SABC & MDDA Board vacancies; BRRR process changes; Committee Reports

Meeting report

Fourth Term Committee Programme
The Chairperson took the Committee through the proposed Committee Programme (see document). The programme was a guide but the Committee is not merely about compliance, there are matters of public interest relevant to the Committee that may arise during the course of the term. This programme provides an opportunity for amendment of agenda items so the Committee can provide oversight on matters affecting the portfolio.

Mr C Mackenzie (DA) applauded everyone who contributed to the compilation of the Committee Programme. It is comprehensive and it covers the majority of entities that report to DCDT. There is an opportunity within the wide spaces between overseeing each entity to discuss topics as they arise during the term. He praised the Committee programme and said it is one of the best he had seen during his time in Parliament.

The Committee adopted the Committee programme.

Committee Report on GCIS 2020/21 Quarter 1 performance 
The Committee went through the Committee Report on the Government Communications & Information System (GCIS) 2020/21 First Quarter performance.

There were no further comments, reservations or recommendations.

The Chairperson pointed out that Recommendation 6.2 was the main recommendation from that meeting.

The Committee adopted its Committee Report on GCIS 2020/21 First Quarter performance.

Committee Report on DCDT 2020/21 Quarter 1 performance
The Chairperson took the Committee through the Committee Report on the Department of Communications and Digital Technologies (DCDT) 2020/21 First Quarter performance.

Observation 1.6
Mr Mackenzie raised his concern about the observation that the Minister overreached her powers by the illegal removal of the Board Chairperson. The matter is in court; it is not known if she removed the chairperson illegally. He proposed that the word ‘illegal’ be removed and retain the words ‘overreached her powers by removing the board chairperson’ and then leave the court to decide.

Mr V Pambo (EFF) responded that there is nothing wrong with the word ‘illegal’. It ought to be there because if the Minister had removed the Chairperson and there is a concern it means the Committee thinks it is illegal. There is nothing that has been put forward to counter the argument that it is illegal. The word ‘illegal’ is important and even though it may be in court, it is what the Committee thinks. The Minister should prove that she followed procedure.  The word ‘illegal’ should be retained.

Mr Mackenzie replied that they do not know if the Minister’s decision to remove the board chairperson was illegal, the court has not ruled on that. So if the Committee wants to take on the powers of the court and make a recommendation or observation that it was illegal, that is overreaching its powers and is not the Committee’s mandate. He is the last person to defend the Minister; it has not been found illegal by the court.

The Chairperson reminded Members of the actual discussion and pointed out that the Minister has responded. The Minister indicated that there was no overreach. Committee members at the time were of the view that there was overreach in the way it was done. This is just to point at the overreach by the Minister as a concern. It does talk to something that has been done which the Committee believes should not have been done. To pronounce on its legality when it is already before the court – he noted that this report will be adopted before the court passes judgement. If the Committee agrees they will leave in the concern about overreaching powers, which will also be decided by the court if the Minister indeed overreached in the way she acted.

Mr Pambo remarked that the observation itself stems from the sense that something illegal happened and they think it is overreach because the Minister did not follow procedure. If the Committee omits the word ‘illegal’, there will be a by-the-way situation. This is viewed as something very serious by the Committee. It is before court and the court will find either it is nothing or is something. However, the Committee's concern does not stem from something purely being a typing error. It is a failure by the Minister to follow procedure and to observe her duties within the framework of the law. In this case the Minister overreached and it is an illegality. If this is not indicated, the Committee will be losing from where they are coming with this concern.

The Chairperson welcomed Mr Pambo’s views. He holds the view that they should leave in ‘overreach’ because that is what the Committee suspects happened, but not to get to the point where that overreach is declared as illegality when the legality of the removal itself is being challenged.

Recommendations
Ms P Van Damme (DA) pointed out that there was a media statement by the Department that the Minister’s WhatsApp was hacked. As this is linked to digital technologies perhaps it is a good idea that the Committee request a briefing from the Minister about this and what legal processes have been followed. There is now a lot of concern from the public that if her WhatsApp can allegedly be hacked what hope do the rest of us have. It would be an interesting recommendation to include and a topic for the Committee to consider going forward.

The Chairperson reminded Ms Van Damme that the Committee Report was based on the particular presentation on Quarter 1. The hack happened yesterday. It is not be covered in what the Committee is dealing with but surely, as the Minister usually does when the Committee requests this, she can brief the Committee about what is in the public domain and give clarity as to what really transpired and how it affects the work of the Department.

The Committee adopted its Committee Report on DCDT 2020/21 Quarter 1 performance.

SABC appointment process
The Committee Secretary, Mr Thembinkosi Ngoma, briefed the Committee on the appointment process to be followed for SABC Board non-executive members. The Portfolio Committee has received a letter, as a referral from the Speaker, in which the National Assembly was informed of the resignation of some of the SABC Board members.

The Committee decides on the number of candidates for interview. In the past there has been a large number of applications even from learners looking for internships. These applications are not responded to because the post is clear that the vacancies are for the SABC Board.

The SABC Board has 12 non-executive members as stated in the Broadcasting Act. The details of the shortlisted candidates are published and the public is invited to comment on the shortlisted candidates. Verification of qualifications usually happens concurrently with the interviews due to time constraints.

Discussion
The Chairperson welcomed Mr Ngoma’s briefing. Members would have seen the letter referred to the Committee and they need to make up their minds on how to proceed. He asked the Committee to agreed to the support staff proceeding with the necessary steps for an advertisement. He asked for an indication from each party on whether they keep the same members for the interview sub-committee or they alter the members given their interest on particular matters. He asked if the Committee agrees to the establishment of a sub-committee or they want the full Committee – having learned from what the sub-committee has been able to achieve.

Ms N Khubheka (ANC) supported the Chairperson's proposal. The same procedure used in the last interviews should be used as the sub-committee had done very well. Hopefully there will be no challenges within the Committee and the opportunity given to the sub-committee to lead the interviews.  

The Chairperson noted that the Committee accepts the referral and is acting on it. The Committee support staff will issue the advertisement. The Committee will use a sub-committee to deal with the SABC Board appointments and the sub-committee will report to the Committee.

The Chairperson proposed that the Committee agree that each party send names to the secretariat for the sub-committee which is based on proportional representation. Parties may change the names put forward for this sub-committee compared to the previous one depending on the interest their members have on a particular matter before the Committee. Once the support staff receive the names, they can proceed to put together a draft programme for the sub-committee so it can start doing its work.

The Chairperson noted the recommendation of the Fifth Parliament Committee in its legacy report: when board members leave the boards of government entities, there is a need for exit interviews to understand the reason they leave. This is something the Committee needs to consider within the committee programme.  

There were no dissenting views from the Committee.

MDDA Board appointment process
Mr Mbombo Maleka, Committee Content Advisor, said Parliament is responsible for giving recommendations to the President for the appointment of six board members and the President is mandated to appoint three board members. The Committee is guided by section 4 and 5 of the Media Development and Diversity Agency (MDDA) Act. The President must appoint the chairperson of the board. The board members are expected to be committed to fairness, accountability, transparency and be honest and uphold the law.

Discussion
The Chairperson acknowledged Mr Maleka's bad network connection. The presentation was similar to the previous one.  It was agreed that the administration will carry out the advertisement process. Secondly, the Committee will have a sub-committee approach and parties will confirm their members. He proposed that the Committee agree on a deadline for submission of sub-committee members' names to avoid delays in the work to be done at sub-committee level.

Ms Khubeka replied that the Chairperson had explained the process and made it very clear. She would submit the ANC names to the secretariat by the end of the day so that they can start soon.

Ms Van Damme replied that she feels uncomfortable. The Broadcasting Act does not deal specifically with filling only one vacancy. It requires an advertisement as outlined by Mr Ngoma. Not following that process makes her quite uncomfortable.  She does not recall if in the Fifth Parliament they would do the same thing where parties just put forward names and then there was a discussion. She proposed that to protect the Committee, it seek a legal opinion. They should avoid a situation where the matter is taken on judicial review. Legal opinions are quick to put together and it would be appreciated.

The Chairperson asked Ms Van Damme to explain her uneasiness. When the Committee refers to a sub-committee approach, the process as outlined by Mr Ngoma is the process that will be followed for the advertisement, shortlisting and so on. He asked if this is where her uneasiness lies. The submission of names is about members from each party who will be sit on the sub-committee. The Committee has already ensured that whatever it does must be within the law.

Ms Van Damme replied that if reference to "names put forward" were for people to serve on the sub-committee then she misunderstood this as being the names for interviews to fill the board vacancies.

The Chairperson confirmed that the names submitted are for sub-committee members and the Committee will take matters from there.

Budgetary Review and Recommendations Report (BRRR) process
Mr Maleka said the current Covid-19 pandemic has had a big impact in these unprecedented times even for Parliament and government on how they do business. There have been two correspondences from the House Chairperson that set out how Committees should proceed with the work of Parliament in assessing the annual report of a department and the BRRR process. This requires the Portfolio Committee to set the date for the adoption of its BRRR report. In the last correspondence it was advised that the Committee should engage with the Department to ensure it provides a consolidated report on its quarterly performance. This will help each Committee to start doing the work on its BRRR.

Mr Maleka briefed the Committee as he had been asked to do a follow up with the Department. The Committee had a first draft programme which looked at the BRRR report differently. The Committee had to change its programme because the Department and Auditor General were not ready.

Mr Maleka noted the correspondence from the House Chairperson was quite clear on what the Committees should engage on. The Portfolio Committee on Communications had done all the quarterly reporting for the 2019/20 financial year and had already done the first quarter report for 2020/21. In responding to the House Chairperson’s call, the Committee will guide the Department on whether it wants to revisit those quarterly reports that have already been done to prepare itself for compiling the BRRR.

Mr Maleka said there has been a discussion with the acting Director General who indicated that the tabling of the annual reports is almost ready and the November deadline was merely for exceptional cases. The acting Director General indicated that the challenge they foresee will be with SAPO. Other reports will be ready on time. He proposed that the Committee discussions should be for when they can schedule the evaluation of annual reports.

Discussion
The Chairperson said the Committee when reading the correspondence from the House Chairperson may come to a different understanding. It is important for the Committee support staff to do some analysis work to help the Committee make informed decisions. With the help of the Department representatives the Committee can use the wide spaces within the Committee Programme without changing its focus. This means that they may look at days which are outside the Committee slots. He asked the Department to give clarity on the readiness of the Department to submit its annual report.

Department’s responses
Mr Vumazonke responded that his understanding of the annual report is that they have completed audit matters with the Auditor General and they should be ready to table the annual report. This needs to be authenticated by the Chief Financial Officer. On the entities, they are compiling the annual reports and are almost ready. It is only the SABC that is still busy because the Auditor General could not finalise the audit report on time. SABC has requested until the end of the month to submit its annual report.

Further discussion   
Mr Mackenzie asked the Department to confirm there is sufficient cash in the South African Post Office (SAPO) to pay salaries for September and October. There are hundreds of people who do not know if they will get their salaries.

Mr Vumazonke asked for indulgence on the matter as they consult the relevant officials in the Department.

The Chairperson noted that the Department has appeared before the Committee for its quarterly reports. The approach now is simply that in a situation where you do not have an annual report ready, the Committee may use the quarterly report and call the Department to appear before the Committee. That may not be the case with this Committee but they would need their support staff to pick up on recommendations and reservations when dealing with those quarterly reports.

The Chairperson reminded Members that in every appearance for quarterly reports the Committee has taken a keen interest in what findings the Auditor General had raised in the previous year's audit and if there has been progress in resolving those by the Department. This is done because the Committee has been included as another assurance level by the Auditor General. This means an opinion is made by the Auditor General each year on whether the Committee has discharged its oversight responsibility and ensured that the Department and its entities are doing well on matters raised by the Auditor General. In doing oversight, the Committee can prevent reoccurrence of audit concerns. In some instances when a quarter one performance target could not be achieved, the Department undertakes with the Committee to achieve it by quarter three.  

The Chairperson asked the Committee to consider the audit report signed off by the Auditor General and of course take into account that the SAPO and SABC audits are outstanding. The Committee has a scheduled programme to call SAPO and SABC to come before the Committee.

Ms Khubeka said that the Chairperson had provided details on what needs to be done and followed up on. There is a concern about Covid-19 PPE procurement as they were supposed to deal with that. PPE procurement is a critical issue. She asked the Department to convince the Committee that it did everything right in its PPE procurement and it will not encounter any accountability problem. Everything seems to be fine on the part of SAPO.  

Ms Joy Mosemola, Department CFO, replied that the Department’s procurement was audited by the Auditor General and there were no matters that were raised on the items procured. The Auditor General indicated that everything was above board. DCDT followed the Instruction Notes issued by National Treasury and they also checked the orders and amounts that were paid.  

Ms Khubeka asked if the Department made any deviations in dealing with the procurement of the items.

Ms Mosemola replied that there no deviations; they followed the normal process.

The Chairperson noted that GCIS has given the Committee a similar report that it is happy with. For purposes of consistency, he proposed that the same information is requested from DCDT about the companies involved as well as when the payments were made. When there is wrongdoing, the Committee should be able to act. The Committee appreciates that procurement can be done in a short period of time without compromising good governance.

The Chairperson checked if there is any feedback on the Post Office's financial challenges.

Mr Vumazonke replied that the Department is aware that the Post Office is experiencing financial challenges but the Post Office has never informed the Department on any challenges to pay salaries. The Department understands that they can pay.

The Chairperson suggested that the Department inform the Committee on developments on this matter.

Mr Mackenzie expressed his concern as the matter is all over the media that the South African Post Office has insufficient funds to pay salaries, medical aid and pension fund contributions. The Department should be aware of this and start to take some contingency planning.

The Chairperson welcomed Mr Mackenzie’s observations. The Department is free to brief the Committee in writing on whether that has been done and to state "where things are". It is understood that the matter would have emanated from the previous SAPO report presented to the Committee where it indicated that there may be cash flow challenges.

Ms Khubeka asked the Department to sensitise the Committee because during September some post offices experienced robberies especially in KwaZulu Natal. She asked the Department to brief the Committee in the next meeting and indicate if security is a challenge. Two post offices were affected.

The Chairperson suggested to the Department that perhaps SAPO should respond in writing to Ms Khubeka’s question because it has been in the media, including allegations of internal collusion in such robberies which also took place in the Eastern Cape. They do not need to wait for a meeting on this. The Committee needs information to make informed decisions. He suggested that the Committee gives the Department space to look at the questions that have been asked. A similar report is expected for the Covid-19 question. The Committee now has clarity on how to deal with the BRRR process.

The Chairperson asked the Department to brief them on the capacity development course at Wits University.  

Capacity development course
Mr Maleka reminded the Committee that it is registered for a capacity development course with Wits University, and they have thus far completed two modules. As part of the plan, the Department has been hosting seminars together with Wits to assist the Department to recap and contextualise the course content. It was proposed that there should be a concluding seminar to consolidate an overview of the key issues and how they fit together with the oversight role of Parliament. They have agreed to host the meeting on 8 October 2020. This date was proposed to the Committee.  

The Chairperson acknowledged the proposed date. For those who have been attending the lectures, they would agree that it is quite beneficial.

Mr Mackenzie was grateful to the  organisers of the capacitation programme; it has been useful. He supported the concept proposed but he was not available for an 8 October seminar.  

The Chairperson noted it is a by election period and people are doing their constituency work. He asked for Members to indicate availability by that evening and they will be guided by the response.

Mr Maleka said the seminar could be postponed.

Committee Minutes
The Committee's assumption was that Members had had an opportunity to go through the minutes. The Committee adopted the minutes of 28 July; 18, 19, 25 August; 2 and 4 September 2020 meetings.

The Chairperson pointed out that the Committee still needs the information they asked for from the Department. These oversight matters are about advancing the cause of the country and that means putting South Africans first. The Committee should never lose sight of carrying out its mandate. He thanked Members for their participation and said they always make the work of the Committee easy by their contributions.

The meeting was adjourned.