Merten writes: to court documents, in a meeting on 26 April 2018 the NEF advised that ‘According aside from the land costs (R18.8-million), R34.7-million had gone towards asset price”, “the for working capital, and further R9-million in 2017, a further working capital of “a and a R1.5-million contingency”. This brings the total government spent to R83.3-million, according to the court papers.’ Her article alludes to a missing/mystery R9 million. It may, of course, all be down to poor punctuation. But it’s patently obvious, if you read the NEF report, that the court document should read: further R9-million in 2017, [comprising of] a further ‘a working capital of R7.5-million and a R1.5-million contingency’. 7.5 + 1.5 = 9. Not 9 + 7.5 + 1.5. What is interesting is that the court papers are, according to Merten, accounting for this as spend’. ‘government
Merten writes: ‘According to court documents, in a meeting on 26 April 2018 the NEF advised that aside from the land costs (R18.8-million), R34.7-million had gone towards “the asset price”, for working capital, and “a further R9-million in 2017, a further working capital of and a R1.5-million contingency”. This brings the total government spent to R83.3-million, according to the court papers.’ Her article alludes to a missing/mystery R9 million. It may, of course, all be down to poor punctuation. But it’s patently obvious, if you read the NEF report, that the court document should read: ‘a further R9-million in 2017, [comprising of] a further working capital of R7.5-million and a R1.5-million contingency’. 7.5 + 1.5 = 9. Not 9 + 7.5 + 1.5. What is interesting is that the court papers are, according to Merten, accounting for this as ‘government spend’.
Solms-Delta_numbers_detail-3.docx