Parliament, Sunday 19 July 2015 - Parliament notes with serious concern that a Sunday newspaper which earlier this month carried an inaccurate article that the Secretary to Parliament had issued instructions to receive "blue-light" protection has repeated these accusations today.

The effect of the inaccurate articles about the Secretary to Parliament seeks to suggest that Parliamentary officials are untrustworthy.   

Parliament remains steadfast that the article previously published by the Sunday newspaper claiming that the Secretary to Parliament demanded blue-light treatment was wrong, incorrect, mischievous and malicious.

In its follow up, today, the paper purports that it has evidence and repeats the same baseless accusations on blue lights.

Once again, and for the record, the Secretary to Parliament has not requested blue-lights, nor has he instructed anyone to use them, nor does he perform co-driving with any official assigned to perform the function or the service provider so instructed to provide transportation. To insist on such a claim is a mere attempt to tarnish the image of the Secretary to Parliament and Parliament.

The second allegation that the Secretary to Parliament uses Parliament transport for private use is equally false, mischievous and malicious. For the record, the Secretary to Parliament uses his own transport to and from work, in doing so he transports and travels with his son daily taking him to school as a normal parent does. When he is on official duty that uses the same route and is leaving home at the same time that he normally leaves, he drops his son off at school as is normally the case. This happens when the official mission is enroute to the school. The Secretary to Parliament has never requisitioned transport to ferry around his child as it is alleged.

In its report the Sunday newspaper deliberately omits providing the information and facts articled above, but rather chooses to distort the facts for sensational and malicious purposes.

Parliament notes the inability of the newspaper to move beyond the fact that its information is grossly inadequate, lacks the understanding of parliamentary management processes and amounts to distortion and malice.

A simple request for transport to attend to a specific official business engagement is turned into some kind of improper conduct. Aspersions are cast through insinuations including allegations about a construction of a 'corporate boardroom' at a rented house which the Secretary occupies. This begs the question about whether the motive is simply the desire to uncover the truth.

The report cites a minute of an old meeting and presents it as recent. The management team last week met with the staff concerned who articulated their legitimate issues that clearly related to the conditions of service and how they are managed in the protection services unit. Information from this meeting is omitted from the report despite the fact that it was made available to the Sunday newspaper in response to the inquiry.

At the meeting, the staff emphatically distanced themselves from those who were using their name, to cast doubt, sow division and mistrust between them and generally in the organisation. They have indicated that those engaged in this manner of work do not believe in the organisational processes, are self-serving and pursuing their own agenda that had nothing to do with them.

Parliament is obviously concerned that its Protection Services section that has been noted to require serious improvements now has lapses in information management and leaks. Parliament is even more concerned that some of the information leaked has been used to create distortions, destabilisation and tarnish the image of Parliament and its Protection Services section.

This matter will obviously receive serious urgent attention given the many risks it poses.

Parliament is also considering its options in respect of the persistent incorrect reports including the possibility of approaching the office of the Press Ombudsman.

Issued by Parliament of RSA