Women Portfolio Audit Outcomes; DWYPD 2022/23 Annual Report

Meeting report

The Chairperson apologised for starting the meeting late, saying the reason for the late start was because the Committee had had to finalise other matters privately. She hoped they could still finish on time. She noted the absentees with apologies.

Ms Mthokozisi Sibisi, Senior Manager: Technical, Auditor-General of South Africa (AGSA), led the introductions of the members of her team.

AGSA findings on Department's annual performance

She began by taking the Committee through the presentation on the Budget Review and Recommendations Report (BRRR).

At 81%, the Department of Women, Youth and People with Disabilities (DWYPD) had performed well in achieving targets. However, the few targets not achieved might have negatively impacted the portfolio, as they were part of the core mandate. Other issues were the number of progress reports on the implementation of the sanitary dignity framework produced by the provinces, and the number of gender-based violence and femicide (GBVF) rapid response teams (RRTs) established.

The National Youth Development Agency (NYDA) had achieved all its indicators and targets planned for the year under review.

The Commission for Gender Equality (CGE) had performed badly in achieving only 48% of its targets. Those which were not achieved might have a negative impact on the portfolio. These targets, which were part of the core mandate, included the number of people reached through community radio education outreach programmes (540 000), and the number of courts monitored. Non-achievement of these important indicators meant that there would still be slow progress in improving lives of women in general.

The AGSA emphasised an under-spending of R8 455 000 recorded in the financial statements. During the 2022/23 financial year, the Department provided quarterly progress reports to the audit and risk committee (ARC) on the matter. The Department reported various systems and mechanisms implemented to manage and monitor the budget and expenditure. The systems included the monthly budget committee meetings, the development of a procurement plan and a demand management plan. Further, the Department had implemented the re-prioritisation of the budget at regular intervals and communication with responsible managers in instances where over- or under-spending of the budget was detected.

According to the annual performance plan (APP) and the addendum to the APP, the Department had 43 planned targets, of which 35 (81%) had been achieved. The ARC monitored the performance information of the Department quarterly. Management provided clarity on areas of performance information in all instances where the Committee requested it. The ARC was satisfied with the explanations provided by the management on these areas.

Performance Information of the Department for 2022/23 was free from material misstatement. However, the Committee noted that the annual audit by the AGSA had identified inconsistencies between the planned targets and the reported achievement in the annual performance report that were not material. The Department subsequently corrected those inconsistencies.

AGSA concluded that the performance information in the DWYPD's review was useful and reliable, in accordance with the applicable criteria as developed from the performance management and reporting framework.

Halfway through the presentation, the Chairperson interjected to express her concern. If there were repeated incidents of non-compliance, what would the penalties be? There needed to be repercussions for repeated incidents of non-compliance. The Committee did not have time to look at every activity when conducting their oversight visits.

Ms Sibisi responded that she understood the Committee's concern, which was why it was being highlighted in the presentation slides. She appealed that during the Committee's oversight, there should be emphasis placed on the irregular expenditure. AGSA still audited compliance matters related to consequence management. Due to the updated framework, they could not provide any assurances. She wished to guide the Committee on their role in the oversight process.

See attached for full presentation

2022/23 DWYPD performance report presentation

The Department reported on its performance for the financial year under review. the Department achieved an unqualified audit opinion. The Department achieved 81% of targets set – see attached for detailed information on performance per programme.

Unauthorised expenditure

The Department did not incur unauthorised expenditure for the 2022/23 financial year.

Irregular Expenditure

The Department recorded irregular expenditure amounting to R719 thousand in the 2022/23 financial year.

Fruitless and wasteful expenditure

The Department did not incur fruitless and wasteful expenditure for the 2022/23 financial year

The Department reported on its goods and services expenditure, and highlighted several issues:

• The increase in administrative fees was due to increased travel linked to the travel agency's fees.
• The decrease in advertising was because there was less marketing and promotional material.
• The increase in catering was due to changeover from virtual outreach events to physical outreach events, and the transporting of the stakeholders to such events
• The decrease in communications was due to the participation in the National Treasury Telecommunication Transversal Contract RT15-2021 linked to thresholds.
• The increase in computer services was linked to the signing of the new service level agreements (SLAs) and the implementation of the migration on the Microsoft platform to the cloud.
• The increase in consultants for business and advisory services was due to research projects that had been undertaken through the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) for the Department.
• The increase in legal services was due to the payment to the State Attorney for ongoing cases involving the Department.
• The increase in contractors was due to the relocation of the Department to new office accommodation and in hiring of audio-visual equipment as part of hybrid outreach events.
• The decrease in property payments was due to the decrease in the rental as part of the relocation during October 2022.
• The increase in transport provided as part of the departmental activities was part of the change over from virtual outreach events to physical outreach events and the transporting of the stakeholders to such events.
• The increase in travel and subsistence was due to the change from virtual to physical outreach events, and for international travel as part of the treaties to which the Department was signatory.
• The increase in venues and facilities was due to the increased physical events held after the COVID-19 pandemic.

See attached for full presentation

Discussion

Ms F Masiko (ANC) complimented the AGSA for their consideration of the return on investment for each budget. Any spending done by the Department should always be for the benefit of the poor in the country, and each cent should be accounted for.

In the annual report of the CGE, there was great concern about the irregular expenditure. There had been a move from an unqualified audit report to a clean status report. The NYDA had maintained a clean status report. It would be good to see the Department and the CGE moving from having an unqualified report to a clean status report. There were issues which required addressing, such as taking the necessary steps to avoid wasteful expenditure. No investigation had yet been conducted in this regard, which was very concerning. Why was there no investigation?

Ms C Phiri (ANC) expressed grave concern over the presentation, particularly the instability of management within the CGE. What was the status of the management? What were the main issues? She pointed to the many instances of irregular expenditure in the report. She noted that in the recommendations section, it required the Committee to do more thorough oversight, and asked that they be more specific on what exactly needed to be reviewed. This would help the Committee to assist the CGE. She did not understand some parts, and as she wanted to understand their role as a Committee, she asked for guidance in this regard.  

The Chairperson echoed Ms Phiri’s comments. She found it strange that the AGSA was guiding the Committee on how to conduct their own oversight. She was looking at the evaluation report for the Department, and noted some inconsistencies in the reports for the Department, the CGE and the NYDA. She was offended by this. All the reports must be the same throughout. During the auditing, had there been an assessment of the performance? Were the processes being correctly followed when contracts were being issued to people? She was very concerned. Looking at the recommendations, she had noted unfairness. Perhaps the Committee should not judge harshly, as there could be a reason behind all of this. Within the Department, there was a certain Deputy Director-General (DDG) who was getting paid a salary, but doing no work at all. There had been no mention of this in the report. This was a problem -- it showed inconsistencies. All entities should be treated the same.

Ms Masiko interjected to comment on consequence management and time sheets for part-time commissioners. She asked for clarity on the comments made by the Chairperson. She also requested clarity on the wasteful expenditure noted in the report (she read the entire section aloud to everyone). It was most concerning, because public funds had been spent with the approval of the accounting officer. This was a serious matter and required an explanation.

The Chairperson commented on the issue of timesheets, and said the AGSA needed to provide the correct facts in this regard because what was in the report was done poorly, with no direction. The Committee worked with facts. In 2021, the (CGE) plenary decided that the AGSA needed to correctly document the information that transpired at the time. The former Chairperson should have finalised the discrepancies in the timesheets -- people were not carrying out their duties. The AGSA needed to meet with the CGE to get clarity on what was happening. The new commissioners had been guided on what their responsibilities were and how to carry them out. What was portrayed was a true reflection of the CGE. All the entities should be audited fairly.

AGSA's response

Ms Sibisi said she noted the concerns. At the recommendation of the Chairperson, she would not respond yet to matters of instability and consequence management -- she would respond only to the concern over the time sheets. The investigation and assessment processes which needed to take place for wasteful expenditure and the like, were processes instituted by the entity itself and within the entity.

She understood the concern raised on the mandate of the AGSA. In the main, they did look at the checks and balances. Consequence management, at times, needed to be implemented by the accounting officer, and this was where the recommendations stemmed from. This was where the instability came from. Internal control could be instituted at a senior level. Some of the findings were repeat findings. Care was taken to also include the previous recommendations. This was not to say that they were auditing instability -- they were just indicating the root cause.

The Chairperson responded that as much as there was guidance on how virements could be done, in some instances, there were virements that were not registered in the report. Were some of the virements done according to the guidelines? The Committee reviewed all the reports given to them. Was it acceptable that entities did virements when oversight was being conducted? This was very unprofessional. Was the Committee expecting too much from the AGSA? This all related to how money was spent and was being shifted from one programme to the other.

Ms Phiri reiterated that they ensured that there must be continuity for institutional memory. Leadership issues were referred to the Commission. What exactly was meant by ‘instability’? She agreed with the Chairperson's recommendation to return and gather the correct information. The expenditure which was unaccounted for was a serious offence, and there needed to be clarity on this. The Committee needed to make an informed decision, so more information was required.

Ms M Khawula (EFF) made all of her comments in a formal register of isiZulu. (The PMG monitor has provided an approximate translation.)

She said that most of the questions she wanted to ask had already been raised. She agreed with what Ms Phiri had said. They could not tolerate the AGSA submitting incomplete documents, and certain funds which were unaccounted for. Once funds were issued, those funds needed to be carefully tracked to see where and how they were being spent. This should be done to carry out the purpose of those funds. Why did the youth of the country remain unemployed when they were educated? The NYDA needed to liaise with other departments to employ the educated youth. Hospitals were lacking in specialists, and the educated youth could be instrumental in this regard, and could better spend their time, rather than turning to drug abuse.

Although she had not been part of the oversight visit to Mpumalanga, she was disappointed to hear that the funds allocated to the province were not being properly spent. There were no sanitary pads for the women. Those who were hired to supply the products were not performing their duties. Invoices needed tracking to determine if funds were being properly spent. The topics being discussed in these meetings needed to be followed up and carried out, after consulting with finance. Funds were being allocated, yet the majority of the country sat without clean running water for a long time, and there were potholes everywhere. How could the AGSA be instrumental in ensuring that the funds were being spent to rectify this situation? She appreciated their honesty. An explanation was required for the surplus funds which had been returned. She was happy that more black people were in the AGSA -- representation was important.

What had been said about the funds which were meant for a certain purpose, but remained unspent? When would the AGSA go physically to the ground to monitor the processes accordingly? If people could not do their jobs, the Committee could have them arrested. The red outfits which she wore were a sign of danger. Many women and children were being raped daily. The AGSA’s failure was also the Committee’s failure, so they should please show respect in this regard.

The Chairperson mentioned the donor funding from the European Union (EU) to the value of R109 million over a period of three years. Why was there no comment in the report on this? This money was donated to the Department to assist women, youth and handicapped persons. So far, only R10 million has been used. This issue should have been reflected in the report. Funds were not being utilised, yet so many people were crying for help. This was unacceptable. There was an issue of officials who signed contracts which were not in line with the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA). The CGE had an issue in this regard, and was even taken to court, and in court, they had said that the leadership was trying its best to handle such matters. This was what had led to the resignations of senior officials. She asked for comment on the EU donation.

There was an investigation which was meant to be done at the NYDA regarding the chief executive officer (CEO), but there had been no mention of this in the report. The comments should be fair for all the entities.

Ms Khawula mentioned the posts which were closed and resulted in people not receiving their money. With all the issues raised, the AGSA needed to track the Department and ensure that those who were entitled, were receiving their funds. These were serious issues.

Ms Sibisi responded by confirming they looked at compliance matters surrounding the virements.

Mr Thabo Ntuli, Audit Manager, AGSA, responded on the issue of the EU donation. Prior to this donation, they had received R23 million, but only R1 million had been used for goods and services, and the rest had to be returned. The existing EU donation had been audited. R8.4 million had been spent on employee costs, and no discrepancies were found.

Mr Tshepang Masombuka, Audit Manager: NYDA, said that in the last three years, they had introduced an audit procedure where they ‘follow the money.’ If an entity claimed to have assisted a young person with a generator, for example, the NYDA would conduct a physical visit to that site to ensure the funds were properly spent. This was done to ensure that the money was being correctly spent.

The Chairperson interjected (in isiZulu) to say that she did not understand the relevance of what he had said -- she wanted a complete and accurate report, that was all.

Mr Masombuka stressed that he was just informing the Committee of the verification processes which the NYDA had for themselves. No news was good news.

The Chairperson disagreed with the notion of ‘no news was good news.’ They worked with written reports only, and did not accept reports done haphazardly. They wanted to avoid negative perceptions of the NYDA, and assure the people out there. They were accountable to the citizens of the country. They demanded a written report from the NYDA immediately.

Ms Sibisi clarified that the selection of site visits was on a sample basis. Regarding the allegations made against the CEO, this was incorporated for the 2022/23 cycle. The investigation conducted by the AGSA was not yet concluded. No discrepancies have been found thus far.

The Chairperson thanked the AGSA for their presentation.

Ms Khawula interjected to ask for assurance that those found guilty of mismanagement of funds were arrested. The people on the ground were not receiving the promised services.

The Chairperson suggested that the AGSA could respond to this at the subsequent meeting.

Ms Sibisi agreed to this.

Engagement with DWYPD Audit and Risk Committee (ARC)

Before the presentation, the Chairperson asked Mr Vusi Shongwe, Chief Audit Executive, to provide her with a report.

Mr Shongwe said he was unsure which report the Chairperson was referring to. He then recalled a report he had issued on the appointments made by the DWYPD during the global pandemic. He had mentioned the progress made by the Department in terms of the witnesses contacted. They have since included the audit on Human Resources (HR) in the annual audit for the current financial year. In this regard, the progress was that the project had begun on 7 October, and so far, they had not yet concluded the reviews on the controls on recruitment and selection. The Department had reviewed its policy and was testing it. Once the conclusion was finalised, the report would be processed and issued to the Committee.

The Chairperson responded that she would check her notes and return to Mr Shongwe.

Halfway through the presentation, she interjected to say that according to her notes, he owed the Committee a report on funded posts being sacrificed for unfunded posts. This report was still outstanding. What about the issue of the recruitment policy, which remained ‘on review’? She asked him to provide an update in this regard, as they had had more than enough time.

Mr Shongwe replied that he might not have captured the issue of funded and unfunded posts, so this was not included in the annual coverage plan. What was included was the review on recruitment and selection. He had made a note of the requested report on funded and unfunded posts.

The Chairperson asked if the ARC had a plan on what needed to be done in the current year. When would this plan be outlined to the Committee? Perhaps the Committee staff members could assist the ARC so that they could provide an adequate response, so he should contact them. Mr Shongwe agreed to do this.

When the Chairperson asked Members to comment on the presentation, most said they would rather reserve their questions for the Department.

Ms Masiko asked about issues of internal control. How would the ARC recommend that there was a reconciliation of repeated findings on such crucial matters? Who should be held accountable for this? Regarding staff shortages, what assurances were in place from the ARC to ensure these posts would be filled? How many proposed vacancies would the Department want the ARC to fill?

ARC's response

Ms Tebogo Tukisi, Independent Non-Executive Member, NYDA ARC, responded that the internal audit reports were usually discussed with management and the ARC. However, in one of the findings, the AGSA had indicated that the controls were there and the outcomes were issued as positive. The Department was expected to report on the irregular expenditure. The ARC would ensure that this task was done to completion.

She did not have the exact number of vacant positions which would be filled, but recalled from the last meeting that there were 18 positions which had been prioritised. Of the 18, two would definitely be filled.

Ms N Sharif (DA) referred to the NYDA's targets, and asked if the technical indicators were set by the Department, and therefore failing to meet them was of grave concern. Was it correct to say that the Department set the technical indicators?

Ms Tukisi confirmed that the Department set the technical indicators. The information which was reported would not always align with the technical indicators.

Ms Khawula asked about the project Mr Shongwe had earlier mentioned was incomplete. What was the reason for the delay? Why were there vacancies which were not yet filled?

Mr Shongwe responded that according to the internal audit annual plan, the recruitment and selection project was scheduled to commence on 4 October and to be completed by 6 November. The project should be completed by then, and the report should be finalised by then as well.

The Chairperson recalled discussing at the last meeting that the labour department was unhappy about not being consulted in the recruitment and selection process. The labour department should have been consulted to avoid unnecessary disagreements and delays.

Mr Shongwe said that he would not be the best person to respond to this -- it should rather by the Chief Director: Corporate Management.

The Chairperson accepted this answer, and asked if Mr Shongwe had yet contacted the staff members regarding the issues raised.

Mr Shongwe said he would get back to the Chairperson on this before the end of the meeting.

She thanked the ARC for their presentation – see attached for detailed presentation.  

She asked why the Department had submitted their report so late.

Adv Mikateko Maluleke, Director-General, DWYPD, responded that the process of submitting was such that the report had to be sent to the Ministry and Parliamentary Liaison Officer, and this had been done only in the previous week. She had received word only a few days prior that the Committee had not yet received the report. She apologised, and mentioned this had been out of their control.

The Chairperson interjected to ask where the Parliamentary Liaison Officer was. He was absent from the meeting, and this was the second time this had happened. The Committee had noted the response and remained concerned. Since there were many slides, the Chairperson proposed that the Department focus on only a few slides to save time, rather than covering all 69 slides in the presentation. She also asked that the Head of Human Resources (HR) respond to the issues raised on the vacant posts.

Ms T Masondo (ANC) asked how the Department had contributed to eliminating poverty, reducing inequality and rectifying unemployment concerning women, youth and those with disabilities. Was the Department able to give effect to its mandate for the current year? Why did the Department continue to have product safety and standardisation workshops with the South African Bureau of Standards (SABS) annually? How had SABS developed standards for developing sanitary items in the country? How many provincial sanitary dignity committees have been established and operational for the current year? How many girls had received sanitary pads in each province, and how did this measure against the targets set? How much was allocated to each province, and how much was spent for the current year? How would the Department address the challenges faced by the Sanitary Dignity Programme (SDP)? Since the outset of the SDP, how many girls have benefited, and how much was spent versus what was allocated to each province?

Ms Masiko asked about donor funding, and was concerned that only R9 100 000 had been used of the allocated R109 million, especially since they were moving to the final year of the allocation. Gauteng, Eastern Cape and Kwa-Zulu Natal (KZN) had been identified as the pilot provinces. What is the current status of the project? What were the implications for the remaining amount if only R9 100 000 had been spent? Donor monitoring was important -- was the Department complying with the donor monitoring requirements?

Regarding exemptions and deviations, there had been an increase in the deviations, and this had been coupled with the use of external consultants  --116 in total. Were these deviations really necessary? Had the checks and balances been made concerning the final decision? Could the Department please provide a list of all the deviations? She was worried about the high use of consultants; 116 was too many. This called into question the capacity of the Department -- why were they not insourcing?

Ms Sharif thanked the Department for the presentation and echoed Ms Masiko’s comments. She asked that the Department submit a report on what the project was, its status and the way forward with the project. She needed to know what the plans were for the project on the donor funding, and an assurance that the money was being well spent. She recalled that the Department had mentioned that funding was one of their biggest issues, so perhaps they could redirect some of the funds towards the National Council on GBVF. She agreed that the use of many consultants was alarming. A capacity and skills audit needed to be done, and what was more concerning was that the beneficiaries would be negatively impacted, so the Department should resolve this. The SDP as being badly implemented, hence the Department’s inability to meet its targets.

Ms Phiri echoed the previous comments, and emphasised her concern on the matter of deviations. Could the Department provide a spreadsheet in this regard? There was under-spending of the donor funding. A breakdown needed to be given of the donor funding. Funding was desperately needed and under-spending worsened the situation. Was the Department satisfied with the monitoring and evaluation? Were they happy with the SDP, compared to the project on condoms? Had the Department met its targets with each province regarding the SDP? Were girls and women in the country receiving sanitary pads? What was preventing this from being achieved? It was not the Director-General’s place to comment on the Ministry -- that was for the Cabinet to give comment. How many vacancies were there in the Department? How could the Committee assist in this regard?

The Chairperson asked about the monitoring and evaluation. How far was the Department concerning drafting temporary contracts? Why were some of the virements not covered by National Treasury? Why was this not in the report? The Labour Department was not at all happy about not being consulted. Labour must be represented. Some of those who were shortlisted were being denied access. She agreed with what the other Members had mentioned. The high number of consultants was alarming. What were these consultants doing exactly? Why was only such a small portion of the donor funding used, instead of most of the funding? How was the work being done with such little funding? If money was donated, why was it not being used? What were the developments concerning economic development? Many of the youth remained unemployed. This was the last year of the term, so the report should have had extensive performance information. This was disappointing. By now, the Department should have achieved most of its goals. In the previous meeting, it was understood that the Department would push for the Persons with Disabilities Bill -- would this be done in the next term?

She expressed her frustration at Committee Members who attended the meetings, but said nothing throughout them. She called for them to speak up.

Members confirmed their presence, and said that they did not want to speak as it meant they would repeat everything which their colleagues had already mentioned.

Department's responses

Director-General Maluleke responded by reiterating the mandate of the Department. Monitoring and evaluation were part of what the DWYPD did, and it worked with the government frameworks. There was a framework which informed how to gather information from various departments to implement its policies and work towards economic empowerment. Government was really lacking in empowering small businesses for persons with disabilities.

She said that for the SDP, the following amounts had been allocated to the provinces:

Free State R14 758 000

KZN R52 789 000

Limpopo R35 345 000

Northern Cape R5 033 000

North West R17 729 000

Eastern Cape R40 595 000

Gauteng R27 574 000

Mpumalanga R20 839 000

Western Cape R10 911 000.

The equitable share was dependent on the number of learners from Quintile 1-3 schools in the respective provinces. She then gave an example to make this more clear.

Adv Maluleke said it was true that the Department worked with the SABS, among others, to ensure that women’s businesses met the required standards.

Concerning the donor funding, the allocated donation did not come in one tranche, but in several tranches, and the CFO would comment more on this. The tranche allocated for the current year had still not been received because National Treasury had not yet released the funds, despite the many unsuccessful attempts to contact them.

The Department had now expanded into all nine provinces.

There were different monitoring and evaluation tools in the Department. The Deputy Director-General (DDG) would elaborate on this later on.

The Department did indeed have a recruitment policy, and HR would elaborate on this and on the consultation with the Labour Department.

She asked the Committee to contact the Minister of Justice regarding the Persons with Disability Bill. The Minister had given assurances on fast-tracking the Bill, but it had not yet been advertised.

HR did not employ the 116 consultants, nor were they working for the Department. Looking at the Public Administration Act, one could see that this was regulated. The Soma Initiative had 11 consultants due to the different applications that were related to them. Competency assessment had two consultants whom HR did not appoint. There was one consultant for broad-based black economic empowerment (BBBEE) verification; the consultant was used when the DWYPD had to report to the Auditor-General; three members were employed by government. For the participation of the DWYPD across three sectors, there was one consultant. For HSRC projects, the Department was instructed to conduct research, and there was one consultant for qualification and verification. There were 38 translators and interpreters. These consultants were not replacing HR -- they were required.

The Chairperson interjected to ask why the Department could not create positions for interpreters. There was an urgent need for them in the Department. The other consultants listed had to be outsourced, but the interpreters could be insourced. The concern was the increased number of consultants.

Adv Maluleke said the Department would consider this suggestion. She understood that the high number was alarming, but for the Department it was cost-saving.

Ms Sharif agreed with the Chairperson, saying the number of consultants had tripled in size and doubled the projects, and the Department was spending R6 500 000 on this. 116 consultants was too much. Certain consultants were not necessary at all. There should be skilled people within the ranks to do ad hoc reports within the Department. Most places had researchers. This did not align with the Department’s mandate. She requested an updated report from the Department on who the consultants were and what exactly they were doing, along with the remuneration for the work they did and how many hours were spent on the work. Public funds need to be saved. The Committee needed to account to their constituents. 23 consultants on one core programme was extensive. This was not necessary.

The Director-General corrected Ms Sharif, saying the number of consultants on the core programme was four, and not 23.

Ms Sharif disputed this, and said this number was for the overall core programmes.

DG Maluleke said that this was because the Department was severely understaffed, and with many projects to work on, it was set up to fail. The White Paper would not be able to be evaluated because it was too large. The disability unit would not be able to achieve its goals due to understaffing. The HSRC was conducting research for the Department. Some of the research needed to be done outside of the Department -- it did not have the capacity to conduct it itself. The budget issued to the Department was very small, and since 2020, there had already been budget cuts. They had had to move to a new building which even the Minister did not like, all to save money. They were trying their best to respond to the needs of the country.

The Chairperson interjected to suggest that perhaps the staff of the Department did not have the capacity to do the work -- this was what she gathered from the Director-General’s comments. What work were they doing every day? Where was the report on research that the Department had done? The CGE had given extensive reports on research, but the Department had failed to do this.

Adv Maluleke said that this was an unfair accusation. The DWYPD was different to other entities. How often had the Department requested the Committee to give them a chance to present? The only times the Department was called was to submit quarterly reports.

The Chairperson insisted that the Committee had a right to get the Department to make them understand how they operated. They required those reports, and the reason for the questions was to ask for clarity. She was concerned about the use of many consultants.

The Director-General explained that three people were working on the White Paper, and they were responsible for the compliance report, the APP and the like. She would forward a copy of the research required for the White Paper.

The Chairperson stressed that the Department needed to inform the Committee of what they were doing so that they could be assisted, hence the reason for the question. She agreed that some of the research done by the other entities was questionable, and the Committee would question them in that instance. The Director-General should not be emotional -- the Committee was just doing its job. Questions needed to be asked.

Adv Maluleke pointed out that the White Paper on its own had seven indicators which needed to be implemented. These were:

1. removing barriers to participation in all aspects of life in the country;
2. protecting persons with disabilities at risk of compounding marginalisation;
3. supporting sustainable integrated community life;
4. promoting and supporting empowerment of those with disabilities;
5. reducing economic vulnerability and realising human capital;
6. strengthening the representative voice of persons with disabilities; and
7. building a disability equitable stake machinery.

This would take a research company two years just to do research on the above alone. People were overworked because there was a lot to be done.

The Chairperson interjected to say that the DG should not make a comparison with other departments, as this was irrelevant.

DG Maluleke replied that she compared it with the other departments so that the Committee could see that they were not doing anything illegal. The Department did both research and evaluation. The challenge with the SDP was that the money did not go to the Department -- it went directly to the provinces. The internal audit of the Department started working with the provincial audits to audit the implementation of the SDP. Involving the internal audit units would reduce corruption, if there was any. There were different prices for the SDP, and internal audit was looking into this matter and into the possible mismanagement of funds. When presenting to the Committee on these matters, it would be good to also invite the premiers. Another challenge they faced was other departments being responsible for certain provinces.

The Chairperson interjected to remind the DG that they were not a service delivery department. The Department had initiated the SDP -- how best could this programme be managed? What was the best solution for the programme? How could the Committee intervene and assist?

The Director-General responded that they had involved the provincial treasuries and their internal audit departments, six provinces had already audited the SDPs, and the remaining three had yet to do so. However, the Department was following up on this. Upon completion of the audits, the Department would present to the Committee, and hopefully, the premiers would be present because the audits would show the failures and the way forward. Generally, government was doing well, because many young women in the country had access to sanitary pads. More funding was still required in this regard.

She was not satisfied with the SDP. The Department of Health (DoH) received billions of rands each year for condoms, and these condoms were in every public facility in the country. The SDP budget was very small, and this was not fair for women since they could not choose when to be on their period. They were not happy with the budget.

The Chairperson was satisfied with this plan and promised to secure a date for the meeting.

Adv Maluleke reiterated that the EU had sent money in January to National Treasury for the Department but they had still not received this money. Additionally, the DWYPD had contacted the EU to ask for more funding, to which they had agreed, but their hands were tied if National Treasury was not releasing the funds, which were supposed to have been released on 1 April of this year. More than R9 million has been used so far.

The Chairperson said the Committee would certainly write to National Treasury to ask why the funds had not been released, when it was so late in the year. She requested a response on the issue of deviations.

Ms Desree Legwale, CFO, DWYPD, responded on the virements, saying some of these had been approved by National Treasury. Some virements affected the published figures of the original budget of the Department. The accounting officer had approved the shifting of funds in a programme, and this had been sent to the Minister and submitted to National Treasury for noting. They would engage with National Treasury on aligning what they approved and what the Department approved to ensure comprehension of the published figures.

Responding to the deviations, Ms Legwale said the high value deviations mainly involved sole service providers. An example of this was the R8 800 000 for the research projects implemented by the HSRC. This R8 800 000 was based on the estimated cost for each project. She noted the request for a detailed report giving reasons for each deviation, and she would cluster them accordingly. They would prepare a detailed report which would explain the rationale for each deviation approved.

The evaluations had been mainly for conferences and workshops conducted by the Department, where certain participants were targeted. They were obliged to National Treasury for all the deviations.

Ms Khawula commented that it was important that the Committee commend the Department for their work, not just reprimand them. She was glad to learn that the EU donation had to go through National Treasury first before going to the Department.

Could the Department please allow the Committee to ask them questions, as this was done for clarity. They were not fighting with the Department; they wanted to help them. Even in the disagreements, it was good that they could reconcile and proceed with their work. Should there be a challenge in the Department, they should be able to approach the Committee for assistance. She commended the Chairperson for her personality and good leadership skills.

(She was then cut off due to a poor network connection, but then returned.)

She said young people were really struggling with drug abuse and violence. Why could the government not assist the youth with skills and provide them with jobs when they were so educated? The government had an issue in dealing with social development. Single mothers were struggling, not knowing where the money would come from to sustain their families. The people of the country were really suffering. Elderly women were being robbed and raped, and teenagers were targeting families, invading their homes and killing them. Social services needed to intervene in this regard. Crime was rife in the country, and drug abuse was prevalent.

Ms Shoki Tshabalala, DDG: Social Transformation, mentioned two national initiatives which sought to empower women economically. The first was called the Women's Economic Empowerment Programme, which sought to empower women on how to conduct business with government so that by the time the tenders were issued, these women would be well-prepared. Approximately 60 women enterprises collectively had participated in a programme of coaching which would usually occur over ten months. The 40% preferential procurement policy was meant to increase the number of women entrepreneurs in the country.

They had just launched a provincial roll-out in KZN to come up with their own action plan. They had involved the economic cluster. The purpose of this was to unlock supply chain management (SCM) opportunities and ensure that they were gender-responsive. They had seen support from the private sector. There was a banking skills project which sought to run rural and township bakeries, to create jobs. There was a programme for financial inclusion for small, medium and micro enterprises (SMMEs) run by women. They were in the process of registering a bank for women -- they had 400 women who had expressed interest, registered and paid the deposit. They looked forward to launching this bank.

For the EU donation, they had appointed technical monitors to monitor the work.

The Chairperson asked about the DWYPD's relationship with the Department of Small Business Development (DSBD). Was there any way to assist women with small businesses?

DDG Tshabalala responded positively, and said they were members of the Women’s Economic Assembly. They had close to ten workstreams. They emphasised the role of checking the state of readiness. This had grown to being a project which encompassed the agro-processing and sugar industry workstreams. These women were very motivated. Hopefully, this would unlock supply chain opportunities.

Part of the EU donation on GBV work went to the technical monitors and data capturers, who assist with the work on the ground. Through this, the Department was able to see how events were evolving at the local level. The monitors and data capturers were also called upon for the 100-day challenge in the local communities. Perhaps the Department could explain this to the Committee in a separate meeting one day. In the 100 days, a problem would be identified, a solution provided, and the goal would be achieved within 100 days. The Department was responsible for building capacity. Six provinces were taking part in this challenge.

The Chairperson said they would find a date in future to invite the Department to present on the 100-day challenge. She noted DDG Tshabalala's involvement in the Women's Economic Assembly.

Mr Mbhazima Shiviti, Chief Director: Resource Management, DWYPD, responded on the recruitment and selection policy, and said the policy was approved last year in November and was still being reviewed.

The Chairperson interjected to ask about the senior management service (SMS) positions -- were they also being reviewed?

Mr Shiviti replied that the SMS positions were guided by the SMS handbook. The unions were involved in the recruitment process. Those with disabilities were provided with personal aids.

The Chairperson asked about reasonable accommodation of persons with disabilities -- was the policy ready?

Mr Shiviti replied that there was a draft policy, and they had had their first session with the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA), and had had a fruitful meeting in this regard.

Ms Phuti Mabelebele, Chief Director: Advocacy and Mainstreaming Rights, DWYPD, mentioned that they had a reasonable accommodation framework, and were working with HR on the reasonable accommodation policy of the Department. They had equipment for those with disabilities so that they would be able to work, and all had been issued their personal aids and equipment.

The Chairperson asked how far they were in finalising their own policy within the Department.

Ms Mabelebele responded that it still needed to be presented to the departmental bargaining chamber (DBC), and only then would it be finalised.

Mr Shiviti said that they would conduct interviews for the Director of Human Resources Management post the following day. They would provide feedback at the subsequent meeting. Two deputy director positions would be advertised soon.

Ms Masiko mentioned that she had been very frustrated trying to find the website of the Department, as the accessibility of this website was so important. What was the update on the website for the Department?

DG Maluleke responded that one of the sections which had been underspent had been the information technology (IT) section.

Ms Malebo Kube, Director: IT Operations, DWYPD, responded that the website had migrated to the State Information Technology Agency (SITA). They were busy configuring the firewall and it should be up and running by the end of the week. The website was currently offline because of the migration.

The Chairperson said they would check the website at the end of the week.

Ms Masiko said she was partially happy with this response.

Mr Shongwe confirmed that he had communicated with the audit and risk committee staff. The report highlighted weaknesses, some within the selection and recruitment processes. The committee had required assurance from internal audit on whether the weaknesses had been remedied. The selection and recruitment process had been included in the internal audit plan which the Audit Committee had approved. It was to commence on 4 October and end on 6 November. He hoped the appointment would occur within the financial year so that they could record the most recent events on the selection and recruitment process. Once finalised, the report would undergo all the departmental processes, and thereafter be presented to the Committee.

The Chairperson promised to give the Department a chance to present in this regard. 

The meeting was adjourned.