly oblige, and that if the DA wishes to review her decisions in court, that was their right.
Naidoo said the reasons provided by the minister for dissolving the board do not constitute good cause. He said on August 12 the board received a letter from the minister, which said the impugned resolution to suspend Guliwe was unlawful.
“We then wrote to the minister the next day, Friday August 15, requesting an urgent meeting to discuss her understanding of these provisions. We received her acknowledgment days later, but no substantive agreement. Then we received a letter advising us of the dissolution of the board.”
Naidoo said there was no meeting of the board on August 1 and maintained if they had the meeting, there would be no reason for them to make a round robin resolution.
“Yet the minister relies, in the letter dissolving the board, on this meeting. The reasons given in the first letter of the 12th are different from the reasons in the letter that announces the dissolution of the board. We were not allowed to respond to that.”
Another member of the now-dissolved board, Oupa Pilane, said the board repeatedly asked the minister for progress on the appointment of a new chair and deputy, to which the minister merely responded that she was “working on it”.
“We cannot have a selective invocation of the law. The law is prescriptive to the minister. So, the minister can, therefore, not choose one part of the act to implement and not implement the others. It is this challenge that we are facing. It is not on the board. It is on the minister for dereliction of her functions.”
He said the Tourism Act instructs the minister to give South African Tourism the leadership capacity to function, and that her failure to do so, while blaming the dissolved board, was a betrayal of her responsibility to honour her constitutional obligation.
“A matter of material irregularity took up to two months, yet the minister is quick to deal with a meeting. We wrote to the minister about the letter. The professionalism we expect from the minister would be to write back and say: ‘I do not agree with your letter’.”
Pilane added that as the board and the minister continued to bump heads over the issue, it progressively became clearer that the board members were becoming “a barrier to the minister’s agenda”.
Another member of the now-dissolved board and former chair of human capital and remuneration, Rachel Nxele, said the chairperson and leader of the board arguably created a toxic environment that put the organisation at risk and destroyed members of staff who worked at South Africans Tourism.
“The board had to deal with bullying from the CEO. Complaints were lodged against the CEO, and the chair failed to act in line with the grievance policy and procedure. These dated back to December 19 and June 14, meaning none of the timelines in the grievance policy were adhered to.”
She said the board was looking to conduct itself in adherence with corporate governance guidelines. She added that the minister’s decision to dissolve the board was “a betrayal of board members”, who worked hard and earned board fees well below those of board members of other state-owned entities.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.