Eskom forks out for Davos trip, but denies sponsorship

ESKOM has vehemently denied it is sponsoring a World Economic Forum (WEF) event in Davos, Switzerland, next week.

This follows a letter written to the power utility by Natasha Michael, DA spokeswoman on public enterprises, demanding that it cancel its apparent sponsorship for the event.

Michael has said that spon- soring and attending the international event has “nothing to do with solving South Africa’s electricity crisis and is a completely unjustifiable expense at a time when Eskom is broke and holding out the begging bowl to South Africans to fund (its) mismanagement”.

She said “no fewer than three executives” would be flying to Davos to represent Eskom.

“It would be complete hypocrisy for Eskom’s chief executive officer to announce that Eskom is on the brink of bankruptcy and its infrastructure is fast collapsing while simultaneously sponsoring a global event in Switzerland.

“Who are Eskom trying to fool by playing up to an international audience when in their own backyard they are creating the conditions for an economic shutdown?

“Further to this, organisa- tions ordinarily attending the WEF are granted one attendee invitation but, as a sponsor, Eskom can send three delegates and has duly taken up this opportunity.”

Michael’s comments followed a report in the Mail and Guardian that said Eskom had not responded to questions about the value of its partnership with the WEF.

The M&G also asked whether a week-long absence by Eskom’s top leaders would be appropriate during a time of crisis.

Yesterday, Eskom spokesman Andrew Etzinger said that the power utility was definitely not sponsoring the WEF.

“I have to point out that only two people will be attending the event.

“This is our chairman, Zola Tsotsi, who is a member of the Inter national Chamber of Business, and our sustainability executive, Steve Lennon, who is an internationally respected expert on climate change.

“This is an extremely important event and it is vital that we are properly represented there.”

Etzinger added that a response to questions had been sent to the M&G. He did not know why it was not included in the newspaper’s report.