Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development BRRR

Meeting report

The Chairperson indicated that the Committee would be taken through its BRRR of the Department and its entities by the content advisors.

Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development BRRR

Ms Nokuzola Mgxashe, Content Advisor, and Dr Tshililo Manenzhe, Content Advisor, took the Committee through its BRRR.

View final approved report: Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development 

The Chairperson then opened the floor for discussion.

Discussion

Ms M Tlhape (ANC) was pleased by the report as she believed that it accurately captured the Committee’s engagements with the department and its entities.

Following that, she raised three concerns that emerged from the report’s findings. One, the under-expenditure recorded in the entities, which was subsequently returned to the National Treasury.  Based on that concern, she asked whether the Committee should, on behalf of DALRRD, request additional funds from the National Treasury.

Two, the continued underfunding of DALRRD, which has, for some time, concerned the Committee, due to the economic importance of the department. Based on this, she proposed that the Committee consider whether or not it should approach the National Treasury to increase DALRRD’s budget allocation, in light of the various issues it is still facing, such as weaknesses in internal control measures; non-compliance with legislation, which is responsible for irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure; and the poor management of the Presidential Economic Stimulus Initiative (PESI) voucher programme.

The third concern was about the challenges faced by the Agricultural Land Holdings Account (ALHA). The report correctly captured that if the entity managed to address its prior transgressions – which it still seemed to be struggling with – it would be better able to provide disadvantaged communities and individuals access to land. Subsequently, she asked if the Members were satisfied with the report’s recommendation that ALHA had to clear the limitations affecting beneficiaries’ ability to access land or did they believe that it required a plan to move forward.

Touching on paragraph 7.4, which spoke to the recommendations relating to PESI, she pointed out that no timeframe was provided on when the department was expected to submit its action plan to resolve the challenges related to the rollout of the PESI voucher. As such, she proposed that this be amended and state that it be submitted in a reasonable time, especially as the programme was the largest contributor to the department’s under-expenditure.

Still referring to recommendations, she asked that the Department provide the Committee with the Comprehensive Agricultural Support Programme (CASP); One Household One Hectare; River Valley Catalytic; Land Care, Animal and Veld Management; Blended finance; Black commercialisation, Land Development Support; Llima-Letsema; and Micro Agricultural Financial Institutions of South Africa (MAFISA) reports, particularly because they accounted for the large sums of money spent on DALRRD’s previous programmes.

Thereafter, she moved to support the adoption of the report.

Ms T Mbabama (DA) indicated that besides expressing her satisfaction with the quality of the report, she had no further comments to make.

Ms N Mahlo (ANC) urged that the Department look into its internal controls so that it can meet the government’s standard of professional performance.

On a separate matter, she recommended that the Department look into International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) programmes.

Mr S Matiase (EFF) mentioned that the report had been the most comprehensive one presented to the Committee thus far and contained the accurate findings, deliberations, as well as its observations.

After expressing his appreciation of the report’s capturing of the Ingonyama Trust Board (ITB) and Ingonyama Trust (IT) as being two separate entities, he highlighted that it was misleading for it to state that the former had achieved an unqualified audit, as it has repeatedly failed to comply with the legislation, and asked that this be corrected.  

Of concern, he said, was the Auditor-General of South Africa’s (AGSA/AG) findings that the Department had been careless and wasteful in the management of its finances – particularly as it acts as the custodian of all the entities. While noting a slight improvement in the irregular, fruitless and wasteful (IFW) expenditure he called for the Committee to continue holding DALRRD to account on this.

He shared Ms Tlhape’s concerns regarding ALHA and the challenges it currently faces.

Ms B Tshwete (ANC) said that she had no comments to make on the report as she had been covered by previous Members. She only agreed that there be timeframes for the submission of outstanding reports.

Mr N Masipa (DA) raised his concern regarding the Department’s consistent underperformance despite high rates of expenditure in its programmes. In the 2018-19 financial year, 98% of the budget was spent on the programmes, yet performance stood at 70%. Budget expenditure dropped in the following two financial years to 92% and 93% respectively as did the performance, which stood at 60%. This, he stressed, was a serious concern which needed to be raised with the Executive, so that the Committee could understand whether DALRRD planned and executed its programmes according to its Annual Performance Plan.

Furthermore, he highlighted that the Department consistently announced programmes, such as the one to put 1 million hectares of rural land into production in 2019, but it struggled with their implementation. As such, he called for the Committee to act. One, to look into the Department’s historical reports on progress achieved in each of its programmes. Two, to monitor AgriBEE’s rollout of its commercialisation project.

Another area of concern he raised was the Minister’s unavailability to attend Committee meetings, which has been a challenge since 2019. Her non-attendance made it difficult for the Committee to hold the Executive accountable for its poor performance and slow pace of drafting and tabling bills – like the Marketing of the Agricultural Products Amendment Bill.

Regular updates have not been provided and the Committee was not informed of departmental plans to launch initiatives, with the last instance being the announcement of its blended finance programme. Such actions gave off the impression that DALRRD did not take the Committee seriously.  

Several farmers have recently complained of not receiving animal vaccines from the Onderstepoort Biological Products (OBP); this was despite its improvements in the reporting of projects.

Mr N Capa (ANC) expressed appreciation for the report, indicating that it correctly covered the Committee’s engagements with DALRRD and its entities.

He then asked what the Committee would recommend to resolve the difference in opinion between DALRRD and the AG on what mechanism should be used to verify which farmers redeemed their vouchers.

Mr H Kruger (DA) proposed that the Committee look into its 2020-21 BRRR, so that it could track its performance in targets, as it seemed that no progress had been made and that issues were, in fact, getting worse.

Ms K Mahlatsi (ANC) thanked the support staff for the report, as it captured all the critical points in the Committee’s engagements with DALRRD and its entities.

Referring to the report’s recommendation that the Committee should regularly monitor the department’s efforts to strengthen its internal controls, she added that emphasis needed to be placed on capacitating DALRRD’s internal audit unit and risk committees.

While accepting that the amalgamation of Agriculture with the Land Reform and Rural Development may have delayed the appointment of officials to the department, she urged for DALRRD to urgently deal with its vacancy rate and report to the Committee on a quarterly basis, regarding the progress thereof.

The Chairperson thanked the Committee for its input on the report and discussions with the department.  

Ms Mgxashe confirmed that the report would emphasise the importance of DALRRD strengthening its internal audit unit and risk management committees. In addition, it would also include the Committee’s recommendation for DALRRD to speed up the filling of vacancies.

Regarding the difference in opinion between DALRRD and the AG on what mechanism should be used to verify which farmers redeemed their vouchers, her understanding was that the AG had been clear on what it expected from the department, having found that there were no adequate internal controls systems for proof of delivery of the goods to intended beneficiaries.

In its report, the AG also reported that there were cases where DALRRD allowed for intermediaries who did not have brick and mortar shops to be used for the redemption of the vouchers. It further found that the service providers used by DALRRD did not have physical stores, and as a result, they were then required to purchase the goods on behalf of the farmers, which allowed for corruption and fraud took place. Many of the issues, particularly relating to the redemption of the vouchers, were also raised during the rollout of the Covid-19 relief programme. To rectify this, the Department indicated it is using an e-voucher system with Vodacom, she added.

Dr Manenzhe mentioned that he and the other content advisors needed guidance on whether the Committee would request for the National Treasury to provide DALRRD and its entities with an increased budget allocation or not. As a possible solution, he proposed that the Committee rather look into which of the entities consistently met their spending and performance targets, and based on that, decide whether or not to appeal to the National Treasury for an additional allocation. For instance, the Committee could request additional funding for the Commission of Land Restitution of Land Rights (CRLR) to complete its autonomy project; meet its programme targets; finalise land restitution cases, as per the Land Access Movement of South Africa (LAMOSA) judgement.

In addition, he recommended that the Committee consider questioning the department on how it planned to resolve the challenges facing ALHA.

The Chairperson requested a mover for the adoption of the BRRR.

Ms Tshwete moved to support the adoption of the report, with the amendments made.

Ms Mahlo seconded the mover for the adoption of the report, with the amendments made.

The Chairperson indicated that the report would then be submitted to Parliament.

Consideration and adoption of the minutes dated 11 October 2022

The Committee reviewed the minutes.

The Chairperson requested for a mover for the adoption of the minutes.

Ms Mbabama moved for the adoption of the minutes.

Ms Tshwete seconded the mover for the adoption of the minutes.

The minutes were duly adopted.

Thereafter, the Chairperson asked if there were any matters arising.

Mr Masipa recommended that the Committee call the Department to appear before it and speak to the AG’s repeat findings on some of its programmes, specifically those related to whether its staff is fit for purpose.

Consideration and adoption of the minutes dated 12 October 2022

The Committee reviewed the minutes.

Mr Masipa requested that the Committee be provided reports from the OBP, on its production and sales focus plan as well as the list of farmers assisted by it and the ARC; the ITB and IT, on the role of the Chairperson of the Board in the ITB as well as Ingonyama Holdings; the ARC on its commercialisation strategy, land and other properties it owns, as well as its study on stone fruit. Furthermore, he asked if the Committee had received a report containing responses to Members’ outstanding questions from the Department and its entities by 21 October 2022, as requested.

The Chairperson asked the Secretariat if the Committee received the reports requested from the three entities, as he was only aware of it receiving one from the OBP.

Ms Albertina Kakaza, Committee Secretary, indicated that the ARC was expected to submit a report alongside the Department on 28 October 2022.

The Chairperson told Members that the Secretariat continuously followed-up on reports requested.

Afterwards, he requested a mover for the adoption of the minutes.

Mr Capa moved for the adoption of the minutes as a true reflection of the proceedings of the meeting.

Mr Masipa seconded the mover for the adoption of the minutes as a true reflection of the proceedings of the meeting.

The Chairperson then asked if there were any matters arising.

Ms Tshwete had a question to ask Members but she was unsure if it was the appropriate time to do so.

The Chairperson asked if her question related to the content of the minutes.

Ms Tshwete said that it partly did.

The Chairperson requested that she pose the question at the end of the meeting, to allow Members to conclude their engagements on the issues arising relating to the minutes.

Mr Capa asked if the Department had submitted the list of farmers assisted in the year under review had been submitted to the Committee yet.

The Chairperson asked the Secretariat if the list had been submitted yet.

Ms Khakhaza indicated that it had not yet been submitted by DALRRD.

The Chairperson requested that the Secretariat follow-up on the report.

With no other matters arising, the minutes were duly adopted

Consideration and adoption of the minutes dated 20 September 2022

The Committee reviewed the minutes.

The Chairperson requested a mover for the adoption of the minutes.

Ms Mahlo moved for the adoption of the minutes.

Mr Capa seconded the mover for the adoption of the minutes.

The Chairperson asked if there were any matters arising.

Mr Masipa asked if the Committee had received the report on the special master (responsible for labour tenancy claims) budget breakdown. If not, he asked that the Committee be provided with a date when the report would be submitted.

The Chairperson assured the Member that the Committee would follow-up on this report.

With no further matters arising, the minutes were duly adopted.

Ms Tshwete noted that Deputy Minister (DM) Mcebisi Skwatsha’s did not attend Committee meetings regularly, which she found to be concerning, as the AG findings of underspending and IFW related to programmes under his watch. To remedy this, she recommended that the Committee ask for the Minister to look into the matter.

The Chairperson mentioned that Members could no longer allow for the Ministry to repeatedly miss Committee meetings and to ensure that this ends, he committed to engaging with the Minister’s Office. As the Office is sent the Committee programme in good time there was no reason for at least one of the DM’s to be present and account to Members if the Minister is unavailable.  

Following that, he thanked the Committee support staff for the report and highlighted that there would be a hybrid plenary session in Parliament later that day.

The meeting was adjourned.