Need explanations for spending

E-mail your letter to The Herald

FUNERAL TRIBUTE: Mlamli Nhani signs a tribute message at the Motherwell, public viewing area in Port Elizabeth on the day of former president Nelson Mandela's funeral. There was a poor turnout at the city's viewing sites. Picture: FREDLIN ADRIAAN
FUNERAL TRIBUTE: Mlamli Nhani signs a tribute message at the Motherwell, public viewing area in Port Elizabeth on the day of former president Nelson Mandela’s funeral. There was a poor turnout at the city’s viewing sites.
Picture: FREDLIN ADRIAAN

ONCE again the people in charge of our finances, who so often use excuses for non-service delivery, have shown their arrogance and have totally disregarded instructions regarding expenditure on events during the Madiba mourning period (“City budget cuts to pay for Madiba mourning events”, February 28).

Among the items of real concern is the R1.7-million that was spent on the Nelson Mandela Stadium and to amplify this is the fact that is was R1.2-million more than what was originally budgeted!

Somebody’s financial acumen is sorely lacking.

Somebody needs to explain why there was a need for T-shirts for a mourning service which cost this metro almost R600000.

Did mourners need to be identified by wearing a special T-shirt?

The general dress code for mourning across the world is black.

Why in South Africa do we need to buy T-shirts for mourners?

Who decided on 46000 T-shirts, why not 40000 or 50000?

Many of the other items and amounts are questionable.

It is no wonder that this metro is always short of finances. Spokesman Roland Williams is quick to point out that these expenses were decided on by “multiparty, multi-organisational and multi-directorate task teams”.

Well, this certainly clears him from any wrongdoing, such as that which he was blamed for during the 2010 World Cup.

Mr Williams, it does not really matter how many parties, organisations and directorates were responsible for making these decisions – orders given by central government were not adhered to and now many departments will suffer as a result of this and ultimately the tax-paying residents of this city will suffer too.

With regard to the R6-million, Williams uses the term “we” in his remark – “only a fraction of what we owe him and his colleagues” – very loosely.

Williams probably does not realise that when he uses the word “we” he is talking about a certain percentage of residents of this city.

It does not necessarily mean all of the tax-paying residents of this metro whose money was used to fund this project and unfortunately none of these residents were consulted about this expenditure.

I notice he cleverly uses the words “Madiba and his colleagues”. Who exactly are these colleagues and for what do “we” owe them for?

Most certainly not for what they have done for this city or have you not seen the decay?

Mr Williams, I am most certainly not one of your “we” members, I pay my rates and taxes, I pay for my water and electricity and pay my taxes to SARS – I do not owe this municipality, Madiba or his colleagues anything.

I can already see how they are going to recover this money from the 2014-2015 budget allocation, and again using this as an excuse why houses and other services will not be delivered.

George van der Merwe, South End, Port Elizabeth

 

Leave a Reply

Please keep in mind that comments are moderated according to our comment moderation policy. Your email address is required but will not be published.