Defence’s clean audit not enough
THE Department of Defence is to be congratulated for the achievement of an unqualified audit — its first in the past 18 years. However, several operational obstacles still need to be overcome.
With the exception of a departure from the normal reporting framework for military assets, the 2011-12 report from AuditorGeneral Terence Nombembe contained no qualifications at all. There is no question that, for all her foibles and obstreperousness, former defence minister Lindiwe Sisulu deserves the kudos for this achievement. During her time in office, Ms Sisulu was dogged in her determination that her department would get a clean audit, going so far as to hire a former employee of the auditor-general to ensure that procurement procedures complied with the necessary financial regulations.
Although the department failed to achieve an unqualified audit in 2010-2011, much of the groundwork for sound financial management was laid during this time. Ms Sisulu instituted better internal controls and better financial systems, as well as making a concerted effort to change the financial management culture. Newly appointed Defence Minister Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula has inherited a solid framework and there is no reason the sound financial management should not continue.
That said, achieving an unqualified audit is only one metric by which to measure the success of a department. Unqualified audits bode well from an administrative perspective, but the department will require strong leadership and a clear strategy — especially with regard to maintenance of equipment and management of personnel — to ensure SA has a functioning and disciplined defence force.
Much of the existing air force fleet is old — many aircraft having been in service more than 30 years — and requires extensive maintenance to be kept in the air, which requires a budget the department struggles to meet. Further, a number of the department’s strategic targets have been missed because of a lack of funding, and it is losing skilled staff as a result.
The resignation earlier this year of defence secretary Mpumi Mpofu and the chief of the South African Air Force, Lt-Gen Carlo Gagiano — after 44 years of service — is an example of how financial and operational frustrations have resulted in the loss of valuable individuals.
Although the facts are not certain, there was speculation at the time that Ms Mpofu’s resignation was the result of pressures related to supply-chain management and financial processes, and Gen Gagiano is said to have grown tired of the battle to keep his air force flying on an insufficient budget. The loss of the combined skills and experience of these individuals is a significant blow to the operational capacity of the department.
Then there are also the troubles with VIP transport services, which are overseen by the department. Over the past year, technical problems with the air force’s VIP fleet resulted in two potentially dangerous incidents involving Deputy President Kgalema Motlanthe. The “shadowing” of President Jacob Zuma’s Boeing Business Jet by two backup aircraft in January was a consequence of this and raised serious questions about the sustainability of the service.
The order to purchase two new VIP aircraft for Mr Zuma and Mr Motlanthe worth R1.6bn was also surrounded with controversy. While there may be reasonably sound reasons for the purchase of new aircraft — the safety of the president and his deputy are matters of national security — the heavy-handed manner in which the process was dealt with left much to be desired.
The strategic purpose of the air force in particular requires re-evaluation. If the department cannot afford to run the operation as it is currently constituted, it should be scaled back. There is no value other than ego in owning expensive equipment the air force cannot afford to maintain and does not have the capacity to operate.