MEC of Roads and Transport
in the Gauteng Provincial
Legislature, Ismail Vadi, has
hit out against accusations
that he failed to take action
against alleged expenditure
irregularities by senior
officials at the Gauteng Roads
and Transport department.
The MEC came under fire
from two sides last week.
First, the whistleblower –
who is himself undergoing
“disciplinary proceedings”
within the department –
opened a case of fraud against
Vadi for allegedly “failing
to stop the abuse of public
funds by officials within his
department”.
In his charge, the
whistleblower (who is chief
director of registration and
operating licensing at the
department) alleges that he
informed Vadi of the abuse of
public funds early this year,
but that Vadi failed to take
action.
The abuse reportedly relates
to two cases, one in which a
legal firm was paid R600 000
to represent the department
in an internal disciplinary
matter, and another where
an advance payment of
R26.5m was made to a private
construction
company
for upgrade
work done
on William
Nicol drive in
Johannesburg.
When the
criminal case
against Vadi
was made
public via
the Sunday
news media,
Democratic Alliance Shadow
Minister for Roads and
Transport, Fred Nel, called
him out for going after the
whistleblower and “deciding
to keep quiet” about his lack
of action.
He called on Gauteng
premier David Makhura
to appoint an independent
investigator to “scrutinise
these allegations of
impropriety” in Vadi’s
department as he said it
was clear that the MEC was
“tainted”.
Vadi
responded
in a strongly
worded
statement to
the Gauteng
legislature
cautioning Nel
not to believe
everything he
read in the
media, noting
that sometimes
“the only truth in the article is
the date of publication”.
He added: “I wish to
assure the House that the
Department of Roads and
Transport will, after proper
investigation, act on any
transgression of the law and
the regulatory framework.”
In a statement sent to FTW,
Vadi pointed out that the
matter of the appointment
of the legal firm and the
payment of R600 000 to
that firm had first been
raised by the whistleblower
in September last year. “I
immediately referred the
matter to Treasury for
investigation and informed
the person who raised it with
me.”
Vadi said he had received
the outcome of the Probity
Audit Report from the MEC
of Finance, Barbara Creecy,
in April this year but that
the head of department had
sought further clarity and
advice from the Treasury
department.
“Having considered
the merits of the
recommendations of the
report – and the further
guidance from the head of the
Treasury department – I can
report that administrative
action will be taken against
the official identified in the
report,” Vadi said.
On the second matter
relating to the R26.5m,
he said that the matter
had already been under
investigation since May this
year. “It is expected that this
investigation will be finalised
within the next two weeks,”
said Vadi.
Nel told FTW he was
pleased to hear that some
action had been taken, but
questioned the fact that it
had taken so long for Vadi to
react. “I look forward to the
results of the investigations,”
he added.
He also raised concern that
the whistleblower seemed to
have been targeted. “Even
if he is under suspicion, it
doesn’t mean his allegations
aren’t true,” said Nel.
INSERT & CAPTION
It is expected that
this investigation will
be finalised within
the next two
