The Gauteng government is shutting down almost all its poverty relief projects, citing corruption, fraud and mismanagement of funds and a lack of skills.
A dossier dubbed the Exit Strategy Report in the possession of the Mail & Guardian alleges corrupt practices by officials and project leaders.
Project leaders are alleged to have enriched themselves with the funds rather than spending the money on the intended beneficiaries.
The provincial Department of Social Services and Welfare’s latest figures show that more than four million people in Gauteng live in poverty, of whom about 2,8-million live in abject poverty.
Mulalo Nemavhandu, manager of the provincial poverty programme, said the department had appointed a high-ranking legal team to probe allegations of corruption, fraud and misappropriation of funds. ”Should the investigation find them guilty, the law will take its course. There is no way we are going to tolerate corruption in this department.”
Nemavhandu said MEC for Social Welfare Angie Motshekga was concerned about the misappropriation of government funds. ”To ensure that government money is protected, she recommended that an independent team be appointed to investigate the matter.”
The report recommends that criminal charges be laid against corrupt officials and project members.
Nemavhandu said the police had already completed investigations. ”But we decided not to rely on their investigations alone. [The police investigations] will be complemented by our legal process.”
The department has spent about R50-million since 1997 to fund 336 community projects. But the report says 85% of the projects did not achieve the department’s objectives because individuals empowered themselves and their families rather than their communities.
Nemavhandu said grants were allocated to benefit the broader community. ”But some people … monopolised the benefits for selfish reasons.”
He said the department had already ended funding for most of the projects, though some were still running. The 15% that had achieved the department’s objectives might still receive funds to develop skills.
”We wanted to make a significant impact on a broader community rather than individuals. That is why our new approach to fight poverty calls for the initiation of development centres.
”Instead of inviting business plans, as we did in the past, we now initiate development centres,” Nemavhandu said. ”We want to strengthen the work of the department by integrating those activities such as care and support for people living with HIV and Aids, the elderly, children, the youth and people with disabilities.
”We call on other departments to fight the war with us. The labour department, for instance, is coming aboard with skills development.”
He said the department would use community groups such as development forums, the civics and NGOs to identify poor families who did not benefit from social welfare programmes.
The Democratic Alliance in Gauteng has described the Exit Strategy Report as a disgrace.
”Obviously the department did not have a strategy in place to monitor the projects. This clearly shows there was no proper follow-up and training,” said Kate Prinsloo, an MPL and the DA’s provincial spokesperson on social services.
”Some of these projects are going to be given additional funds to allow them to exit the programme and this means more taxpayer money will be wasted.”
Mark Weinberg of the South African National NGO Coalition said his organisation welcomed the investigations into the allegations. However, he was surprised that the changes had been made on the basis of isolated incidents. ”This doesn’t seem like sufficient basis for the government to review its policy.”