Ikamva National eSkills Institute (iNeSI) Bill: briefing

Telecommunications and Postal Services

14 November 2017
Chairperson: Mr J Mahlangu (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The Department of Telecommunications and Postal Services provided an update to the Committee on the INESI bill following on its meeting in March. The Department said the bill had been through a long process of extensive consultation which included the Department of Higher Education (DHE) to determine where e-skills training would be positioned. The Department spoke to the background of the bill which found its origins in the NDP. The Department said it was imperative that e-literacy was improved through basic and secondary schooling; and through tertiary, adult education and supplier training to support the production of content. This would increase demand for ICT services. For the sector to grow, a significant number of skilled people would be required to fill the range of specialised job opportunities created and the education system needed to prepare for this and the ICT White Paper recognised the need for a new skills dispensation. The Department defined e-skills as the ability to develop and use ICTs to maximise the social and economic benefits of the Information Society and Knowledge Economy, and associated competencies that enable individuals to actively participate in a world in which ICT is a requirement for advancement in various sectors such as government, business, education and society in general. There was a shortage of e-skills capacity in the country which limited inclusive socio-economic development and the competitiveness of the economy.  The Department then spoke to the framework for the development of e-skills and to the progress made on the bill, noting that the State Law Advisor had said the bill was compliant in May but that in September the Department had been requested to strengthen its business case. In November, Cabinet granted its approval for INESI Bill to be gazetted for public comments. The Department spoke to the CoLab network and to the INESI model where INESI did not do the training, which was done by universities and TVET colleges. INESI provided funds and did monitoring and evaluation. It identified the demand and supply of e-skills, advocated and supported initiatives promoting e-skills. The Department said the Bill sought to:

  • establish INESI as a juristic person and a public entity in terms of the PFMA.
  • Provide a framework to address e-skills capacity challenges in the country.
  • Provide an enabling environment for a coordinated response to the challenges posed by the rapidly-expanding capacity of ICTs to ensure SA competitive position.

Members asked what ‘e -social astuteness’ was. Members asked for copies of the draft bill, the business case and the regulatory impact analysis report. Members asked if the funding for CoLab projects were part of the bill or whether universities could source funding on their own. Members said the bill lacked a definition or the requirements board members needed to have to qualify to serve on the board and there was no requirement that nominees appear before Parliament. There was no condition that regulations needed to be presented to Parliament for approval either. Members said that given where CoLabs were based, the impression might be gained that CoLabs were only for the educated. How would this be countered? Members asked if the Department or INESI had a program to advertise what it offered to people in the rural areas. Members said that INESI appeared to be an advocacy organisation. Members noted that Mpumalanga had no CoLab. Members asked for examples of good and poor performing CoLabs. Members asked why CoLabs had a thematic approach to research topics. Members did not believe the timeframes for processing the bill were achievable. Members said one needed to make sure that boards were appropriately constituted by following the route of parliamentary approval of the board nominees. Members asked how many companies, to date, provided e-skills training. Members said the potential board members had to be vetted first. Members asked if the Department only gazetted the call for public comments or whether it used other forms of advertising. Members raised the issue of the language used in the training and that it should not only be in English and should cater for other languages as well.

Meeting report

Briefing by Department of Telecommunications and Postal Services (DTPS)

Mr Robert Nkuna, Director General, DTPS said work was already being done on eskilling by Nemisa. There was a need to define e-skills beyond universities and encompass all facets of society.

The Ikamva National eSkills Institute (iNeSI) Bill had been through a long process of extensive consultation which included the Department of Higher Education (DHE) to determine where e-skills training would be positioned.

Mr Omega Shelembe, DDG SOC Oversight, said the Department had presented an update to the Committee in March and this presentation was a progress report to date since then.

The bill could be traced back to the NDP.  It was imperative that e-literacy was improved through basic and secondary schooling; and through tertiary, adult education and supplier training to support the production of content. This would increase demand for ICT services. For the sector to grow, a significant number of skilled people would be required to fill the range of specialised job opportunities created and the education system needed to prepare for this and the ICT White Paper recognised the need for a new skills dispensation.

Mr Shelembe defined e-skills as the ability to develop and use ICTs to maximise the social and economic benefits of the Information Society and Knowledge Economy, and associated competencies that enable individuals to actively participate in a world in which ICT is a requirement for advancement in various sectors such as government, business, education and society in general. There was a shortage of e-skills capacity in the country which limited inclusive socio-economic development and the competitiveness of the economy.

Mr Shelembe presented the framework for the development of e-skills. There would be a base which consisted of developing basic digital literacy for the general society followed by sector user e-skills, e-leadership skills and ICT practitioner skills which comprised more specific or advanced skills. In May, the State Law Advisor said the bill was compliant and the Department had targeted the presentation of the bill to Parliament in September 2017. In July, the Bill was presented to the Economic Sectors, Employment and Infrastructure Development (ESEID) cluster. In September the Department was advised to improve the costing and scoping for massification (the Business Case). In November, Cabinet granted its approval for INESI Bill to be gazetted for public comments and it was gazetted on 8 November 2017.

Mr Shelembe spoke to the CoLab network of INESI. Agreements had been signed with universities on e-skills rollout. The Gauteng CoLab which was based at the Tshwane University of Technology was not fully fledged yet. A Memorandum of Understanding had been signed with it. Its theme was Creative New Media and would cover all broadcast related matters which had been the task of the original NEMISA. He then spoke to the INESI model. INESI did not do the training, this was done by universities and TVET colleges. INESI provided funds and did monitoring and evaluation. It identified the demand and supply of e-skills, advocated and supported initiatives promoting e-skills. He then gave an overview of the bill. He said the Bill sought to:

  • establish INESI as a juristic person and a public entity in terms of the PFMA.
  • Provide a framework to address e-skills capacity challenges in the country.
  • Provide an enabling environment for a coordinated response to the challenges posed by the rapidly-expanding capacity of ICTs to ensure SA competitive position.

Discussion

Mr C Mackenzie (DA) asked what ‘e -social astuteness’ was. He asked for a copy of the draft bill.

Ms M Shinn (DA) asked for a copy of the business case. She asked if the funding for CoLab projects were part of the bill or whether universities could source funding on their own. She noted that the bill did not specify what requirements board members needed to have to qualify to serve on the board and there was no requirement that nominees appear before Parliament. There was no condition that regulations needed to be presented to Parliament for approval either.

Ms D Tsotetsi (ANC) said that given where CoLabs were based, the impression might be gained that CoLabs were only for the educated. How would this be countered?

Ms N Ndongeni (ANC) asked if the Department or INESI had a program to advertise what it offered to people in the rural areas.

The Chairperson said that INESI appeared to be an advocacy organisation. It appeared as if there was no interface with civil society and the digitally illiterate. Could the Department provide an example of how it interacted with such sectors? He noted that Mpumalanga had no CoLab. He asked for examples of good and poor performing CoLabs. He asked why CoLabs had a thematic approach to research topics. He did not believe the timeframes for processing the bill were achievable.

Mr Nkuna said the bill and the business case would be sent to the Committee.

He said the Department had needed to cost the mandate, but that government, universities and industry would support it financially and industry would assist with the skilling.

On the appointment of board members, there were already other entities that did not need to send board nominees to Parliament for approval. Similarly, in the case of regulations, as the regulations envisaged was not like that of ICASA.

On CoLab locations, there was an understanding that South African universities needed to transform regarding e-skilling. It could be advantageous that the training was being associated with the universities. This could act as an incentive and the Department needed to embark on an aggressive marketing campaign.

 

On the thematic approach, the themes were in line with the national e-strategy and it applied to all provinces. The Department could implement it in all provinces and establish local best-case scenarios and there was a need for this specialisation

On the time frames, he said the Department were working on a worst-case scenario basis. The Department always received requests for extensions during the public comment phase.

Mr Shelembe said that in costing the bill, it had estimated how much it would cost to cover the training of all people in certain age ranges by 2030. The Department was aware that not all the funding would be available from the fiscus. There were however opportunities to leverage funding from SETA, in conjunction with the DHE, and the Department would engage with the Department of Labour on the budget for unemployed people, for the e-skilling of unemployed people.

The Department took note of the comment on specifying the requirements for serving on the board and this would be considered for inclusion.

The framework model started with e-literacy as its basis and this was where the highest demand at a mass level would be. The Department was looking at accredited modules that would be easily transferable between institutions or courses.

On Mpumalanga province lacking a CoLab, he said the CoLabs were part of a building up process and that every province would have at least one CoLab.

The thematic approach was used because that which was developed in one CoLab could be applied by other CoLabs. The approach was one of specialisation and cross pollination.

He acknowledged that the timeframes were tight but that a team had been set aside to work during the holiday season.

Prof Walter Claassen, Board Chairperson, NEMISA, said the country was at the point in time where people in all walks of life needed to be trained for a digital world. He added that social astuteness was the ability to use skills in various situations.

The thematic CoLab model was a tested way to develop in a decentralised manner, rather than having everything in one place. CoLabs took time to establish and were established in conjunction with provincial role players. Five of the CoLabs were performing because they had been going for some time. The North West CoLab was only established the previous year and operated on a smaller scale. The work happened in the communities and at universities. Universities were mandated to provide short programs and certification.

The Chairperson noted that what Prof Claassen spoke about in terms of work happening in communities should have been included in the presentation.

Ms Shinn said most appointments to SOE boards had been problematic and one needed to make sure that boards were appropriately constituted by following the route of parliamentary approval of the board nominees, as there had been mass dereliction of duty by SOE board members. She wanted a copy of the regulatory impact analysis report.

Mr Mackenzie wanted his question on e-social astuteness answered. He asked how many companies, to date, provided e-skills training.

Ms Tsotetsi said she hoped that the Department would soon provide information on potential hindrances to the e-skills implementation programme. She said the potential board members had to be vetted first.

 

Mr Nkuna said the SOC reform process was an attempt to deal with the issue of making boards effective. The Department would share information on the work arising from this with the Committee so that if Parliament wanted to take a role, it would be informed by that work.

On possible risks, he said it was likely that industry would ask for extensions. A second risk was that the mandate for skills training lay with the Department of Higher Education and Training, but the Department believed that through the engagements it had with that department the risk had been dealt with.

Mr Shelemebe said there had not been an audit of how many other service providers there were. INESI was being positioned as an aggregator of information such as this.

He said vetting was required and initial vetting was done by the Department and full vetting was done after a candidate was appointed.

He said the time scale took into consideration the likely request for extensions.

The Chairperson asked if the Department only gazetted the call for public comments or whether it used other forms of advertising.

Prof Claassen said there was no proper information at the moment on the supply and demand of deliverables, but that aggregation was a defined role of INESI.

He said e-social astuteness was using skills in the broader community space, to organise and inform a community for example like a neighbourhood watch Facebook page or Whatsapp group.

Ms Tsotetsi raised the issue of the language used in the training and that it should not only be in English and should cater for other languages as well.

Mr Nkuna said that at the next meeting with the Committee he could provide a breakdown of the curriculum. He said he took note of the issue of language use in the e-strategy.

He said the Department would be embarking on a marketing drive to publicise three bills, the INESI Bill, the SA Post Office bill and the ECA bill. The Department was just awaiting the processing of the ECA bill by Cabinet before it would start its marketing drive.

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: