Independent Complaints Directorate on its 2011 strategic plan; Analysis of ICD budget

Meeting report

The Chairperson noted that the Parliamentary Research Unit would assist the Committee in preparing for its engagement with the Independent Complaints Directorate (ICD), which would take place immediately afterwards.

ICD 2011 budget vote & strategic plan: briefing by Parliament Research Unit
Ms Patricia Whittle, Researcher, Parliamentary Research Unit, noted that her presentation would be brief and include an analysis of the main features of the ICD budget vote and strategic plan.

Government had set 12 Outcomes on which departments and entities were expected to deliver according to their respective core functions. The approach in the ICD 2011/12 Budget was geared towards achieving those outcomes and utilising existing resources more effectively. In developing the 2011 Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF), there was a shift towards budgeting by function rather than by department. The ICD fell under Police Services, which was clustered under the Public Order and Safety functional classification. Public Order and Safety was tasked with achieving the following Outcomes 3, 11 and 12. The ICD was expected to receive R482.9 million or 0.2% of the Police Services allocation over the MTEF allocation.

The ICD’s budget vote must be considered against those outcomes, as well as the proposed shift in focus to investigations rather than complaints; and the proposed name change to the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) in terms of legislation currently before Parliament. It should be noted however that the 2011/12 Budget did not provide for the implementation of the IPID Bill.

The ICD had 7 strategic outcomes-oriented goals for 2011-2016:
• Conduct effective and impartial investigations
• Combat corruption and systemic corruption within SAPS and the Municipal Police Service
• Co-operate with the Civilian Secretariat for the Police Service
• Develop and promote public awareness of the IPID’s functions
• Develop policy, reporting frameworks and standard operating procedures to regulate investigations
• Ensure corporate governance
• Ensure effective financial management.

Ms Whittle reported on the organisation's Programmes. Programme 1: Administration was responsible for the overall management and support services of the ICD and consisted of 4 sub-programmes, namely Corporate Governance, Internal Audit, Financial Management and Corporate Management Services (Administration).

The selected targets given under this programme for 2011/12 to 2013/14 were:
• The reduction of the vacancy rate by 10%; and
• In respect of skills development programmes, to co-ordinate and monitor 60 training programmes and an internships percentage of 5% of the total staff.

Corporate Governance would focus on monitoring and evaluating performance, and reporting on the attainment of strategic objectives which was in line with the outcome-oriented goals stated previously. This component was yet to be established and no targets were set for 2011/12 for the submission of performance monitoring and evaluation reports. The targets for 2012/13 and 2013/14 were 16 reports respectively.

The ICD had made a differentiation between the current status and the situation after the promulgation of the IPID Bill. The current research function would be transferred to the Civilian Secretariat of the Police Service. Executive support would become a new sub-programme under Programme 1. There would be a new Programme 2: Investigation and Information Management. The new Programme 2 would consist of Sub-programme 1: Information Management; and Sub-programme 2: Policy development, Strategic Planning and Provincial Coordination. This programme would remain the driver of the new IPID’s core business which would investigate all reported cases in terms of section 28 of the IPID Act when promulgated. Investigation targets were listed as per the six categories as outlined in the IPID Bill. Legal Services, which was currently a sub-programme under Programme 2 would become the new Programme 3.

Ms Whittle highlighted the organisation’s quarterly spending pattern of the previous financial year. There had been low spending in the second and third quarters. Much of this had been blamed on delays with the relocation of the ICD headquarters, delays with invoices from the Department of Public Works and the fact that the IT System was down. In the third quarter, there had been low administration expenditure due to an erroneous payment from Programme 2 for staff compensation. It was noted that there had been an increase in costs for travel and subsistence as well as consultants. These were all expected to increase over the MTEF period.

The ICD had received R151.6 million for its 2011/12 budget allocation. This represented a nominal increase of 15.37% and a real increase of 10.09% from the previous financial year. The budget was expected to grow to R160 million and R170 million over the MTEF period. There had been additional allocations of R7.9 million in 2011/12 for salary adjustments, increased financial management capacity and the opening of satellite offices. No provision was made for the implementation of the IPID Act and capital works.

The ICD had 292 funded posts as at 30 September 2010. This figure would increase to 311 over the MTEF. These posts included investigators and support staff in finance management. Since the strategic focus of the ICD was leaning more towards investigations, there needed to be more information given on how that would affect the increase in human resources. The staff ratio of support staff to line staff was 1:3. National Treasury recommended that the ratio should be 1:5 or more for non-centre based staff to centre based staff. The ICD had too many administrative staff members when compared against investigators and other components. In terms of the MTEF estimate, 104 of a total staff complement of 301 were administrative. It was noted that there was a high staff turnover and 23 vacancies mostly in Programme 2, which dealt with the organisation's core business.

Lastly, Ms Whittle outlined the following concerns:
• Fairly small budget increases in light of new IPID investigative function and size of police (Metro & SAPS)
• No provision for the implementation of the IPID Act
• High ratio of administrative staff to investigators and other core functionaries
• The Estimates of National Expenditure noted 2 656 cases had been carried over from the previous financial year. However, there were no measurable targets and clear time-frames for cases carried over and backlogs in the Strategic and Annual Performance Plans
• High vacancy rate and staff turn over
• Travel and subsistence costs were set to increase
• Increase in the costs of consultant fees.

Ms Nadia Dollie, Senior Researcher, Parliamentary Research Unit, asked the Committee to reflect on the following observations:
•The Committee needed to interrogate in detail the targets, programmes and plans put forward by the ICD. Under the Administration Programme, the targets were very vague and mostly had to do with the number of performance monitoring and evaluation reports and workshops that would be held. The targets set seemed to measure input rather than outcome and impact. The Committee must ensure that it is satisfied that the indicators reflected in the planning documents actually measure what needed to be measured.

•The IPID Act was specifically drafted to ensure that once promulgated, priority was given by the ICD to certain priority areas. Why then, had the ICD provided for only a 5% increase in targets for those priority areas? Certain functions were taken away from the ICD, in the legislation, precisely so that it could focus resources on investigations.

•The two new sub-programmes in Programme 2 did not, in their description, focus the programme on investigations. They focused on information management, policy and strategic planning. Why was there no dedicated sub-programme on investigations?

•The ICD failed to mention what additional money it would be requesting in the adjustment period so that they could start implementing the IPID Bill.

•The Committee needed to find out why the ICD had under-spent. The key concern in under-spending was in Programme 3. By the end of the third quarter, the ICD had spent only 53% of its budget but had targeted 75%. The Committee needed to find out if the organisation had any problems spending money.

•There was no allocation in the ICD budget under Payments for capital assets for ‘Buildings and other fixed structures. This meant the ICD did not own property and was currently leasing. A total of R2.6 million was allocated for fleet services i.e. vehicles. The Committee needed to establish whether leasing was the best option and if the organization received value for its money.

•The ratio of administrative staff to core function staff was a cause for concern as more investigators needed to be appointed than what was budgeted for over the medium term. According to the narrative in the Estimates of National Expenditure (ENE) the appointment of staff was focused more on support staff and increasing capacity in areas such as finance.

The Chairperson thanked the researchers for their useful input and invited Members to ask questions.

Discussion
Ms A Van Wyk (ANC) expressed concern that the organisation's stated priorities (for 2011-2016) did not address the objectives of the new IPID Bill. For instance, there was no reference to the use of firearms and torture, which were part of the Bill. In addition, the number of workshops for 2011/12 would total close to 200. She expressed disquiet that the Directorate would be spending all its time in meetings and workshops instead of being on the ground doing the actual work. Also there was no measurement of the actual impact of these workshops.

Ms Dollie agreed that the Directorate’s broad goals should speak to the crux of the Bill but they did not. It seemed as if the specific targets had not been fully emphasised enough.

The Chairperson recalled that the Committee had heard previously that the head office had under-spent because of its intention to relocate to new offices. For how long had this been an intention?

Ms Dollie replied that this matter had been a feature over the years. However, this should no longer be an excuse as the head office had relocated to new premises at the end of last year. There was radical under-spending in areas that were not connected to the relocation.

A Member thanked the researchers for helping the Committee in their engagement with the ICD. He referred to slides 2 and 4 of the presentation that contained contradictory figures for the ICD budget. 

Ms Dollie confirmed that the budget allocation was R151.6 million for the current financial year. The other figure (R482.9 million) came from a presentation done by National Treasury and had also confused her at the time. She would need to go through her notes and then come back to the Committee to explain how that figure was arrived at. She advised that the latter figure be ignored for now.

Ms Van Wyk voiced concern about the 1:3 ratio in favour of administrative staff and commented that this issue was not new and had been raised previously on many occasions. That coupled with the number of vacancies in the investigation component raised concerns about the organisation's capacity to do what it should be doing. According to her calculations, the organisation had 44 posts too many in administration. This would need to be reduced to about 60 if one applied the 1:5 ratio as directed by Treasury. She was therefore puzzled that the organisation was asking to fund 57 more posts even though it had too many.

Ms Dollie wondered if there was a problem with the Directorate’s administrative capacity as it seemed to increase disproportionately every year. She requested the Committee to find out from the Directorate about increasing the number of investigators.

This part of the meeting was adjourned.

Chairperson’ Remarks
The Chairperson welcomed the Executive Director and his delegation from the ICD. She noted that the Committee had received a lot of complaints from the public about people being tortured during
arrest. Members were horrified by these reports and had seen some shocking footage recently that highlighted these practices. This sort of behaviour was prevalent pre-1994 and had no place in a constitutional democracy. Most of the complaints emanated from those who were arrested during protest action. When these complaints came before the Committee, Members always wondered whether people were aware of the existence of the ICD and whether the ICD was investigating these matters. Personally, she had received complains from Mpumalanga. She sought clarity on whether the ICD was currently investigating such incidents or if it was waiting for complaints before it acted. Lastly, she emphasised that people had rights in terms of the Constitution and things could not revert to how they were in the past.

Independent Complaints Directorate 2011 budget and strategic plan: briefing
Opening Remarks
Mr Francois Beukman, Executive Director: ICD, informed Members that the Directorate had dispatched three officials from the national office to assist the Mpumalanga Office. The team would be reporting back at the end of this week on the scope of the issues (they had uncovered) and how they would be addressed. Witnesses and members of the public were encouraged to report these matters and provide the Directorate with assistance. He gave an assurance that the ICD would follow up on cases where torture was part of the conduct and asked Members to refer incidents from their constituencies to their respective ICD provincial offices. If the matter did not reach satisfactory outcome, Members could then direct their complaints to the national office.

ICD Budget Vote and Strategic Plan Presentation
Mr Beukman gave an outline of the Directorate’s strategic plan and budget vote. Amongst the ICD’s strategic outcome goals were the need for the Directorate to conduct effective and impartial investigations, combat corruption and systemic corruption within the SAPS and the municipal police services, cooperate with the Civilian Secretariat for the Police Service, develop and promote public awareness of the Directorate’s functions, develop policy, reporting frameworks and standard operating procedures to regulate investigations, and ensure responsible corporate governance.

The ICD would focus on certain key areas including ensuring that it complied with legislative prescripts, rules, regulations and policies. It would monitor and evaluate its performance and manage its case-flow system. It would implement investigators training and the IPID Act and its regulations. The Directorate hoped to amass a number of achievements by October 2011, amongst these achievements the ICD would appoint 9 Provincial Heads, and it would establish a Corporate Governance Unit and strengthen its executive support.

Ms Lindokuhle Cwele, ICD Chief Financial Officer, presented the Directorate’s budget and financial management plan. The ICD had been allocated R 151 600 000 for the 2011/12 financial year, with R 160 979 000 set aside for the 2012/13 fiscal year and R 170 355 000 for the 2013/14 year. The allocation for the 2011/12 budget would represent a 15% hike on the R131 435 000 which had been allocated in the previous year. The Directorate would spend a total of R59 769 000 on Programme 1 which was dedicated to Administration. The ICD would spend R74 245 000 for Programme 2 which was dedicated to Complaints Processing, Monitoring and Investigation. The Directorate would spend R17 586 000 for Programme 3 which was dedicated to Information Management and Research.

Mr Elias Valoyi, ICD Programme Manager for Administration, presented his programme’s objectives and focus areas. The Programme would work to ensure effective leadership, management, financial and administrative support to the Directorate through the continuous refinement of organisational strategy and structure, in compliance with appropriate legislation and best practice. The Programme received 39.4 per cent of the total budget of R151.6 million. This programme, being the second largest programme, grew from R50.8 million in 2010/11 to R59.8 million in 2011/12, signifying a growth of R9 million (17.72 percent) in nominal terms and R6.3 million (12.32 percent) in real terms. This programme aimed to conduct 16 internal audit reviews and risk management reports in the 2011/12. The programme proposed to hold 10 ethics and integrity workshops. The Programme aimed to ensure the attainment of the goal of gender equality in the workplace by setting out to hire 50% of female staff at a senior and managerial level. The Programme would necessitate the holding of 260 community awareness and outreach campaigns.

Mr Tommy Tshabalala, ICD Programme Manager for Complaints Processing, Monitoring and Investigation, presented an outline of what Programme 2 set out to achieve in the 2011/12 financial year. Pending the promulgation of the IPID Act, this programme would seek to receive, register and process complaints. It would seek to ensure the investigation of deaths in police custody or as a result of police action, monitor complaints of police criminality and misconduct and to monitor the implementation of the Domestic Violence Act.  The Programme would aim to register all (100%) complaints it received and allocate them within 48 hours. The programme would aim to investigate 65% of deaths which occurred whilst in police custody, and had completed the investigation of 55% of cases of police criminality.

Mr Mathews Sesoko, ICD Provincial Head of the North West Province, outlined the sub-programmes of Programme 2 and their effects on the work of the Directorate. The Programme would coordinate and facilitate the investigative process through the development of investigative policy and strategic frameworks that would guide and report on investigations. The Programme had led to the submission of 19 reports which detailed the types of crimes the ICD had investigated. The Programme had seen 100% of recommendation reports generated within 30 days after completion of investigations as well as 95% of complaints registered and allocated within 48 hours. It had seen 65% of investigations completed of deaths in custody as a result of police action.

Ms Noluthando Mbuli, ICD Programme Manager for Information Management and Research, presented on the work and focus of Programme 3. Pending the promulgation of the IPID, the programme would manage all information needs, conduct proactive research and various oversight activities and manage all communication and marketing of activities and products to stakeholders. The programme would see the launch of 260 community awareness and outreach programmes. It had seen the compilation of 3 research projects and recommendation reports. In terms of marketing and communication, the programme would seek to create awareness of the Directorate and its services to members of the public, increase the number of Community Awareness Programmes (especially in the rural areas) to reach specific targeted communities and numbers, respond promptly to media enquiries/community and regional radio stations, as well as join other government programmes such as Imbizos and the 16 Days Campaign.

Mr Thabo Leholo, ICD Provincial Head: Western Cape, provided statistics for the work of Programme 3. The Programme had seen 80% of contracts and service level agreements finalised within 21 days of request as well as 60% of civil and labour proceedings finalised in coordination with the Office of the State Attorney. It had seen 60% of investigators granted with policing powers within three months of application, 80% of legal opinions provided to investigators within 24 hours of request, and 75% of legal opinions provided to the department within 10 days of request.

Discussion
The Chairperson noted that the Chief Financial Officer had delivered her maiden report to Parliament and congratulated her on her new appointment. She hoped that the CFO would bring some fresh ideas and ensure that the fight against crime and corruption was enhanced.

Mr M George (COPE) noted that the Directorate had sent a delegation to Mpumalanga to investigate serious cases. What constituted a serious case? Did this include incidents involving brutal force and abuse of power? Who would be responsible for those cases not deemed serious?

Mr George asked several questions. Firstly, he sought clarity on how many provincial heads had been appointed. Secondly, he asked if the Directorate had been given reasons as to why its budget would be cut. Thirdly, he asked if the Directorate had budgeted for the implementation of the IPID Bill. Fourthly, he questioned why there was a need to host so many workshops (ethical behaviour workshops, security standard workshops and security risk management workshops) and team building sessions. It seemed as if all the time would be spent in workshops instead of doing what was necessary.

Mr George noted that the percentage target of investigators granted with policing powers within three months of application had been set at 60. This was too low and implied that the Directorate was not ready to implement the law. Was this the case?

Rev K Meshoe (ACDP) asked whether the Mpumalanga Office did not have credible and properly trained investigators to deal with the incidents in that province. Why was it necessary to send officials from head office to assist? He noted that over the years there had been a big problem of too much travelling by head office staff. Why not train the provincial staff and strengthen the regional offices to minimise this travel?

Rev Meshoe observed that while the ICD planned to host many workshops, there was no emphasis on the training of investigators. Investigation was one of the core functions of the ICD yet there was no indication that investigators were being properly equipped to ensure that they did their job well.

He commented that the number of administrative posts at national office was proportionally high compared to those working on the ground. How could the Directorate justify this when those doing the core function did not have adequate numbers in their ranks?

Rev Meshoe noted that one of the challenges of the ICD had been its failure to retain skilled personnel. The output under sub-programme Corporate Management was to develop and implement a strategy to keep staff. When was this going to happen as it had been a major problem over many years?

He noted that the Directorate would transfer some of its functions once the IPID Act was enacted. This would suggest that the Directorate would have more time to focus on improving the completion of investigating complaints. However, this did not appear to be the case when one compared the number of completed investigations for 2007/08 (5 003) with the target set for 2013/14 (6 000). What was the advantage of transferring some of the organisation’s functions if there was no marked improvement in its output?

Rev Meshoe referred to Programme 3: Legal Services and sought clarity on what the granting of policing powers to investigators meant.

A Member commented that the ICD had some serious challenges. The finance department needed jacking up; the internal audit was not up to scratch, corporate governance was not in place and the capacity of provincial offices needed to be strengthened. The Directorate was aware of all these issues and had made a commitment to address them by October 2011. Was this still the case and if not, when?

A Member noted that Mr Valoyi referred to percentages when he talked about vacancy rates.  He asked for exact information on the number of vacant posts and when they would be filled.

A Member noted that 135 police stations had been audited. He asked about the geographic spread of these stations and if this information could be categorised by province. Linked to this, he enquired if a breakdown could be given on whether these stations were urban or rural based.

A Member asked about the training that the ICD provided, how many investigators were currently being trained, how many did it intend to train going forward and he sought clarity on the vacancy rate.

A Member referred to page 32 and asked if the awareness campaigns would also be carried out in the rural areas. He noted that the budget increases seemed to minimal yet. He did not get the impression that the ICD was worried about this as he had never heard them plead for more money. The size of the police force was increasing and the Directorate's mandate was broadening yet the budget allocation was not proportional to the kind of work that would be expected of the organisation.

Ms Van Wyk expressed concern about the Directorate’s focus. It was moving towards an academic organisation rather than an investigating organisation as the Bill specified. This idea was reflected even in the naming of some of the sub-programmes. One would have expected that investigations, which was a core function, to be a sub-programme on its own and properly budgeted for. The increase in personnel focused on support services instead of on investigation. These issues were important and needed to be addressed now as there was a need to move into the implementation of the Bill with the right approach and correct things in place. The strategic outcome goals of the Directorate (for 2011-2016) did not speak to the core functions of the Directorate. The issues of deaths as a result of police action and torture were not highlighted. The bulk of the outcomes were administrative related.

Ms Van Wyk asked if the Directorate had prepared the proclamation (for the Bill) so that it could be published immediately as that was normally the reason behind the delays.

Ms Van Wyk referred to page 8 and said that more detail was needed on the priority to strengthen executive support. What was needed there?

Ms Van Wyk pointed to the budget increases over the MTEF and expressed concern if there was provision for the implementation of the new Bill. Had presentations in that regard been made to Treasury? She informed Members that they should not underestimate the amounts involved even if the percentage increases were low.

Ms Van Wyk noted that the Directorate's staff ratio was 1:3, while Treasury recommended a 1:5 ratio or even higher. It was therefore surprising that the Directorate was still asking to fund 57 more administrative staff over the MTEF. If one applied the Treasury guidelines, it would mean that the Directorate had 40 positions too many. Why was the Directorate asking for more staff, it should be cutting down? This matter was a longstanding one. The organisation had too many administrative staff members and too few investigators focusing on the core function.

She referred to slide 16 and highlighted that Programme 1 would have an 18% increase and Programme 2 only 15% in 2011/12. The disparity was 10 and 2% in 2012/13. This was peculiar because Programme 2 was the core business. This disparity was also reflected on page 18 in the posts to be filled.

Ms Van Wyk expressed concern about the targets that had been presented to the Committee. She recalled that in the previous year, the Auditor-General had raised concern that the targets were not measurable. She was certain that he would raise the same concern again. The strategic plan talked about so many workshops but did not say what the effect of these would be. The Directorate was measuring the input but not the outcome and that was a concern. If one added all those workshops, one could conclude that the ICD would be in workshops for 1/3 of the year and the remainder of the year they might actually get to do the real work.

Ms Van Wyk noted that the number of females at top management stayed at 50%. Ideally that should increase over a period of time. This figure could not remain stagnant.

Ms Van Wyk said that the Directorate should have a dedicated approach to deal with HIV/Aids. Was this the case and could the Directorate elaborate on it.

Ms Van Wk said that there was too little information given on the ICT issues. She noted an increase in expenses for travel and subsistence allowances and some of it was attributed to ICT. The Committee needed an explanation on that given that the increase on travel and subsistence was particularly alarming. Also, that increase was not reflected in the outcome of the core business - investigations.

Ms Van Wyk noted that there were contradictions in the document in terms of the target to register and allocate all new cases for investigations within 48 hours of receipt. In some places, it specified that this target would be achieved 100%  and in other places it said 95%. Which was the correct one? In addition, she voiced concern about the target set for death in custody investigations. There should be a much higher target and ideally it should be 100%. There were no plans on how to deal with case backlogs because every single target suggested that there would be backlogs. In light of this, the Committee should request a report on how the Directorate planned to deal with backlogs and at what percentage its working backlog was.

Ms Van Wyk did not understand why the stations audit and Domestic Violence Act were reflected for 2012/13 and 2013/14 because these responsibilities would be taken away from the Directorate as soon as the Bill was enacted. Noting slide 38, cell inspections had nothing to do with the Domestic Violence Act.

Ms Van Wyk did not understand what the 50 contracts were that the legal unit would be involved in. Why was the Directorate involved in so many contracts? If the Directorate was going to have such a unit, its main focus should be support to the investigators.

A Member asked what was meant when the ICD conducted oversight activities. She also raised a concern that the figures they had from page 18 on the presentation was different from the one the ICD had presented earlier. She also commented that there seemed to be an under-spending trend within the ICD.

A member raised his concern about the workshops. He wanted to know, on slide 43 of the presentation, if ’no base line available’ meant they had no records to refer to. Could they explain what that meant. Finally he wanted to know [inaudible] on the Domestic Violence Act, and out of how many was this.

The Chairperson said that after the last meeting with the ICD the Committee had asked for replies to questions in writing, as well as three research reports that had been promised to be forwarded to them. In addition the ICD had said they would report to them on station commanders failing to discipline officers involved in escapes or where injured suspects were not profiled by having their fingerprints taken, as well as the concerns of the Auditor General and their service delivery record. To date they had not received anything from the ICD, why, after almost two and a half months had it not gotten back to the Committee with this information. She asked if they had a costed operations plan, and if they did, could it be forwarded to the Committee so they knew exactly what they intended to spend. She would also like to know how much of their total budget went to compensation of employees.

The Chairperson also raised the issue of under-spending. She said that ‘Complaints, Processing, Monitoring and Investigation' had projected to spend 75% yet only spent 66.1%. For Employees Compensation they spent 76.4% yet had only spent 46.6% on Goods and Services, she could not understand this. How could they spend so much on Compensation but spend so little on these important activities. On Programme 3: Information, Management and Research they spent 53.3% of the allocated budget, much lower than the 75% they had projected. Here they had cited the relocation of the ICD to new premises as the reason for the under-spending; she wanted them to explain that. She would asked how their spending had been during the first quarter of the financial year, a short overview of that would be appreciated. She would also like to know what they expected out of their programmes and how they expected the Committee to be able to monitor the output of these programmes. She would like some way of knowing how much corruption there was in the ICD, how they had gone about reducing it and how the Committee could hold them accountable to these numbers. She stated that they would come to them in September and say that they had held ten workshops on internal corruption and that they had met their target and that would be it. The report would be useless. She said as a former civil servant herself she knew that there were people who attended workshops every day to be away from work. They would not implement any of the suggestions, they were simply lazy and desired to be away from their job. There was no change she said, people worried about numbers instead of output and impact. She said she could see their intent, but there was nothing that showed her the result of what they had done or what they were doing. She could not even fully say that she knew what the ICD actually wanted to achieve. Did they actually expect them as a Portfolio Committee to monitor these numbers, to make sure they held the allotted number of workshops, because they could not. The Committee wanted the impacts, they wanted to see what was happening. If it was corruption, what did they want to see happening to fight corruption? These numbers they had now did not tell them much. She requested the iCD answer the questions the Committee had posed, though she wanted them to respond to her questions first. 

Mr Beukman replied that the reports and responses had been forwarded to the Committee Chairperson of the time, and she had emailed a confirmation that these had been received on 29 November. The research reports had been handed over on 3 December. This information, including the emails could be made available to the Chairperson.

In reply to Mr George’s question, the more serious cases were mostly class one cases. These were a result of police action or the serious cases of torture that had been raised and the public service incidents. Three experienced investigators had been sent there, this was as a result of a written request from the Provincial Head in Mpumalanga for increased capacity to assist him in those cases. Mr Beukman highlighted that in those cases were service delivery incidents occurred, it was usually police units from outside of the jurisdiction that were involved. It would usually be units coming from everywhere else than the towns where it happened, that were involved. These facts made it very difficult to determine who were the perpetrators, and he believed that was the main reason their assistance had been requested. He agreed that those who did travel to work these cases in the Provinces had to be approved following normal practices. As for the question on the composition of the delegation they had now, it included two heads from the provinces as well as two from the head office as chairpersons. Mr George had also asked about the provincial heads positions. To this Mr Beukman said that there was one position vacant and it was now currently being advertised. He did comment that that because there had been so little attrition at senior management level over the years, it had become very male dominated. But if opportunities opened up, they would take them.

He referred to Rev Meshoe’s question about the sufficiency of the budget going forward. He felt it important to note that Treasury had sat with them on the steering committee and their advice all through the process had been that they could only ask for funding in terms of the new Act when that Act had signed off by the President. So in terms of the next cycle, the next opportunity to address the matter would be in October 2011. But Treasury had also advised that they could not come with a big request, it should be spread over the three year period. He believed that this would be their approach to it as well. In terms of their priorities, it was essential they strengthened finances. Even though the ICD came from a history of five previous qualified audits, it was still not stable in terms of that environment. If they did not strengthen these areas, they would run into trouble in the long term. They needed the ability from a governance point of view to make sure that the rules were adhered to. It was vital going forward that they had that capacity.

On Ms Van Wyk’s question about executive support, it was important to note going forward that there would be a lot of reporting obligations on the Office of the Executive Director. They were looking at a supervisor-supervisee relationship of seventeen to one, while the Executive Director preferred to have a ratio of six to one while in the public service. It was important that the Office be strengthened not starved to be able to perform its monitoring duties. Last year they had tabled a draft of an implementation plan, there had already been a second one and a third one was in the works. In terms of that proposal, which was now with the executive authority, they were talking about adding 134 investigators over the three year period, as well as seven new support staff. It was still not official, but they were trying to make sure that their investigative authority had the necessary capacity. They would be focusing very much on that. On the matter of policing powers and where that should be, after the discussions at Portfolio Committee level, they had been able to utilise a very good methodology in terms of approving those policing powers. He believed that as they were going forward they would be able to deal with the defective parts.

On Mr Lekgetho question about finance, internal audit, corporate governance and provincial offices in place by October, Mr Beukman said in some instances yes. In other instances the answer would be no. They were advertising the post of Auditing and hoped to fill this in the coming months. Corporate Governance was a new unit, and they were asking for additional funds in October. The idea was to combine risk and ethics with monitoring and evaluation to ensure that they could independently monitor their key programme, Programme 2. On the provincial heads, it was a matter of getting funds for the posts, he did not believe it would be in October, it would perhaps be later.

The Committee had a short tea break.

Mr Beukmann continued with his responses and addressed Ms Van Wyk’s question on whether the Directorate had prepared for the proclamation. In terms of the status report the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) would be processing the Bill by tomorrow or today. The ICD would then be ready to forward the necessary draft proclamations to the Minister and the required implementation plan. The important issue was the implementation plan. The view of the ICD was that the draft Regulations would be published very soon in the Government Gazette and their implementation together with the Act had to be on the same day. If this did not happen there would be a lacuna. The date appropriate for the implementation would be 1 July 2011.

Ms Cwele, CFO, addressed the question on budget cuts. There had been an increase in the allocation during this financial year as opposed to last year. The increase was from R131 million to R151 million. The ICD received allocations from Treasury in advance, which were subsequently revised due to a general cut of funds across all departments. Therefore this was not specifically an ICD reduction, it was generic. The budgeting for IPID had been done and submitted to the Minister for approval. The reason this was not part of the presentation was that it was not part of the 2011 Estimates of National Expenditure (ENE). At the time of submission of the ENE, IPID had not been approved. The ICD was financially ready, the draft was done in consultation with Treasury and the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) and their inputs have been solicited in terms of the suggestions made by the ICD. It had been demonstrated to Treasury how the costing would be phased in over three years, this included the adjustment requests for October and the next financial year. The ICD was ready in terms of budgeting and planning.

On the question of equipment, these costs were for the renewal of old or fully depreciated equipment. New equipment only applied where there was a new position where new furniture or a desktop was needed. 3G cards had also been recently made available to senior staff that traveled a lot. Most of the increases were factored in terms of Programme 2 with the new IPID structure. This also took into account the current backlogs, and all the individual investigators, case analysts etc within the new structure. These would be catered for in the October adjustments and the general adjustments going forward.

The Chairperson asked what it would mean if there were no IPID.

Ms Cwele replied that the current budget would reflect an increase in corporate governance, internal audit and executive support. These were highlighted in the Executive Director’s presentation.

Ms Van Wyk said that the Committee did not see a shift in focus for the ICD, why could the ICD not achieve the 1:5 but other departments could? This was a concern for the Committee since there should be staff re-focusing. The answers the Committee was getting about staff re-focusing were not adequate. What was the detail on things like “the office of the Executive Director had to be strengthened”, how was this going to impact on where the ICD was going in the long run?

Mr Beukmann said that the ICD would note the concern of the Committee. Four new posts had been advertised. There was a clear focus on Programme 3 under investigators.  

Ms Cwele replied that the comment had been noted.  The under-spending concerns have been addressed and currently 92% has been spent. The reasons for the high under-expenditure were that the ICD was awaiting the move to new official premises, which would incur high costs. During the move to the new premises, the accounting system was not properly operational. This meant that the budgetary figures for costing to management were not readily available. Managers spent funds without any budget projections during this time, this was a major concern but it has been addressed. Budgets were up to date as of December; managers knew exactly how much was spent. There had been no virements to date. The problems experienced after the move to the new premises, was that invoices first did not come or they arrived late and were incorrect. The ICD was trying to correct this. It was projected that 57% of the budget would go towards compensation. The framework guidelines provided definitions for the different terms including those for outcomes and outputs. This was currently being revised by Treasury as there was confusion about the terms. The general consensus was that an output was what was actually produced by the ICD and an outcome was what the ICD wished to achieve in other words the benefits or consequences due to the produced outputs. For example, the ICD wanted to root out corruption and achieve ethical behaviour amongst the staff. This would be achieved by staging awareness workshops with members at different offices across the country. The activity would be the workshop conducted, the output would be staff members would be aware of corruption and fraud and the obligations thereto. The outcome would be what the ICD wished to achieve.

Ms Van Wyk commented that government could not provide funding for non-effective workshops; the proper outcome would be holding disciplinary hearings on non-ethical behaviour. This was a proper measurable outcome. This was what the Committee was looking for. The Committee could not give five gold stars to the ICD because they held workshops, so what? What the ICD should be aiming for were fewer internal disciplinary hearings because of non-ethical behaviour and it should set a target.

Ms Cwele said that the ICD had had the same debate with Treasury and personally she felt that an outcome was a more ideal measurable tool.

The Chairperson said that this matter would have to be raised by the Committee with Treasury.  The Committee was only interested in knowing the measurable impact of what each cent was spent for. The Committee was interested in what outcome was achieved from workshops held to address non-ethical behaviour. The Committee wanted to know that money spent yielded positive results. The Committee should not engage in discussions that were broad based such as which measurable tools to use. The progress should be on a step-by-step basis where it would be made clear that this was what had happened and the direction in which the ICD was headed would be mapped out. This could only happen if there were measurable objectives and there things, which could be measured otherwise the ICD would come to the end of the financial year and say it had held 15 workshops, should the Committee then rejoice? The problems would persist and this did not make any sense at all. The Committee could not just settle for performing oversight where it would only ascertain the number of workshops held.

Ms Cwele said that this would be taken up with Treasury.

Ms Van Wyk moved on to the use of consultants. The Committee had to know whether this work could be done internally as it comprised such things as the editing of documents, drafting monthly report templates and the re-alignment of performance agreements. Were these functions not supposed to be carried out by the research unit?

The Chairperson asked why there was an increase in traveling expenses. With what were the travel costs associated with the electronic systems upgrade?

An ICD delegate replied that they had not decreased their targets. If the Committee looked at the 2010/11 and 2011/12 financial years they would see that the targets were kept at the same level. Once the ICD was in “that” environment they would have better data, which would enable them to have a more realistic calculation of what the baseline should be, and then what the targets should be. The only difference between the two financial years had to do with the receiving and allocation of cases. Currently, they were at 100% but they were proposing 95% for the 2011/12 financial year. The rationale was that the ICD anticipated the issue of reporting obligations in terms of Section 29. The ICD anticipated receiving more of these cases and they did not want to put themselves in a situation where they would not be able to achieve their targets. However, Members’ concerns were noted.

A delegate from the ICD said that generally when station audits were conducted, many of them were done in rural areas. The results of the audits were given as a report to the Minister. It was even included in the ICD’s annual report. If for instance, in the current financial year, they did a number of station audits, the ICD would look at the performance of each station. In the next audit, the ICD would assess whether there was any improvement.

Mr Tshabalala agreed that the ICD had not spoken about its strategy to deal with its backlog. However, they admitted there were challenges in dealing with the backlog in some of the provinces. If the Committee looked at the number of cases in each province that were being carried over from the previous financial year, they would see that there were four provinces that were struggling to cope with the workload. Going forward, the ICD had a monitoring and evaluation committee that had been re-constituted, which consisted of himself as Programme Manager, two colleagues that were heads of their provinces, and some colleagues from the Head Office. They would look at the reports on a monthly basis and assess whether they would reach their targets. The ICD has recently had done interventions in Mpumalanga when they saw that there were stations that were not functioning properly. One was where one person was ill for a very long time and the other was where the person was under-performing. The monitoring and evaluation committee would be taking on this responsibility in the next financial year. The investigators that the ICD used would also be put through training and skills courses.

Ms van Wyk said she appreciated Mr Tshabalala’s answer but it seemed that the Committee had now received two reasons why people from the national ICD had been sent to Mpumalanga. One reason was that the police unit that worked there were from outside Mpumalanga, but now the Committee had heard that there was also a capacity problem. She was not trying to be difficult but she did not completely understand how the ICD was going to deal with backlogs. There was a 45% backlog that was created, which was acceptable according to the presentation. It meant that only 55% of the ICD’s cases would be finalised. This was a huge concern. The ICD was creating a backlog of 45% and they had current backlogs as well. She also had an issue with how the ICD dealt with issues and finalised them. There was a case that she had phoned the Executive Director about. The case was brought to the ICD in September or October 2010, and resulted in another investigation by “another body”. This body reported to Parliament already but they were still waiting for the report from the ICD’s side. This was the kind of information the Committee was looking for; this was the ICD’s core business.

Mr Tshabalala addressed the query on the capacity building of investigators. He reported that a project was started in the 2009/2010 financial year. The Committee would recall that the ICD told them there were monitors within the ICD that they wanted to capacitate to become investigators. This was a one year programme at first but has now become a fully fledged diploma. The course would be completed in October 2011 and the ICD would then have a pool of monitors who would then come over to investigations. In terms of capacity building, the ICD created a three-day long investigations course that would run each year. All the investigators would come together under one roof and would look at specific areas identified by the ICD as problem areas. The ICD was also in the process of writing an investigations manual that would deal with all the aspects of an investigation. Currently, it was a still a draft document.

The Chairperson stated that a 45% backlog of cases was still too much. She wondered if they thought that they needed to have a target for how much they wanted to reduce the backlog by. This should have been included in the ICD’s performance plan. She wondered if programme performance indicators could show explanatory information about sectors and what affected their performance. She referred to the “National Treasury document”, and could not conclude that the National Treasury would not allow the ICD the use of outputs. She wanted to believe that the ICD could use those outputs if they wanted, and as far as the Committee was concerned, it was what they wanted to see. Members wanted to see something measurable; something they could hold the ICD accountable for.

Ms van Wyk agreed with the Chairperson. National Treasury was clear on the matter and the Committee did not have to compromise on what it wanted. She wanted the ICD to come back to the Committee to inform them how they were going to deal with their backlog. A focused approach was needed to deal with backlogs. The ICD also needed to have “measurables” in terms of investigations. If police could have them for their detectives, surely the ICD could have them for their investigators. Also, the growth of the targets in the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) was unacceptable. It seemed as if the ICD was not really aiming to do better, even though the ICD’s “environment” was changing in such a way that the entity was compelled to do better. So, the ICD had to come back to the Committee to discuss how they were going to deal with the backlog of cases, how they would deal with individual investigators’ performance, and how they were going to measure provinces in terms of performance.

Mr Tshabalala noted the Committee’s concerns and would address the backlog issue. As he indicated, the ICD had seen that only four of the nine provinces struggled with their workloads. This was where most of the backlogs were created. Part of the ICD’s strategy for addressing backlogs was to focus particularly on these provinces to find out the causes for the backlogs. The ICD would give the Committee a strategy, in writing, which would show hoe the entity would be dealing with the backlog.

The Chairperson stated that time was running out and she needed to close the meeting.

Mr Beukman reminded the Chairperson that there were still some questions that the ICD had to respond to, but they would consolidate the answers in writing and would forward them to the Committee.

The Chairperson said that she was not sure whether she should request the ICD to review its performance plan so that they could have measurable targets that the Committee could follow and oversee. The Committee wanted to see the impact of the ICD’s work, not just the numbers. It was difficult for Members to deal with the performance plan as it was now. The plan had to show the impact the ICD was making with the funds it was allocated. She thought the information could be included in the ICD’s annual report, which would be presented to the Committee later in the year. The Committee had to know that the budget was being used properly and was yielding the desired effect.

The meeting was adjourned.