Minister on Matters Raised by the Committee during the Second Term 2010: Briefing; Discussion on Third Term Plan

Meeting report

Briefing by the Minister
The Hon. Mr Masenyani Richard Baloyi, the Minister of Public Service and Administration, stated that he and the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) appreciated the opportunity to address the Committee and to clarify issues identified by the Members.

He stated that the filling of vacancies within the public service was a worrying matter that had to be resolved. There were delays in the filling of vacancies and there were quite a number of acting officials. Many departments had found themselves in this situation when the new administration of the state had introduced new departments. People were moving from one area to another. As the Minister, he was responsible for the DPSA and other agencies. He wanted to see that all the positions were filled. He also hoped that the position of Director-General (D-G) for the DPSA would be filled by early June. The Chief Operating Officer (COO) position in the DPSA would also be filled shortly. Most of the appointments in DPSA would be finalised by the end of June. At the State Information Technology Agency (SITA), the Minister had instructed the board to work speedily to ensure that the appointment of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), the Chief Financial Officer (CFO), the COO and any other vacancies were finalised by the end of June.

He stated that all the Ministers were expected to sign performance agreements in 2010. He had already signed his performance agreement with the President. The Programme of Action (PoA) had been outlined in the strategic planning session; however, this was going to be revised to include the signing of performance agreements and the agreements on deliverables. The Minister would then indicate to the Committee what the key targets were going to be. Performance agreements would be signed with all delivery agents.

The Ministry considered all the targets that had to be achieved as projects. To be able to do a project one had to define the project first. This helped to time the project and to estimate when it would be finished. There were major projects that the Ministry and Department were going to embark upon and with which they were busy already. One of the projects that the Minister was beginning was to define the architecture of the public service. The project reviewed whether the country had a public service that was ready to deliver in terms of the developmental agenda, whether the country had quality public servants, and how the country recruited them. The Minister was also working on a labour relations project. The Government had introduced instruments into the country to ensure that there would be workplace democracy and that employer-employee relationships would be handled in a manner that would define labour relations. The Public Service Coordinating Bargaining Council dealt with issues relating to their “nature”. The issue was how to manage this information and how matters could be dealt with in such a way that labour relationships did not degenerate to the point that they did in 2007. The Ministry's view was that it needed to review the approach to salary negotiations. The Ministry thought that the budget cycle could be synchronised with salary and wage negotiations in the public service so that negotiations could become year-round activities. The Ministry was also looking at an anti-corruption project. It would be rolled out soon.

A Public Service Integrity Framework would be developed and launched shortly. The Minister would give the Committee a copy of the Framework as soon as possible; however, it was still at the consultation stage. The Framework would ensure that the behaviour of public servants was as expected and it would strengthen the implementation of the policies that the sector already had.

The Ministry was going to finalise the determination of the corporate forms of two institutions; the Public Administration Leadership and Management Academy (PALAMA) and the Public Service Commission (PSC). When the Ministry had entered the current financial year's budget processes, it saw that PALAMA and the PSCs votes were included as part of Vote 11 in the DPSA. In the past, they were counted as separate votes. When it came to the PSC, there were questions about its situation. This project would be finalised shortly. The repositioning of PALAMA was a major project as well. 

The revival of the SITA was one of the major projects that would address pricing, quality of service and procurement. Focusing on impact assessments was a priority. This project was launched last year; however, the roll out had been slow. The Department was looking at re-launching the impact assessment project. A Single Public Service (SPS) project was also being looked at. The project looked at providing access across the spheres of Government. This was an ongoing, priority project.

South Africa seemed to be playing a role of ensuring that there was good governance in the African continent. This was why the country had acceded to the European Union's (EU’s) voluntary instrument called the African Peer Review Mechanism. It was a good instrument for review and for the country to mirror its performance. There were issues that were identified that needed attention urgently. The DPSA was looking at issues of service delivery, land reform, violence against women and children, and corruption. The Government had adopted a convention to fight bribery at an international level. South Africa was playing a role in governance, not only in the continent, but in the international community.

The Minister reminded the Committee that the Government had developed a policy that had to do with skills development after the Skills Development Act was passed. The Act said that the country had to have Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs). The SETAs would be championing the skills and interventions necessary to address the skills shortage. There were approximately 23 SETAs. There was a SETA for the public service sector, which was referred to as the PSETA. The executing authority responsible for skills development, before the current reorganisation of the state, was the Minister of Labour. This piece of legislation had now been transferred to the Minister for Higher Education and Training. The DPSA also played a small role. The National Skills Development Strategy was still under discussion and would be finalised in February 2011. A draft copy of the strategy would be given to the Committee. The strategy mapped the way forward. He stated that there were stories of excellence from some of the SETAs; however, there were also some SETAs that performed poorly. The PSETA seemed to be performing poorly.

Discussion
The Chairperson thanked the Minister for the detailed briefing.

Ms M Mohale (ANC) asked if the premiers of the provinces signed performance agreements with the President. She wanted more clarity on PALAMA and the PSETA. What was it that PALAMA did that the PSETA did not do?

Ms Colette Clark, Acting Director-General (DPSA), answered the question on performance agreements fro premiers. She replied that there were intergovernmental protocols that would be used between the President and the premiers. The agreement between the Minister and the President already expected that the Minister would work with the different Members of the Executive Councils (MECs) in the country for that specific sector. The premier had to manage the same MECs in terms of their delivery. The intergovernmental protocol dealt with the relationship between the national and provincial governments in relation to its particular mandate, as well as the President's expectation as to what the premier had to deliver. The deliverables that were in the premiers’ intergovernmental protocol was centred on the Government's twelve outcomes at a national level. So, there was a binding aspect in relation to what the premier had to oversee.

Ms Clark answered that all SETAs were “watchdogs” for skills development in their particular sector. The role of the PSETA was to know what the skills were that were needed in the public administration sector. There was a difference between a policy making role, a policy implementation role and the quality assurance role. The PSETA assured quality; it registered qualifications and accredited service providers. PALAMA was a service provider, which meant it had to be registered by the PSETA to be able to give out qualifications to public servants for public administration. There were definite differences in terms of the roles they played. However, they had areas of cooperation in terms of the training skills plan and the sector skills plan. PALAMA was a training provider and the PSETA registered training providers.

Ms J Maluleke (ANC) noted that labour negotiations generally occurred in June, while the budget was finalised in February. If the Government budgeted for an increase of 6% and the labour sector wanted an 8% increase, from where would the other 2% increase have to come? She asked why there was the problem of rollovers when it came to the budget, but there was always an outcry over the backlog of housing. The DPSA had to be an example for all the other governmental departments. There was also the issue of the pension funds. People were waiting for their pensions. Most people did not know where to access their money. She noted that the issue of PSETA was challenging. It seemed that the PSETA was “dead” and the country did not know what was happening with it. The Committee needed the Minister to oversee what was happening between the DPSA and the PSETA. The challenges had to be addressed.

The Minister replied that the DPSA was in discussions with the labour sector to synchronise its negotiation times with the budget cycle. He stated that there was a link between the budget and performance. It meant that departments had to perform their duties. Departmental spending had to be based on its priority items. The outcomes based approach was going to be very helpful in terms of dealing with performance issues. 

Ms H van Schalkwyk (DA) noted that the budget of the PSC now formed part of the DPSA’s budget. The PSC was a Chapter 10 institution. Was this related to a Chapter 9 institution? What was the difference between the two? She asked about the Government Employees Pension Fund (GEPF). There was an Act that allowed a divorced partner of a person with the GEPF to gain access to their share of the pension before that person died. She wanted clarity on this. She asked if the Minister received the Risk Assessment Report on the SETAs. When would the Committee have access to this report?

The Minister replied that there were differences as well as similarities between Chapter 9 and Chapter 10 institutions, especially when it came to the PSC. Chapter 9 institutions were created to support the constitutional democracy. Chapter 10 institutions, more especially the PSC, was established to ensure the country's public administration was firmly focused on plans and operations for running businesses according to values enshrined in the Constitution. When it came to issues focused on accountability in public administration, the PSC was responsible for issues such as transparency, responsiveness, professionalism and fairness. These values were applicable at provincial, national and local level. The values were also applicable to State Owned Enterprises (SOEs). The PSC, as a Chapter 10 institution, dealt with issues broader than those in public administration. Even though the PSC was a Chapter 10 institution, it was supposed to operate as an independent institution. The Deputy Minister was given the duty of following up on all the issues raised in the Public Service Commission report.

Ms Clark replied to the question on the GEPF. She stated that there was a difference between a pension fund that dealt with deferred contributions and one that dealt with deferred benefits. Deferred benefits were calculated from the time of retirement because it was a pension fund. Therefore, it would be a burden to the fund in terms of paying out at the expected rate of retirement for a particular individual. The rule of the pension fund, because it was a deferred benefit pension fund, was there for the protection of all the people who would benefit at the time of retirement. If it was to be paid out it would be paid out to the equivalent of a resignation benefit. Nobody wanted a resignation benefit because it was less lucrative than a pension retirement benefit. It would be unfair and burdensome to the fund to pay out at a rate of a pension payout.

The Minister addressed the question on the Risk Assessment Report. He answered that he had received the report. The Minister did not want to release the report immediately or talk about it at a public level because of the nature of the report. If the report was released it could put the SETAs into complete paralysis. It was not because the Ministry did not want to be transparent; it was because it had to be accountable for what it had to say about the report. The report had been handed to the boards of the SETAs and the issues were being addressed. There were quite a number of issues that had to be addressed and he did not want to put the SETAs from one crisis into another. The board would address the public at some point.

Mr L Suka (ANC) stated that the Government had to approach issues in the country differently. He appreciated the timeframes given to filling vacancies within the DPSA. This was a marked improvement. He asked what the percentage rates of the vacancies were in each department. This could be used as a benchmark to show what should be implemented to improve the filling of vacancies. He also appreciated the signing of performance agreements; however, the Minister had to look at the signing of performance agreement by local government. The Government wanted value for money, and this meant having quality assurance in terms of service delivery. He noted that the Minister wanted to fight corruption. He asked how the Government was going to protect whistle-blowers. Was there a strategy to deal with this issue? It was a good idea to focus on SPS administration, as there were many public service employees who did not realise how much they were earning. He asked where the country stood, internationally, in terms of public service.

The Minister replied that the Ministry was aware that it had to fill vacancies in departments. The DPSA was committed to finalising its own appointments. The Minister did not have the figures for the vacancies rates at the moment. A vacancy was an opportunity for someone that was not employed to get a job. If vacancies were not filled, it meant that the departments were denying unemployed people the opportunity to become employed. Vacancies also compromised a department's ability to perform. It also resulted in under-expenditure.

The Minister answered the question on performance agreements and quality assurance. He answered that the outcomes approach looked at instruments that would deal with those issues.

In terms of the protection of whistle-blowers, there was the Protected Disclosures Act that protected whistle-blowers. The country needed to be mindful of all the interventions that could be used to fight corruption. It took an informed public for good governance to succeed.

The Minister replied that the DPSA planned to finalise the Public Service Model soon. Internationally, South Africa was 55 out of 180 countries in terms of public service. South Africa was fifth in the African continent.

Ms Mohale stated that there were rumours of a defence strike. She asked where the Minister would fit in, as the strike had to do with salaries.

The Minister answered that the Defence sector was in the process of establishing a commission that would look at the condition of services for soldiers. There was no way that the public service sector could not take interest in the matter. The two sectors had to work together to address some of those issues.

The Chairperson stated that it was critical to bridge the wage gap, as the Government did not want to appear hostile against the workers. She was glad that the Minister recognised the issues relating to PALAMA.  She asked if the mechanism for peer review was fitting for the country.

The Minister answered that the peer review was fitting for the country. It helped South Africa share its experiences with the rest of the African continent. Of course, it was a learning curve to have the peer review.

Brief Discussion on the Annual Plan
The Chairperson asked Members to focus their attention on the third term of Parliament. She stated that the Committee would be beginning a study tour after the constituency period. The Committee would be split into two groups. There had to be concurrence as to who would lead the groups. The NCOP was included in this exercise as well as the Committee on Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs. It was in relation to the Public Administration Management Bill, that the Committee was conducting the study tour and would extend it to the rest of the African continent. The groups would reconvene to compile a report on the progress of the tour.

The Women's Parliament was taking place in August. The Committee was part of the cluster. Therefore, Members needed to look at issues that would impact on women. The Committee had to tackle gender issues.

The DPSA would also be briefing the Committee on the progress made regarding its strategic objectives for 2010. There would also be a briefing on human resources and National Treasury regulations. The Committee also wanted to look at the DPSAs anti-corruption strategy.

During the third term, the Minister would also be briefing cluster committees on reports that were tabled in Parliament on the state of the public service.

There would be briefings on the SITA, PALAMA, the PSC and compliance with legislations and regulations.

The PSC would be briefing the Committee on its national anti-corruption strategy. The Minister and the Presidency would be briefing Members on issues raised on the Hot Line.

The Minister suggested that the Committee review some of its time allocations as it seemed that there might not be enough time to deal with some issues on days when they were receiving briefings from certain entities. He stated that he would have to look at the Annual Plan further and refer to the Committee. This also meant that he could coordinate his work with the Committee's activities.

The Chairperson stated that she looked forward to having a fruitful term.

The meeting was adjourned.