This list only includes Committees overseeing a government portfolio. It excludes the Powers and Privileges Committee, the Section 194 Committee, and committees dealing with internal business, such as the Rules Committee. See the addendum here for the activity of these excluded committees, select, joint and ad hoc committees. This data is from May 2019 until March 2024.

* Used to be joined with Water and Sanitation
** Committee only established in 2023
**** Used to be joined with Human Settlements

Committees operate as the central cogs of the parliamentary machinery and are the site where most of the legislature’s business is located. While it is often the main chambers that garner attention, they ratify work that has been processed, deliberated, negotiated and teased out for months, or sometimes even years, in committees.

The above table serves as a useful glance at the overall output and activities of portfolio committees during the Sixth Parliament. We combed through the legacy reports of each committee, and where this information was not available, we relied on PMG website data. The number of tabled committee reports was taken from the PMG website.

Over the duration of the Sixth Parliament, there were 6434 meetings – very similar to the Fifth Parliament

The Sixth Parliament committee system comprised of:

• 35 Portfolio Committees
• 12 Select Committees
• 7 Joint Committees
• 8 Ad Hoc Committee

Over the Fifth Parliament, Portfolio Committees held 4979 meetings. This is followed by the Select Committees which collectively held 997 meetings, 92 Ad Hoc Committee meetings and 266 meetings of the Joint Committees

Scrutiny of government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic was a feature of the committee agenda in 2020 and 2021. We consolidated all the COVID-19-related meetings and events here. Implementing the State Capture recommendations was a big focus area in 2022 and 2023.

COVID-19 saw the introduction of virtual meetings in April 2020. This practice was maintained following the devastating fires in December/January 2022 and continued throughout the term. While limiting and imperfect, virtual meetings have enabled Parliament to function.

We encourage committees in the next Parliament to take a nuanced and flexible approach to virtual and hybrid meetings. There are meetings where a physical presence is necessitated such as detailed deliberations on legislation, where the meeting requires the unique engagement of in-person meetings (e.g. an inquisitorial meeting, summons or Scopa-type meetings). However, there are unique advantages to virtual and hybrid meetings which should not be lost such as making attendance easier for smaller parties and other groups not based in Cape Town (e.g. in public hearings), generally making attendance by the Executive easier, savings on travel, accommodation, catering and printing (also friendlier for the environment) and allowing Members to spend more time in their constituencies.

It is interesting to see the committees that held the most meetings in the Sixth Parliament – Justice and Correctional Services; Finance, Higher Education Science and Technology, Trade and Industry, Scopa and Appropriations. Most of these committees are historically busy (see here) and while the comparison to the Fifth Parliament data does not show neat patterns of clear increases and decreases, it is interesting to see the notable uptick in SCOPA and Justice meetings. It is also interesting to observe the correlation between the number of meetings and the amount of legislation processed by the committee in that, the committees dealing with more legislation have held more meetings. The Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Science and Technology should be applauded for its businesses in the Sixth Parliament as they tackled a myriad of issues in the higher education spaces – see more about each committee meeting here

Petitions are a key way for the public to appeal to Parliament to intervene in matters. Portfolio Committees considered 62 petitions in the Sixth Parliament. This is a big improvement from the Fifth Parliament, where 27 petitions were heard before committees.

Committees can also conduct their oversight on the ground through oversight visits to relevant locations. While COVID restrictions could have impacted this, it is surprising to see the low number of oversight visits conducted by committees in the Sixth Parliament. On average, committees conducted 5 oversight visits over their five-year tenure. The Portfolio Committee on Higher Education, Science and Technology and the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education were particular standouts. One would have expected service delivery-orientated committees, like COGTA, Human Settlements and Water and Sanitation, to have conducted more oversight visits. An interesting and novel development was seen in the Portfolio Committee on International Relations and Cooperation where the committee undertook a virtual oversight visit on South Africa’s cash missions and missions with vacant land parcels and state-owned properties in Teheran, Iran; Luanda, Angola; Khartoum, Sudan; Juba, South Sudan; Havana, Cuba; Brasilia, Sao Paolo, Brazil; Windhoek, Walvis Bay, Namibia; Mbabane, Eswatini; Blantyre, Malawi; Zurich, Switzerland; Funchal, Portugal; Paris, France from 17 to 19 March 2021. The Committee travelled around the world via Zoom and thought of innovative ways of overcoming the Covid restrictions – a pity we have not seen this idea continued or replicated.

The salient work of committees is captured in committee reports which are tabled for debate and adoption in the House. When the committee completes its various oversight interactions and meetings, it is required to produce an official committee report reflecting on the interaction. These reports are critical as they explicitly capture the committee’s recommendations on how / what the department or state entity must improve, fix, address or provide a follow-up response to, update or provide progress on, usually within a stipulated timeframe. This committee report serves as a committee record of the interventions it sought and of clear directives for the executive or government to address. It is interesting to see the number of reports each committee has tabled against the premise outlined in this paragraph. The Portfolio Committees of Communications and Justice and Constitutional Development stand out as having tabled 90+ committee reports over five years. Of course, as we point out in this research paper, these reports are essentially only effective if the recommendations and resolutions contained therein are followed up on, and hopefully implemented.

Statistics and numbers of meetings held, legislation amended, oversight visits embarked on and reports churned out only tell one side of the picture of the performance of committees. While not quantifiable and neatly packed in a table, the real performance of committees is truly measured in the largely intangible impact they made, scrutiny meted out and improved performance of the departments and entities they oversee. If it is to be argued that committees are the primary forum for oversight and accountability, we know oversight is not a once off meeting – it is a continuous cycle of scrutiny.