DSAC was once again caught with its pants down in Parliament.
The department was asked one straightforward question, how much money has it set aside to fight gender-based violence ?
Instead of producing a clean figure, DSAC officials stumbled through a series of conflicting answers.
It took three senior officials, three answers and a lot of shuffling and the MPs still never saw the actual figure on screen.
The accountability chaos happened on Friday, 25 September, when DSAC presented its first-quarter performance report to the Portfolio Committee on Sport, Arts and Culture.
The trouble started when ANC MP Matsholo Mmolotsane asked about the money behind DSAC’s gender-based violence and femicide (GBVF) initiatives.
“On the issue of GBV initiatives, can the department take the committee into its confidence regarding the GBV initiatives it has undertaken under each programme?
“How much has been allocated to each GBV initiative under each programme? Why has the department not prioritised GBV initiatives in quarter one, given the ongoing GBV cases in the country?” asked Mmolotsane.
Vusithemba Ndima, the deputy director-general responsible for heritage, did not answer the question, instead, he talked about plans.
“Let me just start by saying that, as heritage, this is the first time this financial year that we will be doing a programme on GBVF. Our intervention is planned for the third quarter.
“We are currently doing the planning, working together with the Department of Women, Children and People with Disability. Our approach is working with traditional leadership, working with the living human treasures, those people who have got rare skills within the heritage sector, as well as working with the youth.
“If we want to address matters of GBVF, it should be about changing minds. It should be about dealing with the stereotypes in society which entrench patriarchy,
“That’s how far I can go as far as our contribution as heritage is concerned,” Ndima said.
Mmolotsane was having none of it. She pressed harder.
“How much has been allocated? And why has the department not prioritised GBV initiatives in quarter one, when we are aware that as a country we are having a problem with GBV?”
This time Ndima offered a number.
“From our side, from heritage, I think it’s five million, if I’m not mistaken,” he said.
Mmolotsane wanted to see it.
“Is it possible for the department to flight that budget so that we can see how much the budget is in black and white? Now they’re saying it’s five million. With the department nowadays, we don’t know whether we are coming or going. So we need to see the figure,” she said.
That’s when Ndima changed the tune.
“Can I request that we be given an opportunity? I would have to ask my colleague to share the concept document with me, because that’s where this is highlighted,” Ndima said.
Mmolotsane kept pushing.
“Are we going to be shown that amount? With the department, we are not sure. Their word of mouth is no longer enough,” she said.
Chief financial officer Israel Mokgwamme then stepped in, apparently trying to bring some financial clarity to the increasingly chaotic exchange.
Instead, his intervention appeared to deepen the confusion.
“In terms of the budget that I’ve presented, there is no item for GBV,” Mokgwamme said.
The statement immediately collided with the R5 million figure given moments earlier.
Then the chairperson, Joe McGluwa asked whether that meant the R5 million was not budgeted.
Mokgwamme changed the ground and said: “No, it is budgeted for but as you have seen, our budget will say goods and services.”
He explained that goods and services is a catch-all line.
“You’ve got travel in there, you’ve got fees for your committee members. You’ve got a lot of things under goods and services,” he said.
He promised to get the figures from the programmes and email them during the meeting.
Mmolotsane pointed out that GBV was nothing new for DSAC.
“In the 2024/25 and 2025/26 financial years, GBV has always been a key indicator,” she said.
Then she named what she thought was going on.
“I didn’t want to go there, but I’m forced to. I know ‘bayasishaya-shaya’ which means they are being economical with the truth,” she said.
Ndima later clarified that he meant GBV. was new for the heritage branch, not for the department.
“This is the first financial year where we have also joined the fight against GBV. The idea was that we should all join hands as various branches,” he explained.
It was chief director Ntombifuthi Mahlobo who finally put numbers on the table.
She said: “As a requirement, each department is supposed to budget for its GBV initiatives.”
She listed R1.5 million for intergenerational dialogues, R3.5 million for community conversations on GBV and R500,000 for a social media campaign.
She also mentioned R9.3 million for training in community sports clubs, where GBV is “a core part of messaging”.
The biggest single item is a camp.
“When we move to the Golekane mentorship camp, for this financial year, we have budgeted around R8 million,” Mahlobo said.
None of the items she listed was R5 million and she gave no total.
The Golekane Mentorship Camps are three-day camps for learners, run as part of DSAC’s GBVF work.
Past camps were held at the Konka Family Adventure Resort in 2024 and at Zwartkloof Adventures in 2025.
DSAC’s first-quarter report lists a Golekane Youth Camp at Pine Lodge in the Eastern Cape from 17 to 19 April 2026.
Another camp was held at Boontjieskraal outside Kimberley from 31 July to 2 August, for 150 learners.
Ndima also admitted his branch has no formal agreement with the Department of Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities.
“We don’t have an MOU. As I said, for us it is still a very exploratory approach,” he said.
Dr Cynthia Khumalo said that DSAC had reported its GBV spending to the Presidency just the day before.
“We have a latest report that we just submitted yesterday to the Presidency. It identifies the actual interventions per programme in the budget,” she said.
In other words, the figures existed. Parliament just wasn’t shown them.
Minister Gayton McKenzie did not attend the meeting.
