DHET on progress report in migration process of Technical & Vocational Education & Training colleges, with Minister

Meeting report

Chairperson’s opening remarks
The Chairperson gave a special welcome to the Minister, the Director-General and his team, and the unions present. She said that presently the former technical colleges and Further Education and Training (FET) colleges were merged into 50 Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) colleges aimed at building stronger institutions and addressing the skills development challenges facing this country, to achieve the radical socio-economic transformation phase the country had entered.

The White Paper on Post-School Education and Training was approved by Cabinet last year, and now the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) was developing an implementation phase or plan, while at the same time preparations for its implementation were under way. This would ensure that the objectives of the White Paper were achieved -- ensuring the TVET colleges were strengthened and that they became attractive institutions of choice for school leavers.

TVET colleges and Adult Education and Training (AET) centres were currently managed by Provincial Education Departments (PEDs), although they were under the auspices of the DHET. This arrangement had caused some challenges. This became clear in the Committee’s oversight visits where an anomaly was discovered in that deputy principals were not being remunerated at the same level, some being on level 11, and others on level 12. This would not have happened if the TVET colleges were managed at a central point, that being at the DHET. It was obvious that provincial departments had different policies for appointing deputy principals. Therefore the function shift was long overdue, so that standardisation was introduced and people could be treated equally.

Progress report by Minister and Director General
Dr Blade Nzimande, Minister of the DHET, said that it was good that important stakeholders had been invited to discuss the important matter of the migration of AET centres and TVET colleges to the DHET. The Department welcomed feedback -- even critical feedback -- from the Committee. The Department would outline the progress made, challenges faced and what was being done to overcome these challenges.

The first issue that would be outlined was the question of the budget for running the AET centres and TVET colleges. Parliament needed to play a close oversight role when the President transferred a function from one department to another, as the proclamation of the change was easy but the process itself took a long time. The proclamation of the transfer took place in 2009, but the finalisation of the transfer was taking place only on 1 April 2015, six years later.

There had been a squabble over the money that had to be transferred from the provinces to the Department. Some provinces had denied having money to run the AET centres and TVET colleges. After lengthy consultations with the Provincial Education Departments, Provincial Treasuries and the Finance and Fiscal Commission (FFC) about the transfer of funds, agreement had been reached with Treasury as to the amounts to be transferred. Parliament had to look closely into the transferring of funds from one department or institution to another, as departments were loath to part with money. The Minister of Finance communicated the budget amount transferred to the Department in a letter dated 17 October 2014, but the Department was consulting further with the Treasury about the adequacy of the budget received in order to perform the required functions.

The Minister said that initial indications were that the amounts for the administration of functions, including exams for the general education and training certificate for adults, was significantly inadequate. However, it would not be in the interest of the sector to delay the transfer. Some people questioned why that function was being taken over by the Department now, without adequate funds, The Department’s reply was that the transfer was inevitable in any case, and this function was a critical part of the post school education and training system. He expressed concern that presently Adult Education and Training did not receive the attention that it deserved. Research from the Department indicated that there were about 300 000 adult learners in the various centres. Estimates were that there were 18 million adults who needed education and training immediately, but who it could not access it due to the huge backlog in the system. This was a challenge for government.

The Minister said that he would be directing the Director-General (DG) to ensure that vital posts in human resources, finance and examinations were advertised in January 2015, so that vacancies were filled. He would also request the Director General and Chief Financial Officer to use any authorised means possible to ensure that service delivery was not affected. This included the reprioritisation of the R1.7 billion of Adult Education Programme funding for managing and administering the function, including exams. This had been a long and complex process, but the Department was determined to deal with it. Progress had been made, although it was uneven progress. The Department fared better with the migration process of TVET colleges than with the AET centres, but they would now move with speed on the topic of AET centres to ensure that they took their rightful place in the system.

The Minister said that the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) needed to pay attention to the matter of intergovernmental relations. Implementation protocols to manage the transfer of AET centres and TVET College functions were signed between the Minister and the MECs, and between the DG and the Heads of Departments of the provinces. About 117 provincial support staff in TVET units were seconded to the department in terms of those protocols. These units were set up to assist the Department with the migration process, yet necessary documentation needed by the Department had not been transferred by the Provinces.

The Minister was pleased that collective agreements for the transfer of TVET college educators and support staff had been agreed with organised labour, and these agreements had been signed and ratified. A mandate had been given for the negotiation of the AET staff collective agreement, and it would be tabled in November at the Education Labour Relations Council.

For the function shift budget of the Department, R10 million of the requested R81 million had been received in the adjusted estimate budget for 2014/ 15. This constrained work on the transfer function.

The transfer of TVET college management staff had been finalised with effect from 1 April 2013. The staff had a choice of moving to the DHET or staying with their respective provincial Education Departments. The Department was already managing the appointment of management staff in colleges such as principals, deputies and CFOs for the TVET colleges. This would ensure that the right kind of people were appointed.

The Minister thanked the provinces which were still managing the Persal administration for the TVET college staff on behalf of the Department. This would end on 31 March 2015. The co-operation of the Provinces was helping the Department while it was building capacity to manage the transfer. The total number of TVET college and AET centre staff transferring from the provincial administration to the Department was estimated at 38 000.

In summary, the Minister said that the Department was engaging with Treasury on the inadequacy of funds, which included funds for office accommodation, as provincial offices were needed. Staff would remain in provinces, as they had to remain close to the ground. Matters linked to the National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) and Sector Education and Training Authorities SETAs, as well as other matters, had to be dealt with at provincial level so that the Department could act effectively. To illustrate the importance of the provincial offices, they had started to train university council members from universities and for the first time, members from the same region were interacting, which had a positive impact. The provinces were housing the staff for now until funds were released for their offices.

He said that he was proud of the level of progress reached, in spite of the challenges. The DHET had a very important function and a crucial component of this was post school education and training.

Mr Gwebinkundla Qonde, Director-General (DG) of the Department of Higher Education and Training, said that moving a function from provincial to national level with all its intricacies was a highly loaded matter. Constitutional and legislative processes had to be followed. The Minister had requested the Auditor-General (AG) to assist the Department by giving an overview of the structure and financial management of TVET colleges and AET centres countrywide.

The AG had recommended that the AET function not be transferred with effect from April 2015, due to the dire situation it was in. A serious question had been posed as to what would improve if the function was left where it was, and the Department and AG had agreed that nothing would improve. It was then agreed that the Department would take transfer of the function with all the risk and responsibility that this entailed, and work towards improving the situation.

Presentation of the Progress report
Mr Firoz Patel, Deputy Director General (DDG) of the DHET and project leader of the migration process, gave the presentation.

Referring to the background and progress of the transfer of the function, Mr Patel said that there was a difference between assigning and shifting a function. Shifting a function entailed legal and administrative processes, including funding. The Further Education and Training College Amendment Act, 2012, had not yet come fully into effect. Due to transitional measures, certain clauses relating to actual responsibility would be triggered only when the Minister released dates when those clauses would come into effect. The Minister had recently published that those clauses would come into effect on 1 April 2015. The President would proclaim that the AET Act would be repealed with effect from 31 March 2015. The former FET Colleges were now, in law, TEVT colleges. The AET Centres would to be deemed community colleges as of 1 April 2015.

Function shifts from the provincial to the national level did not occur very often, and there did appear to be a legislative lacuna (gap) in this regard. Section 100 of the Constitution dealing with national intervention in provincial administration requires enabling legislation. Administrative organs of state have to drive this process. There was no true co-operation between the Department and provinces in the matter, but consultation did occur. The Minister of Finance had given a directive to the DG that he (the DG) would have to use all his powers to ensure the shifting of funds from the provinces to the Department. The good news was that major administrative posts could be filled as from 15 January.

Of the key legal milestones, the outstanding matter related to the TVET protocols which had been signed. The problem was that the HODs were not submitting signed off annexures, despite requests from the DHET. These annexures had to list the details of the personnel to be transferred from the provinces to the DHET. They have to be concluded, as this would be audited by the Auditor-General.

With regard to progress with human resources and administration, the Minister had the power to establish the needed posts for the transfer of the management, administrative and support staff, and these posts could be filled as of 1 February 2015. Persal had to be activated soon, as these IT matters took some time. Persal information for the provinces was with five different bureaus and the Department was relying on the State Information and Technology Agency (SITA) to ensure the transfer of this information. There were contingency plans in place, as the Department placed the highest priority on ensuring that the transferred staff would get paid.

The budget had been divided into two phases. As the Minister had said, only R10 million had been received. The budget had been reprioritised within the Department to ensure the smooth running of the migration process.

The presentation gave details of the transfer of the TVET college management, the transfer of the provincial FET unit staff, and the transfer of TVET college and AET centres staff, and provided a table of the number of staff transferring to the DHET.

An overview of the ICT arrangements, and the challenges in this regard, were provided. Now that the budget for the function was in place, the Department could begin to address the challenges.

The progress made in the transfer of moveable and immovable assets was outlined. Movable assets would be accommodated by the provinces until the Department, through Public Works, had found suitable accommodation.

Mr Patel gave further details of the transfer process in the presentation.

Slide 25 gave the input from the Provincial Education Departement (PED) TVET as at October 2013. It compared the DHET proposed budget shift (admin budget of TVET Colleges) with the Provinces’ proposed budget shift (admin budget of TVET colleges) and the variances between the two.

Slide 26 provided the outcomes of finance consultation visits to the TVET colleges and AET centres. It had been a challenge to try to get agreement from 20 different authorities, resulting in the Minister of Finance making a determination on the transfer of funds.

Slide 27 provided a comparison between the allocation by the Minister of Finance and the Departmental assessment of the funds needed for various programmes and functions. Large deviations between the amounts were recorded. Reprioritisation of funds was needed to ensure the continuation of essential functions.

Slide 28 summarises the programme one (P1) and programmed nine (P9) PED budgets compared to the total PED Budget for 2014/15. The conclusion was that the allocation by the Minister of Finance was only 2.4% of the PED P1 and P9 total. Five percent would have been ideal, but the Department now had to work with what it has.

Slide 29 showed the challenges and risks of the migration process facing the Department.

Slide 30 outlined the critical tasks which had been delayed, as well as the reasons and implications of the delays. Transitional arrangements were in place, as well as contingency plans to ensure the completion of these tasks.

Slides 31 to 35 provided details of the next steps and required actions.

Slide 36 showed the way forward:

- The Minister and DG were still pursuing the adequacy of funding to manage the functions.
- Confirmation and/or assistance with proposed transitional arrangements by provinces had been requested, such as:
* The use of PED offices for the 2015/2016 financial year while the DHET secured regional office accommodation;
* Connectivity for DHET staff;
* Finalisation of regional offices, TVET colleges and AET centres’ organograms.

The DDG said that the Department would be ready for the function shift on 1 April 2015.

Submissions by the Unions
Mr Michael Nkomokazi, National Chairperson of the Adult Educators Progressive Union (AEPU) said that there were challenges facing the Department in its objective of transforming the AET sector, as it had been neglected and marginalised for a long time. The AEPU was committed to working together with the Department to overcome these challenges.

Details of the challenges and recommendations during the migration process were detailed in the attached submission from the AEPU. These included dysfunctional Provincial Transitional Task Teams (PTTTs), mergers of Public Adult Learning Centres (PALCs) to form the envisaged community colleges, current administration in the provinces, an organogram, conditions of service for AET educators, and funding and involvement of stakeholders at the local level.

In conclusion, he said that the AEPU believed that if some of their proposals were effected or modified to fit the current changes within the sector, there would be a turnaround in the Adult Education and Training Centres.
Mr John April, a board member of the Adult Learning Network (ALN), said that the ALN fully supports the migration process. He called for a speedy implementation of the migration process, as there was frustration in the sector. The ALN appreciated that the DHET would hear the concerns of the sector. Due to the centralisation of the function under the DHET, the sector would no longer have to engage with the various PEDs on issues such as the standardisation of conditions of service, which was a problematic issue.
He called for better co-ordination between the various stakeholders and the Department, and proposed the formation of a forum where the AET sector was represented and their concerns were catered for. The ALN would give comments on the draft policy on the Continuing Education and Training Act (CETA) and other relevant policies.
Mr Daniel Mabuyakhulu, Acting Chairperson of the Further Education and Training Colleges Employer’s Organisation, gave a presentation (see attached) detailing the problems faced by the TVET Colleges. These problems were briefly outlined as follows:
- Low staff morale;
- TVET colleges in rural areas: In the future they would face the problems of small budgets, excess staff and an increasing number of students with no plan yet in place to deal with these problems;
Skills Centres: They face closure due to lack of funds.
- Ideal organogram of TVET colleges: As far as they were aware, this had not been established.
- College day and college week: The collective agreement regulating the working hours in TVET colleges was 35 hours per week, which was unrealistic, as in reality many more working hours per week were used. There were also implications that needed to be considered, due to the college week running from Monday to Saturday.
- Adjustment of baseline funding in some Provinces: Some provinces had not adjusted baseline funding after the recapitalisation process, which had resulted in under-funding in those provinces.
- Programme-based funding versus the post-provisioning norm: The department allocates money as per the full-time equivalent, and not per the cost of the full programme. There was an 80/20 split, and the colleges’ main concern was the 20% that was not fully funded.

Possible solutions to these problems were given in the presentation.
Mr Eitel Bock, Chief Negotiator of the Public Service Association of South Africa (PSA), said that the PSA had two main concerns. The first concern was regarding the budgetary constraints facing the Department, and funding not filtering through to the colleges. The main concern was regarding the staff affected by the transfer of the TVET colleges and AET centres from the provincial level to the DHET, and the question of those staff that would not be transferred. Details were in the attached presentation.
Mr Sibusiso Lekhuleni, a board member from the National Education, Health and Allied Workers Union (NEHAWU) said that the union was organising in the sector, and he believed that it was the majority union in the sector. The Union was there only to observe the proceedings.
Discussion
Dr B Bozzoli (DA) was concerned that there was not enough money for the transfer, and asked the DHET to set out what would not be done due to the lack of funds. The post school education system was a complex ecosystem, with staff having relationships and expectations towards their employer and their work. The concerns of staff due to the massive change taking place were well-founded. If not carefully managed, this change might destroy the ecosystem of educational institutions. Once this was destroyed, it would be difficult to rebuild. Due to the state of limbo the staff found themselves in, she feared a backlash and asked what would be done to prevent this on 1 April 2015. She questioned the 35-hour working week as per the collective agreement and said that this was not suitable considering the role of a teacher. Would people be fired and classes stopped on evenings and Saturdays?
Ms J Kilian (ANC) wanted to get a better understanding of the reasons why the Department was not successful in its request to the Treasury for R81 million. She asked why the Treasury had been so harsh as to grant only R10 million. Due to the required budget not being granted, she foresaw great difficulty in achieving a balanced migration process and asked what was being done about this.
She was also concerned about the Persal administration, due to the amalgamation of systems. Did the Department have a commitment from the State Information Technology Agency (SITA) to manage this change? It could have a have huge impact if the system was not working, as the staff would not get paid and would not be able to meet their obligations.
Mr E Siwela (ANC) said that he got the sense that the Department was ready to take over the functions on 1 April 2015, even though it admitted to challenges such as the shortage of funding. The system being taken over by the DHET was not in harmony due to the different processes in place in the various provinces. Regarding the concerns from the stakeholders about the standardisation of conditions of service and salary bands, he asked what would happen to those employees affected by these issues.
Mr Y Cassim (DA) said that it appeared that the transfer of funds during the migration process was a case study of a breakdown in intergovernmental relations. He asked what the consequences were for the non-cooperation of certain provinces in this matter, and if people would be held accountable? He asked for a better explanation of the total amounts for the budget shift in relation to the amounts allocated by the Minister.
He said that it seemed as if educators and administrative staff were in an unhealthy situation due to uncertainty over their job security, and this could negatively affect the culture at the institutions in the future. He asked for clarity on the way that the 63% threshold calculation was done. He asked how the individuals being left out of the transfer were being dealt with, and what had been communicated to them. The Department had courted comments such as “no employees would lose their jobs,” but what were the practical implications of this?
Ms M Nkadimeng (ANC) asked about the moratorium on the employment of permanent lecturers in the TVET colleges. She wanted to know how many permanent vacancies remained and the state of readiness for these appointments after the migration process was completed on 1 April. She asked how far the progress was on the identification of staff members to be transferred from TVET colleges, as this was supposed to be finalised this month.
Mr C Kekana (ANC) asked if previous experience of migration, such as the migration of the many fragmented education departments in 1994, could empower the Department to deal with the current migration. He asked if the targets set for the training of technical and vocational students would be met due to the many changes taking place due to the migration.
Ms S Mchunu (ANC) said that the migration process was a huge but necessary task. She asked why the DHET faced resistance from the provinces, and if the Department had any recourse because of this.
DHET response
Mr Qonde said that it was not the first time a function had been successfully transferred from one department to another. The Department had successfully migrated the Sector Education and Training Authority (SETA). The matter fell within the project management mandate of the Department and was underpinned by a rigorous change management process. Nothing would be left undone.

On the matter of finance, the Department was engaging with the provinces, Treasury and the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA). Tremendous progress had been made. The letter from the Minister of Finance had been informed by the evolving migration process. There were other areas that needed to be looked at, but the migration was unfolding as planned.

Regarding the deputy principals who were not employed on the same levels, this had to be addressed in terms of the Labour Relations Act. Conditions of service were incumbent on a particular individual and could not be changed. In this case some deputies were disadvantaged, and this was being addressed by the Department and with provinces. The issue was being rectified and did have the full attention of the Department.
On the matter of the consequences for provinces, the Department was engaging on the issue with the Treasury and officials in the Provinces. The matter was being dealt with at the Council of Education Ministers (CEM) level where the Minister was engaging the Provincial MECs of Education and the Heads of Education Departments Committee (HEDCOM), where the Heads of Departments were being engaged to clarify issues. This had resulted in the determination by the Minister of Finance, as no agreement could be reached.
The 63% figure was the norm for every institution and was applicable even for universities. It meant that any college was allowed to use up to 63% of the operational budget for the compensation of employees. It had been established as a norm or standard that for a college or university to function appropriately, it had to adhere to that norm. Colleges and universities were student-centred and had to provide support mechanisms and facilities for teaching, learning and research. It was not possible for the entire operational budget to go to salaries.
On the question of how it was envisioned that no-one would lose his job, he said that every college had programmes which were nationally determined, and all the educators employed for this purpose were captured in Persal. These employees’ jobs were guaranteed. The nature of college operations was such that additional staff, with the relevant skills needed, were employed on an ad hoc basis when the college offered short courses or programmes.
Mr Patel said that institutions were loosely coupled systems which operated in their own environment in terms of the resources that they had. During the transfer process, these institutions would have minimal disruption to their funding and processes. An additional issue arose, which was that the employees’ employment status would change, in that they would no longer be employed by the PEDs but by the DHET. All the funds in regard to the salaries of the employees of the FET colleges and AET centres would be moving over intact if the rules that were set down were followed. If these rules were not followed due to certain practices at colleges, this would emerge. However, money was in the baseline to pay every individual.
The DHET had to follow a process called the “adjustment estimate,” where a request was made to the National Treasury, which then took it to Parliament. In the end, the mandate of Parliament had to be followed.
The issue of Persal was being discussed at a low technical level. Employees would get paid if they were already captured on Persal, as funds were available. If for any unforeseeable reason, Persal did not function for an employee or the information was not correct, a process would have to be followed to verify that person’s qualifications and other personal details. Nevertheless funds would be available to compensate that person and these funds could be transferred to a college so it could compensate that person.
In regard to the issue of accountability for the implementation of protocol, he said that it was a protocol in terms of the Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations Act. This Act did not provide for any accountability or sanction if protocol was not followed. In terms of the Constitution, a sphere of government on one level can not instruct another level of government. In terms of the function shift, this protocol issue was now closed as far as the DHET was concerned because it was in place so that resources could be identified. In 98% of the system, resources had been identified. The outstanding 2% of resources was needed for administration purposes. Now that the funds were available, the DG had the power to reprioritise funds to deal with that.
The R81 million requested was for administrative work to be done in the 2014/ 15 financial year. R10 million had been approved. The administration costs were being absorbed within the budget of the Department. The Department had done an estimation of the administration costs of performing the FET function -- for example the funds needed to manage the payroll, finance, cleaning etc. It had found that R492 million was needed for TVET colleges alone, and an additional R500 million for AET examinations, etc. A comparison had been done with the figures which certain provinces provided and the Department’s estimate, and the Minister of Finance had then found a middle ground. The funds that were not yet allocated were indicated on page 27 of the presentation. In terms of institutional stability, the funds to pay salaries, etc, were there and only the small amounts had yet to be allocated for administration. This could be done by reprioritising funds. Hard choices had to be made and maybe the Department’s savings could be used to boost the funds.
He provided clarity on how the 63% allocation for programme funding works, and the 80/20 split. It was based on the particular programme and provides 80% towards the personnel and maintenance costs of the college. The remaining 20% was supposed to be raised by the college, and in most cases it was provided by NSFAS. The 63% for the cost of programmes had been worked out by a certain group, based on the needs for specific courses. He said that this must be clarified, as it was an important issue. It should be clear that colleges had other sources of money to fund additional personnel, as there had been no change in regard to that. In terms of the FET ACT, all employees that were going to be transferred to the DHET would be coming over with their existing terms and conditions of employment in spite of differences in the salary levels of deputy principals. There would be discussions with unions on how to manage the equalisation process.
For those employees being transferred to the DHET, this had been communicated to them in writing. The identification of these employees was also clearly outlined in the collective agreements. Any problems with those agreements had to be communicated to the DHET.
The moratorium on employing new permanent lecturers was part of the collective agreement and served to protect the rights of those people that were in posts in 2009. On 1 April, the issue of permanent and temporary employees would be looked at. If funds were available, then only could temporary employees perhaps become permanent.
The experience of the amalgamation of the 14 departments in 1994 had been easier because among other reasons, goodwill was there due to the new administration. Problems did occur, and some provinces may still have problems due to the process.
Question and answer session with the Minister
Dr Bozzoli asked about the 35 hour work week and if money would be available for overtime and additional staff.

Mr Cassim asked for the Minister’s own political perspective on the migration and the role of the provinces. He alerted the Minister to the fact that certain immovable assets that had been transferred by state-owned entities to be used by TVET colleges had in some instances been misused. Some local councillors rented out portions of these buildings, and in some cases the full building was not being used for teaching purposes. This would now become a problem for the Department. He asked if the Minister had come across such cases, as well as cases where buildings were not adequate for their purpose, and how the Minister intended to deal with those issues.
Ms Kilian asked if the Department of Public Works (DPW) was conducting an audit of immovable assets, or if the DHET was engaging with them to do so.
Mr Lekhuleni asked about the establishment of a professional body as an alternative to the South African Council of Educators (SACE). The sector was faced with under-qualified lecturers. The White Paper for Post-School Education and Training spoke about the establishment of the South African Institute for Vocational and Continuing Education and Training (SAIVCET) but this had not been mentioned in the presentation.
Mr April asked if the Department was ready to implement the migration plan.
The Minister asked the Committee to consider a proposal from him to plan his attendance at Committee meetings well in advance, and to structure those meetings in such a way that the parties would receive the most benefit from them. At the very least, he would commit to attending these meetings once a quarter and more often if time allowed.
The Minister replied that the Department appreciated the inputs from stakeholders and would like to engage with their proposals, as some of them made sense and may help the Department to move with speed. What may be needed, especially for community colleges, was a task team consisting of stakeholders to assist the Department. It could also play an advisory role, as a lot capacity in the area of AET lay with external practitioners.
The Minister said that he would like to renew, energise, revitalise, transform and improve AET. He hoped to achieve this with the introduction of community colleges. He would like them to offer courses that would contribute to the skills needed by businesses and communities through short courses, etc.
He said that there had not been a breakdown in intergovernmental relations. It was understandable that the provinces did not want to part with money. In general, the intergovernmental relations of the Department were good.
On the topic of those staff members that would not be transferred to the DHET, he said that they must be disaggregated. Colleges always had temporary staff for various reasons. These were people who would not be taken over by the DHET, as they were not in same category as permanent employees.
He questioned whether the point raised by the PSA was a matter for collective bargaining, to be taken back to those structures. If sections of the labour movement felt that it was not adequately catered for, the agreements should be taken back to the appropriate forums and discussed further. The same applied to the issue of the 35-hour work week which was legislated for in terms of the Labour Relations Act. The meaning of this in relation to educators needed to be interrogated. He agreed that educators do work longer than the 35 hours per week. Their hours were complicated due to the unique nature of their work, and there needed to be engagement around this. The Department did not want to be seen as exploiting workers. He would like to engage with the workers on this issue.
On the topic of infrastructure, he said that an audit was currently taking place of all college infrastructure, including its usage. It had been picked up that some colleges were underutilised and could be used more optimally. For example, colleges could be used for AET in the evenings. This issue must be negotiated nationally. All educational buildings had to be handed over to the DHET, and this process was currently underway.
On the issue of SACE, he said that college lecturers would currently fall under SACE. It could be debated whether a new SACE-type of body for college lecturers should be formed or whether the capacity of SACE should be increased in order to deal better with college lecturers. He was cautious about replicating structures where an existing structure could perform the function. He said that the Department was willing to engage on this issue.
Committees’ Discussion
Ms Kilian said that she supported the recommendations by AEPU on Adult Education and Training for the management of the process of establishing community colleges, especially the suggestion for establishing provincial task teams to oversee the migration process. The Department should take on board the concerns expressed by the unions and should look at the issue of provincial officers to oversee the college sector to monitor the migration. She would like to see a better utilisation of infrastructure and welcomed the infrastructure audit. She asked that the Department furnish the Committee with an understanding of the outcome of the audit.

The Chairperson said the Provincial Technical Task Teams (PTTTs) were there, but they needed to be strengthened as they were not effective.
Mr Cassim said that the Ministers’ commitment to engage with stakeholders as the process unfolded would have to be monitored by the Committee. He suggested a joint meeting with the Select Committee on Education and Recreation in the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) for monitoring the migration process, to be scheduled before April 2015. He suggested that the committee should have a discussion on the format of their meetings, where their questions could be answered and other matters discussed.
The Chairperson replied that the Members should inform the secretary in writing as to the focus points of such meeting. As to the format of Committee meetings, she said that a workshop was planned for February on this topic to ensure that the Committee was better able to monitor and evaluate the work it was doing and enable it to focus on key strategic areas to assist the Department.
Mr Mbatha said that the input of the unions and PSA had been enlightening. He appreciated that they had proposed solutions and said the issues raised must be quickly solved, as there was frustration in the sector. He had the impression that the Department was only meeting them when it suited the Department. In order to find solutions, the Department needed to engage with them more often as stakeholders. He said that a harmonisation strategy was needed to ensure a smooth migration. For example, needed skills had been lost from the sector. Salary bands should be revisited so that the best educators could be attracted and retained. Artisan and technical educators mature as time goes by and their quality improves.
He was impressed with the first union that had presented, in that they had segregated the unique problems facing each province. They had given a clear picture of the issues mentioned by the Minister, such as a lack co-operation and speed. As the sector was being rebuilt, labour relation rules had to be reinvented, such as the hours of work of teachers, who needed to spend more time to support youngsters from non-technical schools to prevent failures.
Dr Bozzoli said that the Minister had said that he would like the Committee to help speed up the transfer. Perhaps more pressure needed to be placed on the provinces, and the joint meeting with the NCOP could be a start. She would like to see a risk register from the Department detailing all the risks for the migration on 1 April, and specific action plans to mitigate those risks. Those risks should include the funding gaps, the slow action by provinces and the staff that was not being employed by the Department. She would like to know how the Department planned to deal with the 35-hour work week, as it was inappropriate for teaching, which should be considered to be a profession. She agreed with the proposal from Mr Cassim on a follow up meeting.
The Chairperson said that her understanding of what the Minister had said was that after the proclamation of the merger, the process of the function shift was a long, slow process that needed to be speeded up. The Committee would visit two universities and could meet the PTTT in the Northern Cape. She could ask them to present their province’s migration progress report ,as they should assist with the migration and co-operate with the Department on the process.
Mr Cassim said that the PTTTs needed to be revived. They were not functioning as they should, and had collapsed. This was a departmental issue and therefore it was better to meet with the provincial department and the MECs if possible. The Committee should not generalise as to the provinces on all the matters. The funding issue had been cleared up due to the determination by the Minister of Finance. Generally, it seemed that the issue now was on the transfer of assets from the provinces. It appeared that some provincial staff in the sector were trying to get other positions in the basic education sector. His proposal was that it was best to work through the NCOP, as it was impossible to meet the officials in all the provinces. The Committee needed to get reports on some of the issues, as the best way for the Committee to assist the Department was to put pressure on the provinces. Another point was that there was a huge variance in the budget which would have to be managed.
Ms Kilian asked for details of the plan for the oversight visits from the Committee staff. She agreed with Mr Cassim that it did not make sense to meet the PTTTs on the oversight visits. It appeared some of the provinces did not base the figures that they had given to the Department on facts. She proposed that the Committee request a joint meeting with the Department of Basic Education, including the Minister. There was no law to ensure the co-operation of the provinces and the Committee should ask to what extent the Minister of Basic Education could assist the Committee to ensure their co-operation.
The Chairperson said that a follow up meeting should happen by February, where the Department should give an acceleration plan, and present a risk analysis and risk management plan for the migration process.
Mr Cassim proposed that a Joint Select Committee should be held with the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education and the NCOP committee, with the Ministers present.
The Chairperson agreed that a joint meeting would be the most cost effective way to get all the necessary information in order to assist the Department. The Department needed to present its cost curtailment measures and reprioritisation plan.
Dr Bozzoli said the Department was already understaffed itself and now, on 1 April, much more staff would be transferred and these transferred staff would have to be managed. She would like the Department to inform the Committee who was going to manage the FET colleges. The FET CEO had made six recommendations, one of which referred to the colleges not having enough money, and she asked if that recommendation should be highlighted.
 The Chairperson asked what the key recommendations were that the Committee wanted to make. The Members could forward additional recommendations and with the assistance of the Committee researcher, she would compile a report for Parliament.
Other Committee business
The minutes of the meeting of 21 October were adopted after a change was made to the title, to reflect that it had been a joint meeting.

The minutes of the meeting of 29 October were adopted.
The minutes of the meeting of 4 November were adopted after one sentence was reformulated to give it the meaning that was intended, and a name was corrected.
The minutes of the meeting on 5 November was adopted after a slight correction was made to the wording of one sentence, and two additional points were added.
The minutes of two reports, which had not yet been adopted, were deferred to the next meeting to give the Members a chance to read them.
The meeting was adjourned.