DMV HR plan; Military Veterans Advisory Council & Military Veterans Appeals Board on mandate, achievements and challenges; with Deputy Minister

This premium content has been made freely available

Defence and Military Veterans

30 November 2022
Chairperson: Mr V Xaba (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

Video

The Portfolio Committee held a virtual meeting to receive briefings from the Department of Military Veterans (DMV) on its human resources plan, and from the Military Veterans Advisory Council and the Military Veterans Appeals Board on their mandate, achievements and challenges.

The Advisory Council outlined their purpose, mandate and strategic plan going forward, as well as their terms of reference, the sub-committees that had been established, and the remuneration of the council.

Members asked if the council could review all the military veterans' benefits regarding their appropriateness and effectiveness. The Chairperson gave an example of the transport benefit perhaps not being appropriate, since the public transport system was not as coordinated as other countries, making it hard to effect that benefit. The Department was asked why there were many problems facing the military veterans, when the Minister had had Advisory Boards since 2011.

The Department made a presentation to inform Members of the progress made on the appointment of the Appeals Board, outlining the background, the purpose, and the progress of the appointments.

The presentation on the DMV’s human resources plan focused on its suspension processes, retention strategy and succession planning. The Department said its biggest problem was lack of capacity. Traditionally, this had been because of the limited compensation for the employees. This was exacerbated by the poor rate of addressing the vacant posts. There was also the effect of the suspension of employees, since they were all at a critical level. An entire year had gone by without having a Deputy Director-General (DDG) and chief directors.

Members asked how the DMV was going to correct the imbalance in the employee age groups. Did it plan to retain contract workers or absorb them? What was the reason for its lengthy recruitment process?

Meeting report

Opening remarks

The Chairperson said the Committee was going to receive a briefing on the Department of Military Veterans' (DMV’s) human resources plan, covering suspension processes, its personnel retention strategy and succession planning). It would also be briefed by the Military Veterans Advisory Council and the Military Veterans Appeals Board on its mandate, achievements and challenges. He asked the Deputy Minister (DM) to introduce the advisory council member who had been appointed in March earlier in the year.

DM Thabang Makwetla said that the Advisory Council (AC) had indeed been reconstituted after the expiry of the term of the previous board. The first meeting of the new advisory council had been convened in April and the council had struggled with the logistics to get on with its business, but it had now commenced. He was happy that they had a team of very capable personnel that could advise the Minister. They had very impressive records in the areas of public exposure, public policy and government priorities. The majority had the privilege of serving in government at high levels, and their expertise would come in handy. The Advisory Council's mandate was not a subject that was new to the Committee. The DM said that the oversight committee had suggested reviewing the framework in some areas concerning how the council was positioned.

Presentation by Military Veterans Advisory Council

Ms Jennifer Schreiner, Chairperson of the Advisory Board, outlined the purpose, mandate and strategic plan of the council going forward. She also described its terms of reference, the sub-committees established, and the remuneration of the council.

The AC was established as a national organ of the Ministry of Defence and Military Veterans, by the Minister, in compliance with Section 9 of the Military Veterans Act No. 18 of 2011, to attend to the interest of the military veterans and advise the Minister on any matter relating to policy application (section 10(1)(b) and regulations made under any law (section 25).

The AC is also expected to take initiative on all matters pertaining to military veterans and their dependents and provide advice by way of recommendations to the Director-General and the Minister.

The council held an inaugural meeting with Deputy Minister Makwetla on 26 April 2022. The Deputy Minister explained the term of office and what is expected from the council. He also stated the roles and responsibilities of the Members of the Council. He mentioned that the Members are the Minister’s advisers in matters relating to the Department and the Veterans.

The council held a Strategic work plan with the Department on 7 July 2022. A presentation on the DMV Strategic Plan 2020-2025 was presented by DMV. The presentation included a plan to extend the function of Provincial offices & benefits of Military Veterans and their dependant amongst others.

The AC has reviewed and made amendments on the Terms of Reference to guide the council in overseeing the relationships between itself and the DMV. The AC’s primary responsibility is to ensure efficient and effective delivery of benefits by DMV to all military veterans and their dependents and to further ensure long-term planning that will result in sustainable support. The amendments to the terms of reference are not yet submitted to the Ministry for consideration and approval.

In line with Section (14) of the Act of the Military Veterans, members of the Advisory Council who are not in the full-time employment by the state, must be paid such remuneration and allowances as may be determined by the Minister in consultation with the Minister of Finance.

According to the determination made, the council has been classified as a category C2 by National Treasury and as such the rates for 2022/23 are set as R249 per hour or R1 990 per day and R2 632 for the Chairperson of the Board.

(See presentation for further details)

Discussion

The Chairperson said the Committee had not evaluated the performance of the Advisory Council concerning the appropriateness and the effectiveness of the benefits. The Act was passed in 2011, and eleven years later, it was a matter that it had to look into and review the legislation. He gave an example of the transport benefit, and said he was not sure of its appropriateness in the country, since the public transport system was not as coordinated as other countries and this made it hard to give effect to that benefit. He asked for the review of all the benefits, and if they had to maintain the means test going forward. He also raised the issue that the Department was responsible for supporting the military veterans (MVs) and not the immediate family members as an issue that the council had to look into.

Mr M Shelembe (DA) asked why there were many problems facing the military veterans, when the Minister had had the Advisory Boards since 2011. Was there lack of communication between the Board and the Minister? He asked how often the board raised issues with the Minister, and how they foresaw the rolling out of the immediate benefits to the MVs. He asked if, as Members of Parliament, they had the right to directly request to connect and engage with the council.

Responses

Ms Schreiner said the board was going to do a holistic evaluation of the performance of the benefits. The benefits committee had already started considering aspects such as the linkages between the appropriateness and effectiveness of implementing the benefits. The policy and the legislative amendments were important issues, and she was going to raise them with the board. They were going to be operating, based on the law, as a policy advisory committee to make recommendations and support the Minister. Operational matters would be referred to the responsible Department. The council was going to make sure that things moved at the pace that they needed to and followed proper channels of legislation so that things were not slowed down by litigation.

Deputy Minister Makwetla welcomed the suggestion by the Chairperson to review the benefits. He reminded the Committee that it was the view of the Ministry that a white paper on military veterans would assist the Department in improving its efficiency. The policy would be put out to the public for discussion, and the legislation governing the Department could then be reviewed. The policy in place had been crafted as an interim paper, and there had been no white paper prepared when the Department was put in place with a view to operationalising it. However, the white paper would be an opportunity for the public to discuss what the government could do for military veterans.

The review of the benefits was relevant to the question of whether the benefits were appropriate from the policy and polity point of view, and what would be the best. The review could also look into the efficiency of the benefits being rolled out. The board was not an inspectorate body, and it was not mandated to inspect the functioning of the Department. The Minister could use the council to advise her about the efficiency and the shortcomings in the Department’s operations in delivering the benefits. The DM said he would share what the Chairperson had raised with the Minister.

The Chairperson said the Committee was going to send their official communication to the Minster, and he hoped the process would be expedited as part of amending the legislation.

Presentation by Military Veterans Appeals Board

Mr Sandisa Siyengo, Chief Director: Research and Development Policy, Department of Defence and Military Veterans (DMV), informed Members of the progress with the appointment of the Appeals Board. The presentation outlined the background, the purpose and the progress of the appointments.

In terms of the Military Veterans Act 18 of 2011, as stipulated in the Act 7.(1):

a) In terms of the Military Veterans Act 18 of 2011, 21(1) the Appeal Board consists of at least three persons appointed by the Minister in consultation with the association.

b) (2)(a) The Minister must appoint members of the Appeal Board competent persons who have relevant knowledge, experience or expertise that would enable the Appeal Board to perform its function effectively and efficiently.

c)(b) At least one of the members of the Appeal Board must be an advocate or attorney or other legally qualified person with at least ten years’ experience in the practice of law.

The Appeal Board consists of five members that will serve as part time members for five years. The role of the Appeal Board is to consider any appeal lodged by a Military Veteran against any decision taken by an official in terms of the Act which adversely affects the rights of the military veteran. Consider any question of law relating to military veterans referred to it by the Minister or the Director-General. And advise the Minister or Director-General regarding any legal matter relating to military veterans which the Minister or Director-General refers to it.

The previous Appeal Board members were appointed in 2015 where after their term of office expired. The Minister extended the term of office of the members of Appeal Board until 31 December 2021 in line with section 24(1) of the Act. The Department was instructed to place an advertisement calling for nominations on the government gazette with closing of 19 May 2022. A submission was sent to the office of the Deputy Minister on 2 June 2022 with all 12 nominees received. The Department received additional amendments on 22 July 2022 from the office of the Deputy Minister. The nominations were resubmitted to the Ministry on 25 July 2022. The nominations were resubmitted to the Ministry on 25 November 2022.

(See the presentation for further details)

Discussion

The Chairperson said the Committee was not happy that the process had been delayed. He asked if there was any indication of when the board would be appointed.

Ms Irene Mpolweni, Director General (DG), DMV, said the Department did not know, since the documents had been sent to the Ministry.

Deputy Minister Makwetla said that the process around the reconstitution of the Appeals Board was a puzzling matter, because the previous Appeals Board's term had been extended to 31 December 2021 by the Department due to the pandemic. They were alive to the fact that they should have had a new board in place by last December. However, the adverts to establish the new board happened only in May. A submission had been made to the Ministry, and they had dealt with the memo in June. His office had indicated its view in June on the candidates included in the memo. He was not sure why they did not have an appeals board in place. He did not understand why there had been a resubmission, because everything had been done properly and the names were there. He did not understand the grounds for the resubmission, and wanted to find out what had happened.

The Chairperson asked the DM to talk to the Minister about why the matter had been delayed. He asked for written communication in the two weeks to follow.

DMV’s Human Resources plan

Mr Mondli Makhonza, Director: Human Resource Management, DMV, made the presentation on the Department’s human resources plan, including its suspension processes, retention strategy and succession planning.

Members were taken through the suspension process and progress on current suspensions. The presentation also outlined the progress on filling vacancies, succession planning and the retention strategy.

(See presentation for details)

Discussion

The Chairperson raised concern over the fact that “every third person” in the DMV was a contract employee. He asked how long the contracts were that the employees signed with the Department. He asked if the obligation of the bursary holders to serve in the Department to get a return on its investment did not perpetuate inequality in society by providing both a bursary and a job.

Mr S Marais (DA) said there were at nine over-strength with the 48 contracts. He asked for an indication of which posts were earmarked to correct the process of contracts, and for details of equity distribution and the transformation targets. When would the contracts be terminated, and how would they overlap with the filling of posts? What would be the effect on the budget? He asked why the Department still struggled to catch up with the demand for services for military veterans.

He asserted that there was no transformation regarding the Department’s targets for the other race groups. He asked for time frames and how they were addressing the issue so they could measure performance. How did the Department justify saying it had achieved government targets regarding the representation of people with disabilities, when they had 1.6 % while the target was 2%?

Mr Shelembe asked why there were delays in the cases of the Department. Was this related to the lack of evidence on the side of the DMV, or were they technical delays? He asked why the recruitment process took so long, and suggested that one department had to take the responsibility of employing instead of moving from one department to another. He said the retention strategy was good, but asked about the duration of the service pact as an obligation to those who got the bursaries. He asked if the MVs were going to receive their pensions in December.

Mr T Mmutle (ANC) asked how the Department was going to correct the imbalances in the age groups. Did it plan to retain contract workers or absorb them? What was the morale of the personnel in the Department. Even though the Minister had delegated powers, the administrative powers were still in the hands of the HR unit, and it had to run the process and report to the Minister. It was incorrect to say that the Minister wanted to take control of the process.

Responses

DG Mpolweni said that their mandate was to focus on service delivery, and they were trying to reposition the Department with the necessary capacity. They were ensuring that they had the necessary skills and the necessary staff. Regarding the positions being filled, there were regulations which were drafted by the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) which had been given to the Minister of each department. The Minister was going to delegate to the accounting officer in terms of the levels of appointment. The Department had also subscribed to the process.

The biggest challenge facing the DMV was capacity, which slowed down their service delivery. The Department was trying to ensure that it had people in crucial positions, especially in socio-economic support (CES), which was going to face serious pressure because of the rolling out of the pensions. The Department was going to engage with the DPSA to discuss its short, medium and long-term issues in the light of the organogram being developed.

Regarding the contract workers and how the DMV was going to create a balance and achieve equity, when the positions are available, the Department advertises them to ensure a fair recruitment process. It allows some of the other people not involved in the contract process to participate, ensuring openness and competitiveness.

The beneficiary support services were going to have a lot of pressure, because they were going to deal with the database verification, and they were going to raise their red flags as the Department was rolling out the pensions, as most of the military veterans were struggling. The DMV was repositioning itself to ensure that there was a seamless service. The Appeals Board was also going to be under pressure with the rejection of the pensions.

Mr Makhonza said that the contracts were on an annual basis, and it had been so since 2014. Most of the employees were on the lower operational levels. The Department had created a legitimate expectation by renewing the contracts yearly, and now it was trying to absorb them. Regarding the bursaries, these were only for the employees. All the government departments that had these programmes implemented the service obligation. The staff bursaries were intended to improve service delivery standards.

Regarding positions being earmarked to address the contracts, ten entry-level positions had been advertised internally and the Department was in the process of recruiting for the positions, and the target group was the employees. Once this was done, it would proceed to advertise other vacancies. In the attraction of other race groups, the vacant positions that were advertised internally were only entry-level positions, but the senior positions were advertised externally and special mention was made to encourage people from certain race groups to apply. Regarding the question on the people with disabilities, and not meeting the target of 2%, he pointed out they were sitting at 1.6% and that they had partially achieved their target. They also sent copies of the vacancy adverts to the disability agencies to attract people in this category.

Regarding the delays in the cases, the Department did not have much control, as it was the chairpersons presiding over the cases that were making those decisions. Once preliminary issues were raised, the initiators would come to the Department to present them, and they would then advise on the legal implications. The Department had emphasised to the people assisting with the cases to finalise them by the end of the year. The investigation had been concluded only in March, so there had been good progress.

Regarding the lengthy recruitment processes, the Department was going to try to improve, but the Covid period had had an impact on recruitment processes.

Regarding the imbalances, since there were groups due for retirement, the target was to get people that were still young, with the right skills and qualifications. The Department had an employment equity plan, which would assist in dealing with the imbalance.

Ms Mpolweni said it was important to review the skills the Department would need to match the service delivery targets. The DMV fell in the social cluster and was looking for skills related to the social cluster because these departments were responsible for service delivery. Some of the DMV's people were young and did not understand what was needed, so the Department had to ensure that the people employed had the necessary understanding and patience.

The Chairperson asked if the Department was waiting for feedback from the Minister to appoint a panel to screen, short-list and interview the candidates.

Ms Mpolweni said that, among other things, the Department was waiting for an indication to continue the process and to provide the necessary support to the Ministry on the positions delegated to their level, or if the Ministry needed them to be readvertised.

The Chairperson noted that the positions not delegated were the chief director, to levels 15 and 16. He asked if the positions below 14 were delegated.

Ms Mpolweni agreed with the Chairperson.

Mr Makhonza confirmed that the levels that were delegated were 14 downwards.

The Chairperson asked what they expected the Minister to say about the positions.

Mr Makhonza said that for all the senior management service (SMS) positions from level 13 to 14 which were directed to the DG, once any of the posts were vacant, the Department would write to the Minister informing her that the post was vacant and indicate that it was being advertised, and seek concurrency to proceed. Once the post had been advertised, there was another submission to the Minister to inform her that the applications closed on that date, and inform her of the number of applications to seek concurrency to proceed. The master list would be attached. The Minister would give the go-ahead for the short-listing.

The Chairperson asked who would do the short-listing for the screening.

Mr Makhonza responded that it was the DG, together with the panel. After the short-listing, there another submission was sent to the Minister to inform her that the short-listing had been concluded and to inform her of the number of employees found to be suitable. The Minister would then sign and agree to the interviews. That was the process for all the SMS vacancies.

The Chairperson asked if the officials could deal with post level 15.

Mr Makhonza said the advert would be based on the DPSA guidelines, and the Minister would then approve it and would be sent to the DPSA. Once the applications were received, the Department would do the pre-screening to make the short-listing work of the Minister easy. All the applications were sent to the Minister, and the interviews would be done by her and a panel of other ministers.

The Chairperson asked what the feedback from the Minister had been on all the positions.

Mr Makhonza responded that the Department had made the master list and had sent everything to the Minister, and she had signed the documents on 28 September. The Deputy Minister had signed on 4 August. They both commented, asking why the process had taken so long after the closing date. The DM had requested that the process be expedited and raised concern about the delay. The Minister had raised a question as to whether the posts were those of the people that had been suspended. She had not approved, and had asked the Department to deal with the questions raised. The Department answered the questions on 11 October. The Minister had signed on 4 November to confirm receipt of the responses, but did not sign the memo. For the next two positions, the short-listing was done and the memo was sent to the Minister for advice. However, the Department received a message from the Minister that the positions of the Chief Director and the Legal Director were to be conducted within their office, so the Department could not proceed.

The Chairperson asked about their understanding of the Minister’s directive that spoke to level 14.

Mr Makhonza said that even though the DG had the delegation, she always had to conduct the process through the Ministry on all the SMS positions.

The Chairperson asked if the Minister had signed off on the directive.

Ms Mpolweni replied that it was the Minister herself who had given the directive. The documentation related to the positions was still in the office of the Minister.

Deputy Minister Makwetla said the operational details were necessary, but they did not belong in the Committee. The reason there were delays was that there was no accepted practice concerning how the DMV recruited new employees. Employees at the SMS level were the responsibility of the executive, but the executive delegated it to the accounting officer. This meant that all the posts at this level had to be filled with concurrency with the Minister. It had started with the process described, so it was visible. The process involved three critical steps which the Ministry had to be consulted: the vacancy, the post and the job description, and the advert.

The Department would then short-list the candidates, and thereafter provide the Minister with a long list of the people who had applied and a short list of those who were appointed. The DG would short-list the panel that would process the candidates, and the Minister would have to agree with the people recommended. The next stage was when the DG would provide a record of the interviews on picking the appropriate candidate. It was important to make the last stage visible and show how the candidates had performed. There was also a need for the results of the competency test to be added. The Ministry would go through them and would confirm if the Ministry agreed. However, where the Ministry and the Department did not agree, the process would take a long time. The Ministry did not have the capacity to take over the process.

The Chairperson accepted the explanation of the process.

Deputy Minister Makwetla said that the DG had made appropriate comments when saying that the biggest problem that the Department had was capacity. Traditionally, this had been because of the limited compensation for the employees. The Department therefore did not have sufficient warm bodies, which was exacerbated by the poor rate of addressing the vacant posts. Secondly, there was the effect of the suspensions, since they were all at a critical level. A year passed without a Deputy Director-General (DDG) and chief directors. The procedure for disciplining employees was very important, and the DMV had to comply with the guidelines for consequence management, starting from the allegations through to the final decisions. There were discrepancies and they unavoidably led to prolonged periods. They were now in the second year of the suspensions of officials who were sitting at home.

The other challenge was the organisation of the Department. They needed to engage with the DPSA on its organisational structure, which Treasury would approve. It was one of the key performance measures. The other reason was the verification of military veterans. There was pressure around the verification process because of logistical challenges in the Department, which contributed to the political pressure.

The Chairperson said that the budget had been increased from a baseline of R600 million to R1 billion. If the Department failed to spend the money, it was going to be revised downwards. If the Department spent all of it, it would retain that budget level. It was a commitment from government to assist in dealing with the plight of the DMV and the military veterans in dire situations.

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: