Something to hide? Department of Environment takes the path of least disclosure

Information and Discussions on General Conservation Issues
User avatar
Lisbeth
Site Admin
Posts: 65984
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
Country: Switzerland
Location: Lugano
Contact:

Something to hide? Department of Environment takes the path of least disclosure

Post by Lisbeth »

By Don Pinnock• 15 February 2021

Image

If you want information from the Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries about the policies and activities it undertakes, it will stretch your patience and sanity to a snapping point. But what are they trying to hide?

Secrecy, according to the 19th-century English philosopher Jeremy Bentham, is an instrument of conspiracy and ought never to be the system of regular government. Yet bureaucracy always seeks the path of least disclosure.

That path is well tramped by the Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries (Deff). Transparent they are not.

Because it’s their legal duty to provide information requested of them, they’ve become masters of diversion and diffusion. It’s not that they’re uncommunicative, but that they lead you on a merry dance just to get the facts that you’d expect to be freely available to the public in a functioning democracy.

Do Deff officials have something to hide, are they terrified their inefficiency will be exposed, or is it simply because it’s a damn nuisance to answer questions? That this is happening under Minister Barbara Creecy’s watch is deeply worrying, given the initial elation by the wildlife community at her appointment to the environment portfolio. Is she aware of the problem or part of it?

Access to information is the lifeblood of any democracy and in this our law is unambiguous. Section 32(1)(a) of the Constitution provides that everyone has the right of access to any information held by the state, including provincial governments. This was confirmed in the Public Access to Information Act (Paia) of 2000, which even requires that an officer assist you to frame good questions.

Government departments are required to reply within 30 days. If they’re having trouble finding it, they are permitted another 30 days. And that’s all.

So how are we doing? When I asked environmental NGOs and journalists if they were having problems accessing information, it turned out they were – in spadefuls.

Gold-star deflections

Let’s start with rhinos. For some years, journalist Tony Carnie has been requesting the census data for Kruger Park rhinos, to no avail. Dr Salomon Joubert, a former Kruger Park warden, confirmed that his requests had also been fobbed off by Deff.

When I asked for the same data, I was told to contact the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN – of which, incidentally, I am a law commissioner) based in Switzerland. As deflections go, that got a gold star.

In November last year, in answer to a parliamentary question on the number of rhinos poached, Creecy said: “The department does not publish this information because it poses a risk in terms of our conservation efforts.”

Last month, DA Shadow Minister of Environment Dave Bryant asked for rhino numbers but Deff officials refused to answer. Then, after these refusals, the stats suddenly appeared, buried in the 2020 SANParks annual report just released. So was Creecy mistaken about the risk to conservation or simply badly informed?

The reason for prior refusals became clear – the stats were an embarrassment. Simon Espley of Africa Geographic wrote that, “after years of silence about Kruger National Park rhino populations… we can now confirm that populations in the Kruger National Park have plummeted to an estimated 3,529 white rhinos and 268 black rhinos. This represents a population reduction of 67% for white rhinos – from 10,621 in 2011 – and 35% for black rhinos – from 415 in 2013.”

The EMS Foundation, which supports environmental work, has found state departments to be maddeningly unhelpful. According to its director, Michele Pickover, in 2020 EMS spent almost R500,000 in lawyers’ fees on Paia requests that resulted in microscopically little information.

In 66 requests from May 2019, mainly to Deff, its associated National Biological Institute (Sanbi) and SANParks, the departments either failed to answer, gave partial answers that required further Paia requests or referred requests to provincial authorities, which almost never replied.

According to Stefania Falcon of EMS, “Sanbi and the zoos are better at responding but often don’t give you the proper info. Many hide behind a ‘third party non-disclosure’ [requirement],which they claim exempts them from providing the information. Ledet [Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism] won’t even reply to you; SAPS, the police, didn’t bother despite many mails.”

There’s also something overly cosy about the relationship between Deff and the wildlife industry. The department publishes online all authorisations such as waste management licences, atmospheric emission licences, Biodiversity Act permits and general permits for boat-based whale watching and shark cage diving. But not those of the wildlife industry.

Heavily redacted information

Its reasoning is that wildlife permits have “third-party information”, which they say could be detrimental to those they licence. But for all other licensees, that’s not seen as a problem, to the point where they put them online. What’s the difference? Or, to put it another way, what did hunters, captive breeders and game farmers do to get special protection in pursuit of private gain?

The National Society for the Protection of Animals (NSPCA) and local SPCAs are state-sanctioned enforcement agencies but are required to put in Paia requests for information related to their legal mandate. According to a society official, when they do get the information, it’s often heavily redacted to the point of being almost useless.

Dr Bool Smuts of the Landmark Foundation says government departments hide behind the claim that providing information will expose someone’s right to privacy. “Mostly it’s fabricated and shields them from accountability,” he said. “That way they become unaccountable to the general public.

“Departments have been granted rights to issue permits concerning wildlife and these get issued under a cloak of secrecy. What’s inexplicable is that government departments are giving private parties permits of use or ownership of our biodiversity assets, but hide behind third-party confidentiality to avoid accountability for these allocations.

“It’s hard to avoid suspicion of corruption. And you can’t get the information. Hundreds and hundreds of Paia requests are being ignored. The claimed right to confidentiality is denying the public access to information that affects their right to a healthy environment. It is being abused to hide governance actions of state players for the secret gain of private parties and concealment of accountability. I think it’s ripe for a constitutional challenge.

“And here’s a further problem. If your demands for accountability get uncomfortable, officials turn on the ‘agitators’ by weaponising the permitting system. They cancelled our leopard research and conflict mitigation permits. We’re going to the high court over these issues and we’re quite happy to proceed to the Appeals Court and Constitutional Court because I think it’s fundamentally a constitutional matter that must be settled. But it’s expensive. Who or what are they shielding and why? They feel they’re above accountability.”

Louise de Waal confirmed that Blood Lions has similar problems. “Many of the provinces have no dedicated Paia officer or don’t advertise such a person. Information on websites is often outdated and/or people within those positions are moved so often that a steady contact is difficult to identify.

“Once the Paia officer’s contact details have been found, the emails go unresponded to, or an automated non-delivery email is received. Follow-up emails and phone calls end up in a big black hole or promises are made that are not kept. If requests are answered and Paia fees are paid, extensions are requested by the Paia officer for a variety of reasons and, again, the request is not fulfilled within the extended period.

“After eight months of sending emails, making follow-up phone calls and receiving empty promises, we received satisfactory responses from only three out of the nine provinces approached – Western Cape, KZN and Free State.”

Audrey Delsink, the wildlife director of Humane Society International-Africa, says: “In the last two years we made 14 Paia applications directly to the relevant entity, except for two that were made on our behalf by our attorneys. Our requests included information regarding quotas, numbers of captive breeding facilities, permits (CITES and local), transfer of hunting rights, permission to hunt species including lion, elephant, Cape mountain zebra and giraffe.

“Of the 14 Paia applications, we received one complete response with documents as requested, two rejections which we appealed but did not receive any further communications, had one response stating that information would not be supplied as we had not supplied a reason for the request.

“Our legal counsel provided a counter-response stating that you don’t have to provide a reason for the request. But, despite several attempts, there has been no further response from the department concerned.”

Other information blockages abound. Journalist Elise Tempelhoff said she had been trying to get an interview with Creecy since May 2018; requests were not denied, just flatly ignored.

“Whose environment is it anyway?” she asked. “Why do we have to put in Paias to get answers on our environment? And, besides, we pay these people’s salaries.”

Increasingly, NGOs and journalists have turned to Parliament to find answers. It’s laborious – you have to find an MP prepared to ask the questions in portfolio committee meetings, then wait for the written replies. Even then the results are not always satisfactory. Analysing parliamentary questions, it’s apparent that even when government departments do provide input, they use semantics to avoid answering. Here’s an example:

When Deff was asked in Parliament about hunting in the Associated Private Nature Reserves, the private reserves open to the Kruger National Park, they first answered that they did not “recommend” hunting offtake numbers, but only “comment and support” them (even though the Annexure B to the cooperation agreement refers to both). When then asked in a follow-up question what numbers they “supported”, Deff said they “were not at liberty to release the offtake requests”.

Why so cagey?

Why not? In fact, they’re legally not at liberty to refuse. This despite the fact that, in their own letter, they refer to having “supported” the animal offtakes. The implication: No, we’re simply not going to tell you, but because we’re obliged to answer parliamentary questions, we’ll play word games.

So, it’s fair to ask: What’s going on with our public institutions? Why are they so cagey? Who are they protecting and why? To quote the Swedish philosopher Sissela Bok: “If officials make public only what they want citizens to know, then publicity becomes a sham and accountability meaningless.”

I sent this article to Deff for comment and got a reply from its chief director of communications: “The Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries responds to all media inquiries received. Deff tries to meet deadlines set by journalists. In instances where the Department is not able to meet a deadline, it is communicated to the journalist.”

I think they may have forgotten to read the article. Or maybe they just don’t want to acknowledge (or, worse, realise) they have a serious communication problem. People trying year after year to source legitimate information from Deff are in no doubt that they do. What are they trying to hide?

To echo Tempelhof: Whose environment is it anyway? DM168

https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article ... isclosure/


"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
User avatar
Richprins
Committee Member
Posts: 75439
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 3:52 pm
Location: NELSPRUIT
Contact:

Re: Something to hide? Department of Environment takes the path of least disclosure

Post by Richprins »

initial elation by the wildlife community at her appointment to the environment portfolio
:shock: 0-

As said at the beginning, one of the options is that it is simply too much actual work to respond... O**


Please check Needs Attention pre-booking: https://africawild-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=322&t=596
User avatar
Lisbeth
Site Admin
Posts: 65984
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
Country: Switzerland
Location: Lugano
Contact:

Re: Something to hide? Department of Environment takes the path of least disclosure

Post by Lisbeth »

IMO she has behaved not too badly, especially compared to the last one. I do not think that it is the will that is missing. What is she supposed to be hiding? -O-


"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
User avatar
Alf
Posts: 10705
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2014 12:40 pm
Country: south africa
Location: centurion
Contact:

Re: Something to hide? Department of Environment takes the path of least disclosure

Post by Alf »

They always hide something


Next trip to the bush??

Let me think......................
User avatar
Lisbeth
Site Admin
Posts: 65984
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
Country: Switzerland
Location: Lugano
Contact:

Re: Something to hide? Department of Environment takes the path of least disclosure

Post by Lisbeth »

Aren't we all? lol


"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
User avatar
Lisbeth
Site Admin
Posts: 65984
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
Country: Switzerland
Location: Lugano
Contact:

Re: Something to hide? Department of Environment takes the path of least disclosure

Post by Lisbeth »

AUDITOR-GENERAL REPORT

Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries blows nearly R3bn in irregular expenditure

By Don Pinnock• 21 February 2021

Image
The AG and the parliamentary environment portfolio committee concluded that there was concern that ‘none in the environmental portfolio...

The Auditor-General’s annual review of the Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries’ finances has uncovered irregular, wasteful and unaccounted for expenditure and has issued a string of negative audit reports.

The Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries (DEFF) has accumulated unauthorised, undocumented and wasteful spending totalling a startling R2.9-billion of taxpayers’ money.

The Auditor-General’s 2019/20 report flagged inadequate monitoring of massively expensive supply chain irregularities plus fruitless expenditure and slapped the department with a series of qualified audits.

In a single year, irregular expenditure jumped from R342-million to R2.9-billion within the portfolio due to “inadequate monitoring of compliance with supply chain management (SCM) laws and regulations”. There were also problems of procurement without inviting competitive bids. These issues “appeared to be a common phenomenon in the environmental portfolio”.

The AG also flagged problems with the organisations administered under the department: SANParks, the iSimangaliso Wetland Park Authority, the Weather Service, Fisheries, Forestry and the National Biodiversity Institute (Sanbi).

The report was tabled as part of the mandate of Parliament’s environmental committee to exercise monitoring and oversight of the department. It noted that 87% of the irregular expenditure related to the department itself, where internal controls, it said, were inadequately designed and implemented.

The fruitless expenditure related to “pre-payments made to implementing agents for goods and services that were not in line with the contractual arrangements and agreed deliverables, cancellation of travel/no-show accommodation, payment of interest and penalties, payment of VAT charged by non-VAT vendors, damaged stock, misuse of vehicles and overpayment to suppliers”.

Responding to the AG report, the department notified Parliament that disciplinary action was in process, involving R152,717,823, there was preferential treatment in selecting bidders involving R379,573,308, fraud and misconduct was found in the allocation of R1,411,572,300 and poor management led to wasteful expenditure of R141,173,482. This comes to about R2-billion. According to a SANParks official, it is likely that this amount represented activities that have accumulated over a number of years.

According to the department, “the Minister indicated to the Portfolio Committee that in her view these audit outcomes are unacceptable. The Minister has already initiated consequence management for the irregular expenditure which began in the 2018/19 financial year and continues in the 2019/20 financial year.”

The AG found that Forestry was unable to “appropriately quantify and provide evidence on the value of biological assets (forests)” as well as poor controls and oversight on these assets and unreliable or ineffective monthly reports and quarterly and year-end reconciliation processes. There was also “infighting and lack of leadership… from the executive”. The audit report was accordingly qualified, these problems precluding a clean audit.

In the iSimangaliso Wetland Park Authority, liabilities exceeded current assets by R9.03-million. Problems included misuse of vehicles and overpayments to suppliers. (Its chief financial officer was recently suspended and then discharged.)

Sanbi cracked an unqualified audit opinion despite the AG finding inadequate internal controls in terms of proper record-keeping, daily and monthly controls, and inability to review and monitor compliance. The entity, it said, lacked proper provision of quality assurance at the senior management level. It also noted “irregular expenditure due to procurement without competitive bidding or quotation process and non-compliance with procurement process requirements”.

At SANParks, there were similar problems and “daily and monthly controls were of concern, whereas the ability to review and monitor compliance was inadequate, needing intervention”.

The Weather Service audit was unqualified, but proper record keeping remained a concern, as well as wasteful expenditure. It ended the year with “a significant deficit of R37.5-million in 2019/20, though less than the prior year deficit of R65.5-million”.

The AG and the portfolio committee concluded that there was concern that “none in the environmental portfolios received a clean audit” and that there were problems with the preparation of financial statements.

The massive irregular expenditure, wasteful and fruitless expenditure, flouting of supply chain management legislation and overpayment of invoices, it said, remained a major problem.

The report also expressed concern that the department had for the past four financial years received a qualified audit with findings that were “unacceptable, considering the amount of effort spent on facilitating the department through a series of engagements in Parliament to overcome this challenge”.

Oddly, despite its stated concerns, the portfolio committee said it was “pleased with the performance of the Department and entities as well as those of the Forestry and Fisheries branches, especially in terms of meeting predetermined objectives. The sustainability of the South African environmental sector is being ensured despite the ever-growing myriad of challenges on the sector.”

The report was adopted by the portfolio committee despite objections by the DA, which argued that the members had only received it that morning and consequently were unable to properly study it. It now needs to be adopted by the National Assembly, whereafter the minister would then be required to submit a detailed response to the recommendations in the report within 60 days. DM


"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
User avatar
Lisbeth
Site Admin
Posts: 65984
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
Country: Switzerland
Location: Lugano
Contact:

Re: Something to hide? Department of Environment takes the path of least disclosure

Post by Lisbeth »

All of a sudden the AUDITOR-GENERAL has started to do what it should have been doing for years back. This is the first time that I have heard of a ministry with a disorder in spending. Did the Auditor-general find nothing wrong with all the others now under scan by the Zondo Commission? Or has it just not been made public?


"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
User avatar
Alf
Posts: 10705
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2014 12:40 pm
Country: south africa
Location: centurion
Contact:

Re: Something to hide? Department of Environment takes the path of least disclosure

Post by Alf »

Another circus 0*\


Next trip to the bush??

Let me think......................
User avatar
Richprins
Committee Member
Posts: 75439
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 3:52 pm
Location: NELSPRUIT
Contact:

Re: Something to hide? Department of Environment takes the path of least disclosure

Post by Richprins »

The AG has found irregularities with all departments for about a decade now, every year, don't worry! :evil: :evil:


Please check Needs Attention pre-booking: https://africawild-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=322&t=596
User avatar
Alf
Posts: 10705
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2014 12:40 pm
Country: south africa
Location: centurion
Contact:

Re: Something to hide? Department of Environment takes the path of least disclosure

Post by Alf »

Richprins wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:55 pm The AG has found irregularities with all departments for about a decade now, every year, don't worry! :evil: :evil:
And how many people were locked up for this -O-

Nobody @#$


Next trip to the bush??

Let me think......................
Post Reply

Return to “Other Conservation Issues”