Media statement on reports on purchase of official vehicle for use by the deputy minister of Correctional Services

11 December 2009

We must clarify today’s reports triggered by a story in The Star newspaper (11 December). Despite the statement from Minister Richard Baloyi of Department of Public Service and Administration, explaining government’s position on official vehicles, a matter that has received due attention from government was sensationalised and blown out of context.

For the record, the Department of Correctional Services purchased a vehicle for use by the deputy minister to discharge her duties. The deputy minister had no vehicle to use in Pretoria. The former deputy minister expressed interest to purchase the vehicle she used during her term of office. For the Cape Town office, Deputy Minister Mkhize inherited an existing vehicle.

The official vehicle in question belongs to the state and is a tool to execute duties, as Minister Baloyi explained. It should be understood that the value of the vehicle is by far below the prescribed limit in terms of the ministerial handbook.

Consideration was given by Department of Correctional Services to the nature of Deputy Minister Mkhize’s job. Safety was the major consideration. It would have been irresponsible for the department not to consider the fact that the deputy minister’s responsibilities demand that she should travel across the country, even to areas where roads are difficult. Our correctional facilities are found all over the country, in both urban and rural areas.

The vehicle is a 2008 basic model, not a 2009 model as alleged by The Star. Accessories referred to are standard built-in features. In the last few months, the deputy minister has visited correctional centres in all the nine provinces, and has travelled to different parts of the country to implement government policies and programmes.

We take exception to the reporter’s unwillingness to allow space for consultation before going to press. We are of the view that the media query was only sent to legitimise the story, with no interest whatsoever in getting a response. The query was received at 17h39, further questions were later sent to clarify initial questions. Despite that, we were still expected to respond before 19h00 irrespective of our explanation that the principal would only be available after 20h30.