PC: International Relations: First Term Committee Programme, outstanding reports and outstanding minutes

Meeting report

Addis Ababa Oversight Report
The Chairperson stated that not many of the Committee members present in the meeting had been part of the delegation to Addis Ababa. Only the Chairperson and Mr K Mubu (DA) had been part of the delegation.

Ms R Magau (ANC) requested the Chairperson or Mr Mubu to give the Committee a summary of the Report as they were the only ones part of the delegation that had embarked on the oversight visit.

Mr Mubu responded that the executive summary within the Report was an accurate summarisation and urged members to simply read it.

Mr M Booi (ANC) responded that a verbal summarisation would be preferred.

The Chairperson proceeded to give the Committee an overview of the visit. The aim of the visit had been to perform oversight over the SA mission in Ethiopia. The mission in Ethiopia was critical in that it was both a bilateral and multilateral mission. There was a sizeable European mission in Ethiopia. The delegation had hoped to meet ambassadors of the region but unfortunately it did not materialise. The mission in Addis Ababa was a costly exercise and SA provided 15% of the African Union’s (AU) budget. The idea was to do a check on whether SA was getting value for its money. Another issue was the participation of SA officials and their appointments in European Union structures. The question was whether required quotas had been met. Meetings had also taken place with officials from the SA Embassy in Ethiopia and discussions on political and administrative issues had taken place. Meetings with the human rights component and with the European Union representatives had taken place. The delegation had met with its parliamentary counterparts and it was clear that Ethiopia was trying to find its feet given its turbulent past. There seemed to be a bit of apprehension by the SA mission on how funds were spent by the AU. The SA mission itself had problems. There were cash book management system problems mainly because of the banking system in Ethiopia. Electricity supply in Ethiopia was also not consistent and was erratic at times. The delegation chose not to meet with local staff of the embassy as it could have created increased tensions in the workings of the embassy. Some of the gripes were about payment being in US dollars or in the Ethiopian local currency. The delegation preferred not to interfere as it was management issues. Consular issues also emerged. Persons used fake Ethiopian visas to obtain entry into South Africa and never returned home. Ethiopia processed 400 visas per month. The Department of Home Affairs rejected some of the visas received. Ethiopia would then put pressure on the Department of International Relations to speak to Home Affairs about the granting of rejected visas. The Chairperson stated that engagement at ministerial level was required in order for the two departments to be on the same page regarding the issue aforementioned. He proceeded to highlight certain issues.
The Registration of South Africans Abroad (ROSA) was a project that the Chairperson felt should be popularised amongst South Africans who travel abroad. The issue of late reporting by the Department was already being addressed. Staff vacancies in international organisations were of great concern. It would seem that SA did not apply for vacant posts. The Chairperson suggested that the Department should consider a policy of subsidisation of salaries of SA that work in international organisations. Ethiopia wished to enter into an agreement with SA on mining. Ethiopia felt that South Africa should escalate its mining operations.
The Chairperson stated that the Committee should recommend that the Office of the Speaker should initiate parliamentary relations between Ethiopia and South Africa given that country’s strategic location in Africa.

Mr Mubu stated that a major factor to consider was the geopolitical issues in the region around Ethiopia. It not only affected the region but Africa as a whole. For instance there were political tensions in Uganda and Kenya. The visit to Addis Ababa was important also due to the fact that many international organisations were based in the city. The United Nations Economic Commission’s Office was also in Addis Ababa. Limitations were that the banking and communications industries were largely still government controlled. As mentioned earlier South Africa contributed a large portion of the funds received by the AU. Reports about corruption on the administration of the funds had been received. The allegations did not go down well with the Deputy Chairperson of the AU. The Pan African Parliament was another structure which required attention. It was not a legislative structure and had more of an advisory function. There was a need for it to be transformed.

Mr S Mokgalapa (DA) was concerned about the challenges relating to the implementation of foreign policy. A problem was the co-ordination of (overseas) visits of all spheres of government. There were different interpretations of national policy by the different spheres of government. The issue was about the inconsistency of the country’s foreign policy. It needed to be addressed. Another issue was the late reporting by government on international obligations. 

Ms R Magau (ANC) stated that the issue was about economics. Part of government’s aim was to create jobs. The mission in Ethiopia seemed not to be giving South Africa value for its money. The mission did not achieve its ultimate objective. The Committee needed to look at ways of stimulating job creation.

Mr M Booi (ANC) stated that the present challenge for the Committee was to consider what was happening at present. Was it in the interests of members to address issues of crime and fraud relating to false passports and visas etc? Fraudulent practises were a rising problem. Who did members have to speak to? The Minister perhaps?

Ms C September (ANC) referred to the Report and stated that there seemed to be a slight disjuncture between the purpose of the visit and what was contained in the recommendations. The recommendations were considered far too general. It had to be aligned with the purpose of the visit. The recommendations had to make specific reference to government departments. What was the need for South Africa to enter into a mining agreement with Ethiopia? On what basis had this conclusion been reached? She felt that the Report did not reflect the recommendations properly. The Report also had too much nuances. The executive summary should reflect everything in the Report, the executive summary as contained in the Report only seemed to cover an introduction.

Mr Booi stated that the Report could be improved in certain areas but it also contained a great deal of good things.

The Chairperson stated that the fundamental issue was about the alignment of the stated purpose of the visit and the recommendations made. He suggested that members work on the recommendations.

The Committee agreed.

Ms September suggested that Members forward inputs regarding recommendations to the Committee Secretary for inclusion in the Report.

The Chairperson asked Members to forward their comments to the Committee Secretary by Monday 21 February 2011.

University of Cape Town Oversight Report
The Chairperson noted that only Mr Mubu and Ms Magau were the only members present that had formed part of the delegation that had visited the University of Cape Town.

Ms Magau explained that the idea behind the visit to the University of Cape Town (UCT) was to engage with the South African public on the issue of foreign policy. There was a need to link foreign policy with national priorities. The delegation had engaged with the student community. Some of the issues discussed were democratic accountability and intolerance towards foreigners. After the interactions it was apparent that the public knew very little about the rest of the world. The contributions made by the neighbouring countries towards South Africa’s struggle for freedom was not known. South Africa was a new democracy and the new kid on the block. Yet South Africa was very much involved in Africa. The country’s impact in Africa was however not felt back home. South Africa having hosted a successful soccer world cup had to build on the success of the tournament in looking at other ways in improving the lives of South Africans. Information about the country’s policies should be made available and explained to the broader public.

Mr Mubu referred to an oversight visit undertaken to the University of Limpopo and pointed out that people in Limpopo could not associate with the issue of foreign policy. The problem was that people were not informed about foreign policy. Foreign policy was often seen as an elitist thing. Xenophobic attacks took place because locals felt that foreigners were taking their jobs. In South Africa, foreigners were not kept in refugee camps as in other countries. It was thus very important for the development of a White Paper on Foreign Policy.

Mr Mokgalapa stated that the visit to UCT was a practical step to highlight public diplomacy. The visit to the University of Limpopo had the same effect. The Committee should undertake similar oversight visits to other universities as well. A White Paper on Foreign Policy was a good starting point to inform the public. Domestication of foreign policy was what was needed. Linking foreign policy to job creation was the challenge.

The Chairperson stated that the Committee was in agreement that foreign policy outcomes had to become tangible. There must be a benefit to SA economically.

Ms C Dudley (ACDP) pointed out that the observations and recommendations captured in the Report were not those of the Committee but of the people spoken to. The Committee’s observations and recommendations needed to be reflected.

Mr Booi stated that perhaps a good idea was for the Minister of International Releations and Co-operation to address the Committee on what was happening in Africa at the moment. He was referring to the political upheaval that was taking place in Egypt and other parts of North Africa. Was Africa in a crisis? The Committee needed a common understanding of issues.

The Chairperson agreed that the Committee needed a briefing on what was happening in North Africa.

Mr Mubu stated that the happenings in Africa took everyone by surprise. He noted that Members tended to comment after the fact. What happened in Egypt could happen everywhere. The Committee had to play a proactive role on international issues.

Ms Magau agreed that the Minister should address the Committee on the events that had taken place in North Africa.

Ms Dudley added that perhaps analysts could be asked to comment on how South Africa’s policies were seen abroad.  

The Chairperson referred to Ms Dudley’s earlier observation that the observations and recommendations contained in the Report were those of persons that members had spoken to. No observations and recommendations of the Committee were reflected in the Report.

Mr Booi suggested that the Report be adopted nevertheless and be continuously improved.

Mr Mabu stated that the aim of the visit was to listen to the people and that was what members did. The recommendations were that of members.

The Chairperson disagreed and said that the observations were those of the persons spoken to. The recommendations were recommendations that were made to the Committee by persons who had been spoken to. The Committee had to thus still make recommendations regarding the visit to UCT.

Mr E Sulliman (ANC) agreed with the Chairperson that the Committee had to still incorporate its own recommendations within the Report.

Ms September shared the same sentiments as the Chairperson and Mr Sulliman.

The Chairperson suggested that Members forward recommendations on the visit to UCT to the Committee Secretary by Monday 21 February 2011. 

The Committee agreed.

First Term Committee Programme
The Chairperson brought it to the Committee’s attention that the Programme did not deal with specific issues. It was more a skeleton of a general programme. He had tried to organise an oversight visit to Israel but it seemed unlikely to happen anytime during the present term. It was more likely possible by the end of the next term which was near the end of June 2011. Approval for such trip still had to be obtained.

Ms Magau remarked that during 2010 the Committee had wished to deal with a number of issues. Some were dealt with and some were not. She suggested that those not dealt with could possibly be incorporated into the current Programme of the Committee.

Ms September referring to the Programme stated that it seemed that it was a requirement for Members to draft a business plan for the Committee. She suggested that the Committee schedule a workshop to draft the business plan as it was a time consuming process. The Committee was asked to bear issues brought up during the President’s State of the Nation Address in mind whilst formulating the business plan. A way had to be found to somehow bring in job creation. If bilateral agreements did not encourage job creation then those bilateral agreements had to be reconsidered. International agreements had to have some benefit for SA. Job creation should be high on the agenda of the Committee.

Mr Mokgalapa recalled that in 2010 the Committee had spoken about changing its modus operandi. The Committee needed to do proper oversight. Parliament had to accept the role of the Committee. The debate had been going on for too long.

Mr Booi stated that the Chief Whip and the Speaker had to be approached by the Committee to set out the Committee’s needs. The Programme as it appeared was too wide. It needed to contain specifics. The Programme should make provision for visits by the Minister to address the Committee on a number of issues.

Mr Mubu suggested that the Committee consider the Strategic Plan of the Department of International Relations and Co-operation. It would give the Committee guidance on what should be included in the Committee Programme. The work of other departments like the Department of Trade and Industry and the Department of Tourism needed to be considered as well as it impacted upon the work of the Committee.

The Chairperson agreed that a workshop would be the best place to work on the Committee Programme. The Committee need to gage what it had achieved and what it had not achieved in terms of its Committee Strategic Plan. The workshop would take more than one day and would take place outside Parliament.

Committee Minutes
The Committee intended to consider and adopt minutes dated 18 January 2011. Due to the minutes only being distributed to Members during the meeting, members agreed to postpone its consideration and adoption as members had not had the opportunity to peruse the minutes.

The meeting was adjourned.