Parliament, Thursday, 5 March 2026 – The Joint Standing Committee on the Financial Management of Parliament on Wednesday received a comprehensive briefing from the Presiding Officers of Parliament on matters relating to the appointment and remuneration of the Secretary to Parliament, Mr Xolile George.
The briefing was provided in response to oversight questions and negative media campaigns by certain political parties on the circumstances, process and governance prescripts followed by Parliament in the recruitment of Mr George in 2022 during the Sixth Term of Parliament, as well as the determination of his remuneration and the subsequent adjustments made thereafter.
In keeping with the committee’s constitutional oversight mandate and in accordance with the governance framework provided for in the Financial Management of Parliament and Provincial Legislatures Act, the committee undertook a process to consider the information and documentation presented by the Presiding Officers.
Having considered the briefing and the supporting information placed before it, the committee accepted the comprehensive explanation provided regarding the recruitment process of the Secretary to Parliament, the remuneration at the time of appointment, and the subsequent adjustments made thereafter during the Sixth Term of Parliament.
The committee further noted and welcomed the formal confirmation by the Auditor-General of South Africa that its audit review of the recruitment process, the remuneration and the subsequent adjustments made to the Secretary to Parliament’s remuneration in the 2023/2024 audit cycle found no irregularities in the processes followed by Parliament.
The committee also reaffirmed the governance framework established in terms of the Financial Management of Parliament and Provincial Legislatures Act, and confirmed that the Executive Authority of Parliament – the Speaker of the National Assembly and the Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces, acting jointly – must continue to honour the employment contract of the Secretary to Parliament and its associated terms, which were lawfully concluded through Parliament’s governance processes.
Having satisfied itself that the relevant governance processes were followed and that the matter has been appropriately addressed through the institution’s oversight and audit mechanisms, the committee has formally concluded its deliberations on this matter.
The committee notes the public commentary, sustained negative media reporting and disparaging claims on the integrity of the Secretary to Parliament regarding his appointment and remuneration devoid of facts on this matter. While Parliament respects the important role of the media and the public’s right to scrutiny over the use of public resources, such scrutiny must be guided by verified facts and institutional processes.
In this regard, the committee emphasises that the oversight process has now been concluded and that the factual record, supported by the Auditor-General’s independent assurance, confirms that no irregularities were identified in the recruitment process or the remuneration adjustments relating to the Secretary to Parliament.
The core facts established from presentation by Executive Authority and the supporting documentation are as follows:
The Core Facts: What Parliament Can State, On Record, With Supporting Documentation
The committee confirms the following foundational facts:
- Mr Xolile George did not “increase his own salary”. The remuneration of the Secretary to Parliament is determined through institutional governance processes, including decisions of the Executive Authority and formal parliamentary resolutions. The Secretary to Parliament cannot unilaterally determine or implement his own remuneration.
- The committee confirms that due process was followed in the recruitment and appointment of Mr George, including the passing of appropriate parliamentary resolutions consistent with established practice.
- The committee further confirms that an express understanding existed from the headhunting stage that an independent benchmarking process would be undertaken to determine the final total remuneration package.
- Importantly, after public scrutiny, the Auditor-General of South Africa reviewed the recruitment and remuneration-setting process and found no irregularities based on the information provided. The Auditor-General’s conclusion is recorded as follows: “We reviewed the recruitment and appointment process, the approval of the salary and subsequent adjustment to the salary after appointment of the STP, and no irregularities were identified…”
The committee emphasises that the Auditor-General is an independent constitutional institution. Its work and findings form part of Parliament’s audited annual reporting processes and have been formally tabled and considered in the ordinary course of accountability, including within parliamentary committees that oversee Parliament’s own financial management.
Background On Why The Post Was Advertised At An Interim Level And Why Benchmarking Was Always Contemplated
The position of Secretary to Parliament became vacant after the termination of employment of the previous incumbent. When a decision was taken to advertise the post in 2020, the salary was set at a maximum range of R2.4 to R2.6 million, even though the disclosed salary of the previous STP in the annual report at the time of termination (2019) was R3.225 million.
In 2020, the Executive Authority issued a directive that the position be advertised at a maximum of R2.6 million, with the express intention that a benchmarking process would run to inform a market-related remuneration package. This interim level was also reaffirmed in an HR memorandum, which recorded that the salary range was conditional upon expert benchmarking input to be obtained.
This context is essential: from the outset, the institution contemplated that the advertised amount would be an interim figure while an evidence-based benchmarking process would determine a final package that reflected the constitutional, governance and fiduciary complexity of the role.
Recruitment Advertisements, Outcomes, And Why Headhunting Was Activated
The committee confirms that the post was advertised in February 2020 and re-advertised in October 2020 at the maximum of R2.6 million. The advertisement process yielded 43 applications, with several disqualifications for non-compliance. After screening, eight candidates were shortlisted and presented to the Executive Authority in December 2020.
Following engagement with the shortlist, the Executive Authority expressed concerns regarding the depth and overall quality of the shortlisted candidates, and requested that recruitment scope be broadened, with emphasis on attracting suitable female candidates through a targeted headhunting process.
A formal motivation was submitted to activate Clause 8.3.3.1 of the HR Policy, which permits a targeted executive search process where an advertised recruitment process fails to yield a suitable candidate. Parliament appointed an executive search agency, Revolution Human Capital (RHC), through applicable SCM processes, to identify suitable candidates and facilitate the process.
This sequence directly contradicts the public narrative that the process was “manipulated” or that anyone “hired himself”. The documentary record demonstrates that the institution first exhausted advertisement rounds, then used a policy-sanctioned executive search route once those rounds did not produce a candidate considered suitable for a role with constitutional-level responsibilities.
The Panel And The Recommendation
Interviews were conducted on 17 and 18 March 2021 by a high-level panel comprising the Executive Authority, Members of Parliament from multiple political parties, and external members, including the Chairperson of the Public Service Commission, a Judge President, and a specialist policy expert from academia. This composition ensured broad institutional oversight, political representation and governance accountability.
The panel unanimously agreed to recommend two candidates (Mr George and Mr Dangor), with Mr Xolile George as the top candidate for consideration as Secretary to Parliament designate.
Why The Initial Contract Was Not Finalised Immediately
Parliament adopted a formal resolution on 1 June 2022 appointing Mr George on a five-year performance-based contract. The offer presented to Mr George reflected the appointment at the advertised amount.
Parliament further confirms that, from the outset, the then Executive Authority determined that the position of Secretary to Parliament would be publicly advertised, while the remuneration and job level of the position would be independently benchmarked by a remuneration expert. This approach was adopted to ensure that the recruitment process proceeded without delay, while enabling the institution to determine – through an objective and professional assessment – a market-related remuneration package commensurate with the complexity, scope and responsibilities of the role.
The documentation records that what was issued at that stage was not a finalised contract of employment because the independent benchmarking exercise – expressly contemplated and communicated as part of the recruitment framework – had not yet been concluded. It is further recorded that Mr George’s acceptance of the offer was on the understanding that the final terms and conditions, including the total remuneration package and associated benefits, would be determined upon receipt of the benchmarking outcome.
During the interim period, Mr George was paid the advertised package (R2,604,661 for the first six months), consistent with the interim arrangement pending benchmarking.
Benchmarking And Salary Determination: Independent Assessment, Validation, And Formal Approval
Parliament confirms that the procurement process for an independent benchmarking service provider commenced through SCM processes, and a formal requisition was submitted for 21st Century Pay Solutions to review the remuneration and contract of employment for the STP.
On 15 December 2022, 21st Century submitted an independent benchmarking report and recommended a revised salary range of up to R4.4 million, taking into account the role complexity, institutional scale and public sector benchmarking. The benchmarking findings were independently validated by SNG Grant Thornton (external auditors).
On 18 January 2023, the Executive Authority approved the implementation of the revised salary, retrospectively effective from 15 June 2022, consistent with established precedent. The retrospective implementation was applied from 1 August 2022 to account for transitional arrangements agreed to between Parliament and the Secretary to Parliament’s previous employer, SALGA. It is important to note that a benchmark-led remuneration adjustment after appointment is not new within Parliament. This approach dates back to as early as 2007, has previously been applied to the same position (of Secretary to Parliament), and clearly forms part of an established institutional practice.
The benchmarking also recorded objective parameters informing the decision, including the institutional type and political environment, budget and financial oversight responsibilities, staff complement, geographic footprint and accountability profile. These are some of the factors that informed the determination of the Executive Authority.
Critically, the report records that no further salary adjustments were made beyond standard annual inflationary adjustments applicable to all employees and disclosed in annual reports.
Parliament also records that the benchmarking outcome resulted in remuneration that was lower than the Mr George’s prior earnings at SALGA (approximately R1.4 million reduction), aligning with value-for-money considerations.
Independent Assurance And Parliamentary Accountability: Auditor-General Confirmation And Committee Consideration
Following public scrutiny, the Auditor-General conducted an audit on the recruitment and remuneration process and confirmed, on 31 July 2024 and 12 August 2024, that no irregularities were identified.
Specifically, the Auditor-General's findings focused on the following three crucial areas in relation to the appointment and Conditions of Service of the STP:
- Recruitment and appointment process
- Process and context relating to the salary offered; and
- subsequent adjustment of the remuneration.
The conclusion in relation to these was that there were no irregularities in the process followed by Parliament.
The Auditor-General’s findings formed part of Parliament’s audited annual report and were tabled and processed through relevant parliamentary structures, including tabling and joint standing committee consideration during the 2024 and 2025 financial years.
In line with Parliament’s financial governance framework, the Joint Standing Committee on Financial Management of Parliament requested clarity and received a formal briefing reconstructing the process and confirming the lawful and compliant nature of the appointment and salary adjustment, anchored in formal resolutions and governance prescripts.
Access To Documentation And Protection Of Sensitive Information
Members of the committee were granted access to the documentation at the meeting; however, due to sensitive personal and security-related information contained in the report, copies could not be removed from the meeting in their current form. Full circulation of the documentation will take place once the protected information has been redacted in accordance with applicable legal prescripts.
Restoring Accuracy, Protecting Institutional Integrity, And Closing The Matter On Verified Facts
The committee therefore concludes that:
- The appointment of Mr Xolile George was conducted through a properly constituted recruitment process, including advertisements, screening, a policy-sanctioned headhunting route where advertisements did not yield a suitable candidate, and a multi-party, high-level interview process with external governance participants.
- Mr George’s appointment was anchored in a formal parliamentary resolution.
- The remuneration adjustment was a once-off outcome of an expressly contemplated, independently conducted benchmarking process, validated by external auditors, and approved by the Executive Authority; it was not an action taken by Mr George himself.
- The Auditor-General reviewed the recruitment and remuneration adjustment process and found no irregularities, and those findings were processed through Parliament’s accountability mechanisms, including committee consideration.
The committee recognises that public debate will continue in a democracy. However, Parliament calls for debate to be anchored in verified facts and the documentary record, and not on repeated allegations that ignore the independent findings of the Auditor-General and the institution’s formal governance processes.
Conclusion
The committee expresses its profound disappointment and regret at the personal harm and reputational damage that the prolonged circulation of allegations of impropriety in the public domain has caused to the Secretary to Parliament and his family. The committee is particularly concerned that, in some instances, public commentary has extended beyond matters of legitimate institutional oversight to include highly personalised and invasive attacks on private relationships that fall entirely outside the scope of parliamentary scrutiny.
The committee considers such conduct deeply regrettable and inconsistent with the standards of fairness and responsibility that should guide public discourse. In light of the findings before it and the absence of any irregularities identified through the oversight and audit processes, the committee is of the firm view that the Secretary to Parliament is owed a public apology.
The committee therefore calls on all stakeholders to exercise fairness, restraint and responsibility in public commentary, particularly where unsubstantiated allegations may cause serious harm to individuals and their families.
ISSUED BY PARLIAMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA ON BEHALF OF THE CO-CHAIRPERSON OF THE JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT OF PARLIAMENT, MS SANNY NDHLOVU AND ACTING CO-CHAIRPERSON, MR CAMERON DUGMORE.
For media enquiries or interviews with the Chairperson, please contact the committee’s media officer:
Name: Alicestine October (Ms)
Cell: 083 665 4345
E-mail: aoctober@parliament.gov.za
Arrange a tour