Public Administration Management Bill: briefing by Minister of Public Service and Administration & Department

Public Service and Administration

06 November 2013
Chairperson: Ms J Moloi-Moropa (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The Public Service and Administration Minister, Ms Lindiwe Sisulu, briefed the Committee on the Public Administration Management (PAM) Bill. The Bill was framework legislation, which responded to the Constitution. It sought to solve the problems that the Members of Parliament, as representatives of the people, had identified. There had been extensive consultations on all levels with stakeholders and following consensus on these submissions and consultations, a revised Bill had been developed to reflect the public comments. The Bill had been reduced from 135 pages to 17 pages. It would be implemented in a phased manner.

Enhanced leadership, improved accountability and better use of people had been some of the priority areas identified to improve the quality of service delivery and a development-orientated public administration management system.

The Department of Public Service and Administration said the Bill sought to achieve the national legislation of promoting the values and principles listed in subsection 1 of the Constitution, which dealt with the management of public administration. The scheme of the Constitution stated that resources should be shared equally in society, with regard for the history of the country. The Bill therefore sought to address this and to ensure that future governments were able to intervene directly and with purpose to improve lives. The Bill did not undermine the Constitutional mandate of local government, but sought rather to ensure compliance with the Constitution, by complementing public administration that had been integrated across the three spheres of government. The Bill also did not undermine the powers of the provincial governments. Each clause in this Bill sought to address a particular problem.

The Bill was published on 31 May 2013, with 28 June 2013 as deadline for submission of comments. Due to public demand the deadline for comments had been extended to 31 July 2013. Submissions had been received from the Ministers of Finance, Performance Monitoring and Evaluation and Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs. A further 27 written submissions had been received from institutions, individuals and government. Extensive consultations had been embarked upon at all levels. Further submissions had been received from the Ethekwini, Emalahleni, City of Cape Town and Mossel Bay municipalities. Three workshops had been held with various legal experts as well as with the legal advisors of Ministers. Following the consensus on these submissions and consultations, a revised Bill had been developed to reflect the public comments. This Bill was the net outcome of the product of the consultations.

The key areas of the Bill (see document) were:

·         Mobility of staff within public administration (Clauses 5-7);

·         Prohibition on conducting business with the state, and disclosure of financial interest (Clauses 8-9);

·         Capacity development and training (Clauses 10-13);

·         Use of information and communication technology in public administration (Clause 14);

·         Ethics, integrity and discipline (Clause 15);

·         Minimum norms and standards (Clause 16);

·         Office of standards and compliance (Clause 17);

·         Regulations (Clause 18); and

·         Repeal and amendment of laws (Clause 19 and the Schedule).

 

Members voiced mixed feelings about the Bill. The ANC members felt that the Department had done a good job with the Bill. There was appreciation for the fact that the Department had managed to reduce the Bill from 135 to 17 pages. They also applauded the Department for the intent shown in the Bill to improve service delivery in local government. The DA members expressed concern that government seemed to want to take control of municipalities through the Bill. There was also a fear that the government would try to manipulate the transfer and secondment of staff.

Meeting report

Briefing by Minister & Department of Public Service and Administration
The Minister Public Service and Administration, Ms Lindiwe Sisulu, briefed the Committee on the Public Administration Management (PAM) Bill, which she referred to as the “longest-serving Bill that changed more than 700 times”. The Bill – 11 years in the making – should have been passed in 1996 after the Constitution had been established, but this had never happened. The PAM Bill was framework legislation, which responded to the Constitution. It sought to solve the problems that the Members of Parliament, as representatives of the people, had identified. There had been extensive consultations at all levels with stakeholders and following the consensus on these submissions and consultations, a revised Bill had been developed to reflect the public's comments. The Bill had been reduced from 135 pages to 17 pages. This Bill, therefore, had been the net outcome of the product of the consultations. It would be implemented in a phased manner.

The Public Service Commission had identified the following priority areas to improve the quality of service delivery and a development-orientated public administration management system:

·         Enhanced leadership and performance management;

·         Improved accountability, through more effective financial management;

·         Better use of people, through improvements in Human Resource Management;

·         Ethics and integrity, to root out corruption and maladministration; and

·         Improved performance in a developmental state.

 

Advocate Menzi Simelane, legal advisor to the Minister, said the Bill sought to achieve the national legislation of promoting the values and principles listed in subsection 1 of the Constitution, which dealt with the management of public administration. The scheme of the Constitution stated that resources should be shared equally in society, with regard for the history of the country. In order to do this, the government needed to be structured in accordance with the scheme of the Constitution. This was not the case, however. For example, the best areas in the country had been those serviced by national and provincial governments. Those areas serviced by local government had been left out. Therefore there was a need for government to ensure that there was an equitable distribution of resources across the country. The PAM Bill sought to address this and ensure that future governments had been able to intervene directly and with purpose to improve lives. The Bill did not undermine the Constitutional mandate of local government, but sought rather to ensure compliance with the Constitution, by complementing public administration that had been integrated across the three spheres of government. The Bill also did not undermine the powers of the provincial governments. Each clause in this Bill sought to address a particular problem – it was about the management of public administration.

Mr Alvin Rapea, Head: Policy, Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA), said the Bill had been published on 31 May 2013, with 28 June 2013 as the deadline for submission of comments. Due to public demand, the deadline for comments had been extended to 31 July 2013. Submissions had been received from the Ministers of Finance, Performance Monitoring and Evaluation, and Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs. A further 27 written submissions had been received from institutions, individuals and government. Extensive consultations had been embarked upon at all levels. Further submissions had been received from the Ethekwini, Emalahleni, City of Cape Town and Mossel Bay municipalities. Three workshops had been held with various legal experts as well as with legal advisors of Ministers. Following the consensus on these submissions and consultations, a revised Bill had been developed to reflect the public comments. This Bill was the net outcome of the product of the consultations.

Definitions

Mr Ailwei Mulaudzi, Director: Legal Services, DPSA, elaborated on the content of the Bill. He highlighted specific definitions of the Bill – an “employee” meant a person appointed in the public administration, but excluded a person appointed as a special advisor and a person performing similar functions in a municipality; a “family member”, in relation to any person, meant his or her parent, sister, brother, child or spouse; “institution” meant a national department, a provincial department, a municipality or a national or provincial government component; and “public administration” meant the public service, municipalities and their employees.

 

The key areas of the PAM Bill were:

Clauses 5 – 7

Mobility of staff within public administration (Clauses 5-7). Greater mobility of staff and the transfer of functions from one sphere to another was desirable in certain instances to allow services to be delivered at the most appropriate sphere, and to enable deployment of staff to where they were most needed in government.

Clauses 8 – 9
Prohibition on conducting business with the state, and disclosure of financial interest (Clauses 8-9).  As part of promoting professional ethics and integrity by employees, the Bill prohibited employees from conducting business with the state and from being a director of a public or private company conducting business with the state. Employees were required to disclose their financial interests and the financial interests of their spouses and persons living with them as if they were married to each other.

Clauses 10 – 13
Capacity development and training (Clauses 10-13). The Bill sought to promote capacity development of employees by providing for the establishment of a national school of government.

Clause 14
Use of information and communication technology in public administration (Clause 14). The Bill required a head of an institution to acquire and use information and communication technologies to provide for cost-effective service, ensure inter-operability of its information systems and eliminate unnecessary duplication of information and communication technologies.

Clause 15
Ethics, integrity and discipline (Clause 15). The Bill established a public administration ethics, integrity and disciplinary technical assistance unit, to provide technical assistance and support to institutions in all spheres of government.

Clause 16
Minimum norms and standards (Clause 16). The Bill sought to empower the Minister to prescribe minimum norms and standards on, inter alia, the promotion of values and principles, capacity development and training, information and communication technologies in public administration and measures to improve the effectiveness of institutions.

Clause 17
Office of standards and compliance (Clause 17). The Bill established an office of standards and compliance, whose objects were to promote and monitor compliance with minimum norms and standards set by the Minister.

Clause 18
Regulations (Clause 18). The Bill empowered the Minister to make regulations on, among others, matters required or permitted by the Bill to be prescribed.

Clause 19
Repeal and amendment of laws (Clause 19 and the Schedule). The Bill repealed sections 4, 14 and 15 of the Public Service Act, 1994, and the Transfer of Staff to Municipalities Act, 1998.

Discussion
Mr D du Toit (DA) said the real problem with municipalities did not necessarily lie with the officials, but with the civil oversight and leadership, because councillors sometimes did not have the necessary skills.

The Minister replied that civil oversight was one of the biggest problems the Department had to deal with. The Auditor-General had indicated that audit committees had been established to look at this problem.

Mr Du Toit said the biggest concern was that the purpose of certain sections of the Bill seemed to be to control municipalities through central government.  He was also worried that staff could be demoted if they consented to it. What was the real purpose of these sections of the Bill? He foresaw big problems if the state was going to encroach on municipalities in this way.

The Minister replied that it was not government’s intention to control municipalities. She was concerned that municipalities did not have the capacity to do what they had to do. The intent was to use the personnel power and skills at national and provincial level to make up for the inequalities at municipal level. Her intention was not to control municipalities, but to empower them.

Mr S Marais (DA), wanted to know if the Bill was tagged as a section 76 Bill?

The Minister replied that it was indeed a section 76 Bill.

Mr Marais asked what had happened to the anti-corruption bureau, which had not been included in the draft Bill. It seemed to have been replaced by the ethics unit. What would be the purpose of this unit? Would it be given the power to enforce consequences for corrupt behaviour?

The Minister replied that the anti-corruption bureau was still in the Bill, but the focus was now not only on anti-corruption activities, hence the change in name. If the government were to zero in only on corruption, many other “things” would go unpunished.

Mr Marais asked if the School of Government was to be the responsibility of the Minister of Higher Education, or would responsibility for it reside with the DPSA. He also wanted to know where the funding for it would come from.

The Minister replied the School of Government was the responsibility of the DPSA and that funding for the project would be “borrowed” from SETA.

Mr Marais said one aspect that had not been mentioned in any of the deliberations and which could compromise the Constitution was section 114.  This stated that the national or provincial government may not impede a municipality’s ability or right to exercise its powers or functions.  As the Bill stood now, it seemed like it would give a lot of power to the Minister through regulations.

Mr Marais said individual transfers and secondments, which could be seen as the same thing, infringed on the rights of local government.

The Minister replied that transfers had to be mutually accepted. Government would not have the authority to send someone where they did not want to go.

Mr Marais was concerned that the role of the MEC was not mentioned enough, as it was the MEC's task to implement the values of the Constitution.

The Minister replied that MECs were part of provincial government, and when mention was made of that sphere of government, it included MECs.

Mr E Nyekemba (ANC) applauded the Department for having reduced the Bill from 135 pages to 17.

Mr A Williams (ANC), complimented the Department for the intent shown in the Bill to improve service delivery in local government. It was a fantastic piece of legislation.

Mr L Ramatlakane (COPE) asked whether there was a cooling off period for people who resigned to take up a position in the private sector, in order to prevent the leakage of privileged information.

The Minister replied that a cooling off period of one year did exist.

The Minister asked the Committee to prioritise the PAM Bill.

The meeting was adjourned. 

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: