Zuma's R1m a month VIP protection bill

Come on, what springs to mind immediately? B-a-n-a-n-a republic. Why does a leader of a political party merit having a VIP protection unit at the expense of taxpayers? He is not the president of the country, just president of a political party. Imagine how this money could have been spent on the very people that will be voting for him next month.

Dianne Kohler Barnard MP accuses the minister of safety & security of wasting taxpayer money.

DA outraged over Zuma's R50 million SAPS VIP protection bill.

It is has been revealed today that the president of the ANC, Jacob Zuma, is receiving South African Police Service VIP protection at a monthly cost of R998 815. This means that protecting Zuma has cost taxpayers in the region of R50 million since his dismissal as Deputy President in June 2005 - a grossly inappropriate and excessive degree of expenditure on a single individual.

Jacob Zuma's massive monthly protection costs were revealed in a reply to a Parliamentary Question from the Democratic Alliance (DA). In his reply, received by the DA today, Safety and Security Minister, Nathi Mthethwa also failed to place any time limit on this astounding rate of expenditure, by stating that protection would continue as long as "the situation analysis" dictated it.

The almost R1 million per month is spent on close protection, static protection, overtime, vehicle and telephone costs. This is an extraordinary waste of taxpayers' money, especially given that the South African Police Service is so chronically underfunded in many essential areas. Indeed, many millions of South Africans are besieged by crime, even while the president of the ANC - who is not, it should be noted, a public office-bearer - receives this kind of largesse.

The DA will tomorrow write to the Minister of Safety and Security, to demand an explanation as to why Mr Zuma receives such excessively high levels of protection and upon what basis this money is allocated. Unless these answers are forthcoming it will be clear evidence of political favouritism. We will also at the first possible opportunity submit further parliamentary questions to ascertain whether other former deputy presidents receive such significant levels of protection.

It is bitterly ironic that even while the South African taxpayer foots the bill for Zuma's astounding protection costs, his blue light cavalcades have become notorious for their dangerous antics on South African roads, placing in danger the lives of ordinary citizens. The mind boggles at what would be spent on his security should he become President.

Statement issued by Dianne Kohler Barnard MP, Democratic Alliance spokesperson on safety and security, March 12 2009