SAPS 2016 Budget and Annual Plan briefing deferred, in absence of Minister

Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The Committee was scheduled to receive a briefing on the annual budget for the South African Police Service (SAPS) but after thirty minutes of waiting for the Minister of Police to arrive, Members decided, after a discussion, that no purpose would be served in continuing with the meeting, because of the importance of the budget discussion and the power and accountability positions of the Ministry officials. Several Members voiced their disquiet at the Minister's failure to attend, or to submit an apology, for the second time, pointing out that this was a particularly important meeting, and regarded this as disrespectful to all Members and the institution of Parliament. Finally, a decision was taken to postpone the meeting to a later date to suit the Minister and Deputy Minister, both of whom should be present.
 

Meeting report

Chairperson's opening remarks
The Chairperson welcomed all officials and generals from the South African Police Services (SAPS). He noted that the Minister was not yet present and asked whether the Members wished to proceed.

Mr G Michalakis (DA, Free State) asked the Chairperson if the Ministry officials were specifically invited to the meeting and, if so, whether they were aware of the level of progress the Committee had made thus far. He also asked that if any excuse was given for the absence of Ministry officials, if invited.

The Chairperson said that he was not sure if any apologies were received but invitations were certainly sent out.

Mr Michalakis said that the last time the Minister had been seen by him at a meeting was when he first introduced himself. Last year, Mr Michalakis had indicated that the Deputy Minister was not there at the meeting, and he did not even know who “he” was, and Mr Michalakis had to be corrected and told that it was a woman; this illustrated that she had not ever appeared at meetings either. He felt that it was not asking too much of the Minister to be present at an annual briefing. He thanked the members of the South African Police Service for the presentations they prepared for the meeting. He felt that other Members would probably agree that the absence of the Minister was unacceptable. He saw this as disrespectful, not only to himself as a Member of Parliament, but to all his colleagues present in the meeting, and to Parliament as an institution. He suggested that the Committee should write a serious letter to the Minister, or that a recommendation should be sent for the Minister to be at the meetings to answer executive questions that will be directly referred to him or the Deputy Minister, for the Committee’s budget speeches. He felt that he could not do his job properly and be fully accountable to his legislature if the Minister, who was accountable to Parliament, was not present.

Ms T Wana (ANC, Eastern Cape) stated that the Committee was anxious to get a political overview of the Department (SAPS). She noted that this was the second time the Minister had failed to attend a meeting and felt that the meeting should be adjourned and the Members released.

Mr J Mthethwa (ANC, Kwa Zulu Natal) responded that this was simply answered by section 66(2) of the Constitution which said that the National Council of Provinces may require the Deputy Minister or Minister or a member of the national executive to attend a meeting or committee of Council. He felt that this was the way to address the matter

Ms Wana accepted that but said that she was making the point that this was not the first time that the Minister had not attended meetings. Previously, it was not certain whether the letter of invitation had been sent but today this had been confirmed. Mr Mthethwa’s office also sent a copy of the letter of invitation, and still no apology was given for the Minister's absence. It was particularly important that he should attend because the Committee was dealing with the budget and the Annual Performance Plan, and the Minister needed to oversee what was being discussed and give some insight in what was being discussed.

The Chairperson noted that the Committee should break for a while so that the delegation from SAPS might be able to establish the Committee's whereabouts.

After the brief adjournment, Ms Wana reiterated her suggestion that Members be released to attend to other work; it was clear that nothing was going to happen because the heads were not present.

Mr S Thobejane (ANC, Limpopo) noted with regret that the Minister was unable to fill his duty, although he should have accepted the invitation and participated in today's meeting. He suggested that the Committee should take drastic measures since the Minister had, to his mind, been irresponsible and neglected to appear with the nine provincial commissioners present in the committee meeting today. The taxpayers' money had already been spent and the nine provincial representatives had prepared their presentations and came because they were invited. He proposed that the meeting should continue, but that the Minister should be charged to come before the Committee and explain why he was absent.

Mr Michalakis thanked the police generals for attending the meeting. The Minister’s failure to attend meetings had been ongoing on since 2014, even before the transition. There was no excuse proffered as to why the Minister could not be present. If the date did not suit the Minister, the correct procedure would have been for the Minister to inform the Committee and ask to reschedule the meeting. Taxpayer money had been wasted because of the Minister's and Ministry officials' failure to  communicate with the Committee. The Minister was responsible for the waste of taxpayer money today, not the Committee. The Department of Police and Independent Police Investigative Division (IPID) are the only two portfolios that the NCOP is debating this year from the security cluster. This discussion is a vitally important part of the debate. It would be unfair to ask any of the SAPS officials a political question. They could not reply to political questions and be held accountable. He also felt that  there was no point in sitting in the meeting, if the Minister was not present to reply to political issues. Questions could be asked about the administration of the South African Police Service, but it is the political questions that the Committee wanted answers to. He suggested that the Whip should reconsider, because if the Committee followed the route of accepting this, the Minister would continue this type of behaviour and he would not like to  come to the end of the fifth year saying that he had never seen the Minister. He said that alternatively, the Committee should request the Minister to reschedule and appears with the Commissioners. The Minister must also be held accountable for wasting taxpayers' money. It could not be laid before the committee that the tax payer’s money is wasted. A meeting that would ask political questions could clearly not continue if the political head was not present. He would excuse himself if the Committee decided to continue.

Mr Thobejane also expressed his thanks for the officials from SAPS who had made themselves available. He also regretted that the Minister was not, saying that the team who were here were accountable to the Minister. The Department's budget was due to be presented and there was, to his mind, nothing more important than that for the Minister to deal with. He did not understand why the Minister was not here, unless the executive failed to appreciate the importance of the budget presentation and review. He pointed out that for the next thirteen days or so, the Department would not be allowed to do any spending beyond a set percentage. All Members of Parliament should place equal value and respect on this important exercise, as required by the Constitution. Once the budget cycle had been completed, people could not ask who would then educate the executive, for the executive should themselves have cleared their diaries in order to be present on the day allocated for the executive and Committee to debate the budget of the Department.  He felt that no excuse whatsoever can justify the absence of the Minister and Deputy, unless they were in hospital or in prison. The budget cannot be run in the absence of the Minister. Even worse was the fact that the Minister had not even had the courtesy to send an apology.

Mr Mthethwa proposed another short break to allow for a caucus.

After the caucus, Mr Thobejane asked the Chairperson who the Acting National Commissioner was, and where this person was.

Ms Manolope responded that the Acting National Commissioner is Kgomotso Phahlane, who was attending the Portfolio Committee on Police meeting this morning.

Mr Mthethwa noted that time had been wasted through the absence of the Minister, Deputy Minister and Acting National Commissioner. He felt that it would be useless and fruitless to allow the administrative heads to present the budget without the executive, since the Committee would not be able to fully exercise its rights and ask political questions, particularly a number of relevant issues. The caucus had reached the conclusion that this meeting should be postponed. The budget discussion affected lives and was very important. The caucus also felt that the Minister needed to be held accountable for not attending, and not providing any apology for his absence.

The Chairperson asked for confirmation from all Members that the meeting should be closed.

Ms Manolope fully agreed and reiterated that clarity was needed on several political issues so it was important to get this from the executive authority.

The Chairperson noted that the meeting would be adjourned. 

Documents

No related documents

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: