Row grows over King’s budget

ACCUSATIONS are still flying high after KZN Premier Senzo Mchunu’s controversial announcement last week that his office will assume responsibility over the Department of the Royal Household’s budget.

Tabling his R743.2m budget before the Provincial Legislature, Mchunu stated R57.6-million will be allocated to King Goodwill Zwelithini and his Royal Household with much of the spending to be monitored by the Office of the Premier.

This decision has not boded well with the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) with IFP’s National Chairperson Blessed Gwala considering the move an insult to the Royals.

Gwala yesterday declared, not only did the ANC fail to consult the Household’s portfolio committee about the Premier’s plans to adopt the Department of the Royal Household, but he fears the party will totally ‘obliterate’ the Zulu Kingdom in years to come.

‘Reducing the Department to a mere directorate is an insult to the King and treats the Kingdom with disdain,’ said Gwala.

‘The Premier will now look after the King as an individual and this is an indication that the Kingship could be completely dissolved in the future.

‘We do not know what will happen tomorrow.’

KZN ANC Secretary Sihle Zikalala vehemently shot down the statement.

‘This is not true at all. It is a political statement that could not be more far from the truth.

‘The Kingship will not be dissolved, but its finances will be integrated to be managed more efficiently by the Premier.’

Zikalala also insisted the party did inform the Royal Household of the transfer.

Economist and Deputy Dean in the Faculty of Commerce Administration and Law at the University of Zululand, Dr Irrshad Kaseeram believes the Office taking control over the finances could avoid a repeat of the King going broke.

‘The confusion arising from the separation of duties is blamed for the gross overspending that occurred last year with the King having to seek a bailout to the tune of R12-million.

‘Having a single entity controlling the King’s affairs will make it easier to hold an individual accountable and is more likely to ensure efficiency in the spending and monitoring of funds and offering of guidance to the king.’