Process followed regarding nominations for the SABC Board and ICASA Council: briefing by Committee Secretariat

Meeting report

Opening Remarks
The Chairperson said that the Committee would be dealing with two issues – the appointment of the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) board member and the appointment of the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) councillor. 

He stated that the Committee also recently received a notification that there would be a vacancy on the Media Development and Diversity Agency (MDDA) board in December. It had been formally referred to the Committee.

Presentation on the SABC
Mr Thembinkosi Ngoma, Committee Secretary for the Portfolio Committee on Communications, informed the Committee that a letter was received from the President on 25 April 2012 notifying the National Assembly about the resignation of Mr Clifford Motsepe from the SABC board with effect from 13 April 2012. The Committee was requested to recommend a candidate for appointment in terms of the Broadcasting Act for the unexpired portion of the period for which Mr Motsepe was appointed – until 9 January 2015. The matter was referred to the Committee for consideration and reported on 7 May 2012.

The vacancy was advertised in three national newspapers, two in English and one in Afrikaans, a regional newspaper in isiZulu, and a community newspaper in Setswana. The closing date for nominations was 22 June 2012 at 4pm and the total cost for advertising amounted to R103 852.90.

By Friday, 22 June 2012 at 4pm, 38 nominations were received. Only one late application was received on Friday, 22 June 2012 at 4:30pm. It was recommended that the Committee should take a decision on whether or not the late application would be considered.

All 39 CVs had been summarised, qualification checks were verified, and security clearance results were still pending. The Committee had to shortlist candidates, interview them and report the names to the House.

Discussion
Ms M Shinn (DA) noted that two of the people that applied for the position did not have formal qualifications, they only had matric qualifications. She asked if it was a necessity for a board member to have a tertiary qualification.

Mr Ngoma replied that it was not a necessity. He just thought he should indicate to the Committee which candidates did not have tertiary qualifications. One of the candidates had short courses that unfortunately were not recognised by the system used to do the verification checks – for example five-day workshops, and some submitted articles that they had written, but these could not be verified by the system used.

Ms Shinn asked what the process was to select candidates.

The Chairperson clarified that the process involved the Committee receiving the applications, deciding how many candidates to shortlist, doing interviews and then making recommendations.

Mr A Steyn (DA) stated that he did not think it was good enough to verify only the latest qualifications that candidates had. If candidates had two or three degrees, it influenced the interview panel to a certain extent. A person with three degrees could be deemed to be more qualified than a candidate with one degree; therefore, every degree included in the CVs should be verified. He wanted to know when the Committee could expect the security clearance procedure to be completed. If all the qualifications were verified, what sort of timeframe could the Committee expect the process to be completed in?

Mr Ngoma explained that every degree could be verified; however, it was a long process and it would delay the entire selection process as well. It would be a long process, but it could be done. It would just depend on what the Committee wanted to do.

He had hoped to have the results of the security clearance yesterday but unfortunately, the person that the Committee Section liaised with on the matter was not there. He would be doing a follow up and hoped to have results by the end of the week.

Mr G Schneemann (ANC) asked what the deadline was by which the Committee should complete the interview process and make its recommendations. He noted that Mr Ngoma said there was an application that was received late. What was the reason for the delay?

Mr Ngoma replied that when the matter of the SABC board vacancy was referred to the Committee, it was not given a deadline by which to report to the House. However, it was recommended that the process should be completed as soon as possible.  

Ms W Newhoudt-Druchen (ANC) asked for clarity on how the application was received – by post, fax or email? The application was only late by 30 minutes so this information was important.

Mr Ngoma answered that the applications had been emailed.

The Chairperson asked the Committee to note that when a candidate was appointed, he or she would be appointed for the rest of the term, not for a full period of five years. This was different to ICASA.

Mr Steyn recommended that all the shortlisted candidates’ qualifications had to be verified.

The Chairperson noted Mr Steyn’s recommendation.

Ms Shinn asked if the sender of the late submission had given any indication as to why the application was late. She did not think that 30 minutes made much of a difference. If the Committee knew the reason for the late submission, they could decide whether or not to accept the application.

Mr Ngoma replied that when he received the application he acknowledged its arrival as well as the fact that it was late. He then told the applicant that it was the Committee’s decision whether it would consider it or not. The applicant did not offer an explanation as to why the application was late, he just replied saying thank you.

The Chairperson clarified that Ms Shinn was saying that the application could be considered along with the others since it was only 30 minutes late. The fate of the application was at the hands of the Committee. The Committee needed to decide whether or not to consider the application. Members also had to decide how many candidates it wanted to shortlist. He wanted to bring it to the attention of the Committee that there were eight men and four women on the SABC board. The person leaving was a male in the legal profession. He wanted Members to understand the situation on the board.

Mr Steyn imagined that when the position was advertised, the advert said that no late nominations would be entertained. It was important for the Committee to consider this. The submission was made via email, and there was not any reason given for it being late. He wanted the Committee to make a decision before it looked at the candidate’s qualification, as he did not want Members to be influenced by the merits. The decision had to be based on what the advert said.

The Chairperson clarified that the advert said that the closing date for nominations was Friday, 22 June 2012 at 16:00pm.

Mr Steyn clarified further that nothing was said about late submissions not being accepted. 

The Chairperson noted that the Committee had not been kind to late submissions before.

Ms J Killian (COPE) stated that this made it easier for the Committee. There was no indication that there would not be any consideration for late nominations. 30 minutes was not a big difference. The Committee only received 39 nominations, so she wanted to propose that the Committee accept the nomination.

Mr Schneemann replied that, on the one had he wanted to be sympathetic, but on the other hand, the Committee had deadlines for a reason. He was aware that the Committee did not accept late applications in the past. If this was the case, then the Committee should consider continuing along the same line. The Committee could always investigate why the email was late, but if Members bent the rules, this would set a precedent – why then have a deadline?

Ms Killian said that the Committee had in the past “sanitised” a late submission. This would not be the first one. She thought it would be best to include on the adverts that no late submissions would be considered. She wanted to withdraw her submission to consider the late nomination.

Mr Steyn agreed that the late submission should not be considered. The Committee ran the risk that the other candidates would complain if they found out about the late nomination, as it did not conform to the closing date and time. He suggested that the Committee err on the side of caution.

The Chairperson noted that it was agreed that the late nomination would not be considered. He asked how many candidates the Committee wanted to shortlist.

Ms Newhoudt-Druchen recommended that five candidates should be shortlisted as there was only one position that had to be filled on the SABC board.

Ms Killian supported the recommendation.

The Chairperson noted that there were no objections and that five candidates would be shortlisted for the SABC board member position.

Mr Ngoma informed the Committee that the abridged version of the CVs would be sent to Members immediately after the meeting. The full CVs would be sent to Members on 1 August 2012, before 16:30pm.

Mr Steyn asked if the Committee could receive a spreadsheet on which candidates the Committee Section had to get additional information from, and what the information was.

Mr Ngoma indicated that this could be done.

Ms Shinn asked when the Committee could be expected to do the interviews.

The Chairperson said he hoped the Committee would complete the shortlisting at the next meeting. Interviews could start immediately after that. This was an urgent matter, and the Committee could set aside three days to finish the process for both SABC and ICASA. This depended on how many the Committee decided to shortlist for ICASA.

Ms Killian stated that the Broadcasting Act prescribed the type of experience and expertise that was required for the board. She thought that in filling the vacancy, the Committee had to look at the existing expertise on the board so they could know what skills were needed.

The Chairperson stated that the Committee understood the challenges experienced on the board. The candidate that they select should assist with these matters.

Mr C Kekane (ANC) said it would be helpful if someone did an assessment on the challenges experienced on the board and what skills support was needed.

The Chairperson stated that all this information would be given to Members. He reminded the Committee that there would be five shortlisted candidates, and no late nominations would be considered.

Presentation on ICASA
Mr Ngoma announced that a letter dated, 20 April 2012 was received from the Minister of Communications, Ms Dina Pule informing the National Assembly that the terms of office of Mr Thabo Makhakhe, Ms Nomvuyiso Batyi and Mr Fungai Khumbulani Sibanda, Councillors of the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa ICASA), would expire on 9 July 2012, 3 August 2012 and 30 September 2012 respectively.

The National Assembly was requested to fill the vacancies in terms of the ICASA Act. The matter was referred to the Committee for consideration and was reported on 16 May 2012.

The vacancy was advertised in one English national newspaper, one Afrikaans national newspaper, and eight community newspapers in Tsonga, isiXhosa, isiZulu, Setswana, SeSotho and SiSwati. The closing date for nominations was 29 June 2012 at 4pm and total cost for advertising amounted to R81 446.22.

By Friday, 29 June 2012 at 16:00, 39 nominations were received. No late applications were received. All 39 CV’s were summarised, qualifications checks were done and security clearance results are still pending.

The Committee was advised to shortlist the number of candidates to be interviewed and to report the names to the House.

Discussion
The Chairperson reminded the Committee that the candidates would be appointed for a period of four years each. The Committee also had to make one and a half recommendations for each position that had to be filled, which meant that the Committee had to submit five candidates to the Minister. The names should not be sent in any order of preference.

Ms Killian stated that the Committee had discussed changes to the ICASA council and its structure – there had been talk of having a smaller council. How would this affect the appointment of three people that were going to run for a period of four years? In the mean time, the Committee was waiting upon legislation that would amend the composition of the council. If the council is restructured, did it mean that the rest of the councillors had to be bought out?

Ms Newhoudt-Druchen asked what skills the outgoing councillors had.

The Chairperson answered that the skills were in the areas of engineering, economics and law.

Mr Schneemann responded to Ms Killian’s concern saying that it was his understanding that there was no legislation to amend the ICASA Act before Parliament at the moment. It was also difficult to pre-empt what was going to be included in that legislation to try and determine what the changes would be to the current ICASA council. As far as he was concerned, the Committee could not base their decision on what could or could not happen with the legislation in the future. Ms Killian raised valid points; he was not discounting what she said, but the legislation was not in Parliament at the moment.

The Chairperson added that Ms Killian was correct to say that there could be difficulty if the legislation was amended. However, Mr Schneemann was also correct – the Committee could not halt the process. Once the matter of the vacancy was referred to Parliament, the Committee was expected to act upon the referral. The vacancy could also affect the operations of the council if the Committee failed to fill it. However, the Committee had to agree that the reviewing of ICASA’s council could not be arbitrary. The Committee needed to assess the situation properly and make recommendations on what model to use for the council.

He reminded the Committee that appointments to the ICASA council were very tricky. The Committee should submit five candidates to the Minister through the National Assembly. If the Minister appointed three, and the National Assembly was not happy with them, they could reject the appointment. He thought this process had to be streamlined or amended, as it could be cumbersome.

Ms Killian noted that for all three councillors, it could have been the conclusion of their second term. She asked for clarity on this.

Mr Ngoma replied that two of the three councillors had reapplied for their positions.

The Chairperson stated that the Committee would have to check the legislation in terms of limitations. The Committee wanted to be on the right side of the legislation. He asked Members to make recommendations for how many candidates should be shortlisted.

Ms Shinn recommended that there should be three candidates per vacant post, which would be nine.

Ms Killian seconded this recommendation.

Mr Schneemann proposed that the Committee consider five names per vacancy given the number of CVs the Committee received. He did not want the Committee to restrict itself by selecting too few candidates. This would give the Committee a total of 15 candidates to choose from.

The Chairperson asked if the Committee could say that there should not be more than 15 candidates. This meant that they could shortlist fewer candidates if they wanted to.

Ms Shinn stated that she was nervous about having 15 candidates, as the interview process could be quite long and extensive, and then the Committee still had to whittle those names down to five. She recommended that the Committee shortlist no more than 12 candidates.

The Chairperson asked if Mr Schneemann was comfortable with this recommendation.

Mr Schneemann answered that he was comfortable with 12.

The Chairperson noted that 12 candidates would be the maximum. He asked when Members would receive the CVs.

Mr Ngoma replied that Members would receive the abridged version after the meeting and the full CVs by 16:30pm the next day.

Discussion about the MDDA vacancy
The Chairperson informed the Members that a letter had been received from the Minister to say that a vacancy had to be filled on the MDDA board in December. The person would have to start in January 2013. It was the Chairperson of the MDDA board who was finishing her term in December. The Committee would try to finish the advertising process and he hoped the position would be advertised for a month.

Ms Killian wondered how the Committee selected the media in which the advertisements were placed. How was the Committee going to do it for the MDDA? It was necessary to reach the right target audience as the MDDA played an important role in the community and the regional newspaper industry.

Mr Ngoma said that the process involved asking the MDDA for names of community newspapers in each province that had large distribution figures.

Ms Killian was happy to know that the newspapers would reach the broader section of the communities.

The meeting was adjourned.