DA clears Steenhuisen on credit card claims — but questions remain

A preliminary investigation report into allegations levelled against Democratic Alliance (DA) leader John Steenhuisen and party finance chair Dion George was adopted by the party’s highest body on Monday, said the DA’s federal executive chair, Helen Zille, on Monday.

The investigation, stemming from an increasingly ugly public spat between Steenhuisen and George, was led by the chairperson of the DA’s federal legal commission (FLC), Glynnis Breytenbach.

“One of the allegations the FLC investigated was that [Steenhuisen] had misappropriated party funds through the use of his party-issued credit card,” said Zille.

“The report found that the expenditure on the card had been fully reconciled, that there was no prima facie evidence of misappropriation, and that the limited number of personal expenses had been adequately explained and reimbursed.”

She added that Breytenbach’s report recommended that the DA’s policy on the use of party credit cards “be strengthened”.

Zille announced that a “disciplinary inquiry” would now investigate the actions of Steenhuisen and George, to determine whether either or both had brought the party into disrepute. She warned that if anybody involved in the matter publicly discussed it, this could be grounds for expulsion from the DA.

In response to questions from Daily Maverick on Tuesday, Helen Zille replied, “The FLC was investigating the complaints received in connection with this matter. The [federal executive] adopted the report and issued a statement. That is all we wish to say at this time.”

Questions remain around credit card misuse

Daily Maverick was the first outlet to report the allegation that Steenhuisen’s party credit card was taken away because the account could not be reconciled. George said that in his capacity as the party’s finance chair he had removed the card from Steenhuisen.

George supplied Daily Maverick with text messages from an unnamed staffer asking him to “speak to John” about “his DA card”.

George subsequently elaborated to City Press that among the personal expenses Steenhuisen was allegedly charging to his party card were Uber Eats deliveries for Steenhuisen’s family and “household expenses”.

Steenhuisen acknowledged that the card was returned to the party, but claimed that it was his decision.

“I chose to return the card and moved instead to a reimbursive system to deal with claims incurred from the execution of my duties, given that the administration relating to the card proved onerous,” Steenhuisen told Daily Maverick.

Among the unanswered questions relating to Zille’s Monday statement is why Steenhuisen’s party credit card was either withdrawn or returned.

Zille’s statement acknowledged that Steenhuisen’s party card had been used for personal expenses, but described these as “limited” and “adequately explained and reimbursed”.

In many companies, however, the use of a company credit card for personal expenses — even if the funds in question were subsequently reimbursed — would be grounds for dismissal.

A BBC work advice article explains the principle as follows: “For employees, expense rules are one of the most obvious black-and-white boundaries in corporate ethics.

“What you can’t do, and even the most junior staffer with a corporate credit card knows it, is bill the firm for personal expenses. That’s stealing. Yes, sometimes companies will overlook the odd lapse: buying yourself a People magazine to read on your flight to a business meeting, or ordering room service when you could eat breakfast at the corner coffee shop for half the amount. But that doesn’t mean the rules don’t still hold.”

Experts weigh in

“From a governance perspective, it is important that organisations have clearly documented finance policies governing the use of things like company credit cards, that these are well understood and that they are applied consistently in practice,” the CEO of the Institute of Directors in South Africa, Parmi Natesan, told Daily Maverick.

“From a control perspective, it is generally preferable for business and personal expenses to be kept separate. This supports a stronger control environment, simplifies tracking and reconciliation and reduces the risk of errors, misunderstandings or adverse perceptions.”

Professor Deon Rossouw, a former CEO of The Ethics Institute, told Daily Maverick: “The rule of thumb when it comes to using your company credit card is that it is meant exclusively for company-related expenses related to your role in the company.”

Rossouw acknowledged, however, that some exceptional cases could arise.

“For example, where a manager travels abroad and then loses her personal credit card, and then resorts to using her company credit card in order to resolve the situation in which she now finds herself,” he said.

“But even in such exceptional cases, it would be preferable to first contact the company and seek prior permission for using your company credit card for personal expenses and also to arrange for repayment of such expenses to the company.”

Rossouw added that if possible, “concrete evidence” should be supplied of the emergency circumstances leading to the personal expense.

Other queries

The details of exactly what allegations the DA’s federal legal commission were probing remain unclear.

Although Zille released the findings related to one of the more serious charges — the alleged credit card misuse by Steenhuisen — she did not give any indication of the findings relating to alleged wrongdoing by George.

The allegations spread through the media to justify Steenhuisen’s axing of George as environment minister in the Government of National Unity included lavish spending on hotels, bullying of staff, speaking ill of colleagues and sexual misconduct.

George’s reputation remains under a cloud due to the lack of clarity as to whether any substance was found to these charges, or if they were investigated at all.

The other issues Zille specifically identified as being further probed by the party’s FLC appear largely targeted at George and his team, and seem to relate mainly to the alleged leaking of information to journalists — including “public communication following the submission of complaints to the Public Protector”, and “the leaking of internal financial information from the party”.

No timeline was given for the further disciplinary inquiry into George and Steenhuisen. The clock is presumably ticking, however, given that the DA’s next leadership election is scheduled for April. DM