Court case on Immigration Regulations, ID Campaign, Container Project & HANIS: briefing by Minister

Meeting report

HOME AFFAIRS PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
1 April 2003
COURT CASE ON IMMIGRATION REGULATIONS, ID CAMPAIGN, CONTAINER PROJECT & HANIS: BRIEFING BY MINISTER

Chairperson: Mr H Chauke (ANC)

Documents handed out:
Address by Minister Buthelezi
Presentation on the HANIS Project
HANIS Project Overview

SUMMARY
The Minister objected to comments made about him at the previous meeting. He briefed the Committee on the Immigration Relations. The Cape High Court has ordered that the Aliens Control Act and its regulations remain in force until the hearing on government's leave to appeal on 7 April 2003. The Minister has initiated the Section 7 process and will appoint the Immigration Advisory Board as soon as the public nomination process is completed. The Committee agreed to revisit the matter once the outcome of the hearing on leave to appeal was known.

The ID campaign will be launched in April 2003. The Container project had been scrapped after serious irregularities and on the advice of the Department of Public Works that it was the least desirable option to get services to rural areas. The Minister has proposed devolution to municipalities to make services available to rural areas as an alternative. Cancelled meetings were holding this up.

The Acting Director of HANIS briefed the Committee on the HANIS project. The HANIS project aims to combat fraud using an Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) and a smart card ID. The AFIS basic system is operational, but record capturing is proceeding too slowly. The smart card component is proceeding slowly and means to speed it up were being sought. Under-staffing is a problem, especially due to resignations of Information Technology staff. The Committee expressed concern about the short lifespan of the smart cards and the cost.

MINUTES
Briefing by Minister Buthelezi
The Minister explained that he had been unable to attend the previous meeting because of a prior commitment to deliver a lecture at Fort Hare University. He was taken aback by the comments made regarding his absence reported in the media. He knew of no other Minister subjected to such disrespectful treatment by a Portfolio Committee.

Court case on Immigration Regulations
The challenge brought to the Regulations in the Cape High Court related to whether the Regulations were correctly made in terms of Section 52(1), dealing with regulations made during the transition. Should they have been made in terms of and in partial compliance with the provisions in Section 7(1), which is the general provision prescribing how regulations are to be made?

The Department interpreted these two Sections as giving the Minister the power to make regulations during the transitional period, without having to follow the provisions in Section 7(1). The same interpretation had been given by the State Law Advisor when the Committee asked his opinion and in the affidavit given by the Speaker and Chairperson of the NCOP.

The content of the Regulations was not challenged. The Court ruled that the Regulations were incorrectly made in terms of Section 52(1) and should have been made in terms of Section 7(1) and were therefore invalid. The Minister has noted an appeal to the decision and the hearing on the application for leave to appeal will be heard on 7 April 2003. The Court has now given a written judgement, which is being analysed by counsel.

Although Section 52(2) of the Act allows that the Regulations made in terms of the Aliens Control Act continue in force, these would not work with the Act. The Court has suspended the coming into force of the Act, except for the provisions that had already come into force: Sections 4, 7 and 52. The Aliens Control Act and its Regulations remain in force in terms of the Court order, which lasts until the hearing on leave to appeal.

In spite of the appeal, the Minister has begun the Section 7(1) regulation-making process. The process can thus move forward whatever the result of the appeal. The Minister has begun the process aimed at establishing the Immigration Advisory Board. Nominations have been received from the relevant Ministers. At the close of the public nomination period, the Minister will appoint the members of the Board and bring the nominations to Cabinet for its concurrence.

Discussion
The Chair asked that the Committee address itself first to the Minister's comments on the relationship between the Committee and the Minister. Members must try not to be partisan and a good relationship should be fostered between the Committee and the Minister.

Prince N Zulu (IFP) agreed that the Chair had tried to create a spirit of Members working together as a Committee, not as Members of parties. The Members referred to in the Minister's statement should now withdraw their comments.

Chief P Mathebe (ANC) stated that relations between the ANC and IFP have nothing to do with the Committee. The Minister must refrain from seeing people as party Members. Threats around IFP-ANC conflict were tiresome.

The Minister responded that a Member had alleged that he was not present because he was in Ulundi attending to floor crossing issues. The press had reported this comment, creating the impression that the Minister was neglecting his ministerial duties in favour of party matters. He is not here just to be disdained.

The Chair stated that in the last meeting he had ruled that Members should not make such comments about the Minister and they had then been withdrawn. The matter had been dealt with in the meeting - the media picked up on the comment but not the withdrawal.

Mr G Grobler (DP) responded that although the Chair had ruled that Members should not make such comments, he could not recall any Member having withdrawn their comments. He had never encountered such an ongoing onslaught on a Minister before.

Mr W Skhosana (ANC) stated that although it was correct for the Minister to raise the issue, it was unfortunate that the Committee was now using its time discussing it rather than continuing with the agenda for the meeting. The matter should be noted and discussed separately.

The Chair responded that the issue should be dealt with so that the Committee and the Minister could have a proper relationship, conforming to parliamentary procedure. The Committee should be proud of the Minister.

Mr I Mfundisi (UCDP) stated that Members should be in a position to take responsibility for their statements. He had tried to correct the wrong impression of the Minister at the meeting. There should not be a separate meeting on this.

Prince Zulu stated that the way to bring the matter to a close was to follow parliamentary procedure, as the Chair suggested. In Parliament, Members who made incorrect statements withdrew them; the same should happen in the Committee.

The Chair closed the matter for discussion.

Turing to the issue of the immigration regulations, Mr Grobler asked if there was a date for the final implementation of the provisions on the Immigration Advisory Board.

The Minister replied that he would appoint members of the Board as soon as the public nomination process was closed.

Mr Mfundisi suggested that the matter be dealt with when the Court action was resolved.

Prince Zulu noted that a previous Court ruling required that a new Act be passed by 2 June 2002 or that the Aliens Control Act be amended. Currently, the old Aliens Control Act was in force. Is this valid in light of the earlier ruling?

The Minister replied that the Department had to abide by the Court's ruling. It would not be appropriate for him to comment on whether the Court was right.

The Chair asked why the Minister was continuing with the appeal rather than saving time and simply implementing Section 7, which the Minister had already started doing.

The Minister replied that no time was wasted in the appeal process, since the Department was proceeding with the implementation of Section 7 anyway. Senior counsel advised that the appeal was worthwhile to clarify the matter.

Adv I Lambinon, Acting Director General, added that in addition to providing clarity, it was in the interests of the country to have the Act implemented as soon as possible. Counsel judged that there was a more than reasonable chance of a successful appeal. This would bring the Immigration Act into force much faster. Whatever the outcome, Section 7 will be followed in full.

The Chair asked how long the process would take.

Adv Lambinon replied that the Board had to come into operation 90 days after the Act is implemented.

The Committee agreed to await the outcome of the trail and a briefing on this.

Briefing on ID Campaign
The Minister noted that Cabinet has approved the launch of an Identity Document Campaign in preparation for the next general elections. The Campaign will be launched in April 2003, with a special focus on rural areas. R15 million has been set aside for the Campaign. The Department is alive to the possibility that a number of eligible voters do not have the bar-coded identity document, but do not have sufficiently precise information to determine the number and location of people involved. The Department has thus received draft needs assessments from its Regions. Plans are being considered for the distribution of uncollected identity documents.

The Department will liase with the Government Communication and Information Services on strategies to inform the public on the need to apply for identity documents well in advance of the elections. Understaffing would impair the campaign and the Department will seek permission to fill all vacancies in the Directorates of Identity Documents and Identification. Temporary and volunteer staff will be appointed where a need arises.

Discussion
The Chair asked the Minister to elaborate on a suggestion that the Department would supply free photographs for ID documents.

The Minister confirmed that the Department had applied for funding from Treasury for this. A mayor in Zululand had taken the initiative and bought a camera to provide photographs.

Prince Zulu suggested that traditional leaders be involved in the free photograph programme.

The Chair suggested that constituency offices be used to distribute ID documents, either through letting Department officials use the offices or by having the MP and staff do so. The Committee should assist the Department with suggestions.

Briefing on Container Project
The Minister noted that his former Director General had not discussed the container project with the Minister. When it became public, the Minister enquired about the situation and uncovered a number of serious problems, including irregular actions. The Department of Public Works advised the Department that using containers was the least desirable of the options to bring services to rural areas.

Delivery of the Department's civic services is terribly skewed and reflects the patterns and imbalances of apartheid. This cannot be remedied by short-term measures. The Minister thus launched the notion of devolving the delivery of civic services to the new system of municipalities. The Department has completed the project's basic investigation and the matter now needs to be carried forward in cooperation with the Department for Public Service and Administration.

Unfortunately, meetings between himself and the Minister for Public Service and Administration to launch the project have been cancelled four times in a row. The Minister hopes that the project will soon take off since this approach will ultimately solve the problem of unequal distribution of Home Affairs offices since municipal offices are equally distributed.

Discussion
Mr Grobler praised the idea of devolution to municipalities since this was the level of Government closest to the people. Why is it 'hanging in the air'?

The Minister replied that meetings to carry the programme forward had been cancelled four times in a row.

The Chair noted that the matter had arisen previously and the Deputy Minister had said the matter was being discussed at Cabinet level.

Prince Zulu asked again why the Clause dealing with the regions, which would have helped usher this programme in, had been expunged. He was not satisfied with the explanations given. The Committee was crying for services but had then expunged an idea that would help.

The Acting Director General noted that dealing with service delivery and the pattern of offices could be a meeting on its own. Broadly speaking, service delivery had been restricted to Department officials to avoid forgery. Security was thus a consideration in giving Department functions to other bodies.

The Chair noted that a slot in the programme (15 April) is set aside to discuss restructuring.

Briefing by Department on HANIS
Mr I Mamonyane, Acting Director of HANIS, briefed the Committee on HANIS (Home Affairs National Identification System). Planning for HANIS began in 1992 and the project started in 1996. Initially the contract was for AFIS (Automated Fingerprint Identification System) and for an ID card with two-dimensional barcode. The card component of the contract had been dropped when it was decided that smart cards should be investigated as an alternative to the barcoded card.

Smart cards would allow for extended objectives since they are more versatile. Other Departments could then use the card, such as for the payment of social grants. The card could also have private sector application.

Cabinet had requested funding for the card programme and Treasury had approved R15 million for a Public Private Partnership (PPP) study.

Some progress on HANIS has been achieved. The Population Register was to be re-written using current technology, but was currently operational. 600 thousand records have been captured on the ID application database, but this was not satisfactory. It was a mistake to have left out the card aspect of the contract. Speedy progress was needed on the ID card. Cabinet wants the card by the end of 2003, but the PPP process would only be completed by September 2004. Ways to shorten the process were being sought.

The Department had problems maintaining competent IT resources, with several resignations. Positions then remained unfilled due to the moratorium on hiring public service staff.

A two-tier system was proposed. 30% of people over sixteen were 'unbanked', often in rural areas, and would not require a smart card and so would get a card on an ordinary platform. All others would receive the smart card, which would have a lifespan of about ten years. The estimated costs of the smart card are R1, 8854 billion: R1,71 billion for 30 million smart cards at R56 each (rolled out over five years), R100 million for infrastructure costs (over ten years), R50 million for Personalisation Centre and R25,4 million for general project costs.

Discussion
Ms M Maunye (ANC) asked why rural people would not get the same cards as urban people.

Chief Mathebe asked about the lifespan of the cards. Ten years was very short, especially since the cards seemed expensive. The cost could be a problem in rural areas.

Mr Mamonyane replied that the lifespan was determined by the technology. The card type issued would be decided according to need. It would waste money to provide smart cards to rural people with no reason to use them.

Prince Zulu noted that he comes from a deep rural area and thus would not be eligible for the smart card, yet he had been deployed to Cape Town and so led a sophisticated life. Would he not need the smart card?

The Chair added that the Department would have to look at the movement of people from rural to urban areas.

Mr Mamonyane replied that technical advice supported the two-tier system, but this was not yet final policy. The criterion is not where one stays, but what needs one has. Where one stays is only relevant as a pointer to one's likely needs.

Mr Skhosana asked if it was possible to have a two-tier smart card system, with an option of more expensive, longer-lasting cards.

Mr Mamonyane replied that they would like a card with a longer lifespan, but the technology determined this.

Chief Mathebe asked if the Marpless consortium was local or foreign. Were local companies involved?

Mr Mamonyane responded that the prime contractor in the consortium was based in the USA and Japan. The main subcontractor was NEC, also foreign, which was responsible for AFIS. AFIS is NEC's technology and no local equivalent is available. Unisys, also foreign, was to integrate the components. The Department had insisted that the contractors meet Black Economic Empowerment requirements.

Ms Maunye asked when people could apply for the cards.

Mr Mamonyane replied that a card could be in place this year, but this would be irresponsible. It would result in a cheap card that did not serve needs. The aim was to have a card available some time in 2004 if the PPP process could be shortened, otherwise 2005 was the earliest a card could be expected.

Mr Grobler asked how many Departments were coming on board with the smart card. Would driver's licences, for example, be incorporated?

Mr Mamonyane listed Departments that were to use the smart card:
-Social Development would use it to facilitate payments.
-Housing was to provide terminals to use it to verify details for housing subsidies.
-Labour would use it for UIF.
-Health to monitor treatment.
-The SAPS for firearm licences.
-Transport for driver's licences.
-Communication would use it as part of the electronic commerce initiative for services.
-Education for SAQA requirements, and so on.
These matters were discussed at the Interdepartmental Technical Committee, which looked at Departments' needs, and in meetings of the Directors General.

The Chair raised the driver's licence 'fiasco'. How did this relate to HANIS? Would HANIS affect the costs of the licence?

Mr Mamonyane replied that there was currently no integration of the licensing system. With integration, licences would be programmed on to the smart card. He could not comment on costs.

Mr Skhosana asked why the HANIS project was proceeding so slowly, especially considering rising costs. Was it because of the resignations?

The Chair added that given the experience and capacity of the companies involved, one would expect the project to proceed faster.

Mr Mamonyane responded that resignations had an effect but were not the cause of the delays, though they might contribute to them. The delays were due to technical considerations. A mistake had been made when the Cabinet had asked for an investigation into smart card technology and the Department had decided to cancel the card portion of the contract. Had the Department continued with a Home Affairs card, applications for this could have populated the database. If one looked at Finland's smart card project, this had not been successful because of hasty technical decisions. Taking good decisions required research.

Mr M Sibande (ANC) asked how the system would curb fraud.

Mr Mamonyane replied that measures to curb fraud included ensuring unique registration, coupled with biometric identification. For example, aliens that attempted to apply for an ID document under another name would be 'tripped up' by biometrics.

The Chair asked about the rollover of R41 million. Where is this spent?

Mr Mamonyane replied that the R41 million was the total rollover by the Department. R17 million of this was for HANIS and would be spent on image capturing equipment.

The Chair wondered why the Committee was focussing on the card and not on AFIS, on which money was being spent. Members should go back and study the presentation, and compare it with the presentation from September 2002. They should send any questions to the Clerk, who would send it to HANIS for a response.

Adv Lambinon thanked the Committee for engaging on the card since the project involved both AFIS and the card. The card had to be a gateway to allow other Departments and the private sector to come on board. The Department had no definite figures on the cost of the card and this was a serious concern. The R1,8 billion was a guesstimate. Furthermore, some suggested that the card's lifespan is only three years. There could be huge budgetary implications, especially if the Department had to spend such huge sums every three years.

Discussion of the legislative programme was carried over to the next Committee meeting.

The meeting was adjourned.