Communications & GCIS Budgetary Review and Recommendations Reports (BRRR) 2012

Meeting report

The Chairperson welcomed Members and invited comments on the two reports for consideration before the Committee.

Department of Communications Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report 2012
The majority of comments from Members were based on the semantics and structure of the report.

Ms J Kilan (COPE) noted that an earlier recommendation that the business model of the South African Post Office (SAPO) be changed in order to ensure its sustainability in the light of its reduced subsidy was missing from the draft report.

Ms A Muthambi (ANC) remarked that it was important the recommendations of the Committee be aligned with its findings.

Ms Muthambi drew Member’s attention to the finding that the Department of Communications (the Department) had not appeared before the Standing Committee on Appropriation for its 4^th quarter meeting and stated that the Committee’s report ought to include a finding on this and  strong exception be taken to this.

Ms Muthambi noted that there had been no report from the Auditor-General (AG) with regard to ‘.za Domain Name Authority’.

The Chairperson responded that ‘.za Domain Name Authority’ was to be an independent entity but had been lumped up with the Department. The entity did not submit annual reports to Parliament as was required by legislation.  This was an issue the Committee needed to pursue further with the Director General (DG) of the Department as it was a funded entity and had been funded to the tune of R1.5million in the financial year under consideration.

The Parliamentary Liaison Officer (PLO) to the DG responded that the entity was initially independent but was subsequently taken over by the government and it served as the regulatory body of the domain name ‘.za’. It represented South Africa globally and monitored all issues related to the domain name. The Department planned to ensure stricter monitoring of the entity’s activities and report to Parliament subsequently.

Ms Muthambi commented that it was time the Committee requested the AG to conduct a special audit on the entity as it had been funded over the years and had constantly defaulted in appearing before Parliament to account.

The Chairperson reminded Members that the entity had appeared before the Committee in 2010; however it they needed to question the Department on its management of the entity.

Ms R Morutoa (ANC) noted that the current recommendations on the Universal Service and Access Agency of South Africa (USAASA) in the draft report did not properly portray the findings of the Committee.

The Chairperson responded that previous recommendations of the Committee with regard to USAASA had been that the board be overhauled by the Minister. The same issues which informed this recommendation still persisted and were traceable to the mandate of USAASA which was not in line with current realities.

Ms Morutoa suggested that the Committee’s recommendation be rephrased to capture this.

The Chairperson recalled from previous presentations that USAASA planned continued roll outs even though present realities indicated that these roll outs like others would be non-functional. There were no focal plans for sustaining its operations. The report of the Committee should in fact contain a finding that the operations of USAASA were not functional.

The PLO suggested that the Committee’s finding be structured to state there was no value for money in the roll out plans of USAASA. Out of the 63 centres that it had rolled out, only 59 were functional and it had no budget to cover technical maintenance costs.

Ms M Shinn (DA) remarked that there was a need to acknowledge the good intentions behind the roll out plans. The issue was that no responsible entity had been designated to drive the scheme. The Committee’s report should include a recommendation that SAPO investigate the feasibility of assuming responsibility as it had the required presence and technical capabilities to do this.

The Chairperson noted that a general review of the mandate would help address this concern.

Ms Muthambi noted that beyond the establishment of a Ministerial task team as a recommendation to address governance issues in the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA), the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) also provided penalties to address capacity and leadership issues and this should be explored in the Committee’s recommendations.

Ms Muthambi stated that it was time for the entities of the Department to be taken to task. Many entities presented SMART reports before the Committee that did not reflect the realities on ground. She cited the example of the DG of the Department misrepresenting facts to the Committee on Performance Management contracts which the Minister had later refuted.

Ms Shinn replied that the Committee had earlier agreed to consult the parliamentary legal team for advice on the next steps the Committee could take against the DG concerning this matter. The Committee needed to take action, but with the correct legal advice.

Ms Shinn highlighted that the Committee needed to do more with regard to tasking the Department on reporting on its programmes and timelines to address both the Committee and AGs recommendations.

The Chairperson responded that when the Department appeared before the Committee to present its strategic plan for the next financial year, the Committee should consider the strategic plan viz a viz these recommendations to consider whether or not the recommendations had been incorporated into the strategic plan.


Recommendations
Ms Shinn suggested that the recommendation on Green policy be modified to include resource conservation and lowering of costs.

Ms Muthambi suggested that a recommendation be included that the Minister must ensure that corrective and remedial measures be taken against accounting officers and senior officials for failing to comply with Sections 38,39,40,41 and 42 of the PFMA.

Ms Muthambi suggested that the Committee made a recommendation in its report that it wanted the Minister to provide progress reports on matters where the DG had misrepresented facts to the Committee on signing of Performance Management contracts which were yet to be signed. This was tantamount to lying to the Parliament.

Ms Muthambi suggested that the report include a recommendation that the Department and its entities came up with action plans with regard to issues raised in the AGs report and report to the Committee on a quarterly basis the progress made on the said action plans.

Ms Shinn moved for the adoption of the report subject to the corrections and recommendations and being effected. Ms Muthambi seconded the motion and the report was accordingly approved.

Portfolio Committee on Communications- Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report: Government Communication and Information System (GCIS) 2012
The Chairperson tabled the document for consideration.

The majority of comments from Members were based on the semantics and structure of the report.

Ms Shinn queried the recommendation in the draft report that government entities be made to devote a certain percentage of advertisement budgets to community papers. No independent audit had been carried out yet to determine whether community newspapers reached their intended targets. If government entities were compelled to advertise in these papers, it might end up being regarded as fruitless expenditure.  The GCIS and Media Development and Diversity Agency (MDDA) needed to conduct research on the measurable impact community papers had on their target market.

Ms Shinn also questioned the recommendation in the draft report that the government come up with a different funding model for the print media. Were there no provisions to discontinue funding where the venture proved financially unsustainable?

Ms L Van der Merwe (IFP) moved for the adoption of the report subject to the corrections being made.

Ms Muthambi seconded the motion.

The media was adjourned.