Top secret: What Zuma’s home cost you

 It’s classified. Even the audit of the expenditure on what is now officially known as the Nkandla Security Project is a secret.

“You will never know how much was spent for all the presidents because it is classified,” said acting public works director-general Mandisa Fatyela-Lindie on Friday. “The Defence Act will take me to jail [if I disclosed that].”

And public works would not confirm the amounts spent for security and other developments at President Jacob Zuma’s rural homestead that media reports suggested would cost between R203 million and R238m, most if not all of it from taxpayers’ pockets.

On Sunday City Press reported that Zuma would pick up only five percent of a R203m tab, while the Mail & Guardian reported on Friday that costs could run to R238m – this on top of the R1 billion earmarked for a new town to be built in the Nkandla area through the Masibambisane rural development project chaired by Zuma.

Fatyela-Lindie was adam-ant: “We can’t confirm. That is classified information… Our legal interpretation of the Defence Act prohibits any official from releasing classified information.”

Public Works Minister Thulas Nxesi questioned the motives of leaks from his department – at a time when the ruling ANC opened nominations for leadership elections at its Mangaung conference.

“There’s no way we can classify the president’s residence [private or otherwise] like any other residence… unless you are in denial because it is a particular president.”

Nxesi also cited SA’s constitutionally-enshrined cultural diversity.

“We have to respect all cultures. The president comes from a rural area, not a city… and the president’s family, whether you accept the family or not, is in Nkandla, and it’s not a small family.”

Zuma’s Nkandla home and nine other presidential residences and those of former presidents were declared National Key Points by Police Minister Nathi Mthethwa on April 8, 2010, the presidency said on Friday.

The upgrade at Nkandla started in 2010. Briefing journalists in Parliament, Nxesi said it was a coincidence that the president’s personal funding of improvements at his rural homestead coincided with the official security upgrade.

Public works’s argument is that while the ministerial handbook limits spending on security at residences of public office bearers to R100 000, this was only one consideration as the same guidelines also referred to the need for security assessments.

“The approach to providing security at the Nkandla high risk area was based on a frank assessment of the security threat there and the requirements of the security forces.

“The security threat analysis pointed to a deep rural area in which there were basically none of the services we all take for granted in an urban area,” Nxesi said.

For this reason security arrangements included fences and barriers, “the relocation of pylons to allow a clear access flight path”, fire-fighting capacity at the Nkandla helipad, waterborne sewerage, roads, a clinic, guard houses and stations and “the creation of safe havens as with other sites all over the country”. 

- Saturday Star

Press statement on Nkandlagate Security Project from the Ministry of Public Works

The Security Project at Nkandla has raised enormous public interest. Although it is not the standard practice to comment on the security arrangements of dignitaries, it is now clear that certain parties will continue to make allegations about this project unless these serious misperceptions are refuted with facts. We are cognizant of the fact that by discussing some of these security arrangements openly, we endanger the very same security.

The Government has decided to give as many details as the maintenance of sound security arrangements allows.

At the outset we would like to state that the developments at Nkandla are by no means unique and are part of works undertaken and being undertaken at various security sites like Houghton, Qunu, Union Buildings, Tuynhuis, Parliament and King’s House.

When President Zuma was elected President, it was a requirement understood by all that the security would have to be beefed up at places of high security risk. An expert team representing the Departments of Police Service, Defence (and Military Veterans) and State Security reviewed the circumstances surrounding our principal and addressed all shortcomings.

As part of meeting international standards for the security of dignitaries, plans were drawn up and implemented. As part of this process, new capacity was requested for Nkandla, in and surrounding the private residence of President Zuma.

The approach to providing security at the Nkandla high risk area was based on a frank assessment of the security threat there and the requirements of the security forces. The security threat analysis pointed to a deep rural area in which there was basically none of the services we all take for granted in an urban area.

The water supply was erratic with it being available for hours at a time and only for a few days of the week. There was no waterborne sewage. The Eskom pylons and the mountainous area made access by air (helicopter) hazardous. The steep terrain and the surrounding cliffs and mountains make any form of transport difficult in bad weather. The roads to the area were muddy and required good 4x4 driving skills and suitable vehicles.

Given that the area is on the leeward side of the surrounding escarpment and is generally dryer than surrounding areas, the threat of fire was high.

The security forces would need to be accommodated locally as a 24/7/365 service was required with force levels varying based on the current threat. The poor or non-existent roads would need to be improved.

It was noted that the venue was the location of many diverse type of functions. There were meetings of heads of state, cabinet ministers, other high risk dignitaries, local communities, provincial and national government and many foreign and local other categories of dignitaries.

It was decided that the following principles would be adhered:

1. The residence of the President is a private residence which has been declared as a National Key Point (as are all other presidential residences). Our responsibility to protect should not unduly interfere in the privacy of the principal’s household.

2. The security forces and other government employees would have to be accommodated locally. To base them themselves at the nearest town, Eshowe, was impractical. Parking for security vehicles would also be needed.

3. The security provision should be able to deal with any level of threat and be able to escalate to the level required.

4. Clear separation must be made of expenses that are for the private account of the principal and that which arose from the state’s duty to provide appropriate security.

5. Instead of continuing to land in local veld, there should be proper helipads to allow for day and night landings with statutory approval for the safety features.

6. The healthcare provision should allow for proper healthcare to all government officials deployed on site (President and approved dependants, military, security) and the constitutional imperative to not turn away any health emergency by healthcare workers. Given the threat level, there should be adequate capacity to maximize medical interventions in the “golden first hour” of trauma management.

7. Occupational and environmental health requirements such as working conditions, food and water safety, proper refuse management were to be provided for relevant government employees.

8. Sufficient garaging was to be provided for.

9. Aircrew pavilion was to be provided for air force personnel to allow for standard inter flight rest areas.

10. Military and police assets were to be properly safeguarded.

11. Any new capacity should benefit the local community in the short term to the extent possible and then maximized when the principal was no longer President, for example, the clinic and security compound.

12. The President would continue to receive state support when no longer President and this must be factored in as with other retired Presidents.

These principles, among others, resulted in the following measures to satisfy the requirements of the security forces.

1. The reinforcing of barriers

2. The erection of high security fences

3. The provision of local fire fighting capability for the helipads

4. The creation of safe havens as with other sites all over the country

5. The relocation of pylons to allow a clear access flight path

6. Roads constructions in and around the precincts

7. The building of a security compound to house security and support staff

8. Improving and rendering the water safe

9. The provision of waterborne sewage systems

10. The provision of an air crew pavilion

11. The provision of a clinic in a lower security area to allow for both dignitary care and later conversion to part of the community health service in the area

12. Security guard houses and stations

13. Security systems for all areas

14. The provisions of interim accommodation arrangements with Park homes etc. while the construction was on-going

15. Earthworks and barriers erection.

We are pleased to announce that, although there were a few hiccups, as would be expected with this high security project and the difficult local circumstances, that most of the state requirements have been met. We have taken special care to allocate expenses to private and public entities, as appropriate.

Lastly, this government required changes were effected whilst the President was himself effecting a major upgrade to his residence on his own private account.

Statement issued by the Departments of Public Works, in consultation with Safety and Security, Defence and Military Veterans and South African Police Service.

Issued by: Department of Public Works 

5 Oct 2012

Zuma’s R1000-a-year deal for Nkandla homestead

PRESIDENT Jacob Zuma does not own the land on which his Nkandla compound is built – and Public Works is now doing a deal to take up the lease, potentially for as little as R1000 a year.

This means that not only will the Zuma compound be bankrolled by the taxpayer to the tune of R203m, but so will the land on which it stands.

The compound – which, City Press revealed, is being upgraded with a R203m investment by the department of Public Works – is on communal land owned by the Ingonyama Trust and is about 24km south of Nkandla town centre in northern KwaZulu-Natal.

The trust is headed by King Goodwill Zwelithini and manages about 32% of all land in the province on behalf of the state for the benefit of its occupants.

The disclosure also challenges the justification of spending on the property by Public Works in the face of a public outcry over the splurge. The department cited the Ministerial Handbook’s rules allowing spending on the president’s “private” residence.

The handbook defines a private residence as a “privately owned house” and says only R100000 worth of security-related upgrades may be made to office bearers’ private residences; the rest should be for the politician’s account. The National Key Points Act – also cited to justify the spending – also requires the owner of the property to pay for security out of his own pocket, unless the Minister of Police orders otherwise.

Judge Jerome Ngwenya, the chairman of the trust, confirmed that the Ingonyama Trust held title to the land on which Zuma’s residences stand, and that it had given permission for the development to take place.

Ngwenya could not reveal the specific conditions of the lease for Zuma’s compound, but he said the Department of Public Works usually paid the trust R1000 per year in rental for similar premises of schools, clinics and other public buildings under its custodianship. The leases were usually valid for 40 or 99 years.

He said prior to the arrangement currently being finalised with the Department of Public Works, Zuma had held tenure rights to the Nkandla homestead in his personal capacity.

But Zuma has never declared owning the tenure in his legally required public declaration of interests despite occupying the property from at least 2000.

Public Works already maintains three state-owned official presidential residences in Cape Town, Pretoria and Durban.

Several legal experts told Media24 Investigations that if Zuma does not hold title to the land, the beneficiary of the massive upgrades to the Nkandla compound would ultimately be the Ingonyama Trust, as land held by the trust cannot be sold.

Prof. Themba Msimang, an IFP MP with similar occupational rights to land in the Nkandla area, described the situation as “a big problem”.

“He hasn’t got title to the land; it’s communally owned, and that means that if you are no longer needed for staying there, [the land] reverts back to Ingonyama Trust and given to the next occupant.

“It’s a big question mark, especially for someone approaching the end of his term,” Msimang said.

Mario Oriano-Ambrosini, an IFP MP who was involved in drafting the legislation that set up the trust, said the situation ought to have been remedied by the Communal Land Rights Act, which provided for traditional land to be transferred to occupants, but the act was declared unconstitutional in 2010 and the process has been placed on hold.

He said because leases with the Ingonyama Trust could be registered with the deed’s office, they could be sold on and Zuma could be regarded as the owner.

There is no record of a deed registered in the President’s name in KwaZulu-Natal, according to online deed’s office records.

Requests for comment from the Presidency, Department of Public Works and police ministry went unanswered.

- m24i

Protests cost Cape ratepayers R14m

Cape Town - Service delivery protests have left Cape Town ratepayers with a R14 million bill – the cost of damage caused over the past three months.

The city’s safety and security executive director Richard Bosman outlined the impact and costs of the protests on Thursday. He was briefing the city’s safety and security portfolio committee.

The city also plans to share its model on responding to the protests with other municipalities in the province.

Bosman said there was the possibility of more protests in the run-up to the 2014 elections.

At the height of the protests, city officials met every day. Early warning systems informed officers of protests before they broke out, and there were constant patrols along freeways including the N1, N7 and N2.

Metro police, traffic and law enforcement officer patrols increased during hot spot times, which were identified as Monday and Friday mornings.

Off-duty staff were roped in and overtime costs climbed to more than R1m.

Staff had to act soon to ensure damaged services were repaired quickly.

Bosman said Golden Arrow Bus Services staff were among the city’s most important allies.

“They had conductors on the road from about four in the morning, and became important in our early warning system.”

The R14m bill is for:

• Repairing roads, which cost R6m.
• Fixing traffic signals, which cost R4.5m.
• Overtime for staff, which came in at R1.5m.
• Fixing portable toilets, which cost R1.5m. Cleaning services added R500,000 to the bill.

A video was played showing protesters destroying a new traffic signal set up on Duinefontein Road in July. The signals were still covered with tape and were only set to start operating the following day.

In about five minutes, just after 3am, the entire set of signals was destroyed. Bosman said it had cost R1m to put up and was in response to a high number of car accidents at that intersection.

Bosman said the key to dealing with the protests was managing and meeting on the incidents and plans daily.

It was critical to have immediate responses, where officers received tip-offs of possible protests.

Bosman said the protests had died down recently, but added that the city might get more involved in the police’s operations around the current transport strike.

Bosman stressed the importance of regular maintenance and repairs.

- Cape Argus

Nkandla upgrade: Last-minute bid to hide costs

President Jacob Zuma's Nkandla homestead appears to have been declared a national key point and consequently subject to blanket secrecy.

Even more state funds than reported – now nearly R240-million – is being spent on President Jacob Zuma's Nkandla homestead, the government's own figures show. This emerged as the government ratcheted up attempts this week to suppress the information using apartheid-era secrecy legislation.

A document published by City Press on Sunday last week revealed that in March 2011 the state approved a security upgrade for an amount of R203-million at Nkandla, Zuma's private home.

But department of public works director general Mandisa Fatyela-Lindie refused to comment in City Press, claiming the homestead was a national key point and thus subject to blanket secrecy.

Skirting draconian defence laws with ease in Zuma's sleepy hometown

Public Works Minister Thulas Nxesi then defended the enormous expenditure and announced that the mere possession of the "top secret" document was illegal and he would investigate how it had reached the newspaper. Yet such posturing has been undermined by the fact that, in May this year, Fatyela-Lindie herself supplied Nkandla's detailed cost allocations and projections in a briefing before Parliament's National Council of Provinces. This document can be freely accessed online. It suggests the department and Nxesi's claims that the information is "top secret" could be a recent construct, designed to prevent embarrassment for Zuma in the run-up to the ANC's elective conference in Mangaung in December. Scrutiny of the legislation used to justify the secrecy suggests the claims are paper-thin.

The cost schedule presented to the council reveals the following:

• Contractor fees at Nkandla are expected to total R193-million;
• Consultant fees at the homestead are projected to cost an extra R44-million. Three engineers canvassed by the Mail & Guardian expressed concern that, at 23% of the contractor's fee, this figure was very high. Consultant fees on such projects typically range between 10% and 15%;
• Several security upgrades for ministerial private residences are priced at exactly R100 000, which is consistent with the ministerial handbook regulations. The only two exceptions are Zuma's Nkandla, totalling R238-million and former President Nelson Mandela's Qunu residence, at R23-million, a fraction of what is being spent on Zuma;
• The department misled the M&G last November when it claimed it was spending only R36-million on Nkandla. In the cost schedule, it does reveal that R36-million was spent on contractor fees in "previous years". But the schedule also reveals that during the same period the department spent another R26-million on consultant fees.
• In addition to this glaring omission, the department was obfuscatory by failing to make reference to the enormous projected costs.
• Secrecy provisions

According to the May 2012 cost schedule, contractors' fees are projected to reach R194-million and consultant fees would reach a startlingly high R44-million. This adds up to R238-million. These figures dwarf the earlier claim of R36-million and are considerably more than the R203-million approved by the department back in March 2011, as reported by City Press.

The public works department first argued that Nkandla was subject to secrecy provisions in response to an M&G Centre for Investigative Journalism (amaBhungane) Promotion of Access to Information Act (Paia) application in August.

In the application, amaBhungane requested financial and procurement information for the Nkandla upgrade, emphasising it was not interested in "technical detail of security-sensitive improvements".

But Fatyela-Lindie rejected amaBhungane's application, claiming Nkandla was a national key point and "information related to [it] is protected in terms of the National Key Points Act". Fatyela-Lindie's arguments are misplaced. First, the National Key Points Act has an impact on information disclosure "relating to the security measures" or "any incident that occurred there". Clearly, she could have given details on the amounts of money being spent.

More importantly – as pointed out by amaBhungane's lawyers in an appeal to the refusal – Paia should override the National Key Points Act in this case. "Where any other legislation has the effect of prohibiting or restricting disclosure of a record and where such provision is materially inconsistent with either an object or specific provision of Paia, then Paia will apply and not the restrictive provision of the other legislation."

It remains unclear when Nkandla was designated a national key point. For example, when the M&G approached the department last November, it willingly detailed the various facets of its security upgrades. That, together with the cost disclosures made in Parliament, suggests Nkandla might have been assigned key-point status only after May. It raises the disturbing possibility that Nkandla was de-signated a national key point in a conscious attempt to hide information after questions arose about the huge expenditure, such as through ­amaBhungane's Paia application.

Ministerial handbook

AmaBhungane is appealing the department's decision to reject its Paia application.

Faced with heated criticism, Nxesi this week defended his department's spending on Nkandla by claiming it was "in line with the Ministerial Handbook".

On the face of it, however, this is just plain wrong. As pointed out by constitutional law expert Pierre de Vos, the handbook allows public works to spend a maximum of R100 000 on security measures at Cabinet members' private residences. Additional costs are for the minister in question, or, in this case, Zuma's account.

How Nxesi justifies the expenditure in terms of the handbook remains unclear.

According to City Press, when the public works department approved R203-million in state spending on Nkandla, officials also discussed whether or not R10.7-million should be billed to Zuma because this fell outside the state's mandate. But it appears Zuma would not be able to afford this without assistance.

Since his appointment as president in May 2009 to the financial year ending April 1 2013, Zuma will have received a total salary of R9 730 596.

Zuma's R9.7-million presidential salary for the four years is therefore R900 000 short of the R10.6-million the department of public works has agreed will be his personal contribution towards the upgrade.In November 2011, the M&G reported that one of the companies contracted by the department of public works to do construction work in Nkandla, Bonelena Construction Enterprise, employed Zuma's niece. One of the company's projects, referred to as "Project A", was worth R30-million for work undertaken in Nkandla.

Zuma's high-flying nephew Khulubuse, who has his finger in several multimillion-rand mining pies, also has his own residence in the compound. According to reports, Khulubuse's stands include two double-storey flats and two houses.

Presidential spokesperson Mac Maharaj received the questions, but was not able to reply by the M&G's print deadline. – Additional research by Vinayak Bhardwaj

Disclosure: The M&G Centre for Investigative Journalism's mandate includes advocacy to secure the information rights that ­investigative journalists need to do their work. As such, it has ­campaigned against the abuse of secrecy laws to ­withhold important information from the public

- M&G

Nkandla row: Now the cover-up

If allegations are true that the state is ploughing R203 million into upgrading President Jacob Zuma’s private home at Nkandla, he might be in breach of the law, says constitutional law expert Pierre de Vos.

Public Works Minister Thulaws Nxesi says he and his department are “not aware” of the amounts that City Press reported at the weekend would be spent on improvements at Nkandla. The newspaper said documents in its possession indicated Zuma would be paying only five percent – around R10m – of the costs.

Now, Nxesi says he is launching an investigation into how the newspaper ended up in possession of what he says is “a top secret document” that the newspaper evidently obtained “illegally”.

The DA has accused Nxesi of “shooting the messenger”. Party spokeswoman on public works, Anchen Dreyer, said she would ask for an urgent meeting of Parliament’s public works oversight committee so that Nxesi could be called to explain both the alleged spending and his plans to probe the newspaper’s actions.

In a statement on Tuesday, Nxesi said no details would be given about any work being carried out at Nkandla. This was because it fell under the National Key Points Act.

But he defended any spending on security arrangements at the remote KwaZulu-Natal presidential compound and said these were “approved and carried out… in line with the Ministerial Handbook”.

De Vos – writing in his blog, Constitutionally Speaking raises a number of questions about both the use of the Act – introduced during the height of apartheid in 1980 – and the handbook.

He says the Executive Members’ Ethics Act and code of conduct bars any president from using his position to enrich himself, or to disregard administrative rules that apply to him.

De Vos says the Ministerial Handbook clearly states that cabinet members must pay “for all costs related to the procurement, upkeep and maintenance of private residences used for official purposes”.

While some costs for security arrangements at private residences can be paid by the state this was limited to R100,000, according to Annexure E to the handbook, adopted by cabinet on June 11, 2003.

The difference in cost had to be carried by the public office bearer.

“The president is clearly a public office bearer. Nkandla is clearly his private home… Any amount above R100,000 spent on any upgrades at Nkandla (even for security-related reasons) are therefore not spent in accordance with the provisions of the Ministerial Handbook and must be deemed unlawful,” De Vos states.

And he says, while the National Key Points Act allowed for the use of public funds to protect them, this had to be paid from the Special Account for the Safeguarding of National Key Points and only on instruction of the Minister of Defence.

The government could refuse to give information on security measures at Nkandla but could not use the Act to “try and hide unlawful expenditure on the upgrading of his private house through the looting of public funds”.

De Vos says in a constitutional democracy, legislation can never be used to hide unlawful conduct, maladministration or corruption – nor be used “to try and escape from accountability for the spending of public funds.”

- Political Bureau

Nxesi contradicts handbook on Nkandla upgrade

The ministerial handbook has again been used to veil state officials' spending of public funds on private luxuries - this time on Zuma's Nkandla home.

Public Works Minister Thulas Nxesi has defended the department’s plans to spend R203-million on upgrading President Jacob Zuma’s homestead in Nkandla, saying this was in line with the ministerial handbook. But a look at the handbook has shown that this is not the case.

On Tuesday, Nxesi was quoted in the City Press as saying: "I would like to state categorically that everything that has been approved and carried out at the private residence of the current president is in line with the ministerial handbook as far as it relates to security arrangements for private residences of the president."

Nxesi then criticised the newspaper for publishing details of the "top secret" documentation and warned that even possessing the document was in breach of the country's security laws. He called for an investigation into how the paper came to possess the document.

Threats against whistleblowers aside, Nxesi's justification for the expenditure is paper thin – and contrary to the guidelines in the ministerial handbook.

Although members can designate a privately-owned residence for use as an official residence at the seat of office, the handbook states that the public works department will only be responsible for making available general cleaning services in private residences used for official purposes.

"Members are responsible for all costs related to the procurement, upkeep and maintenance of private residences used for official purposes," it said.

Even so, it's unclear whether Zuma’s private residence at Nkandla has been designated for use as an official residence in addition to the president's existing three official residences in Pretoria, Cape Town and Durban.

And while the handbook states that the public works minister may approve a state contribution to security measures at the private residence of a public office bearer, this sum is restricted to no more than R100,000.

• You can read the full policy on security measures at the private residences of public office bearers, beginning on page 101 of the Ministerial Handbook here. The policy on private residences is outlined on page 28.

Key point defence

Nxesi also intimated that Nkandla was a national key point, and so required special security arrangements, which could not be made public because of laws prohibiting this.

But, writing on the Daily Maverick website, constitutional law professor Pierre de Vos pointed out that the law used to provide for security of national key points did not apply in this case.

"It is true that the National Key Points Act [a piece legislation adopted at the height of apartheid in 1980] provides for the use of public funds to protect so called national key points. But such expenditure can only be paid from the Special Account for the Safeguarding of National Key Points and only on instructions of the minister of defence. This was clearly not done in this case, which means the Key Points Act is not applicable here," he wrote.

The important point here, too, is that Nkandla is not a state property – it is privately-owned.

The Act states that the owner of a national key point must take steps to secure the area "at his own expense". The defence minister may take over security but "the owner or owners shall be liable for the cost thereof to such extent as the minister may determine".

While a special account has been set up for the safeguarding of national key points, these can only be used to render "financial assistance, including loans" to the owner of the key point and this only on the authority of the defence minister.

Handbook still under review

The ministerial handbook has frequently been used to justify questionable expenditure by public officials. Late last year, Public Protector Thuli Madonsela urged the public works department to "set standards for domestic accommodation of ministers".

This came after Madonsela found that the R700 000 spent by Police Minister Nathi Mthethwa on accommodation for himself, his staff and guests at five-star hotels in Cape Town and Durban – a drop in the ocean compared to the sums now being spent on Zuma's private residence - were "unreasonably high".

She also recommended that the review of the handbook should be "expedited to provide clarity on ethical considerations regarding executive accommodation, particularly in the current climate of fiscal challenges".

The review of the handbook has been underway for over a year.

A spokesperson for the public service and administration department, Ndivhuwo wa ha Mabaya, told the Mail & Guardian that this process was still underway. Mabaya said the process required much consultation with public office bearers at all levels, and research into the guidelines set in other countries.

He could not say whether a deadline had been set but that "it’s something that the department is attending to".

A penchant for luxury

Outside of the planned spending at Zuma's private residence, the state has in recent years spent huge sums of money on upgrades to the president's official residences.

Last year, R200-million was set aside in the budget for the refurbishment of the president's official residence at Mahlamba Ndlopfu at the Bryntirion Estate. That year, then public works minister Gwen Mahlangu Nkabinde told Parliament that in the preceding year R13.9-million had been spent on Genadendal in Cape Town, R1.9-million was splashed out on Kings House in Durban and R40-million had been spent on Mahlamba Ndlopfu in Pretoria since 2005.

In 2009, it was revealed that R50-million was being spent on a four-metre high razor wire-topped metal inner fence – which stood 10.7m away from an exterior fence – at King's House, Zuma’s official residence in Durban.

The total cost of the extensive security upgrades, which included bullet-proof electric fences, motion and smoke sensors, watch dogs and police on quad bikes, was not known.

- M&G

Klapmuts protesters block road

Cape Town - Klapmuts residents vented their frustration against poor services and houses in a protest that started at 5am, barricading roads.

They marched on the Klapmuts Main Road, burned tyres tree stumps and road signs, chanted and sang Struggle songs. They protested about a poor sanitation, roads and formal housing.

Protesters blocked the road with dirt, rocks and broken concrete water pipes. Some 50 residents protested on Main Road, while a group of about 400 sat on a field next to it.

Negotiations between police and community leaders failed after local ward councillor Sophia Louw did not arrive to address the protesting residents. Police warned protesters to disperse but they ignored the this.

After an hour, at 6am, police fired rubber bullets and tear gas at the crowd. Protesters ran between shacks and houses.

Motorists passing the area were turned away by protesters who threatened to stone cars if they passed.

The situation calmed down, but at 1pm two police Nyalas drove into the area and all the residents re-grouped and took to the streets again.

Police again fired rubber bullets and tear gas at the crowd. Residents jumped over a wall of a sports field to get away from them.

Community leader Malibongwe Gebha said some residents had been on a housing waiting list for 20 years, and were promised formal housing in August last year.

“The municipality told us that houses will be built once the land was bought from its owner. The land was bought this year and we thought we are going to move in, only to be told that residents from [nearby] Koelenhof will have to move in [instead],” Malibongwe said.

“We want our houses and we will not stop at anything. Until our demands have been met we will protest,” he said.

Anneline Damonse, 44, who is unemployed, said the municipality had promised her a house since she had moved to the area in 1989.

“Since I started living in a shack, we were promised houses. We looked forward to having decent toilets, a nice home and running water. This was all just empty promises made,” she said.

Meanwhile, in the city centre, more than 400 residents of Samora Machel and Sweet Homes Farm in Philippi marched from Keizergracht Road to the offices of the MEC for Human Settlements, Bonginkosi Madikizela, to hand over a memorandum of demands on Monday.

Madikizela’s spokesperson, Bruce Oom, said the memorandum was received by the department and would be checked.

Shack dwellers’ movement Abahlali baseMjondolo organised the march and mobilised residents from the areas “because the government has sidelined the poor”, said its provincial chairperson Mthobela Qona.

“We will fight for poor people living in unacceptable conditions. Residents of the area live without toilets and they have been promised formal houses for years now.”

In August nearly 500 residents from the settlements closed several roads, demanding sanitation, housing and electricity.

The city is unable to provide services because the land is privately owned.

Sweet Home Farm community leader Siyambuleka James said they would protest until their demands were met.

- Cape Times

Department to probe Nkandla documents leak

Public Works Minister Thulas Nxesi will investigate how City Press obtained documents revealing the R203-million budget for Zuma's Nkandla upgrade.

City Press reported that R203-million of state funds would be spent on the upgrade, with Zuma paying only 5% of the bill – around R10-million.

Speaking for the first time after Sunday's exposé, Nxesi defended the expenditure, but refused to confirm the amount of state funds spent on the project.

He slammed City Press for publishing details from "top secret" documentation.

"The merely unlawful possession of a top secret [document] is a breach of the laws ... This therefore calls for an investigation to be launched to determine how the City Press illegally ended up in possession of this document," Nxesi said.

Nxesi defended the expenditure, saying it was in line with the Ministerial Handbook.

"I would like to state categorically that everything that has been approved and carried out at the private residence of the current president is in line with the Ministerial Handbook as far as it relates to security arrangements for private residences of the president," Nxesi told the paper.

"This is also the normal practice for the former presidents of South Africa."

Strong defence

Zuma's spokesperson Mac Maharaj told the Telegraph online that the president's Nkandla homestead needed to be upgraded to house his staff and those of visiting guests.

"What do you do when President [Barack] Obama or an African head of state visits him? You can't send them to a hotel," he was quoted as saying on Tuesday.

"Where do Prime Minister [David] Cameron's security staff stay when he goes to his private house? President Zuma's medical and security staff are inside that complex but you can't put them in the same house as his family."

The president should, on principle, not be expected to pay for security staff accommodation and guests out of his own pocket.

The Democratic Alliance called on Public Protector Thuli Madonsela to probe the allegations and for Zuma to cancel the upgrade.

 "Reports that the department of public works will be spending millions on Zuma's private homestead is a serious abuse of taxpayers' money by a department which is failing in almost every other key responsibility," DA parliamentary leader Lindiwe Mazibuko said in a statement.

"This expenditure by public works represents a serious confusion by the president and the minister of public works as to what the pressing priorities for South Africa are," she added.

"[We] will not allow for this to go unanswered," said Mazibuko.

State property

She said she wanted the Madonsela to investigate whether the money for the project had not been transferred from other projects that needed the funds.

The party also criticised the fact that the residence would be a private home and would not remain the state's property.

Political commentator Karima Brown said the unconfirmed reports were another example of how the media were targeting Zuma.

"Jacob Zuma has never been an easy fit for South Africa's chattering classes," she said.

"His existence challenges the notion of what it means to be black and middle-class in South Africa, and they will take any opportunity to attack him."

The City Press reported that the budget for the revamp was approved by the public works department in March last year.

Interference

According to the paper, Durban's public works regional manager Kenneth Khanyile wrote a memorandum last year to the then public works minister Gwen Mahlangu-Nkabinde saying their head office had assisted in apportioning costs between the department and Zuma.

Khanyile had reportedly informed Mahlangu-Nkabinde that they had already spent funds on certain building aspects which were initially meant to be catered for by Zuma.

"[Zuma] may want to implement these issues himself without the interference of the department or else he may want to opt to reimburse the department the same," Khanyile's memorandum was quoted as saying.

The presidency referred the City Press to the department of public works for answers but the department refused to give comment.

The "handling of information for this residence is protected in terms of the 1982 Protection of Information Act," the department's acting director general Mandisa Fatyela-Lindie was quoted as saying.

The revamped house would contain 10 air-conditioned rooms, underground living quarters, a clinic for Zuma and his family, 10 houses for security personnel, a helipad, houses for air force and police units, underground parking, playgrounds and visitors centres, said the City Press.

Worst audit option

Financial chaos continues to dog the public works department, according to Auditor General Terence Nombembe.

This resulted in Nombembe giving the department another disclaimer for the 2011/12 financial year – one of the worst audit opinions possible.

Nombembe said he could not rely on information provided by the department about, among other things, how many properties it owned and leased to sister departments and other state entities, and the accuracy of irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure.

"I was unable to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence to satisfy myself as to the completeness of irregular expenditure relating to the current year stated at R171,127,000 (2011: R1,396,000)."

The department's financial statements indicated there was over R69-million in fruitless and wasteful expenditure.

Nombembe said he could not rely on this figure either, as the department did not have a system in place to identify this type of spending.

Audit evidence

The lease problems at the department continued.

"I was unable to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence for operating lease expenditure transactions with an estimated value of R48,513,867" said Nombembe.

Action against department officials accused of wrongdoing was lacking in various instances.

"Investigations have not been conducted into all allegations of financial misconduct committed by officials, as required by treasury regulations."

As a result of this failure, disciplinary steps were also not taken against officials suspected of such conduct.

On the supply chain management side, the department was faring poorly by contravening treasury regulations and procuring goods and services of a transaction value higher than R500,000.

Sanctioned

Nombembe took aim at officials who played a part in awarding relatives, friends, partners or associates lucrative public works contracts

Some of these officials had not been sanctioned for fraud and corruption.

The department's leadership was criticised for not holding officials accountable for their actions.

"Instability in key leadership positions had a negative impact in providing effective leadership in the department."

There have been various changes and turnaround plans in the department in the past few years.

Public works has had three ministers at its helm in the past two years following Cabinet reshuffles by Zuma. 

– Sapa

Zuma's upgrade needed - Maharaj

Cape Town - President Jacob Zuma's Nkandla homestead needs to be upgraded to house both his staff and those of visiting guests, his spokesman Mac Maharaj has said.

“What do you do when President Obama or an African head of state visits him? You can't send them to a hotel,” he was quoted as saying on the UK's The Telegraph online on Tuesday.

“Where do Prime Minister Cameron's security staff stay when he goes to his private house? President Zuma's medical and security staff are inside that complex, but you can't put them in the same house as his family.”

The president should, on principle, not be expected to pay for security staff accommodation and guests out of his own pocket.

City Press reported that R203 million of taxpayers' money would be spent on the upgrade, with Zuma paying only five percent of the bill - around R10 million.

The Democratic Alliance called on Public Protector Thuli Madonsela to probe the allegations, and for Zuma to cancel the upgrade.

Political commentator Karima Brown said the unconfirmed reports were another example of how the media were targeting Zuma.

“Jacob Zuma has never been an easy fit for South Africa's chattering classes,” she said.

“His existence challenges the notion of what it means to be black and middle-class in South Africa, and they will take any opportunity to attack him.”

- Sapa

Housing MEC receives memorandum

CAPE TOWN - Western Cape Human Settlements MEC Bonginkosi Madikizela on Monday received a memorandum of demands from protesting shack dwellers.

Dozens of residents from three informal settlements marched on the provincial legislature earlier in the day.

Sweet Home Farm community leader, Siyamboleka James, said residents want basic services and homes.

“They need to engage the community and communicate openly.”

The MEC's spokesperson Bruce Oom said, “The issues are related to housing. We will definitely look at them. However, the reality is that the Western Cape can only deliver about 12,000 houses per year.”

The province has a housing backlog dating back to 24 years.

The province has recorded the highest number of service delivery protests in 2012.

- Eyewitness News

Land row loud enough to wake the dead

Cape Town - The death of a squatter living next to the Maitland Cemetery has sparked a bunfight between the City of Cape Town and his neighbours over the shack he used to live in.

Two weeks ago, Michael Melane, who lived at the “Peace Accord Camp” alongside the cemetery’s grounds near Gate One, was attacked and died. His neighbours claim he was assaulted by people who had since moved to Mfuleni.

Mayoral committee member for human settlements Ernest Sonnenberg said that he was aware of Melane’s death, but that the circumstances were not clear.

In April, the city had relocated 100 families from Maitland to Bardale, Mfuleni, where they were given plots.

Eleven families demanded that the city allow them stay in the cemetery.

Some residents who moved to Mfuleni were unhappy there, so they sold their plots and moved back to Maitland.

The city has confirmed that one person living at the cemetery has been arrested “due to the illegal selling of a plot in Bardale”.

Sonnenberg said that the selling of plots was done informally - not via the Deeds Office - and was illegal.

Melane’s shack has since become the centre of a heated dispute between residents and the city.

Steven Mganga, one of three people currently living in the shack, said he had been renting from Melane.

They have been at loggerheads with the city regarding their tenancy. with Mganga claiming that city representatives had threatened to tear down the shack. The city claims that one of the people who allocated a site in Bardale, and a partner, had invaded Melane’s structure.

“The situation has always been of a temporary nature and the city is currently seeking legal advice to find a permanent solution for the remaining families,” Sonnenberg said.

He said that the city’s Informal Settlements Department’s chief field officer in the area and the Anti-Land Invasion Unit had been monitoring the area and were working with the residents to prevent further invasions.

A community representative, Jimmy Xalipi, said it was not true.

- Cape Argus

Housing projects ‘under microscope’

Cape Town - The total value of housing contracts being probed by the Special Investigation Unit (SIU) stood at R4-billion, President Jacob Zuma said on Sunday.

Replying in writing to a Parliamentary question, Zuma gave an update of the status of the SIU's investigations.

In respect of the Human Settlements Department, the president said 59 low-cost housing contracts were identified by the SIU for investigation.

“From the aforementioned 59 contracts, the investigations into 42 contracts have been completed and the investigations into 17 contracts are still ongoing across seven provinces,” said Zuma.

Some of these contracts dated back as far as 1996.

The investigations started in April 2007 and were originally due for completion by 2010, but the deadlines were extended several times.

The probe into the alleged misappropriated housing subsidies was done in March and a final report was being prepared.

“The estimated date for the conclusion of the remaining investigation is 30 April 2013,” said Zuma.

The president said the SIU had already made several “systemic findings” on the 17 contracts which were still being probed.

These include non-compliance with the Housing Act and National Housing Code as well as contraventions of procurement procedures.

Zuma said other findings by the SIU include:

- Fruitless and wasteful expenditure amounting to R27.9-million for certain investigations;

- Potential losses estimated at over R71-million suffered by provincial departments;

- Potential recoveries amounting to over R100-million in respect of certain investigations;

- Various instances of misconduct by officials, employees or agents of the institutions; and

- Possible criminal charges against some of the previous and/or current heads of departments.

The intention of the probe was to uncover the mismanagement and misuse of taxpayers’ money allocated to low-cost housing projects since 1994. - Sapa

DA wants probe into Zuma’s home

The Democratic Alliance (DA) wants the Public Protector to probe allegations that R203 million of taxpayers money would be used in the revamping of President Jacob Zuma's iNkandla homestead, the party said on Sunday.

“Reports that the department of public works will be spending millions on Zuma’s private homestead is a serious abuse of tax payers’ money by a department which is failing in almost every other key responsibility,” DA Parliamentary leader Lindiwe Mazibuko said in a statement.

“This expenditure by public works represents a serious confusion by the president and the minister of public works as to what the pressing priorities for South Africa are,” she added.

The DA's outrage came after a report in the City Press stated that Zuma would only be footing five percent of the bill, which amounted to around R10,6 million.

Previous reports suggested that Zuma would pay for most of the revamping.

“ We will not allow for this to go unanswered,” said Mazibuko.

She said she wanted the Public Protector to investigate whether the money for the project had not been transferred from other projects that needed the funds.

The party also criticised the fact that the residence would be a private home and would not remain the state's property.

The City Press reported that the budget for the revamp was approved by the public works department in March last year.

According to the paper, Durban's public works regional manager Kenneth Khanyile wrote a memorandum last year to the then Minister of Public Works, Gwen Mahlangu-Nkabinde saying their head office had assisted in apportioning costs between the department and Zuma.

Khanyile had reportedly informed Mahlangu-Nkabinde that they had already spent funds on certain building aspects which were initially meant to be catered for by Zuma.

“Zuma may want to implement these issues himself without the interference of the department or else he may want to opt to reimburse the department the same,” Khanyile's memorandum was quoted as saying.

The presidency referred the City Press to the department of public works for answers but the department refused to give comment.

The “handling of information for this residence is protected in terms of the 1982 Protection of Information Act,” the department's acting director-general Mandisa Fatyela-Lindie was quoted as saying.

The revamped house would contain 10 air conditioned rooms, underground living quarters, a clinic for Zuma and his family, 10

houses for security personnel, a helipad, houses for air force and police units, underground parking, playgrounds and visitors centres, said the City Press. - Sapa