Necsa and Cef to appear before committee on Mineral Resources and Energy to present annual performance plans

The Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources and Energy heard legal opinions from Parliamentary Legal Services on whether it is legally bound to request the South African Nuclear Energy Corporation (Necsa) and the Central Energy Fund (CEF) to appear before it to account on their annual performance and strategic plans, reports Abel Mputing.

The two entities did not present their performance and strategic plans for the current financial year on the grounds that schedule 2 entities are not obliged to table these plans in Parliament.

Mr Kanana said the bank finds it difficult to provide loans and is thus not able to prioritise its development and transformation mandate as much as it did in the past. This mandate has long been the bank’s priority. In recent years, this priority grew from 4% to 22% to date and it is envisaged that it will grow up to 55% of the loan book going forward.

Mr Buthelezi emphasised the importance of this mandate for South Africa to thrive. He also noted that the committee would continue to engage with the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs and urged National Treasury to have a special focus on the Land Bank. “If not, we would not have food security and the country will go hungry. We don’t want that to happen. Even a thought of it is undesirable. Let us ensure that the bank succeeds in all its endeavours. There is so much that is at stake in it.”

The committee also wanted legal opinion on whether it can still intervene and conduct oversight over procurement on the Risk Mitigation Independent Power Producer Procurement Programme (RMIPPPP). This is related to the allegations of corruption shrouding the awarding of a contract to the Turkish-led Karpowership Consortium, which is now the subject of litigation filed by the energy consortium DNG Power Holdings.

The RMIPPPP was released to the market in August 2020. The aim of the programme is to alleviate short-term electricity supply constraints and to reduce the extensive utilisation of diesel-based peaking electrical generators in the medium-tolong-term.

In giving an overview of what led to the committee to solicit a legal opinion on Necsa and CEF, the Chairperson of the committee, Mr Sahlulele Luzipo, said the entities did not appear before the committee during the year under review. This was based on the fact that they are schedule 2 entities and therefore they submit to the Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy for approval.

The committee understands that as schedule 2 entities, Necsa and CEF are not legally compelled to table annual performance and strategic plans in Parliament. It also notes Parliament Legal Services’ contention that they do not receive funding through the Appropriations Bill. However, all entities are subject to the committee’s oversight ambit and when public entities experience liquidity challenges, they rely on a Special Appropriations Bill for relief.