No, ministers should not pay

I am sure you have seen all over the media the furore about the benefits ministers get from the fiscus.

Let’s break it down – previously the public works department was responsible for providing and paying for water and electricity up to R5,000 per month on all stateowned residences occupied by ministers and their deputies, and anything over that the occupant had to pay.

Earlier this year, the president changed the ministerial handbook and all the expenses related to the provision of water and electricity to those stateowned residences are now to be incurred by the public works department, entirely.

Those up in arms point out that these ministers earn in excess of R160,000 per month, so surely they can afford to pay their own way.

There were also newspaper reports that the state spent more than R2m on generators for the minister’s houses in the last year or so.

Cosatu spokesperson Sizwe Phamla said: “It is extremely insensitive for this administration to cushion the members of the executive, while expecting extreme sacrifices from the workers and the unemployed.”

At first glance it seems overly generous, unwarranted and wasteful. There are 126 official residences both in Pretoria and Cape Town that can be used by ministers.

These ministers are almost always up and about doing their work, so in reality how many of them actually stay in those residences for an extended period of time?

Many of them earn enough to be able to buy themselves very comfortable private homes which may be way superior to some of the residences the state provides for them.

Many are from Gauteng, so how many actually spend a lot of time in those state houses?

The way this has blown up has led to a lot of people relying on headlines and soundbites without reading what the ministerial handbook actually says.

I am sure if I could ask you what the issue is, many would falsely claim that ministers do not pay for electricity and water, period, without qualifying this by saying – in the official residences owned by the state and maintained by the public works department.

I bet many of you missed that part. Being a minister is not a job but a political appointment that can be terminated at the whim of a sitting president. There is no employment contract and no job security whatsoever.

The minister is in the service of the public 24 hours a day with no discernible working hours and determined holidays, like many other public servants.

While being a minister looks glamorous, it hardly is and involves a lot of time away from home and work around the clock.

Do you want to be in a situation when you have a crisis, where your minister tells you he has no electricity because of load-shedding so he cannot help you?

The minister has his own home which he or she pays for and maintains, so why should they be made to pay for a residence we provide for them in order to carry out their duties?

Do we apply the same logic to teachers who stay in school boarding houses who pay no rent, no electricity and get free food?

What about prison warders, soldiers and the police who stay in quarters for next to nothing?

All these civil servants have permanent jobs or contracts and job security, something ministers do not enjoy.

Do you remember Des van Rooyen? While I understand it is fashionable to slate government and all that, in this instance I think we are being dramatic and unfair. Let the ministers worry about doing their very demanding jobs without having to worry about running residences that do not even belong to them.