Cosatu called it right on S'bu Ndebele's Merc

As we noted earlier this week the row over British members of parliament claiming expenses on their second homes does not revolve around the issue of whether they were legal or not but rather the question of their moral defensibility. Indeed in the overwhelming majority of cases the items concerned were totally legitimate in accordance with British law; the problems arose when members tried to justify the necessity of draining moats and cleaning chandeliers to the hard-pressed taxpayers of that country.

The same — I dare say — must apply to the issue of S’bu Ndebele’s Mercedes.

The transport minister has been given an S500 Mercedes-Benz and two head of cattle by a grateful group of contractors. At this point in time I have no reason to doubt that the gifts were an act of kindness and gratitude for above-board assistance given by Ndebele to Vukuzakhe and the rest of the parties who gave the gifts.

The minister thereupon approached President Jacob Zuma and enquired as to whether it would be proper for him to retain these items considering their value and the basis upon which they were given. The president, correctly in my humble opinion, confirmed that as long as the minister complied with the ethical requirements he was free to make an election as to whether he wanted to keep it or not. It is not illegal for ministers to keep gifts provided that they are given in accordance with the proper procedures and arising from a legal basis.

In Britain, for example, two Lords have been suspended following a potential bribery scandal:

“In the Lords, two Labour peers were recommended for suspension after a report on the ‘cash for amendments’ scandal. The Lords Privileges Committee found that Lord Truscott and Lord Taylor of Blackburn ‘failed to act on their personal honour’ by offering to help undercover reporters posing as lobbyists to seek amendments to government legislation in return for cash.”

Accordingly not only the procedure but the basis for the giving of the gift is in question where a minister or member of parliament is involved. They are after all representing the people of the country and must be seen to be people of integrity.

Yet even if all of that is in order, we must ask whether it is morally defensible for our transport minister to be accepting lavish gifts of that kind at this point in time?

The Democratic Alliance believe that the decision of whether to keep the gifts or not should not have been left to the minister. I disagree on the basis that where we have established ethical guidelines and laws governing an issue it should never be subject to outside interference other than by courts of law or bodies specifically created to hear complaints regarding that issue. Subject to what is set out above, it must be left to the party concerned to make the call.

“However, the Congress of South African Trade Union’s Patrick Craven argued that the president was merely following the law. ‘The legal position, I’m sure, is that he was entitled to accept it but I don’t think that in anyway alters the fact that the moral position was to return the gifts,’ Craven remarked.” (iafrica)

South Africa is currently embarking on a war against poverty because millions of our people live in appalling conditions and fight starvation almost every day of their lives. How would it look to them if the minister was to accept these gifts so soon after his appointment, or at all?

I believe that Craven’s summation is the correct answer.

My heart does go out to the minister because nobody in their right mind would want to give up that Merc.

Unfortunately in his position it was the right thing to do.

S’bu Ndebele and Trevor Manuel talk ethics