Committee Report on International Relations Budget

This premium content has been made freely available

International Relations

20 April 2016
Chairperson: Mr M Masango (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The Portfolio Committee met to consider the draft report on the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) Budget Vote 6. It was agreed that the observations made by the Members should be considered directly, rather than going through the entire body of the report page by page. The observations were therefore carefully considered, after a brief summary of the report had been given by the content adviser of the Committee.

A few suggestions were made with regard to the rewording of some parts of the reports. Other major observations and recommendations made to the report included the request for timeframes for the rationalisation of missions and the submission of the list of South African embassies and missions; the importance of follow-up on the money loaned out by the Department to countries to ensure that such funds were used for the purposes for which they had been loaned; and the need to engage National Treasury on the issue of rationalisation only after the Department had been engaged on the matter.

The EFF did not support the adoption of the report, while the DA reserved its right to adopt the report.

Nevertheless, the report was adopted.

 

Meeting report

Committee Report on DIRCO Budget Vote 6

The Chairperson suggested two means by which the report could be considered -- either through a consideration of each page or each chapter, or by going directly to chapter 10 on page 48, where observations made by the Members were reflected, after which comments could be made where necessary.

Mr S Mokgalapa (DA) commented on the late delivery of the report, saying they had received the report only in the late afternoon of the previous day. He proposed that the report should be considered page by page, after which the main chapter be considered more carefully and comments made on it.

Mr L Mpumlwana (ANC) proposed that the report be considered page by page, but some time should be given to going through the observations carefully.

Ms S Kalyan (DA) proposed that the Committee should go through the observations directly, rather than going through each page of the report for further comments, since the Department was not present at the meeting to take down any further comments that may arise from the body of the report.

Ms D Raphuti (ANC) supported the proposal that Members consider the observations section of the report directly.

Ms Lineo Mosala, Committee Content Adviser, said that the report had been summarily based on the reduced budget allocation to the Department in the current financial year, which was in line with the directives that affected all other government departments. The budget had been further affected by the fluctuating foreign exchange rate.

The budget for the compensation of employees, goods and services and the operational budget of the African Renaissance Fund (ARF) had been reduced in order to kick start some projects in the department. The National Treasury had allocated only R31 000 to the ARF because it had a surplus of about R1.7 billion, with which it would still be able to achieve its objectives. The Department had also committed to the Committee that it would still be able to achieve its objectives.

The Chairperson noted that the Department’s service delivery is measured, among others, by the number and impact of high level visits to the country. An impact assessment of such visits needed to be reported on. A progress report was requested on the processes around South Africa building the headquarters for the Pan African Parliament. It was also highlighted that clarity should be sought on how the Department ensured that Locally Recruited Personnel (LRPs) in the missions did not compromise the security of those missions.

Ms Kaylan proposed that there should be a timeline for when the Committee would be provided with a list of South African embassies and missions abroad and the international organisations to which South Africa is a member.  Accompanying the list of South Africa’s representation abroad should be an annexure indicating the magnitude of South Africa’s investment in each region and each country.

Members noted the proposals that had been made.

The Chairperson highlighted that it was encouraging that Home Affairs and the Department had reached some form of agreement, where the former had transferred a budget for the operational costs of its officials serving in the missions abroad. Members suggested that other relevant departments should also be encouraged to do the same. The Committee had also recommended that more information should be sought on which countries were assisted with the African Renaissance Fund and if there was collateral for loans given to a particular country. It was also emphasised that the Fund was conditional and could not be used outside what was intended for.  

 

The Committee Content Adviser responded that this would be added in the recommendations that had been made by Members.

The Chairperson highlighted that it was encouraging that Home Affairs and the Department have reached some form of agreement, to the effect that Home Affairs had transferred a budget for the operational costs of its officials serving in the missions abroad. Members suggested that other relevant departments should also be encouraged to do the same. The Committee had also recommended that more information should be sought on which countries were assisted with the African Renaissance Fund and if there was collateral for loans given to a particular country. It was also emphasised that the Fund was conditional and could not be used outside what was intended for.  

The Committee Content Adviser responded that this would be added in the recommendations that had been made by Members.

The Chairperson added that the Committee still needed to ascertain whether the African Renaissance Fund would be able to fulfil its objectives in view of the budget cuts. Furthermore, it should be explained whether the dwindling budget under the ARF would have a bearing on the establishment of South African Development Partnership Agency (SADPA).

The Committee Content Adviser responded that the Department, National Treasury and the Reserve Bank were scheduled to meet to discuss the best method to assist the Department with its budget as it gets affected by unpredictable foreign exchange fluctuations.

The Chairperson noted that locally recruited personnel were vetted and security checks are done before they are employed by the missions, however in such situations, there was always a security risk. It must be pointed out that each country was to choose how the Locally Recruited Personnel would be vetted and this was once again an attempt to protect privacy and prevent the hacking of important information.

Mr B Radebe (ANC) added that there is an internal and external service that is utilised for the vetting of locally recruited personnel. South Africa could never allow spying organisations like Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to vet those that are employed by the missions.

The Chairperson said that the Department and Home Affairs have reached an understanding (MOU) which it is believed would address the challenges experienced regarding operational costs for the running of Home Affairs services in the missions.

Mr M Booi (ANC) expressed concern that the Department in point 11.11, on page 17 had prescribed that the Committee needed to start debates on inclusive societies aiming to distribute wealth and resources. There was cognisance that this would, to an extent, curb instances of many youth being easily attracted to options of terrorism. The main concern, however, was on the fact that it was impossible for any department to prescribe what Parliament should debate about. It was the responsibility and mandate of Members to conduct an oversight over the Department and not the other way around. This also assumed that parliamentarians did not know what they are doing and therefore should be given a prescription on what needed to be done.

The Chairperson replied that it was not that the Department had prescribed the Committee to start debates on inclusive societies aiming to distribute wealth and resources in order to curb instances of many youth being easily attracted to options of terrorism. The Department was merely suggesting that the Committee should be having these debates as there are also South Africans that are likely to be recruited to acts of terrorism, especially in groups like Islamic State (IS).

Mr Booi explained that his concern was mainly on how point 11.11 was phrased than the content of the matter as it created the impression that the Department was giving an instruction to the Committee or Members. The authority of Parliament must not be withered away especially when one considered the latest Constitutional Court ruling against Parliament.  

Mr Mokgalapa disagreed with the suggestion to rephrase point 11.11 as this was precisely the respond that was provided by the Department. The Committee could only note in the recommendations that the Department needed to engage the Committee on the matter of starting debates on inclusive societies aiming to distribute wealth and resources in order to curb instances of many youth being easily attracted to options of terrorism through the public diplomacy programme. 

 

Members agreed with the suggestion.

Mr Radebe proposed that the Department needed to meet with the National Treasury and the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) so as to calculate the consequences of budget cuts on the organogram of the Department. The Committee should support the report as it had already been indicated that the Department would still meet its mandate despite all the budget cuts that had been implemented.

Mr Mokgalapa suggested that the Committee should be provided with the timeframe for conducting a feasibility study on the viability of developing an acquisition and disposal strategy as this was an important study that was aimed to promote a shift towards property ownership over rental.

The Chairperson responded that it would be difficult for the Committee to prescribe a timeframe for the Department to deal with the issue of shifting towards property ownership over rental without knowing the cost that would be involved in the process and funds to be available.  

Mr Mokgalapa maintained that the “bone of contention” was on the fact that the Department had had qualified audit opinions for two consecutive financial years because of the issue of assets. It was prudent for the Department to promptly deal with the issue of shifting towards property ownership over rental, especially when this is juxtaposed with the budget cuts that had been implemented to all government departments. It had been reported that property leasing was costing the Department R575 million and R209 million in the maintenance of infrastructure and this was likely to increase to R330 million. It was the responsibility of the Committee to prescribe a timeframe for conducting a feasibility study on the viability of developing an acquisition and disposal strategy to promote a shift towards property ownership over rental as there is already enough information available on the number of properties that are leased and the cost involved.

 

The Committee Content Adviser firstly indicated that it had already been stipulated that the Department was to consider the reports on progress made within three months of adoption by Parliament. Therefore, there is a timeframe for all reports to be considered by the Department. In relation to the issue of budget, the Department had been operating on a shoe-string budget year after year. This year in particular, it had a reduced budget which would further be affected by the imminent foreign exchange currency fluctuations. Its main operations abroad have previously been affected by currency fluctuations.

Members supported the proposal that had been made in advance that the Department must consider all the reports on progress within three of adoption by Parliament.

The Chairperson said it would be difficult for the National Treasury to budget for the Department based on currency fluctuation.

Mr Booi suggested that the Committee would need to go to policy documentation in order to check how to deal with budget allocation of government departments in relative to the currency fluctuation.

The Committee Content Adviser clarified that the Treasurer is able to make estimations before the beginning of the budget cycle on the possible performance of a Rand against other currencies. However, the concern was that these estimations always fell below what had been targeted for and there is a meeting to take place with the Reserve Bank on resolving this matter.

The Chairperson proposed that there should be a timeframe on the dedicated debate on the review and rationalisation of South Africa’s missions abroad, especially with the prevailing economic situation and the budget cuts.

Mr Radebe rebutted the proposal to include the timeframe on the on the dedicated debate on the review and rationalisation of South Africa’s missions abroad as the South Africa’s missions abroad had the potential of empowering the country in opening up new frontiers of trade. It must be highlighted that South Africa could not afford to assist Europe on the migration crisis it was facing currently, especially when one considered that there are about 800 000 people from whole on the continent who are now dependent on resources of South Africa. The European Union (EU) had also had pointed out that South Africa needed to have more funds to deal with the migration crisis in the continent.

 

The Chairperson stated that the debate on the rationalisation of South Africa’s missions abroad had not taken place as yet and therefore Members could not assume as if there were discussions that had already taken place on the matter. A foreign relation is not the responsibility and task of the Department but the Executive or Cabinet that is led by the President. The Department was only responsible for assisting the President in terms of offering advices on the strategic objectives to be achieved in foreign relations. There is no need to stipulate in the report that the Committee would be having a debate on the rationalisation of South Africa’s missions as this was not what was intended or desired to take place. There was an analysis that was done by the Treasury on the cost of South Africa’s missions abroad and this was the report to be discussed by Members based on solid facts.

 

The Chairperson suggested that the Committee should invite the Department on the possible debate on rationalisation of South Africa’s missions abroad. The Committee would also engage with the Department on the advancement of national interest and how the Department could carry out its mandate within unpredictable, at times turbulent, external environment to advance South Africa’s national interest.  

Mr Radebe noted that the Committee should be provided of South African embassies and missions abroad and the international organisations to which South Africa is a member.  Accompanying the list of South Africa’s representation abroad should be an annexure indicating the magnitude of South Africa’s investment in each region and each country.

Mr Mokgalapa added that intention of engaging with the Department on the South African embassies and missions abroad and the intentional organisations to which South Africa is a member was to also get information on the possible rationalisation of South Africa’s missions abroad, as suggested in the Auditor-General report. He further suggested that under Committee recommendations, the report should also include the remedial actions of the Auditor-General.

Members agreed with the suggestion.

Ms D Raphuti (ANC) moved for the adoption of the report and was seconded by Mr Mpumlwana.

The EFF had already indicated that the party was objecting to the report.

Mr Mokgalaka said that the DA still needed to caucus its position regarding the Budget Vote 5 Report of the Department. 

Other Committee Business

The Chairperson mentioned that the Department was to brief the Committee on the quest by International Criminal Court (ICC) to arrest the President of Sudan, Mr Al-Bashir when he visited South Africa in June 2015 to attend the Summit of the African Union. It was previously indicated that the Committee could not be briefed on the matter as yet as the matter was still pending in the Constitutional Court.      

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: