SABC Interim Board: First meeting with Committee

Meeting report

The Chairperson thanked Members for agreeing to convene during the recess and thanked the Interim Board members and Executive Management for attending on short notice.

Mr N Van Den Berg (DA) raised a point of order. The deadline for the nominations to the permanent SABC Board was 31 July 2009, and he suggested that this be postponed to 6 August 2009.

The Chairperson responded that Members would deal with this later in the meeting.

SABC Interim Board
Ms Irene Charnley, Chairperson: SABC Interim Board (the Interim Board or the Board) gave a presentation on the Board’s activities to date and its goals for the mandate period. The Board had been appointed officially in terms of the Broadcasting Act on 10 July 2009, to serve for a maximum of six months. It had five non-executive directors and three executive directors, and six of the total would form a quorum. The key goals of the Interim Board were to stabilise the SABC, while taking all stakeholders’ input into account, and to ensure compliance with relevant legislation. The focus for the next four months would lie in working to resolve the wage dispute and the impasse with the former Group Chief Executive Officer (GCEO), to re-establish good corporate governance and integrity, to fill key vacant executive positions, to strengthen the management capacity, to decrease costs and increase revenue, and to institute plans for paying critical debts. She noted that the Board was also trying to recoup outstanding payments from different government departments. As a step to ensuring compliance with the Broadcasting Act and the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) the Board had to establish an audit committee, finalise the Annual Report for submission to Parliament and organise an Annual General Meeting.

Key operational issues included keeping the FIFA World Soccer Cup preparations on track, reviewing impending business decisions, addressing the outstanding internal audit issues, overseeing and supporting the forensic investigation by the Auditor-General (AG), overseeing the submission of the funding requirements to the National Treasury, and managing the liquidity issues. To date the Board had had meetings with the Minister of Communications, organised labour, the former GCEO and all the Group Executives. The Board had agreed with the executives that each executive had five clear and measurable deliverables for the next quarter, with a focus on stabilising the SABC, achieving or increasing the revenue targets, and reducing costs. These deliverables would be monitored fortnightly, with clear accountability of each executive and consequences for non-delivery.

Ms Charnley ended the presentation by pointing out that the SABC still had very important and relevant objectives as the public broadcaster, to inform, educate, and entertain the South African populace. More than 20 million people were addressed every day in all languages, including sign language, and the public broadcaster was still the most favoured amongst all broadcasters in both television and radio services. The Interim Board members felt proud to have been considered for this duty and they looked forward to serving the nation in stabilising the SABC. The Board members also requested insight as to what the Committee wanted from the Board, so that they could then work on their own to achieve those objectives.

Discussion
Mr Van Den Berg asked for a list of the Government Departments that owed the SABC money, as well as the relevant figures.

Ms Charnley responded that the management was busy dealing with the departmental debt collection, and it would not be conducive to their efforts to “name and shame” the affected Departments now. Non-payment was most probably due to administrative issues rather than an unwillingness to pay. If the management still encountered problems with collecting the payment after presenting requests to the departments, then the Board would come to the Committee. She had mentioned this to illustrate that the Board was determined to collect revenue from all possible sources.

Mr E Kholwane (ANC) expressed the ANC’s appreciation for the Board members’ willingness to serve the nation through their appointments, especially when much criticism had been expressed about the SABC affairs. He also appreciated the opportunity to meet all members of the Board. He asked whether the turnaround strategy that had been presented to the Committee a few weeks ago was still in place, since the SABC was now moving forward, and if there had been any changes to the strategy, in which case he asked what these were. He said it was also important that any priorities that had been identified in terms of the strategy were outlined.

Ms J Kilian (COPE) asked what the five key goals identified for the various Group Executives were.

Ms Charnley responded that the turnaround strategy that had been presented to the Committee was still in place, and that it was critical for the future of the corporation. The focus of this, however, was on the medium and long term. The Interim Board was more concerned with the short-term strategy to resolve the crisis situation that the SABC had found itself in, involving leaking of confidential information and a dire financial position.

Mr Kholwane noted that six members must be present to form a quorum, and asked if there were any further specifications, for instance that the Chairperson or the Deputy Chairperson had to be present.

Ms Charnley said that the quorum requirement was that all five non-executive Board members, plus one of the executive Board members, must be present.

Mr Kholwane said that the ANC had been criticised both within the House and by the public since it was accused of serving its own interests in appointing the Interim Board while leaving the management intact. It was therefore important that the Committee showed its commitment to resolve all the problems within the SABC. In doing so the Committee had to ensure that the disciplinary cases involving management were finalised, while also taking the Auditor-General’s investigation into account.

Dr P hilip Mtimkulu, Deputy Chairperson, Interim Board, responded that the Board would make sure that it was available to help the Office of the Auditor-General (AG) in its investigation, and that the Board’s commitment in that respect would be expanded on later in this meeting.

The Chairperson thought that Mr Kholwane’s question referred back to the Committee’s request to the Executive Management for a comprehensive report into allegations made previously. That report was to outline the investigations carried out by the preceding Board, as well as the outcome of these investigations. The report was still pending and the Interim Board had not mentioned it so far.

Ms Charnley said that the Interim Board had not been aware of the requests for such a report, and asked the Chairperson to give a deadline for the report’s submission, to ensure that it was made and handed in timeously.

The Chairperson responded that the report should be submitted within the next two weeks.

Ms Kilian wanted to know how the Board saw its role in facilitating the AG’s investigation. She said that it was necessary to further investigate the allegations that had been supplied, together with prima facie evidence. An example would be the first joint union submission. It was important that all must help to clear up the situation. She felt sorry for those who had been fingered and named, but when working for a public institution it was to be accepted that public investigations might take place. While the investigation was taking place the auditors must have access to all the relevant documents and adequate protection for whistle blowers must also be ensured. Very often in these kinds of situation the Auditor-General’s Office found it difficult to get access to relevant documentation. Ultimately the goal was that the Board and the Executive must be able and happy to work together to achieve what they had been appointed to do, and all areas must be clarified.

Mr Kholwane asked Ms Kilian to clarify if she had heard any reports that the AG had encountered problems in this regard at the SABC. If so, he wanted to know where such reports came from. He cautioned that the Committee should not make the mistake of unfounded allegations.

Ms Kilian responded that she was not hinting that there had been any problems of this nature at the SABC, but was saying that, from her past experience, this had been a common problem for the AG when conducting investigations. The unions had also made clear that they were concerned when supplying information, because they were scared of being victimised, which was why she had brought that issue up.

Mr Gabriel Mampone, Acting GCEO, SABC, clarified what the Executive Management team had done. They were busy compiling information, that went even further than the allegations made by the unions and were actually volunteering to share new information that they thought could be important in resolving the issues at the SABC with the Committee. That report should be available for the Committee in the next few days. They were taking these issues very seriously. They had also met with the AG and had given the AG’s staff a work station from which to perform the forensic audit over the next three months.

Mr Sipho Sithole, Head: Group Strategy and Risk, SABC, said that Group Management had sent the labour allegations that had been addressed to the GCEO to the Auditor-General, and had asked that these allegations be included in the investigation. Although labour had subsequently distanced themselves from this document, it was important that all the allegations were investigated and cleared up. There should be no doubt that the Auditor General would have full support from SABC, and Management was willing to go the extra mile.

Ms Charnley confirmed that as indicated, the organised labour report would form part of the AG’s investigation. She also said that the Board would make sure that the Committee would get the Management report within two weeks.

Ms Kilian said that it was clear that the Board had hit the ground running, which created trust that the members would be able to execute their mandate. She also pointed out that concerns that had been raised about the Board’s ability were general, rather than linked to any individuals on the Board. She asked what was happening around the vacancies, since it had been indicated that the Board aimed to fill vacant senior management positions. She asked if that included permanently filling the many ‘acting’ positions, or if that task would stand over for the permanent Board.

Ms Charnley responded that the Interim Board aimed to fill the vacant and the Acting positions.

Ms Kilian also said that it was good to see that the Board aimed to restore accountability within the SABC, since the lack of accountability had been a serious concern of the Portfolio Committee over the past eighteen months. She said that this must go beyond financial accountability to include the administration.

Ms Kilian noted that the austerity plan prescribed decreasing costs and increasing revenue. She wanted to know if the Board had assessed the situation in regard to the creditors, as she was worried about the effect that non-payment of accounts could have on the independent producers and production houses.

Dr Mtimkulu said that he understood that most production houses had been paid and the payments that were still outstanding were in the process of being made.

Ms Kilian said that it was important that the Board focused on the SABC mandate, since the obligations had been increased without a proportional increase in the funding.

Ms Charnley responded that the ratio of revenue to costs was a major concern as the costs were high and not matched by the revenue. It was important to assess where the funding gaps were, in order to create a comprehensive report that could be used by the permanent Board to develop a new funding plan, since the current model had caused problems.

Mr Kholwane said that there had been criticisms that the advertisements for the SABC permanent Board positions had been too limited. The presentation had noted that SABC’s reach was about 67% of all television (TV) viewers, which was surely larger than any newspaper’s reach. He therefore asked if the SABC would consider using their platforms for such advertisements.

Mr Mampone answered that the Interim Board could come up with a creative advertisement for the permanent Board.

The Chairperson asked the GCEO to confirm that they would indeed ensure that such advertisements would be posted.

Mr Mampone confirmed that they would.

Ms Suzanne Vos, Member of SABC Interim Board, added that although it was possible to provide some short slots for such advertisements, it was important to note the implications of changing the programming schedule. Often, various nation building or other requirements of the SABC resulted in the interruption of programming, which in turn interrupted the revenue stream. Advertisers wanted to see the schedule when purchasing advertising space and they needed to be assured that this schedule would not change. When she had served on this Portfolio Committee in the past, the Committee had thought that SABC 3 would be a “cash cow”, but this had not happened. It was necessary to consolidate the thinking at that stage with the reality of what was happening now.

Ms Charnley assured the Committee again that the Interim Board could provide an advertisement for the permanent Board members on the SABC platform, as it was part of its public service.

Ms Libby Lloyd, Member of SABC Interim Board, pointed out that the Committee would have to be prepared to receive thousands of applications.

Mr Kholwane replied that the Members would be ready for a million applications.

Mr Van Den Berg said that the mentioning of scheduling stability had made him think of the situation with the programme “50-50”. There had been a huge public outcry when the programme was allegedly discontinued, and this had created bad press for the SABC. He asked that some light be shed on what was actually happening with this programme.

Mr H Mkhize (ANC) agreed that it was necessary to have clarity about 50-50, since there had been a lot of concerns raised about it.

Ms Charlotte Mampane, Acting Chief Operations Officer, SABC, responded that the Board had been very forthcoming in addressing the management; whether it had to do with bad publicity concerning programming or any other issues. SABC had to ensure that everything shown was in line with SABC’s mandate to inform, educate and entertain the public. The programme 50-50 had been educating the populace in terms of wild life, and the producers had given good content for a long time. However, broadcasting was dynamic in nature, and had to ensure that the content continued to be appealing to audiences. 50-50 had been running for over ten years. SABC had received a new and very interesting pitch for a wildlife show, which was now broadcast as ‘Shoreline’. SABC had not done away with 50-50, which would be broadcast again in April 2011, but had merely allowed a chance for another concept, while at the same time giving the producers of 50-50 an opportunity to reflect on and improve their product.

Ms Charnley said that there had been a lack of communication with the public around 50-50. More than 8000 complaints were posted on the website, and the Interim Board would ensure that the public would be informed about what was happening.

Mr Van Den Berg said that perhaps SABC should rethink its approach. If it was aware of any changes it should rather be proactive and let the people know about them, instead of waiting for issues to be discussed in the newspapers, and then reacting. SABC had and should use its information platform.

Ms Kilian said that she trusted that the leadership of the SABC realised that production houses developed very specific production lines, and that their ability to continue producing a show, after a gap in commissioning, could be problematic. For smaller production houses, a gap in the production line could mean that they had to close down. The SABC had to be realistic about its scheduling to ensure that it did not cause negative effects to small production houses.

Ms Mampane said that SABC had a commissioning process in place that was cognisant of such issues, which was why there was an 18-month lead period for those kinds of productions.

Mr Van Den Berg asked about the current salary negotiations, and wanted to hear from the Board and the Executive how they understood the situation. He noted that the workers were offered an increase of 8.5%, although last year they had been promised an increase of 12.5%. It was an important issue for the employees, and also for the country as a whole, considering the looming strike. The staff morale at the SABC was lower than it had ever been in the preceding 27 years, and it was imperative that the Board gave the employees some strength. The SABC could not exist without its employees, who thought up the creative ideas and ensured that the SABC was kept on air.

Ms Charnley responded that the factual situation was that the Interim Board had offered an 8.5% increase, to be backdated to April. It had been indicated that the management had offered an additional 1.5%, but before that offer could be cleared the Interim Board needed to see where this additional increase could be funded. The Board would meet on 31 July to make a final decision. The unions did have a legitimate expectation of a higher increase, since they had signed a three year multi-tier agreement, valid until 2011. The agreement outlined an increase of the CPIX plus 1% per annum, but would be subject to negotiation if the CPIX was lower than 4% or higher than 9%. Since the CPIX had been higher than 9% during the past year management did have the right to re-negotiate the increase. It was clear that the unions were committed to act in the interest of the SABC, and she was sure that they would cooperate with the Board. They would continue with their engagements but she did not want to provide any further information at this stage, since it could impede the future negotiations.

Mr Van Den Berg wanted to know if there was a possibility and willingness to go above the 8.5% limit, and move towards the unions’ position.

The Chairperson interjected and said that Ms Charnley had adequately explained the situation.

Mr Van Den Berg asked whether the allegations, that the deficit had increased by R100 million since the Committee’s last meeting with the SABC, were true.

Ms Charnley said that before she could comment on that, the Board must ensure that it had all the correct and relevant information. Once it was confident that this information was to hand, the Board would report to the Portfolio Committee.

Ms W Newhoudt-Druchen (ANC) noted that the presentation had indicated that the SABC reached 20 million people in all languages, including sign language, every day. Although she was pleased that the broadcasting was accessible to deaf people, there was a problem with the timing, since the broadcasts were often screened in the early hours of the morning, when most deaf people would be asleep. She also indicated that when there were broadcasts of national interest, such as election matters, the Presidential inauguration, or Youth Day celebrations, a translator must be available. Every time such events were taking place, DeafSA had to call the broadcaster and ask it to make the broadcast accessible.

Ms Charnley said that she would ensure that the Board took that input back to the management team, so that they could explain what considerations were taken into account when deciding what programmes to translate. The Acting Chief Operations Officer would be asked to revert to Ms Newhoudt-Druchen within the week.

Mr R Radebe (ANC) said that it was important that the Committee acknowledge that the new members of the Interim Board were only ten days into their work. It also had to be appreciated that they had already moved forward, which showed their commitment. It was important that the Board helped the Committee to turn SABC around and he believed that the Board would work according to the timeframes that they had spelt out. He was also sure that, as the FIFA 2010 event was approaching, SABC would deliver as expected. The management had reported that certain sectors could cause disturbances to the broadcast, if they were not attended to immediately, and the Committee needed to have the assurance that this was being taken care of. The fact that the Board had already suspended two officials showed that they were really on their toes.  He saw that they had also adopted a ‘togetherness’ strategy, and he believed that by working together with the management, which also must strongly support the Board, they could ensure that the previous mistakes were not repeated.

Ms Charnley thanked Mr Radebe for the positive comments.

Mr Leslie Sedibe, Member of SABC Interim Board, responded that it was common knowledge that FIFA had given South Africa 7.5 out of 10 points for its work on the Confederations Cup, which was a distinction. They had done well, notwithstanding all the problems the SABC had been facing. The game between South Africa and Brazil had had the highest rating since the rugby World Cup final. There had been five objectives outlined in connection with the 2010 World Cup, including job creation and country branding. The fact that FIFA had awarded 75% grading indicated that South Africa was ready for the World Cup. This World Cup belonged to Africa, which could be seen as a theatre, while South Africa could be seen as the stage. It was also important to improve the infrastructure, so that the World Cup left a legacy. During the European Cup last year, there had been some blackouts, although it was broadcasted by some of the best broadcasters in the world, so the fact that South Africa had been able to show all its Confederations Cup matches without interruption spoke hugely of the country’s ability when all were working together. Such collective work would enable all challenges to be overcome.

Dr Mtimkulu said that good working relations between the Board and the management were necessary for the SABC to function. The Board and the Executive had held long sessions, and although the discussions sometimes became intense, neither sector was stubborn, obstinate or recalcitrant, and they could laugh together after a flaring of tempers.

Ms Phumelele Ntombela-Nzimande, Chief Personnel Officer, SABC, said that the Executive Management was very excited to have been engaged by the Board and spent an entire two days focusing on how they could turn the SABC around together. The Executive had received clear delivery and strategy guidance and support from the Board, and it had been made clear that whilst the management needed to take the leadership, the Board would support them. This also incorporated the SABC values of conversation and partnership. Management were rolling out the stabilisation plan, which the Board was supporting, and they were very excited about this development.

Ms M Magazi (ANC) said that she was happy to hear from the Deputy Chairperson of the Board of the harmonious relationship with the Executive. She was also happy to finally meet all of the members face to face. She wanted clarity on the legal requirements for the audit committee, and whether it must be made up of entirely independent members or was drawn from within the SABC.

Ms Charnley responded that the Audit Committee consisted of four independent members, plus the Chief Financial Officers (CFOs), and the Board had the right to bring in outside members, which it would want to do immediately after the first board meeting.

Ms Vos said that in the short time that the Board members had worked together they had met with all the relevant SABC departments to go through their mandates, what they were achieving, and what the Board was expecting in terms of cost/revenue potential. When they had met with the audience division, it was noted that the Electronic Communications Act (the Act) did not have a definition of what a television set was. This had serious consequences. She gathered that there were different interpretations given by, for example, Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) and Multichoice. It would be critical for the revenue of SABC that a formal definition be legislated for, particularly in view of the upcoming digital convergence. The SABC legal division was looking into a definition of a television set as any apparatus or electronic device that had been designed or adapted by technological or any other means to receive a TV broadcast. It was therefore urgent that the Committee consider amending the Act by incorporating a short amendment that defined a television set.
 
Mr Kholwane responded that the ANC welcomed input on legislation by those people affected by it. The reason a television set had not been defined initially was that members had wanted to avoid the situation where the legislation had to chase technological development.

Ms Lloyd said that it must be realised that there was only so much the members of the Interim Board could do in four to six months. The most important thing was to reinstate SABC’s integrity and to ensure that the people of South Africa could trust SABC as an institution, because without that nothing else mattered.

Mr Kholwane said the ANC was becoming confident that the Board could deal with all the challenges. The Board needed support from all its stakeholders. The ANC did not locate SABC issues outside the broader understanding of transforming the South African society at large. SABC had an important role to play in transforming South Africa, by supplying information. He raised this because no matter how much separation there was as to what were the issues of the Interim Board and what would be dealt with by the permanent Board, it must be clear that the SABC had to deal with transformational issues. SABC had not dealt with transformational issues until now. The newsroom at the SABC must be transformed, and the ANC would not rest until a total transformation of the SABC had been achieved, while of course ensuring that the SABC remained independent. Low staff morale was not only due to low wages and other matters named, but also due to a lack of transformation. This had to be confronted very soon.

Ms Charnley agreed that transformation was a key issue and that the members of the Interim Board took serious note of that. One of their first priorities in stabilising the SABC was employing a head of news, which was a key position to drive transformation within the news department.

Ms Vos said that not only was radical transformation needed within the SABC, but also within the industry at large. One of their key priorities was to not only sustain but also to grow the local industry of independent producers, authors and others. Content was of prime importance as it was necessary to have content that would inspire people to produce within the corporation and create an industry that felt connected to what was required in order to boost nation building and other key priorities. It was important that the independent industry felt that the SABC was concerned about their success as well.

Mr Van Den Berg asked again how staff morale was being dealt with.

Ms Charnley responded that in order to improve morale, the Interim Board had to start from the top and establish a good relationship with the Executive Management. The Executive had seemed to be energised and upbeat about what needed to be done, since they had started working together, and she was sure that that sentiment would filter through to other staff levels. The members of the Interim Board were also working on governance issues, and getting motivational speakers to address the lower levels of the staff. When discussing changes in one business unit they would also bring in all other units that would be affected by those changes, to avoid working in a silo environment. The GCEO and the Chief Personnel Officer had also started working together to create morale-boosting sessions for staff.

Ms Lloyd added that the issue of improving morale had begun when the Committee had started to take decisive action, and this had been used as a building platform. This would be a long process that could not happen immediately, but the Board was aware that without boosting morale it could not achieve its goals.

The Chairperson wondered if SABC had come to a decision about the acting GCEO.

Ms Charnley responded that the Interim Board had had discussions with the Acting GCEO and they were positive. However the discussions involved details that were not appropriate to discus in the current forum, since the negotiations were ongoing. She suggested that the Board present the Committee with more details as the process unfolded.

SABC Report: Oral presentation by the office of the Auditor-General (AG)
Mr Banner, representative of the Office of the Auditor-General, thanked the Chairperson for the opportunity to update the Committee and also to establish lines of contact and communication, since it was crucial that they worked closely together. He gave a brief background, noting that the Portfolio Committee had written to the AG on 1 July 2009 asking that this office launch an investigation into the allegations around to the SABC. Since the AG’s office was guided by strict standards, the first step had been to do a risk assessment to determine which of the allegations, fell under their investigative mandate. The AG had then approved the engagement on the grounds that certain of the allegations could indeed be investigated by it. This approval had come through on 10 July 2009. The steps to be followed had been set out in an engagement letter, which was sent to the Minister of Communications and the GCEO of the SABC, which specified what the AG could cover, the administrative issues and deadlines.  The AG had identified three areas relating to the investigation. These were, firstly, the supply to management, which related to allocations where there were conflicts of interest or where there had been undue influence in procurement. The second investigation related to potential fruitless or wasteful expenditure, for instance, relating to procurement of content that was not utilised. The third issue was around human resources issues, such as severance packages.

The terms of reference, the scope and the costs involved were agreed with the Director General of the Department of Communications. The AG had also specifically indicated which allegations fell outside the scope of investigation by the AG, because they did not produce a clear audit trail. Subsequent discussions with the Minister’s office had informed the AG of the establishment of a Ministerial task team that included support from National Treasury. It had been important to have engagements both with that Ministerial task team and the Department of Communications, to avoid duplication of work and audit fatigue. The Ministerial task team would be dealing with most of the allegations that could not be dealt with under the AG’s mandate.

The AG had also met with Mr Mampone, the Acting GCEO, and the Chief Financial Officer of SABC, and their level of cooperation had been excellent. The AG’s team was given an office space and unhindered access to information as well as to people who could supply relevant information. The AG had also met with the external auditors and established a relationship with them to the effect that they would provide the AG’s office with all their relevant information and findings. The SABC staff and external auditors had been cooperating as they were expected to.

The AG was currently waiting for the formal terms of reference from the Minister’s office, which should be received later today. This was important since the timeframes depended heavily on the scope of the investigation. It was common that investigations might begin with a well-defined and narrow scope, but that they would branch out indefinitely as they proceeded. This had to be monitored very carefully, especially since there had already been indications that the Interim Board wanted to extend the current scope. There were many stakeholders in this investigation, but it was important that be realistic about what could be done, and in particular to appreciate that certain areas that might have been highlighted now might not have been fully examined during the investigation. A team from the A-G had travelled today to Auckland Park and would by now have been given access to data, and have begun specialist downloads. The AG hoped to be able to complete the investigation on the initial scope by 24 August, which would enable the AG to compile a management report outlining the findings. This would be submitted to the SABC Management, who would be asked to respond to any findings. Once the factual accuracy of the responses had been checked, the AG’s report could then be finalised. The final report would be submitted to the Committee on 21 September, before the Parliamentary recess. This report would indicate specifically which allegations the AG would not have been able to investigate and thereafter the Ministry and the Portfolio Committee could guide the AG on how to move forward.

In conclusion, Mr Banner noted that the indications of support had been good and that without such cooperation an investigation would not be able to succeed. The AG was determined to get unhindered cooperation, and should it encounter problems the AG would then revert to the SABC management, the Interim Board and finally the Committee, in that order.

Discussion
Mr Kholwane said that it seemed that the AG was on course with the investigation, and he was thankful for the process since many had doubted the Committee’s commitment to it. He said that he would like to know the final deadlines, so that the Committee could ensure that the process was not dragged out. He was also looking forward to receiving the final report so that all the dark clouds could be cleared, and so that everyone involved could move on.

Ms Kilian said that she wanted to make sure that the source documents presented to the AG included the joint submission by the three unions. In general, she also asked for clarity as to which documents the AG was dealing with. She agreed with Mr Kholwane that although it was important to deal with any additional matters, that should be done at a later stage. It was imperative to keep to the timeframes since the Committee must get the report prior to making the permanent Board appointments. She suggested that the AG provide the Committee with a progress report and a report on any problems or non-cooperation that might be encountered, to ensure that communications were maintained, and so that the Committee could address such issues immediately.

Mr Banner responded that the source documents were the submission made by organised labour, as well as submissions made by former Board members. The terms of reference were spelt out in detail in the engagement letter, which the AG could provide to Members.

The Chairperson noted that that letter had been classified and wondered if the AG’s office would be willing to declassify it.

Mr Banner responded that this could be done, as it was important that the Committee knew what the AG was doing.

The Chairperson said that as soon as the AG’s office had reworded the document he would forward it to all Members.

Committee business: Draft programme
The Chairperson noted that at the beginning of the meeting, Mr Van Den Berg had asked for a postponement of the closing date for applications to the permanent SABC board, from 31 July to 6 August.

Mr Kholwane said that it was a public matter and the ANC had no problem extending the closing date. Since Members had, earlier in the meeting, asked the SABC to assist with advertising the posts, it was only fair that the public be given time to nominate members before the final application date, although Members might have to come in during the recess to ensure that the process was dealt with speedily.

Ms Kilian said that she supported the extension but suggested that it be moved further, to 14 August, and that the Committee programme then be changed accordingly. She said that the Committee must follow the correct procedure to ensure confidence in the new Board, and she did not think that it would be possible to draw a shortlist of the candidates by 25 August.

Ms L Mazibuko (DA) pointed out that if the Committee was expanding the scope and spread of the advertisement for the nominations, it also must extend its time frame since there would be far more work to be done.

Ms Kilian said that the Committee would need at least one more week to ensure that the administration went smoothly.

The Chairperson suggested that the shortlisting of candidates be moved from 25 August, to 1 September, and that the interviews then also be moved by one week to 7, 8 and 9 September. He also suggested that 25 August be left open as a meeting date for any issue that might come up.

Mr Kholwane pointed out that the ANC had a caucus in the morning on 8 September and asked the Chairperson to ensure that interviews would be held in the afternoon that day.

The Chairperson acknowledged his request and said that 10 September should then also be added as an interview date to ensure that the Committee was able to complete the process. The final selection of the Board members would be done on 23 September, and the Committee would present its report to the House after the recess.

Ms Mazibuko proposed that the open time slot on 25 August be used for presentation of the interim report by the AG to the Committee, as suggested by Ms Kilian.

Mr Brenner said that the AG would need an additional week or so before it was able to present the interim report, as SABC management must be given the opportunity to reply to the AG’s findings.

Mr Kholwane agreed that the AG’s office had to be allowed to finish its process before the Committee discuss the matter, and that the timeframes be left.

Ms Mazibuko clarified that she was suggesting a general progress report, which the AG had previously indicated that it would be willing to give.

Mr Brenner reiterated that it was important that the AG be given the opportunity to prepare the final report before discussing any specific findings, but that there was no problem in providing a general progress report.

Ms Kilian suggested that perhaps the AG should only attend on 25 August if it was facing any problems.

The Chairperson said that the AG presentation would not be scheduled for 25 August slot yet. He had weekly contact with the AG’s office and if any issues arose then a meeting could be organised. It was better to leave it open ended for now.

Mr Kholwane noted that there was a problem with the 11 August date for short listing for candidates to be appointed to the ICASA Board. 86 nominations had been received for one post, and the Committee had not yet discussed how many candidates would be on the shortlist.

The Chairperson said that he had been in touch with ICASA, who was ideally seeking a person with knowledge in the economics of communication and a strong legal background. He suggested that the Committee agreed on a short-listing of five names for interview.

Mr Van Den Berg stressed that the Portfolio Committee was not to be seen as opposing, but rather as helping and assisting the SABC Board and Management, and hoped that the latter would keep in touch.

Mr Radebe asked the Chairperson to try to schedule a visit to the SABC headquarters on the programme for next term.

Ms Magazi proposed that although the suggestion had been made before, and she thought it was a good one, such a visit should wait until after the Interim Board had done its work.

Mr Mkhize agreed, and said that such a visit should also take place after finalisation of the AG’s report.

The Chairperson said that he would try to schedule a visit in the programme for the last quarter. He thanked all Members, Board members and Executive Management. He acknowledged that they all must be realistic about what could be done in the short time span, and thanked the Board members for their dedication and energy.

The meeting was adjourned.