SABC handing over control to MultiChoice; Department of Communications; GCIS; ICASA; SABC; Brand South Africa 2015/16 Annual Performance & Strategic Plans, with Minister & Auditor General; MDDA Board recommendations

Meeting report

Briefing by Auditor-General South Africa (AGSA)
Mr Promise Buthelezi, Auditor Manager: AGSA, said the briefing provided information to Members for them to be able to conduct oversight. AGSA would be sharing the outcome of its evaluation as all presenting entities had been audited. According to their prior audit reports, there was a little change. However, SABC had moved from a qualified to an unqualified report. The matters falling within TV licencing were not audited. Some consultants were appointed to do this. No audit work has been done thus far on the TV licencing system as the components are not ready for audit yet. The prior issues with SABC compliance involved: Strategic planning and performance management; Annual Financial Statements, performance report and annual report; Procurement and contract management; Expenditure management; Revenue management; Asset management and Consequence management. With regards to the interim audit of the Annual Performance and Strategic Plans of the DoC entities, he stated that there was nothing to report yet. There was a problem with pension matters. AGSA was challenged as there were agreements that contained non-disclosure clauses. AGSA had evaluated contracts that were concluded within a three-year period. On the issue of disclosure, the clauses ought to be written in a simple language. A major issue was data collection.

Discussion
The Chairperson commented that there would have to be a later date on which AGSA briefed the Committee on the entities of the Department of Communications.

Mr W Madisha (COPE) sought clarity on whether it should be assumed that nothing had been submitted on the entities hence they had an unclean audit.

Mr Buthelezi responded in the negative. He said that certain internal audit matters could not be verified and some matters which remained unresolved could not be audited. An audit could be done once these issues were resolved.

Briefing by the Committee’s Content advisor
Mr Maleka Mambo, Content Advisor to the Committee briefed the Committee on a review of the strategic importance of the new department. He focussed on the key areas that the Department had to expedite if it is to make an immediate impact on nation-building (Outcome 14: Nation Building and Social Cohesion). These were captured by the Minister and the Department as:
- Review and streamline communication legislation
- Develop and implement an overarching communication policy
- Develop and implement enabling communication strategies
- Publicise government programmes and positively brand the country locally and abroad
- Stabilise governance matters of entities reporting to the Ministry
- Expedite digital migration
- Broaden support to community media, and
- Transform media.

Mr Mambo noted imperatives for the current medium term period for the Department included (i) stabilising itself as an organ of the state, (ii) cementing its role as the lead Department for Communications and branding of the country, and (iii) align its activities to the broader macroeconomic policies of government such as the National Development Plan (NDP), National Growth Path (NGP) and the Industrial Policy Action Plan (IPAP), so that it was able to consistently deliver on its mandate.

Mr Mambo explained that to render the Department effective, the Committee was required to support review of legislation related to the (i) Broadcasting Amendment Bill; (ii) ICASA Amendment Bill; (iii) MDDA Amendment Bill; (vi) Films and Publications Board Amendment Bill; and (v) Brand South Africa Bill.

For the financial year 2016/17, the Department received a total of R1 280 900 000 for its budget. In terms of the entities that reported to it, 89% was allocated to SABC. The large allocation to the SABC was presumably prompted by the digital migration process that has since commenced and would put a burden on the public broadcaster and its mandate.

Finally, Mr Mambo identified 14 issues for consideration by the Committee during the discussion with the DoC entities.

Discussion
Mr R Tseli (ANC) sought clarity on utilisation of community media and asked the Content Advisor whether, based on his analysis, the progress was satisfactory. Were the consultation services necessary?

Mr Mambo responded that there was an insignificant progress in the utilisation of community media because all government departments were not making use of it. Lack of usage of the community media had implications as government messages failed to reach communities, as the majority who live in rural areas. Adoption of a policy requiring all departments to utilise community media services could be a solution to increase utilisation of community media.

On consultation, Mr Mambo responded that the Department and its entities should focus on retaining people with these skills so as to minimise expense spent on consultation services.

Opening remarks by Minister of Communications
Minister Faith Muthambi stated that the Department’s Strategic Plan imperatives for the Medium Term Period 2015/16-2019/20 derived from collaborative effort to take the Department forward. The presentations would reflect a product that was put together through collaboration. They would be talking about mandates, visions and what each institution was responsible for. All the presentations were submitted to the DoC and it had an opportunity to comment on them and they were revised in accordance with the Department inputs.

Given the new mandate of the Department, the work of the GCIS, as an entity would have to be reviewed. It got its main mandate from the Department. The GCIS ought to ensure that the strategic imperatives report was fully implemented, but some of programmes were not fully funded. DoC was having a conversation with cabinet to find how all these programmes could be fully funded. An area that needed to be reviewed was media engagement, which was the core work of the GCIS. It was within this area in which more government’s adverts were to be published.

Referring to the work of ICASA, Minister Muthambi stated that it is recommended that it reduce its strategic goals from eight to three. This would enable DoC and the Committee to measure them accordingly. That approach also enabled it to focus on its core mandate. Important to note was licencing for secondary commercial markets. DoC would ensure that ICASA conduct market studies to support the business cases so as to licence more broadcasting companies in the Republic. Local content was one of the areas which was prioritised. With regards to financials, 60.4% of ICASA budget went to compensation of employees. More resources should be allocated to monitoring compliance of the regulations. That would ensure effectiveness of the regulator in implementing its mandate. ICASA ought also look closer at the need for an effective amendment of radio frequency spectrum.

Referring to SABC, Minister Muthambi stated that no major issues were found in the SABC operations. However, DoC made a number of suggestions to enhance input of the presentation. SABC projected sustainability in its revenue over the last three years. Audience remained consistent at 53% which was a bit worrying. Though DoC understood the challenges within the sector, the SABC had to make an effort to grow. SABC should state how it would deal with that matter. With regards to local content, the SABC had made a request for a “requirement book” of more than six million.

Referring to Brand South Africa, Minister Muthambi noted that there had been an engagement with the Chairperson, along with the Board of Trustees. They agreed that there was a need to reposition Brand SA to enable it to do more branding both locally and internationally. Within its mandate, it has a duty to promote the national anthem and the constitutional aspirations. Brand SA would lead all national, provincial and local institutions on branding matters. There was also an agreement that the number of trustees be reduced. The legislation needed to be amended for the purpose of effective implementation of resolutions.

The Minister noted that she would be dealing with a regulatory system for the print media at later stage. However, the Deputy Director General was the right person to elaborate on it.

Government Communication and Information System (GCIS) presentation
Mr Donald Liphoko, DoC Acting Director General, spoke about its mandate, vision, mission and values; strategic goals, 2014/15 strategic overview, GCIS structure, 2015-20 Medium Term targets, 2015-20 targets per programme.

The GCIS mandate was twofold, oneo of which was to provide leadership in government education and to coordinate a government communication system that ensures that the public is informed about government’s policies, plans and programmes. It has adopted four strategic goals: maintain and strengthen a well-functioning communication system that proactively informs and engages the public; to provide a responsive and business-focussed corporate service; enhance the image of government and that of the state; to provide an efficient and effective marketing and advertising agency for government; and to professionalise the communication system and to build a reliable knowledge base and enhance communication products.

The GCIS had three programmes in which its strategic objective and targets were devised and in which achievements ought to be evaluated. They were (i) administration content processing, (ii) dissemination and inter-governmental coordination, and (iii) stakeholder management. These three programmes were further refined into sub-programmes that were briefed on in terms of financial management for 2015/16, 2016/17, and 2016/17 financial years.

Referring to media engagement, Mr Liphoko noted that the GCIS strategic objective was to implement a proactive media engagement system building, maintaining and improving relations with media and drive the government communication agenda. To achieve this, 16 engagements would be held.

With regards to financials, the GCIS total appropriated expenditure was R413.1 million for 2014/15 financial year and a decrease in expenditure for subsequent financial years was expected. The GCIS had received unqualified audit.

Mr Liphoko concluded by stating that GCIS was committed to assisting all government departments and their entities with government communication services; that it remained committed to communicating on the National Development Plan’s developments and achievements andit would , together with other departments, implement the National Communication Strategy (NCS).

Discussion
Ms V van Dyk (DA) asked why it took too long to appoint an acting CEO, or the reason why it took so long to appoint someone in permanent position. On the 15% spent on community media, what exactly was the money spent on? How much budget was allocated to compensation of personnel?

With reference to the CEO, Minister Muthambi responded that the Presidency dealt with issue in July 2014 when it recommended that there must be a change. We have indicated in our presentation that the GCIS should be under DoC. Before that, it was not clear where the GCIS could be allocated. On 01 April 2015, the Minister appointed an Acting DG and has put into motion a process of recruiting personnel. When DoC reported back to the Committee, it would be able to report to that effect.

The Chairperson appreciated the development in aligning the duties of the CEO to that of the Deputy Director General.

Mr Liphoko responded that GCIS was spending much on community media – including radio and newspapers – because it was buying space for departments for adverts. He did not have statistics with him and said that he would forward figures to the Committee. Various channels were being used to ensure that members of the community received messages relayed by departments. Print media was the best option.

Minister Muthambi said that the GSIS had a database, comprising about 10 000 members, including business people, leaders, workers union, church ministers, etc. who assisted the GSIC to circulate messages.

The Chairperson reiterated that the issue raised by the Minister on communication strategy funding should be taken seriously and thus be supported by Committee. The Committee would put its efforts there to ensure that it was funded. The alignment of what have been highlighted in the presentation was also essential. The understanding of the alignment of leadership was important for the Committee to be able to monitor and evaluate the work of the GCIS.

Minister of Communications briefing
Minister Muthambi stated that the Department and GCIS had planned together. Other entities would brief the Committee on how they would be implementing these strategic plans. DoC’s work, in particular, covered improving government communication, broadcasting policy review, content development, community media support, and strengthening its entities to deliver effectively. In dealing with its mandate, strategies for implementation were formulated. The GSIC continue to be part of DoC by implementing certain strategies and reporting back to the Minister, particular with regards to communicating the work of the government to the people.

Referring to the SABC, she noted that this entity was in a sound financial position. However, it should fully address the findings raised by the AGSA in its report; otherwise it would fail to fulfil its mandate. One of priorities was to fund broadcasting and to ensure all official language were catered for. Digital migration was also prioritised. Since 1994 progress had been made in establishing community media including TV, radios and newspapers which accommodated diversity. This bought into line the print media regulation system that DoC had to take immediate action on to ensure a meaningful transformation agenda of our country which would include resuscitation of a parliamentary inquiry in which DoC would participate to come up with a more balanced and acceptable regime within the industry. In terms of advertising, a dispensation would be created to ensure that the media contributed to diversity. In this regard, DoC would continue to engage with various stakeholders, including Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) so as to develop a policy that gave effect to the Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE) code within the industry, which had been self-regulated.

Mr Norman Munzhelele, Deputy Director General: ICT Policy Development, took the Committee through the presentation focusing on its strategic overview, Five Year Programme Strategic Plans and its 2015/16 Annual Performance Plan priorities. In its strategic overview, the presentation touched on vision, mission and value statement; mandate, planned policy and legislative initiatives, situational analysis, organisational environment, strategic outcome oriented goals, programme overview and resources plan. He elaborated on the targets of the Strategic Plan and APP 2015/16 targets. 

He noted that DoC’s mandate derived from the Bill of Rights, in particular the principles of freedom to receive or impart information or ideas and freedom of artistic creativity. Its main focus was to deepen democracy and sustain nation-building and patriotism by ensuring the citizenry was informed about government programmes and that they were able to influence and participate in such programmes. Other mandates were derived from Acts of Parliament and the President’s pronouncement establishing DoC. In the medium term, DoC was focussing on an overarching communication policy, an overarching broadcasting policy, a community media and broadcasting support strategy, and a media bulk-buying strategy. He noted that certain legislation would be amended in order to have in place its planned policy.

In the DoC’s situational analysis, communication played an important supportive role in the realisation of Government strategic objectives as outlined in the National Development Plan and the Medium-Term Strategic Framework. It energised and mobilised the nation to take an active role in realising the government’s programme of radical economic transformation which stressed poverty, unemployment and inequality. It was a catalyst in promoting nation-building, unity and social cohesion. It protected and defended the image of government by proactively communicating government messages and showcasing delivery successes, challenges and corrective action plans.

Government communication happened largely at three levels: print media, broadcasting and face-to-face engagement with citizens through programmes such as the izimbizo. Key challenges that needed to be addressed and which informed DoC’s strategic plans were:
- The media were largely dominated by monopoly players with its ownership and management remaining far below prevailing population demographics, hence the need for transformation;
- Communication content which was driven by a minority of companies;
- The challenge posed by the emergence of social media
- Poor funding of the public broadcaster
- Inadequate performance of public and community broadcasting.

Further key challenges that were identified and needed to be addressed and which informed DoC’s strategic plans were governance challenges of state owned entities; the delayed digital migration project; and inadequate communication of government programmes and plans.

DoC was made up of three branches and two chief directorates. These branches were (i) Communication, Policy, Research and Development Branch, (ii) Industry Capacity Development Branch, and (iii) Entity Oversight Branch. The two chief directorates were Corporate Services and Financial Management. DoC’s entities included ICASA, SABC, Brand SA, GCIS, Media Development and Diversity Agency (MDDA) and the Film and Publication Board (FPB).

Mr Munzhelele noted DoC’s four strategic goals, along with nine strategic objectives, and said that DoC played an important role in implementing Outcome 14: nation building and social cohesion. In so doing, it was expected to provide support to the Department of Sport and Recreation and to influence South Africans to be proud South Africans.

He listed DoC’s four programmes: (1) Administration; (2) Communications, Policy, Research and Development; (3) Industry and Capacity Development; (4) Entity oversight. For 2014/15, the resource plan stood at R1.2 billion. He outlined the five-year strategic plan targets and 2015/16 APP priorities developed under four programmes.

Minister Muthambi remarked that the presentation covered everything and she had nothing to add but to take questions.

Discussion
The Chairperson welcomed the presentation and commented that it was indeed interesting and very informative.

Ms van Dyk commented that DoC had long term projects. Referring to previous reports, she said that 54% were performed and achieved, meaning that 36% were not performing well. Added to this, there was no performance agreement and that meant no one could be held accountable. Referring to the report developed by SABC consultants, she said that there was a lack of skills within DoC and some positions remained vacant. She asked why these challenges were not made a priority. Why was it taking DoC six to eight months to fill a position?

Referring to the poor funding of broadcasting, Mr Tseli commented that DoC should come up with a strategic plan to address the matter. He asked if lack of support of community media was due to the problem of an absence of infrastructure. He asked what penalties could be imposed on an entity which was not performing. He remarked that community media relied on government advertisements to make money and thus suggested that they should be financially supported to ensure their sustainability.

Mr Tseli asked about the internal audit committee and said that it was not clear how the committee would be established. With regard to the five community radio stations, it was not clear how these stations would be established.

Minister Muthambi replied that she was not in a position to answer the questions raised by Ms van Dyk because these questions should be directed to Department of Telecommunications and Postal Services. She could not take responsibility for these matters.

Minister Muthambi objected to the question on the use of consultants. DoC was using its personnel wherever possible, given that it had limited resources.  

With regard to sustainability of community print media, Minister Muthambi stressed that DoC was having public consultations through Izimbizo initiative to get more suggestions. So far, DoC had allocated 30% on community print media. She remarked that organs of the state were used to using the national print media and that should stop because the majority of people do not read national newspapers. They should use local newspapers which were written in the local language.

With regards to establishing an internal auditor, Minister Muthambi replied that there were other services that DoC was using to ensure that its financials were audited. The matter of internal auditing would be dealt with by the Chief Financial Officer.

With regards to the five community radios, Minister Muthambi agreed that some of the radio structures needed upgrading (e.g. software) and that DoC was working on that. New ones were being established too. The challenge was to ensure that radio stations were situated in different areas. It ought to be noted that what might be news at national level might not make it news at local level. In this context, DoC was trying to find a broadcasting model for use in our community media. DoC had looked at various models including Australian and American ones. The area that needed to be strengthened was production.

With regard to penalties, Minister Muthambi indicated that there was a Memorandum of Understanding between DoC and GCIS which could be used to hold the GCIS accountable. Moreover, DoC was confident that staff were knowledgeable about the National Treasury regulations. She was happy that the issue of compliance was raised in the presence of her entities. There was no problem because, for example, the SABC Charter contained matters related to the legal consequences in case the SABC was not performing. She requested the SABC to also establish a shareholder compact that included penalty measures. For ICASA, a performance contract that contained punitive measures had been signed by shareholders. DoC would be sharing copies with the Committee so members could be knowledgeable of how the entity or its councillors could be held to account and their performance monitored.

The Chairperson sought clarity on whether the SABC Charter and Shareholders Compact were aligned to the BBBEE Sector Charter. Referring to the constitutional mandate, she remarked that various aspects should be taken into account included the national anthem and racism and xenophobia. DoC should start zooming in on these matters and start to plan strategies on how they could be responded to. The issue of funding broadcasting had been raised over and over again and there was a need to solve it. Another interesting issue was about policing. She had never had issues with consultancy.

Mr Munzhelele responded that the BBBEE sector code was gazetted in June 2012, but not much work had been done about that.

Minister Muthambi replied that the percentage Ms van Dyk referred to was not an issue connected to the new DoC because DoC was non-existent last year. It terms of compliance, DoC had to comply with the Public Financial Management Act (PFMA).

The Chairperson remarked that the audit compliance issues were of concern and nothing had been said about them. Policy and industrial development was another area that needed attention. Achieving this needed partnership with other departments.

Independent Communication Authority of South Africa (ICASA) presentation
Dr Stephen Mncube, ICASA Board Chairperson, introduced his team and Mr Pakamile Pongwana, ICASA CEO, took the Committee through the presentation, focussing on mandate, vision, mission and values; government’s policy objectives, government’s key priority outcomes, ICASA’s strategic alignment with the ICT ministries, operation projects, institutional risks and finances. ICASA’s mandate was to regulate electronic communications, broadcasting and postal sectors in the public interest and to ensure affordable services of high quality for all South Africans. Its vision was to advance the building of a digital society. ICASA had adopted three strategic goals for 2016-20: to promote competition; to promote the digital agenda; and to improve stakeholder and consumer experience. These strategic goals were aligned with DoC’s 2016-20 priorities.

Mr Pongwana noted four institutional top risks:
- Legal challenges to regulatory processes
- Policy uncertainty due to lack of coordination
- Inadequate funding for execution of institution’s mandate
- Non-adherence to defined and documented operational processes.

Mr Pongwana provided a history of its baselines with regards to DoC grants for ICASA’s economic classification costs, staff costs, consultancy budget, and total budget summary. Total expenditure was R443 551 898.

The Minister said ICASA need to improve its supply chain management. ICASA had aligned its objective goals to the NDP. Its priority was competition. She appreciated the fact that the presentation was not presented in a cut-and-paste fashion as had transpired in its previous presentation.

Discussion
Mr van Dyk welcomed the presentation and sought clarity on how ICASA would operate on the basis of policy uncertainty.

Mr Tseli sought clarity on the challenges of its funding model as touched on in the presentation. When will ICASA develop a funding model?

Mr M Kekana (ANC) sought clarity on litigation and how these legal issues were solved. How many cases were still unresolved? Did ICASA intend to reduce its consultancy costs? Why did it make use of consultants? How many positions are vacant? When are these posts going to be filled? How will it go about resolving supply chain management challenges?

On staff positions becoming vacant, Mr Pongwana replied that that there were people who left ICASA simply because their contract came to an end. Others left because they were offered better positions elsewhere. In ICASA, there was no incentives package encouraging person to apply for higher positions. When employees saw there was no room for progress, they left ICASA.

On its use of consultants, Mr Pongwana replied that consultation was used to study the market. The use of senior counsel legal services were classified as consultants.

On the development of a funding model, Mr Pongwana replied that ICASA was following a model that had been presented to the Parliament.

On the matter of litigation, Mr Pongwana replied that Cell C was contesting new regulations that were presented to Parliament.

Mr Kekana stated the issue of cell phones was dominant in the previous meeting held sometime in July 2014. There was also the issue of PWC which needed to be clarified. He said that it would be appreciated if ICASA responded in writing on the litigation matters.

Ms van Dyk remarked that the performance of ICASA had been very poor. She sought clarity on whether there was an improvement.

The Chairperson asked the Committee Secretary to ascertain whether there was outstanding information that Members had requested but for which there had been no response.

Referring to funded positions, Mr Pongwana said that all vacancies, be they filled or unfilled, were all budgeted for. On the issue of PWC, he was not in a position to give clear information and that he would revert to the Committee in writing.

Mr Tseli, referring to employees who left because of the lack of skills, asked why they were not trained to enhance their skills.

Mr Pongwana replied that when there was the spilt in the department, job descriptions were reviewed and positions were restructured. Many people found that they were not capable of performing the new duties. It should not be noted that ICASA did not dismiss any of its employees and that some employees were given an opportunity to further their skills.

The Chairperson noted that there were matters being reported in the media which the Minister wanted to clarify.

Minister on SABC handing over control to MultiChoice
Minister Muthambi said that Members might have heard that the SABC had sold its national archives to the MultiChoice company. The duty was on ICASA to clarify what happened so that the issues become clear to the Committee and the public, because they have been misled.

Mr Pongwana, ICASA CEO, stated that the ICASA Council took the SABC to the Competition Commission arguing that the SABC had sold its national archives to MultiChoice. However, the ICASA leadership realised that the ICASA council was actually asked to take a decision on litigation on the basis of misleading information. ICASA leadership had to say to the council of ICASA that the information that it had been given was misleading and it did not have a valid basis for keeping this issue with the Competition Commission. The matter should be withdrawn.

Mr Hlaudi Motsoeneng Chief Operations Officer: SABC, replied that the complaint was malicious and misleading to say the SABC had sold or given MultiChoice its national archives. On SABC ceding its power to determine its policy on set-top box control to a commercial broadcasting entity that is also its competitor, he said there ought to be regulations from ICASA, saying that all SABC channels should not encrypt the content on Pay TV channel or any Pay TV. SABC was not on Multi Choice only, it was also on Top TV because they were a Pay TV company. SABC had been there for 20 years. An agreement that was signed contained a non-disclosure clause. It just made both parties benefit from national achirves. This move was made after discovering that SABC was not benefiting from its resources. It would be a mistake to allow a commercial TV company to have free access to its SABC archives. Free access was restricted to ordinary people – scholars and researchers. SABC had commercial archives. It was licensed to international archives such as Days of our Lives.

Mr Motsoeneng explained that if a prominent person dies, SABC can ask a particular country to give to the SABC archives about him or her since birth to death. That happened in the case of President Mandela. Some of Mandela’s archives were held by foreign country that had followed him since his activism days. It was true that some corporates were competing with SABC and these corporates were not happy with the success of the SABC. MultiChoice was paying R50 million per five years. It was asked to also fund SABC’s content. SABC did not have any problem whatsoever with eTv’s encryption.

The Chairperson commented that this was highly technical information. A time was needed so Members could get into this matter. The Committee would need documentary evidence so that it could understand the problem better. It appreciated the information that had been forthcoming but it needed to sit and find the manner in which it could assist both ICASA and SABC.

Mr Kekana appreciated the information provided and fully agreed with the Chairperson.

Mr Tseli seconded them. However, the agreement in question should be made available to Members.

Mr Madisha seconded this. The matter should be resolved on the basis of empirical documents.

Mr Motsoeneng objected to making the agreement available. The contract was concluded on a business basis and on the basis of non-disclosure. He was concerned that once the document was made available, it could be leaked to the media.

Mr Motsoeneng said that the SABC was complying with the ICASA regulation that demanded that SABC programmes be 55% local content.

The Chairperson said that SABC should put its trust in the Members and should note that when it briefed the Committee, the SABC ought to give all documents that the Committee requests in line with its mandate.

The Minister said that it was important to brief the Committee as the matter was in the public sphere and collaboration with the Committee was in the interest of the public. MultiChoice did sign contracts with various channels, national and foreign. She thought that the issue was not the SABC archives but rather the SABC was a victim in the fight of two big media industry.

Mr Tseli said that the matter could be engaged in the presence of the Minister.

Mr Kekana agreed. He commented that he had suspected something fishy was going on but now he agreed with them a 100%.

Mr Madisha objected to the comment made by Mr Kekana that matters had become clear. He said that it was resolved that the matter should be resolved on the basis of documents. The Committee would sit with Minister and disputants to find a solution.

The Chairperson agreed with Mr Madisha. She had ruled on the matter. She had called on SABC to brief the Committee.

South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) presentation
Mr Hlaudi Motsoeneng Chief Operations Officer: SABC, took the Committee through presentation focusing on vision, mission, values; purpose and strategic overview; strategy 2015/16 and 2016/17/18.

Mr Motsoeneng noted that SABC’s content was reviewed on the basis of consultation. Consultation had indicated that people wanted to watch local programmes and not international programmes. SABC is putting money into local emerging production. From August 2015, there would be a new programme that was produced by locals. A new programme being shown in KwaZulu Natal had attracted a big audience. Each province should produce its own local-based content. A new programme which was more educational on who we are as Africans would be launched. It is believed that it would help to deter xenophobic violence. The newsroom should transform. TV news differed from that of newspapers; because they published unchecked content. SABC did not. The SABC journalists ought to give news that was based on the evidence. Our legislation required us to defend democracy but news ought to be balanced.

Mr Motsoeneng reported that it was working closely with municipalities because journalists were not prophets. Municipal officials could direct them where matters were occurring that could make news, more precisely lack of service delivery.

On the issue of audience, Mr Motsoeneng agreed that SABC needed to improve its audience size. It was losing audience because most of its programmes were being repeated. SABC was not funded by government but it was sustainable, by growing its revenue through various traditional and innovative new resources. He remarked that broadcasting the messages encouraging people to desist from attacking foreigners was costing the SABC. This was not a problem because SABC was contributing to saving humanity from this spate of attacks.

On the issue of TV licences, SABC was getting service providers to detect people who were watching TV but who did not pay their TV licences.

Discussion
Mr Tseli sought clarity on TV licence auditing.

Mr Kekana welcomed the presentation and appreciated the improvement of the SABC within its financial sphere. It took SABC 20 years to have a clean audit. He sought clarity on whether there were other litigation cases and how many people had been disciplined, if yes, what were measures that were taken. What was happening with vacancies? He took an opportunity to thank SABC for airing the national anthem but made a request that it should be aired at or around six or seven.

Mr M Kalako (ANC) welcomed the information on the SABC financial statements. He suggested that people should be requested to pay for the TV licence when buying the TV set. How much was collected during the 2014/15 financial year in licence fees?

Mr Madisha appreciated the presentation and congratulated the SABC on its growth. He suggested that the SABC should sit with the labour unions to resolve labour disputes. With regards to locally-based content, he sought clarity on how people would access the SABC content when they were poor and illiterate.

Mr M Ndlozi (EFF) remarked that the SABC should find a way of refining and organising programmes and allow foreigners to play African soaps to ensure that South Africa show that it is part of the African continent. South Africans should be interested in African stories because they are Africans. Why was the SABC much more interested in European programmes. Why was SABC not airing even the most loved Nigerian movies?

Mr Motsoeneng responded that it had put in place a strategy to air African content and it would give feedback to the Committee. It was also encouraging people to write for TV shows in different languages. Referring to the national anthem, he stated it was a strategic approach to air it at 5am because many people are getting ready to go to work. Referring to the TV licence audit, he responded that the issue was being dealt with and would be resolved very soon. TV licensing was not audited because there were still problems in that area. Referring to the disciplinary hearings, he replied that these were matters for the human resources department. As this was not included in the presentation, he would not be able to provide figures. On the vacant positions, this matter was being approached carefully to ensure that all demographics are represented and to ensure gender equity and disability representation.

On the combating of xenophobia, Minister Muthambi echoed Mr Motsoeneng’s statement and said that foreign content mainly from Africa would be aired with the aim to restore harmonious relations. African content would be aired for educational purpose. She thanked SABC for airing messages to stop xenophobia.

Brand South Africa presentation
Ms Alice Puoane, Brand SA CFO, briefed the Committee on its mandate, vision and mission, strategic goals and objectives, and the manner in which these goals were aligned with DoC priorities. Brand SA’s focus was “one story, well told”.

Ms Puoane talked about Brand SA purpose and core functions, its modes of communication and the social, political, economic, cultural, and patriotic issues that Brand SA thought it should to deal with in the media. She explained its key assumptions, South Africa’s Vision 2030, the story that was supposed to be written, the biggest risks, global targets, local target audiences, and its three main programmes: Administration, Brand Marketing and Reputation Management, and Stakeholder Relationships.

Ms Puoane provided a budget for 2015 to 2020 and stated that a high percentage was spent on foreign matters.

She said that Brand SA was challenged by the xenophobic violence because Africans had started to boycott South African products. A lot had to be done to restore the relationship.

Discussion
Mr Tseli welcomed the presentation as sound. He realized the impact of the xenophobic attacks and on South Africa’s image and the impact these new circumstances would have on the South African brand. He sought clarity on what measures were in place to ensure that the brand was revived.

Mr Madisha sought clarity on whether Brand SA attempted to look into the problem of xenophobia and to find out what should be a solution to this. If it did, what would be its advice to the Committee? How did Brand SA deliver in terms of politics, tourism, investment? With reference to interaction with other countries, was Brand SA working with other departments such as Home Affairs and International Relations? In other words, has it established the structure of working with other departments?

The Minister explained that the initial mandate was a local responsibility which was later extended to an international responsibility. The matter of collaboration was considered and it resolved that Brand SA should collaborate and partner with other departments. DoC was seeking to establish a structure of engagement with other departments. Dealing with xenophobia was of paramount importance in order to reposition the South African brand.

Ms Puoane responded that to counter xenophobia needed strong advocacy. Messages to stop xenophobia, coupled with education programmes were needed. There was a necessity to raise awareness of the dignity of foreign nationals so as to tell South Africans how their behaviour has an impact of debasing humanity, tarnishing the image of South Africa, and causing the economic regression of South Africa.

Ms Puoane noted that Brand SA was challenged by the energy shortage problem.

On deliverables, measurable targets and indicators were available even though they were not contained in the presentation. These would be forwarded to the Committee.

Mr Madisha asked how many staff members did Brand SA have around the world.

Ms Puoane responded that there were three main managements abroad: in China, UK and US.

Mr Madisha reiterated that when he said the world he meant it. The Minister should answer the question.

The Chairperson remarked that Minister had noted the issues raised by Mr Madisha and that she would be responding to them.

Minister Muthambi said that there would be further engagement on those questions and matters where they had been unable to provide clarification.

Committee Report on MDDA Board recommendations
The Committee Report, recommending that Ms Palesa Kadi, Mr Thamsanqa Ntenteni and Mr Jabulane Blose be appointed to the Media Development and Diversity Agency Board, was considered and adopted. The Chairperson remarked that there was no dispute with regards to the recommendations and the report would be submitted to the National Assembly.  

Adoption of the Second Term Committee Programme
The programme was considered and adopted without further amendment

Meeting was adjourned.

[Apologies: Mr M Ndlozi (EFF), Ms N Ndongeni (ANC), Mr G Davis (DA)]