Department of International Relations and Cooperation orientation workshop

Meeting report

The Chairperson said that the Committee had requested a briefing on international relations as a whole.
The workshop was to provide an overview of the six key high-level objectives of the Department of International Relations and Cooperation. It would give members an idea of the strengths and weaknesses of the branches of the Department of International Relations and Cooperation.

Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO)
The Director General of DIRCO, Ambassador Jerry Majila, kicked off the workshop with an overview of SA’s foreign policy. Prior to starting he asked whether he could speak on the Foreign Service Bill and the White Paper on SA’s Foreign Policy. The Chairperson placed the proposal before the Committee for consideration.

Mr B Radebe (ANC) asked whether the Foreign Service Bill had been tabled in Parliament.
 
Amb Majila stated that the draft Bill had gone through a consultative forum process. At present the process was a little behind on it. The White Paper on South Africa’s Foreign Policy had however been through Cabinet. He wished to speak on the two items for informational purposes to the Committee and perhaps to elicit the Committee’s assistance on this.

Mr S Mokgalapa (DA) stated that the aim of the workshop was for members to get an idea of the work of DIRCO. If the Committee was going to deal with the two pieces of legislation, then it should be done properly.

Ms C Dudley (ACDP) noted that the two items did impact on the work of DIRCO.

Mr M Lekota (COPE) felt uncomfortable dealing with the two pieces of legislation. Why should the Committee pilot the two pieces of legislation through the House? The roles of the Legislature and that of the Executive should not be blurred. It was not correct for the Committee to be presented with draft legislation. The meeting was for the Committee to be orientated on the work of DIRCO. He felt that when the two pieces of legislation was formally referred to the Committee, it could be dealt with. If the Committee was to allow Amb Majila’s proposal then it would be setting the wrong precedent.

Mr Radebe noted that in order for the Committee to deal with the legislation, members needed to do groundwork. He suggested that the Committee not deal with the legislation.

Ms S Kalyan (DA) pointed out that in terms of the rules, all bills that had gone before the previous Cabinet had subsequently lapsed. The bills needed to be reintroduced in Cabinet as there was a Fifth Parliament presently in sitting.

The Chairperson addressed Amb Majila and said that members had expressed their views. It was evident that the Committee was not in favour of dealing with the bill and the white paper.

Amb Majila accepted the decision and proceeded with his overview of SA’s foreign policy. He emphasised that there was a changing global environment. Trade and economic patterns were changing. There were new players on the world stage. A shift from the north to the south was taking place. The north comprised of players such as North America and Western Europe. SA formed part of the emerging south. The shift had resulted in new trade and economic formations like BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa). There was also the G20 bloc of developing nations. There were new global opportunities and frontiers. New economies like the blue economies, green economies and knowledge economies were emerging. The impact of non-state actions had also to be taken into account.

There was a new transitional resource agenda. Scarce resources were fuelling tensions. The nature of conflicts was also changing. In the past there were issues of colonisation, at present there was internal armed conflict. There were new technologies in warfare, that is, unmanned drones and robots. A shift in demographics was also taking place. It was the effect of global population growth. In Europe in the north there were ageing populations. In Africa on the other hand there was a youth bulge.

The global trends impacted upon SA. Economic migration resulted in rapid urbanisation which put a strain on infrastructure and on service delivery. Regionalism resulted in economies of scale, eroding sovereignty and in protectionism versus cooperation for national benefit.

SA’s global standing had changed from being the skunk of the world to that of a respected global citizen. In 1994 SA had 36 missions and 80% of the missions had been in Europe, USA, Canada, Israel and Taiwan to mention a few states. SA however had an expanding global footprint. In 2001 the number of missions had increased to 92 and by 2013 the number was 125. SA had taken a deliberate decision to change its foreign policies. There was a mission in each South African Development Community (SADC) state. There were also missions in Asia, Middle East, Latin America and the Caribbean.

SA’s global trade patterns were also shifting. In Africa in 1994 trade amounted to R11.6bn, and in 2013 the figure had reached R385.2bn. In Asia in 1994 trade figures sat at R40.2bn whereas in 2013 it had reached R760.2bn. Trade with Europe had also increased from R67.3bn in 1994 to R498.2bn in 2013.

Tourism trends in SA had also changed since 1994. There were more visitors from Africa than other places. Africans exchanged the most dollars in SA. Tourism growth was thus taking place. Africa was the second fastest growing region in the world.

The rest of the workshop spoke to the five programmes of DIRCO.

Discussion
Mr Mokgalapa stated that it seemed that there was a little intra Africa trade. Why was this so? Taking into consideration the missions, bilaterals and trade seminars that SA had, one needed to consider if there was value for money. He asked if DIRCO had measures in place at missions to ensure oversight and accountability.

Amb Majila conceded that there was less intra trade in Africa, it was between 11%-12%. Trade with Europe sat at 68%. African countries traded less amongst themselves. African countries were not connected. There was a new belief in Africa that African countries were able to do things. An issue was also that there was little to trade amongst African countries. The most feasible activity for African countries was mining. Minerals were exported from Africa. No beneficiation was taking place in Africa after the minerals were mined. He noted that value for money was a vexing question. A mission entailed placing a long range plan in place. Value for money was not only about money. It could mean money in other terms.  

Ms M Moonsamy (EFF) asked to what extent SA exported raw materials to Asia. Was there no export of raw materials to Africa? She asked if the African continent had delegated industrialisation to outside the continent.

Amb Majila noted the concern about SA exporting its raw materials. SA however had a more built economy than in 1994. The World Trade Organisation had set a 66% threshold for local content. SA had surpassed this threshold in the manufacture of motor vehicles. The value of exports had increased even though the volume of exports had not increased. In 10 years’ time SA would have industrialisation.

Mr M Maila (ANC) noted the increase in trade with regions. How much did SA export and import? Which was more? There were reports that Brazil dumped its chickens in SA at the expense of SA farmers.

Amb Majila spoke to the balance of trade and noted that SA had a surplus of trade with Japan. The balance of trade in Africa was positive. In 1998 R2.3bn worth of goods was sold to China. In 2013 this figure had risen to R90bn.

Ambassador Rapulane Molekane, Deputy Director General: Europe, noted stated that to a large extent SA had a trade deficit with the European Union. SA exports were few but it imported a great deal from the European Union. Its trade with European Union countries was low.

Mr Radebe appreciated the work done by DIRCO. He asked if DIRCO had done work around the G2 bloc of countries. What threat did the G2 have on the entire world? He stressed that there was a scramble for African resources at present. What strategy did DIRCO have to address it? Investment in Africa must be real investment. He asked what progress DIRCO had made on SADC value chains. He noted that Chapter 7 of the National Development Plan (NDP) was very clear about the research capacities of government departments. Did DIRCO have the required capacity that the NDP demanded?

Amb Majila referring to the G2 countries, that is, China and the USA, pointed out that the world had changed. The USA and China commanded the world economy. China was seen as the factory of the world. China produced over 1m highly skilled persons annually. China no longer simply copied goods, it was now into innovation. On the scramble for Africa, a China-Africa forum was to be hosted in 2015. On research capacity, he said that DIRCO did have a 24-hour centre.

Ms Miriam Segabutla Chief Director: West Africa, said that SA needed to have one strategy when it went into African countries. SA tended to follow a silo approach.  When China went into a country, it went in as a whole as China Incorporated. 

Ms D Raphuti (ANC) was concerned about the African youth bulge. Did DIRCO have a plan in place to assist with the phenomenon?

Amb Majila replied that more Further Education and Training (FET) vocational schools were needed to train and educate the youth. He pointed out that President Obama had stated, on a recent visit to SA , that a stop should be put to the exportation of jobs. Investment in the youth needed to take place. A skilled youth would transform African economies. The problem was that African youth that studied abroad did not return home.

The Chairperson asked where the diplomacy of Ubuntu came from. Public and economic diplomacy was commonly known, Ubuntu was inherently African. On the youth bulge in Africa, he said that after the Second World War, Japan and China placed a greater emphasis on assisting the youth. SA was made up of 58% youth. The issue was whether Africa was also investing in youth. He had observed that the United Nations had grown weak. Member states were acting outside its bounds. The world has seen a rise in militarisation. The same thing had happened in history with the League of Nations. He saw the scramble for Africa as being an attempt to re-colonise the economies of African countries. Was Europe giving less for development in South Africa?

Mr Molekane emphasised that DIRCO wished to ensure that young persons got trained. Russia had agreed to provide 100 scholarships for agricultural training. There was also a Kader Asmal scholarship with Ireland. He stated that all European countries were giving less developmental assistance. The countries were giving the funds to its own companies to invest in SA. They definitely had a new agenda. The funds were there but there was new conditionalities attached to it. The European countries still provided soft loans.

The presentation on Programme1: Administration would be delayed as Mr C Ramashau Deputy Director General would be joining the workshop at a later time.

Programme 2: International Relations
Asia and Middle East Branch
Ambassador Anil Sooklal, DDG: Asia & Middle East, said that in the interests of time he would only touch on key areas. He emphasised that the relationship with Asia and the Middle East had grown dramatically. Historically the relationship with SA had been none existent due to trade sanctions. There were in total 32 SA missions in Asia and the Middle East. SA had a major footprint in Asia. In the early days of SA’s democracy there had been minimal trade but today it comprised 36% of SA’s foreign trade. It amounted to R900bn.He stated that 100m Chinese travelled abroad each year. SA only wanted 1% of that total for tourism. The scope for expanding tourism in the region was massive.

As far as structured bilaterals were concerned, in 1994 there were none. At present there were six bilaterals with the Middle East and eighteen in Asia. On its strategy for engagement in the region, SA had a political relationship with 57 countries. He felt it easy to solidify political relationships with countries; the focus at present was on economic relationships. Economic diplomacy should be a win-win situation for both SA and the other country. Investors into SA should be attracted and technology transfer should take place. Development cooperation was also needed. He felt assured that by 2015 Asia and the Middle East would be a major trading partner with Africa and SA. Intra Africa trade would also grow.

SA joined BRICS in 2011. The major trading power countries of the world made up the G8 bloc which was formed in the late 1970s. The BRICS countries had realised that they needed an African member and hence the SA membership. The BRICS headquarters would be in China with a regional centre in SA. SA’s trade with Asia and the Middle East was still in its infancy and could still grow. SA should check on its capacity and resources to exploit the opportunities that lay ahead. 

Americas and Caribbean Branch
Mr Ben Joubert, Director: MERCOSUR and Chile, and Mr Johnny Moloto, Director, provided the Committee with an overview of this branch which covered thirty five states. One of the biggest countries was the USA with 307m people and one of the smallest states was Grenada with 104 000 people. The branch was guided by three high level objectives: strengthening south-south relations, strengthening relations with strategic formations of the north and strengthening political and economic relations.

There were a total of 17 missions in 12 of the countries, 6 of which were in the USA and Brazil. Some of the achievements by this branch were a steady growth in visits and bilateral contact with the region as well as areas of growth in value added trade (exports) and tourism. Challenges faced were insufficient resources to optimally engage and to duly capitalise on opportunities available. Another was that the region was vast with differing realities and a “one size fits all” approach did not work. Key areas of interest for SA in mining were countries like Canada, USA, Brazil and Venezuela. Brazil, the USA and Venezuela were also of interest in terms of energy opportunities. SA exports and imports to the Americas for 2008-2013 were to Mexico, Argentina, Canada, Brazil and the USA. SA imports and exports to the USA were far greater than the other countries mentioned.

It was emphasised that closer strategic cooperation between DIRCO, the Department of Trade and Industry, the Department of Mineral Resources, the Department of Energy and the Department of Public Enterprises was needed.  Regular interaction with the business sector active in the region was also required.

Europe Branch
Amb Rapulane Molekane said that the branch theme for 2013/14 and 2014/15 was job creation through inward investments. SA should continue focussing its engagements with Europe in order to enhance its five national priorities, the NDP, the African Agenda and its global governance priorities over the next 20 years. SA maintained 21 missions in 19 European Union member states. SA also maintained 6 missions in non-European Union member states. There was a mission in Russia and it was SA’s BRICS partner. The five pillars of SA-Europe relations was high level political dialogue; trade and tourism; investment industrialisation and job creation; policy dialogues, sectoral cooperation and human development and lastly development assistance. Progress was positive on all pillars with the exception of development assistance. European countries were phasing out development assistance to SA. The European Union was very much of relevance to SA as it had a combined population of over 500m inhabitants. It was the second largest economy in the world, accounting for 17% of the world’s gross domestic product.

African Bilateral
Ms Miriam Segabutla Chief Director: West Africa, pointed out that Africa was larger than the combined land mass of China, the United States, India, Europe and Argentina. SA ‘s foreign policy was driven by the vision to achieve an African continent that was peaceful, democratic, non-racial, non-sexist, united, prosperous and which contributed towards a world that was just and equitable. SA pursued this vision whilst still informed by its national interest and the values of ubuntu. There were 47 SA missions in Africa. There were structured bilateral engagements with various African states. For example on the 16 April 2014 in Brazzaville a SA - Congo Joint Commission for Cooperation was held to improve cooperation on Small, Medium, Micro Enterprises (SMMEs), energy, agriculture and mining. Economic diplomacy initiative achievements were that missions had submitted their economic diplomacy programmes to be undertaken for the year, business units were actively involved in the monitoring of mission performance in relation to its economic diplomacy targets. A total of 19 trade and investment activities would be undertaken during the financial year.

Discussion
Mr L Mpulwana (ANC) referring to the Asia Branch noted that each country wished to promote its own interest. He had a problem with SA’s balance of trade. In Malaysia the majority of the population was made up of Indians and Chinese. Malaysians were in the minority. He noted that there was a difference in investing on an equal footing and investing where one party was being exploited. What was SA’s policy on this? Did SA intend to invest in Europe? He asked if SA exported professionals to Africa. He asked what programme DIRCO had to advance the objectives of SADC to become a union.

Mr Molekane reacted that for Europe since the economic crisis had happened the balance of trade was in their favour. The mindset of companies who invest in SA needed to be changed. Investing was both exploitative and beneficial. The Europeans only invested where there was maximum profits and if jobs could be saved in their countries. The positive spin-off was that jobs were created in SA. SA needed to be vigilant to maximise its own benefits.

Mr Sooklal conceded that SA did have a trade deficit. One had to take into consideration the total relationship with a country. Just looking at trade deficits was too simplistic. It was nevertheless important. SA was not the only county with a trade deficit. The USA had a trade deficit with China. It was a complex issue. He disagreed with the figures given by Mr Mpulwana and stated that the total population of Malaysia was 30m. 67% of the population were indigenous Malaysians, 24% were Chinese and only 7% were Indian.

Mr Mokgalapa referring to Asia and trade balances, he said that what SA put in was what it should get out. It had to be a win-win situation. Trade relations should not be skewed. On the clustering of embassies for maximum impact, he asked whether information and communication technology (ICT) was being used. If there were opportunities in the Americas with countries such as Chile, why were things not moving forward? He pointed out that that there were bad air links between SA and Latin America.  Had DIRCO engaged with South African Airways (SAA) and other stakeholders on the issue?

Mr Moloto responded that South African Airways functioned optimally in North America.

Mr Joubert explained that in July 2012 there had been a commission agreement between SA and Chile. A follow up was due in November 2014. He added that engagement with SAA had taken place. SAA had recently stopped its flights from Buenos Aires to Johannesburg. The flights had become uneconomical for SAA. Language was another issue which needed to be looked at. 

Mr Radebe said that rhinoceros populations were becoming extinct due to the demand for rhino horn. The horn was being smuggled to countries that SA traded with such as China. What was China doing about the problem? He added that recently one of the largest illegal drug factories in SA had been discovered and it was run by Chinese. In townships each and every spaza shop had been taken over by Bangladeshis. Why was SA allowing it? Often times when high level investment was made, it was at the expense of small business. What was DIRCO doing about it? Cable theft was huge in SA. The problem was that SA knew which country was buying the cable. What was DIRCO doing about it? He wished Amb Majila to state what an ideal mission was. The Committee should be given information on what the values of mission properties were. He stressed that the oversight model of the Committee was not correct as the Committee was unable to visit missions abroad. For example, £10m had been spent on renovating the London mission, yet the Committee was unable to do oversight.

Mr Moloto, on what an ideal mission was, stated that the Chinese mission in SA was huge so was the USA’s mission. SA had a trade surplus against the USA. 

Ms Segabutla added about an ideal mission, saying that it depended on the capacity of the mission to implement its economic diplomacy programme. 

Ms Moonsamy agreed that the cost of the renovation in London was huge. The value of property abroad should be made known to the Committee. What governance structures were put in place for the BRICS developmental bank? How could SA ensure that it got skills transfer in return from its trade partners? She asked what the economic growth in Nigeria meant to SA. Failures of developmental states often lay with a lack of capacity.

Mr Moloto stated that skills transfer and human resource development was starting to become a trade condition of SA.

Ms Kalyan said that the BRICS developmental bank was new and no structures were in place yet. She felt that there should be legislation in place. She wished to receive information from DIRCO on what the legislation would be that required ratification by the five member BRICS states. There seemed to be a great deal of confusion around the issue. The objectives of the bank were to assist with the development of skills and projects. If SA was to contribute towards the start-up costs, how would the funds be monitored.

Mr Sooklal noted that the BRICS bank agreement had to be ratified by Parliament. The headquarters was in Shanghai, the president would be from India and the regional centre would be in SA. The other members also had roles assigned to them. There were articles of association which would ensure proper governance. 

The Chairperson agreed with what Mr Sooklal had said about intensifying the branding and image of SA. In the USA, no matter who the president was at any given time, the country was marketed and sold as one. Why could SA not speak as one? He was aware that diplomacy was complex. What was DIRCO doing about educating South Africans to promote “Brand SA”? He referred to the comments made by Mr Radebe about Bangladeshis and said that the same could be said for Pakistanis and Nigerians. They could be a threat to small businesses. Thus far the presentation had not mentioned trade attaches. The whole of the European zone exported technology to SA but they did not allow exports from Africa to them. The trade balance was in the EU’s favour. How far was the African Union in developing a common medium for communication? A possibility was Swahili.

Ms T Kenye (ANC) felt the BRICS development bank to be an important step forward. SA’s contribution was $2bn over 7 years. Would all the BRICS members contribute the same amount? What mechanisms were put in place to ensure BRICS cooperation took place?   

Mr Sooklal referring to the BRICS bank said that all members had to pay $2bn over seven years. There was equal shareholding. 

International Relations and Co-operation: Branch Multilateral Global Governance
Amb Nozipho Mxakato-Diseko, Branch: Africa Multilateral Deputy Director General, prefaced her presentation by replying to a question raised earlier by the Chairperson on the reasons for a seemingly stable understanding of international relations priorities in countries which have competitive multi party democracies and changes in government, such as the United States. She said that what was needed in the context of the Department of International Relations and Co-operation (DIRCO), particularly Branch: Multilateral (the Branch) being best able to exercise its negotiation capacity is a common sense of patriotism and a clear understanding of national interests so that all stakeholders can act with a common sense of purpose. Key stakeholders such as the media could help foster an understanding of the needs of South Africa and how this can be achieved through the international system; rather than focusing on how other country's national interests affect South Africa.

She said the Branch's vision was for a rules-based global governance system which is supportive of South African international relations priorities and developing countries generally in a peaceful global context. Further, that its mission lead South Africa's participation in global processes to foster the realisation of the Branch's vision.

The Presentation contained a brief summary of the Annual Performance Plan, however she chose not to cover this part as it would be covered in future presentations. In sum the Branch falls under Programme 3 of DIRCO: International Co-operation; and runs sub-programmes 3.1 and 3.3,Global System of Governance and South-South Relations respectively. The Branch's stance on its function according to the Annual Performance Plan is that as South Africa is committed to a rule based international system, premised on multilateral negotiation with the United Nations (UN) system as the central vehicle, the Branch ought to play an active role in all the fora of the UN system in pursuit of South Africa's international relations priorities. These include global security, sustainable development, the promotion of human rights and international law. South Africa, through the Branch supports a more just, equitable and representative UN and efforts to improve the effectiveness and accountability of the various secretariats. Activities under sub-programme 3.1: Global Governance System include engaging in multilateral structures and process to advance South Africa and other developing countries needs; the promotion of South Africa's candidatures for membership in strategic intergovernmental organisations identified and promoted; and a target has been set for the percentage of requests for legal and policy advice responded to, particularly relating to international law, treaty obligations and compliance with treaties, as well as the corresponding domestic law. Sub-programme 3.3: South-South Cooperation aims at enhancing South-South co-operation to the advantage of developing states. This is in light of a common position on political, economic and social issues being essential to effectiveness of the collective influence of countries in the global south in addressing the historic marginalisation of these countries. The Branch therefore plans to participate in meetings of organisations of countries in the global south to advance the adoption of common positions which are aligned with South Africa's foreign policy position.

She went on to describe a map of the world which gives an indication the various centres where South Africa has a presence at multilateral fora, including the Hague in the Netherlands where it interacts with the International Criminal Court, International Court of Justice; and Washington in the United States where it interacts with the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. Next she outlined an organogram of the Branch with the Deputy Director at the head, four Chief Directorates and various directorates below. The Chief Directorates are: Office of the Chief State Law Advisor, Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations (Political) and Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs.

She then went on to a breakdown of basic activities of the four Chief Directorates. On the Chief Directorate on Human rights and Humanitarian Affairs she said that here the Branch champions human rights at multilateral fora with the aim of ensuring balanced protection for all human rights, particularly as the South African Bill of Rights contains socio-economic as well as civil and political rights. She also noted a tendency for the work of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) to be pushed into a bilateral context through the leverage provided by funding.

On the Chief Directorate for Economic and Social Affairs the Deputy Director-General said it is involved in all negotiations on sustainable development in its three spheres, social and economic environmental. She said that the details of the Chief Directorate's activities would be covered in later parts of the presentation. She however noted a comment made by the Director-General during the morning session concerning a rebalancing of global economic power, following the fall of the Breton-Woods institutions with a corresponding reduction in the competitive advantage of developed countries. She then said the Chief Directorate seeks to 're-write the rules of the game', along with other BRINCS countries which seek to ensure that the rules of engagement allow space for development and the national interest of developing countries.

On Chief Director UN Political Amb Mxakato-Diseko said that it deals with various sub-bodies of the UN including the Security Council, the General Assembly and International Atomic Agency. She noted the Directorates support for reform of UN Security Council based on the Freedom Charter and ANC manifesto, which are binding on the Department. The level of participation in the UN is because South Africa remains committed to the UN as the central deliberative, policy and decision-making body in the international system, in light of its universal membership. South Africa, through the Chief Directorate, aims to remain an active participant in the UN by promoting coherence between the UN Security Council and the African Union Peace and Security Council; disarmament, non-proliferation and the peaceful use of nuclear energy; and pursuing equal attention for the control of conventional weapons.

On The Office of the Chief State Law Advisor that it is legal defender of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of South Africa. It functions as the principle legal advisor on all matters pertaining to international law across government, with an increased focus on domestic compliance regarding DIRCO. The Office of the Chief State Law Advisor is also the custodian of all international agreements to which South Africa is a party and participates in the negotiation thereof.

Amb Mxakato-Diseko then turned to the achievements of each Chief Directorate in the recent past. Turning to Chief Directorate: UN Political she said that its achievements included having engineered South Africa rejoining the UN Peace building Commission, which is an important forum for the prevention and peaceful resolution of conflicts in Africa and elsewhere. It has overseen South Africa's critical leadership role in the Syrian conflict firstly through actualising the President's stance on military strikes against targets in Syria with the Security Council through the OPCW and managing the destruction of chemical weapons in Syria. It also participated in the Nuclear Security Summit in March 2014 and begun preparations for Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference in 2015. The above entailed an initiative, with other countries, to create an alternative forum to formulate an effective political response following the deliberate or accidental detonation of a nuclear weapon and management of the humanitarian fallout which would result.

Amb Mxakato-Diseko said the Chief Directorate: Economic and Social Affairs, in terms of its economic negotiation mandate has achieved a place at the G20 and co-chairs the Development Working Group allowing it more influence in matters affecting regional and continental development. South Africa, through the Chief Directorate has returned to the Economic and Social Council , which is the UN Charter mandated body for dealing with economic and social matters, until 2015. South Africa's major involvement has been to reshape the negotiations about the post-2015 development agenda which is to replace the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), particularly by reinforcing the need for development to focus on developing countries, rather than the economic recovery of developed countries. This resulted in a UN High Level Event to deal with the MDGs, which resulted in the adoption of a resolution stating that the developmental agenda will be decided in a multinational forum commencing in September 2014 and going beyond 2015. This developmental agenda will be based on the MDGs and continuity with the Rio Principles, especially “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities”.

The Chief Directorate: UN Political has continued to be play a leading role in the drafting of a universally binding agreement under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) with its negotiation strategy based on the view that there is a common, but differentiated responsibility in light of the causative impact of things such as the industrial revolution by already developed countries and the need to allow the South African and other developing economies to exercise their right to develop unhindered. The Chief Directorate continues to build on the Durban Plan for Enhanced Action which aims at advancing national and continental interests in this arena, particularly in light of the global south's improved position vis a vis the developed world. The overall aim here is the creation of a legally binding document under the auspices of the UNFCCC which provides for the above dynamism in the response to climate change, which is to be concluded by 2015 and becoming operational by 2020.

Amb Mxakato-Diseko said that the Chief Directorate: Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs has achieved the return of South Africa to the UNHRC for the period 2014-2016 and aims to champion socio-economic rights which are not universally recognised, but of fundamental importance to South Africa because of constitutional entrenchment of these rights. On the UNHRC, it plans to combat the liberalisation of the work of the Council by certain countries, done through manipulation of vulnerable countries using funding. A renewed emphasis on the achievements of the World Conference on Racism is also planned, as this is a continuing global problem. It has also submitted two claims for extended territorial jurisdiction over continental shelves and certain islands to the UN in 2009 and which if successful will make South Africa the largest country in Africa, through the addition of more than 1.9 million square kilometres to South Africa's marine territory.

Although Amb Mxakato-Diseko did not have time to enumerate the challenges facing the Branch were contained in the presentation document. First was inadequate budgetary resources. Secondly, non-adherence by the three spheres of government to the Measures and Guidelines for Enhanced Coordination of South Africa International Engagements when engaging in multilateral for a. Lastly the growing tendency by developed countries to undermine and fray multilateral ism as mentioned earlier.

Africa Multilateral
Mr Lenin Shope, Chief Director: Africa Multilateral, gave a basic outline of the relevant Branch: Africa Multilateral's structure, which Directorates: African Union,SADC and NEPAD, APRM and African Renaissance Fund . He went on to say that integration policy is different from the EU which requires the attainment of certain in criteria as a prerequisite to integration, with Africa through the African Union (AU) having opted with universal membership, with a focus on regional integration.

Saying that the DIRCO supports the African agenda through the auspices of the AU, Mr Shope outlined the involvement of the Department in the African Union (AU) structure. He chose to use the AU Peace and Security Council as an example of the Branch's involvement as it has joined this body for the next two years to relieve other members who also have duties to the UN Security Council. This structure makes decisions about what interventions are justified in countries where there is existing or emerging conflict, within its territorial jurisdiction. A second example is the African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights, which meets twice a year to review the actions taken by various governments in promoting human and people's rights. This body is important because it takes account of government and civil society interventions.

At the programme level the AU has decided on the AU agenda 2063 which embodies the AU's broad vision for Africa in the next 50 years. The AU programmes face similar challenges about funding, particularly programmes funded by international co-operation partners, because it is important for the AU to decide for itself what programmes are funded and it therefore seeks alternative funding. Turning to the African Capacity for Immediate Response Crises. This is designed as a interim measure before the creation of the African Standby Forces, which was planned to be ready by next year, despite this a number of countries have pledged resources at different levels for the interim programme. Related to this the AU is involved in post conflict reconstruction and development and South Africa chairs the post reconstruction and development mechanism in Southern Sudan. Echoing the presentation on Branch: Multilateral Global Governance Mr Shope said that the AU had a forum for the determination of a common position on post-2015 development agenda and this has been adopted. There is also a focus on intra-African trade is a challenge, because there is a lack of harmonised focus, infrastructure and African countries tending to produce similar goods.

Turning his focus to the regional arena Mr Shope said that the Southern African Development Corporation (SADC) is the principle body and has two aspects: the political and economic. SADC works on the basis of a rotational troika with three countries in the economic and three more heading the political. The political aspect covers structures which are said to function under the organ, which deal with the peace, security and social issues within the region. Turning to peace and security and DIRCO's work with SADC Force Intervention Brigade, was involved in three interventions with some success especially in the eastern DRC where the Brigade was instrumental in defeating the rebel force know as 'M23'. SADC-ICGLR Ministerial and summit meetings, these are annual meetings aimed at policing the disarmament of forces in the eastern DRC and other regions with conflict. The Branch is also involved in SADC electoral observer missions.

Next he dealt with Regional Economic Integration. Here the Branch is focused on capacitating the SADC Secretariat, because this is the driving force behind the processes in this area. The Branch is in the process of finalising the Review of the Regional Indicative Strategic Development Plan, with the aim of making it correspond to the National Development Plan priorities and the Africa 2063 vision. It is also working to consolidate the SADC free trade zone, because there have been problems with derogations which undermine the fee trade zone project. The Branch also seeks to promote the Regional Infrastructure Master Plan, although there are funding constraints. This lead to South Africa proposing that instead of having a SADC development fund, a Project Operational Development Facility. Lastly, it is involved in tripartite negotiations between COMESA, EAC and SADC in pursuit of the development of a larger free trade zone, he however said this process has stalled for the moment with Egypt failing to host a planned summit in December.

The Key challenges highlighted the need for the Branch to properly understand economic differentials with other African countries and regions, so that as a part of a particular sub-region South Africa can properly position itself for better integration. He reiterated the need to address non-tariff barriers and derogations from the free trade zone. He emphasised the need to complete the review of the protocol on the SADC Tribunal and said the ministers of justice are going to meet in August, hopefully producing a final decision before the AU summit. There is a problem with the high number of extra-ordinary ministerial and summit meetings, because the ad hoc nature of these leads to problems. The Branch has been inter-departmental meetings to improve co-ordination, but more could be done. He said the filling of South Africa’s quota of representation on SADC and AU bodies is important. He said there is a need to contribute to improved resource mobilisation, so that the funding problems which the regional bodies face can be resolved and they can fully dictate their own mandate. He then said that the low absorption rate of International Co-operation Partner (ICP) funding needs to be addressed.

Mr David Malcomson, Director: NEPAD, APRM and African Renaissance, introduced the last three aspects which the Branch deals with under the Enhanced African Agenda and Sustainable Development which are the socio-economic development programme of the AU, NEPAD; the governance programme which NEPAD produced, the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) and the strategic partnerships Africa has with north-south and south-south configurations. The Branch provides institutional support to South Africa's involvement in the above at various levels, from presidential involvement downwards. He then outlined a graph which depicts how the Branch aims to push for the realisation of South Africa's National Interests through the regional and continental linkages, with the aim of concretising the context for African programmes in the international context through involvement at this level through things such as negotiating and signing the Millennium Development Goals.

He then said that DIRCO's main involvement in NEPAD relates to infrastructure, although it is to a lesser extent involved in other aspects such as the Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Programme and Science and Technology Initiative. The mandate for its involvement stems from the NEPAD Base Document which was adopted by five founding countries, including South Africa. DIRCO, through the Branch has identified key priorities for the 2014/15 financial year, which include finalising the NEPAD Implementation and Coordination Strategy for South Africa for Cabinet and Parliamentary approval; this aims to make the work of NEPAD more domesticated and relevant on the ground. He said ensuring effective coordination across government departments was important for optimising the involvement of South Africa in NEPAD; this is being done through structures such as the Forum Of South African Director-Generals Technical Committee.
 
Mr Malcomson then spoke about the two infrastructure programmes which South Africa is involved in, the Programme for Infrastructure Development (PIDA) and the Presidential Infrastructure Championing Initiative (PICI), which is also known as NEPAD's Heads of State and Government Coordinating Committee (HSGOC). He said that although PICI pre-dates PIDA, PIDA is the overall framework for the implementation and coordination of infrastructure projects and development. PICI was designed by a select sub-committee of heads of state to provide political leadership to the infrastructure development programme, particularly by attempting to fast-track certain projects to serve as best case scenarios. He said that President Zuma is chair of PICI and responsible for coordinating the involvement of the other heads of state. President Zuma is also involved with the North-South Road and Rail Corridor, which initially aimed to link Durban and Dare salaam, but which has been extended to cover Cape Town to Cairo. These projects are designed to remedy the infrastructural imbalances left by colonisation; while also aiding physical regional integration and stimulating intra-African trade. He said that the priorities for 2014/15 relating to the above, mostly relating to the North-South Corridor project. These include providing support to the Presidency and the President in terms of his focus on the North-South Corridor project, most importantly the steering committee co-chaired by Ms M Mabitje-Thompson, Deputy Director-General: Industrial Development Incentive Administration Division, and Mr L October, Director General, of the Department of Trade and Industry. This steering committee has three sub-committees which have identified ten priority infrastructure projects to become involved in the management and monitoring of; which President Zuma reports on to NEPAD and the AU on a six monthly basis. The Branch is also working with regional structures on a Project Management Unit, Project Preparation Facility, project reporting systems, and a memorandum of understanding for the North-South Corridor Project. Developing a monitoring mechanism to effectively monitor the implementation of key infrastructure projects and to identify bottlenecks, such as Beitbridge on the Zimbabwe-South Africa border. Create structured platform for engagement with private sector, for example through the NEPAD Business Foundation, the African Infrastructure Desk and strategic partnerships with state owned enterprises. The Branch plans to coordinate the implementation of North-South Corridor project with the strategies other government departments have for Africa.

Turning to the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) Mr Malcomson said that it is a unique mechanism, and that countries in no other region have opened themselves to this level of scrutiny and peer learning in areas including economic, corporate, social and political governance. South Africa has already gone through the first phase of the review process, having done its base review and presented its third national report on the implementation of the APRM. The Branch plans to provide support to principals during summits of the APR Forum and other relevant meetings; and, together with the National APRM Secretariat, to the South African member of the APR Panel of Eminent Persons. Provide support to the Office of the National Focal Point situated in DPSA and strengthen inter-departmental coordination between DIRCO, DPSA and the Presidency to ensure that the country adheres to its continental reporting obligations as well as to ensure the national APRM process is implemented. The Branch will also work with the DPSA in preparation for South Africa's Second APRM Periodic Review. Lastly the branch will work towards the finalisation of the relocation of the APRM Secretariat and the NEPAD Agency and the Host Agreements for the APRM and NEPAD agencies.

In terms of the partnerships and engagement in North-South configurations. The vision of the Branch here is changing the paradigm from an unequal donor-recipient relationship, one where South Africa as part of the region and continent engages on a more level playing field and is able to get northern partners to respond to the requirements of the South, particularly Africa. This was part of the reason why NEPAD was set up in order to have a platform from which Africa could present an agenda which focused on the need for northern partners to correct historic imbalances and keep to UN agreements on the special needs of Africa; rather than the focus of their which tended to be on peace and security. He noted that there was a process involving the Permanent Review Council sub-committee on Multilateral Co-operation to review all strategic partnerships with Africa, to determine the progress of these partnerships on the agreed outcomes. He noted that there have been problems withG8/Africa outreach through the Africa Partnership forum and this is to be replaced with the Africa Global Partnership Platform as agreed to recently at Malabo. Germany has indicated that it would like to revive the G8/Africa outreach next year when it takes over the presidency. Further, the AU Assembly has requested South Africa as a member of the G20 and Senegal and Mauritania as heads of NEPAD and the AU Assembly to look into possible engagement with the G20 and creation of a G20/Africa Outreach programme.

On engagement in South-South configurations, Mr Malcomson said that there are a number and countries want to engage in more, however there is a moratorium on new partnerships at the AU level and that this will not change in the foreseeable future. The existing partnerships Mr Malcomson noted were the New Asia Africa Strategic Partnership, the Forum for China Africa Cooperation, Africa-Arab, Africa-India, Africa-Turkey and Africa-Korea. The work that goes into these partnerships is the implementation of the outcomes documents produced at previous summits. South Africa also organised follow up on BRICS Africa outreach, which saw the establishment of the Africa Regional Centre and Development Bank. In relation to questions raised in the earlier session he said that the work that goes into both North and South partnerships and the outcomes documents which are produces is focused on the issues Members highlighted, including skills development, capacity building and transfer of relevant technology. The key outcome is beneficiation of source which means adding value to locally produced products. He also wanted to warn against unduly viewing China as a threat, because through his personal experience being posted in China and statements in 2008 from the economic working group of the Central Communist Party stating that trade imbalances were unsustainable; which lead to the acceptance to the concept of beneficiation in FOCAC outcomes.

Mr Malcomson briefly looked at the challenges facing the Branch in terms of the above, aside from what he mentioned already. He said that human and financial resources continue to be a concern and the Branch will aim for a unified and inter-departmentally coordinated approach to AU Agenda 2063, Post-2015 Development Agenda, and African Diaspora processes. He concluded by noting something not in the presentation which was that Cabinet had approved the hosting of the Smart Partnership Dialogue which aims to use science technology and innovation for socio-economic development.
 
Public Diplomacy
Mr Clayson Monyela, Deputy Director General: Public Diplomacy, began with the mandate of Branch: Public Diplomacy, saying that this programme is meant to advocate and promote the foreign policy objectives of South Africa to the domestic and international public. The Branch is also responsible for building relations with other cultures through effective communication and brand building, in coordination with Brand South Africa. This in order to correct the perception that South Africa's policy on international relations is inconsistent, incoherent and even 'schizophrenic'. This was due to the non-use of platforms for engagement on domestic and international platforms available to discuss foreign policy and explain South Africa's stance. This lead to the Branch focusing its strategy on the exploitation of dynamic linkages in order to project who we are as a country in a proactive manner.

Some of the interventions introduced by the Branch include engaging in weekly media briefings, in order to anticipate controversial issues and set the agenda. It has introduced a quarterly magazine which is internally focused, called Ubuntu, which deals with issues of interest to people involved in the field of international relations within South Africa such as students, diplomats and employees of DIRCO. This magazine is available electronically on the DIRCO website and Mr Monyela requested the Members to contribute opinion pieces for the magazine. This website is another initiative for communication and is regularly updated. The Branch has also made use of social media as of communication. Most importantly, the Branch has an aggressive public participation campaign in all nine provinces, but also incorporating an international element. This takes various formats such as mass based events and public lectures, such as the upcoming one on the BRICS summit, aimed at unpacking the outcomes of this summit such as the Development Bank. There is also an annual event called the Diplomatic Fair in Pretoria, where all the embassies accredited to South Africa are invited and which is geared towards informing South Africans about the work involved in diplomacy. Mr Monyela also said that the Branch has established an online radio station called Ubuntu Radio, in order to have regular information available worldwide on a continuous basis. This also helps the Branch to have a continuous platform for engagement, because the Department does not have the funds to continuously advertise in other forms of media and also this platform is under the control of the Branch which allows it to express its own perspective. This radio station is soon going to be broadcast as part of the DSTV audio bouquet expanding the reach of the platform and Mr Monyela invited the Members to participate in the radio station. Lastly, he said that the Branch has launched a smart phone application which also provides access to the work of DIRCO.

Mr Monyela also said that the Branch has created a Strategic Communication Directorate which conducts ongoing research and an annual survey to determine the effectiveness of the public participation programmes. This information is then used by the Branch to evaluate the manner in which it conducts these campaigns, to optimise the outreach efforts.

Mr Monyela also highlighted the Operations Centre established by the Branch. The Operations Centre is aimed at providing support to South African Citizens, by allowing them to, before travelling to any part of the world, register on ROSA so that DIRCO is aware of citizens travelling abroad and is prepared to provide them any assistance which they may require. Also functions as an early warning centre monitoring affairs in other countries and is able to alert the Director-General's office of these potential problems. He said that the Branch also handles the coordination of logistics, along with other departments, for South Africa's involvement in international relations platforms such as the BRICS and AU summits.

He said that moving forward the Branch is exploring the expansion of platforms to communicate South Africa's foreign policy. Towards this end the Branch has signed a number of memoranda of understanding with entities such as Brand South Africa, GCIS and broadcasters across the continent and world. This is all in an effort to realise the mandate of the Branch and communicate South Africa's foreign policy to domestic and international audiences.

State Protocol
Amb JM Matjila, Director-General of the Department of International Relations, presented on Branch: State Protocol. He said the core business of the branch can be described as a facilitating role and provides services to DIRCO and government generally relating to the protocol surrounding incoming and outgoing international travel. It is tasked with the management of outgoing and incoming State and Official visits, with the President as the primary client; the coordination of logistics for International Conferences; the training of state officials on appropriate protocol for international visits on for provincial and local government's international visits. The Branch also manages the state protocol lounges at points of entry, specifically the lounges at Oliver Tambo International, King Shaka International and Cape Town International Airports for VIP and VVIPs. Lastly, the Branch manages state ceremonial protocol, including order of precedence, the signing of agreements and dress codes, and manages the state/diplomatic guest houses.

This Branch also manages the immunities and privileges of diplomatic officials, specifically diplomatic accreditation, privileges, Foreign and South African Heads of Diplomatic and Consular Missions, South African Diplomatic Passports and Visas for South African diplomatic and official passport holders. This is because the Branch views the opening of an embassy is a major asset and the Branch will handle the accreditation and documentation of these officials and their households, including the details of their diplomatic immunity. For example if a foreign ambassador wishes to purchase property in South Africa, the Branch will be tasked with having this erf declared foreign territory. The Branch also deals with the appointment South African ambassadors abroad, for example by preparing the documentation for the reception of the diplomat in receiving state.

He concluded by noting issues surrounding the issuing of diplomatic passports. He said that all DIRCO officials carry these passports as a result of the nature of their work. He had also engage Cabinet their policy stance on who is entitled to such passports. He said that a problem which has arisen is these being given to kings and religious leaders, however the problem is accreditation and the Branch is still dealing with this. There is a similar problem with access to protocol lounges.

Discussion
Mr B Radebe (ANC), speaking to the presentation by both Multilateral Branches, said there are a lot of inconsistencies in terms of the criminals referred to the International Criminal Court by the UN Security Council, yet some members of the UN Security Council have not signed nor ratified the Rome Statute. He specifically cited the examples of the lack of repercussions for the invasion of Iraq and the inconsistency of former president Laurent Gbagbo being referred to the ICC, while former president Outarra was not. He therefore wanted to know what DIRCO is doing to counter this trend. He said he appreciated the point on reduced funding coming from the European Union and it being directed to Non Governmental Organisations, but would like to know whether the Department has any measures in place to regulate how these funds are distributed, in order to prevent these organisations being unduly influenced. He then spoke to page eight of the presentation on Branch: Multilateral Global Governance around domestic foreign policy priorities and synergising this with policy documents such as the National Development Plan, he asked why the Industrial Policy Action Plan was not included, as this was critical to sustainable development of South Africa and wanted to know if this was an accidental oversight. On the visiting municipalities and the commitments which these entities engage in with foreign states, yet there is no follow through on these commitments and how is DIRCO handling these issues. On temporary residents permits, he raised the issue of high ranking officials of other countries, such as generals, being granted these permits and using their skills to crowd out local entrepreneurs to the detriment of local people and asked DIRCO for guidance on this problem.

Ms S Kalyan (DA) said there needs to be a synergy between the Department and National Assembly. She then commented that she had been at the Pan-African Congress for a term and wished she had been briefed on protocol prior to this, particularly On language issues. Further, that in her experience the South African official passport is of higher value on Pan-African Congress passports, whether travelling in Africa or not and would like a comment on this. Turning to the APRM, she said that she had been part of the first evaluation as part of the social cluster and was disappointed that the report does not come to Parliament before it is presented in APRM for a and would like to know when the next phase is planned for and what the extent of Parliament's involvement will be. Lastly on the evaluation of the MDGs and move towards the post-2015 development agenda, she would like to know how Parliament has been engaged to evaluate its stance on climate change and what is the common position of Africa is on the post-2015 development agenda.

Mr L Mpumlwana (ANC) requested the publication called Inside DIRCO to be emailed to the Members so that they may have a better insight into its workings. He also wanted to find out the particular national interests of each country which South Africa has diplomatic ties with and what South Africa's corresponding interests are in relation to these countries, because he wanted justification for the extent of the diplomatic relations of South Africa.

Mr M Maila (ANC) speaking to the Multilateral: Africa presentation wanted to know concerning the peace-keeping aspect, what is looked at when embarking on a peacekeeping mission, especially on the political positioning of the aggressors, i.e. how do you differentiate your response to a freedom fighter from that of a rebel and both of these from terrorists. On electoral supervision, what is the position where SADC observers give positive responses and international observers give opposing views? He cited the example of the recent elections in Zimbabwe and does this mean that these missions lack credibility. Further, does SADC send observers to elections in first world countries. On public diplomacy, he wanted to know if the Department has particular target groups for the public participation programmes and who instigates these events, the Department or stakeholders. Turning to state protocol, he wanted to know when permission is given to a delegation to go to a particular destination and what is required for this to be granted. He also wanted to know about municipal delegations, how the Department monitors the signing of memoranda of understanding by local municipalities, particularly in terms of the local benefit of these agreements.

Ms D Raphuti (ANC) emphasised the need for training on protocol. She then wanted to know which countries are used as models for South Africa's foreign policy stance and best practices. On the diplomatic passports she said that these cannot be free for all. She also wanted to emphasise the lack of patriotism that South Africa projects and was concerned about the extent of work done in the international arena and further how this is communicated to the street level of South Africa. On Nigeria being part of NEPAD, she said that although it may be undiplomatic she feels this is a problem and that something must be done about the situation. On the Peer Review Mechanism, she would like to know about the results produced from this on South Africa, requesting a report to be tabled, and other countries and what lessons have been learned from the process by South African Government.

Ms T Kenye (ANC) asked concerning Branch: Multilateral Global Governance understood that DIRCO established task teams to drive South Africa's engagement on the post-2015 development agenda and wanted to know about what will take over from the MDGs and why is this being done now. She also asked about the fluctuating participation of South Africa in ECO-SOC, particularly in light of the reformulation of the development agenda. She then wanted to know what had caused the Commission on Sustainable Development being replaced by the High-Level Political Forum and whether this truly is a change for the better. She was also concerned that South Africa was pulling out of the Human Rights Council after sustained participation over the period 2006-2010, noting that human rights is integral to the South African Agenda.

Mr S Mokgalapa (DA) asked about the status of the free trade zone in Africa, which was supposed to be completed by March 2014 and what the stumbling blocks have been. Status on the protocols for African Courts of Justice and Human Rights; further the status of the SADC Tribunal. In respect of the above he would like an indication of the position of the Department. He also wanted an update on the Department's progress on filling positions in multi-lateral fora by South Africa, for candidacy diplomacy rather than mere participation in these fora. On PICI, he asked whether there are any success stories or a report which could be brought before the Committee. On Multilateral: Global Governance, he again asked what is being done to fill the quotas in the international institutions and fora. He then asked a technical question about the procedure for resolutions in multilateral for a; particularly what the chain management process is after the President indicates what the official stances is and how the Department manages the various stakeholders, such as various government departments, input on a particular resolution. He also commented on protocol that it would be useful for the Department to help Members on language issues, particularly French. On Public Diplomacy he wanted to know about the salaries of the freelance presenters on the radio stations and said that perhaps as part of the BRRR budget review process perhaps the Committee could lend support to this cause. He also echoed Ms Raphuti's sentiments about making the foreign policy of South Africa accessible to people on the ground.

The Chairperson wanted to comment on Multilateral: Global Governance, saying that this is a good place for the concept of Ubuntu diplomacy and South Africa ought to push this as the basis of interactions between countries, because a dog eat dog approach to international relations does not help humanity. On the post-2015 development agenda, he wanted to know who will decide what the agenda entails, because it is important for there to be consensus and not dictation. On the PICI, he wanted to know if it is the same as the PIDA and what the progress of this effort was, particularly whether there was sufficient buy in and if the process was off the ground. Turning to public diplomacy he warned the Department that it is perceived as elitist and speaking to the fact that the South Africa is the country with the second largest diplomatic corps after the United States, but are ordinary South African's aware of DIRCO's work. He suggested perhaps targeting institutions such as universities and political associations, because the people here are interested in the Department's international involvement. He then emphasised the need for outreach to be conducted in indigenous languages to help remedy the above concern. He also wanted to ask what the Department is doing about the tendency for municipalities to engage in a proliferation of 'fact finding missions', even concluding trade agreements in the process. He then said it is important for the Department to engage officials on the protocol around what they may and may not say or do while abroad in light of their level in government. He also welcomed the invitation to participate in the Ubuntu media efforts and would like to know whether the radio station would be broadcasted in indigenous languages. On protocol, particularly diplomatic passports he wanted to know whether Bishops from African churches are given the same status as bishops from Roman Catholic, Anglican and other churches.

Mr Monyela addressed the proposal on having a document called Inside DIRCO to be provided to the Members, containing basic information about the Department, saying that the content of such a document would have to be looked into, but appreciated the input. On who initiates the public participation programmes, he said that the Branch has programme which is designed for the three political principals, the Minister and Deputy-Ministers, on a monthly basis because this is a Cabinet level directive, however if any community requested an event on a particular subject the Department would oblige. On taking the message of the Department to the people, he said that the public participation programmes and efforts such as the use of community media platforms are aimed at this, but also wanted to note that the field of International Relations is seen as by its nature elitist in other countries and South Africa is one of the few countries which have public participation processes.

Amb N Mxakato-Diseko replying to Mr Makgalapa said South Africa has filled its quota as per capita, but these are filled with people who carry South African documents, but are not South African leading to the need for management of the immigration policy. Replying to Ms Kenye she replied that South Africa had reached the end of its terms at ECOSOC, but remains involved because of the bodies importance and that South Africa decided to leave its position on the Human Rights Council in order to give another country and opportunity to sit on the Council, because it operates on a rotational basis. Replying to the Mr Radebe, about the disparities in the ICC, South Africa had fought for the amendment of the Rome Statute on two occasions consequent to movement towards this in the AU. However, when South Africa raised the excusal of sitting presidents and the non-ratification of the Rome Statute, it found no support. She said this issue needs to be dealt with extensively and candidly by the Committee and the Minister. On the post-2015 development agenda she said there are Strategic Development Goals to be submitted to the UN General Assembly and these include a goal specifically targeting industrialisation as it pertains to inclusive growth. On Ms Kaylan question on what will be happening in terms of the post-2015 development agenda, this year sees the culmination of a process of negotiations on climate change, and a negotiation strain will begin on the post-2015 development agenda. The negotiation process in respect of the Strategic Development Goals gave an indication of what can be expected from the post-2015 development agenda negotiations and here trends have emerged which see the redefining development, through the embedding of conditionalities for things such as developmental assistance and en bloc non-tariff barriers and new concepts such as co-governance with civil society. She then said that South Africa will need to work with other African countries on this issue, because Africa's bargaining power is best exercised collectively. The starting point remains the MDGs and where these have not been achieved, for example MDG 8 on partnerships, is to redraft them as legally binding documents, focused on the needs and developmental priorities of Africa. The negotiation process is set to run from September 2014 to the end of 2015, what has been done is to clear pre-determined issues such as how the NDP is incorporated, how NEPAD is brought into the process and how Africa is not compromised in pursuit of its needs from the global system. She said that this is a vast issue and suggested a fuller report on the Strategic Development Goals and the broader issue.

Mr Shope replying to the question on the SADC free trade agreement said most countries have signed it, with the exception of DRC and Angola, but the main problem is derogations from the agreement with certain problem countries being repetitively non-compliant with the commitments they have made. The process agreed in this regard was a linear model which planned to go from a free trade zone, to a customs union and eventually to a monetary union. He said that local discourse has identified the problems hindering this level of integration as issues such as the lack of infrastructure, rather than merely tariff barriers and perhaps the focus should move to these issues. On the protocols for the SADC Tribunal, he said that this could be the perfect forum to take the above non-compliance issues, because it was designed to pronounce on interpretations of the SADC Treaty. The reason for the suspension of the Tribunal was because of a perception of the Tribunal wanting to act beyond its mandate and as a supra-national entity above national courts. A revised protocol is supposed to be generated by the ministers of justice in August, for presentation at the AU Summit. Adding to the comments on the ICC, he wanted to say that the debate around the African Court of Justice and Human Rights has been reignited by the Kenyan situation, because these types of issues could be decided before reaching the international level. The issue in this regard is the unwillingness of countries, including South Africa, to sign a declaration submitting to the Jurisdiction of this court, which would allow civil society to proceed against them in this structure. On the quotas in international fora and institutions, he agreed that there were too few actual South Africans, as opposed to naturalised South Africans, in positions and that a possible solution is co-ordination with other countries in order to decide which high-profile candidacies South Africa ought to pursue, in light of the variance in the number of candidacies and limited capacity to fill the quota. On the peace-keeping question, he said that South Africa engages in both peace keeping and peace enforcement, an example of enforcement would be the Force Intervention Brigade which operated under a UN peace enforcement mandate. On defining a freedom fighter versus a rebel he said that while South Africa does not intervene with terrorists, it would however involve itself in peace keeping in civil war situations. On the statements by SADC election observers, he said that the reason DIRCO invites Members of Parliament to be part of these missions is exactly to foster credibility and discrepancies with other observer missions could lie in the wording of the report and what was important was whether the malfeasance during the election was to the extent that it materially affected the free choice of the people involved.

Mr Malcomson replying to Mr Radebe's concern about the Industrial Policy Action Plan, he said that it only did not reflect because the presentation had been edited, but that it was part of the negotiation policy of DIRCO. On the requests for the report of the APRM process, he said that the Department of Public Service and Administration was the custodian of this process and he understood that Minister Sisulu had informed DIRCO that the report had been tabled in Parliament prior to the President presenting it in January last year. On the PICI, he said that it is different from PIDA, because PICI was a specific effort by a select few Presidents for some identified projects, while PIDA is the overarching programme for the implementation of infrastructure processes by NEPAD and the AU. On the reporting of success stories and progress of PICI, he said that copies of the President's report made to the NEPAD HSGOC on PICI progress and developments will be made available to the Committee.

Amb Matjila added to the issue of quotas to multilateral organisations saying that the immigration policy of South Africa aggravates this problem, particularly on spousal naturalisation. Further, that Cabinet had in 2012 approved on the Secondment Policy, which entails seconding officials to multilateral organisations and also that an initiative to expose young people to these organisations in order to foster an interest among South African youth in filling these posts. Replying to question around municipal and provincial memoranda of understanding, he said that only the national departments, with presidential support can conclude binding agreements at state level, what the municipalities ought to sign are intentions to co-operate. On the proliferation of fact finding missions, he said that he shared the Chairperson's concerns and following Cabinet's initiative in 2008 called Measures and Guidelines Regulating International Relations and Diplomacy and he asked the Committee to help inform provincial politicians about this initiative which should help these officials to understand the dos and do nots around fact finding missions. He also emphasised the need to re-evaluate the migration policy, because its liberal nature has aided the creation of a situation where there is a monopolisation of small business by foreign nationals and this is detrimental to local interests. On the AU passports, he said that the value of a document varies depending on the policy on issuing documents in different countries. On protocol preparation, he said that diplomacy was a skill which had to be taught, part of which is learning the correct protocol for this such as dress, behaviour and interaction with officials in order to be able to better able to pursue the objective of the visit. Also, that if Members would like similar preparation, the Diplomacy College can be brought to Parliament for a workshop, because it is important for Members to be prepared to receive guests. Replying to the Chairperson's question on whether all bishops and similar individuals receive the diplomatic passports, he said that the Department had gone to propose this to Cabinet, because as bureaucrats DIRCO could only propose policy options and DIRCO chose to promoted a universal availability policy, but the problem lies with accreditation and standardisation of the positions.

Adoption of Committee Programme
The Chairperson went through the programme covering the period up until September, item by item and asked for comments and following that a proposal for adoption, saying that amendments could be made in the future.

Mr Mpumulwana asked for clarity on the length of the constituency period and proposed adoption.

The Chairperson replied that he had been informed that it will go on until 19 August.

Mr Mokgalapa said that there was no date set aside for the strategic planning session which was necessary for the Committee to produce its Strategic Plan.

The Chairperson noted this issue.

Ms Kaylan said that a Women's Parliament was planned for the 12 and 13 August and this may clash with the Committee's scheduled sittings. She asked what the trip to the Pan African Parliament's headquarters would entail.

The Chairperson replied that it was up to the Committee to decide on the content of the visit and a caucus could be arranged to this effect.

Mr Mokgalapa then seconded the proposal for adoption.

The Chairperson commented on several items, saying that in the next Committee meeting the Foreign Service Draft Bill will be looked at, as well as a presentation on the Draft White Paper on South Africa's Foreign Policy and the presentation on DIRCO's internal audit and human resources. Lastly, he asked for a report on the specifics about South Africa's national interests to allow the Committee to properly engage with stakeholders and be the first to speak for the country.

Closing Remarks by Mr B Rabede
Mr Radebe first thanked the Chairperson and thanked Chair of the House Boroto for attending the meeting. He could not forget his 'partners in crime' the Members, especially considering the discord from the morning, because all Members have contributions to make and must be treated equally, while remaining honourable Members of Parliament. Finally to the Department, he said that it had really ensured that it had made its executive truly representative of South Africa and he really appreciated the gains the Department had made relating to the continental shelf. Lastly, he wanted to comment on the national interests which the Committee had been concerned to hear about, saying that it is very clearly represented in documents such as the National Growth Path, NDP and Industrial Policy Action Plan .

The Chairperson declared the meeting adjourned.