Department of Environmental Affairs 1st Quarter 2015/16 performance & South African Weather Services 2014/15 & 1st Quarter 2015/16 performance

Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

01 September 2015
Chairperson: Mr J Mthembu (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The Committee met with the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) and two of its entities, SANParks and the SA National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) to discuss performance for the first quarter of the current 2015/16 financial year. Minister Molewa attended the meeting.

The Department specifically briefed the Committee on challenges in meeting targets in each of its seven programmes. The Committee questioned the implications of targets not being met and the need to review dependence on international donor funding in terms of delayed target achievement. The Committee made its displeasure known around targets not being met, particularly in the Oceans and Coasts programme. Members were of the view that if difficulties were foreseen they should have been included in the planning stage and measures put in place to mitigate against them. The Committee thought there was no sense of urgency in meeting critical targets in the programme and said excuses would not be accepted.

SANParks and SANBI briefed the Committee on their first quarterly performance where both entities zoomed in on challenges experienced in meeting objectives. The Committee questioned SANParks on the impact of the moratorium on the filling of posts, especially on service delivery, the impact on savings on service delivery and if the savings were reinvested, and the ratio of expenditure on personnel vs. the expenditure on non-personnel. The Committee was particularly pleased with the stellar performance of SANBI was reported on for the first quarter.

Meeting report

The Chairperson said the first quarter performance of the Department and entities tied into the oversight role of the Committee and ensured the Department and entities could fulfil its various obligations. The Committee needed to know the budget allocated was indeed used for the purpose intended.

Department of Environmental Affairs First Quarter

Ms Limpho Makotoko, DEA Chief Director: Business Performance and Risk Management, took the Committee through the presentation, highlighting challenges, targets achieved, and where outstanding issues of the fourth quarter of the previous financial year were addressed for each programme of the Department. 

The Chairperson particularly wanted the presenter to focus on where the difficulties were in this quarter and how they were being managed. The Committee had the Annual Performance Plans (APPs) for the other detail. 

Ms Makotoko began with programme one: administration, where there were challenges, in the main, around the master system plan.

Mr P Mabilo (ANC) sought more elaboration on challenges affecting progress – he was more interested in the details. This was particularly in the collaboration with SETA.

Ms Makotoko outlined that the challenge was that Kwazulu-Natal (KZN) indicated it was not ready for training to be conducted in the first quarter and requested the training be done in the second quarter – the target of training 56 officials was then not met as only 23 were trained. This was not because of SETA but because KZN indicated it was not ready. 

Ms Makotoko then moved to programme two: Legal, Authorisations, Compliance and Enforcement where there were challenges around follow-up investigations on cases which delayed the progress in starting investigations on new cases – the Department would be able to catch up on this in the second quarter. One compliance awareness campaign was postponed and it occurred outside the second quarter. Overall in the programme, 63% (10 of 16) of targets were met, two were totally off target and four were partially achieved.

In terms of programme three: Oceans and Coasts, there were challenges around norms and standards for coastal management setback lines – coastal provinces were already considering doing the work which would result in duplication of efforts according to a legal opinion. Another challenge was with the review of affluent disposal – there were issues with the availability of officials from the Department of Water and Sanitation so the progress was delayed in the first quarter. There were challenges with the issues raised in the consultation of designation of coastal access for three priority areas.

Mr Ashley Naidoo, DEA Chief Director: Oceans and Coastal Research, elaborated that the Department was somewhat ambitious when it came to stakeholder engagement. Difficult issues were being raised around access. It might be necessary to be bit more cautious in the mid-term review in terms of access. Coastal management setback lines gave local businesses and residents some idea of how far to retreat in the case of flooding or high waves.

The Chairperson understood the difficulties faced but found the Department should have thought about them when it set out plans. Why did the Department make plans for coastal access knowing full well how difficult it would be? What legal instruments could the Department use to open access and intervene? He asked if the setback line targets were made in consultation with provinces. This was again an issue of planning.

Mr Hadebe fully agreed, the Department should have known it would meet these challenges when it set its targets. He wanted to know what measures were in place to mitigate these challenges and resolve them.

Mr Mabilo asked if it meant there was no synergy or coherence between the Department and, specifically, the three coastal provinces especially considering there were only three.

The Chairperson was of the opinion that it would be really terrible if the review of affluent disposal was not completed and asked what the implication thereof would be. Was the Department was sleeping on the job?

Mr Naidoo thought the comments of the Committee touched the heart of the matter but he noted the Department would change the direction of these targets in the second quarter so that it would be achieved by the end of the year and he accepted this challenge. He agreed more time needed to be spent talking to coastal partners and this could have been done better.

The Chairperson thought more could have been done, and better, at both planning and implementation phases working together with partners. Parliament did not take excuses as these were matters that spoke to the history of this country – negotiating access of the coastal could not still be happening 21 years down the line.  

Mr Mabilo felt the Department just set targets for the sake of setting targets. There was no sense of urgency, fast results or turnaround and he found this unacceptable. The explanations provided were not plausible because the Department had the human resources. It was the last time the Committee would be taken for a ride. It had been said that natural resources, like oceans and coasts, had been under-utilised and this was a problem. Therefore it must be a priority to address the challenges in SA, namely of unemployment, poverty and under- development. This could not be accepted and the Committee needed to be hard on the Department for delivery as the environment was central to the entire development of SA. If people were not doing their jobs this should be stated. Targets had to be met even if it meant personnel worked around the clock, especially as the Department was a flagship one.

Mr Ishaam Abader, DEA DDG: Legal, Authorisations, Compliance and Enforcement, explained the target was framed for the annual objective and this was why there was a disjuncture.

The Chairperson asked the Department to work with speed and coordinate with other stakeholders so that the same challenges were not experienced in the second quarter.

Mr Mabilo asked if there was no quality assurance when it came to setting targets as it promoted inefficient and ineffectiveness. He found some of the excuses ridiculous and unacceptable. He was not casting aspersions or questioning capacity.   

Ms Makotoko agreed with the Members in terms of quality assurance – in the case of this target, the Department did not have adequate evidence that the target was met above what was written in black and white.

The Chairperson noted that the Committee knew human beings were working in the Department and it was to be expected that mistakes could occur but those mistakes must be understandable. Nevertheless the Committee was looking forward to quarter two.     

Ms Makotoko then took the Committee through programme four: climate change and air quality, where the target for national framework for climate services being developed and implemented. Another challenge was with the roll out of the “let’s respond” toolkit to 40 municipalities – the contract partner to assist with the roll out did not happen. It was also a process to be co-funded with the SA Local Government Association (SALGA) but SALGA indicated it had financial limitations in terms of the project. The Department was no engaged with GIZ, its donor funder, to try to fund this project by the second quarter. With the National Adaptation Strategy, there were delays in releasing the funds by GIZ for the Department to begin the work – this funding was only finalised in the last month of the first quarter so work was delayed. Overall in the programme, 50% of targets were fully achieved and seven of the milestones were in progress or partially achieved.     

Mr Hadebe thought it would be useful if the Committee were told what was being done to mitigate against the challenges so that the Committee would not need to interrogate the Department.

The Chairperson agreed that this was an important point; he understood the delay with appointing a service provider due to funding. Why were the other targets not achieved?  Were they linked to international funding? 

Ms Makotoko explained the framework was not linked to international funding – the delay was with the appointment of a service provider. The DDG for the programme was currently in a meeting to try to fast track some of these matters relating to the appointment of a service provider. The Department now had the funding for the “let’s respond” toolkit so it will be rolled out in the second quarter in the 40 municipalities.     

Ms Makotoko then took the Committee through programme five: biodiversity and conservation and programme six: environmental programmes. On programme six, the major challenge impacting most of the targets in the programme was the Department of Public Works coming up with a new reporting framework for Extended Public Works Programmes (EPWP). This framework was only introduced in June. This meant all data on the old system needed to be recaptured for all those people working in the programmes. With programme seven: chemicals and waste management, there were challenges around the review of industry waste management plans, specifically for e-waste lightning, paper and packaging.

Mr Mabilo emphasised the need for a sense of urgency to bring fundamental change to the lives of people especially those affected by problems like asbestos. Delays were unacceptable.

Ms Makotoko explained there were also issues with adequate funding where further internal engagement with Treasury was needed.

The Committee agreed that it would discuss the finances of the Department during the mid-term review so that there was a fuller picture of how funds were spent.  This would apply to the entities as well.

The Chairperson noted that the Department needed to pay more attention to projects being delayed because of dependence on foreign funding and how this could be averted. This seemed to be particularly in the case of the climate change and air quality programme.   

SANParks First Quarterly Performance Report and Financial Position

Mr Fundisile Mketeni, SANParks CEO, briefed the Committee on the entity’s 2015/16 quarterly performance, zooming into areas where target achievement was somewhat challenged. With the first strategic objective, optimising economic contribution through tourism and associated activities, SANParks was 7.3% below budget in terms of income/revenue. There was also a 7.9% decrease in the gross operating tourism revenue attributed to a 7.0% decline in the total number of visitors to national parks from 1 146 233 to 1 066 349.

In terms of the second strategic objective, enhanced conservation and ecological integrity of the national park system, SANParks was behind in its target on the total hectares of land rehabilitated or restored. This was also attributed to a decline in the total numbers of visitors to national parks. Completion and ultimate approval of the wetlands project plans would be expedited to enable progress as planned.

With the third strategic objectives, optimised socio-economic beneficiation, the entity was behind in the total number of full time equivalent jobs created and the total number of temporary jobs created through socio-economic initiatives. This was similarly for the number of community contractual agreements in place.

Mr Mketeni then discussed strategic objective 5: effective and efficient corporate governance where there was an issue with meeting the target for the % progress against the risk response plan but SANParks risk management framework was currently under review to ensure an in integrated approach on risk management initiatives.

Overall, SANParks achieved 74% (31) of its targets, 2% (1) target was below the planned amount and 24% (10) targets were in a cautionary zone.

Discussion

Mr Mabilo questioned specific strategic objectives, as they did not have targets set for the first quarter. He also wanted to know the timelines for specific targets. On the moratorium for the filling of posts, he asked which posts the moratorium affected and the implication for service delivery. He sought an explanation on how the savings impacted on service delivery, was there any re-investment or was it just saving for the sake of saving?

Mr Hadebe wanted to know the impact on saving on human resource expenditure. 

Mr Mketeni indicated that there was no target for the first quarter for performance indicator “total number of revenue generating products implemented” – as part of the process for any product to develop, it must be identified, there must be a feasibility study and had to be checked if there was any scoping. SANParks could not commit to a target because these processes were underway including engaging with relevant investors and communities. Although work and planning processes were underway, the product could not be delivered in the first quarter. There was no target because this preparatory work had to be conducted first. On the moratorium and its impact, there were critical posts and positions that could not be compromised, for example, a ranger or a receptionist as these were frontline staff. Restrictions were felt in head office for example posts with for admin officers, and to rather encourage managers to share support staff. There were structural problems but the only impact communicated to the staff was that there might be relocation or that skills could be put to better use elsewhere. With the savings, the Board indicated the entity needed to cut down from 58% to 55%. This might be a struggle but the entity was trying. Overall there was no impact on service delivery because operations were not compromised. Reporting processes would be strengthened in line with an electronic document management system.   

Mr Mabilo questioned the ratio of SANParks between personnel and non-personnel expenditure.

The Chairperson thought it would make sense to delve into this in detail when the Committee met with the Department and entities on their financial performance in the mid-term.

Mr Mketeni said this was a very important question – he would go back to the Board to discuss it but he was not aware of any national or international norm in terms of the ratio. It largely depended on the type of business of the institution. It was also important to note that as operations changed, for example, if there was more tourism infrastructure, more staff must be appointed and the revenue must be grown. Therefore the ratio was a moving one and not fixed. 

Minister Edna Molewa drew the attention of Members to the fact that if there was no management by the Board or whoever set policy, there was a tendency to grow the HR element where it evaded the space of developmental finances. There was always a need to look at the spend on personnel within the sector itself – for example, education by its nature was a sector driven by people. Restrictions on HR expenditure came in the time of reduced budgets by Treasury and looking at where excess could be saved. 

The Chairperson noted the Minister had just announced the statistics on rhino poaching. He did not want to go into too much detail because the Committee would set up a more in-depth private engagement on the matter.  

Minister Molewa commented that the Department did not report necessarily on statistics – it was a holistic report on all measures being taken on how fruitful they were. Statistics were only a part of the picture that included other issues such arrests and convictions. 

SANBI

Ms Tanya Abrahamse, SANBI CEO, outlined key challenges and opportunities of the entity noting Groen Sebenza was an important intervention to transform the sector, however there were huge challenges in getting job placements from Host Institutions. Measures had been taken to meet project targets. Provision of evidence based information for the SIPs was being addressed through information management and research capabilities. Where required, new skills were being mobilised. Implementation of new Invasive Species Regulations had financial and human resource implications. Funding support from DEA was requested. The establishment of two new Gardens required careful planning and allocation of human and financial resources. This was being addressed through planning, recruitment and budgeting. Overall, SANBI had 41 planned targets and 38 were achieved and exceeded while 3 targets were behind schedule.

SANBI was behind schedule on the target for programme three, building foundational biodiversity science, and specifically the performance indicator of the number of quality controlled records added to spatial data for species. With the plant database - each of the three SANBI herbaria had plans for their individual targets and this target for plants would be achieved over the next three quarters. With the animal’s database, SANBI was dependent on external partners for the data, and this came in through various projects. SANBI was addressing a challenge where its partner was not providing cleaned data for the Mammal Red List Project.  SANBI was currently receiving data for the Shale Gas Exploration SEA and some of it would be new data.  In addition to this, data was being generated through the Foundational Biodiversity Information Programme.  Through these projects SANBI would be able to meet the target by the end of Quarter 4.

In terms of programme five, providing biodiversity policy advice and access to biodiversity information and support for climate change adaptation and the performance indicator for the percentage increase in registered users on the Biodiversity Advisor website, the entity was behind schedule in meeting this target - previous counts included spam records and these were removed this quarter and would be removed from all future reports. To make up the shortfall that the spam counts represented, SANBI planned to do advertising and capacity building on information services and this should lead to increased numbers of users. In addition, a national workshop was planned for 17-19 November 2015. The annual target was thus deemed achievable.  

The last target behind schedule was in programme six, providing human capital development, education and awareness in response to SANBI’s mandate, on the number of individuals participating in Groen Sebenza and job creation initiatives with a percentage coming from designated groups. The target achievement was behind mainly because of the Host Institutions (HI) not signing legally binding contracts offering pioneers permanent placement at the end of their contracts. Remedial action put in place included:

-One-one engagement with HI leadership to get them to commit.

-Engagement with the private sector e.g. Black Business Council, Black Management Forum.

-Engagement with public sector – Department of Tourism and Water and Sanitation and the SA Weather Service (SAWS)

-Use of Working Groups, MINTECH and MINMEC to highlight the risks and seek intervention even political if necessary.

-Use of media adverts in print and electronic media.  

-Use of Groen Sebenza social media platform to promote job opportunities. 

All these had resulted in an improved 608 jobs created to date.

Discussion

Mr Hadebe was impressed with the presentation.

Ms H Nyambi (ANC) was impressed by the work done by SANBI, especially with the jobs created. 

The Chairperson highlighted that the exercise was for the Committee to assess if the entity was able to meet its obligations as planned. The Committee could see that out of 41 targets, SANBI was able to meet 38 and these could be met in the second quarter. He thought the entity was doing a great job. This was also noted during the previous engagement with SANBI on its Annual Report. The only area needing further attention was to skill young graduates and ensure that they were then absorbed. This was not an issue for only SANBI to look into. The Chairperson encouraged the Institute to keep up the good work. Even on a recent oversight, the Committee was very impressed with the entity and the work done to ensure biodiversity was conserved and protected for many years to come. This was also a positive reflection on the Minister and public entities. All entities of the Department were doing what was expected of them.

Minister Molewa asked that it be kept in mind that SA was the third most mega-diverse country in the world after Brazil and Indonesia.

Committee Business

The Chairperson said there was a draft programme for Committees to have joint oversight programmes in a few weeks time. For a while now, the Committee had noted the need to visit iSimangaliso Wetland Park and this might be an opportune time to conduct this visit to an international heritage site. The Committee would also visit Durban South on issues of pollution. He had signed a letter that committed the Committee to go to KZN during the oversight work together with the Committee on Arts and Culture and Tourism.

Mr Hadebe did not have a problem with the joint oversight programme. He was pleased to be visiting to iSimangaliso given a recent expose by Carte Blanche.

Mr M Shelembe (NFP) suggested stakeholders be invited to express their feelings as it was the view that the Committee was listening only to the side of the Board of iSimangaliso. It was important for the Committee to be fair and listen to these grievances. 

The Chairperson agreed a way would be found to listen to these stakeholders

The Committee would meet on Friday with iSimangaliso and the SAWS on their first quarter performance.

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: