Election of Chairperson; DHET Annual Performance Plan 2024/25; with Minister and Deputy Ministers present

Meeting report

The Committee Secretary welcomed everyone present and announced that Members needed to elect the Chairperson of the Committee as per the Rules of the National Assembly. He outlined the election process, and called on Members to propose a nomination.

Mr T Letsie (ANC) was nominated and elected unopposed to chair the Committee.

The Chairperson welcomed everyone present and acknowledged the new Minister of Higher Education, Dr Nobuhle Nkabane, and the returning Deputy Minister, Mr Buti Manamela.

Minister's opening remarks

Dr Nkabane congratulated Mr Letsie on his election as Chairperson of the Committee. She said the 2024/25 financial year was critical for all departments, as government closed the performance of the commitments of 2020-25 and transitioned to the 2024-29 medium-term development plan.

The annual performance plan (APP) was transitional and sought to close the departmental commitments for the years 2020 to 2025. It was transitional because it would be later reviewed to align with the medium-term development plan of the Seventh Administration once adopted by the Cabinet.

The 30-year review of democracy showed that the country should pride itself on reducing poverty and extending basic services to reach the majority. However, a lot more still needed to be done as they faced unprecedented economic conditions. They would build on the legacy left behind by the previous Minister, Dr Blade Nzimande.

She said the Department would strive to increase and expand access to post-school education and training (PSET) opportunities, improve the quality of provision in education and training institutions, and improve the success of the students while improving the efficiency of the entire system. This APP showed their continued support to young people to access the opportunities available in the PSET sector. They were fixated on Vision 2030 of the National Development Plan and its targets. They aimed to increase enrolment in institutions, the number of universities, and technical and vocational education and training (TVET) students receiving funding from the National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) over the 2024 medium-term expenditure framework (MTEF) period.

The Department would intensify the rollout of the integrated infrastructure programmes, which include the two new universities. The multi-purpose facility in Giyane and the satellite campus in Ulundi were examples.

The Department planned to train 33 000 artisans in TVET colleges in 2024/25, increasing to 39 000 in 2026/27. Learner development programmes would also increase from 150 000 in 2024/25, to 155 600 in 2026/27. These were some of the critical targets of the APP, but the Department would come back with a revised APP that would acknowledge the dynamics of the socio-economic conditions. South Africa was currently undergoing a demographic transformation, and this meant that the future was bright.

Department's briefing on its Annual Performance Plan

Mr Zukile Mvalo, Acting Director-General, Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET), took Members through the presentation, which included the strategic outcomes, annual performance plan and budget information.

[See the presentation for details]

Discussion

Mr M Shikwambana (EFF) indicated that there were serious challenges in the sector, and as the new administration commenced, it was doing so with the NSFAS in crisis. He asked what the Department’s plans were to address the challenges at NSFAS, such as accommodation, and the late payments of allowances to students, leaving them not knowing what they would eat for the next three months.

Secondly, he wanted to know the Department’s plans to address the four fintech companies contracted to disburse NSFAS funds to students. He understood that they were the source of challenges, and the reason why students could not be paid their allowances.

Thirdly, he asked the Department when the construction of the new universities in Giyane and the University of Ekurhuleni would commence. This matter had come up several times before, so when would the Department present a detailed plan with timelines and other important details to appraise the Members? He felt that this song had been sung for a long time, and he was not seeing any progress.

Fourthly, he asked the Ministry if there were any bills from the DHET that overlapped with the new administration.

Ms L Sapo (ANC) asked the Department about its progress in filling the 4 000 vacant posts indicated on slide six. The vacancy rate was less than 10%, but what was the exact rate? When would a permanent Chief Financial Officer of the Department be appointed? Did all TVET colleges have permanent principals appointed? If not, when would they be appointed for all TVET colleges? Further, the Department had incurred irregular or fruitless expenditures in the first quarter, but how much had been reported?

Lastly, the Department had indicated that it took less than 40 days to release the results, but how long did it take for the TVET college students to receive their certificates? Further, the DHET intended to increase the capacity of lecturers to have appropriate qualifications -- did they not have appropriate qualifications now, and what was an appropriate qualification?

Mr M Msezane (MK) said that he was a secretary-general at the University of KwaZulu Natal not so long ago, and these matters were close to him. He had appeared before the Committee before with the President to speak on some of these matters. He suggested that adequate time was required to deliberate on these matters thoroughly.

He asked for details of the iMbali Precinct information communication technology (ICT) infrastructure project; what informed the location of the two new universities, and if any research had been done to determine the location of these institutions; if the construction of three 5 000-bed facilities for student accommodation in 2024/25 had started, and where these beds would be built; the relationship between the private sector and the DHET, as the Department still funded over-saturated courses; details of the budget allocation for post-graduate funding; and the certification release of qualifications of students, and whether it was legal for the institutions to withhold these qualifications for students who still owed tuition fees.

Lastly, he said NSFAS often responded to funding applications after the registration closed, even when students had received their acceptance letters from institutions. This challenge had persisted over the years, and he wanted to know if the Department was planning to address this matter.

Ms S Khojane (PA) said that as new Members of the Committee, they had not had the opportunity to go through the documents to engage them thoroughly. However, in the presentation, it was indicated that there were skills shortages in the science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) subjects, but there was underspending on that.

She asked how the DHET was aligning with the Department of Basic Education (DBE) to allow students to be phased into higher education institutions to avoid skill shortages and the enrolment of students in saturated courses. She also interrogated the throughput rate, and said that universities were focused on theory while the skill shortages in the country were practical. How was the Department planning to assess the practical competency of students? Lastly, she asked whether the DHET monitored and conducted oversight over infrastructure projects at institutions.

Mr B Nodada (DA) noted the transitional period of the Seventh Administration, and that although Members were dealing with the APPs, there would be an adjustment budget period that would reflect what the Seventh Administration intended to do. He would therefore not want to get into the details, but there were matters being wrapped up for the 2024/25 financial year. Hopefully, all the areas of concern that had been raised before would be considered in the discussions of how the new Administration would unfold.

He said that those programmes which were within the pockets of excellence in the Department must be protected, but the Achilles heel would be reflected in the priorities outlined in the budget. Some of these weaknesses included NSFAS, which had been an absolute abomination and a mess -- a situation which had been ventilated over and over. It had had administrators, and there had been discussions on its decentralisation and the recent corruption scandals. The funding model used should not be the same for all students. For students from rural villages like uTsolo, their funding should reflect that so that they do not suffer when they get to the doors of the institutions. Almost 10% of the NSFAS budget had been cut, which could result in over 87 000 qualifying students being affected. It was therefore important to review the funding model and consider whether it should be centralised or decentralised to make it efficient and ensure that students did not suffer. He believed that the plans and targets should reflect this.

Secondly, there were pockets of excellence in TVET colleges, and he visited these colleges. If Members visited the False Bay TVET College, they would find a solid college, but not so much at the Lovedale TVET College. It was therefore critical to review the excellent colleges and use them as models. There was also a significant issue of over-saturated courses at TVET colleges. The qualifications offered at these institutions must reflect the skills shortages in the country.

Thirdly, the quality of accommodation and safety in higher education facilities was abysmal. Some TVET and university students received different allowances, even though they used the same facilities. TVET college students often got the harsh end of the stick when it came to decent accommodation.  

Referring to the National Skills Fund (NSF), he said there was no review of the Skills Development Act as part of the targets, yet it was part of the recommendation in the report to address the inefficiencies at the NSF. He also questioned the access and enrolment reviews, with just over 520 000 students for TVET colleges, while the target for 2030 was 2.5 million. How could the targets be reviewed to ensure that they reflect the state of the country and could be met?

Ms M Maseko (DA) asked if any institutions were currently placed under administration, or which the Department anticipated would be placed under administration this academic year.

Mr G Kgabo (ANC) indicated that access and success should feed into one another, otherwise one would sit with a huge surplus of skills that did not speak to the economic objectives of the country. There was a need to embark on a skills revolution, but it must be able to translate to resolving the triple challenges of the country. If any of their plans did not speak to access and success, the whole exercise became futile.

The National Skills Plan was a good one, and if it needed to be reviewed it must be reviewed to reflect the reality of the country, not what the markets want. To achieve this, they had to de-tender NSFAS and revert to a system that worked before. They could not embark on a skills revolution project when the funding for development was going down.

What were the Auditor-General's (AG’s) views on the previous financial year, and what were the post-audit action plans and the status of implementing them? Why was the Department convinced it would move from an 11.5% to a 15% increase in the throughput rate when the report and financials seemed to suggest otherwise?

Mr J Ngubane (MK) said that Members should be given documents much earlier in the future. If they came through the day before, they were strongly disadvantaged. Now that there was a government of national unity (GNU), he hoped that the "Train to Employ" programme would yield some positivity, because this programme was only for a limited time and the trainees still sat at home unemployed. There should be agreements that absorb the trainees and the young talent. Companies receive significant amounts of money from these programmes, but they yield no permanent results of employment in the long term.

Ms F Hassan (ANC) commented that National Treasury had consistently underfunded the sector, but if one continued to increase access, how could one address the issue of underfunding? Going forward, they should consider discussing how they could support the sector beyond the National Treasury funding allocation, as it was not reliable. Underfunding had led to major protests, like "FeesMustFall."

She referred to the quality of teaching and learning, and how critical it was to ensure that students walked away with the right qualifications.

Thirdly, the TVET college graduate target for the year was 21 000, or 5% of the total number of students, which was just a mere drop in the ocean. The Department needed to review this target.

Fourthly, the planning in this financial year indicated targets that have increased from 11.1% to 45% (for TVET colleges) in this financial year. This was a dramatic change, so what was the Department planning to do to support the process to achieve that target? She cautioned against creating false impressions and over-targeting without adequate funding or measures in place to support those targets.

Lastly, she also raised a concern about the public perception of TVET colleges. There were semantics involving words like "principals" and "learners," but words like "Vice Chancellors," " Professors" and "lecturers" were used for universities. TVET colleges needed to be considered on a par with universities, but did they treat them as such? She felt that it was not just a budgetary issue, and this was something that should be considered to build more trust in the TVET college sector.

The Chairperson cautioned the Department that when compiling an annual performance plan, it must insert indicators or plans that it could control. On slide 30, there was a target on revising the Higher Education Act, but the target was that Parliament must pass it by 31 December. The Department did not have control of Parliament’s schedule. He felt that the Department must narrow its targets as to what it could do, and not base them on what another department or arm of the state must do.

Due to time constraints, the Department should respond to all the questions in writing. In the previous term, Members had experienced the challenge of questions not being responded to in full. The Department was expected to respond to all the questions to avoid discontent regarding unanswered questions.

They were at the end of the MTEF period, and to see how well thought through their plans were, he encouraged the Department to go back to the 2020/21 financial year to review how many plans the Department had achieved. This must include all the financial years, including the current financial year. Reasons for non-achievement must be provided. The reason for this exercise was to assess whether the Department had been efficient in planning, or if it had had gaps, to ensure that going forward, it planned better.

Members raised concerns about the NSFAS, which owed Parliament two annual reports from the two previous financial periods. The entity used public money and had not accounted for it in Parliament for two years. NSFAS was under administration now, and the Administrator should have been in office for three months now. The Committee would like a report and would invite the entity to appear before it. He encouraged the Department and Ministry to meet with NSFAS beforehand.

He announced that the draft Committee report on the 2024/25 APP might be ready tomorrow afternoon. He proposed a virtual meeting on Friday to deliberate and adopt the report before the debate on Tuesday.

Minister Nkabane indicated that the main challenge was the misalignment of data between NSFAS and the institutions, which resulted in the myriad of challenges noted by the Committee. The Comprehensive Student Funding Model would speak to the remodelling of the funding.

The Department would respond to all the questions raised by the Members.

The meeting was adjourned.