CLEAN : South Africa: Treasury deal for Zuma criticised

The transcript discusses the controversy surrounding taxpayer-funded non-security items in Jacob Zuma's house, including lifts. Legal actions are being pursued against Zuma and his architect, with claims of corruption and racketeering. The Treasury has decided on a minimal repayment to avoid political backlash, suggesting a compromise to prevent the issue from affecting upcoming local government elections. The ANC appears to want the matter to disappear to avoid it becoming an electoral issue.

What was the nature of the items in Jacob Zuma's house that were funded by taxpayers?

• Security items

• Non-security items

• Luxury items

• Essential items

What is the amount of the civil claim against Jacob Zuma's architect?

• 155 million rands

• 200 million rands

• 100 million rands

• 50 million rands

Why was the repayment ordered for Jacob Zuma considered minimal?

• To support his financial situation

• Due to lack of evidence

• Because the total cost was low

• To avoid a political backlash

What was the Treasury's intention regarding Jacob Zuma's repayment?

• To demand a large sum

• To make him responsible without much conflict

• To completely waive the repayment

• To delay the repayment

What was the ANC's primary reason for wanting the issue to disappear?

• To prevent it from affecting upcoming elections

• To focus on economic reforms

• To avoid international scrutiny

• To support Jacob Zuma