IEC on payment of electoral staff, Department of Home Affairs 2011 strategic plan: further deliberations

Home Affairs

18 April 2011
Chairperson: Ms M Maunye (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The Committee was briefed by the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) on the payment of electoral staff during elections. It was noted that in the previous financial year the payment to the contracted electoral staff had been one of the reasons leading to a qualified audit. The IEC was concerned that this might have a negative effect on its high standing internationally, and therefore had done its best to rectify the issues in the 2011/12 financial year. The IEC was unique in that it did not employ civil servants to carry out its work. Instead, it employed civilians, whom it trained to carry out the work of the Commission, although this did provide an additional challenge when these individuals were no longer available for the new election cycle. The IEC indicated that it would employ around 200 000 electoral staff in an election cycle, paying out R260 million to them. The staff included data capturers, and area managers who managed specific voter stations. The IEC sometimes experienced problems with payments, either because incorrect details were provided, the staff did not sign the necessary forms, their bank accounts may have been closed, or no bank accounts were in existence, or staff may try to give the details of other people’s bank accounts for receipt of their cheques. The Presiding and Deputy Presiding Officers were expected to sign contracts with the Commission, and their payments, because they were in excess of R2 000, were paid by electronic transfer. However, since the remainder of staff were paid less than R2 000, these amounts were paid by non-transferable cheques. In short, it was human error and extenuating circumstances that led to the problems. Members questioned whether there were also other issues that led to the qualified audit in the previous year, and heard from the Auditor-General that these problems were identified only after payment of electoral staff, and had largely resulted from lack of sufficient contracts and registration details. Members were assured that the plans for 2011/12 had improved, and should avoid recurrence, although the Auditor-General conceded that it was almost inevitable that some problems could occur, due to the large numbers of people and substantial pressures on election day. Members noted the response of the IEC that although it could spend a substantial amount on installing electronic systems, it was confident that it could improve matters through increased controls. Members questioned some of the procedures and commented that these needed to be improved.

The Department of Home Affairs (DHA) then briefed the Committee further on some aspects of the strategic plan for 2011 that had been questioned during a previous meeting. The DA reiterated its focus on addressing problems around identity documents (IDs), including high numbers of uncollected documents, and individuals who held several duplicate IDs. The DHA was identifying and rectifying the duplications in conjunction with banks and other departments.  The Departments had already implemented higher tariffs for IDs and passports, partially to discourage people from applying for duplicates, and to encourage safe-keeping of documents. The DHA explained that the dispute with Gijima on the ‘Who am I Online’ project, noted that it had been settled, and set out the terms of settlement. The modernisation process was proceeding. A risk management committee had been established, to prevent future recurrences of this nature. The budget of R5.46 billion was set out and estimates for revenue collection and a breakdown of the allocations was given. To try to settle issues with the Department of International Relations and Cooperation, DHA aimed to establish a trading account, by 1 July 2011. DHA would also strengthen financial management and try to clear the audit issues to achieve an unqualified audit report in future. Members asked about training of immigration officials and other departments’ officials, asked about the overspending, and debts incurred in relation to the Department of International Relations and Cooperation, and how this was to be resolved, asked about the settlement in the Gijima case, and what lessons had been learned, and expressed their concerns both about the raising of ID tariffs and the lack of communication on this. Members also asked what DHA was doing to address scarce skills, although one Member said that she did not believe that this was the task of DHA, and questioned how much was budgeted for legal costs, and how DHA would tackle fraud and corruption. Questions were also asked about appointment of provincial managers, links with the entities, and the documentation for Zimbabweans.

Meeting report

Payment of Electoral Staff: Independent Electoral Commission briefing and Auditor-General and National Treasury comments
The Chairperson welcomed representatives from the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC), the Auditor General South Africa (AGSA) and Office of the Accountant General. She noted that in the previous financial year the IEC had received audit qualifications around the payment of electoral staff, and therefore wished to discuss the payment of electoral staff during elections.

Dr Brigalia Bam, Chairperson, Independent Electoral Commission, noted that the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC or the Commission) had received a qualified audit in the 2010/11 financial year, and was concerned about the possible negative effects that this might have on the IEC’s reputation and standing. IEC was being considered for an international award, and hoped to succeed in winning it. IEC was disappointed with the qualified audit and sought to rectify the issue in the 2011/12 financial year. Dr Bam pointed out that the IEC was highly-ranked in the world, ahead of other electoral bodies, and was unique in that it did not employ civil servants to carry out its work. The IEC relied on employing civilians, whom it trained to carry out the work of the Commission. The Commission had lost previously-trained civilians as a new election cycle had begun, posing an additional challenge.  

Advocate Pansy Tlakula, Chief Electoral Officer, IEC, outlined the situation that the IEC faced with respect to electoral staff and the payment of those staff. The IEC employed 200 000 electoral staff in an election cycle and paid out about R260 million to them. The staff included data capturers and area managers, who were in charge of managing specific voter stations. The IEC sometimes experienced problems with issuing payments, due to the problems posed when people’s bank accounts had been closed or who may not bank accounts at all. The IEC had an employment plan that required electoral staff to sign employment contracts with the Commission, by a particular date. Presiding Officers and Deputy Presiding Officers were expected to sign contracts with the Commission, and were paid sums in excess of R2 000, through electronic transfers. The rest of the electoral staff were paid sums under R2 000, which could, therefore be paid by cheque, and all the cheques were marked “non-transferable”. Electoral staff sometimes provided incorrect banking details, leading to problems in issuing payment. She reiterated that some electoral staff did not have bank accounts, and may try to use the banking details of other individuals, which led to additional problems. Human error and extenuating circumstances occasionally led to electoral staff not signing the registry forms provided, which led to different problems in issuing the payments. 

Discussion
Adv A Gaum (ANC) asked whether the payment of electoral staff was the only issue that had led to the IEC’s qualified audit.

Mr M Mnqasela (DA) sought clarity on the main issues behind the qualified audit.

Adv Tlakula responded that the payment of electoral staff was not the only issue, but it was the main issue that contributed to the qualified audit.

Mr Norman du Plessis, Deputy Chief Electoral Officer, IEC, added that the additional issues that had resulted in the qualified audit included an overstatement of commitments, as well as another matter. These were not able to be rectified immediately, but they would be addressed in the 2011/12 financial year.
 
Mr Carl Wessels, Senior Manager, Auditor-General South Africa, said that the Office of the Auditor-General (AG) had only become involved in the audit process after the payment of electoral staff had already taken place. There was a problem around lack of contracts and registration proof for staff employed by the Commission. However, the plan for the 2011/12 financial year was better than in previous years, and would improve the system used to capture electoral staff,  thereby circumventing the issues which had led to the qualified audit in the previous year. He conceded that it was very difficult for the IEC to manage 200 000 staff in a short space of time, and said that there would always be some problems, but also noted that the IEC was very well-organised and the staff seemed to be aware of their roles in the process, for which they ought to be commended.

The Chairperson commented that it was problematic that contracts and registry forms could not be located, and it was an issue that needed serious consideration.

Ms Unathi Ndobeni, Director, Office of the Accountant-General, National Treasury, said that she could not comment on the attendance registry issue. Her office could authorise payments under R2 000 to electoral staff who did not have bank accounts, but all payments above R2 000 would have to go through a process of making requests to the Office of the Accountant-General.

The Chairperson said that the IEC needed to meet with the Office of the Accountant-General to see how it could improve its system of payment to electoral staff.

Mr Mnqasela said that the point of payment to electoral staff had been well made. He agreed that the process of managing 200 000 people, while also managing an election, could be cumbersome, and it was understandable and acceptable that there might be some areas where imperfect practices could occur. In his view, the Committee had been given a sufficiently clear explanation on the issues that affected payment of electoral staff, and he expressed the view that the Committee should wish the Commission luck in its endeavours during the upcoming election period.

Mr Du Plessis commented that the IEC would not have a substantial problem in paying people. The Commission would have to improve its handling of payments on cheques, but that was an evolving issue, which would improve with time. There were exponential complexities in ensuring that people signed the attendance register when they worked at a voting station. This was an area where total compliance would be very hard to attain, due to the high number of electoral staff and the pressures around an Election Day.

Adv Tlakula said that, because of human error, some people who did not turn up for work on a particular day but had not been deregistered from the electronic registry, had received payment for work they had not done.

Dr Bam said that the issue could possibly be resolved with a shift in classification of payment of electoral staff. This could be done according to communities where stations were located. Staff sometimes misplaced the registration forms and could not fill out their details on an Election Day, and this had presented a problem to the Commission.

Adv Gaum asked for the views of the Auditor General on exponential complexities.

Mr Wessels responded that there was always a chance for human error, and exponential complexities were inevitable.

Ms S Bothman (ANC) asked whether the IEC had a system in place that counterchecked who was, or was not present at a voting station during an election. She commented that the correct system seemed not to be in place.

Adv Tlakula replied that the IEC did have checks and balances to check attendance. However, there was pressure on an Election Day and this sometimes led to human error in capturing staff information. The capturing of electoral staff information was not an exact science, but the Commission was working to improve the system. The IEC was not seeking to make excuses for shortcomings in the system, but was explaining how the situation played out on the ground.

Mr Du Plessis said that sometimes contracts were put in ballot boxes by mistake, and because these could only be opened by an order of court, this had presented problems for the Commission. The IEC had good plans, but sometimes human error intervened to disrupt those plans.

Ms D Mathebe (ANC) asked about the IECs policy on employing teachers, as opposed to using unemployed people as electoral staff. She also asked about the payment to people operating in rural areas.

Ms H Makhuba (IFP) also sought clarity on payments and closed banking accounts of electoral staff.

Mr Du Plessis replied that the Commission tried to strike a balance in employment. It would employ those with an understanding of the law, or with experience, in the positions of Presiding Officer and Deputy Presiding Officer. The rest of the electoral staff complement comprised 50% otherwise-unemployed people. The IEC did sometimes have problems in paying people working in rural areas, whose accounts had been closed, but this was rare.

Adv Gaum asked whether the IEC could not institute a penalty or incentive to ensure that people complied with the register and contract rules.

Mr Du Plessis replied that the labour laws prevented him from instituting penalties against electoral staff.

Adv Tlakula said that sometimes contracts were locked in ballot boxes by mistake, due to fatigue on the part of electoral staff.

Dr Bam added that sometimes election stations closed later than planned, leaving staff unable to fill out the registry forms and contracts. She reiterated that the IEC was not trying to make excuses, but was attempting to explain the realities.

Ms A Lovemore (DA) commented that a better plan should be implemented on the contractual and registry issues. She asked what role the roving electoral officers played in ensuring that people fulfilled their paperwork obligations.

Mr Du Plessis responded that area managers were involved in the registry and contract signing process, but the scale of workers involved in an election meant that there would be human error somewhere along the line, with resultant problems.

Adv Gaum asked whether it was possible to set up an electronic register for electoral staff, to address the problems around physically filling out forms.

Mr du Plessis replied that the IEC could spend another R40 million or R50 million on systems that would absolutely guarantee correct recordal, if necessary, but that was not necessarily a practical solution to the problem. The issue could also be resolved by instituting better checks and balances.

Ms Lovemore asked whether the IEC was intimating that the Auditor-General should alter his methodology of analysing the IEC’s payment to electoral staff.

Mr Du Plessis responded that the IEC was not suggesting that, but was noting that the issue had to be seen in a proper context.

Department of Home Affairs (DHA) strategic plan: further engagement
Mr Mkuseli Apleni, Director General, Department of Home Affairs, raised and dealt further with certain issues that had been the subject of contention during a previous presentation of the 2011 strategic plans on 15 March 2011.

Mr Apleni highlighted that, in light of the National Treasury’s new requirements around targets, every department had to provide a listing of attainable targets. This would mean that certain areas of the operations of the Department of Home Affairs (DHA or the Department) would have to be downscaled and others readdressed, in order to comply with the  new Treasury regulations.

Mr Apleni reiterated the Department’s focus on addressing the issue of identify documents (IDs) and addressing the high rate of uncollected IDs. He stated that there was an inherent problem with duplicate IDs, as there were cases where one individual was in possession of several documents under his or her name. The Department was endeavouring to address and stop that practice and implement better controls, in coordination with other Departments and banks, when people sought to open accounts. He restated the Department’s plans to raise tariffs on ID and passport applications, which was already being implemented, and explained that this was done to discourage people from seeking to create duplicate IDs, and to encourage individuals to be responsible in looking after their documents.

Mr Apleni then turned to the “Who Am I Online” project. The Department had reached a settlement of the dispute with Gijima and other suppliers, and various conditions precedent would have to be fulfilled, in order to proceed with the modernisation of the Department’s IT infrastructure and systems. He reminded Members that the original bid by Gijima of R2.1 billion was approved, and a contract was signed for delivery on the project in 2008. Concerns over escalating project costs (which had reached R4.5 billion by 2010), coupled with lack of progress, led to an investigation by the Department early in 2010. In April 2010 the Department notified Gijima, the prime contractor, that the Department now regarded the contract as invalid. Gijima disputed the repudiation of the contract. The Department, in order to avoid indefinite delays and costly and lengthy litigation, then entered into negotiations to try to resolve the dispute amicably, and allow for the urgent completion of the project, in line with the Department’s original requirements and original cost estimates. The Department had now reached settlement and had established a risk management committee to prevent future recurrences of this nature.

Ms Rudzani Rasikhinya, Chief Financial Officer, DHA, explained the Department’s budget. The Department had been allocated a budget of R5.46 billion for the 2011/12 financial year. The Department would allocate R1.78 billion for administration purposes. R3.09 billion was allocated to citizen affairs, and R587.6 million to immigration affairs.

She pointed out that the budget for the forthcoming financial year was lower than the 2010/11 budget of R5.83 billion, because the latter had included allocations for the 2010 World Cup. The estimated amounts for revenue collection in the following financial years were set out (see attached presentation for full figures). The Department would aim to establish a trading account by 1 July 2011. It would seek to strengthen financial management and clear the audit issues, to achieve an unqualified audit report.

Discussion
The Chairperson asked about the training of immigration officials and asked whether DHA was also training the South African Police Service (SAPS) to handle immigration issues.

Ms A Lovemore (DA) asked whether training courses for immigration officers were ongoing.

Mr Apleni responded that the training of immigration officers had been undertaken, and that had included training of the SAPS. The Department would also seek to involve the South African National Defence Force (SANDF) in the training, as that would be equally beneficial.

Adv Gaum asked why the outstanding debts of the Department had not been budgeted for in the previous financial year. He complimented the DG for his explanation of the new targets that were now set out to meet the National Treasury’s regulations.

Ms Rasikhinya replied that the outstanding debts related to the DHA’s dealings with other departments, such as the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO), as well as to administration issues. These were in the process of being resolved. All parties involved, including the Auditor-General, had been informed of the debts. Advance payments were being made to DIRCO to mitigate the problems and prevent them from recurring in future.

Adv Gaum asked what the settlement amount in the Gijima case was, and commented that it had been correct to settle the case. However, he also commented that it was incorrect for any department to appoint an incompetent supplier and he asked what lessons the Department had learned from the Gijima case.

Ms Lovemore also sought clarity on the ‘Who Am I Online’ (WAIO) issue and asked who would be handling hardware and software on the programme.

Mr Apleni responded that the settlement of the Gijima case had not been expressed in financial terms. The Department had agreed that Gijima would provide the software management for the ‘Who Am I Online’ programme. National Treasury would be in charge of the hardware for the WAIO programme.
He reiterated that the Department had learnt from the Gijima issue and would improve its vetting for future projects.

Mr Mnqasela commented that the increase in tariffs for IDs was a concern to ordinary members of constituencies, whom this Committee represented. He said that it was a shame that the explanation for the increases was made only after the policy had already been implemented. He further commented that the new prices were unaffordable for the majority of people. He requested the numbers of duplicate IDs, and an indication of the periods in which the duplications had occurred. He said that it was outrageous that one person could hold multiple ID documents.

Mr Apleni conceded that tariff hikes had not been well communicated by the Department, and that was regrettable. The Department had learnt from that and would improve communication on issues of that magnitude in future. There needed to be better coordination across government to prevent duplicate IDs from happening. 

Mr Mnqasela also sought clarity on the Department’s overspending in the previous financial year and asked whether it had sought approval for that over-expenditure, and how it would affect the audit in 2011/12. 

Ms Rasikhinya replied that the outstanding debts related to the DHA’s dealings with other departments, as set out earlier, and that these were being addressed.

Ms P Maduna-Petersen (ANC) asked how far the Department had gone in identifying scarce skills that South Africa needed to attract. She sought clarity on the proposed risk committee. She asked what the Department was doing to fill its funded vacant posts. She asked what steps the Department was taking to alleviate the problem of reissued IDs.

Mr Apleni replied that the issue of scarce skills was one that the Department was still struggling to implement fully. The Department had been tasked with attracting 50 000 individuals with scarce-skills to the country. The Department was working to fill all its funded vacancies by 2012/13.

Ms Lovemore commented that, in her view, the DHA was not mandated to attract scarce skills, but that this was the responsibility of the Department of Labour.
 
Ms Lovemore asked where, in the budget, the line item for the Department’s legal costs could be found.

Ms Rasikhinya replied that the line item for legal costs would fall under goods and services, and the total amount budgeted for that in 2011/12 was R23 million. 

Ms Lovemore sought clarity on how the Department would address the issue of economic migrants, pointing out that there was no clarity in the strategic plan on that issue. She said that the Department had not measured its output on fraud and corruption in its strategic plan. She sought clarity on the rectification of errors on IDs. She also commented that the costing of IDs seemed to be quite high, up to 600% greater than what the Department had said this would be.

Mr Apleni noted that the Department was working to tackle corruption through the fraud and corruption summit and was saying boldly that anti-corruption must be a major strategic goal of the Department.

Mr Jackie McKay, Deputy Director General: Immigration Services, DHA, replied that the Risk Committee comprised of all the Deputy Director Generals heading up the units, and that this committee identified risks and the impact on the Department’s performance. The Committee also managed the mitigation strategy for the Department where such issues did arise.

Ms Lovemore asked why the Risk Committee had been mentioned in the strategic plan.
Mr McKay responded that it was a requirement that the Risk Committee appear in the strategic plan.

Mr Apleni expanded on this, giving an example that one of the risks noted in the strategic plan was the danger of recording details on physical documentation, since, if a building burned down, those details would be lost. The mitigating response to that would be to capture the details electronically, to circumvent the threat of losing information due to a fire.

The Chairperson asked how far the process of appointing provincial managers had gone.
Mr Apleni responded that the Department had appointed three permanent provincial managers and six who were acting managers, pending final approval of their appointments. He added that the Department would continue to work to fill vacancies within its ranks but there were challenges.

The Chairperson asked whether a memorandum of understanding had been signed between DHA and DIRCO.

Ms Rasikhinya responded that a memorandum of understanding between DIRCO and DHA had been signed in 2009/10, and a trading account had been established between the two Departments, with the approval of National Treasury.

Ms Bothman asked where the link lay between DHA and its other entities, such as the IEC and the Film and Publications Board.

Mr Apleni responded that there was effectively a separation of powers, which meant that coordination between the DHA and its other entities was minimal. Work was being done to improve that aspect and it would change in future.

Ms Makhuba asked whether the document issued to Zimbabwean immigrants under the new dispensation was also subject to the tariff hike for IDs.

Mr Apleni replied that the documents issued to the Zimbabweans were done under the dispensation model that contained specific expiry dates, and so these were separate from the ID tariff increases. The documents were regarded as a once-off permit.

The meeting was adjourned.

Documents

No related documents

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: