Davidson Proposal: Procurement (Business Interests of Employees) Bill to regulate the business interests of State employees

Meeting report

Ms Moloi-Moropa explained that the joint meeting had been arranged in order for both committees (Portfolio Committee on Private Members’ Legislative Proposals and Portfolio Committee on Public Services and Administration) to discuss a legislative proposal by Hon Davidson. The member concerned had identified a vacuum and argued that legislation was needed to regulate the business interests of State employees. Thereafter, linked to that, the Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration would receive a briefing by the Minister of Public Service and Administration on the Public Sector Ethics and Integrity Management Framework. The third item on the agenda was a presentation on the work-studies conducted on Premiers’ offices in all the provinces of South Africa

The Chairperson announced that Ms D Boshigo, a member of the Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration, had lost her husband.

Mr Thobejane summarised that the Private Members’ Committee had received a memorandum from the Speaker’s Office requesting it to consider the proposal by Hon Davidson to regulate the business interests of State employees. The Committee decided to hold a joint meeting with the Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration in order to get its input on the matter.
For the benefit of the Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration, he outlined the guiding six principles on which the Committee on Private Members’ Legislative Proposals and Special Petitions confined its consideration of a legislative proposal, which were whether it -

a) went against the spirit, purport and object of the Constitution;

b) sought to initiate legislation beyond the legislative competence of the National Assembly;

c) duplicated existing legislation or legislation awaiting consideration by the Assembly or Council;

d) pre-empted similar legislation soon to be introduced by the national executive;

e) would result in a money bill; or

f) was frivolous or vexatious.

It was felt that item c), whether there was existing legislation or legislation awaiting considering by the Assembly or Council, was of particular relevance in this instance.

Mr Thobejane asked what the position of the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) was and invited the Hon Minister and the Department to lead the meeting through that.

The Hon Mr Richard Baloyi, Minister of Public Service and Administration, welcomed the opportunity to address the joint Committee and noted that the Department was working on introducing legislation dealing with some of the issues raised in the proposal. The Department had submitted its legislative programme to the Leader of Government Business. In it, the Department noted that it intended two review two pieces of legislation – the Public Service Act and the State Information Technology Agency (SITA) Act. One of the issues that needed to be addressed was the behaviour of public servants. There was existing legislation and policy that governed the acceptance of gifts by public servants. It talked about a dispensation where public servants were allowed to receive gifts. However, it put a cap in place and no gifts above a certain level could be received. It further stated that there should be declaration. The issue in the public discourse was that attention needed to be paid to the issue of acceptance of gifts by public servants, which could be perceived as corrupt activity. South Africa was the only country on the Continent that acceded to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Instrument, the convention that dealt with the management of bribery as the manifestation of corruption by officials, and some of the manifestation was the acceptance of gifts. It was realised that work needed to be done and the DPSA was doing something about that.

The Minister referred to the issue declaration of financial interests. Current policy and legislative framework allowed public servants, senior managers, to declare their financial interests, but was it enough to declare business interests in a particular company? Some argued that the declarations and disclosures were used as providing shelter for activities that might otherwise be unbecoming. The Department was responding to that. There was ongoing debate about whether public servants should say choose between being employed in the public sector or being a business person.

The Department was also dealing with the question of behavioural issues, such as the post public service employment restriction, referred to as cooling off period. The decision was taken to answer all such questions under one instrument, which was called the Ethics and Integrity Framework. The process of consultation had been started and certain policies and legislation would have to be reviewed. Cabinet had been consulted; stakeholders were being consulted; and on 31 September all identified stakeholders would be brainstorming and discussing the Integrity Framework. The Public Service Act would be reviewed and amended. Hon Davidson had identified the need, he was not aware of what was being done concurrently, his views would be considered in the Ethics and Integrity Act.

Discussion
Mr P Pretorius (DA) was very happy to hear that the Department was discussing and taking those measures. Thereafter he asked about time frames. When would the draft legislation be brought to Parliament?

Minister Baloyi replied that the time frame was before the end of the current financial year. The Public Service Amendment Bill would be tabled before Parliament and would include issues addressed at this meeting. It was not a simple legislative process.

Ms M Kubayi (ANC) saw the Public Sector Integrity Framework as a separate process; did it cover all the issues raised by Hon Davidson?

Minister Baloyi replied that it would be compared with the contents of the proposal. The intention was to regulate on behavioural issues of public servants. Were the instruments sharp enough to manage the behavioural strategies of operators? Bills came to Parliament for engagement, and would be discussed there. It was not a question of who raised the issue; it was a question of what input was being made in the democracy, and what was wanted in terms of monitoring behaviour. It was expected to be a very lively engagement.

Mr Thobejane thanked Hon Minister Moloi. He noted that the Committee on Private Members’ Legislative Proposals and Special Petitions would allow the Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration to consider and make submissions in writing that would assist it to arrive at a determination.

Ms Moloi-Moropa thanked the Committee on Private Members’ Legislative Proposals and Special Petitions, working together she realised the need for Parliament to work in clusters to better coordinate and avoid duplication. The work of the Public Service Administration was work for all committees and it was very critical that it had a cluster for Parliament and motivated for a cluster approach. The organisation that Minister Baloyi belonged to already organised itself in clusters, it would be easy for the committee to do oversight. She appreciated the joint meeting, they would meet again.

The meeting was adjourned.