There is much debate about Nkandla and everyone seems to have an opinion about it.
The media report over R200m spent whilst the office of the president refrains from revealing any figures, all they say is that it is less than that. I'm not sure anyone knows the real figure and hopefully it will be revealed in time.
My question is this: Is the amount spent unreasonable?
Whilst R200m sounds like a lot of money, is it vastly more than was spent on the previous presidents houses? Perhaps an investigative journalist can find out how much money was spent on personal properties belonging to Mbeki, Mandela, De Klerk and even PW Botha.
I personally saw what the State spent on De Klerk's house in Hermanus. They erected two small brick rooms at each side of the house for guards to stand in and the State purchased the house next door for the protection unit to sleep in when he was there. In those days the house next door probably cost a million or two and the brick rooms couldn't have cost much. (The house next door is still owned by the State and is now used by the local police for parties even though De Klerk no longer owns his house in Hermanus. Another wasted State asset that should be sold!) I cannot comment on any other properties of any president as I have not seen more, but in my view the amount spent on De Klerk's seaside house was minimal and reasonable.
Let us thus compare apples with apples. I challenge Zuma and the State to reveal the costs associated with personal properties belonging to all of our previous presidents and the cost of Nkandla. Give the people the facts and they can judge you based upon them. That is reasonable, is it not?
Disclaimer: All articles and letters published on MyNews24 have been independently written by members of News24's community. The views of users published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24. News24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
