Department of Correctional Services Budgetary Review and Recommendations Report

Meeting report

The Chairperson stated that due to the lack of quorum, Members should read the report over the weekend and send their corrections to the Committee Secretary by the midday on Monday to consolidate the corrections. The Committee would then meet half an hour earlier before the meeting on Tuesday to consider adopting the report. The deadline for adopting the report was October 23^rd; hence time was of the essence.

Mr J Selfe (DA) wanted to know why the Committee had not taken any action against the Department as Members had constantly warned the Department that they would amend its budget if it did not follow the Committee recommendations.

The Chairperson replied that the Committee had been accused of trying to micro-manage the Department in the past. Therefore, in the recommendations, the Committee should call for a meeting with the Department to discuss the realignment of the budget.

Mr Selfe said that the problem was that there was no consequence for the lack of action of the Department. The report summed up the frustration of the Committee, but that was the most it did.

The Chairperson suggested that the Committee scrap off section 7.1 of the report and emphasise in section 7.2 that the Committee was seriously considering a three-way indaba with the Department and its senior management to discuss budget allocations.

Mr Selfe stated that the Committee should not scrap off section 7.1, but instead strengthen it. He proposed that the Committee replace the word “concerned” with “extremely disturbed” and add the phrase “apparent inability and unwillingness of the department to address its shortcomings.”

Mr L Max (DA) stated that the sentence was too long and suggested that the Committee split it into two.

Mr S Abram (ANC) stated that the Committee was constantly addressing issues in the report, but the feedback it always received was apologetic, blaming the culture of the Department. When was that culture going to change? What effect would the adoption of the report have? How much was the Committee’s oversight even making a difference in the administration of the department? The department management did not seem to care about their mandate. For instance, they had once reported that they could not produce agricultural products because the equipment had broken down. Did the department not have a maintenance budget? They needed to run these departments like private businesses, bearing in mind that they yielded service instead of profit. He added that they lacked civil servants who perceived their jobs as a calling.

The Chairperson agreed and reiterated the need for a three way indaba. He concluded that the matters raised by the Members needed to be discussed when they had a quorum.

Meeting was adjourned.