PSA demands labour participation in PIC
23 October 2017
In pursuit of transparent management of public servants’ investments by the Public Investment Company (PIC), the PSA has written a letter to the Finance Minister, Malusi Gigaba, to request greater involvement of labour in the investment company.
The PSA also requested more information on the basis for an independent forensic audit ordered by the Minister. The Union demanded full disclosure of already-funded, non-listed companies and the freezing of funding for new investments of this nature. The PSA also demanded that 80% of the PIC’s Board must comprise of public servants and called for the removal of current Board members with conflicting interests.
“The basis for an independent forensic audit on all investment contracts by the PIC for the past two years is questionable. On-going speculation regarding attempts to capture the PIC to gain control over public servants’ pensions by individuals for their personal financial gain casts doubt regarding the motive for the audit. The PSA is concerned that the instruction might be yet another attempt to remove the PIC’s CEO, Dr Dan Matjila, based on unsubstantiated media reports about alleged improper funding. Forensic audits, as ordered by the Minister, come at great expense and should be conducted when there is substantial grounds and evidence of financial mismanagement. The PSA is not convinced that there is sufficient evidence to warrant such an audit. The PSA supports the current PIC structure but there must be a clear separation of power between the administration and the Board,” said PSA Deputy General Manager, Tahir Maepa.
The PSA also indicated to the Minister it requires full disclosure of non-listed companies that have already been granted funding by the PIC to enable the Government Employees Pension Fund (GEPF) to track portfolios. “It is vital that the report includes a list of politically-connected persons. The PSA wants the funding model for such companies to be restructured and until then, the PIC must freeze such funding. BEE companies, by nature, pose a risk as most do not have assets that can used as guarantees to repay loans,” said Mr Maepa.