In terms of Section 80 of the Municipal Structures Act, Ugu District Council has five portfolio committees to assist the executive committee in its work by being able to go into finer detail and making recommendations to the executive committee, which enjoys vast delegated powers from council.
These committees are scheduled to meet ten times a year. In the 2011/12 financial year, the five portfolio committees met from 40 percent of the time to 60 percent of the time. In the 2012/13 financial year, the average went up from 50 percent to 70 percent with water and sanitation achieving a remarkable 100 percent. Despite all this, the Auditor-General issued the council with a disclaimer opinion – the worst finding possible.
In the mayor’s forward to the draft annual report, Mayor Ntombifikile Gumede made the following outrageous statement: “In conclusion, the 2012/2013 financial year would not have been successful without adhering to stringent and tight financial management control measures that have been put in place by the political and administrative leadership.”
One might ask where is the evidence? And where is the evidence? The newly-appointed accounting officer of the municipality puts it this way: “Our audit opinion being that of a disclaimer for 2012/2013 points to an institution that is dysfunctional!” The Auditor-General says in his report: “I was unable to obtain sufficient, appropriate audit evidence to provide a basis for an audit opinion.” Where is the evidence?
As Ugu is already insolvent and has been for some years, it asked for a Section 137 Discretionary Provincial Intervention last year and province has provided assistance from Cogta and Treasury. Just how strictly this advice is being taken by Ugu is perhaps best revealed by the infrequent meetings of the critical finance committee.
The committee last met in June. In July it could not meet as there was no quorum present. In August no meeting could take place because some of the critically important pages of the document prepared for the committee’s decisions and recommendations could not be read and the meeting was abandoned. If the committee does manage to meet in September, it will be the first time in three months.
I do not know what this failure of finance to meet does to lighten the burden of the executive committee. Perhaps there is a bunch of financial wizards there that can turn the ship around before it sinks beneath the waves?
DAVE SNASHALL
