SIU sets sights too low, say MPS
Minimal impact on rising graft levels
THE corruption-busting Special Investigating Unit (SIU) is setting its sights too low to make a real impact on ever-increasing levels of graft, MPs complained yesterday.
Referring to an estimate supplied two years ago by former SIU head Willie Hofmeyr that corruption, incompetence and negligence in the public sector were costing the state R30 billion a year, ACDP MP Steve Swart said the unit’s target for uncovering financial misconduct of R1bn in procurement was “a drop in the bucket”.
“My concern is the direct question… are we making any impact in the fight against corruption when one looks at the figures and the targets?”
The SIU was presenting its strategic plan, annual performance plan and budget to Parliament’s justice oversight committee.
It had set itself a target of R100 million for potential cash recoverable, but had achieved R179m the previous year.
The target should be higher, Swart said.
It had managed impressive figures in evidence prepared for civil litigation, which referred to attempts to have irregular contracts set aside or to enforce delivery, achieving 9 800 for 2009/10, 7 600 for 2010 and 6 400 for 2011.
But it had fallen to 300 last year, which Swart described as the unit’s “annus horribilis”, and was expected to slump to 30 this year and 40 next year.
He noted that the SIU had declared its intention to focus on more complex cases.
“But it’s a massive drop. From thousands down to tens, almost,” Swart said.
ANC MP John Jeffery said while it was understandable that if the SIU was shifting its focus to bigger, more complex cases the number would fall, the total value of cases should increase significantly.
MPs also complained that the presentation lacked detail.
DA MP Debbie Schafer said she wanted a full list of investigations proclaimed and progress reports on each.
Acting SIU boss, advocate Nomvula Mokhatla, said the explanation for the drop in the value of procurement irregularities identified was that the unit had previously based its reporting on the total procurement budget of a department under investigation.
It now reported the actual value of contracts where financial misconduct had been uncovered.
SIU legal head, Gerhard Visagie, said the targets should not be viewed only in relation to the R30bn estimated loss to the state, but also in light of the deterrent effect of investigations.
For example, when the unit began its investigation into social-grant fraud and there were reports of successful prosecutions and cancelled grants, there had been a “huge spike” in the number of grants surrendered voluntarily and not collected, he said.
This could only be attributed to the deterrent effect of the probe. But Swart said if this were true, levels of corruption should be falling. The opposite was true, however.
“The concern is still the levels are increasing to an unacceptable level and we need to take more drastic action,” he said.