Chairperson, over the last three weeks, the media and opposition MPs have had a field day commenting on the report of the Portfolio Committee on Communications. The report expressed a serious concern at developments at the SA Broadcasting Corporation, and the loss of confidence in the ability of the SABC board to discharge its statutory responsibilities.
Most have interpreted the crisis at Auckland Park as part of the fallout within the ANC after its Polokwane conference. For example, the hon Dene Smuts has said that "the atmosphere is thick with conspiracy and political purges". Suzanne Vos from the IFP has said that "the in-fighting was the result of there being two centres of power in the ANC".
Similarly the Sunday Times' editorial claimed that "Corporate governance and effective management at the SABC has all but collapsed as a result of the fight in the ruling ANC for political control of the public broadcaster". Jabulani Sikhakane, from The Star, drawing on Cold War symbolism, stated that "It would appear the Polokwane brigade, as in the new leadership of the ANC, has found its own pair of testicles to squeeze: the Scorpions and the SABC."
Pippa Green says that -
There is little nobility in the battle raging at Auckland Park, and no obvious winner. There is a loser, though, and that is the country, which has seen an institution that should be a foundation of democracy crumble because of factional political battles."
Of course any major development today must be located in its political context. It would be foolish not to do so, but what these journalists and opposition members fail to realise is that Parliament must act when there are clear signs of a leadership breakdown in a state-owned entity. Parliament must act when it becomes apparent that a board of a state-owned entity has become dysfunctional.
The committee's drastic display of displeasure against the SABC board is about the right of Parliament to exercise effective oversight over the public broadcaster, rather than about factional strife in the ANC. It is principally about public accountability of an institution that spends from the public purse.
Secondly, it must be remembered that the problems at the SABC did not start on 30 April when the committee expressed its loss of confidence in the board. In fact, the problems can be traced back at least two years. There is a long string of events that were either administratively mismanaged or just not tackled at all. To start with, there were media reports in June 2006 of the blacklisting of selected political commentators and journalists by the SABC's head of news and current affairs. Later, there was the appointment of the Sisulu Commission of Inquiry into the matter. We must state today that the recommendations of the Sisulu Commission were virtually ignored by the executive management of the SABC.
Then, in early 2007, there were media exposures of financial irregularities and a conflict of interest by the head of legal services of the SABC, which were also not dealt with decisively. This was followed by serious allegations of mismanagement, racism and staff in-fighting in a number of regional offices of the SABC. Then came the news early this year that the SABC has lost its broadcasting rights for soccer, cricket and rugby to a privately-owned TV channel.
I suppose the final straw for the committee was the leaking to the Sunday Times of a company memorandum by a board member. The memorandum contained serious allegations against the group Chief Executive Officer of the SABC.
The group CEO, of course, disputed the facts raised in the memorandum, and placed on record that it contained factual inaccuracies and misleading information. He expressed his extreme displeasure at the allegations levelled against him. He informed the committee that he first became aware of the memorandum through the media, and despite requests to meet with the board to resolve the matter, the board had refused to meet him.
What happened after that is history. The group CEO suspended Dr Snuki Zikalala. This was followed by the midnight suspension of Mr Dali Mpofu and then his reinstatement by the courts. Only two days ago, the board announced that it is appealing against the court's decision. So, the SABC saga drags on.
In all of this, what the committee found is that there was a complete breakdown in the relationship between the SABC board and its executive management. There was no trust between the board and the group CEO. There were no mechanisms or processes in place to resolve differences satisfactorily between the board and the executive management. Further, the board was not in a position to execute its responsibilities effectively.
The committee is fully conscious of the fact that neither it nor Parliament has the legal power to remove a board member or the board as a whole, but it also cannot turn a blind eye to the crisis that exists at Auckland Park.
We therefore recommend to the House that, at the very least, it expresses its serious concern at the failure and inability of the board to fulfil to its statutory functions. Secondly, the House should express its loss of confidence in the board. In doing so, we must be clear that we are not taking sides between the board and the group CEO. Our criticisms are aimed at the board as a collective entity.
Having said that, I must emphasise that there is today an urgent need for the board to reclaim some degree of public trust and confidence. In this regard, and in the light of the controversy that has dodged this board since its inception, I would respectfully appeal to each and every member of the board to search his or her conscience. I would also appeal to each member to ask himself or herself two simple questions: "Am I serving the best interests of the public broadcaster?" Secondly: "Am I discharging my responsibilities in the best way possible?" If the person's answer is no, then such a person should take the honourable step and resign voluntarily. Thank you. [Applause.]