Speaker, far from practical demonstrations of commitment, it seems that the ANC administration has gone soft on corruption and tough on those bodies whose anticorruption investigations hit too close to home. The number of proclamations in this regard speaks volumes.
Cabinet recently proposed the establishment of an overarching anticorruption body to review the effectiveness of corruption-busting organs like the Public Protector. You said the idea of an overarching anticorruption body was still at an initial stage, but it has red flags. The only red flag is Cabinet's intention to trespass on ground that is constitutionally out of bounds. The Public Protector reports to Parliament, and its independence is constitutionally enshrined. Cabinet therefore has no mandate to interfere with its activities.
Why then, Minister, did Cabinet make this proposal? According to what criteria would Cabinet judge whether the Public Protector was effective or not, and what steps would Cabinet plan to take if the Public Protector was deemed "ineffective"?