Statistics Amendment Bill Advert; DPME, Brand SA & Stats SA BRRRs

Meeting report

Budgetary Review and Recommendations Report (BRRR) -- DPME

Mr Julius Ngoepe, Committee Content Advisor, took the Committee through the BRRR for the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME).

Mr J McGluwa (DA) requested that a timeframe be allocated to the item listed as 10.5 in the report, which referred to the fast-tracking and finalisation of the National Development Planning Bill.

He requested clarification on issues regarding Brand SA, but the Chairperson confirmed that there would be a second presentation to clarify issues related to the entity.

He commented that the Bill on monitoring doping within competitive sports had not yet been tabled and asked if mention could be made on the progress of this Bill within the report.

Mr M Manyi (EFF) expressed his concern at the wording of item 9.3. He disagreed that the Committee had expressed the views that were reflected in the first sentence of this item. There was no evidence that the Committee had expressed these views, and requested that it consider rephrasing this section.

He also brought to the attention of the Committee to issues in item 9.7, which stressed the fact that under the National Development Plan (NDP), some goals had not been achieved despite projections that stated they should have been met by this financial year. He emphasised that absolutely no goals had yet been achieved, and by wording it as ‘some,’ the report was misleading.

Lastly, he said the recommendation listed under item 10.1 should be considered a medium-term goal, but in the interim, the Department should submit this recommendation to Cabinet as a means of enforcing it. All recommendations should be submitted to them timeously. The legislative process would take too long.

Ms C Phiri (ANC) asked the Secretary of the Committee to take note of the recommendations and comments made, and submit them in writing to the DPME. She suggested that recruitment processes within the Department should be expedited. Staff shortages should not be an excuse when it comes to fulfilling the commitments made by the DPME to deliver reliable and capable monitoring and evaluation.

She urged the Department to reach out to National Treasury and other organisations to ensure more funding for the recommendations and projects of the Department. In developing effective performance-outcome indicators and a solid framework, the Department must work closely with the Auditor-General (AG), Treasury and Statistics South Africa (StatsSA). The DPME could not continue to work alone without support from other stakeholders and institutions. This would contribute to building sufficient institutional capacity. She also suggested that the performance indicators must be directly linked to the budget of the DPME for that financial year.

Ms Phiri disagreed with the comment made by Mr Manyi on raising issues of the ministry being unavailable to enforce the recommendations in these reports, directly into strategic plans and annual performance plans. If this was presented to the Cabinet, there was no assurance that the ministry would be able to do this in the future. The legislation in process to allow for the implementation of recommendations must be tabled and finalised. The Bill should force the Minister to consider the recommendations, which Cabinet could not recommend.

Ms T Tobias (ANC) emphasised the role of the Committee in providing their own recommendations and tracking the oversight processes within the Department without stepping on the toes of the executive. Despite the newness of this Committee, its role must be established as ensuring the Department was on track to fulfilling its target requirements.

The Chairperson requested that Mr Ngoepe answer the questions, note the comments made, and go through the points raised in the order of the document.

Mr Ngoepe answered the concerns about the phrasing of item 9.3, and said that these were comments made by the Auditor-General (AG), and did not come from the Department. He agreed to amend the first sentence from “welcomed by the Committee” to “noted by the Committee,” and gave acknowledgement to the AG for making certain comments and reflections. Mr Manyi stated his satisfaction with this amendment.

On Point 9.7, Mr Manyi had requested that the Department clarify that no goals had yet been achieved. The Chairperson clarified that the ten-year review of the NDP had not yet been presented to the Committee, but it was scheduled to take place this financial year. Without this presentation, the Committee could not be sure of the goals achieved by the Department. He commented that the phrasing may not be a lie, so to say, but was rather misleading.

Mr Ngoepe acknowledged that there was no available evidence to be presented to the Committee aligned to item 9.7 upon the requirement to finalise this report, but he assured the Committee that there had been a gradual improvement to the framework of the NDP, so he did not support rephrasing this item.

Mr Manyi clarified that his concerns were not that developments within the NDP were not occurring, but rather that the report misrepresented the NDP achievements, considering no targets had been concretely met. He requested that Mr Ngoepe acknowledge this failure, and ensure it was reflected in the report.

Ms Tobias accused Mr Manyi of creating a political debate within the meeting instead of offering constructive criticism. The targets created in the NDP had been aimed for achievement by the year 2030. As departments individually worked to implement certain targets, the statement in item 9.7 claiming that the targets had been “somewhat achieved” was not misleading at all. Only the tabling of the tenure review could clarify which targets had been achieved and which targets had not been achieved. Many of the targets had been put in place.

Mr K Pillay (ANC) requested that this argument no longer continue, and that the Chairperson use his position to put an end to misplaced claims.

Mr Manyi refuted Ms Tobias’s claim that his argument was political, and asserted that it was about the lack of providing factual information in the report. There was a difference between goals that had been successfully implemented, and those that had begun the slow processes of implementation. He stood by his statement, requesting that item 9.7 be rephrased.

Ms Tobias took it upon herself to clarify the processes implemented as part of the NDP. She mentioned the Carbon Tax Bill which had emerged from the NDP, amongst other resolutions such as creating job opportunities under the social protection goals.

Ms Phiri said she had sent her recommendations in writing to the Secretariat. She also requested that a workshop take place for the Committee so that Members did not continue to educate each other during the meeting.

The Chairperson reminded the Committee that when they sat for the ten-year review, Members would have the opportunity to make their own judgments and comments on the achievements and failures of the NDP. The Committee must ensure they did not make preemptive judgments before receiving the facts.

Mr Ngoepe supported the Chairperson’s request that the Committee wait until the ten-year review discussion to make finite judgments. He suggested that a report on that discussion be written up to ensure the concerns and comments of the Committee were recorded.

Item 10.1 under recommendations was amended to include Cabinet as an interim means, in the absence of legislation, to enforce the Minister to apply the recommendations in annual performance plans and strategic plans.

Mr Ngoepe said that item 10.5 could not yet offer a timeline, as the Department was waiting to hear from a pilot district development model (DDM) that had been implemented recently. Once it hears from this pilot programme, a more concrete timeline for finalising the National Development Planning Bill could be projected. He admitted that he was doubtful that this Bill could be concluded within the current sixth Parliament. The Chairperson agreed, commenting that the Bill had not even been tabled in Cabinet.

Mr Manyi reminded the Committee that the AG had made a dashboard presentation on the progress of the DPME, where none of their projects had been reflected as completed. He requested that this presentation be correctly reflected in the report. He also expressed his frustration at other Committee Members making condescending comments, and asked the Chairperson to monitor these comments.

Ms Tobias accused Mr Manyi of being emotional, and protected the comments made by Ms Phiri. She reiterated that despite goals not being completed, there had been partial achievements. She requested that the Committee recognise that the template used by the AG had never been the template used by the Department or by the Committee.

The Chairperson thanked Members for the robust engagement.

The Committee duly adopted the report.

Mr Manyi did not object to the report, but asked that a further recommendation be added stating that the annual report from the DPME should in future, include a dashboard progress report mirroring that of the AG. This was listed as item 10.8, and should show progress and performance on governance.

Budgetary Review and Recommendations Report (BRRR) -- Brand SA

The Committee was then led through the report from Brand SA by Mr Ngoepe.

Mr Pillay acknowledged the concreteness of this report, and requested that the Committee move to adopt it without further discussion.

The Chairperson said he wished to hear from other Members before considering adopting the report.

Ms Tobias acknowledged her bias, as she had previously been on the board of Brand SA. She supported the comments made by Mr McGluwa early in the presentation requesting better visibility of Brand SA, particularly in Sport, Arts and Culture. This was added as item 10.15.

Ms Phiri recommended that BrandSA approach organisations and National Treasury to increase the funding it received. Performance indicators and targets should also be created by BrandSA, with a focus on targeting collaborations with businesses and the creative sector. These two amendments were added as items 10.16 and 10.17, respectively.

Lastly, Ms Phiri suggested that Brand SA forge partnerships with all departments in government to increase their visibility. She made mention of the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO), emphasising that embassies across the world should be used to promote visibility for South Africa. This was added to the report by Mr Ngoepe as item 10.18.

Mr McGluwa agreed that financial challenges contributed to the constraints facing Brand SA. He acknowledged the point made by Ms Tobias to request an increase in funding from National Treasury.

Mr Manyi asked for clarity on the point of a suggested merger that Mr McGluwa had made in previous discussions.

Mr McGluwa clarified that he still stood by his suggestion, stating that perhaps merging Brand SA with the Department of Tourism, or at least promoting a closer working relationship, could provide Brand SA with more direction.

Ms Phiri disagreed with this suggestion, citing internal issues at both Brand SA and the Department of Tourism. She suggested that this merger be considered only once the internal issues were fixed at both entities.

Ms Tobias agreed with Ms Phiri, and stated that both entities must exist independently and not be merged due to financial constraints.

Mr Manyi clarified that the reported merger had come from the Department and the Minister himself, and hence the role of the Committee was to request an update on the discussions taking place within the Department, and not to discuss the merits or feasibility of the merger.

Ms Tobias agreed with Mr Manyi, stating that the way he had delivered his argument had antagonised her and she had got carried away. She conceded that Mr Manyi was correct in not debating the merits of the merger.

Thereafter, the Committee adopted the report with the additions of items 10.15, 10.16, 10.17 and 10.18.

Budgetary Review and Recommendations Report (BRRR) -- StatsSA

Mr Ngoepe took the Committee through the BRRR for StatsSA.

Mr Pillay commented on the first three sections of the report, where the comments made were almost identical to the preface found in the DPME report.

Mr Ngoepe clarified that the introductory comments were on the Department, and not specifically on StatsSA or BrandSA. From section four onwards, the commentary was different.

Mr Pillay requested that a recommendation be added, stating that StatsSA must review its institutional delivery structure to adapt to digitisation and reduce its funding capacity. This was added as item 10.6.

Mr Manyi said that the report should reflect the entity's progress on employment equity against the targets set in its employment equity plan.

Mr Ngoepe listed this as a recommendation under 10.3.

Mr Manyi also suggested that the figure reported under irregular expenditure be added to item 9.8. He requested that the concern and anxiety expressed by the Committee concerning the irregular expenditure be formulated into this point.

Ms Tobias requested that the Committee’s comments include recommendations for an increase in funding from the National Treasury. Under item 10.4 in the original document, she also requested that the statement on investigations into irregular expenditure be clearer and more concrete.

Mr McGluwa acknowledged the many departments that needed more funding to be allocated, and the shortage in revenue accrued by the government. Taking this into account, it may be best to assume that StatsSA would not receive an increase in funding. The proposal sent to the Treasury must be detailed, and state what functionality and use would come out of the increase in funding.

Mr Ngoepe confirmed that the reports would all be circulated alongside the AG's report after Mr Manyi expressed his concern that not all of the AG’s findings and concerns were reflected in this report.

The Chairperson requested that Members adopt the report, and there were no objections.

Committee minutes

Mr Manyi expressed his concern that some minutes were more detailed than others. He asked the Chairperson if a fundamental framework was used to capture minutes correctly.

Mr Ngoepe clarified that some reports dealt directly with reports in which the comments made by the Committee were captured, and the minutes referred to the report.

The Committee was then taken through three sets of minutes, which were adopted.

Mr Manyi commented on the minutes of 22 September, stating that it was not clear in the minutes that the Committee did not agree with the ten-year proposal.

Mr Ngoepe disagreed, and said that the concern of Members of the Committee was abundantly clear in the minutes.

In the minutes of 13 October, Mr Manyi asked where the discussions on StatsSA and the employment equity plan were recorded.

Mr Ngoepe said the slide from the presentation would be clarified, and recirculated by the Secretary.

Statistics Amendment Bill

The last item of the meeting dealt with the advertisement for the Statistics Amendment Bill [B31-2023].

Mr Ngoepe said that the advertisement would be available in a number of newspapers and locations.

The Chairperson requested clarity on when the advertisement would be published, as it stated that they required all submissions before 24 November.

Mr Ngoepe said the intention was to release the advertisement by next Friday, 27 October.

Ms Phiri and the Chairperson welcomed this timeline and insisted it be released by this date.

The Committee then passed the advertisement and the timeline presented to them.

The Chairperson thanked Members of the Committee for their engagement, and the meeting was adjourned.