National Dialogue funding now under Auditor-General's radar

THE hundreds of millions of rands to be spent on the National Dialogue will now form part of Auditor-General Tsakani Maluleke’s audit for the 2025/26 financial year. 

According to the Auditor-General, material findings, if any, from the audit process will be incorporated into the respective audit reports of those institutions, where applicable.

This follows uMkhonto weSizwe Party MP Mzwanele Manyi’s request for the A-G to set its sights on the National Dialogue. 

Manyi had warned of an imminent and serious risk of irregular expenditure arising from the proposed financing of the National Dialogue through the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA).

“The proposed financing of the National Dialogue through PFMA Section 30(2)(d) is legally dubious, procedurally irregular, fiscally reckless, and politically imprudent.

“It establishes a dangerous precedent of ‘half-disclosed’ projects being slipped into the budget, eroding the integrity of the fiscal process and weakening parliamentary accountability,” he wrote.

Section 30(2)(d) of the PFMA states that a national adjustments budget may only provide for money to be appropriated for expenditure already announced by the Finance Minister during the tabling of the annual Budget.

Manyi asked the Auditor-General to record the matter for examination in the forthcoming audit cycle and issue any necessary advisory alerts to ensure an audit trail is established.

Manyi said he was alerting Maluleke to an imminent and serious risk of irregular expenditure amounting to R270 million immediately, with projected costs of up to R500m, arising from the “proposed financing of the so-called National Dialogue through Section 30(2)(d) of the PFMA”.

He said the National Dialogue had not followed any processes and was just a public relations exercise. He described it as a pure looting machinery, much like emergency procurement during the Covid-19 pandemic.

In response, Maluleke said: “I appreciate your attention to matters of probity and the avoidance of leakage of state resources.

“I have determined that the matter falls within the ambit of our audit mandate and that it will, therefore, be appropriate to respond to these matters during the 2025/26 regularity audit by including them as part of the audit risk and response processes of the relevant departments and public entities that will be involved in the procurement or incurrence of the related expenditure.” 

“The National Treasury Regulations 3 and 27, informed by sections 38, 51, 76, and 77 of the PFMA, provide for the accountability ecosystem role-players such as the internal audit units and the audit and risk committees of these institutions to first provide the required level of assurance on this procurement and its related expenditure,” Maluleke said.

In response to a parliamentary question by DA MP Katherine Christie in October, Deputy President Paul Mashatile, who chairs the inter-ministerial committee on the National Dialogue, said an amount of R42m was initially requested from the National Treasury to support the inaugural National Convention held in August last year.

“The University of South Africa, which hosted the convention, provided substantial in-kind support – including venue, facilities, and logistical services. This sponsorship reduced the overall cost burden on the fiscus,” he said.

“As a result, only R25.3m was ultimately allocated through the fiscus. This amount was used to cover the operational costs of the National Dialogue secretariat, and the overheads associated with hosting the National Convention.”

Additionally, he said, following further planning and refinement of the broader National Dialogue programme, the estimated cost of the initiative was revised downward from R445m to R412.8m, and the updated budget remains under review and is expected to be funded through a mix of government allocations, sponsorships, and in-kind support.

DA MP Darren Bergman said the more questions they ask, the more murkier it seems to get.

“We were told there was sponsorship. Yet when you look at what has been sponsored, it is clear that the government will be signing a portion of the check. So we (are) either flying this one blind with a blank check or we are kicking the can down the road till after the elections. Neither of these options is inspiring much confidence,” he added.

Cape Times