Briefing by Department of Military Veterans on the Annual Performance Plan 2024/25 and Budget, and performance information for 2023/24 Annual Report; with Deputy Minister

Meeting report

Opening remarks

The Chairperson welcomed the Deputy Minister and the delegation from the Department of Military Veterans (DMV, or the Department) to the meeting. She introduced the Members and Committee support staff before requesting the Deputy Minister to formally introduce the DMV delegation for the record.

She expressed gratitude for the Deputy Minister’s attendance, emphasising its importance in initial engagements with the Department on specific issues. She noted that such meetings often resulted in commitments that were followed through in Member statements, National Council of Provinces (NCOP) engagements, or during oversight duties. The Chairperson highlighted that while it was the Deputy Minister’s responsibility to participate, the Committee appreciated and valued the effort, reiterating the significance of the Deputy Minister’s presence in fostering productive discussions.

The Chairperson explained that this introductory meeting aimed to familiarise the Committee with the DMV’s mandate, programmes, budget, and performance as part of the Committee’s broader induction to its oversight responsibilities. She took a moment to reflect on a tragic incident reported the previous day, where a 14-year-old boy, Jahmiel Van Reenen, was fatally shot on his way to school in Elsies River, Western Cape, with two other teenagers injured in the same incident. Condemning the violence, she stressed the collective responsibility for community safety, transcending race, colour, or gender. She conveyed condolences and prayers to the families affected and highlighted the need for all sectors of society to prioritise safety and well-being.

In a reflective tone, the Chairperson recalled the repatriation of the remains of 49 former liberation fighters on 25 September 2024. She shared her emotions witnessing the families finally finding closure after years of uncertainty. She praised this milestone, achieved during South Africa’s 30^th year of democracy, as a poignant reminder of the strides made in honouring the sacrifices of those who fought for the country’s freedom.

The Chairperson reflected on the recent repatriation of 49 former liberation fighters who had passed away while in exile in Zimbabwe and Zambia. She noted that the fighters were formally received and honoured at Freedom Park in Pretoria, an event that also provided an opportunity to learn more about South Africa’s history and the military veterans’ struggle. She expressed hope that the families gained valuable knowledge about the country’s past and that similar initiatives would continue in the future.

Turning to the Department, the Chairperson remarked that the Department had received a qualified audit opinion, primarily due to unverifiable assets and incomplete disclosure of irregular expenditure from the previous financial year. She raised concerns over underspending during the 2023/24 financial year, highlighting that the socio-economic support management subprogram had utilised only 12.5% of its final allocations. She noted with disappointment the slow delivery of housing and other benefits to military veterans, a recurring issue highlighted during provincial oversight visits.

She expressed concern about the Department's growing vacancy rate and the prolonged suspension of three staff members, with an average suspension period of 365 days at a cost of approximately R3.3 million. She emphasised that only 33% of the Department's targets had been achieved during the financial year, which she described as a serious concern for the Committee. She also noted the Committee’s intent to better understand the work and challenges of the DMV’s Appeals Board and Advisory Council in future engagements, as detailed information was not included in the Department’s submissions.

Additionally, she highlighted the importance of addressing issues related to the DMV’s database, digitalisation efforts, and ongoing challenges with securing adequate office space. She affirmed the Committee’s commitment to working collaboratively with the Department to find solutions, emphasising that their oversight role was not judgmental but corrective. She explained that the aim was to understand the root causes of challenges, explore solutions, and establish clear timeframes to effectively address identified issues. She concluded by officially opening the meeting, stressing the importance of improving the lives of all South Africans through diligent oversight and action.

The Chairperson informed the Members about the introduction of a clocking system with a stopwatch to manage time during the meeting. She explained that when someone exceeded their allotted time, a beep would signal that they had gone over the time limit. This measure, she stated, was necessary to ensure that discussions remained focused and efficient, particularly when officials were providing detailed responses.

She emphasised the importance of time management during deliberations, noting that participants should prepare their contributions and remarks in advance. The Chairperson reminded the officials that the Members had already reviewed the submitted documents, as was customary in their work, and encouraged them to focus on concise and relevant points during their presentations. This, she asserted, would help the meeting proceed smoothly and maintain its purpose.

Apologies were noted during the meeting, and the Committee Secretary informed Members that Dr N Mcinga (EFF, Eastern Cape) had previously announced the conclusion of her term in office and would therefore not be attending.

The Chairperson added that Mr V Gericke (EFF, Western Cape) had indicated the need to await a formal notice from the party regarding these changes. She clarified that, for the time being, the Committee acknowledged Dr Mcinga's absence based on the information shared informally via WhatsApp, ensuring transparency with all present. The Chairperson requested that the Parliamentary Monitoring Group communicate this update to the broader community, emphasising that the Committee was still awaiting an official response from the party that had deployed Dr Mcinga.

Deputy Minister’s opening remarks

Deputy Minister of Military Veterans, Mr Richard Hlophe, acknowledged the introductory remarks made by the Chairperson, noting that they had already addressed many of the issues the Department intended to raise. He assured the Committee that the Acting Director-General would provide a detailed presentation covering these matters. Reflecting on the Department's challenges, he emphasised the importance of taking responsibility for addressing them, regardless of who originally encountered the issues.

The Deputy Minister affirmed that the Department’s focus was not to deny or evade the undeniable but to confront the reality of the problems presented. He highlighted the need for a turnaround strategy aimed at correcting deficiencies rather than dwelling on complaints. While he would touch on the issues, the primary objective of the meeting was to outline corrective measures and a clear path forward. He emphasised the significance of moving beyond problems to solutions, ensuring that the Department and the Committee collaboratively worked towards meaningful progress.

Department of Military Veterans 2023/24 Annual Report and 2024/25 Annual Performance Plan

Ms Nontobeko Mafu, Acting Director-General, DMV, acknowledged the issues raised by the Chairperson, expressing confidence that these would be addressed during the presentation. She assured the Committee that if any matters were not covered, the Department would provide clarification to ensure the Committee fully understood the Department's actions and strategies.

Ms Mafu explained that the Chief Director would lead the presentation, but responses to questions and concerns would involve participation from the entire departmental team. This collaborative approach, she emphasised, was intended to provide comprehensive insights and offer the Committee the necessary assurance regarding the Department’s efforts.

Led by Mr Sandisa Siyengo, Chief Director: Research and Policy Development, DMV, the presentation reviewed the DMV’s Annual Performance Plan for 2024/25 and reflected on its performance and budgetary utilisation during the 2023/24 financial year. It emphasised the Department’s legislative obligation under the Military Veterans Act 18 of 2011 to ensure socio-economic support and empowerment for military veterans and their dependents.

The DMV outlined significant benefits, including compensation for injuries, healthcare, housing, pensions, education, and burial support. Key achievements included disbursing pensions to over 1 500 veterans since regulations were enacted in 2023, allocating healthcare access to 17 638 veterans, and providing educational support to military veterans and dependents, with over 3 600 bursaries issued in 2023/24. However, challenges persisted, such as slow progress in housing delivery, inadequate public transport subsidies, and limited employment placements.

Efforts to enhance database accuracy were highlighted, with verification completed in three provinces and plans to cover the remaining regions. The DMV emphasised the need to align its organisational structure and improve coordination with stakeholders to address service delivery gaps. Budget constraints and inefficiencies in expenditure utilisation were noted, with only 69% of the allocated budget spent in 2023/24.

The Department had identified key mitigations, including reviewing policies on housing and education benefits, increasing pension processing capacity, and enhancing collaboration with external stakeholders to facilitate employment and business opportunities. It also stressed the importance of legislative amendments to expand the scope of benefits and improve governance. Despite these challenges, the DMV noted progress in empowering military veterans, improving their socio-economic status, and fulfilling commitments like repatriating and memorialising fallen heroes.

Mr E Noe (ANC, Free State) expressed a desire for clarity regarding the presentation. He pointed out that the Committee had mostly heard about the challenges faced by the Department, based on the brief and highlights shared so far. He asked whether this focus meant that there had been no successes to report. If there were any successes, he suggested that they be addressed immediately, so the Committee could acknowledge both the challenges and the successes. If there were no successes to report, then the Committee could proceed accordingly.

The Chairperson responded by confirming that the presentation included both the challenges faced by the Department and the proposed interventions. She clarified that the Department had already submitted details on how they intended to address those challenges. The Chairperson explained that Mr Siyengo had simply provided a brief overview of the presentation's contents. She emphasised that, having reviewed the submissions, the Members were free to ask questions if they felt uncertain about how the proposed interventions would help resolve the issues and bring solutions to the Department. 

Mr Sibongiseni Ndlovu, Chief Financial Officer, DMV, began by providing a detailed overview of the Department’s financial history, particularly regarding audit opinions. He explained that when the DMV became a transfer vote in 2013, it faced an adverse audit opinion due to incomplete financial information, which violated section 4 of the Public Finance Management Act 1 of 1999 (PFMA). However, improvements had been made over the following years, with the Department achieving a qualified opinion from 2014 to 2016 and an unqualified opinion from 2016/17 onwards. Unfortunately, in 2022/23, the Department had reverted to a qualified opinion due to an inability to fully disclose irregular expenditure.

He clarified that the irregular expenditure stemmed from contracts entered into in the 2021/22 financial year, which should have been declared as irregular but were not. This had led to a spillage of the expenditure into 2022/23 and 2023/24. To resolve this, the Department was proposing a full-scale forensic investigation, with the aim of closing the matter and ensuring proper accountability. In addition, the Department was undergoing a comprehensive verification process of its movable tangible capital assets, which were also flagged in the 2023/24 audit. He assured the Committee that the asset register, which primarily included furniture and computer equipment, would be cleaned up by the end of the financial year.

Mr Ndlovu also discussed the challenges faced in terms of spending. While most of the budget was spent on benefits, such as compensating military veterans, there was significant underspending, particularly on the military veterans' pension. Due to delays in the rollout of the pension program, only about 615 veterans were paid, far below the target of 2 000. As a result, R250 million was unspent and returned to National Treasury. Of this, R159 million was intended for the military veterans' pension. Additionally, certain operational activities could not be carried out due to a high vacancy rate, further contributing to the underspending.

He concluded by outlining the Department's current financial situation. Despite a recent budget cut of R51 million from National Treasury, the Department was working to address the shortfall in military veterans' pension payments, which were projected to reach around R190 million by the end of the financial year. He also noted the challenges posed by the stringent approval processes for critical vacancies, which had resulted in a lower spending rate. However, he expressed confidence that the Department would continue to strive to meet its targets within these constraints.

Ms Mafu clarified the Department's structure and its reliance on external entities for implementing various benefits. She explained that, of the 85 000 military veterans, the DMV operated with an approved organogram of 169 staff members and a budget of R864 million allocated for 11 benefits. She emphasised that many of these benefits depended on cooperation with other government departments. For example, the DMV relied on the Government Pensions Administration Agency (GPAA), a National Treasury agency, to manage pensions, and Federated Employers Mutual (FEM), an arm of the Department of Defence (DoD), for health services and compensation for injuries. Additionally, counselling services were provided through Social Development and FEM, while housing was managed through the Department of Human Settlements (DHS).

She noted that the DMV directly handled burial support, skills education support, employment, job placement, and database management. She pointed out that these dependencies significantly influenced how the budget was spent and the pace at which services were delivered. For instance, delays or challenges with external departments, such as the unavailability of doctors from FEM for compensation claims or substandard housing from DHS, could impact the quality and timeliness of services provided to military veterans.

Regarding suspensions within the Department, she clarified that only five officials were suspended, including a Chief Director and two Directors, with their suspensions ranging from six months to just over a year. She emphasised that the suspensions were relatively recent and distinct from the issues within the DoD, despite both departments sharing the same ministry.

(See attached presentation for further details).

The Chairperson thanked the Director-General and the DMV team for their presentation and acknowledged their efforts. She then invited the Members to engage with the officials regarding the details presented, emphasising the need for the Committee to focus on specific issues that were important to address and encouraged Members to be precise in their questions and comments.

Discussion

Mr Gericke began by stating his intent to be concise and direct in his remarks. He expressed his disappointment with the state of affairs in the DMV, describing the situation as troubling. While acknowledging that the Department may be working on a turnaround strategy, he emphasised that the current situation remained concerning. He raised a specific issue regarding the discrepancies between the number of military veterans the Department reported as qualifying for benefits and the figures provided by the veterans' structures on the ground. He requested clarity on this, noting that the numbers presented by the Department were much lower than what the veterans' groups claim, and that there had been considerable media and social media attention surrounding complaints about the Department’s incompetence.

He also highlighted the struggles faced by former fighters, particularly those from uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) and the Azanian People’s Liberation Army (APLA), who played a significant role in the liberation struggle but were now living in difficult conditions, with some being homeless or facing financial hardship. He questioned why these veterans, who helped secure the country's freedom, were not prioritised for benefits and urged the Department to expedite the process to ensure they received the support they deserved. He called for a project or program that would prioritise these veterans, recognising the importance of honouring their sacrifices.

He noted that, during an oversight visit, he had observed that white veterans, specifically those who had fought in the South African Defence Force (SANDF), seemed more satisfied with the benefits they received from the Department and did not have significant complaints. He implied that there appeared to be a disparity in how different groups of veterans were treated by the DMV.

He continued by emphasising that the veterans who had fought in the true liberation struggle were not receiving the attention or support they deserved. He made a quick calculation based on the figures provided by the Department and raised a concern about the military veterans' pension. He pointed out that if a military veteran was earning R5 400.00 in pension, they would be above the threshold for qualifying for the South African Social Security Agency (SASSA) pension, even if they were disabled or elderly. He asked for clarification on whether this was correct and how the Department could engage legislatively to address this issue. Specifically, he sought to understand the distinction between the military veterans' pension and the old age or disability pensions, and how the Department could help veterans who fell into this category but did not qualify for SASSA support.

He then shifted to the issue of unspent funds, acknowledging the challenge of sending money back to National Treasury when it has not been utilised. However, he requested that the Department develop a clear strategy for how the remaining funds would be used effectively in the future. He urged the Department to focus on developing a model that would reduce reliance on other departments and increase the DMV’s independence, particularly in terms of managing its own projects and resources.

On the matter of housing, he shared his frustration with a long-standing project in Saldanha where, despite the approval of 60 houses for military veterans eight years ago, the houses had still not been built, even though the land and budget were available. He stressed the need for better planning and a model that would allow the Department to operate more autonomously, potentially through hiring consultants, to ensure that such projects could be completed without relying on other departments. He emphasised that a more independent and effective Department was essential for better serving military veterans going forward.

Mr N Gotsell (DA, Western Cape) began by commenting on the DMV's organogram and the various positions held by officials, specifically noting the focus on policy and planning. He expressed confusion over the prolonged delay in appointing a permanent Director-General, despite the Acting Director-General providing an overview of the situation. He questioned why the Department was taking so long to resolve this matter and fill such an important position.

He also expressed concern over the Department receiving two qualified audit opinions, particularly given that the DMV was a relatively new Department. He questioned what the Department was planning for if it was still facing these significant issues, such as qualified audits. He raised alarm about the suspension of officials, particularly those in critical positions, highlighting that the suspensions had been ongoing for six months. He found it troubling that these individuals, who were not contributing to the Department’s work, were still receiving salaries, especially considering the size and importance of their roles.

Turning to the issue of assets, he expressed confusion over how a Department that was relatively new could have problems keeping track of its assets. He questioned how this could happen, especially when the Department should be focused on other priorities, such as delivering benefits and ensuring that veterans received the support they deserved. He also inquired about the current state of the DMV’s database, which he understood had issues. He expressed concern that the database was causing confusion and hindering the Department’s ability to serve more veterans more efficiently.

Mr Gotsell raised additional concerns about the lack of interdepartmental coordination, referencing issues faced by other departments like Correctional Services. He suggested that there should be better collaboration between the DMV and the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure (DPWI) to address these challenges. Lastly, he expressed his worries about substandard housing for military veterans, questioning why this issue, which involved DHS, was becoming a problem for the DMV to solve. He emphasised the need for better interdepartmental cooperation to address these persistent challenges.

Mr P Phala (ANC, Limpopo) began by sharing his personal connection to the matter, stating that as a military veteran himself, he understood the importance of the Department's work. He acknowledged that the Acting Director-General and he came from the same camp and that it was heart-breaking for him to see the current state of affairs in the Department, especially considering that it was responsible for honouring those who fought for justice and freedom in the country. He emphasised that the work of the Department spanned both the past and the future, and that its mission was rooted in the preamble of the Constitution.

He expressed his frustration with the slow progress in dealing with the past and ensuring that military veterans, particularly those who had suffered for the liberation of the country, received the benefits they deserved. He pointed out that many veterans who had been integrated into the DoD or the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) may not need assistance, as they were already receiving benefits. However, he stressed that there were still a small number of veterans who truly needed help, particularly those from the liberation movements like MK, and these veterans should not be forgotten.

Mr Phala highlighted the urgency of the situation, especially as time was running out for some of these veterans. He mentioned that the highest number of surviving veterans were in the Eastern Cape, while only a few were left in Limpopo. He called for swift action and for the Committee to work together with the Department to find solutions to address the challenges faced by veterans, emphasising that time was critical.

Lastly, he raised an important issue about the treatment of veterans, specifically mentioning a case in the Northern Cape where a former MK combatant, a prisoner of war, was treated poorly. He strongly condemned the manner in which the prisoner of war had been treated, stating that it was unacceptable. He proposed that the Department address the issue of how veterans who died in the struggle were treated, stating that those who fought and died for the country must be honoured properly. He argued that no veteran, particularly those who fought with honour and sacrifice, should be buried without the respect they deserved.

Mr M Billy (DA, KwaZulu-Natal) began by expressing his agreement with Mr Phala’s sentiment that the welfare of veterans was critically important for the country. He emphasised the necessity of ensuring the Department was well-supported to fulfil this responsibility. However, he also raised a few concerns and posed questions.

He suggested that it would have been beneficial to have the Auditor-General of South Africa (AGSA) present, as was customary, to address the ongoing concerns about the Department’s financial management. He noted that recurring issues with the Department’s financial administration, as flagged by the AGSA, remained unresolved, which he found concerning, and stressed the importance of involving the AGSA in the legislative process so that they could continue to monitor progress and provide accountability.

His first question focused on the financial administration sub-programs and the budget cuts it received. Given their importance in addressing budget issues, he inquired why the sub-programmes had been cut. He also asked what steps had been taken to improve internal budgeting processes, particularly in light of the outsourcing of certain functions.

His second question related to the delivery of houses for military veterans. He suggested that both the Department and the DHS should meet to discuss the ongoing problems and improve coordination between the two Departments. He emphasised the need for effective collaboration to meet housing targets for veterans.

He also raised concerns about reallocating funds, referencing the R36 million earmarked for pension pay-outs that was ultimately returned. He requested clarification on these reallocations and assurances that housing, in particular, would not be negatively impacted by such decisions.

Lastly, he expressed dissatisfaction with the prolonged suspensions of senior officials, particularly the six-month suspensions mentioned. He questioned the process behind these suspensions and sought clarity on when they would be concluded. He noted that there was a recurring pattern where challenges were acknowledged but not sufficiently addressed, and he emphasised the need for concrete actions and follow-through on commitments. He stressed that the Committee needed to ensure that these undertakings led to real solutions, making the engagement meaningful and productive.

The Chairperson responded by emphasising the importance of accountability when executives appeared before the Committee. She said the Committee must ensure that those who make commitments take them seriously, highlighting the need to hold officials to their word. She suggested that the NCOP rules should be read to executives, so they understood the gravity of their statements and the Committee's commitment to follow through on the issues raised.

The Chairperson also reflected on the historical perception that the NCOP was not taken seriously, particularly in advocating for provincial interests. However, she underscored that the Committee aimed to change that perception in this seventh administration. She made it clear that the Committee should not be viewed as a shadow of the National Assembly (NA), but rather as a body that expected serious commitment and accountability. She urged the Deputy Minister to convey this message to their colleagues, stressing that any commitments made in future meetings would be closely monitored, with the Committee following up to ensure they were honoured.

Mr O Mokae (DA, Northern Cape) began by thanking the DMV team for the information and presentation. He raised several questions and sought clarity on various issues discussed.

Firstly, he addressed the issue of office accommodation, referring to the struggles with finding alternative accommodation since 2016, and the involvement of the DPWI. He suggested that DPWI should be included in future discussions, as it played a key role in managing facilities and buildings for government departments. He specifically asked about the lease for the current property, questioning its cost and location, as well as whether it was too small or too expensive to accommodate the entire DMV staff. He then inquired about the timeline for resolving the accommodation issue and establishing a permanent headquarters for the Department.

Next, he raised a concern about vacancies within the Department, specifically asking when the vacant positions, including the provincial coordinators, would be filled. He pointed out that the vacancy list mentioned positions for provincial coordinators, including those for Northern Cape, Eastern Cape, and Western Cape. He wanted to confirm whether the three officials already working in these provinces were included in the vacancy count or if the positions were still open. He also sought clarification on how the DMV was addressing the vacancies, particularly the role of public administration in facilitating the process.

He also asked about the office in Kimberley, expressing curiosity about how effectively it was operating and how veterans in the area were being served. He inquired about the access to business value facilitation, noting that there was zero support for veterans in the Northern Cape and requesting clarification on what assistance, if any, was being provided to veterans in that region.

Regarding health benefits, he sought confirmation on whether military veterans had access to healthcare services through the South African Military Health Services (SAMHS). He asked whether veterans could use military healthcare facilities, particularly those located at military bases, and wanted to ensure he understood correctly that veterans could access these services.

He then touched on the issue of the Department’s database, implying that there might be concerns or confusion surrounding it, and requested clarification to ensure he had the right understanding of how the data was being managed. He continued by sharing some statistics on the number of military veterans, stating that there were approximately 86 000 veterans, of which around 67 000 are still alive, and 19 000 have passed away. He clarified that these numbers did not include dependents.

He asked whether the Department had observed a decrease in the number of veterans over time and requested an explanation of the annual expenditures related to military veterans, including the number of applications processed. He suggested that the Department should track an average number of veterans annually to better understand the movement of dependents and the services needed for them.

He then shifted to the topic of pensions, asking for clarification regarding the relationship between the military grant offered by the SASSA and the pension provided by the DMV. He mentioned hearing about a military grant from SASSA and wanted to know how it correlated with the pension offered by the DMV. He asked for further clarification on this, especially concerning the amount of money involved in both the SASSA military grant and the DMV pension. Additionally, he inquired about the financial implications for government and the pension fund in relation to these pay-outs.

Ms O Medupe (ANC, North West) expressed her concerns about the high vacancy rate within the Department, a point also raised by other Members. She highlighted that the delays in filling vacancies, particularly in high-level management positions, were exacerbated by bureaucratic red tape, particularly the lengthy processes involved with the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA). She suggested that the Committee take action before going on recess, proposing that a letter be written to the DPSA on behalf of the Department to request clarification on the issues causing delays in filling vacancies. This would help address the backlog and ensure that the Department could begin advertising and appointing staff, especially to critical positions. She emphasised that prolonged delays could lead to conflicts of interest, particularly in supply chain matters.

She also addressed concerns regarding housing delivery for military veterans, pointing out that housing allocations seemed to be concentrated in specific areas, creating unnecessary tensions among veterans in other regions. She proposed that departments share detailed statistics on housing service delivery for each province, including where allocations had been made. She noted that in her own province, the North West, housing was concentrated in one area, which led to dissatisfaction among veterans. She requested that the Department provide breakdowns of housing service delivery across provinces so that when the Committee engaged with provincial governments, they would have a clear understanding of the distribution and progress of housing projects. This transparency, she argued, would allow the Committee to better represent the concerns of their communities.

She expressed concern over the Department's decision to outsource its internal audit function. She requested further explanation on the procedures followed in outsourcing this function, including the terms of reference for the outsourcing agreement and the total amount spent on these services to date. She referenced a previous instance, possibly from the previous financial year, where irregular payments were identified, and noted that the Department’s current audit practices might be linked to similar issues. She stressed the importance of understanding whether this outsourcing had been properly managed and whether any corrective actions had been taken to address past irregularities.

Additionally, she raised concerns about the potential lack of transparency regarding the business opportunities available to military veterans. She proposed that the Committee receive a detailed report on the kinds of business ventures veterans are involved in, to ensure proper oversight and support for their economic activities.

She also reiterated the suggestion to engage with the DPSA and the State Information Technology Agency (SITA), similar to her previous recommendation. She emphasised the need to address these issues before the Committee’s recess so that there was a clearer understanding of the situation and a better approach to resolving these challenges, particularly as the end of the financial year approached.

Mr Noe expressed dissatisfaction with the presentation, criticising the focus on challenges without offering a clear understanding of the Department's activities or successes. He stated that the Department should have provided a broader view of its efforts and how it had spent its allocated budget, rather than just emphasising its failures. He felt that the presentation gave the impression that the Department was struggling to find its way and lacked the necessary capacity to fulfil its mandate, particularly in key areas like housing.

He argued that the Department was essentially set up without the resources or authority to deliver on its goals. For example, while the Department had a mandate to deliver housing to military veterans, it lacked the capacity to build houses on its own and had to rely on the DHS, which controlled the necessary resources. He suggested that the Department’s structure and mandate might need to be revisited, as its current form, without sufficient resources or the ability to independently execute its responsibilities, seemed unsustainable.

He also expressed concern about the high vacancy rates within the Department, noting that the presentation did not provide specific details on which vacancies could not be filled or why, beyond general statements of incapacity. He argued that the Department needed to be more transparent about which positions were critical to its functioning and why they remained vacant.

He raised questions about a task team that had been established to address the Department's challenges but expressed frustration that the Committee had not been informed about the team's objectives or achievements. He also questioned the role and effectiveness of the Advisory Board that had been set up to advise the Minister, asking whether the Advisory Board was involved in addressing the ongoing challenges within the Department.

Further, he criticised the Department for identifying a policy gap regarding pensions during the sixth administration, but the issue is still struggling to be resolved today. He asked for a timeline and clearer information on the progress of addressing the pension policy problem.

Lastly, he addressed the lack of strategic leadership, particularly in terms of audits, and the Department’s poor financial performance. He highlighted the fact that the DMV had returned R260 million in unspent funds, which he saw as a clear sign of mismanagement. He called for a thorough re-assessment of the Department’s goals and performance to ensure that it could effectively serve military veterans.

Adv I Nonkonyana (ANC, Eastern Cape) agreed with the Chairperson's opening remarks and appreciated the critical issues raised by colleagues. As a culturally aware person, he acknowledged the challenges in the Department, emphasising that these challenges would persist until the spirit of the fallen heroes and heroines was fully honoured and respected. He compared this to traditional practices, noting that when soldiers were sent to war, they were empowered both spiritually and traditionally. After the war, there were rituals performed to honour them. He lamented that this cultural aspect had not been sufficiently addressed for military veterans in South Africa, especially considering the sacrifices made by those who fought for the country.

He appreciated the Department’s efforts to assist veterans but emphasised the importance of incorporating cultural and spiritual elements into the support and recognition of military veterans. He reflected on his own experiences as the former Chair of the House of Traditional Leaders in the Eastern Cape, where people had come forward with specific cultural needs regarding military veterans. He also referenced personal experiences, particularly the issue that had directly affected his own king, highlighting how the system had failed in some respects.

While acknowledging government's efforts and the Department's initiatives, he stressed that more needed to be done, particularly in involving the true leaders of the liberation movements like MK and the APLA. He urged the Department to engage these leaders in decision-making and action, ensuring that the contributions and sacrifices of all veterans were appropriately recognised and addressed in the Department’s programs.

He expressed his appreciation for the Acting Director-General, acknowledging her involvement in the Department’s work and noting that their presence was crucial because the issues at hand could not be addressed without the people who were directly impacted. He emphasised the importance of involving the children of those who fought for the country in the process, suggesting that their involvement could bring valuable support and insight into the work of the Department.

He then inquired about the status of the former Director-General, asking whether the Director-General had retired, and requested clarification on the process surrounding the appointment of the Acting Director-General. He sought further details on how the Department was managing this leadership transition.

He also addressed the AGSA’s report, noting that while the Department had shared limited information, the report itself revealed a lot about the Department’s performance and challenges. He encouraged the Committee to pay attention to these findings and for the Department to address the issues highlighted, so that future improvements could be made. He assured the Department that the Committee would support them in addressing these matters effectively.

He also mentioned the ongoing struggles of military veterans, particularly in the provinces, and emphasised that many veterans’ children were still suffering, with some veterans’ names being forgotten or neglected. He highlighted the emotional and serious nature of these issues, stressing that veterans' contributions had to be recognised and their families supported. He expressed his commitment to working with the Department to address these challenges, asserting that the stability of the country could not be achieved until the issues surrounding military veterans were adequately addressed.

The Chairperson addressed the Committee, confirming that although the AGSA had been invited to the meeting, they were unable to attend due to prior commitments. As a result, the Committee had requested the AGSA’s presentation in advance so that Members could be adequately prepared for robust engagement. She praised Mr Billy for his thorough analysis of the AGSA's findings. She emphasised that the Department had to submit a detailed programme of action in response to the AGSA’s recommendations. She reminded the Department that they had 14 working days to submit their response, ensuring that a dedicated team would provide a comprehensive answer, rather than a partial one.

The Chairperson further stated that any recurring issues highlighted by the AGSA should be addressed clearly, with explanations provided for why they continued to be unresolved. This would help the Committee understand the required interventions and allow for a more focused approach to resolving the problems.

She also highlighted the need for uniformity across all departments, particularly in terms of office accommodation. She pointed out the variation in the design and management of offices in different municipalities, specifically in Gauteng. She emphasised the importance of learning from the best practices of those municipalities already implementing successful models. She suggested that the Department should not treat the issue of veterans’ benefits as a "special project" but rather as a critical mandate that required a systematic, long-term approach to honour the sacrifices of veterans.

She stressed the importance of data management, particularly in verifying and consolidating information on military veterans. She advocated for the digitalisation of data and supported the inclusion of a detailed data strategy in the Department’s 2024/25 program. This would help streamline processes and ensure better service delivery to veterans.

The Chairperson also touched on the broader issue of employment within government. She acknowledged the challenges of addressing unemployment, particularly among graduates. She emphasised that the Committee would advocate for the hiring of unemployed graduates, even on a temporary basis, to help build a more capable and operational institution. She believed this would contribute to addressing the triple challenges of unemployment, poverty, and inequality.

The Chairperson addressed the Department’s internal challenges, particularly the issue of proper record-keeping. She pointed out that there was a lack of proper documentation within the Department, which could be improved by utilising qualified interns in administration. These interns could assist in resolving many of the Department’s issues without the need to look abroad for solutions. She emphasised that there were local benchmarks that could be applied to address the Department's challenges effectively.

She also raised concerns about the Department’s policies, specifically in relation to job and economic opportunities. The Chairperson asked whether the Department had a policy that directly addressed these issues, particularly the concept of set-asides. She questioned how the Department could support such initiatives without a clear policy in place. Additionally, she advocated for a specific quota for male veterans, similar to the policies already in place for youth, disabled individuals, and women. She suggested that a formal policy would ensure that veterans' needs were met, with enforceable quotas to guarantee adherence.

Regarding the Gauteng Premier’s intervention, she asked why the presentation did not mention this initiative, which involved including veterans in housing and economic opportunities. She emphasised the importance of highlighting these local interventions to show that progress was being made in certain areas.

The Chairperson also brought up a point from previous engagements with the Department of Higher Education and Training, where it was revealed that the National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) had a special project for military veterans. She pointed out that NSFAS had been providing financial assistance to veterans from 2020 to 2024, and asked why this was not included in the Department’s report. She requested clarification on where this information could be found in the Department's documentation.

She also made a pointed remark about the Department's failure to plan effectively, referencing the saying, “If you fail to plan, you plan to fail”. She urged the Department’s leadership to address the ongoing issues, particularly the six-month suspensions of officials, and to stop postponing necessary actions like “spring cleaning.” She noted that it was concerning to have individuals receiving payment while suspended, especially when many veterans were still facing significant challenges, such as poverty.

The Chairperson emphasised the need for the Department to address the AGSA’s findings on inadequate consequence management. She requested that the Department provide a detailed explanation within 14 days, unpacking why the management of consequences had been insufficient. She acknowledged that Members had thoroughly reviewed the presentation, offered recommendations, and urged the Department to consider these suggestions moving forward.

She also pointed out the importance of improving coordination and collaboration with other departments, specifically mentioning the DPWI, DHS, and SITA. As the Committee prepared for the next year, the Chairperson emphasised that the Department needed to focus on strengthening its relationships with these entities. She stressed that it was the responsibility of the officials to work on this, but the Committee would assist in mending any disunity through effective engagement.

The Chairperson further questioned why certain issues, such as transport and social services, were not being addressed through existing departmental collaborations. She expressed concern that some problems might be intentionally created to conceal deeper issues like misused irregularities or unspent funds. She also raised the point that there should be better engagement with the Department of Transport and other relevant partners to resolve issues related to transportation, particularly for veterans who were terminally ill and needed assistance travelling to appointments.

Lastly, she highlighted a gap in the Department’s performance bonus system. She noted that performance bonuses for senior officials should be tied to their efforts in advancing the inclusion of vulnerable groups such as youth, women, and persons with disabilities. However, she observed that such accountability was not being enforced, creating a disconnect between policy and practice. She emphasised that, while the Committee was prepared to offer advice, the Department needed to act on specific issues in a more direct and coordinated way to ensure real progress.

In conclusion, the Chairperson encouraged the Department to use this meeting as an opportunity to speak openly about the challenges they faced, especially regarding issues that required urgent action at the provincial level. She reminded the Department that the Committee would hold them accountable and push for necessary actions, particularly around the concerns raised by Members.

Responses

Ms Mafu began by addressing the questions raised during the meeting, starting with the issue of the Director-General. She explained that the previous Director-General was suspended and subsequently resigned from the public service, leaving a vacancy. The DPSA had initially advised the Department not to appoint a new Director-General due to discussions about consolidating certain government departments in the face of budgetary constraints. The DMV was one of the departments under consideration for consolidation with the DoD.

However, with the current austerity measures in place, the Department was required to get concurrence from both the Minister of Public Service and Administration, and National Treasury before proceeding with any appointments. She said the Department had already secured concurrence from National Treasury and hoped that the critical vacancies would be advertised by November. She emphasised that the Department currently faced significant risks due to the concentration of responsibility in a single person, as only three Deputy Directors-General had been appointed instead of the full complement of three Deputy Director Generals and a Director General. The absence of key positions such as legal services and human resources leadership was highlighted as a critical concern.

Regarding the internal audit function, Ms Mafu acknowledged the Department's recognition of the issues with the internal audit structure, specifically the inadequacy of the current setup. The Department's organogram, approved in 2010, had not been reviewed, leading to a sub-optimal structure for internal audit and risk management. She mentioned that an audit committee had raised concerns about the performance of the Deputy Director in charge of internal audit, stating that he had not been assessed for three years due to challenges within the Department. Consequently, the Department decided to deploy him elsewhere and outsource the internal audit function.

She elaborated on the outsourcing process, explaining that the Department had advertised for service providers and appointed one for a six-month period. However, the service provider did not complete the agreed-upon work within the specified timeframe. As a result, the Department extended the contract within the original budget to allow the service provider to finalise the necessary tasks. Moving forward, she explained that the Department planned to outsource the internal audit function for 36 months while simultaneously building internal capacity. The goal was to reduce dependency on consultants, which could be expensive and often lacked a deep understanding of the Department's specific needs. The Department intended to ensure a transfer of skills as internal processes were strengthened.

She acknowledged the concerns raised regarding the six-month suspension of senior managers, explaining that the delays in consequence management were not due to departmental inefficiency, but rather the legal processes that had to be followed. She described two specific cases where senior managers, a Director in information and communications technology (ICT) and a Director in Internal Audit, were suspended and subsequently took legal action against the Department. Despite the Department winning the case in the Labour Court, the officials continued to challenge the process, including filing claims at the Bargaining Council. She explained that while these tactics delayed the process, the Department had to comply with legal requirements, even if it took longer than expected.

She emphasised that these legal challenges were not a sign of departmental negligence but were necessary to protect the Department from potential legal risks. She expressed the Department’s commitment to ensuring consequence management, but also pointed out that due to the nature of the cases, the Department could not bring the suspended individuals back into the workplace until the matter was fully resolved. She also addressed the issue of paying suspended employees, stressing that it was not ideal, but the Department could not legally transfer them to other departments.

On the issue of the Department’s digitalisation, she acknowledged that the lack of proper record-keeping and digital systems were significant challenges. She pointed out that while the Committee had been supportive in facilitating collaboration with other departments, SITA, in particular, had been failing all government departments due to its outsourcing practices and lack of capacity. Despite its inefficiencies, she explained that the DMV was compelled to work through SITA.

Ms Mafu also responded to the perception that veterans from the statutory forces, for example, former SANDF members, had an easier time getting into the Department’s database compared to veterans of the liberation struggle. She explained that statutory force veterans had official records of service, making their verification easier. However, for liberation struggle veterans, the verification process was more complicated, as there had been instances where individuals falsely claimed to be veterans. She shared an example of a woman who claimed to be a military veteran, despite lacking any training or qualifications, highlighting the challenge of distinguishing legitimate veterans from those falsely claiming status.

To address this issue, she suggested that there may need to be an amnesty for individuals who were wrongly included in the database, allowing them to disclose their status without penalties, while simultaneously fast-tracking the verification of those who were genuinely deserving. She also mentioned the difficulty of verifying military veterans, noting that while a retired general led the verification process, there were still many challenges in reaching a consensus on who should be included. Despite these challenges, the Department was working to address them and hoped to complete the verification of around 4 000 veterans.

She acknowledged the frustration of veterans who felt entitled to benefits, particularly in education. She explained that while the Department was supposed to target destitute veterans for education support, many veterans pushed back, feeling entitled to the support regardless of their financial situation. She shared an example of a veteran who had requested educational benefits for her eight children, despite the fact that they did not qualify. She emphasised the stress this caused for Department officials, who were constantly faced with resistance and entitlement claims, but assured the Committee that the Department was doing its best to manage the situation.

Ms Mafu addressed several issues related to the Department's operations and challenges, beginning with the Minister's concerns about the Department's conflict with national laws regarding the funding of private schools for military veterans' children. She explained that it was government policy to support military veterans’ dependents attending public schools. However, due to lower grades among military veterans' children, public schools may not admit them, whereas private schools are willing to take them in exchange for payment. The Department had struggled with this issue, as private schools profited from admitting these students, and there had been pushback from veterans on this policy. She stressed that this was a significant challenge and would likely provoke criticism, but it was a necessary stance for the Department to take.

She then explained the pension issue, noting that some military veterans, particularly those who had fought in Angola, received a pension from the Department of Social Development. This pension was not directly managed by the DMV, but rather through GPAA, which checked whether veterans were already receiving old age or disability pensions. GPAA then topped up the amount to ensure veterans received the full R5 400.00 pension. She explained that this pension had its origins in a special dispensation provided by the government during the Angola war to compensate veterans who had returned severely injured. However, there were difficulties in dealing with past laws and regulations, which the Department struggled to address effectively.

On the issue of housing, she noted that military veterans who married foreign nationals and brought them back to South Africa faced complications. Housing benefits were typically only available to principal members of the military veterans' community. In cases where the foreign spouse had passed away before receiving housing benefits, the Department was unable to provide housing to those widows, as they were not considered principal members. Similarly, orphans whose parents were military veterans were excluded from housing benefits, despite their need. The Department had proposed changes to this policy in the past, but these proposals were rejected. Despite these challenges, she expressed hope that the issue might be revisited in the future.

Regarding the database of military veterans, she explained the complexities involved with veterans from other countries, such as Angola and Zimbabwe, who fought alongside South African forces. These individuals were in the Department’s database because they were granted South African citizenship during the apartheid era, and they now claimed the same benefits as South African veterans. This created a significant challenge, as these veterans, while not South African, continued to demand benefits, which complicated the Department’s ability to manage resources effectively.

Ms Mafu also discussed the Department's provincial offices, agreeing with the Committee on the need for local offices to ensure effective service delivery. While there were eight provincial offices, the Department had not advertised vacancies in these offices yet, as the capacity and infrastructure were still being built up. She explained that these offices needed to be properly staffed and capacitated to ensure efficient service delivery. Currently, the offices only have a Deputy Director, Assistant Director, and Administrator, which is insufficient. She emphasised that the Department’s goal was to build a stronger structure in these offices before advertising the vacancies, to ensure better service for military veterans.

She addressed concerns related to the verification of military veterans and the inclusion of individuals in the Department's database. She assured the Committee that she would follow up on the issue of "Rasta" and other similar cases. She explained that the Department conducted assessments through social workers, who verified claims and, when necessary, gathered affidavits to include individuals in the database. She also addressed the issue of the Luthuli detachment, noting that the majority of those individuals were already in the Department’s database, and she would continue to follow up on any missing cases.

She then discussed the handling of the remains of military veterans, acknowledging that the manner in which the remains were received from Zambia and Zimbabwe was not ideal. She emphasised that these remains should have been treated with dignity and military honours, but the process of exhumation and repatriation fell under the DoD and not the DMV. Due to budgetary constraints, the DMV had limited influence over these matters, but they did provide support where possible. She mentioned that, in the case of Mr Madikizela, a military veteran from the Eastern Cape, a special provincial funeral was held to honour him, though it did not include full military honours. She suggested that the Committee might assist in elevating the status of military veterans' funerals to better honour their contributions.

She also responded to the issue of the alleged R36 million being used for pensions, which she clarified was based on an unverified news article. She explained that such a claim was not possible, and that the figure likely stemmed from misinformation. She further disclosed that, in 2021/22, four senior managers, including herself, the Chief Financial Officer, and two Chief Directors, had been suspended for nearly two years. Despite the length of the suspensions, the disciplinary processes were delayed, with no charges read out to the Chief Financial Officer for almost two years. She recounted how one Chief Director's case was complicated by a witness who failed to testify. She noted that former Minister of Defence and Military Veterans, Ms Thandi Modise, had instructed that they return to their positions in March 2023, which allowed them to resume their duties.

On the issue of departmental spending, Ms Mafu clarified that the Department had not purchased any furniture for senior officials. She responded to the claim about the R36 million allegedly used to buy furniture, stating that the Department had not bought any furniture and would not do so until they had moved to a proper office. She explained the current situation with the Department’s offices, which were in inadequate buildings that had insufficient facilities, such as only five toilets for over 50 officials. Due to the dependency on the DPWI for securing new office space, the Department has been unable to move since 2018. However, she mentioned that there was hope for a new office space, with a potential decision expected soon.

Ms Mafu concluded by assuring the Committee that any unanswered questions would be addressed in writing, with supporting documentation, to ensure transparency and accuracy. She acknowledged that some of the information discussed required further verification and expressed appreciation for the Committee's assistance managing time effectively during the meeting.

The Chairperson acknowledged the depth and importance of the information provided by Ms Mafu, recognising that it was both insightful and valuable in addressing various issues. She emphasised the need for written submissions on some of the matters discussed, particularly regarding the Department’s handling of issues like the suspended officials and the adequacy of consequence management. She requested that the Department provide detailed written information, including specifics on the situation involving the Chief Financial Officer and the other senior officials, to help clarify the process and provide transparency. The Chairperson noted that such details would be important not only for the Committee's understanding but also for public explanations in interviews or other forums where these issues might be raised.

Further, she reiterated the request for detailed information on the inadequacies of consequence management, emphasising the importance of thoroughly understanding the Department’s efforts and challenges in this area. She then invited the Deputy Minister to offer his full remarks to conclude the meeting, ensuring that all key points were addressed before closing.

Deputy Minister’s concluding remarks

Deputy Minister Hlophe began by agreeing with the Chairperson’s approach of receiving direct, specific information from the Department to ensure clarity and transparency. He acknowledged that there was often scepticism when the Department spoke on these matters, as it could be seen as hearsay or influenced by officials. He appreciated the opportunity to clarify the situation first-hand, emphasising that this approach would give the Committee a more accurate insight into what was truly happening within the department.

He expressed agreement with the views shared by Members, stating that he understood the frustrations surrounding the ongoing challenges the Department faced. He highlighted that such frustrations could sometimes lead to a sense of disillusionment, where people began to question the legitimacy of the Department’s efforts, especially when issues were repeatedly presented in the media. He pointed out that while trying to follow proper laws and regulations, the Department was often hindered by bureaucratic processes and legal frameworks that frustrated progress.

On the issue of exhuming and repatriating remains, the Deputy Minister stressed that the Department’s work was not finished, as remains from prominent fighters were still in places like Zambia and Zimbabwe. He mentioned that the Department was now preparing to address challenges in Rwanda as well. He pointed out the complexities and cultural sensitivities involved, particularly when dealing with other countries. For example, in Zambia, there were instances where officials from different Departments had differing views on who should take the lead in ceremonies or discussions. He shared an anecdote where the Zambian Minister of Defence insisted that the Deputy Minister of Defence, not officials from other departments, should take the lead during official events involving military veterans' remains.

Deputy Minister Hlophe concluded by noting that while many of the challenges faced by the Department, such as the provision of housing for veterans, required collaboration with other departments, the DMV had to continue to uphold its principles. He acknowledged that some aspects of the work were beyond their control, but they remained committed to working with other relevant authorities to ensure the proper treatment of military veterans, their remains, and their families. He reiterated the importance of working together to address these complex issues, even when external factors complicate progress.

Chairperson’s concluding remarks

The Chairperson thanked the Deputy Minister and colleagues for their engagement in discussing how to address the challenges faced by military veterans. She emphasised the Committee's agreement on the need for decentralisation of services, but with the caveat that it had to be professionalised, uniformed, and well-structured. She also stressed the importance of acting on actionable items without delay, especially issues that were within the Department's control.

She pointed out the need for better coordination with SITA, urging the Department to engage with them before the Committee intervened, to avoid unnecessary interference. She mentioned that the Committee wanted to ensure proper integration and cooperation between departments, especially on issues like transportation and housing, which involved multiple stakeholders. She also called for the Department to submit more detailed reports on their dealings with the DPWI, highlighting any alternative mechanisms they had tried to resolve issues. This would help the Committee advocate on their behalf and support them in addressing transportation and job creation challenges.

Further, she reiterated the need for an improvement in expenditure, specifically in the distribution of benefits and striving for a clean audit. She emphasised that the Committee did not accept non-compliance as normal and asked the Department to address issues like supply chain irregularities, overspending, and underspending. She urged the Department to focus on setting realistic targets, especially for long-term goals, and to make sure these targets are smart and achievable.

She also discussed the importance of relocating military veterans and providing dignified housing in heritage sites. She pointed out the critical issue of filling vacancies and requested an update on the Department's engagement with the DPSA, including a clear plan for addressing vacancies.

The Chairperson reminded the Department to be specific when identifying the departments that needed assistance and urged them to give updates on any responses received from external parties, particularly from government entities that might not fully understand military veterans' issues. She referenced past efforts where the Committee worked with the presidency on judiciary remuneration and advocated for a structured process for dealing with similar issues in the future.

Finally, she requested a detailed report on the status of ongoing disciplinary processes, specifically criminal allegations, and asked for gender demographics to be included in the report to ensure transparency and support for transformation within the Department. She concluded by thanking everyone for their commitment to keeping the meeting on track and ensuring that time was used effectively.

The meeting was adjourned.