Western Cape Adjustments Appropriation Bill: Social Development

Social Development (WCPP)

28 November 2022
Chairperson: Mr D Plato (DA)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

Video

The Select Committee was briefed by the Department of Social Development (DSD) on Vote 7 in the schedule to the Western Cape’s Adjustment Appropriation Bill B3-2022.

The DSD reported receiving additional funds based on the adjusted budget. These funds would go towards purchasing additional vehicles for disabled persons, as well as hiring social workers and filling other critical posts.

Members expressed concern over the budget cuts for the compensation of employees. They questioned the Department over the recent rise in the closure of non-profit organisations (NPOs). They also expressed disappointment that the adjusted budget failed to address the recent spike in violence against women and children.

The Department responded by explaining that most of the NPOs had closed down voluntarily, while others with additional facilities that had closed down, had moved their affected employees to their other facilities. It said that despite the budget not expressly addressing issues of gender-based violence (GBV), such issues were covered by the Department’s priorities, which were safety and well-being.

The Committee approved the DSD's 2021/22 adjusted budget, and recorded the minority view of the ANC and the EFF, which opposed the Bill.

Meeting report

Adjustments Appropriation Bill: Social Development

The Chairperson said the meeting of the day was to debate Vote 7, Social Development, in the schedule to the Western Cape’s Adjustment Appropriation Bill B3-2022.

Ms Sharna Fernandez, Western Cape Minister of Social Development, said that it was always difficult to balance a budget, and the Department had had three robust engagements with the Treasury. Coming into the day’s meeting, it had come in a little bit more hopeful than it did in March.

Mr Charles Jordan, Acting Head: Department of Social Development (DSD), said he was going to highlight three things in terms of the adjusted budget. The first was that they would receive R43 million for compensation, and the second was that they had also received a R6.2 million rollover for modifying disabled vehicles. The third was that there was R25 million that was being provided for food relief.

Discussion

The Chairperson invited questions on pages 153 to 160 of Vote 7.

Ms N Bakubaku-Vos (ANC) referred to page 153, and said that the budget increase of over R79 million was welcomed, particularly the R43 million from national government and the R25 million for food relief. She was concerned that the budget adjustment had come a few days after the release of the second quarter crime statistics, which showed a 23.6% increase in sexual offences within the province, and the budget seemingly made no provision to respond to this increase. She asked why that was the case, and how was the Department going to deal with the rise in cases of sexual offences, and the murder of women and children in the province.  

In table 7.2.1 on page 154, regarding the R5 million reduction in the budget for the compensation of employees, she asked the Department to explain the number of posts affected by the cut, and which critical occupations were affected. On Page 155, she asked for an update concerning the expenditure of the rollovers, particularly the one on the transportation of children with intellectual disabilities and the sanitary dignity projects.

Regarding page 157, Ms Bakubaku-Vos asked the DSD to provide clarity on the disability sub-program because the funds were for the same programme, but were reclassified for the same purpose. What had necessitated the reclassification and what would the funds be spent on now? How had the officials in the programme assisted Ms Cynthia Blasé, who continued to live in an abandoned building with her disabled son, despite the subsidy being approved in September 2020?

Ms R Windvogel (ANC) referred to page 157 regarding the underspending realised due to the closure of non-profit organisations (NPOs), and asked the Department to provide details on why they were closed down, and how many were closed down.

She also asked the Department to take the Committee through the process it had initiated to cut the budget allocations to a number of NPOs working with children, as a number of them had received a letter regarding closure.

Department's response

Minister Fernandez responded to the question regarding the crime statistics that had been released. She explained that budgeting for the year was done transversely, with dignity and well-being being the focus. Therefore various issues, including gender-based violence (GBV) would be included in safety, health and social development. She was disappointed that the numbers had increased, and agreed that there was a need for greater awareness and prevention. However, the Department was doing its best and they had received an allocation for social workers, 50% of which would be placed in the "hotspot" areas so they could focus and try to reduce the number of GBV cases.

As government, they no longer worked in silos and were working transversely. They had gone into medium term expenditure committee (MTEC) engagements as a collective, and in their case, dignity and well-being included education, health, and other social issues. The Department was also represented in the safety mandate, because they worked very closely with the department of policing oversight and community safety.

Mr Jordan said there were a few critical vacant posts such as social workers and social auxiliary workers, which would be filled in the safety hotspot areas and which would support child protection services and also GBV. This was why the Department was trying to strengthen the whole process of filling the critical posts that had been vacant for a while.

Concerning the role of intellectual disabilities' transportation, he said that R6.2 million was going to be used to purchase another two vehicles for the disabled, and in total, they would have six vehicles. The funds had been broken down in order to purchase another two 15-seaters, and the balance of the money would be reclaimed for reclassification for the maintenance of the vehicles. They were in the process of acquiring the two new vehicles, and the Department of Public Works was helping them with the tender process.

Mr Mzwandile Hewu, Chief Director: Community and Partnership Development, DSD, confirmed that the R1.5 million applied for as a rollover had been approved. What this meant was that instead of paying this money from the budget, they had been given a reprieve to pay the money from the old budget. The planned purchase of the quantity of sanitary towels would go ahead, but they were aware that the Department of Education in the Western Cape wanted to introduce new schools. The DSD would be able to use the extra funding to accommodate the needs of these new schools.

In response to the question on NPOs, Mr Jordan said that in the current financial year, two of these institutions had closed down, but it had been their own choice. One had had more than one facility, and all the personnel had moved to the other facilities. The same happened with the Cape Peninsula Organisation for the Aged (CPOA), which had about 15 to 20 facilities. They had also closed one of the facilities, but it was now under new management. There was a new organisation that, from 1 April, had taken over three of their facilities. In effect, there was no loss regarding the support in services to older people.

When it came to child protection services, five organisations had closed down, and the main reason was sustainability. The Department had various interventions they would launch when they got early notification that there was a possibility of an NPO closing. The first thing would be to reach out to see how they could be of help, and meet the board. The last thing they would like to see was the closing down of NPOs due to finances. If there was money available after an organisation closed down of its own volition, the Department would look at those funds and reprioritise them to organisations that may also be facing financial hardships. He said it was a reality that some organisations were in financial difficulty. The Department had so far helped, but although they had had to give some organisations less funds, they had not closed down. It was a case of needing to plan these interventions by sitting down with the organisations to see how they could be assisted.

Mr Jordan explained that the reprioritisation of budgets was specifically for the families programme, so the letter went out only to the family programme organisations. It was not specifically child protection services, which worked with child neglect and child abuse. It was part of their mandate as a Department to start talking to organisations if there was a possibility of funding, as they did not want these organisations to find out at the last minute that their budget was going to be cut back.

Mr Juan Smith, Chief Financial Officer (CFO), DSD, referred to the R5 million reduction, and said these had been additional compensation of employment (COE) funds, and some of those funds had been taken away and allocated to households. He explained that households referred to when the Department needed to pay leave gratuities, and also for some of the early retirements where they had to pay a penalty. The money was still within the budget -- it was just the shift.

Mr Jordan said he remembered that they had mentioned the issue of Ms Cynthia Blasé, but he had not received any details. He asked for the details pertaining to that case to be emailed to him. After the meeting he was ready to sit and talk with Ms Bakubaku-Vos over the issue so he could get the person's contact details.

Closing remarks

Minister Fernandez said that as a Department, they would have been happy to receive more money, as it worked under very challenging financial circumstances. She appreciated the Committee Members' questions, which had been pertinent. She assured the Committee that the Department would stay on top of things. She asked Ms Bakubaku-Vos to provide them with the details so that they could follow up on that matter and try and get it resolved as soon as possible.

The Chairperson echoed the Minister’s sentiments, saying what stood out for him was the little bit added to the current budget so that the Department could fulfil its responsibilities outside all the necessary services. It was important for the Department to be on top of all the issues discussed in the meeting -- even concerning the case of Ms Cynthia Blasé that had been raised. There were many similar cases of people in distress which the Committee did not know about, but it was a good thing if even one of the people in such a situation could be assisted. He asked the Committee to give the Department added support, as they had their work cut out for them so that the necessary relief could be brought to the public.

Mr Jordan expressed thanks for the additional funding. There were critical posts that they would fill, and they were looking at their own social workers who were "burning out," so the additional posts that would be filled would bring relief not only to the Department’s staff, but also to the community that they served.

The Chairperson thanked the Minister and the Department for a job well done.

Adoption of report on Vote 7

The Chairperson asked the Members if they were ready to consider the Committee report on Vote 7 in the schedule to the Western Cape Adjustments Appropriation Bill [B3-2022] by expressing their support or rejection.

Ms Bakubaku-Vos asked the Chairperson to note the ANC’s minority view not to support the budget, in line with Rule 90. The party did not support the budget as they did not agree with cuts to the COE budget allocation, and they also did not believe that the budget addressed the current challenges, such as the rise in GBV in the province.

Ms W Philander (DA) expressed her support for the vote.

Ms N Makamba-Botya (EFF) said the EFF did not support the vote because the budget did not speak to the social ills of the province.

The Chairperson asked the secretary to note the changes in the report, and thereafter called for its adoption.

Ms Philander moved for the adoption of the report. Mr C Fry (DA) seconded the motion, and the report was adopted.

The meeting was adjourned.                  

Audio

No related

Documents

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: