South African Weather Services, South African National Parks & Isimangaliso on their 2016 Strategic & Annual Performance Plan

Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

14 April 2016
Chairperson: Mr Z Makhubele (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

Document missing: 
Isimangaliso Wetland Park and South African National Parks (SANParks) presentations [email [email protected]]

The South African Weather Service (SAWS), Isimangaliso Wetland Park and South African National Parks (SANParks) met with the Portfolio Committee to present their strategic and performance plans for the 2016/2017 financial year.

Achieving transformation for both SAWS and Isimangaliso Wetland Park had been challenging. This was because many previously marginalised people still did not have the necessary skills, but both the entities had set up programmes to enable training to happen. In the case of SAWS, there had been several attempts to ‘open up’ the field through a SAWS training academy that attracted people from around the world. SAWS had a responsibility to the government and the public to provide weather information that was clear and understandable. The mandate by SAWS to be community conscious required SAWS to be involved in community projects, especially those communities that were at risk with regard to climatic conditions. There was a special target from SAWS to employ people of colour, women and people with disabilities, as a transformation strategy.

Isimangaliso Wetland Park had endured great strain because of the country’s current drought, which had resulted in many water species dying and rhinos and crocodiles having to be moved to where water was available. The Park was looking to work with the Department of Tourism and other entities in order to expand the organisation and also to provide jobs for locals. The Park had managed to provide job creation and evolve small businesses in the past. It also prioritised education and gave bursaries to the needy and deserving every year. This was another act of transformation and a contribution to the National Development Plan.

In the afternoon session, the Committee was briefed on the South African National Parks strategic plan and annual performance plan. Public holidays, especially Easter and Christmas were identified as the busiest days of the year for SANParks, and the fact that Easter 2015 and 2016 fell in the same financial year, together with the Christmas period, explained why they had performed so well in the past financial year.

There had been increasing attempts to poach rhinos, elephants, abalone and cycads, but the organisation had significantly decreased the success rate of poachers due to the presence of skilled and sufficient rangers patrolling the parks.

Some of SANParks’ key objectives included effectively managing eco-systems, growing tourism income, diversifying and enhancing tourism opportunities, progressive transformation and optimising the contribution to the green and blue economies by enhancing awareness and skills.

Key risks identified were:

  • Inadequate revenue to realise the objectives of its mandate;
  • Wildlife crime, which posed a huge risk especially with its impact on species, the reputation of the country and visitor security;
  • An inadequate and obsolete tourism reservation and property management system;
  • An inability to acquire new firearms or retain existing ones;
  • Infrastructure maintenance – specifically road infrastructure and staff accommodation.

In the discussion, the Committee drew particular attention to the need to prevent poaching completely and not just to maintain the current success rate.

Meeting report

Opening remarks

The Acting Chairperson apologised for the meeting starting late. This was because a Member of Parliament was sick and Mr J Mthembu (ANC) was now the Chief Whip of the party in Parliament, so they had had to wait until they reached a quorum. The Minister and Deputy Minister of the Department of Environmental Affairs had both indicated their apologies. He handed over to the Director General of Environmental Affairs, Ms Nosipho Ngcaba, who welcomed the three presenting entities.

South African Weather Service (SAWS)

Ms Ntsoaki Mngomezulu, Chairperson, SAWS, gave the opening remarks on behalf of the delegation and paid tribute to the expertise of the entity’s personnel.

Dr Linda Makuleni, Chief Executive Officer, SAWS, said that the entity’s mandate was inclusive of being sensitive to the demographics of the country. It had to play a role in the transformation agenda. SAWS wanted to ensure that South Africa was a nation that was ‘weather smart ‘. It was invested in providing innovation and for this to be achieved, SAWS had to work closely with communities. Its community consciousness meant that the delivery of weather information should be simple, understandable and accessible to all people.

SAWS was seeking to work with other entities, especially those involved in agriculture and environmental affairs. It was a learning organisation, so partnerships with other entities and Departments would ensure that the entity developed and grew. SAWS worked closely with agriculture to ensure food security, and with the Department of Science and Technology for innovative purposes.

Dr Makuleni said that SAWS was looking for ways to ensure long term sustainability that would add value to the country at an international level. This could be achieved through SAWS being a strategic partner to the government and seeking the best technology through partnerships with other organisations that were technologically advanced.

The SAWS brand promise to the public was to make people weather smart, ensure safety, provide products and services that met the needs of people, provided services to the government, the economic sector and the public. It would invest in human capital and infrastructure, and build a talent pool for weather services.

In keeping up with SAWS being a learning organisation, it sought to improve on research and knowledge production so that when decisions were made, they were science based. Working with communities that were at risk of encountering bad weather so that they could be enlightened, equipped and skilled about what to do and what to avoid, was central to SAWS. An example of such communities was those that were likely to have to deal with lightning.

Dr Makuleni said that SAWS should have a five-year marketing plan, especially in the area of agriculture. The entity wanted to ensure that their outcomes correlated with local and international outcomes. To achieve this, SAWS could not afford to lose people, and unfortunately the entity’s retention goal was at 92%. It wanted to create access for the marginalised and attract black people, women and people with disabilities to be a part of SAWS. It had a training centre that attracted people from all over the world to learn about weather in South Africa. Since this field had not been open to previously disadvantaged people, SAWS hoped to get more of them involved and the training centre could be used as a gateway to achieve this. To further show commitment to skilling the previously marginalised, SAWS had a bursary programme and this had been created to open up the field.

Education within SAWS was very important, and SAWS was pushing its internal personnel to study towards their PhDs.

On the issue of risk areas, she said that competitors were coming in and being influential in the international agenda, so information communication technology (ICT) should be looked at very closely and strengthened all the time, in order to avoid risks. SAWS had many stakeholders and it was focusing on the area of innovation and having awards to compensate those who were innovative. It was spending R177.8 million to address its strategic goals. In order for it to make money, it needed to spend money.

Ms Marilize Hogendoorn, Chief Financial Officer, SAWS, asked the Committee to think clearly about the need for SAWS to spend money to make money. She asked, rhetorically, whether strategy followed the budget, or whether budget followed strategy?

Director General Ngcaba said that the cost-cutting measures would require the Department of Environmental Affairs and its entities to review some of their plans.

The Acting Chairperson said that SAWS had an important role to play, so work needed to be done to make sure that SAWS was not under-funded.

Discussion

Mr H Kekana (ANC) asked what the impact of this years’ budget would be on the targets of SAWS, and which would be most affected.

Ms J Edwards (DA) asked what SAWS had done to prepare government for what was happening regarding the drought. She asked why SAWS wanted the newest technology, and how they were generating money to implement this technological outcome. On the issue of SAWS not being able to market itself, she said that the world today was on social media and asked if it would not be cheaper to conduct its marketing using radio and social media.

Ms H Nyambi (ANC) asked what the dynamics for race and gender in the entity looked like. Which goals would not be implemented due to budget cuts?

Mr S Mabilo (ANC) asked about the implications of the cost-cutting and what the timeframe for the implementation of SAWS’ strategies were. He was not sure what the role of SAWS was in the rural areas, and asked if rural and township people were aware of the entity and what they did. He asked why some issues had not been made targets, as they were critical. What was the positioning of SAWS on the continent, and how many potential students were they training?

The Acting Chairperson asked if a climate centre that had been spoken about years ago, had been established. If not, what had happened? If it did exist, who was leading it?

On the matter of transformation, especially with regard to gender, Mr Mabilo asked why the employment target was 40% for women, as this could be limiting and potentially problematic. SAWS should be wary of taking public money to invest in projects that were not sustainable. He asked SAWS if their commitment to agriculture was not limited to commercial farmers, and said that commercial farmers should not be prioritised over the poor and marginalised.

The Director General said that the climate centre was led by the Department of Science and Technology (DST), and not by the Department of Environmental Affairs. However, she could ask the DST for details and get back to the Committee at the next sitting. SAWS was also not involved in the wind farms, but rather gave information on wind.

She said that SAWS had very important costs, and she acknowledged the importance of investing in scientists and researchers, so cutting down the budget had not been pleasant. The country could make the choice of being modernised and having information on a regular basis. New infrastructure was important, or else South Africa would lag behind. If South Africa was not making the choice to invest in new infrastructure, it was making a choice to be fed old and inaccurate information. The more SAWS did not have sufficient funds, the more it would be drawn towards the commercial farming sector and the poor would suffer.

Ms Thuli Khumalo, Chief Director (CD): Department of Environmental Affairs, said that it could take up to three years to publish a journal article and this could affect knowledge circulation.

Dr Makuleni said that the entity could not give a guarantee on commercialisation because of the state of the economy. On the issue of the drought, she said that SAWS provided ongoing information and sat on the Disaster Management Committee. It was also involved with the drought committee. On the question around technology, she said that to ensure the successful use of technology, SAWS worked with other entities, and spent money on improving technology. On the question about social media, she said that they had negotiated with the print media for free coverage. SAWS would be meeting with the media to discuss what would happen over the next months. It would also be engaging with community workers to ensure that they were visible everywhere. SAWS had been working with the University of Pretoria, the University of the Free State and the University of the Witwatersrand, and now it wanted to expand to rural universities like Fort Hare University in the Eastern Cape.

Even though it looked like their plans on innovation were vague, they were working on them and they were indeed critical and urgent. To show this, SAWS was working with entities in the UK to improve on the innovative manner its work and the demands of the Committee, and they could provide a detailed report on this. SAWS was doing its best to ensure the public good and public involvement. It had a gender balance among its managers, but what was limiting the entity right now was that it did not have much space to accommodate a lot of people.

The Acting Chairperson said that South Africa should not use a lack of funds as something that would stop it from being a developmental state. The CEO had not answered his questions on the challenges of SAWS in the Southern African Development Community (SADC) region, but she could answer this at another sitting.

 

Isimangiliso WetlandPark

 

Ms Terri Castis, Business Director, Isimangaliso Wetland Park, said the entity had a responsibility to protect and conserve the park. Its strategic objectives included optimising its revenue generation in a commercially and environmentally sustainable manner -- one that fostered job-creation and empowerment of historically-disadvantaged communities – and to conserve the terrestrial, freshwater, marine biodiversity and ecological processes in a cost-effective manner, observing global best practice.

The Park did not have a research budget, and it was students that usually carried out research for them.

 

The strategic risks that Isimangaliso Wetland Park faced included the rapidly changing legal environment and incompatible land use outside the park. The Park had had to issue court orders to prohibit this.

 

It depended heavily on key skills to execute its programmes.

Discussion

Ms Edwards asked how the drought had affected the wetland park and whether or not in the last couple of years, tourism on the wetlands had gone up.

Mr Mabilo asked what the ideal situation was. The document handed out had confused the Members, as it had not been clear.

Ms Kekana referred to the job creation figures, and asked where the figures for 2015 were and what plans were in place to create black businesses.

Ms P Ntobongwana (EFF) asked which bursaries the entity provided.

The Acting Chairperson asked if the presenter was giving the impression that everything was in order. In her presentation, she had not mentioned any challenges the organisation faced. What were their challenges and how were they addressing them?

Ms Castis responded that the drought has affected different parts of the Park differently and in those parts, the rhinos and crocodiles had had to be moved. It had caused a lot of fish deaths in the Mfolozi River. On the question of whether everything was in order, Ms Castis said that she could never say that everything was fine because they constantly dealt with stakeholders, which could be very challenging. Another challenge was that the Park was located in a municipality where service delivery was an issue.

On whether tourism had gone up or down, she said that Isimangaliso Wetland Park was looking to work with the Department of Tourism. She said that they had black businesses in place and were giving people of colour opportunities to develop. Many small businesses had evolved through the activities of the entity.

On the issue of funding, she said that they were fairly well covered by their current funding, and they were working with what they had. Regarding bursaries, there were 68 bursaries and the distribution was not always even, so they were working on that. Another challenge they faced was that sometimes when the Park was full, like on public holidays, it was difficult documenting who came in and out for recreational purposes.

Ms Abeeda Kadir, the Park’s CFO, added that their total 2016/17 budget was 207 million.

The Acting Chairperson asked about transformation. He said that blacks should not be limited to manual labour jobs, like ‘gate management.’ The Park needed to ensure that transformation at the managerial level was achieved.

South African National Parks (SANParks)

Ms Lize McCourt, Chief Operating Officer (COO), said SANParks had been established in terms of the now repealed National Parks Act 57 of 1976 and continued to exist in terms of the National Environmental Management Protected Areas Act 57 of 2003, with a mandate to conserve, protect, control and manage national parks and other defined protected areas and their biological diversity.

Easter and Christmas were the biggest visiting times of the year, and in the 2015/16 year there were essentially two “Easters.” However, in 2016/2017 Easter would not be falling in the financial year.

The SANParks mandate was to excel in the management of a national park system. Only North West Province and KwaZulu Natal did not have national parks managed by SANParks. Top level positions had been filled and there would be no more acting positions in the executive team. SANParks had a staff establishment of over 4 000 people, but at the senior level it did not have good demographic representation of. Over 50 000 people went to the national parks for work on a daily basis.

Over the medium term strategic framework (MTSF) period, SANParks would be spending R672 million on infrastructural projects. 2% of conservation fees were invested directly in the neighboring communities. This was mostly beneficial to schools, through science laboratories, and recently old age homes had been beneficiaries. SANParks managed quite a number of trans-boundary parks, together with Zimbabwe, Lesotho, Mozambique and Namibia.

There had been an increase in incidents of elephant poaching, along with rhino, abalone and cycads.

SANParks contributed toward transformation through the Broad-based Black Economic Empowerment BBBEE charter.

In terms of alignment with the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA), the following key strategic objectives were of particular relevance:

  • Biodiversity conserved, protected and threats mitigated;
  • Fair access and equitable sharing of benefits from biological resources were promoted;
  • Ecosystems restored and maintained;
  • Adequate and appropriately skilled staff;
  • Secure, harmonious, transformed and conducive working environment;
  • Effective and efficient information technology services;
  • Equitable and sound corporate governance;
  • Improved access to information;
  • Improved sector education and awareness; and
  • Effective knowledge and information management for the sector.

 

Looking at the Annual Performance Plan (APP), the strategic objectives were closely aligned with the pairing of the departments. Over the MTEF, SANParks would pursue the following key strategic goals:

  • Sustainable conservation assets: SANParks had a key objective – improved representative conservation assets to ensure that the land they did add was representative of under-represented ecosystems;
  • Effectively managed eco-systems: With regard to species and cultural heritage assets, to effectively manage sustainable ecosystems focusing on environmental crime for the sustainability of species.
  • Responsible and diverse tourism: to grow tourism income, and to diversify and enhance tourism opportunities.
  • Progressive, equitable and fair transformation: to optimize contribution to the green and blue economy – enhanced awareness and skills.
  • Cross cutting: enhanced knowledge for decision making – making science-based decisions, ensuring knowledge and information by SANParks and government, and enhancing stakeholder engagement.
  • Effective resource utilization: Adequate, appropriately skilled, transformed and diverse human capital, a conducive working environment, optimised business processes and knowledge management systems, accountable corporate governance and financial sustainability.

 

Ms McCourt said the MTSF priorities included an improved representative conservation estate. Total areas added to national parks should be in line with the biodiversity framework, line grants and other funding utilized for this purpose. The state of biodiversity rating of three or above was a new baseline, and concerns had been expressed that SANParks may be neglecting biodiversity management and therefore had to measure the state of biodiversity in the parks and constantly monitor. The Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT) score had gone down in the 2015/16 and this was not because they had performed poorly, but because the tool to manage had changed. The state of area integrity assessment was an instrument used in parks up until ten years ago, and with wildlife crime and public safety, it was becoming important to reassess this.

SANParks aimed to reduce the percentage of fossil fuel-generated energy consumption by 2%, as well as water, by using new and cleaner methods. In terms of wetlands, the target for total hectares of land rehabilitated/restored had been reduced because of the amount of work being done, the need, and the budget.

Effectively managed ecosystems, species and cultural heritage was not just focused on rhinos and elephants, but other endangered species. By aiming to reduce the success rate of poachers, SANParks wanted to widen the gap between attempting to poach and the success of the poacher.

In the area of enhanced knowledge for decision making, the organisation now had junior and senior scientists, with varied demographics and gender. Internal bases were favouring black scientists.

The target for enhanced tourism return had not been increased due to decreases in the growth of the South African market as well as the fact that there would be no Easter weekend in the coming financial year.

Ms McCourt said that for diversified and enhanced tourism opportunities, the emphasis was on both scientific processes and cultural heritage. SANParks was currently working on a methodology to count the number of people accessing parks. To enhance stakeholder engagement, it had a high engagement on social media, but needed to work out its impact on information sharing. It was actively working to improve access for people with disabilities. To promote workplace cohesion and harmony, and healthy working environment, it aimed to provide conducive working conditions. Business processes and knowledge management systems were being optimised. SANParks fostered a systematic and robust approach to corporate governance to optimise its efforts to efficiently achieve it. Organizational revenue streams would be sustained through the effective and efficient management of financial resources.

Ms McCourt identified some key risks. These were:

  • Inadequate revenue to realise the objectives of SANParks’ mandate.
  • Wildlife crime – a huge risk, especially the impact on species, the reputation of the country and visitors’ security.
  • An inadequate and obsolete tourism reservation and property management system.
  • An inability to acquire new firearms or retain existing ones.
  • Infrastructure maintenance – specifically road infrastructure and staff accommodation.

Mr Rajesh Mahabeer, CFO: SANParks, added there had been no real growth in revenue due to the climate and other factors mentioned by the COO. Tourism income was currently sitting at R1.2 billion. The organization had done well to resource its own infrastructure by generating income. Their balance was in good shape and they could cope as an organization. There had been a decline in sales of flora and fauna, but this had been due to the impact of drought on the purchase of animals and plants. Donation income had increased, however.

Discussion

Mr Mabilo said it was important for a balance to be kept between people arrested and those convicted. For 2015/16, SANParks had said rhino poaching had stabilised. The Committee’s key concern was prevention. With regard to the inability to retain firearms, one could not plan to lose firearms – was the entity projecting that people would lose their firearms, or were they being stolen?

Ms Kekana asked what the project on Tsitsikamma entailed.

The Chairperson asked whether, in the light of the budget cuts, SANParks was still able to provide laboratories to communities and schools where national parks were present. To what extent had it been able to meet its expected outcomes? In relation to the green and blue economy, it was understandable for the green economy that it would be accumulating, but for blue economy it had been indicated as “one” throughout. How did it remain at one?

With reference to rhino poaching, without overemphasizing the point, the concern was that as while poaching continued, what happened to the breeding? Was there any comfort that perhaps there was a replenishment of the species? In terms of the gender point and the institution being male dominated, it did not seem that SANParks was making serious efforts to do change the current situation. The Committee had been made to believe that the situation would change with time. With 21 years into democracy, the expectation was that change should happen.

With the challenge of insufficient budget to deal with infrastructure maintenance, would there be a situation where everything deteriorated to levels never seen before, all in the name of budget cuts or the economic situation? One should rather maintain the infrastructure than support other projects which it may not be able to maintain. There must be a portion of the budget for maintenance instead of cutting budgets for new projects. How was SANPark’s programme for the reduction of the fossil fuel-generated energy doing? What was the situation with the “wild card” system which used to exist, where people subscribed and could gain access to all the national parks?

SANParks’ response

Ms McCourt said SANParks was striving very hard to maintain and improve on job creation.

The organisation had not lost a single rhino over the past two years. There had been a substantial increase in poaching, but it was preventing incursions. It had deliberately not included the conviction rate because this was out of its area of jurisdiction, although it was being measured by the DEA. SANParks was as concerned about cycads and abalone as it was about rhinos and elephants. A census had been conducted on how rhinos were doing, but it was not at liberty to comment because it was being discussed at Cabinet level and the Minister would make an announcement once the results were available. There was evidence that there was at least one elephant remaining in the Knysna forest.

SANParks was not projecting that it would be losing firearms, but rather that there might be thefts or they might be lost. This had to be highlighted as a risk factor, because it was reliant on firearms to prevent poaching.

She said there had been incredible cooperation through the trans-frontier parks in terms of exchanging conservation technology, combined enforcement activity between the parks and the training of staff.

To enhance sustainability, SANParks was using solar power to conserve energy. The retrofitting process had started in some of the remote areas. Because of power outages, some remote areas had had to rely on solar energy only.

The blue economy in Tsitsikamma was being maintained at the “one” level because there was no control over how long the process was going to take.

The percentage of game sales seemed low because some “sales” had been donated to communities on loan basis, but they had committed to them being firm sales.

There were no targets for public-private partnerships (PPPs), because SANParks was currently employing the same economic strategy, although there was one in the Table Mountain National Park.

Regarding the employee gender split, SANParks had taken the Committee very seriously. Its targets were indicating that by 2017/18 there would be a 50% female complement.

The “wild card” was back, fully functional, and in use by all its members. SANParks was bringing in pensioner and student products. The challenge was that the old wild cards had cost less and were still valid and being used, so there was a loss of income.

If replacement was cheaper than carrying out maintenance, then SANParks replaced. The maintenance budget was not being used for other programmes, but the need for infrastructure was evaluated on the basis of what was best -- replacement or maintenance.

Ms Ngcaba, the DEA’s DG, added to the responses. She said that to curtail rhino poaching, the police had an operations centre within the Kruger National Park. A broader initiative focusing on how one dealt with convictions, not just for SANParks, was being coordinated by the Department.

Most of the marine areas were also managed by SANParks.

The cooperation with countries both within and outside the SADC was not only in the control of SANParks, but involved agreements in international cooperation.

Regarding the maintenance of infrastructure, SANParks had historically had to deal with a backlog in staff accommodation that was not up to acceptable standards and therefore had to be rebuilt for health reasons. The rest of the infrastructure renovation was linked to its own revenue.

Mr Ishaam Abader, Deputy Director General, DEA added that the conviction of poachers was outside the Department’s control. Around Kruger Park there had been an increase in poaching activity and at the same time, the number of arrests in the area had increased substantially. There was a need to be patient with conviction rates and success in capturing poachers. However, legislation was improving and sentences being handed to poachers were high, as ten and 12 year sentences had been imposed.

Mr Mabilo said the DEA should be interested in both the number of arrests and the conviction rate, and suggested that this was an area where it could improve. He requested that it provide a holistic figure on the outcome of conviction cases.

The Chairperson said what was being sought was clarity on where this was happening and what the results were, rather than being given information on a case by case basis.

Ms McCourt added that SANParks did have a mandate to arrest poachers, which was why it could set a target for arrests, but what happened with those arrests was out of its control.

Closing remarks;

The Chairperson said the Committee knew that SANParks played a role in assisting communities, and they provided assistance as well. Regarding the participation of women in management, the APP target was 50%, but that could surely increase and should not be limited to only achieving 50%.

He expressed appreciation for SANParks achieving their target in terms of donation revenue. It had given the Committee answers on its budgets and performance, and it now knew where improvement was necessary.

The meeting was adjourned.

Share this page: