Let Majodina account for son’s deal

ANC chief whip Pemmy Majodina must be held accountable for allowing her son to benefit from a contract to supply thermometers to the party’s parliamentary caucus.

The Sunday Times reported that Majodina’s son Mkhonto weSizwe was awarded a deal to supply150 thermometers valued at R350 each. His company King Mzimshe Trading invoiced the caucus R52,500 in January.

In the report Majodina claimed that the caucus did not have to go to open tender as the amount was less than R100,000. This was disputed by her colleagues in the caucus.

Even if this was the case, the problem here is a clear case of conflict of interest and what appears to have been nepotism on the part of the chief whip.

Therefore her attempt to obfuscate the issue is disingenuous and lowers the bar of the kind of conduct we should expect from someone who occupies her position.

In her initial response Majodina attempted to downplay this conflict. She then claimed the process of awarding the contract had been led by the caucus’s head of finance, thus implying that she was not involved.

Yesterday morning her office released a statement in which she said the involvement of her son in the procurement of the equipment was “regrettable”.

“It is the intention of the chief whip to subject herself to a parliamentary ethics probe if and when called upon to do so to clear perception of any flouting of regulations,” her statement said.

This is not good enough. It is improbable that Majodina would not have known that the caucus she leads was transacting with her son. One of her responsibilities as chief whip is to act as the accounting officer for the party in respect of money received from parliament for administrative and political support. Therefore she has a duty to ensure its efficient and transparent administration, following due processes as required by law.

This appears not to have been the case here. For that Majodina must account.

Parliament has the responsibility to investigate any role she may have had in the awarding of the tender as well as her conduct in addressing the matter. If found guilty, she must face the appropriate sanction.