Portfolio Committee on International Relations and Cooperation Legacy Report

This premium content has been made freely available

International Relations

18 February 2015
Chairperson: Mr M Masango (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The Committee Content Adviser and the Committee Researcher presented the Legacy Report of the Fourth Parliament’s Portfolio Committee which identified its lessons as well as challenges for which it hoped the present Committee could perhaps find solutions. The framework of the previous Committee’s work included parliament’s strategic focus for the Fourth Parliament, government’s key priorities, State of the Nation Addresses (SONAs), and both the Department of International Relations and Cooperation and the Committee Strategic Plans for 2009-2014. The focus areas of the previous Committee were aligned to the four department programmes: Administration, International Relations and Cooperation, Public Diplomacy and State Protocol and International Transfers.

Topical thematic issues that the Fourth Parliament Committee had left outstanding included the parliamentary oversight model versus the mandate of the Committee, the elitist nature of foreign policy, regional integration, SA’s role in the Brazil, Russia, India, China and SA (BRICS) agreement and parliament’s role in decision making.  Strategic stakeholders that that Committee had engaged with included civil society organisations like the Muslim Judicial Council, the Friends of Cuba and Palestine Solidarity groups. Government representatives from countries like Palestine, Morocco, Western Sahara and Cuba had met with the Committee. Interactions with academia, students and research institutions had also taken place. As with the previous Committee the oversight model of parliament remains a challenge at present. Visits had however taken place to Addis Ababa and outreach had taken place in the Limpopo Province.

The Fourth Parliament Committee had provided a platform for both sides to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It had received an invitation to visit Gaza via Egypt but unfortunately only members of the ANC majority party were able to undertake the visit. Given this fact, the Committee decided to undertake a second trip to the region comprising both majority and minority party Committee representatives. The second visit was to Israel and to parts of the West Bank. The Israeli authorities had not permitted Members to enter Gaza the second time round.

Important outstanding issues that the current Committee had inherited was the need for a comparative study on the parliamentary oversight model; oversight over African Renaissance Fund (ARF) projects in keeping with the “follow your aid” principle; implementation of bilateral and multilateral treaties; the need for a public diplomacy strategy and a para-diplomacy coordination mechanism for municipalities and provincial offices; oversight visits to DIRCO for each programme and key strategic objectives as well as oversight visits to SA missions abroad.

In the discussion that followed, concern was raised by Members that the previous Committee seemed to be doing the work of DIRCO when the Committee should have been checking on the work of DIRCO. The previous Committee had highlighted a concern about the inadequate budget for oversight and study tours, given that the Committee’s work was essentially outside of SA, which the current Committee agreed about. The Committee agreed to relook at parliament’s oversight model as its predecessor had planned to do. Members were interested to find out what the actual benefits to SA were in being signatories to international agreements. More specifically what the economic benefits were. The Committee agreed with its predecessor that DIRCO needed a public diplomacy strategy especially since there was a misconception that DIRCO was elitist and that SA was the big brother of Africa.

The Committee wanted clarity on the conferment process due to the fact that there was a great deal of overlap between the work of committee and department. It agreed that important issues to be dealt with by the Fifth Parliament Committee should be extrapolated from the Legacy Report of its predecessor. Members were in agreement that the legacy report presentation was useful preparation for the Committee’s strategic plan process. 
 

Meeting report

Five Year Review: May 2009 – March 2014
Ms Lineo Mosala, Content Adviser to the Committee assisted by Committee Researcher, presented the Legacy Report of the Fourth Parliament Portfolio Committee on International Relations and Cooperation. It was the culmination of the work of the previous Committee. There could be lessons that the Fifth Parliament could learn from the Report. She noted that the previous Committee had identified challenges to which the present Committee could perhaps find solutions to.

She provided insight into the broad framework of the Fourth Parliament Committee’s work which covered amongst others parliament’s strategic focus for the Fourth parliament, government’s key priorities, State of the Nation Addresses (SONAs), the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) Strategic Plan and the Committee’s Strategic Plan 2009-2014. Members were provided with an overview of the approach followed by the previous Committee. There were briefings that were required from DIRCO, input was obtained from stakeholders, expert opinions were obtained, dialogues and symposia were encouraged and a solidarity conference had been held in support of Palestine, Cuba and Western Sahara. Oversight visits and study tours were undertaken but this was on a limited basis. Outreach programmes to further public participation were also initiated. The breakdown of focus areas of the previous Committee under the four Programmes of DIRCO were: Administration, International Relations and Cooperation, Public Diplomacy and State Protocol and International Transfers.

Topical thematic issues that the Fourth Parliament Committee had left outstanding included the parliamentary oversight model versus the mandate of the Committee, the elitist nature of foreign policy, regional integration, SA’s role in the Brazil, Russia, India, China and SA (BRICS) agreement and parliament’s role in decision making.  Strategic stakeholders that that Committee had engaged with included civil society organisations like the Muslim Judicial Council, the Friends of Cuba and Palestine Solidarity groups. Government representatives from countries like Palestine, Morocco, Western Sahara and Cuba had met with the Committee. Interactions with academia, students and research institutions had also taken place. As with the previous Committee the oversight model of parliament remains a challenge at present. Visits had however taken place to Addis Ababa and outreach had taken place in the Limpopo Province.

Committee Researcher, Mr David Madlala, stated that the Fourth Parliament Committee had provided a platform for both sides to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It had received an invitation to visit Gaza via Egypt but unfortunately only members of the ANC majority party were able to undertake the visit. Given this fact, the Committee decided to undertake a second trip to the region comprising both majority and minority party Committee representatives. The second visit was to Israel and to parts of the West Bank. The Israeli authorities had not permitted Members to enter Gaza the second time round. A Committee Report on its visit to the Middle East including recommendations had been compiled and parliament had subsequently adopted it. The previous Committee had also undergone training in parliamentary diplomacy and on protocol and etiquette. Future training would cover the manner in which legislation needed to be considered by the Committee.

Ms Mosala stressed that there were important outstanding issues that the current Committee had inherited. These included the need for a comparative study on the parliamentary oversight model; oversight over African Renaissance Fund (ARF) projects in keeping with the “follow your aid” principle; implementation of bilateral and multilateral treaties; the need for a public diplomacy strategy and a para-diplomacy coordination mechanism for municipalities and provincial offices; oversight visits to DIRCO for each programme and key strategic objectives as well as oversight visits to SA missions abroad.

Ms Mosala reiterated the importance of DIRCO needing a public diplomacy strategy to strengthen SA’s influence, reputation, and relationships internationally as well as to promote an international policy agenda that reflected core national interests whilst improving domestic understanding of DIRCO’s role. The Fourth Parliament Committee also identified the need for linkages with non state actors in foreign policy, with other committees in parliament, with municipalities and provinces as well as with international counterpart committees.

Discussion
Mr L Mpumlwana (ANC) noted that the legacy report had spoken about stakeholders such as non government organisations (NGOs) and intellectuals that had been taken on board by the previous Committee. He asked who these persons or organisations were. He asked if the previous Committee had taken rural communities on board. He asked what improvements the current Committee could make. Who took the initiative when the Fourth Parliament Committee had shown solidarity with countries such as Palestine? Was it the Palestinians or the Committee? He asked to where the Fourth Parliament Committee had undertaken study tours. Did it visit the United Nations? He asked if the “follow your aid” principle was something that the Committee should do. Did South Africa influence the outcomes at the United Nations? Could the issue be unpacked for the Committee?

Ms Mosala replied about stakeholders, saying the previous Committee had done outreach to provinces. The Committee had trailed the Minister. The first province which the Committee had visited was Limpopo Province. People needed to have an understanding of SA’s foreign policy. The previous Committee had been tired of boardroom oversight. The outreach programmes were focussed at people from all walks of life. An imbizo had also been held. Other role players on foreign policy were the Presidency and government departments.

The “follow your aid” principle was a concept to follow development aid. It was considered a useful principle.  

On the issue of solidarity, Mr Madlala explained that the previous Committee had been approached by different groups on issues similar to the Palestinian matter such as the Democratic Republic of Congo and Eritrea. The Fourth Parliament Chairperson, with the Solidarity Conference, wished to create a platform where issues of Palestine, Cuba and Western Sahara could be discussed. This approach could be continued by this Committee or the Committee could initiate things themselves. 

Ms C Dudley (ACDP) said that the previous Committee had a great deal of success on dialogues. The idea was to reach people on the ground. She stated that the previous Committee tended to do all the work when it should have been checking on the work of DIRCO. She felt it important that the Committee link up with other Portfolio Committees such as Home Affairs. On oversight and study tours, she said that the Committee was not following the budget. The trips that the previous Committee had undertaken were essentially to do work which DIRCO was supposed to do. The Committee should check up on the work of DIRCO. The problem was that the Committee was allocated the same budget as other Committees for trips when the Committee’s work was essentially outside of SA.

Ms Mosala commented about the oversight trips of the previous Committee, stating that verification visits to African Renaissance Fund projects had not been approved by parliament. Neither had visits to the United Nations. Only the visit to Addis Ababa had happened.  

Mr M Maila (ANC) noted that countries abroad had used the “follow your aid” principle to track how funds were spent in SA. What system had the previous Committee used to check on how funds were spent? The Legacy Report spoke about the use of experts’ perspectives and analysis. Who identified the experts to be used?  A discussion on a re-look of the oversight model still had to take place. He asked if the previous Committee had considered oversight and study tour models of overseas countries. On the issue of conferment, he asked whether after a shortfall had been identified, there was an improvement.

Ms Mosala said that that she and Mr Madlala had sourced the experts. She confirmed that comparisons had been done with oversight models from overseas countries. There was a document available and it had been presented to the powers that be in parliament. Unfortunately there was no buy-in as yet. It was something that the Committee needed to discuss.

The Chairperson responded that he would present the document to the powers that be in parliament. He requested Ms Mosala and Mr Madlala to make up a package of issues that had emerged from the Legacy Report that he could take to the powers that be in parliament.

Ms Mosala said that conferment was covered in the rules of parliament. The previous Committee had taken its own initiative to confer on matters relating to treaties, visas and so on. 

Ms T Kenye (ANC) was concerned about what were the benefits to South Africa of international agreements that it was signatory to. She asked who the stakeholders were. The average South African did not know what international relations was all about? How could the Committee reach out to South Africans? What methods had the previous Committee used to reach South Africans? The previous Committee had visited Addis Ababa and had visited missions. What was the impact of the visit and was a report compiled?

Ms Mosala replied that on the Addis Ababa bilateral, the finding was that bilateral relations with Ethiopia needed to be strengthened.

Ms D Raphuti (ANC) asked if Members were going to be given extracts from the State of the Nations Address (SONA) 2015 that related specifically to international relations.

Mr Madlala said that each year after the President’s SONA, he extrapolated issues from it relating to international relations. The same was done for SONA 2015. The issue was about continuity. This document would be distributed to the Committee.

The Chairperson recommended that Ms Mosala and Mr Madlala extract from the Legacy Report issues and weaknesses and make recommendations in this regard. In this way the Committee could see what lessons it could learn from the previous Committee. He asked why the Legacy Report was quiet about xenophobia. Had international terrorism also not come under the attention of the previous Committee? The Legacy Report spoke about public diplomacy and the perceptions that were out there that DIRCO was elitist and that SA played a big brother role in Africa. Whose perceptions were these? Was it perceptions of South Africans or foreigners? SA had 126 missions and hence had a visible presence in the World. What could the Committee learn from it?

He also asked what benefit was there to SA being part of international agreements such as the Brazil, Russia, India, China and SA (BRICS) agreement. What were the economic benefits? In many instances SA helped to ensure that peace was kept in certain regions and once things were settled, other countries stepped in to reap economic benefits. DIRCO would be requested to provide information on the benefit that international agreements were to SA. On conferment, he asked which department had been conferred and on what matter. How was the power of conferment given to chairpersons of committees? Did the Chair of Chairpersons make the decision?  He suggested that the Committee together with its counterparts such as Defence, Justice, Security and Home Affairs could discuss these issues.  

Ms Mosala noted that the perception of SA being the big brother of Africa came from Africa and beyond. She noted that there were jealousies out there. Public diplomacy needed to change perceptions.

The Committee Secretary, Mr Lubabalo Sigwela, replied on the subject of conferment, saying it was a challenge to the Committee when a document was referred to another committee when it should have come to the Committee. It was a problem which required political intervention. He explained that at a conference if there were two committees present, there could be a co-chair or either one of the chairpersons could chair.

The Chairperson noted that there was a great deal of overlap in the work of departments.

Mr M Lekota (COPE) said that the work of DIRCO and the Department of Defence often overlapped. The Department of Defence should be guided by diplomacy.

Ms Dudley said that the Department of Trade and Industry was also important given the aim of economic benefit to SA. She also felt that DIRCO needed to align its strategy with the National Development Plan.

Mr Madlala reminded Members that foreign missions had attaches and there were defence attaches. He noted that there were areas of overlap on a regular basis. The chairpersons of committees needed to initiate conferment. He felt that the Committee should visit one or two provinces before the end of 2015.

Mr Mpumlwana pointed out that the Committee did not have enough resources for oversight.

The Chairperson stated that resources would be covered when the Committee looked at its oversight model. He said that the quality of the information in the presentation was excellent. Its format needed a bit of tweaking as often times issues were hidden in between content. Matters that the Committee needed to deal with would have to be packaged. Members should feel free to make inputs about the issues they came across in the Legacy Report.

Mr Mpumlwana asked what conclusion had been reached on engagements with people from Palestine, Israel, Western Sahara and Morocco. What could be done about a public diplomacy budget? He felt that benefits of treaties to SA relevant to international relations should only be communicated to the Committee since looking at all treaties would be a wasted exercise. Did DIRCO in purchasing properties abroad take into account insurance costs? On the conduct of SA companies abroad, should South African labour laws not be applicable. What was the progress made on the integration of the Southern African Development Community (SADC)?

The Chairperson pointed out that some of the questions posed by members should be directed to DIRCO. He noted that Ms Mosala and Mr Madlala were tasked with checking on the work that DIRCO did.   

Ms Raphuti suggested that Ms Mosala merely note the questions asked. She said that the Committee needed a full picture of SA’s 126 missions. What type of training was given and what were the costs?

Mr Maila asked if the Committee was expected to adopt the Legacy Report of the previous Committee.

Ms Mosala answered that the Legacy Report was only a working document. It was not binding on the Committee. The Committee would have a proper discussion of issues when it entered the process of its strategic plannling. The presentation of the Legacy Report was preparation for that process.

Ms Kenye suggested that members submit questions in writing to Ms Mosala to which she can offer a written response at a later time. The Committee was at present limited by time constraints.

Ms Dudley asked what diplomatic training entailed. In addition, she asked about the status of the Draft White Paper on International Relations.

The Chairperson agreed that the presentation was useful preparation for the Committee’s strategic planning process and gave the Committee insight into how the previous Committee did its work.

The meeting was adjourned.  

 

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: