Public Administration Leadership & Management Academy:Responses to questions on Annual Report for 2008/09, Department's programme of Action for 2010/2011

Public Service and Administration

03 November 2009
Chairperson: Ms J Moloi-Moropa (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The Public Administration Leadership & Management Academy (PALAMA) recapped some of the questions that remained to be answered after the Committee’s last meeting with this institution. It summarised that the Committee of Ministers (MINCOM) had  recommended this Academy to lead and drive the capacity initiative within the Public Service, and Cabinet had approved a report on the issues. The Academy, instead of being a facilitator, then became a provider, and collaborated with other service providers in delivering training. There had been some deviations from the recommendations of both MINCOM and the Cabinet, which were outlined. The Director General, instead of a Task Team, had led the implementation.  The funding for PALAMA was in place and it would be embarking upon strategic planning and would address some of the challenges.

Members indicated that they had not been impressed with the presentation, including that no documentation had been provided to the Committee. The Committee questioned whether the theories could be implemented to show tangible results, asked what were the skills offered by PALAMA that were needed by the public sector, whether it trained on request, and how it interacted with other government departments. The Committee would be doing a follow up.

The Department of Public Service and Administration briefed the Committee on its operational plans for 2010/11, saying that in this period it would be implementing the second anti-corruption programme, and outlining what it would comprise, and would be undertaking a Compliance Audit Report. It outlined the purpose and structure of the Thusong Centres, formerly known as Multi-Purpose Community Service Centres, noting that these were essentially one-stop facilities where communities could do business with a range of government departments, and also could find banking and post office facilities. A blueprint had been developed but was not implemented through lack of funding. There were some challenges, including how to allocate costs to different Departments. There was no management facility or infrastructure to support the concept and some of the centres did not have connectivity or counters. However, community development workers were being trained, some in other countries, and the DPSA intended to establish and advance an effective environment within the public service through adoption of progressive policies. Members asked about the Head of Department contracts, mentioned that at a Thusong Centre in Kimberley a political party had constituency offices in the centre, for which it was not paying, and sought clarity on that, asked for documentation around the blueprint, the involvement of Umsombomvu Youth Fund and State Information Technology Agency, and feedback from the community development worker training programmes. Members felt that there should have been more clarity on the centres and a greater concentration on tangible service delivery. The Deputy Minister responded that human resources and governance were the key focus areas of the Department, conceded that there had been some problems, but that the Department was addressing the issues.

Meeting report

Public Administration Leadership & Management Academy (PALAMA):Responses to questions on Annual Report for 2008/09
Mr Rufus Mmutlana, Deputy Director General, PALAMA, recapped some of the questions asked by the Portfolio Committee during the last meeting. These had related to the issue of its transition whether PALAMA had complied with the recommendations, questions around its business model and its impact on training, PALAMA ‘s procurement activities, its gender representivity of women in management positions, and the financial surplus rollover, and the donor supported programme.

He noted that PALAMA commenced in 2005 after a Ministerial Committee (MINCOM), consisting of members of different institutions, was formed, had gathered evidence and compared international models. MINCOM recommended the current PALAMA Academy to lead and drive the capacity initiative within the Public Service, and be part of Government. A report was sent to the Cabinet and was approved. The Academy had to stop being a facilitator and become a provider. It also moved from competing with other service providers which were seen as delivery arms of training, and had to collaborate with them. The Academy also consulted with organised labour to recruit people from outside the public service. The former staff had applied for positions that were available. Positions that  were not filled were advertised through the media.

He noted that there were some deviations from MINCOM’s recommendations. MINCOM had  recommended that the Academy should not be a Government Department but a Public Institution reporting to the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA), and be appointed by Cabinet. MINCOM also recommended internal quality assurance. It also suggested that the Academy be funded. This had not happened, which deviated from the cost recovery. There were also deviations from the Cabinet decision of not establishing the Task Team which was supposed to implement  the Academy, which led to the former Director General leading the implementation. The funding of PALAMA was completed and now the delegation had to embark on strategic planning and respond to the challenges that it had.

Prof Solly Mollo, Acting Director General, PALAMA, continued with the presentation. He noted that PALAMA had a strategy of not having the internal trainees on its payroll. Instead, there were three outsourced categories of Service Providers. There were 125 individual trainees. The Higher Education (HE) Institutions had 300 facilitators, of whom 90% were blacks and 60% were females. There were also five private training companies, who did training on behalf of PALAMA using their own material. They owned the copyright on that material. PALAMA trained more women than men, as showed in the graph presentation.

Mr Carlo Venter, Corporate Finance Officer, PALAMA, summarised PALAMA’s financial performance, and emphasised that the rollover of R52 million would be utilised in projects such as induction programmes.

PALAMA also explained about the donor funding, and noted that this was utilised not only in the training areas, but also in other areas. PALAMA had received funding from Royal Netherlands, which had been used to customise curricula at the government level, as a result of agreements with other countries. PALAMA also had entered into partnerships with other countries.

Discussion
The Chairperson commented that PALAMA had not provided the Committee on time with the documentation it was using for the presentation. This was unacceptable.

Mr A Williams (ANC) asked if PALAMA was an agency and if it was effective. He wanted clarity on why there were such large gaps in the structure of PALAMA. He also asked what were the skills offered by PALAMA that were needed by the public sector, and if PALAMA trained when it was asked to train.

Prof Richard Levin, Director General, Department of Public Service and Administration, explained that PALAMA would transform itself into a training facility to fill the gaps, and it would be addressing the problems of over-qualified public servants.

Ms F Bikani (ANC) was not impressed with PALAMA’s presentation and suggested that the Committee had to look again at the relevance of PALAMA, in terms of the development of its skills. She wanted clarity on whether PALAMA was a consultancy. There were other government departments who had their own training divisions. She asked if there was any connection between these and PALAMA.

Ms  H Van Schalkwyk (DA) asked if the high number of outside high profile consultancies did not reflect negatively on PALAMA.

Prof Levin gave a summary of the vision of PALAMA and stated that because there were many public servants who were qualified to be trainers, PALAMA could draw on their skills and use them as trainers to ensure that capacity was kept in house to implement the programmes of training.

The Chairperson stressed that the Committee was not impressed with PALAMA. It would be following up on the issues raised. The Committee felt that PALAMA’s theories may not result in tangible results. It would also be looking to the implementation issues, and would give PALAMA some guidance on how the Committee wished to interact with it.

Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA): Presentation of 2010/11 programme of action
Prof Richard Levin, Director General, DPSA, tabled and summarised the Department’s programme of action for 2010/2011. He noted that the managers of the DPSA would elaborate on those strategies.

Ms Vanessa Phala, Acting Chief Director: Anti-Corruption, DPSA, noted that the DPSA would be implementing its second anti-corruption programme. During this period, the Compliance Audit Report had to be done, on the implementation of MACC requirements, at National and Provincial Departments. This project had to implement the Business Anti- Corruption Training Programme. Anti-Corruption communication, training, an awareness programme and the Public Service Integrity Management Framework would be implemented and monitored. By 2011 there would be implementation and hosting of anti-corruption management information Systems. This project would also hold a quarterly anti-corruption convention.

Ms Michelle Williams, Deputy Director, Office of the Government Chief Information Officer, DPSA, gave an explanation about the Thusong Centres, formerly known as Multi-Purpose Community Service Centres. The first had been established 1998. These Centres provided connectivity to government departments. They provided a one stop facility, where communities could find more than four departments, and a post office or banking facilities. A blueprint was developed but could not be deployed because no funds were available. This project had challenges, as it had not been clarified how the costs should be allocated across the different departments. It also did not have management or any infrastructure to support it. Some of these centres did not have connectivity or counters. The funding for installation of Government communications and information services, the training, and development of an operations manual to support the staff was provided by DPSA. Umsobomvu Youth Fund had provided funding for the support of staff. However, there were still several key challenges. One of the absence of transversal funding to support connectivity. The funding was insufficient, and 90% of it went on salaries. The Thusong Centres in the urban malls were supposed to provide for an integrated approach to service delivery in urban under-serviced areas. Maponyane Mall in Soweto had about nine departments represented.

Ms Florence Maleka CD: Community Development Work Programme, DPSA, noted that this programme  had been established for four years. It was to improve service delivery, inter governmental coordination and interaction between government and communities. Phase 1 of this project was concerned with literature, and the second phase was a consultation review, which had been conducted in eight of the nine provinces. The DPSA had  focused on the definition and purpose of responsibilities of communities and departments, and had also investigated institutional responsibility and accountability for progress. This programme had operated through governmental levels, including the municipal levels. The challenges included the lack of sufficient funding. The master plan was instrumental and it highlighted qualities of government. There were agreements with other countries, such as India, where community development workers had been sent.

Ms Rhulani Makhubela, Chief Director: Diversity Management, DPSA, briefed the Committee on gender mainstreaming, which aimed at ensuring a transformed, non discriminatory and fully inclusive public service that reflected the Constitutional values of non sexism and non racism. DPSA had managed to advance an effective environment within the public service through adoption of progressive policies, establishment of relevant institutional mechanisms and development of key operational processes to ensure a transformed non-discriminatory and fully inclusive public service.

Discussion
The Chairperson wanted clarity on what was happening with the Head of Department (HOD) contracts.

The Deputy Director General: Human Resource Management, DPSA, explained that HOD’s contacts were managed by the Public Service Committee, and that each Premier was responsible for Provincial HOD contracts whilst DPSA was responsible for National contracts.

Ms H Van Schalkwyk (DA) mentioned that she had visited a Thusong Centre in Kimberley, which was very organised, but the problem was that it had an office for a constituency of a political party which did not pay for any of the services of the Centre that it was utilising, she wanted clarity on the procedures used for that political party to be in that Centre. Secondly she wanted to know how government policies differentiated between the State and the party.

Ms Williams confessed that she had no knowledge of what happened in the Thusong Centre in Kimberley, but would make enquiries.

Ms F Bikani (ANC) wanted clarity on how far the processes and regulation of Thusong Centres had gone. She asked the delegates to provide the Committee with documentation on the blueprint for development in rural areas so that Members could get some knowledge of what had happened. She also asked whether DPSA had a partnership with Umsobomvu, and why the latter had been paying salaries. She further enquired as to the feedback from the community development workers who had travelled to India, and the relationship between the DPSA and the State Information Technology Agency (SITA).

Ms Williams explained that the Department was working with SITA as it had developed the blueprints.

DPSA had an agreement with Umsobomvu to assign and train youth, as they were not part of the DPSA staff.

Ms Maleka explained that the community development workers programme required them to go on a 12-month learnership training programme. She had mentioned India as an example of the learnership countries.

Mr Williams commented that there should have been more clarity on who was responsible for Thusong Centres. The Community Development Workers would have to stop bringing up the excuse that this was a new operation, since it had now been in place for four years. Communities were expecting and wanting service delivery, and when this did not happen they ended up by demonstrating and destroying government property.

Honourable Roy Padayachie, Deputy Minister of Public Service and Administration, emphasised that DPSA had to remind itself of the strategic focus of its work, which were human resources in the public sector, and governance. He believed that the Thusong Centres and the Community Development Worker programmes had both performed very well. He agreed that one of the faults had been that these did not have their own governance service operating efficiently. He promised that the DPSA would be looking at the project and would come with guidelines so there would be more control. The DPSA was also going to finalise the first phase by December, so the second phase would be concerned with implementation. He explained that no political party should be part of the Thusong Centres as the political parties were separate from the State.

The meeting was adjourned.

Share this page: