STATEMENT BY ID PRESIDENT PATRICIA DE LILLE AS SHE RELEASES MPS' ROAD TRAVEL INFORMATION FROM 1 APRIL 2009 UNTIL 31 MARCH 2010

I would like to start by reading Section 57 of the Constitution, which says, and I quote:

"Internal arrangements, proceedings and procedures of National Assembly....The National Assembly may, (1b), make rules and orders concerning its business, with due regard to representative and participatory democracy, accountability, transparency and public involvement." [End quote].

On 20 October 2009 I wrote a letter to the Speaker of Parliament reminding him of his budget speech in May, where he challenged newly elected MPs to exercise greater responsibility in the use of Parliamentary resources. I then requested a detailed breakdown of all travel claims by MPs.

In his response on 11 November 2009 he wrote that disclosing this information would amount to "a violation of their right to privacy" and "could compromise their security." He further advised that if I really wanted the information I could use the Promotion of Access to Information Act of 2000, or table the matter before the Joint Rules Committee of Parliament.

I then requested the travel information for the ID Members of Parliament, which was provided to me very quickly and without the permission of the ID MPs. Then, on the 27th of January this year I submitted an official request to Parliament in terms of the Promotion of Access to Information Act, which cost me R35.

On 15 February I also submitted a question to Minister of Finance Pravin Gordhan asking for the same information. Reminding him of his call to public representatives to sign a collective commitment to fight corruption, I also asked whether the Minister would release the info on a quarterly basis. The Questions Office rejected the question.

Ten days later, on 25 February, the Secretary of Parliament invited me to go and see the information in "a closed and secure environment" on condition that I would not make the information public. Of course, I turned down his offer.

On 16 March the Parliamentary Oversight Authority then made the incredible offer to give me all of the information, only without any names.  I turned them down again.

On 13 May my lawyers wrote to the Speaker seeking permission to serve an application to go to the High Court, on the Speaker and the Secretary as required by The Powers, Privileges and Immunities of Parliament and Provincial Legislature Act 4 of 2004. We waited for almost two months, until 7 July, when we wrote another letter reminding the Speaker of our request.

On the 16th of August, I phoned the Secretary and complained about Parliament's failure to give my lawyers the necessary permission to serve papers. The Secretary then responded that the Audit of the information I was looking for would be completed by the 18th of August and that he would seek the Speaker's permission to give it to me.

And finally, after many, many phone calls and repeated threats of court action, I received the information yesterday, on the 1st of September, almost one year later.

We have done this because never before in the history of Parliament in our country has this information been made public. I have said before that it does not make sense that while Parliament holds the Executive to account and MPs that are Ministers have to disclose exactly what they are spending on accommodation and travel, ordinary MPs are accountable only to themselves.

This leaves us in the very tricky situation of having no one watching over the watchdogs. The fundamental principle here is that the public have a right to have access to this information. I have therefore ensured through my almost year-long battle with Parliament that MPs are also held accountable for their spending. It is the public that voted us into office and it is the public that must decide whether we are fulfilling our mandate.

I believe it is immoral that while ordinary South Africans and workers are told to tighten their belts during times of economic hardship, some MPs have chosen to use Parliament's secrecy regarding their travel claims, to earn a few extra thousand rand every month. Road travel claims often cost Parliament more than double as much as plane tickets and it just does not make any sense that some MPs have been driving across the country even when there is an airport at their destination, just so that they can claim more money than if they were to fly.

MPs are allowed to claim 86 single tickets per year and road travel is set off against those plane tickets. For the 2786 km return trip from Cape Town to Johannesburg an MP would get approximately R4 per km, although this rate fluctuates according to the petrol price. The mean that you would receive a total of R11 144 in travel claims. In addition to this, because the drive to Johannesburg is longer than 800 km, the MP is entitled to claim R1150 from Parliament for an overnight stay on the way to Johannesburg and again on the way back.

Before we look at some examples I would like to stress that in pinpointing some of the biggest money-makers we have not taken their political affiliation into consideration.

Take John Gunda, for example, who claimed a total of R134 046,17 for his road trips to Upington and back. Next up is Dirk Feldman, whose road trips to Pretoria eventually cost the taxpayer R158 008,17. The third MP we have who prefers driving is Lewis Nzimande, whose car trips to Pietermaritzburg cost us R177 105.

This is still a lot less than Hargreaves Magama, whose trips to Upington have cost R205 896,65, even when there is an airport there, and Ebrahim Sulliman, whose trips cost R242 335,81. The person we found who enjoys driving the most, Salomon Vandyk, cost the taxpayer R275 512,85 driving to Pretoria and back. Vandyk often did the return trip twice a month.

There is an airport in Johannesburg and Parliament would have had to fork out less than half of this R275 512 if he had flown. You will notice that some MPs reduced their driving substantially after I announced late last year that I wanted to see these documents.

The ID Caucus also last year implemented a procedure whereby all claims by MPs are approved by the Party Leader. In addition, we made the decision that all claims must be linked to an approved party political programme. In conclusion, I believe there is absolutely no honest reason for the tabling of the Protection of Information Bill. The fact is that even without this Bill, it is already difficult enough to get hold of information.

If as a country we allow the ANC to push this Bill through Parliament, then we face a very bleak future. I would like to call on all South Africans who support freedom and truth to write letters to Government, to phone in to radio stations and to write to newspapers to voice your opposition. We cannot allow them to hijack our Freedom.

Statement issued by Patricia de Lille, leader of the Independent Democrats, September 2 2010

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter