NLB must answer numerous questions about unpaid grants
The Democratic Alliance (DA) once again calls for an independent inquiry into the National Lotteries Board (NLB), whose waters appear grow muddier with every attempt by the board to explain itself. The charities which work so hard to care for the ill, the homeless and the abandoned should not have to bear the brunt of the organization's ineptitude and indifference.
Several charities have recently complained to the DA that amounts listed as having been awarded to them in the NLB's annual report have never actually been paid to them. Lotto spokesperson Sershan Naidoo yesterday accused the DA of "selective understanding of the facts" for raising questions about this. But his explanation, that the amounts listed were only conditionally awarded, and that these grants were never confirmed, only raises more questions.
Firstly, if grants were not finally approved, why, in at least five cases that the DA is aware of, have charities not apparently been informed (more than a year later) that their claims were rejected?
Secondly, if their claims were indeed rejected, what conditions did they fail to meet? The charities concerned state they have complied with all conditions and have not been informed of any non-compliance.
Finally, why does the NLB record approved amounts in its annual report which have not been finally approved?
Rather than attacking the DA, Mr Naidoo should urgently explain the following:
• The Novalis Ubuntu Institute says it was awarded R500 000 in April 2006. But was only actually paid half of this and no amount is recorded in the NLB's 2007 annual report. It has been unable to obtain any explanation from anyone at the NLB as to why only half of the grant was paid.
• In the 2007 annual report, Vhananyana Mountain School was listed as having been awarded R100 000 (for an application made in 2005). In February 2008 it was notified that its application was successful. The school states that it has yet to be paid anything.
• The Thohoyandou Victim Empowerment Programme is listed in the 2007 Annual Report as having been awarded R488 037, conditional on certain requirements. Despite stating that it met all these requirements, no money has been paid to it. Naidoo has claimed that this application was turned down, but the organisation has received no communication to this effect, and is not aware of having failed to comply with any conditions.
• The NLB annual report states that the Teddy Bear Clinic was awarded an amount of R2 million. They have never received this money. Naidoo has claimed that their application was denied, but they state that they have never been informed of this.
• An NGO that wishes to remain anonymous was informed in December 2006 that an amount of over R600 000 had been conditionally allocated to it, and this was recorded in the annual report. No money has yet been paid to it; it has received no information on the application, and has been unable to locate anyone at the Lotto to advise on this matter.
It is unacceptable that it takes intervention from a political party for the NLB to engage in any communication with the organizations that it is supposed to be serving and supporting. The time has come for the NLB to provide clear answers.
Statement issued by Janet Semple MP, Democratic Alliance spokesperson on social development, August 12 2008
