Parliament's Standing Committee on Public Accounts (Scopa) and the Portfolio Committee on Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs have demanded an exhaustive breakdown of the more than R13.2-billion in unauthorised, irregular, fruitless, and wasteful expenditure that the City of Johannesburg wrote off or regularised during the 2024/25 financial year.

During a joint parliamentary briefing regarding the metro's recent audit outcomes, the committees demanded explicit details on the R13.278-billion balance reduction, which fell from R23.614-billion in 2023/24.

The committees stressed that regularising or writing off unlawful expenditure did not make it legal, and did not absolve the embattled municipality of the obligation to hold responsible individuals accountable.

The committees requested an itemised, factual, and legal breakdown of each contravention, the exact financial loss and whether any value was received, as well as the current status of disciplinary action, money recovered, and criminal referrals.

The Auditor-General previously cautioned Scopa that the City of Johannesburg was operating on "false assurances" regarding its true financial health. This was owing to deep-rooted problems with internal controls and reliance on an unfunded budget.

Committee members, including Scopa chairperson Songezo Zibi and Portfolio Committee on Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs chairperson Dr Zweli Mkhize, made it clear that accountability would not be measured by the metro's public relations efforts, but by completed investigations, sanctions against responsible officials, and the recovery of lost funds.

Committee members said a crucial distinction must be drawn between "administrative procurement breaches" where necessary services were actually delivered, and cases involving deliberate financial loss, waste, inflated pricing, or criminal conduct.

The committees expressed concern over the delayed disciplinary processes within the municipality. Currently, historical cases still languished before the disciplinary board while 34 related matters remained under active investigation. The metro has blamed these lags on missing documentation, a backlog spanning over a decade, and implicated ex-employees leaving the municipality.

DEMANDING ACCOUNTABILITY

However, the two committees dismissed these factors as justifications for indefinite delays.

In response, they demanded strict, finalised deadlines for all outstanding investigations. They also want to be provided with a clear outline of actions that will be taken against senior managers and heads of department who fail to provide the information.

Meanwhile, the committees also pressed the City of Johannesburg Metro regarding accountability and governance issues across its 13 municipal entities. Members demanded strict adherence to the Municipal Finance Management Act’s (MFMA's) financial misconduct frameworks, full transparency on executive remuneration, and concrete consequences for ongoing service delivery and financial failures.

Committee members said they were concerned that previous disciplinary actions were handled merely through routine labour relations, rather than the stricter financial misconduct framework mandated by the MFMA.

“This approach raises potential double-jeopardy issues, prompting members to demand a legal and factual explanation of each affected matter and the intended actions by the metro,” the committees noted.

FRAGMENTED CITY

They also highlighted that the metro's accountability issues were exacerbated by a highly fragmented structure consisting of a core administration and 13 municipal entities, each with separate management, boards, and audit structures.

The committees questioned if political and administrative leadership could properly control these entities, noting that recurring issues included unreliable performance information, procurement failures, unpaid creditors, and financial deterioration.

Furthermore, assigning responsibility was often difficult, as lines blurred between the city manager, mayoral committees, group governance, and entity boards, the committees said.

Zibi questioned whether any other city used such a complex governance structure, highlighting that weak entities directly damaged Johannesburg’s consolidated balance sheet, liquidity, and borrowing costs.

The metro is currently conducting an institutional review to evaluate whether entities should be retained, merged, or absorbed into municipal departments. The committees formally requested the total costs of these entities, including executive remuneration and board fees, alongside a strict value-for-money assessment of each entity.