Speaker 1: Right, let's get into this issue. Then we do, in
Speaker 1: fact have Vincent mcgwenia presidency spokesperson on the line to us,
Speaker 1: actually at an airport in severe in Spain. Mister Mogwenea,
Speaker 1: let's just jump straight into this while we have you,
Speaker 1: I want to start with the origins of this particular
Speaker 1: matter and ask you this question. Unless you are disputing
Speaker 1: that then Deputy Minister Andrew Whitfield wrote requesting permission to travel.
Speaker 1: What would be the explanation for the fact that over
Speaker 1: a ten day period he never got a response to
Speaker 1: his request. Why would that be?
Speaker 2: I'm g John and grafton on to your listeners. John,
Speaker 2: I think at this point that postmotem is no longer helpful.
Speaker 2: The President has already made his decision. He's a waiting
Speaker 2: for MINNESOTAIS and m the DA to give him a
Speaker 2: name that proposing for the role and the replacement for
Speaker 2: former Minister Whitfield, I mean Deputy Minister Whitfield. And that's
Speaker 2: where we are now. We are looking past this issue.
Speaker 2: The President has already made that decision. I don't think
Speaker 2: a postmatum of who said what, who did what will
Speaker 2: be any helpful.
Speaker 1: Well, with respect, Miss Mark gwen you in your statement
Speaker 1: have engaged in exactly that kind of post mortem of
Speaker 1: who said what? My question I think is relevant. I'm
Speaker 1: struggling to see why it's so difficult to answer.
Speaker 2: No, it's not difficult to answer the bottom line, John, Unfortunately,
Speaker 2: the then deputy minister did not get permission. There is
Speaker 2: no prescribedterialist to when the President can respond to a request.
Speaker 2: At the end of the day, he did not have
Speaker 2: permission to travel, and he went ahead and traveled. He
Speaker 2: understood the gravity of his actions, according to Minister Stenaisan
Speaker 2: to the President, he was expecting the sanction and so,
Speaker 2: as I said, it doesn't help to start need picking
Speaker 2: at days and to start net picking and who said what,
Speaker 2: who did what. The President issued that statement simply because
Speaker 2: he needed to clarify the matter that in the exercise
Speaker 2: of his constitutional prerogatives, he doesn't have to explain himself. However,
Speaker 2: because of the distortions coming from Minister Stenaisen and former
Speaker 2: Deputy Minister Whitfield in needed to clarify the issue.
Speaker 1: Can can you at least then confirm mister Magwenya that
Speaker 1: mister Whitfield never got a reply to his request.
Speaker 2: He never got permission that I can confirm to travel
Speaker 2: to the US.
Speaker 1: Why wouldn't the President not just simply have said no,
Speaker 1: permission is not given.
Speaker 2: It also it also that if you are not informed
Speaker 2: that you've been given permission, you are not to travel.
Speaker 2: So there would have been a number of things on
Speaker 2: the president's desk that the president felt were priority to
Speaker 2: attend to, and so the permission was not given.
Speaker 1: What what are what is the range of offenses that
Speaker 1: the president would consider in removing someone from his cabinets?
Speaker 1: What are the main factors that he takes into consideration.
Speaker 2: Well, in this particular case, John, it's quite inevident. It
Speaker 2: has been articulated in the statement that there was a
Speaker 2: clear violation of rules, rules that are well known to
Speaker 2: all members of the National Executive and rules that were
Speaker 2: affirmed during the induction, as well as by the President
Speaker 2: himself when he addressed the members of the National Executive.
Speaker 2: And so that is a factor in this particular case.
Speaker 2: I cannot talk to either cases. I can talk specifically
Speaker 2: to this case that this is what informed the president's decision.
Speaker 1: So let me use a phrase that is in the
Speaker 1: President's statement, a clear violation of rules and established practices
Speaker 1: governing the conduct of members of the executive Now that
Speaker 1: presumably is the framework within which these decisions are made.
Speaker 1: Is that always, though ultimately the president's prerogative, that even
Speaker 1: where there are clear violations of rules and established practices
Speaker 1: governing the conduct of members of the executive which presumably
Speaker 1: would be the oaths that they take when they take
Speaker 1: their offers, it is still it's not an automatic step
Speaker 1: that the president takes. He can weigh it up and
Speaker 1: decide yes or no.
Speaker 2: It depends on our case furcase process, John. Each case
Speaker 2: has its own factors, Each case has its own merit
Speaker 2: that the President will consider.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much, Vincent Mgweny, Presidency spokesperson,