The Portfolio Committee on Police met to consider the annual reports of the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) and the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (PSiRA).
The Committee expressed pleasure upon hearing of IPID’s unqualified audit opinion. They were impressed that IPID had achieved this despite not having a permanent Executive Director for the year under review. Members raised concerns about IPID’s underperformance in the completion of investigations. IPID had only been able to achieve around 30% of decision-ready cases from the total cases the Directorate received. Members urged the completion rate to be prioritised and that funds be allocated to support service delivery, as well as the recruitment of further human resource capacity to increase efficiency and improve investigations.
Members welcomed the fact that forensic auditors had begun auditing allegations of cases that had been prematurely closed. A progress report would be provided to the Committee at the end of November 2020.
The Committee was told that IPID and the Secretary for Police had begun reviewing the IPID Act. It would address the independence of IPID, conditions of service, structural operation, as well as the expansion of IPID’s oversight role over the police. This was welcomed and the Committee emphasised the importance of reviewing legislation to ensure it was suitable for the current operating environment.
The Committee praised PSiRA, saying it was consistently one of the best performers of the Police portfolio that the Committee oversaw. PSiRA had achieved a second consecutive clean audit and had achieved over 95% of its targets. Members were particularly impressed with the number of inspections of security businesses and officers that had been conducted. For the period under review, PSiRA had inspected 7155 security businesses and 37136 security officers. The Committee identified the importance of widespread and effective investigations to ensure accessibility, accountability, equity, professionalism and transparency in the private security industry.
Members voiced concern and dissatisfaction however with the length of time it had taken for the appointment of the PSiRA Council, with the previous Council’s term having come to an end in January 2020. The Committee identified the need for the Ministry to improve this process to resolve this recurring.
The Chairperson said the reports had been covered already and the Committee would be finishing them in the meeting. She apologised that the PSiRA report had been sent late to Members. It had only been sent to the Committee on 15 November 2020. She thanked the Committee Secretary for her efficiency in getting the reports out to Members in time.
The Chief Whip had not yet approved the Committee’s oversight visit. She awaited clarity and would inform members. There was tremendous pressure to finish work by the end of the parliamentary term.
The Chairperson said the previous time IPID had appeared before the Committee there had been network and connectivity challenges. She was disappointed that IPID had not fixed it. She noted apologies from the Minister. She asked the Deputy Minister to introduce the presentation.
Deputy Minister Cassel Mathale allowed the presentation to proceed in the interests of time.
2019/20 Annual Report of the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID)
The IPID Executive Director, Ms Jennifer Ntlatseng, apologised for the technical issues. In her overview, she said IPID was without a permanent head for the period under review. However, an unqualified audit opinion had been obtained.
The total workload was 13 255 cases which included 5640 new cases. The investigation of 3889 cases had been completed. This included 1612 backlog cases.
New office accommodation had been secured and the relocation was expected before the end of 2020/21. Accruals had increased by 36% during the year under review due to constrained financial resources.
Implementation of Section 23 of the IPID Act – that investigator salaries be on par with SAPS detectives – had commenced in 2019/20 through reprioritisation of the budget. IPID was unable to fully implement Section 23 within its appropriation.
IPID had commenced the review of the IPID Act in collaboration with the Civilian Secretariat for Police Service (CSPS).
Forensic auditors had been appointed to address allegations of cases being prematurely closed. They had commenced the audit on 27 August 2020 and would provide a progress update to management on 30 November 2020.
IPID Financial Statement 2019/20
IPID Chief Financial Officer, Mr Victor Senna, presented the audit results. The unqualified audit opinion had produced findings that were mainly on internal control deficiencies. These included non-compliance with payment of invoices within 30 days due to funding challenges, the correction of some disclosures during audit, and record keeping matters due to delays in retrieving certain documents during the audit.
Key Disclosure Areas
On virements, to allow for the implementation of Section 23, several amounts had been moved from their original programmes to Programme Two: Investigations and Information Management.
IPID had not incurred unauthorised expenditure in 2020/21. IPID had disclosed R125 000 fruitless and wasteful expenditure. It had disclosed R98 million irregular expenditure. This included amounts awaiting National Treasury condonement, irregular expenditure undertaken by the Department of Public Works that would be removed from IPID following the finalisation of the audit, irregular expenditure incurred by the Office of the State Attorney when appointing external legal expertise on behalf of IPID, amounts awaiting condonement for irregular appointments made during 2017/18, as well as overspending on compensation of employees as a result of implementation of the Court Order on Section 23, this was also awaiting National Treasury condonement.
Measures Being Implemented to Achieve Clean Audit
IPID was strengthening the internal control function in the Department and trying to capacitate the unit. It was ensuring compliance with applicable legislations through improved monitoring through the exco and enforcing consequence management. IPID was conducting internal awareness sessions on departmental policies for procedures and compliance. Training and development of staff in finance and supply chain management units was being undertaken. IPID was on track with its targets.
The Chairperson interjected that the Committee did not need to have everything on the slides read to them, the Committee had received the presentation prior to the presentation and gone through it. She asked to be taken through the pertinent matters as she wished to finish by 10:15 with IPID matters.
IPID Director: Strategy and Performance Monitoring, Ms Susan Letlape, explained why certain programme performance measures had not been achieved.
Ms Ntlatseng said IPID was working hard to ensure a clean audit. It was strengthening compliance and control deficiencies and ensuring officials were held accountable for non-compliance. Interventions had been identified to address the irregular expenditure and these would be implemented moving forward. Measures identified to improve performance would be implemented in 2020/21. The investigation of the backlog cases would continue to be prioritised. The 2020/21 targets included the backlog cases.
Implementation of the ICT Implementation Plan would be strengthened through the establishment of a steering committee. The action plan for the amendment of the IPID Act would be monitored to ensure finalisation of the process. Allocated funds would continue to be reprioritised to support service delivery.
Mr O Terblanche (DA) said his first concern was that it had been indicated at the beginning of the meeting that had the Committee had previously dealt with the reports already. There were instances of serious underperformance, especially in the Administration Programme where only 33% of targets had been achieved – this was concerning,
In a recent Committee meeting, the Executive Director had indicated that IPID was in the process of employing retired detectives to deduce its backlog. He asked for an update on this.
The results from cases referred to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) were concerning. 78 cases had been declined for prosecution. Only 50 cases had been prosecuted. This was concerning.
There had been serious allegations of statistical manipulation in the past to inflate performance, especially in the provinces, he asked for clarity on this.
IPID had spent money on audit review services by an outside consultant, why had this been necessary? Could it be explained to the Committee?
Dr P Groenewald (FF+) referred to the implementation of Section 23. This entailed settlement of the pension fund liability. It had been said that the last phase of implementation would be done in the first quarter of the current financial year. In the presentation it said it would be completed in the first quarter of 2021. Had it been completed and fully implemented?
On the R15.2 million irregular expenditure on the supply chain management process for the appointment of legal services, IPID reported that this irregular expenditure had been removed following finalisation of the audit. These had been legal costs for Mr Robert McBride. Dr Groenewald asked if this irregular expenditure had simply been written off with no consequences as it seemed to be.
On the appointment of consultants, only 50% had been implemented so far. Why was this the case?
The IPID Acting Chief Director of Human Resources replied about the employment of detectives. Since the last Committee meeting, IPID had looked at reprioritising the detective positions within IPID vacancies due to the budget cuts from National Treasury. IPID wanted to capacitate and augment detective capacity with skilled and competent officials. The recommendation had come from management based on the budget cuts as it would be difficult to increase capacity because the cutting of compensation of employees had been a condition from National Treasury. The decision had been made that IPID needed to reprioritise filling vacant positions. Instead of filling positions at a higher level, IPID would augment current capacities to address the issues with detectives.
Mr Senna explained the appointment of external service providers to investigate statistics manipulation. At the Portfolio Committee meeting in 2019, it had been resolved that IPID could not “investigate itself”. Therefore, to bring credibility to the investigation, this required an objective report. IPID had therefore appointed forensic auditors as an external service provider.
Mr Senna replied about the pension liability settlement in implementation of Section 23. The amount that had been due had been paid to the Government Employee Pension Fund. The pension liability was fully paid.
On the appointment of legal services, he had indicated in the presentation that the process followed was IPID submitted a request to the Office of the State Attorney. If the Office could not provide the service, it appoints an external service provider. This process was handled by the Office of the State Attorney. While IPID had initially disclosed this irregular expenditure, after discussion with the Auditor General, the Office of the State Attorney itself had disclosed the irregular expenditure. Two departments could not disclose the same irregular expenditure. Therefore, it would be dealt with by the Justice Department. It was the same principle if the Department of Public Works disclosed the irregular expenditure on its books, IPID could not also disclose it as irregular expenditure. Internally, IPID had also investigated the matter to find those to be held accountable; the process was ongoing. It would be corrected going forward so that the correct process would be followed in future for the appointment of external legal services.
On the poor performance achievements in 2019/20, there was a combination of factors. There was the lack of leadership stability. He had been the acting Executive Director for a period; this had affected overall performance. There was also the budget shortage. IPID had had to prioritise a large portion of the budget to settle Section 23 obligations. Many departments had been affected by constrained budgets. Therefore, performance had been affected due to compliance with Section 23 in compliance with the court order. Measures were being taken going forward to cope with the circumstances of budget cuts.
The service provider appointed to investigate statistics manipulation had submitted a draft report that IPID management was perusing. The matter would be finalised.
Ms M Molekwa (ANC) appreciated that IPID had performed well in most programmes. She cautioned IPID on Programme Three – Record Keeping. IPID needed to put a record system in place. Record keeping was important.
Mr K Maphatsoe (ANC) said it was clear moving forward that there would be stability in IPID. He asked if IPID had consulted with National Treasury to address the irregular expenditure and if the expenditure had been condoned. This was related to the amounts of R32.8 million and R35 million.
He raise the issue of investigators. To address the backlog, IPID was looking at retired detectives. However, he had seen something on TV the previous Sunday which had not augured well to him. It reported the Helen Suzman Foundation and Public Service Association (PSA) had been in a battle with IPID about the detectives in its special detectives unit that was being disbanded. In this meeting, IPID was saying it had challenges with a lack of specialised investigators, yet on Sunday the Helen Suzman Foundation and the PSA had been fighting for the unit not to be disbanded. What was happening? Was the special investigation unit known about? What had its work been if it was being disbanded and IPID was looking at retired detectives instead?
Had the actions that had been undertaken for the ICT review delivered the expected outcomes?
Mr Terblanche said that in the 14 October 2020 Committee meeting, the IPID Executive Director had indicated that the NPA had declined to prosecute some IPID cases due to the quality of investigation. What had been done to address this? The Executive Director had also indicated that cases that the NPA had declined to prosecute would be re-opened and analysed to determine what was lacking. What had happened since? Had the process been started? What had been discovered? What had been done to rectify that?
Ms Ntlatseng acknowledged the comments on improving record keeping. This was a challenge. IPID was working hard to improve and was looking at assistance from its ICT department to digitise the process.
Mr Senna replied about consultation with National Treasury on irregular expenditure. In terms of the National Treasury Irregular Expenditure Framework, IPID had to investigate and confirm the irregular expenditure. The Department would conduct an investigation on the impact of and losses suffered from the irregular expenditure. It would then request condonation from National Treasury. This process had been done for the R30 million amount. IPID was engaging with National Treasury. National Treasury was considering the matter. IPID was following up on the matter to receive feedback.
Ms Ntlatseng asked her delegation for a response about the lack of specialised detectives, the retired detectives and the disbandment of the specialised team.
Former IPID Acting Executive Director, Mr Patrick Setshedi, replied that the unit in question was made up of investigators from different provinces. This resulted in the unit comprising of people who utilised resources such as hotel accommodation and travel expenditure due to their moving between provinces. It had been determined that IPID could not afford these expenses. This was particularly the case as the members of the unit were not necessarily specialised; they were similar to the investigators that were based in the provinces. Therefore, the members of the unit were being returned to their respective provinces and the matter was a separate issue to that of the skills deficit at IPID. As a result of the backlog in provinces, management had decided that it could not have the members of the unit incurring the money it required to function. It was determined that the members would rather be redirected to the provinces where they belonged and work with some of the investigators to reduce backlogs. The decision to bring back retired detectives would be used to address the backlog in specific provinces. The strategy was trying to strengthen capacity in all the provinces to ensure all the backlogs were dealt with.
On the ICT review, the IPID ICT Director, replied that the ICT plan would deliver what IPID wished to achieve. One of the problems identified by the Committee had been records management. It was prioritised alongside the review of the IPID case management system in the coming financial year as part of the strategy for the digitisation of IPID.
Ms Ntlatseng replied about the NPA dismissal of IPID cases, saying the statements submitted by IPID to the NPA had not made sense – A1 statements needed to be written properly. This required strong writing and legal skills at IPID. She had requested the management team ensure that any new recruitments were of people who had degrees to upskill the workforce. IPID had entered a partnership with the National Youth Development Agency (NYDA). It was coming on board and would provide around 100 students to assist with administration and uploading statements.
On ensuring quality of work at IPID, by the end of November 2020, an advertisement would be released for legal people to assist with legal quality assurance to ensure dockets were ready to hand over for prosecution. The posts would be advertised by the end of November 2020.
Deputy Minister Mathale thanked IPID for the presentation.
Mr Maphatsoe said he had a follow up comment about what was broadcast on Sunday 15 November 2020. The way the matter had been communicated on TV was as if IPID was “doing away” with the specialised unit. It had appeared as if IPID did not want the specialised unit despite it doing good work and performing well. However, the way the situation had been explained now to the Committee, it had been clear that it was not due to other motives that the specialised unit was being disbanded. It was because of the financial constraints. The work done by the unit was no different from regular investigating officers, and the unit members were simply returning to their respective provinces. When putting out statements, IPID should clearly communicate this as it had been explained to the Committee.
Mr Terblanche noted his question on the reopening of prematurely closed dockets had not been answered.
Mr Matthews Sesoko, Head: Investigations and Information Management, replied that processes were currently running looking at the cases that it was thought may need to be reopened. The processes were ongoing. An external service provider was also doing an exercise investigating dockets thought to have been prematurely closed. This would assist IPID to know which cases had been prematurely closed. IPID management had discussed the approach to ensure the cases were reopened and were adequately investigated. They would be given to dedicated people to look into the cases and ensure they were well investigated and finalised. IPID expected to receive new members to be allocated the dockets in question. There were specific provinces where the exercises would be targeted. IPID was aware of the specific areas that would require the intervention.
Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (PSIRA) 2019/20 Annual Report
Mr Manabela Chauke, PSiRA CEO, introduced the presentation and handed over to the Chief Operating Officer to present.
Mr Stefan Badenhorst, PSiRA COO, said that PSiRA had brought about a 96% achievement of key performance indicators in the period under review. Some training interventions had been prevented by COVID-19, preventing full achievement of targets.
The Chairperson asked if the PSIRA board was present.
Mr Badenhorst replied that PSiRA currently did not have a Council. The term for the previous Council had expired in January 2020. In terms of the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA), the Executive Director was the acting accounting authority. The appointment of the new Council would be dealt with by Cabinet.
In reply to the Chairperson asked if PSiRA had been waiting since January 2020 for the appointment of the new Council, Mr Badenhorst said yes.
Industry Training Highlights
241 new training providers had been accredited by PSiRA in the year under review. This meant there were a total of 722 accredited training providers nationally.
The total number of registered private security businesses was 10 298. The number of registered security officers was 2 495 899. The most active security businesses were in Gauteng (38%), KZN (20%) and Western Cape (10%). Most active security officers were in Gauteng (37%), KZN (18%) Western Cape (12%).
PSiRA had operated under the leadership of the Council until its term had ended on 31 January 2020. The Ministerial process for the appointment of the new Council was still in progress. The Director had been appointed as the Acting Accounting Authority according to the PFMA.
Ms Mmatlou Sebogodi, PSiRA Deputy Director: Finance and Administration, said PSiRA had achieved an unqualified audit opinion for 2019/20 - a clean audit.
Total revenue had increased by 10% compared to 31 March 2019. Expenditure had increased by 11% due to the provision of debt impairment amounting to R15.8 million.
The Chairperson congratulated PSiRA on its clean audit. The CFO was one of the best in the Police portfolio. It had been a very good presentation.
Deputy Minister Mathale pointed out on the matter of the PSiRA Council that Minister Cele had done all of the required paperwork. Security clearance was still outstanding, and the Department was awaiting clearance. This was the reason for the delays since January 2020. The decision to recommend the names of candidates for the new Council had been taken.
Ms Z Majozi (IFP) said PSiRA never disappointed in their presentations. She was happy with the work and performance of PSiRA, having achieved an unqualified audit. She recommended zooming into the findings that the Auditor General had made. This was so that next time PSiRA needed to have an unqualified audit without findings when appearing before the Committee.
Mr Maphatsoe said that since he had been in the Committee, PSiRA had been receiving unqualified audits. Taking into account that PSiRA funded itself with no money coming from government, this was something that needed to be appreciated. Here was an industry, without funding from government, creating its own initiatives on how to sustain itself. PSiRA collected funds and used the funds collected effectively to benefit the industry. He urged PSiRA to keep it up and not to “drop the ball”.
He was happy that Deputy Minister Mathale had raised the matter of the Council. He was unsure how the matter had been missed by the Committee for such a long time. Had the Committee been allowing this or did it not have that the information that there was no board at PSiRA and there was an appointment process going on. The vetting process needed to be sped up. In future the appointment process needed to begin before the end of the board term. It should not be allowed to expire and only then the new appointment process begins. PSiRA had been 12 months without a board. Both Cabinet and the Committee had missed this. The Committee should not allow a “good industry” requiring a board to be without a board for 12 months. This should not happen.
On levy collection, one of the things affecting collection was the Private Security Industry Regulation Amendment Bill passed in 2014. This was affecting PSiRA not due to its own actions. It was awaiting the President to sign it. Once the Act was amended, it would outline how PSiRA would be able to raise funds and sustain themselves.
What was the percentage of debt for small security businesses with one to five officers employed? These would be businesses were struggling to get contracts. Faced with the withdrawal of certificates of struggling smaller businesses, this would affect PSiRA’s revenue collection. Was there a provision for bad debts that had increased? PSiRA should indicate the number of small businesses in operation. What was the amount of debt held by these small companies? "Everyone” wanted to go into the private security industry, such as military veterans. PSiRA and the wider industry needed to have a plan on how to grow from being smaller businesses. This would address unemployment.
Mr Terblanche commended PSiRA on its presentation and 2019/20 performance. PSiRA had improved in all aspects of performance when compared to previous financial years. This was very good, particularly as PSiRA’s main challenge was its funding model. He also noted that PSiRA was able to fund itself, even ending up with a funding surplus. Some other entities could take a page from its book.
On the matter of accreditation for the training that people received, what was being done by PSiRA? He saw that this was not necessary in terms of current legislation. Accreditation of training from PSiRA would make it even better. What was PSiRA doing to ensure accreditation would be done in the future?
Would the lack of the PSiRA Council be resolved? He was disappointed that this was yet another appointment that Minister Cele had missed in the Department. The Minister had failed in every appointment expected of him thus far. The PSiRA board had been outstanding for a year. It could not be said that the matter was “in progress”. There were serious allegations about the delays in finalisation of appointments. Was the delay on purpose or was it due to incompetence? What was the reason for Minister Cele and the Ministry consistently failing to complete appointments? Something had to be done. The Committee needed to tackle the matter head on.
Ms Molekwa congratulated PSiRA on “sterling performance”. She noted the consecutive years of good performance. She congratulated the Minister and Deputy Minister. Had an audit action plan been developed to ensure PSiRA would attend to the audit findings? The finalisation of criminal cases was very low. Were there measures in place to eradicate the backlog?
The Chairperson asked for the difference between registered security guards and active security officers. PSiRA kept the statistics, did it mean that registered security officers paid fees each year?
The matter of PSiRA not having a Council for such a significant length of time was irregular. The Police Department could not have an entity without a board for almost a year. She would write to Minister Cele and express the Committee’s unhappiness and dissatisfaction that it had been ongoing for a year. She understood that the board had to be vetted prior to appointment by Cabinet. However, a year had passed where a legal entity had gone without a board. The vetting process should have begun prior to the conclusion of the previous board’s term. She asked for this to be explained in the strongest terms to the Minister. The situation was totally unacceptable.
Deputy Minster Mathale said that the leadership of PSiRA through the CEO had been raising the matter to the Ministry. He was “not excited” that the matter had been ongoing for so long. The submission was now done and awaiting clearance. When the term of a board expired, the Department needed to be ready with a new board. This was noted and going forward he would try to take it on board to avoid being in the current position again. Both the Minister and himself always wished to ensure things were properly done. The matter would be followed up and ensured that it was done.
Mr H Shembeni (EFF) remarked about the percentage of debt of small security businesses with fewer than five officers that these were businesses struggling to get contracts and this was affecting PSiRA’s ability to collect revenue. What percentage of security businesses had fewer than five officers? Which security courses drew the most interest from security guards?
He wished to raise a concern about security companies not paying security guards their salaries. In Mpumalanga, he had been made aware of BES Security Company where 76 security guards in Nelspruit had been arrested. The employer had not paid employee salaries, including leave pay and bonuses. The employees had gone to the employer’s office to demand their salaries. Instead of paying them or explaining why they had not been paid, the employer had called the police. He asked for measures that were going to be taken to stop such scenarios. What would be done with the company that was exploiting their people?
Mr Chauke replied on the matter of levies raised by Mr Maphatsoe, that the Private Security Industry Levies Act was trying to be made operational. This process was done through National Treasury. PSiRA was awaiting National Treasury to table some amendments to Parliament to make it operational. Once done, it would enable PSiRA to be adequately funded.
Mr Badenhorst replied about the accreditation of training providers and the way forward, legislation allowed PSiRA to accredit private businesses to train officers and PSiRA monitored these businesses. Part of the strategy for the next five years was to develop examination centres to be managed by PSiRA. It was looking at online platforms for examinations as well. This would provide more comfort in overseeing the quality of training. PSiRA was looking at efficiencies going forward in the examination of learners to ensure integrity in training standards.
On the registered versus active officer distinction, security officers / businesses could apply for registration. If they successfully applied, they would be registered on the PSiRA database, this did not mean that registered security officers gained employment immediately once they were registered. Their status changed from registered to active once they were employed in the industry. The legislative requirement and process were that companies reported the employment of an officer within 10 days. PSiRA then linked the officer in question on the database to the company, the officer would then be classified as registered and active. Currently there were 2.5 million security officers on the database of which 548 000 were actively employed private security operators. These were either as employees of private security businesses or as independent operators. The car guard industry for example was made up of independent operators.
On the question of which security courses were drawing the most interest, there were numerous curriculums provided for in the legislation on the guarding sector. These included Grades E, D, C, B, A. There were also specialisation courses such as assets in transit and dog handling training that were popular. The most interest was in guarding courses categorised under Grade E: Entry Level. This allowed access to registration within PSiRA for security officers.
The Chairperson asked if it meant that registered security officers paid fees each year, even if they were not active.
Mr Badenhorst replied that they only paid fees if they were employed and active in the industry. There was no obligation to pay annual amounts to PSiRA by legislation otherwise. This meant that those who were not active were not prejudiced against. Security businesses did have to pay an annual amount however, but not individuals.
Ms Sebogodi replied that 59% of the R40 million debt emanated from small companies, that is, R24 million. PSiRA had looked at payment terms to assist small businesses to pay annual fees. There was a clause where a person who was not able to obtain contracts or obtain business within the period of one year; that person could voluntarily come to PSiRA to cease operations of a business. Levies were only implemented for businesses that were active. There were payment plans for small business. If there were no contracts, they were not billed.
Ms Sebogodi replied that PSiRA did not have audit findings, it had received a clean audit. The findings were “housekeeping findings” which were, for example, not signing an invoice or stamping dates. PSiRA had developed an action plan to address the issues, even if they were considered insignificant. The plan had been presented to the audit and risk committee. It would be tested by the internal audit company.
PSiRA Deputy Director: Law and Enforcement, Adv Linda Mbana, replied that there was concern about the time taken to finalise matters of law enforcement and criminal case investigations. PSiRA had opened 3838 cases, of which 453 had been finalised. This meant there was a huge number of cases still pending. After PSiRA had identified a contravention, the matter was forwarded to SAPS to open a criminal case. Normally PSiRA received no feedback from SAPS. The numbers PSiRA had were from putting SAPS under pressure. It was only then that they received feedback. PSiRA was trying to forge relations with SAPS. There was an MoU expiring in January 2021 and PSiRA was returning to it to improve relations. It outlined what each party was meant to be doing and what was not being done. PSiRA wished to iron out the matter of the cases that were delayed by SAPS or where PSiRA was not receiving feedback. Criminal cases were forwarded to the NPA and this took more time. The NPA sometimes believed that cases from PSiRA were not as urgent as other matters. PSiRA was also having other meetings with the NPA in provinces to get them to understand the legislation imperatives.
On the BES Security Company case in Nelspruit, PSiRA would now be looking into it. PSiRA did not have any complaints or reports of the employees not receiving salaries or labour exploitation. There were no structure in place at PSiRA to deal with such scenarios. PSiRA had dealt with wages and exploitation issues previously, but now the matters were forwarded to the bargaining council that had been established. PSiRA did however follow up on cases with the bargaining council to monitor progress. This was the same for pension fund matters; PSiRA forwarded all complaints it received to the pension fund. There were also meetings with labour and the bargaining council on pension fund matters. As much as PSiRA was not dealing with matters that were not within its mandate, they did follow up on them with the relevant bodies. The abuse of power when people went to follow up on their rights as raised by Mr Shembeni was news to PSiRA, but Adv Mbana had asked PSiRA’s Mpumalanga office to follow up on the matter.
Mr Chauke replied about the economic market structure of the industry and the balance of forces. The biggest companies were smallest in number and enjoyed 85% of the economic pie of the industry. Medium companies accounted for about 10-12% of the market. Smaller companies accounted for around 1%. The smaller companies were many in number but owned the smallest share of the market. A lot needed to be done in this area to even the environment in terms of transformation.
The Chairperson wished PSiRA well and congratulated it on its performance. The Budget Review and Recommendations Report (BRRR) would indicate that PSIRA had been without a Council for over a year.
Deputy Minister Mathale thanked the Chairperson. He had noted the comments and would work on the matter to bring the PSiRA board appointments to finality. He appreciated the platform and the comments and advice from Members; it made the Ministry better with the interactions.
The Chairperson thanked Mr Chauke and said that PSiRA was one of the best, if not the best run unit under the Committee’s supervision. She did not pay compliments to government departments, but for an independent unit, PSiRA was doing a sterling job.
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.