Department for Women, Children and Persons with Disabilities Budget & Strategic Plan 2010/11with

Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities

23 March 2010
Chairperson: Ms B Thompson (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The acting Accounting Officer of the Department of Women, Children and Persons with Disabilities (DWCPD) tabled the Strategic Plan and Budget to the Committee. The presentation also comprised a foreward and introduction by the Department’s Minister, Ms Noluthando Sibiya and the department’s three-year programme for its Budget allocation.

The programme for the three-year budget allocation was tabled to the Committee. The final allocation from National Treasury of R156 million over the three years was going to make it very difficult for the DWCPD to achieve the critical capabilities to deliver its mandate. 

The DWCPD had budgeted for R97 790 million for 2010/11, R108 268 million for 2011/12 and R114 853 million for 2012/13.

Other issues presented pertained to the DWCPD legislative framework, mandate, strategic objectives, core functions, broad five-year priorities, departmental improvement plan, branch implementation plan, statutory bodies, Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) and accountability framework and performance indicators and outcomes.

The DWCPD mandate was to drive government’s equity, equality and empowerment agenda of marginalised groups and historically disadvantaged communities in each of its sectors through mainstreaming, empowerment and oversight.

The vision of the DWCPD was for the creation of a non-racial, non-sexist, equity and gender equality orientated and inclusive society that cared; developed and protected the human potential of its women, children and persons with disabilities.

Key national achievements of the DWCPD were discussed in the presentation. They pertained to human rights based national Constitutions, the parliamentary portfolio committee, the South African ratification of key gender equality instruments, public private partnerships, the submission of sector specific African Union (AU) and United Nations (UN) reports, the DWCPD and the South African visibility at international level.

With regards to a way forward, the DWCPD recommended the integration of gender equality, children’s rights and disabilities considerations in the key activities of government priorities lead departments.

The DWCPD would also develop a Green Paper, develop systems to establish the Department and develop a GDC agenda.

The DWCPD gave the Committee an operational plan for 2010/13. The plan pertained to the DWCPD programmes for women, children and persons with disabilities for the three-year period. Programme one pertained to administration for the office of the Minister and DG. That programme had a chief directorate of strategic management and legal services. It also had a directorate for communications.

Programme two pertained to Women Empowerment and Gender Equality (WEGE). That programme had chief directorates for planning and policy implementation for WEGE, mainstreaming and capacity development on the promotion of WEGE and the monitoring and evaluation and research and development of the promotion of the WEGE.

Programme three pertained to children’s rights and comprised three chief directorates pertaining to that.

Programme four pertained to the rights of persons with disabilities with three chief directorates pertaining to that.

The development of further policy with regards to issues pertaining to women, children and persons with disabilities was discussed and the previous work of the Office of the Status of Women (OSW) was noted.

A discussion about the DWCPD consultations with the CGE and the other government departments ensued, as the Committee had displayed concern about the duplication of programmes. The DWCPD had made a Budget allocation to the CGE, so consultation was imperative for the prevention of duplication programmes.

Meeting report

Department of Women, Children and Persons with Disabilities (DWCPD) strategic plan
The Minister, Ms Noluthando Sibiya, introduces her team: Dr Ellen KornegayDr Ellen Kornegay, acting Accounting Officer of the Department, Simphiwe Mabasa (Chief Director: Staff), Adv Nomazotsho Memani (Advisor to Minister), Mr Sandile Mbatsha (Special Advisor). [The position of Director General has in the process of being filled so Dr Kornegay had been seconded for this meeting as she had headed up the Office on the Status of Women in the Presidency prior to the Department being formed].

Minister Sibiya said that the central tenet for establishing stand-alone national machinery for gender, disability and children’s rights was to address issues of capacity, technical skills and resources. The DWCPD was also in existence to expand government’s capacity to mainstream Gender, Disability and Children (GDC) considerations.

Dr Ellen Kornegay presented the Strategic Plan and Budget which looked at the following matters: the DWCPD legislative framework, mandate, strategic objectives, core functions, broad five-year priorities, departmental improvement plan, branch implementation plan, statutory bodies, Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF), accountability framework, performance indicators and outcomes (see document).

The legislative framework comprised national, continental and international levels. It included the constitutional mandate and other legislation dealing with transformation, the public service, gender equality, children’s rights and disability. International and continental instruments had been signed by South Africa. The DWCPD had specific imperatives arising from international and national obligations.

The DWCPD mandate was to drive government’s equity, equality and empowerment agenda of marginalised groups and historically disadvantaged communities in each of its sectors through mainstreaming, empowerment and oversight.

The core functions of the DWCPD included:
▪ The monitoring and evaluation of delivery on agreed targets in the three sectors that would culminate in disaggregated rights delivery databases as well as national efficiencies for all-encompassing reporting at national and international levels.
▪ The advancement of international cooperation and partnerships to promote, and protecting socio-economic and the cultural rights of women, children and persons with disabilities.
▪ The setting of development oriented norms and standards for political and socio-economic transformation necessary to achieve incremental women empowerment and gender equality, children’s rights and the equalisation of development opportunities for disabled persons.

Strategic objectives included the facilitating of planning, implementation tracking and agreement on strategies for continuous improvement in the three sectors. Other objectives pertained to ensuring of compliance and comprehensive reporting on implementation of national, continental and international commitments on the GDC considerations through the development of an effective and efficient system.

Its national priorities were decent work creation, sustainable livelihoods, education, health, rural development (including land reform, food production and security) and the country’s fight against crime.

In improving its mandate implementation since the Department started operating in May 2009, the following factors were identified as important: the strengthening of family life, the strengthening of strategic public private partnerships for sustainable delivery and to align the strategic thrust of the focal points in the three spheres of government with that DWCPD.

Key national achievements to date: the human rights based Constitution, the establishment of the parliamentary portfolio committee, the South African ratification of key gender equality instruments, public private partnerships, the submission of sector specific reports to African Union and United Nations, the DWCPD and South African visibility at international level.

With regards to the way forward, the DWCPD recommended the integration of gender equality, children’s rights and disability considerations in the programme of government priorities. The Department would also develop a Green Paper, along with develop systems to establish the Department and develop a GDC agenda. The performance measures and targets for the three programmes for each of the following three financial years were detailed. Anticipated outcomes included the GDC National Plan and the GDC Policy Document. The human resources plan as well as the physical and financial acquisition plan were discussed.

Dr Kornegay noted that political accountability for the Commission on Gender Equality (CGE) had been moved from the Department of Justice to DWCPD.

The Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) zero based budget included physical acquisitions for the new Department. It had submitted a proposed three-year budget of R1,174 million in October 2009. National Treasury had come back in November with a figure of R150 million in November, a compromise of R461 million was reached in December but this had changed to R321 million in February 2010. The Department was still motivating for a review of this allocation. The allocation from National Treasury over the three years was going to make it very difficult for the DWCPD to achieve critical capabilities to deliver its mandate. 

The three-year budget allocation for each of the three programmes was tabled, totalling: R97 790 million for 2010/11, R108 268 million for 2011/12 and R114 853 million for 2012/13.

Discussion
Ms D Robinson (DA) asked when they would be appointing an Accounting Officer/ Director-General for the Department.

Ms H Malgas (ANC) said that the DWCPD needed to indicate who the Accounting Officer was for the day.

Minister Sibiya said that the DWCPD did not have a permanent Accounting Officer in place yet and that interviews had been conducted the day before which would lead to Cabinet appointing an Accounting Officer.

Minister Sibiya explained that Dr Kornegay was the acting Accounting Officer for the day.

Mr D Kekana (ANC) said that the Budget allocated to the DWCPD from the National Treasury was alarming. They had been given the Department’s strategic plan. He noted that the Committee also had a strategic plan and wanted to know if the strategic plans were going to be dovetailed.

Mr Kekana said that children were being neglected at an alarming rate in South Africa. Those children who were abused and traumatized. It could lead to the breeding of psychopaths and criminals if we neglected them.

Mr Kekana noted that in the DWCPD presentation, one of the key priorities was economic development for women, children and persons with disabilities. He asked how the department was going to prioritise that.
People were always talking about economic development and many industries including mining and agriculture were focusing on economic development. It was imperative that the focus for economic development should be on women, children and persons with disabilities.

The Chairperson also asked if the DWCPD plan was not going to be built into the Committee’s plan. In terms of the work the Committee had done, they had picked up a lot of challenges that needed attention. According to the department’s presentation, those challenges had not being tabled into their plan.

Ms G Tseke (ANC) said that she thought the Department would go further in giving a breakdown of their budget. It was not specific enough. For example what was the specific intention of the Department for the budget allocated to the empowerment of women.

The Chairperson also asked why they had not been given a more detailed breakdown of the DWCPD budget.

Dr Kornegay replied that there was a very detailed breakdown in the documentation that had been handed out to members during the meeting. Her colleague would go into more detail on that. The presentation had only been a PowerPoint outline but all the documentation had to be perused by the Committee.

The DWCPD gave the Committee an operational plan for 2010/13. The plan pertained to the DWCPD programmes for women, children and persons with disabilities for the three-year period. Programme 1: Administration for the Office of the Minister and Director General. That programme had a chief directorate of strategic management and legal services. It also had a directorate for communications.

Programme 2 Women Empowerment and Gender Equality (WEGE) had chief directorates for planning and policy implementation for WEGE, mainstreaming and capacity development on the promotion of WEGE and the monitoring and evaluation and research and development of the promotion of the WEGE.

Programme 3: Children’s Rights comprised three chief directorates as did Programme 4: Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Ms Robinson was concerned that the amount allocated for children and persons with disabilities was very small.

Ms Malgas asked what National Treasury’s reason was for the decrease in the budget. She asked if the Department had prioritised within the constraints of the budget that had been allocated.

Dr Kornegay replied that they had not been informed what National Treasury’s reason was for the reduction of the budget but the DWCPD had had expense consultations with the Treasury upto R461 million.

Ms Malgas asked what the DWCPD relationship was with the Commission on Gender Equality (CGE).

Dr Kornegay replied that from a process point of view, at no point had the DWCPD had any consultation with the CGE. In terms of linking programmes, there had been cooperation with the CGE. However, the CGE had an oversight responsibility over government and that that would have to be taken into consideration.

Mr Kekana asked how the DWCPD intended to link the budget with their intended programmes. With the limited funding, which programmes would be possible to implement and which would not. He made reference to the DWCPD organogram and said the DWCPD was indeed larger than the money that they needed to fund it.

Ms Robinson was concerned that money had been taken from the DWCPD to give to the CGE but the CGE did not seem as if they were achieving anything. As far as she could remember, the CGE had not even produced an annual report for the past two years. She was concerned that the CGE had been given so much money.

The Chairperson told Ms Robinson that that would not be a fair question to ask DWCPD as they were probably asking the same question. The right entity to ask would be the National Treasury. CGE could not answer the question why they had been allocated so much from the National Treasury.

Dr Kornegay responded generally and collectively to the Committee members who were concerned about the reduced budget and the prioritisation of projects. The original budget of R1 billion had been integrated within the budget catalytic projects. When the R1 billion had not come through, the issue of whether the DWCPD could undertake catalytic projects had to be asked.

In assessing the R75 million that was allocated to the DWCPD in November 2009, it had become very clear that the DWCPD would not be able to hire personnel and move into office premises. According to estimates done by the DWCPD and the Department of Public Works, there had been an indication that around R40 million would be required to move the DWCPD. What they had for accommodation was a mere R7 million.

Dr Kornegay explained that in November 2009, the DWCPD had come up with a compromise scenario. That scenario provided National Treasury with a budget of R561 million with very clear programme areas and indicators.

In January 2010, with the National Treasury at the official level, there had been a consensus for R461 million which the DWCPD had accepted as acceptable. This consensus would allow the DWCPD to fund flagship projects.

In terms of the Children’s programme, there was a programme to take children off the streets. There was also a programme where one could “adopt” a child. The child would not necessarily have to be moved, but one could support the child to attend school et cetera. Amongst those for the Women programme were the 50/50 programme and a programme on rural development and the economic development of women. For the People With Disabilities programme, it was economic advancement of those people.

The budget had also been informed by the Strategic framework, which had been informed by the rationale for establishing the national machinery. The rationale was to increase government’s capacity to mainstream. Consequently, the budget had been allocated to ensure that there was enough technical competence to work with the different government departments and to ensure that they took into consideration gender, disability and children’s rights. As a priority, the DWCPD needed to develop a Green Paper that would inform everyone concerned about its objectives, tasks, methodology, strategies and oversight function.

The importance of the focus on equity measures was deemed as a priority. The setting up of a national agenda which would be identified through a clear national plan of action in the three areas, was also identified as a priority. The DWCPD would also be expected to continue to report internationally and international measures would need to be integrated into the national plan of action.

With the allocation, it would not be possible for the DWCPD to do the flagship projects. The budget allocation for the 195 approved staffing had been established at R72 million. The plan had projected that 195 would be in place by the end of the MTEF period, but under the current configuration, it was quite limited as to how many people could be hired as staff.

The Chairperson said that in her view, the DWCPD would have to link up with the Department of Public Works to see what it had been doing in terms of programmes for women, children and persons with disabilities. This process would be to prevent duplication of programmes.

She also suggested that the DWCPD engage with all other government departments to identify what progammes for women, children and disabled persons the Departments had, also for the purpose of not duplicating programmes. The budget allocation for the DWCPD was already so little to go that one must not waste money on duplicate programmes.

Ms G Tseke (ANC) said that she thought it was most unfortunate that the DWCPD did not meet with the CGE prior to its meeting with the Committee that day. The DWCPD needed to meet with the CGE for the prevention of duplicate programmes, as R51 million was coming out of the DWCPD budget and allocated towards programmes for the CGE.

Ms Malgas echoed Ms Tseke’s stance on meeting with the CGE and knowing exactly what programmes the CGE had been budgeting for.

Dr Kornegay replied that the DWCPD had had consultations with the CGE. The CGE had been in consultation with the Department of Justice and that was why the DWCPD had not consulted with the CGE with regards to that part of the budget. The consultations with the CGE and the Department of Justice had been exclusive.

Dr Kornegay said that the DWCPD had had a meeting with the CGE in 2009, and that the meeting had indicated that the CGE requests were at a much higher level than what the National Treasury had allocated to them. DWCPD was consulting with the CGE on a continual basis and there was and would be continual consultations with other government departments as well. Consultation would continue as part of gender mainstreaming.

Ms Tseke echoed the Chairperson’s stance that it was important for the DWCPD to meet with all other government departments to prevent duplication.

Mr Kekana noted with concern that the DWCPD intended to develop policies as a priority. The development of policies was lengthy.

The Chairperson said that the DWCPD was not starting from scratch but from the work that the Office of the Status of Women (OSW) had already begun. She thought the DWCPD would take the work covered by the OSW forward and just implement it.

The DWCPD had responded by making reference to the very detailed operational plan that had been handed out to Committee members at the meeting.

Mr G Selau (ANC) thanked the DWCPD for a very detailed, informative presentation. It was clear from the presentation what the DWCPD were intending to achieve in the next three years. He noted the large numbers of people in South African society for whom the DWCPD was responsible.

The meeting was adjourned.

Present

  • We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: