Finance and Economic Opportunities

With reference to the replies to question 3 and 4 of 30 April 2021:

(1) Whether this conflict was a risk that should have been included in the report to the Provincial Cabinet; if not, why not; if so, why was it not reported to the Provincial Cabinet;

Please refer to the previous response to part (5) of question 5 of Question Paper 20 of 2021.

(2) whether the Provincial Cabinet should have been made aware of the conflict of interest when considering the appointments; if not, why not; if so, why was this information withheld from the Provincial Cabinet;

Please refer to the previous response to part (5) of question 5 of Question Paper 20 of 2021.

(3) whether either of the job descriptions was amended at any point after the positions were first advertised; if so, (a) when, (b) why and (c) in what way;

No.

(4)(a) how were the headhunted candidates identified, (b) who (with reference to designations) formed part of the committees that (i) identified, (ii) interviewed and (iii) ultimately selected these candidates;

(a) Please refer to the previous response to part (2)(a) of question 3 of Question Paper 15 of 2021.

(b) The selection committee, which, for the DDG position, comprised of Ministers Maynier, Fernandez and Bredell, and the HOD: Provincial Treasury.

The selection committee, which, for the CD position, comprised of the HOD: Provincial Treasury, the Acting DDG: Fiscal and Economic Services and the Acting DDG: Governance and Asset Management.

(5) during what stage of the interviews (prior to or during) of the headhunted candidates was he made aware that the two successful candidates were related;

The relationship between the two candidates was raised with the Head Official: Provincial Treasury by the CD on being approached as part of the headhunting process. The Head Official: Provincial Treasury then immediately advised me and the Branch: People Management.

I was advised that there was no regulatory bar preventing both candidates from being considered and interviewed for the respective positions. To exclude one, or both of them, would have been uncompetitive and discriminatory.

As stated in previous replies, the potential for a conflict of interest was disclosed by each candidate on being offered their respective positions.

(6) whether the Head of Department (HOD) of the Provincial Treasury previously worked for the National Treasury and/or with the incumbent DDG and CD at the National Treasury;

Yes.

if so, what are the relevant details;

The HOD worked at the National Treasury from 2014 to 2018 and this period overlapped with both incumbents’ tenure at the National Treasury. During this period, he interacted professionally with the incumbent DDG on matters related to Fiscal and Economic Policy and the incumbent CD on matters related to Local Government Finance. These interactions were intermittent, given the nature of the various work assignments.

(7) whether the HOD was aware of the conflict before the headhunting process formally commenced; if so, what are the relevant details;

No. The HOD was not aware of the relationship, as his interactions with the individuals only ever occurred in a professional context, at different times and on different subject matters.

(8)(a) who made up the selection committee for each post and

Please refer to the response to part 4(b) above.

(b) what provisions in the WCG’s Recruitment and Selection Policy guided the headhunting pro

 Paragraph 14 of the WCG’s Recruitment and Selection Policy.

(9) whether a copy of the Headhunting Policy or the section of the WCG’s Recruitment and Selection Policy that guided the headhunting process can be made available?

Yes, refer to Annexure 1.