As it happened - I laboured under the false impression that I had retired - Molefe

The live updates for tonight are ending, although the inquiry is still set to continue, possibly late into the night. 

The Portfolio Committee on Public Enterprises has announced that on Wednesday it will continue its inquiry with Minister of Public Enterprises Ms Lynne Brown set to give evidence. 

Why not use nuclear power, says Molefe 

"I don't understand why we in Africa who do not have electricity are afraid of nuclear," says Molefe.

He is being asked by the EFF's Floyd Shivambu about nuclear power and SA's nuclear build. 

Shivambu asks Molefe about the view that the "whole rush to utilise nuclear as a source of energy" is linked to the Guptas and an alleged bribe from the Russia. 

"I don't know anything about those allegations," he says. "What I do know is that Koeberg is giving us cheap electricity."

Molefe says that SA could source nuclear power from Japan, France, or the USA, and didn't need to source it from Russia. 

He adds he doesn't understand why people are "scared of" Russia.  

The EFF's Floyd Shivambu, who has been chomping at the bit to get involved in the questioning, is now set to quiz Molefe. 

He asks Molefe when he first met members of the Gupta family. Molefe says he met members of the Gupta family when he was still at the PIC. 

He says he met Ajay Gupta at the time. 

Shivambu asks Molefe if, before he applied for his job at Transnet - where he worked before he joined Eskom - he ever met Jacob Zuma, members of the Gupta family, or now former Eskom CFO Anoj Singh

Molefe says he didn't, but he did meet Singh at Transnet, as well as former Oakbay chief executive officer Nazeem Howa. 

Mazzone is now asking Molefe why, if his contract of employment was in fact still valid when he took early retirement, he was able to become an MP for the ANC. 

Molefe says that he was able to become an MP only because he didn't know he was still, legally, employed by Eskom. 

"I laboured under the false impression that I had retired," he says. 

Molefe says that, when he left Eskom, he paid a courtesy call to Minister of Public Enterprises Lynne Brown when he left Eskom in late 2016. 

Asked if he told her he was retiring or resigning, Molefe says: "Minister Brown says that her recollection is that I said I resigned. I dispute that," says Molefe. 

Molefe says that an upcoming court case will deal with the matter.  

The questions have now moved on to the relationship between the Gupta-linked firm Trillian and Eskom.

"I do not have details of what happened there and I do not have details of those transactions," says Molefe, adding that former Eskom CFO Anoj Singh should be able to answer. 

The DA's Natasha Mazzone asks why, as Eskom's CEO, he didn't know about Eskom's links to Trillian. 

Molefe now says that Mazzone has "hijaked" him and he could not be expected to know the details of all deals under his watch. 

Mazzone then asks: "Did you know that Eskom was doing work with Trillian?"

"No," says Molefe. 

I have never denied I know the Guptas - Molefe 

Asked if he had ever been to the Gupta's Saxonwold compound, Molefe says he has never denied this. 

"I have said in this committee that I have known them for some time, since they came into SA. They tried to do a deal at the PIC, but they never succeeded ... I have never denied that I have known them," he says. 

Saxonwold Shebeen?

Molefe is now asked about the notorious 'Saxonwold shebeen'. He tells the inquiry he never said he was at a Saxonwold shebeen.  

"On the issue of the shebeen I will let you know I complained to the press ombudsman about the Sunday Times reporting that I said I was at the shebeen', 

"The press ombudsman asked the Sunday Times to apologise," he says. 

After Vanara ends his questions to Molefe, it will now be up to MP's to quiz the former Eskom CEO. 

The first question to him is whether any service provider at Transnet, where he worked before joining Eskom, was affiliated with the Gupta family. 

"At Transnet I am not aware that there has been any business between Transnet and Gupta-owned companies," says Molefe, adding "unless I am making a mistake". 

"At Eskom there was, there have been several coal supply agreements," he says. 

Asked whether he has any knowledge of why the Guptas should not be allowed to do business with the state, Molefe says: "I am not aware that the Guptas or any of their companies have been blacklisted, or have been guilty of a crime". 

Molefe, trying to answer Vanara's questions about whether he resigned from Eskom in late 2016, keeps repeating that contemplating doing something doesn't make it so.

"You see, you can decide to go to Bloemfontein as you are sitting here now. It doesn't mean that you are in Bloemfontein," he says. 

He says his statement talked about a decision to step down had been made but "not implemented".

He tells the committee that, a few days after his media statement announcing he was leaving Eskom he then put in an application for early retirement.  

Varan says his reading of the statement reflects a unilateral decision to walk away from Eskom. 

Parliament's evidence leader Advocate Ntuthuzelo Vanara starts by asking Molefe how he left Transnet, and he said he resigned. 

Vanara notes this is different from early retirement. While someone may resign at "their discretion" to be granted early retirement an employee needs to get buy in from the company. 

Vanara then cites Molefe's media statement dated November 11, 2016, where he stated that he had "decided to leave my employ at Eskom from 1 January 2017" in the wake of the Public Protector's report. 

Molefe said in the statement that: 

Start

I am confident that, when the time comes, I will be able to show that I have done nothing wrong and that my name will be cleared.

I shall dedicate myself to showing that an injustice has been done by the precipitate delivery of 'observations', following an incomplete investigation, which the former Public Protector has drawn back from calling 'findings'.

The truth will out.I have, in the interests of good corporate governance, decided to leave my employ at Eskom from 1 January 2017.

I do so voluntarily: indeed, I wish to pay tribute to the unfailing support I have had since I took up office from the chairperson, the Board and with those with whom it has been my privilege to work. Together we brought Eskom back from the brink.

End

Vanara then says that according to the statement, he appeared to have unilaterally left Eskom. 

Molefe then asks whether Vanara is trying to say that he had written a resignation letter. 

"We are trying to get ourselves out of the mist," says Vanara. 

Regarding former Public Protector Thuli Madonsela's State of Capture report which said that he could placed in the Saxonwold area of Johannesburg - where the Gupta family lives - 19 times, Molefe said that the report did not provide specific details about his whereabouts, or what he was doing there. 

Molefe now moves onto former Public Protector Thuli Madonsela's State of Capture report, which was released in mid-October 2016. 

He said the report did not make any findings, only observations and notes. 

Part of the report dealt with phone calls between Molefe and Ajay Gupta. 

"She [Madonsela] did not ask me for my side of my story as regards the phone calls,  nor did she bring the phone records to my attention," he said. 

He adds his "right to be heard" has been infringed. 

"The public protector fails to provide any other details about the phone calls," said Molefe. 

Former Eskom chief executive Brian Molefe has told Parliament's inquiry into state capture that less than a month after being reinstated as the power utility's CEO in June 2017, he was dismissed. 

"On the 2nd of June 2017, I received a letter from Dr (Ben) Ngubane advising me of the minster's instruction to rescind the reinstatement."

"On the 5th of June 2017 I launched a Labour Court application to set the summary dismal aside." 

By this time the DA and the EFF had also approached the courts to set Molefe;s reinstatement aside. 

He adds that the matter of what he owes the Eskom pension fund for the R7.7m he says was paid out to him will be determined in the High Court starting on November 29. 

Molefe said that his reinstatement agreement just regulated the manner he would return to Eskom, and should not be understood as a new position for him, as legally he had "never left".  

Molefe said he understood Minister Lynne Brown was happy with the agreement that he return to Eskom.  

He said that, on May 15 2017, he resumed his duties as Eskom's Group CEO. 

Former Eskom chief executive Brian Molefe has told Parliament's inquiry into state capture at Eskom that the decision to give him early retirement in late 2016 was a "common error". 

He said that he obtained legal advice that this was indeed the case, but he has not yet defined to the committee what, exactly, he means by "common error". 

"The legal position was that the situation had to be restored to status quo ante," he said.

Molefe said he then signed a reinstatement agreement. 

"The reinstatement agreement did not seek to reinstate me," said Molefe. "The fact that my pension arrangement or pension agreements were void ..... meant that my contract of employment was still in existence."

"That is the legal advice that we obtained," he said. 

Molefe said that, after having his request for early retirement from Eskom accepted in late 2016 (and becoming an Eskom pensioner) he accepted appointment as an ANC member of the National Assembly in April 2017.

He said that, in the same month, members of the Eskom board then met with him and "intimated that acceptance of my early retirement application was a mistake". 

"I asked them to make a proposal on a way forward that would get the Minister of Public Enterprise's approval," Molefe told the committee. 

Molefe said that, on May 11 2017, he received a letter from Dr Ben Ngubane requesting that he resumes his duties as Eskom Group CEO. 

Molefe said the decision to implement the early retirement was a "common error". 

Early retirement 

Molefe said he wrote a letter requesting early retirement from Eskom on November 11 2016. 

On November 24 2016 he said he received a letter from Dr Ngubane saying the Eskom board  had approved his early retirement. 

"I did not received R30.1m as has been reported,' he said.  

Rather, Molefe said he received a lump sum of R7.7m for his pension. Of this, he said, R4.3m was originally from his Transnet pension fund.  

Molefe, in his statement, said that after entertaining several buyers, Glencore eventually sold Optimum coal mine to Gupta-owned company Oakbay. 

At the time of the sale, he said the price of coal that Optimum would keep supplying to Hendrina power station would remain at R150 per tonne. 

Molefe says that Glencore wanted to up the price of the coal it was supplying Eskom, but he didn't think the price was right.  

He said he didn't, however, support moves to suspend Glencore's mining licence. 

He said while he didn't think Glencore's increased price was right, Eskom still wanted coal to be supplied from the company as it was worried out load shedding

Former Eskom chief executive Brian Molefe has begun reading a 20 page statement at Parliament's state capture inquiry. 

"I saw my first task as instilling a fresh sense of purpose and improve the morale of all staff," he said. 

Former Eskom CEO Brian Molefe during a meeting with Parliament’s Standing Committee on Public Accounts on May 30, 2017. (Gallo Images / Sowetan / Esa Alexander)

The EFF's Floyd Shivambu is now arguing with the inquiry's chair about why he is not allowed to ask questions. 

The chair has said that the witness Viroshini Naidoo needs to leave to catch a flight, and has already stayed beyond her time. 

Shivambu said that the EFF will write a letter of complaint. 

Naidoo appears to have left. 

I think it is really unfair to assume that I am captured - Naidoo 

Former Eskom board member Viroshini Naidoo has said that, despite knowing Gupta business associate Salim Essa, she never used her position on the board to benefit others. 

"My entire life in the last year is based on perception and association," she told the Eskom inquiry into state capture. 

Naidoo previously told the inquiry that she and her husband knew Essa, and that her husband knew members of the Gupta family. 

"Because I knew certain people I am perceived to have done things wrongly at Eskom, or to have created undue influence for the benefit of others. 

"I can assure you, and I swear under oath, I did not." 

She said that, after an article came out last year that linked her the Gupta family, she wanted to respond publicly, but the minister of public enterprises said she shouldn't. 

"I think it is really unfair to assume that I am captured. I can't speak for anyone else." 

Guptas never influenced me - Naidoo 

Former Eskom board member Viroshini Naidoo has said she doesn't know the Guptas and has never been influenced by them. 

She was asked the question during Parliament's Eskom inquiry about the controversial R586m pre-purchase of coal from Gupta-linked firm Tegeta.

"I wold never allow anyone to influence me. Nobody influenced me," she said.

She said that she does know Gupta associate Salim Essa, however. 

She said her husband does know the Guptas, but he doesn't discuss his relationship with them with her. 

We weren't trying to assist Tegeta - Naidoo 

Former Eskom board member Viroshini Naidoo is giving evidence to Parliament's Eskom inquiry about the pre-purchase of coal from Gupta-linked firm Tegeta. 

"I was given the impression that Tegeta controlled the mine (Optimum Coal mine)," Naidoo told the evidence leader. 

"There was no thought of one chance that we were aiding or abetting of trying to assist Tegeta at all," said Naidoo. 

She said Eskom also "really needed the coal" and the power utility was worried about load shedding. 

'We wanted to be fair to Matona' - Naidoo 

Former Eskom board member Viroshini Naidoo is giving evidence to Parliament's Eskom inquiry about the suspension of four executives in early 2015 amid an internal inquiry, including former CEO Tshediso Matona.

Naidoo said the power utility's board tried to be fair to the four people suspended. 

“The feeback from the board was you have to be fair to these people. But at the end of the day of they wanted to leave, you couldn't force them to stay." 

The inquiry's evidence leader then noted that Matona wanted his job back, and asked Naidoo again why he left Eskom permanently when the inquiry found no evidence of wrongdoing. 

“My understanding is … he eventually felt the relationship between Eskom and him had broken down,” said Naidoo.  

Former Eskom board member Viroshini Naidoo is next to give evidence to Parliament's inquiry.

Molefe or Tsotsi expected to testify next

Parliament's Eskom inquiry is set to reconvene at 16:00, and it is expected that former Eskom chief executive Brian Molefe or former chairperson Zola Tsotsi will be next to give evidence.

The inquiry is being conducted by Parliament’s public enterprises portfolio committee. 

Molefe and Tsotsi’s names have been raised countless times during the inquiry, which has seen damning testimonies from former and suspended executives, business rescue practitioners, consultants and pension scheme officials.

Tsotsi was chair from 2011 to 2015 and Molefe was chief executive from 2015 to 2016.

The inquiry is investigating corruption and state capture allegations at Eskom, following former public protector Thuli Madonsela’s State of Capture report and the countless allegations contained in the #GuptaLeaks.

Eskom Venete Klein, a former non-executive Eskom board member, has told the Eskom inquiry that the power utility's board didn't know the reasons behind the suspension of its former CEO Tshediso Matona in March 2015. 

She was being quizzed by former Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan about the suspension of four senior executives in March 2015, including Matona.

Gordhan asked Klein why Matona was suspended. 

"There wasn't any reason given [for his suspension]," said Klein.

"You stood by and allowed an innocent person to be suspended and virtually smeared?" asked Gordhan. 

"The answer has to be yes, sir," said Klein. 

Former Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan is now quizzing Venete Klein, a former non-executive Eskom board member, about how successful the Eskom board was in dealing with allegations of wrongdoing. 

Venete Klein, a former non-executive Eskom board member, has told the Eskom inquiry that she was never asked to meet with the "Guptas or Zumas".

In response to a question, she added that Gupta business associate Salim Essa did once introduce himself to her and gave her his business card, but that was all. 

Eskom board didn't have oversight over all large contracts - Klein 

Former Eskom board member Venete Klein has told Parliament's inquiry into Eskom that there was too much leeway for delegation at the power utility, in terms of who could approve contracts. 

She said that the Eskom board did not have oversight over all large contracts. 

"For example, the authority to approve contracts with a value up to R750m is fully delegated to the executive, while the authority to conclude contracts with a value of over R750m up to “Investment Decision” or “Budget level” is fully delegated to the BTC (The Budget tender Commitee)," she said in her statement to the inquiry.  

Klein told the inquiry that while the Eskom board does and should take accountability for everything that happens, it still has to deal with how authority is delegated. 

She said when she first arrived at Eskom she was surprised to hear that Eskom executives could conclude contracts up to R750m without board oversight. 

"In my mind, I couldn't fit it in there," she said. 

She told the inquiry that this delegation of financial authority must be reconsidered. 

"The board are sitting ducks, because you are not going to see that [i.e. contracts up top R750m] come to you," she said. 

Read former Eskom board member Venete Klein's full statement to the Eskom inquiry below

Statement of Venete Klein by Allison Jeftha on Scribd

Klein - Molefe signed contract with no fixed term 

Former Eskom board member Venete Klein has said there was no mention of a term of office for Brian Molefe as Eskom CEO in a letter in early September 2015. 

By contrast, Klein said she received an email from now suspended Eskom legal head Suzanne Daniels dated November 4, stating that a letter confirming Molefe’s tenure of only 5 years has arrived. 

Klein was giving evidence before Parliament's Eskom Inquiry into Molefe's controversial pension payout of over R30m and the nature of his contract. 

“The difficulty is the letter given by Dr (Ben) Ngubane to Mr Molefe does not state a 5 year term. We must ask Ms Daniels why she gave Dr Ngubane a letter without a term in it,” Klein told the Eskom Inquiry.

Klein, the former chairperson of the Institute of Directors of Southern Africa, was then told by the inquiry’s evidence leader that he would not hesitate to call Daniels to come and clarify this matter.

Klein continued to explain that the board then sat with a scenario of Molefe having signed a contract with no fixed term in it. 

To Molefe, apparently, this meant he had secured full time appointment. 

“Molefe told us his motivation to come to Eskom was that he thought he could retire from there (Eskom) in the end,” said Klein.

“We tried to persuade him to go for a 5 year contract.  He then said that would take away his ability to retire from that position.

Klein said that there is a rule that says if you have been in an organisation for 10 years and you are over 50 years old, the organisation will pay for certain things. So, after 5 years at the power utility Molefe would have been 55 years old – but he would then not have been at the organisation for 10 years.

“So with that in mind Mr Minnaar brought the proposal where he explained the process and people in governance accepted that after 5 years Molefe would be 55 and we agreed that he could buy the additional 5 years in order to also comply with the requirement of having worked there for 10 years,” said Klein.

She added that this took place without the notion that an additional 50 or 60 years would paid out to Molefe.

Letter to the minister

Klein said a letter was written to the Minister of Public Enterprises as a result of the board finding out on 11 November 2015 that it was in a quandary wit regards to the contract.  

“Molefe signed a contract without a fixed year 5 year term – and now we were asking him to go and change it to a 5 year period.” 

“We then wrote to the minister informing her of a proposal about these amendments,” said Klein.

From 25 November to 9 February the board heard nothing, according to Klein. 

On 9 February the board met to discuss the matter.

Klein said that, as she was concerned she was sitting in a meeting with a skilled company secretary and other experienced people, and she relied on that to be sufficient for them to pass a resolution on that day. 

The board had not heard back from the minister at that stage, she said.

“Ms Daniels told us it is not an approval we are seeking but that we are advising the minister of what we are going to do,” said Klein. 

The advocate leading the evidence process in the parliamentary hearing put it to Klein that the issue of Molefe’s pension fund payout was clearly not consistent with the resolution taken by the board – rightly or wrongly – at the February meeting. 

Klein confirmed this to be a correct statement.

The advocate then asked Klein on what possible resolution this pension could then have been paid by the pension fund.

Klein replied that she was not privy to the contract’s contents when Molefe applied for early retirement.

The application went to the chair of the board. 

“There was apparently in Molefe’s contract something about a 6 months exit clause,” she said.  “There were a lot of things the board may have said, but that never happened. I was told by Ms Daniels that we do not need a full board signature on this and that the February resolution stands,” said Klein.

In her view there were opportunities after Molefe left for people to point out where the board had “gone wrong”. 

When she asked about this she was told all had been done correctly to the letter of the law.

She said there was no subsequent resolution regarding money paid for the pension.

The advocate then put it to Klein that, if there was no resolution authorising the payment of the pension fund, the pension payout amounted to theft from Eskom “camouflaged as a pension”.Klein then said this is an interesting question, but not how she saw it until it was now asked. 

“Where we went wrong is what happened at the back end and when I queried it I was told Dr Ben (Ngubane) had the authority to ok it,” she said.

Former Eskom CEO Brian Molefe. (Photo: Gallo)

Eskom board was in awe of Brian Molefe after he fixed load shedding  

Venete Klein, a former Eskom board member and former chairperson of the Institute of Directors of Southern Africa, said the board thought Brian Molefe was the best person for the job as chief executive.  

“What happened with state capture has changed many people’s lives,” she said at the Eskom Inquiry. “I pray that we can do a proper inquiry so that those who are found guilty of wrong doing face justice quickly."  

“The candidate was selected based on the information we had at the time,” she said. “What I see in the media leaves me cold. We did not have the benefit at that stage. I hope we can start the state capture inquiry so people can be held accountable.”  

In a written statement to Parliament’s Eskom Inquiry, she said Molefe’s secondment from Transnet to Eskom in 2015 was relieving.  

“I was particularly relieved and pleased with the manner in which Mr Molefe had brought immediate stability to the organisation and taken control of the business with all the correct results,” she said.  

“At the time of Mr Molefe’s secondment, Eskom was understandably in an extremely unstable position,” she said. “In addition to the crisis at executive and board level, Eskom remained with going concern problems and stage 3 load shedding.”  

“The entire board, including me, was in awe of what Mr Molefe had been able to deliver, especially as he had done so with substantially the same executive team who had previously not known how to turn the load shedding situation around.  

“Bearing in mind that the board had been under severe public and media scrutiny and attack since its appointment in December 2014, the turnaround experienced under Mr Molefe’s tenure had been particularly pleasing.  

“In fact, such was his performance that Mr Molefe was nominated for the award of South African of the Year in 2015.  

“In his tenure as acting group chief executive, Mr Molefe assisted the board with the turnaround of Eskom. Along with the rest of the board, I was impressed by Mr Molefe’s performance and the immediate and significant strides that Eskom made under his leadership.  

“Mr Molefe demonstrated the expertise, urgent resolve and certainty of direction required to set Eskom on the right course.”

Eskom board got misleading info - Klein  

Venete Klein, a former Eskom board member and former chairperson of the Institute of Directors of Southern Africa, says the board received misleading information and was given reports with critical information completely omitted.  

In a written statement to Parliament’s Eskom Inquiry, she said “the board struggled with not having all the required information at hand when submissions were presented”.  

“It now appears that many of the submissions that were considered in my time contained misleading information or completely omitted critical information.  

“What compounded matters even further for me, is that there are now differing versions of matters that I previously thought that I fully understood.”  

Eskom cleared Matjila over New Age deal despite concerns - Klein  

Venete Klein, a former Eskom board member and former chairperson of the Institute of Directors of Southern Africa, said she refused to sign a board report regarding the New Age deal.  

In a written statement to Parliament’s Eskom Inquiry, she said the contract between Eskom and The New Age (TNA) Media regarding The New Age breakfast deal had been discussed by the board in November and early December 2014, before her appointment to the board.  

Her testimony comes as former Eskom CEO Collin Matjila reportedly pushed for the R43m Eskom/New Age breakfast sponsorship deal to go through.  

At the time in 2014, then Eskom board chairperson at the time Zola Tsotsi said the situation should not be "prejudged. It's a little premature to comment until I get feedback... to tell me what they [the subcommittee] uncovered."  

That outcome appeared to clear Matjila and ratified the expense.  

Klein said: “My first and only engagement on the issue came about on 2 March 2015, when a resolution proposing to ratify the expense incurred in this regard and resolving not to take any action against Mr (Collin) Matjila (as he was no longer a member of the board) was circulated for approval by way of round robin.”  

“I categorically refused to sign the resolution as I did not agree with its contents, particularly as Mr Chose Choeu was still employed by Eskom at the time, and I believed that action needed to be taken against him.  

“My position in relation to the proposed round robin resolution regarding the TNA matter is reflected in the minutes of the board in-committee meeting of 19 March 2015. These minutes record that the chairman of the board indicated that he would speak to me regarding this issue, which never happened.  

“Despite my disagreement, the round robin was accepted as (to my knowledge) I was the only board member who refused to support and/or sign the resolution.  

“In addition to the aforesaid, it was noted by the board that the contract with TNA was of a commercial nature, and therefore could not simply be rescinded by Eskom at its own volition.  

“It was accordingly agreed that all future contracts of that nature should have an early termination clause included for Eskom’s benefit. A resolution to this effect was ratified at the Board meeting of 28 May 2015.  

“My main consideration in taking the position that I did in relation to the TNA matter was that, owing to the information at hand, I did not believe that the approach proposed in the round robin resolution was in the best interests of Eskom.”

Tsotsi will be appearing before the committee later on Tuesday.

Pictured below is Venete Klein at the Eskom Inquiry on Tuesday.

State Security minister should be reported to public protector – Shivambu  

State Security Minister Bongani Bongo should be reported to the public protector after he was accused of offering a bribe to advocate Ntuthuzelo Vanara, who is the evidence leader of Parliament’s inquiry into state capture at Eskom.  

Members of the portfolio committee of public enterprises supported Parliament’s ethics committee investigation into the allegation.  

However, DA MP Natasha Mazzone said action should be taken in terms of the Prevention of Corruption Act, while EFF MP Floyd Shivambu said it should be reported to the public protector because an executive had been accused of breaching the executive ethics code.  

The MPs rallied behind Vanara, saying they had no reason to doubt his version of events.