COSATU’s response to
Mail& Guardian
story
COSATU has noted the report in the Mail & Guardian, 1
April 2010, “Mrs Vavi, the pension funds and the bribe”. The
General Secretary has responded, with the following answers to questions put to
him by the M&G reporter, Matuma Letsoalo:
Are you aware of
the fact that your wife Noluthando is contracted
to SA Quantum and receives R60 000 a month for doing marketing for the
company
[SA Quantum] within the labour Union movement, Cosatu and its
affiliates?
Yes I am aware that my wife is doing consultancy work for SA Quantum.
The
agreement signed between SA Quantum and her states that she “undertakes
to:
1. Furnish professional consulting services in respect of marketing,
distribution and
servicing strategies into the employee benefits market;
2. Keep quantum informed on developments, trends, political dynamics
and key role players in
order to improve Quantum’s understanding of the market; and
3. Improve Quantum’s effectiveness in distribution employees’ benefits
solutions into
the market.”
In this direct quote from the
contract, nowhere is it stated that
she will do “marketing of the company in the labour union movement,
COSATU and its affiliates” as your question seeks to imply. In my view
there is no conflict of interest at all. COSATU has no relationship
with
SA Quantum and if it did that would constitute a conflict of interest
indeed.
The provident funds of workers are controlled by workers and employers
who have
a 50-50 representation in the board in terms of the law. My wife has no
relationship with any of the provident fund boards. I have no direct
relationship with and provident fund board that has a relationship in SA
Quantum. As far as I know no union is able to dictate to the boards of
the
provident funds in which company their monies should be administered.
These
decisions are left to the boards controlled by workers and employers.
Given that you are the general secretary of COSATU, don’t you think
the business that your wife is doing with a company that does business
with
COSATU and its affiliates constitute a conflict of interest?
As stated above, SA Quantum has no business relationship with COSATU and I am
not even aware which COSATU unions have their provident funds/pension
funds
administered by SA Quantum. I assume that there should be some who have a
relationship. In that case there is no way she can influence the
decisions of
the provident fund boards in terms of where they invest their money or
who
should administer their provident funds.
After COSATU first called for a lifestyle audit for public
representatives,
you publicly declared some of your assets, including the Morningside
house, but
did not mention anything about Zwelothando. Do you have any reason why
you did
not mention this?
Zwelothando is a company owned 100% by my wife and not me. Secondly I
answered all questions to me by the Star journalist honestly and
truthfully. I
did not hide any interest. I have no personal business interest. I am
not
registered in any company as a director. You can verify this with CIPRO.
Noluthando has a consultancy company called Zwelothando. She had that
interest by the time we were married. I married her not because of her
consultancy interests or business interests. I am not going to instruct
her to
withdraw from consultancy or even business because she is married to me. I
don’t seek to control anyone in that manner. The only interest I have is
that there should be no conflict of interest with COSATU and or with
government. This is so precisely because if she was to win any contract
with
COSATU and or government this will raise a question as to whether she
won it
because she has my surname or is related to me instead of winning it
above
board. I have an agreement with her that she should never do any
business with
either COSATU or government. I am satisfied that SA Quantum indeed has
no
relationship with COSATU and therefore the conflict of the interest
issues does
not arise.
Don’t you think it would have been appropriate for you to declare
this
publicly as well? Did you declare your wife’s business interests in SA
Quantum to Cosatu and its affiliates, who are doing business with the
company?
I have answered this question already. I did not declare because COSATU
does
not have any business relationship with SA Quantum. I am not aware of
any
relationship between SA Quantum with COSATU affiliated unions. Even if
there is
as I assume there would be, the driving question to me is whether any
observer
would reasonably believe that I have in any way influenced worker
provident
funds to enter into a business relationship with SA Quantum. The answer
is
clear that such a possibility does not exist, as all provident funds
board have
a 50-50 representation between workers and the employers.
It is clear from the tribute you delivered at the funeral of former
SA
Quantum CEO Abraham Nduru in 8 December 2009, that you personally had
close
ties with directors of SA Quantum, which did business with your wife.
How do
you explain this?
I have known, and in fact have worked with, Abe Nduru for many years as
indicated in my tribute at his funeral. I don’t know any other director
of SA Quantum as your question suggest. Please read the speech again and see if
it suggests that I know the other directors as well.
Do you find it comfortable with your wife involved in business, while you on
the other hand are pushing the communists’ agenda? What was your
relationship with Nduru like? SA Quantum CEO Veon Back offered us R120
000 not
to write the story about SA Quantum’s business dealings with Zwelothando
Consulting, a name which appear to be a contraction of her first name
and your
first name. Already Bock gave us a payment of R40 000 and promised to
give us
the balance by the end of April. This is to us a clear cover up for you
and your
wife. What is your reaction to this?
I have stated in other interviews such as Destiny magazine,
November/December
2009, that sometimes that makes me feel uncomfortable. This is so
because some
people would not buy a suggestion that I have nothing to do with my wife
business activities and yet I seriously never ever attempted to
micromanage
her. I did not her ask to enter business. This is her own initiative. I
am not
going to divorce her though because she has business interest. I had
enough of
that. Our relationship is not founded on whether she has a business
interests
or that I am the leader of COSATU. As I said the only protection I have
is that
she should never conflict me through getting into business deals with
COSATU or
even with the government. So far she has not done that. Regarding Abe
Nduru as I have said above I have known him since the days he was
working for
NBC. See my speech which traces the relationship between COSATU and Abe
Nduru.
Regarding the alleged attempt to silence Mail and Guardian, I
must state
categorically that it has absolutely nothing to do with me and the
person best
suited to answer your question will be the one who offered you money.
Veon Back
has no reason to protect either me or Zwelothando in this regard – there
is no conflict of interests there is no scandal. Lastly Zwelothando is
not a
contraction of my name Zwelinzima and that of my wife Noluthando. It is a name
on its own with a completely different meaning. Zwelinzima means this
world is
difficult/heavy/tough and Noluthando means love. Zwelothando means a
country of
love.
___________________________________________________________________
Conveniently the Mail &
Guardian chose not to run this
full response to their questions, despite the General Secretary asking
them to
do so, through a text message to Mr Matuma Letsoalo.
The article is a typical example of
journalists being used to
fight factional battles. Mr Matuma Letsoalo has a long documented
history as a
journalist of being used by factions in COSATU to tarnish the name of
its
leaders, in particular its General Secretary.
We wish to point the following
inaccuracies, sensationalism,
innuendos and outright lies in the article:
1. The headline of the story is: “Mrs Vavi, the pension funds
and the bribe”. Whilst this headline seems to be an honest summary and
caption of the story, anyone reading the headline and street posters,
without
reading the article, will go home wrongly thinking that Mrs Vavi is
involved in
some scandal that has to do with pension funds and she may have also be
involved in bribery. This is sensationalism at its worst.
2. Despite the correction printed above, the article, throughout
and
in particular in the first paragraph, makes a damaging claim that
Noluthando
Vavi “is being paid R60 000 a month to market financial products to
union
members”. Mr Matuma prints this despite being in possession of the
contract signed by Mrs Noluthando Vavi and SA Quantum that categorically states
the terms of the agreement between the parties. There is no single line
in that
agreement that says Mrs Vavi will be “marketing financial products to
union members”. This is being done deliberately to suggest improper
conduct on the part of Mrs Vavi and by association the COSATU General
Secretary, who is the real target of what is clearly a smear campaign.
3. The article claims that Veon Bock, CEO of SA Quantum, told the Mail
& Guardian that “she was engaged specifically to market its
products which include pension and other employee benefits to labour
unions,
particularly COSATU unions”. The article further make the claim that
“she has already helped secure direct and indirect business with two of
COSATU’s biggest unions, the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) and the
National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA), which together
account
for about 500 000 of COSATU’s membership”.
4. Whilst we cannot vouch for what was said in the discussion
between
Mr Veon Bock and Mr Matuma Letsoalo, we are in possession of Mr
Motsoalo’s written questions to Mr Veon Bock and his written responses.
At no stage does Mr Bock make the above assertions that “she has already
helped secure direct and indirect businesses with the two of COSATU’s
biggest unions…”
5. The article then mischievously, inappropriately, and with a
clear
view to mislead unsuspecting readers, makes a link between the speech
the
General Secretary made at the funeral of Abie Nduru and the decisions of the
Metal Industry Benefit Fund. The speech, which is available on the
COSATU
website, traces the relationship, between the General Secretary and Abe
Nduru,
not as a personal relationship, but one that existed between Mr Nduru
and
COSATU. This relationship predates the existence of SA Quantum. Yet the
article
seeks to suggest that Mr Nduru or SA Quantum or even with Mrs Vavi
benefited
from a relationship. There is no shred of evidence to suggest that
COSATU, the
General Secretary or his wife ever tried to influence the Metal Industry
Benefit Fund to have a business relationship with SA Quantum as emplied
in the
article.
6. The article then goes further to say that “Bock told the Mail
& Guardian that Noluthando had been instrumental in securing a
contract
with TEBA Bank, owned by members of the NUM, Zwelinzima Vavi’s former
union”. Again in the written reply to Mr Letsoalo’s questions Mr
Bock did not make this claim simply because it is not true that Mrs Vavi was
instrument in securing any contract between SA Quantum and TEBA Bank.
This lie
is being told in order to suggest that there is a conflict of interest
that is
not there.
7. The article, consistent with its political purpose, then claims
that “nevertheless the close political and personal proximity of the key
players has raised concerns that the Vavis are profiting from the
suggestion
– however implicit – that any deal proposed by Noluthando is backed
by her husband and COSATU”. It is true that COSATU General Secretary
enjoys a close relationship with the General Secretaries of NUM and
NUMSA, but
equally he enjoys the same relationship with the leaders of all COSATU
unions.
It is not true that he lobbied for the election of General Secretaries
of the
two unions. Even if that was true that there is no relationship between
that
and the innuendos in the article.
8. In introducing the story “On how the deal (bribery) went
down”, Mr Letsoalo states that “COSATU General Secretary insists
his wife’s role in the marketing financial products is no scandal. But
the company that pays her to do it clearly disagrees”. The article does
not back this assertion. Mr Letsoalo merely concludes that by paying a
bribe,
the company was admitting guilt to some wrong doing. This is wrong and
actually
it amounts to character assassination.
COSATU also condemns strongly the
attempt by Mr Veon Bock to bribe
journalists doing their work. This is clearly unethical and it amounts
to an
attack on media freedoms. The General Secretary also condemned this in
his
response above, a condemnation which strategically Mr Letsoalo decided
not to
print.
The only sin committed by COSATU is to take a strong stance
against corruption. This article together with other attempts before to
turnish
the name of the COSATU leadership will not deter us from campaigning to
rid
South Africa of corruption. The General Secretary of COSATU has come
under
immense personalised attack from those who have something to hide from
life
style audits. Recently he was said to own a R6 million house – when this
was proven to be a lie, it was said that he abused a COSATU credit card –
no evidence was produced and when these forces were challenged, then
they
spread a rumour that his wife is deep and has won governmetn tenders
everywhere
– they have not produced shred of evidence to back this, then it was
said he has a two months old baby out of wedlocks – till to day they
have
not produced the baby and the mother. Quite clearly there is an attempt
to
discredit him as the principal spokesperson of COSATU. They will not
succeed to
silence us!
Veon Bock’s responses to Mail &
Guardian
Matuma,
Below are my responses to your questions. As indicated to you before,
our
clients are Retirement Funds and not Trade Unions. Retirement Funds are
run by
independent Boards of Trustees made up on a 50/50 basis by members and
employer
representatives.
I therefore want you to read my response against this background.
Regards,
Veon
Dear
Mr BockIt is
with regret to inform you that we are intending to publish the story on
Friday
on both your attempt to bribe me and the original story about your
company- SA
Quantum- payment to Cosatu general secretary Zwelinzima Vavi’s wife-
Norah Noluthando Vavi. The intention from the start in my accepting
payment
from you was in order to expose your attempted bribe. Now, I would like
you to
answer the following questions for me;
* If there is nothing wrong with SA Quantum doing business with
Zwelinzima Vavi’s wife- Norah Noluthando Vavi, why would you go to the extent
of offering me R120 000 [and in fact paying me R40 000 in cash as
the first instalment on Saturday March 27 2010] in what clearly appears to be a
cover up for the Vavis?
I deny paying you the sum of R40,000 in cash or offering you
R120,000. The agreement with Mrs. Vavi, which was entered into by the
Late Mr Abe Nduru is above board and at no stage did Mrs. Vavi consult
or
market the services of SA Quantum to COSATU affiliated Retirement Funds
nor is
a condition of the agreement that Mrs. Vavi consult or market the
services of
SA Quantum to COSATU affiliated Retirement Funds.
* Why should I not consider the agreement to pay me R120 and the actual
R40 payment as an attempt to bribe me and as criminal act?
I deny that an agreement of this nature exists.
* Why out of all people did SA Quantum chose Vavi’s wife to do
marketing for the company within the labour federation?
Mrs. Vavi is an independent business woman and has a right to
earn
a living, as do any other individual. Why did the Mail & Guardian
employ
you?
* How much has SA Quantum paid Zwelothando since it entered in a
contract with Vavi’s wife?
I quote clause 4 of the agreement: “4.1. In consideration
for the rendering of the services contemplated in clause 3, Quantum
shall pay
Zwelothando a consulting fee amounting to 5% (five percent) of first
year
income on business generated for Quatum by Zwelothando. No consulting
fees
shall be paid unless all the retainers are paid in full.” Furthermore
clause 5 of the agreement states that: “Zwelothando is not, and will
never be deemed to be an employee of Quantum.”
* Why would it be wrong for me to assume that the payment by SA Quantum
to Zwelothando, constitute a kick back or an attempt to influence
Cosatu or its affiliates through Cosatu or Vavi- to channel business
opportunities to SA Quantum?
As explained to you before, Mr Vavi does not excercise control
over Boards of Trustees of Retirement Funds, which are our clients and
independent legal structures outside of COSATU. The Boards of Trustees
are made
up on a 50/50 basis of members’ representatives/employer
representatives.
* During our first meeting, you stated that SA Quantum was doing
business
with Numsa, NUM and Theba Bank, which is owned by the mine worker’s
union [NUM]. Which other Cosatu unions are you [SA Quantum] doing
business with within Cosatu?
As indicated to you before, we do not
deal with COSATU or any of
its affiliates. We deal only with Retirement Funds, which are
independent of
COSATU and they make use of various service providers. I would appreciate
it if you could respond to my questions before 10am on Wednesday, for
deadline
reasonsBest
RegardsMatuma
Letsoalo
________________________________
Hasta Siempre la comandante
Sithembewena Tsembeyi
Socialismo o Muerte...
________________________________
--
You are subscribed. This footer can help you.
Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this
message.
You can visit the group WEB SITE at
http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options,
pages, files and membership.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You
don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put
anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this
address (repeat): [email protected] .
To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
