3 days ago
GLB commission of inquiry into corruption is just for show, while solutions are readily available
Mike Moriarty | Published 56 minutes ago
The Democratic Alliance (DA) in Gauteng is not fooled by the Committee of Inquiry set up by the Gauteng MEC for Economic Development, Lebogang Maile, into the affairs of the Gauteng Liquor Board (GLB). Maile established this committee to obscure evident corruption that has escalated within the GLB for many years.
The sins of the GLB are obvious, and the solution is readily available. GLB's incompetence can be addressed through retooling its business processes. Its corruption can be purged through forensic investigation and ruthless prosecution of those guilty.
On Sunday, 15 June 2025, MEC Maile announced the appointment of a 15-member committee of inquiry to investigate the affairs of the Gauteng Liquor Board (GLB). This committee has been tasked with probing allegations of corruption, bribery, and the long processing times for liquor licenses within the board. He also announced the dismissal of five GLB personnel. However, it is understood that these dismissals took place long before the announcement was made.
In truth, the GLB is a small portion of what the Gauteng Provincial Government does. Its budget of R80 million is tiny compared to the overall budget of R1.6 billion in Maile's Department of Economic Development. This represents 5% of the department and is a minuscule portion, 0.046%, of the total provincial budget.
Maile's actions are like trying to fasten a button with a sledgehammer. These committees are expensive, and previous ones have taken an unreasonably long time to achieve anything. Just like Makhura's e-tolls committee, and the committee that was headed by Trevor Fowler to look into the state of municipalities. These inquiries have a tendency of essentially achieve nothing at all. This committee is likely to take 10 months to do its work at an estimated cost of R6 million.
If the solution is so simple, why has Maile set up this committee? He is merely trying to have the appearance of acting decisively. The MEC's move is fatally flawed for four reasons: Firstly, during the length of time it takes to do its work, the stealing within GLB will continue. Secondly, the exercise will cost a lot of money.
Thirdly, the committee will be buried in an avalanche of complaints, allegations, and documents, while the real nuggets are hidden. Perhaps this is what Maile wants. Not all the perpetrators are his enemies. Any friends that he exposes could turn on him and his allies. Finally, the eventual report will cover so much ground that the real priorities will be difficult to identify.
No sooner had the committee been identified than allegations emerged that various committee members are tainted in one way or another. One may validly query whether it is wise to appoint previous employees of the GLB, such as Mpho Mosing and Jennifer Rankeng. Fhedzisani Pandelani was a previous board chairperson.
Ms Nalini Maharaj is a board member at the Gauteng Gambling Board (GGB), which is now also under scrutiny. If members of the committee were part of the problem, can they be part of the solution?
But Maile already has information on the failings of the GLB. He has received adequate correspondence, a series of court actions, responded to various questions in the House, and hosted meetings where complainants and staff tabled grievances. Is he unable to comprehend the issues with the information he has?
When the committee does get down to business, it will inevitably conclude the following:
The application process is far from transparent.
The much-vaunted online system is useless and costly. Once an application has been made on the system, the entire process thereafter is a manual one.
The administration of the GLB is poorly managed.
The process from beginning to end should take no longer than three months. However, most applications take longer than six months, while some have been outstanding for years.
No one knows the actual size of the backlog. The board says one thing. The administration says another, and the applicants will tell you the full story.
Objectors will advise that the Board does not make it easy to remain vigilant against undesirable liquor outlets.
The GLB has a habit of bringing in arbitrary and unannounced changes.
The GLB has been taken to court more often and has lost almost all the cases.
The policy and legislation are overdue for review as they currently have major loopholes, permit unnecessary obstructions, and create a huge opportunity for bribery.
as they currently have major loopholes, permit unnecessary obstructions, and create a huge opportunity for bribery. Restaurants get licenses, and the owners then sell to others who convert the restaurant into a place of entertainment. These become incredible nuisances.
The GLB website is a joke. Other provinces have websites that are far more informative about applications in process, hearing dates, and approved licenses.
When the committee finalises its report, it will recommend the following actions: Forensic investigations should be conducted in various areas of the GLB's operations and the transactions that arose from these in the past seven years.
The recommendations of the investigators should be implemented.
Management and various members of the board should be replaced.
Business process analysts should be brought in to recommend changes.
There should be immediate changes to the tracking and reporting of GLB work, and these reports should be available publicly in a suitably summarised form.
IT experts should be asked to make recommendations to overhaul the GLB website and the online system.
Various policy amendments should be effected and implemented.
Legislative processes should be initiated to amend the Gauteng Liquor Act and its regulations.
The irony is that all of the above can be kick-started with immediate effect. If this were done, 10 months and R6 million could be saved. There is no logical reason to appoint this committee. Consequence management doesn't happen often enough.
Apart from Maile's need to be seen to be taking action, the only explanation that makes sense is that various connected people, currently profiting from a corrupted system, will be shielded.
Mike Moriarty MPL, DA Gauteng Shadow MEC for Economic Development
