Division Managers on their portfolio’s scope, mandate, budget and challenges

Meeting report

Chairperson Ndhlovu welcomed everyone present, including the Speaker of the National Assembly. We are now in day two of our session. She called for apologies. Those who were not here yesterday, please ensure that when you do the presentation or speak, you just introduce yourselves. So that's how we are going to handle our meeting. Yesterday, we received the presentation from the Secretary to Parliament (STP), and we didn't deal with the question and answer. Today we are going to receive the presentation from the division managers. Then we'll do the question and answer at the end of the presentations.

The agenda for the day was adopted.

Division: Strategic Management and Governance

Ms Brenda Mashika, Division Manager: Strategic Management and Governance, gave Members an overview of the division. In 2009, Parliament passed the Financial Management of Parliament and Provincial Legislatures Act (FMPPLA). The Act regulates strategic management in Parliament, including strategic planning, operational planning and budgeting, performance management, reporting, and auditing.

SMG’s outputs are aligned to the requirements of the FMPPLA to provide professional support to the Accounting Officer of Parliament (Secretary to Parliament) to produce and submit the following documents:

• a 5-year strategic plan (Sections 13, 14 & 17)
• a 3-year annual performance plan (Sections 13, 15 & 17)
• quarterly performance reports (Sections 52 & 54)
• a mid-year performance assessment (Sections 53 & 54)
• the annual report (Sections 55, 59 & 60)

The Strategic Management and Governance Division offers advice and support for the strategic management of Parliament, by providing:

• strategic planning and strategic advisory services to enhance decision-making,
• facilitation of strategic and governance processes,
• publication of governance documents
• monitoring and evaluation of strategy implementation
• Institutional policy development
• business intelligence and analytical services (capability to be built)

See attached for full presentation

Division: Institutional Support Services

Adv Modibedi Phindela, Secretary to the NCOP and Caretaker Manager of the ISSD, took Members through an overview of the division. The ISSD ensures the provision of facilities to Members and employees:

• offices
• transport
• catering
• cleaning services
• health and safety service
• artwork service

See attached for full presentation

Division: Human Capital Division

Mr Duke Mgaga, Chief People Officer, gave the members an overview of the division.

The Human Capital Division develops and drives the Human Capital Strategy and manages Parliament's overall remuneration and benefits, employee wellness, employee relations, talent and development, organisational effectiveness, and transformation initiatives.

Challenges

• Outdated HR processes, tools, policies
• Digital Transformation & future Readiness (Digital Upskilling)
• Lack of structured succession planning
• Workforce Planning
• Resolve Legacy topics

See attached for full presentation

Division: Member Support Services

Ms Linda Harper, Acting Division Manager: Member Support Services, gave Members an overview of the division. MSS exists to create a responsive support system that enhances Members' ability to fulfil their constitutional mandate effectively. The division is dedicated to empowering members by providing comprehensive support services and facilities that align with the Members' Facilities Handbook. This ensures that Members have the necessary tools and resources to execute their responsibilities effectively.

MSSD is committed to delivering:

• Efficient air travel arrangements and travel reimbursements
• Essential tools of trade, such as mobile phones, laptops, and tablets
• Relocation support for seamless transitions
• Educational bursaries and capacity building to support ongoing development
• Tailored disability support to ensure inclusivity
• Convenient airport parking facilities
• Efficient human resource administration

MSSD focuses on creating a supportive environment that empowers Members to execute their responsibilities

The Members’ Support Forum in the governance structures of Parliament formally facilitates the engagement with Members.

The Members’ Support Forum represents Members' needs. It is a consultative body that provides a platform for processing matters related to Members’ support and facilities, facilitates Members’ input, and makes recommendations to the Executive Authority.

Communication with Members is critical to ensuring the information is available to better respond to needs. The current focus is improving communication channels and solutions to elicit input and gain feedback that ultimately informs policy decisions and facilities.

The provisional budget allocation for Members Facilities for 2025/26 is R185m, excluding the Parmed contribution for former members of R85m. The provisional funding is 92% of the budget request. MSS is working with the MSF to consider areas for cost containment and the most effective use of the allocated budget.

See attached for full presentation

Division: Information Communication Technology

Mr Jurgens Pieterse, standing in for the acting CIO, gave Members an overview of the division. The presentation addressed the transformational objectives of the Annual Performance Plan and ICT operations and services. The objective of the ICT Division is to improve the provision, usage, and management of ICT solutions and ICT infrastructure to meet the information needs of Members and staff.

ICT is responsible for broadcasting (Camera Operations, Broadcast Infrastructure, video feeds to broadcasters and Social Media platforms, Public Participation/Oversight events support, Content storage/Archive) and audio/video support (Chamber Technical AV support, committee rooms technical AV support, Hybrid meeting setup, External events audio and broadcast technical support, Zoom and Hybrid technical support, MATV/ Kiosks Support).

ICT also deals with ICT systems and application support:

• Systems development
• ICT support and maintenance
• Systems analysis
• Systems Integration
• Database support
• ICT training
• Customer support services

ICT also deals with customer support services:

• Laptop support
• Mobile Device Support (iPad/Tablet, Cell phones)
• Printing
• Systems support (Password changes
• Operating system (Mac and Windows)
• Microsoft Office
• Anti-Virus, Email)
• ICT Training the Members of Parliament and Administrative Support Staff

The presentation looked at the OCT training provided to Members.

In the Seventh Parliament, Members are provided with ICT equipment, voice and data contracts through the Parliament corporate account. Parliament ICT sets up the equipment for the Members of Parliament (a cell phone, tablet and a laptop computer)

• Laptop (5GB TopUp Data, Wi-Fi pocket modem and laptop bag)
• Cell phone – Unlimited Voice package with 100GB data
• Tablet with 5GB TopUp Data

ICT defined the following challenges:

• Outdated and obsolete ICT infrastructure
• Limited support for public participation events
• Reduced/deferred licensing
• Defer cyber security tools roll out
• Longer development lifecycles
• Limited digital strategy implementation

See attached for full presentation

Discussion

Chairperson Ndhlovu: Thanks very much to the division managers for the briefing. I think we agree that we will do a question-and-answer session for the STP presentation [from yesterday’s meeting] and the division managers.

Chairperson Lekganyane: Thank you so much. Greetings to the Speaker and all Members present in this meeting. I must also extend greetings to those from the administration led by the Secretary of Parliament, and indicate that this meeting is a continuation of the meeting that started yesterday.

Mr R Badenhorst (DA, Western Cape): Good evening. Thank you very much for the opportunity to engage. A lot of information has been given to us in a very short space of time. So I'll try my best to get through questions. I want to ask, what is the difference between the administration strategy used to hold the accounting officer accountable and the strategy for Parliament as the two Houses, as defined in the FMPPLA? I had this conversation with Adv Phindela before, and it looks like the administration is preparing a strategy for Parliament as a political house. So that's where my question comes from.

Regarding the ISSD, it's my understanding, and maybe I'm wrong, that Parliament leases land for Parliament’s building. So the holder of that land must then be the public and the buildings must be Public Works. So can you build on that land? Surely, you have to get permission from the land owner. Has anybody asked permission to build on Parliament's land through a Government Gazette from the Minister? It's just a question.

Also, I've noticed that the ISSD's pillars, especially the last one, are related to managing infrastructure and space development projects. So, why is ISSD not managing the rebuilding of Parliament? It didn't come up that they are actively involved in managing it.

I don't think we saw an organogram yesterday regarding human capital. It might be useful for us to see one. If we see the organogram, the logical question would be, who approves that organogram, and are there any positions that haven't been approved? That's where you start. When you look at an organisation as big as Parliament, you would begin with an organogram because that's what most municipalities, functional municipalities, do.

Do you have enough funding for ICT? There's a lot of work ICT still needs to do. I’m stressed that ICT doesn't have enough funding, and maybe we should not be funding other things while ICT is being sacrificed. ICT could help Parliament get a lot done, such as improving public participation.

HR, how many suspensions have there been? And how many acting positions are there? Maybe expand on the human capital issues referred to. I noticed yesterday in the presentation by the STP that there's a low turnover rate in Parliament, a 2% turnover rate, which means employees stay here for a long time. So, if there are 1,250 employees, how many are functionally employed and so actively busy every single day with what they are employed for? Are we recruiting more people for Parliament instead of re-skilling and optimising the integral capacity building of the people we currently have as employees in Parliament? And maybe if we as a committee can get a report on that, that'll be very useful. Thank you.

Ms M Clarke (DA): Thank you Chairperson. I'm not going to repeat the questions my colleague has already covered. Regarding the SMG's work on institutional policy development, can we just have some timeframes for that policy that talks to the APPs and the operational plans? But it would be very good to have a report here to align the budgets that we get to APPs and operational plans, because we so often don't meet targets and are not sure what the budget for that line item is so it's very important to analyse a report that has the numbers next to what is expected in terms of work.

Then, in terms of the ISSD, I’m interested to see a report on catering, in terms of line items, for example, what we pay for soft drinks, what we pay for water, etc. It would be very interesting to see what that budget would accumulate to if there's a report like that so that we can analyse.

In terms of the human capital division, it would be good to see the organogram and the budgets that align with it.

And then in terms of members’ support, I would like to raise the issue of getting claims paid, etc. But we do find that there are many times that claims are sent back, and they say they can't read the supporting document when it's clear as mud, which you can see. So it's just those small things I think we need to look at because we have members in our caucus who complain a lot about that, and they haven't been reimbursed for three or four weeks. And we do welcome the walk-in provided for us. I think that would make a big difference if the staff and all the support are there, so that we can speak to each one of those people if we have any problems.

Then, regarding ICT, I'm unsure if you can provide this information to me or whether we will get this from the support meeting on Friday. Still, I'm just interested to know how far the negotiations are in terms of the broadband and Wi-Fi agreements at the parks. We were told that would happen because many of us battle with signal in the park regarding our work. We must wrap up that issue and ensure members can access their computers and get proper signals in the parks. Thank you very much.

Mr D Van Rooyen (MK): Let me start by welcoming the brief presentations that were provided to us. I find it difficult from an oversight point of view, as a Member of this activist Parliament, we're expected to be agents of transformation. So, as much as I appreciate the information being shared with us, I was trying to establish detailed information about each division, and I will tell you what I'm missing from these presentations. I'm missing the point cited by previous speakers, the organisational structure, and employment equity issues because we are here to transform. I’m also missing the AGs for these divisions. The AG’s findings about parliamentary institutions have been very favorable so far. Still, it's important for us as MPs to understand the details of each division in the AG’s opinion. So it's important for us to obtain the management letters the AG has generated about these divisions because that will empower us to do our oversight work properly. But also I'm missing the details…. I'm looking at the presentation, and it's clear that there are a lot of procurement services in this institution. So, as an agent of change, I want to know to what extent that leverage is used to ensure that the previously disadvantaged are properly empowered. So I hope each division's detailed documents show this lies somewhere because much information has been provided here verbally. And that is alarming me. Detailed information can be electronic. I think it will help us to go to those details.

Coming to ISSD, a reference was made to fleet services, which is somehow in-sourced or in-house. Does that mean we are not procuring transport services from outside providers? Of course, if we are doing that, it will be important for us to get those details. But also, quite interestingly, when you refer to your human capital, you didn't mention the staff for our transport services. And I will tell you, Chair. I had a very bad experience after one of these late night meetings. I was transported by someone who didn’t even know where I was going, and this guy was a foreigner. So I then asked myself, am I really in safe hands here? But I didn't make a meal out of it because I thought maybe an opportune time will arrive. Because in your staff complement, you didn't cite the staff complement of the transport. I'm not sure if we have the fleet, but we source privately for the drivers, which will be a very interesting arrangement on the human capital development. I'm not sure what the role of human capital development is in parliamentary villages, because one of his key responsibilities is Members’ wellness. Now, if you look at sports facilities in those villages, they leave a lot to be desired, and some of us, truly speaking, are serious about this programme of fighting old age. You know, we want to exercise, we want to play tennis, we want to swim. And we are in a very stressful environment here. An environment of point of orders is very stressful. So the result is that the swimming pools are not up to scratch. They are not well taken care of. I don't even want to refer to the tennis courts, especially the Pelican ones. The nets are off. The tennis courts are just dilapidated. I'm not sure how regularly you make a turn in our villages, because if you are concerned about wellness, it can’t only be wellness here. It should also be wellness where we stay. So I'm humbly requesting that should it be routine. If it's Public Works' responsibility, you can constructively engage with them on our behalf because we are encountering these problems. Since arriving at Pelican, I've launched this complaint with a caretaker there, and nothing has come out of that process. So it will be good as an institution, from the wellness point of view, to take a keen interest in our living conditions in those villages. There are many facilities. I know that at some stage, many years ago, there was an undertaking that we would have many gyms. We are not asking for your Virgin Active type of gym, but a reasonable effort. Unfortunately, those facilities were secured, but the equipment was not there. I think it's important that this should also be entertained at this meeting.

And lastly, in the same spirit, we have a plethora of service providers in this institution. I think Parmed is an issue now because it's taking a lot of our money. But I'm interested in knowing what they're plowing back as part of their social responsibility plan to us as members and to some of these facilities because it doesn't make sense to me. Why can't these people sponsor [us] if they are really concerned about our health? Why can't they sponsor? For example, why can't he sponsor some of these gyms in villages? It’s not going to take much just to fit the villages with proper gym facilities. I think that will be a better example of their social responsibility. We can't talk of their social responsibility if they can't do anything for us as their client. So I'm just making an example, but please consider partnering with this service provider. Some might be interested in supporting those facilities in our parliamentary villages.

We have a serious problem with interpretation facilities. We are not employing enough interpreters to cover all our South African languages, and there is a serious problem there. I don't know which division is responsible for interpretation.

Is there any official arrangement with any intelligence service provider we must know of as Members Of Parliament, because ICT is the currency of intelligence work. It can be local. It can be international. Are we having any official relationship with intelligence services in South Africa or outside South Africa that we must know of as the committee charged with the responsibility of overseeing your work? Thank you very much.

Ms O Maotwe (EFF): found the presentations very high level introducing the work of the divisions but with no “meat” yet. Maybe the meat will come on Friday because the devil is in the details. So if you are talking about the strategy, we need to see it. What exactly are we talking about? And that's not what we have received today. So I'm just going to engage on a high level as well. So on the ISSD, it is very interesting that Parliament owns the combis. So why do we not own the buses? If we can own the combis, what stops Parliament from owning the buses, and whose buses are you renting, and at what cost to Parliament? Because I think you've got a very nice case study with your taxis, where you can also insource the buses. I’m sure the maintenance strategy can also apply. We're saying this because once you insource, you are bound to save costs and not use somebody else for a service you ordinarily could do yourself. If you look at the transport of members who are stuck in those villages, there will never be a time when you don't need transport for members. So it's something that you can't do without. And if it's something you can't do without, why are you still outsourcing it when you should be sourcing it? You know what is difficult is that some of the functions, actually, most of them, are conducted by Public Works. Public Works does not sit in this meeting, so maybe we need to agree that they must be permanent invitees to this meeting because it will help us a lot. The ISSD presentation indicated a lot of tasks that Public Works performs, and then there is a staff member that [the Minister] has in his office. So maybe there's even duplication of functions there. She spoke about the duplication of functions between Parliament, Public Works, and contractors, Public Works might outsource to a service provider. How do we make sure we just have one person employed? So I think let's agree that Public Works must form part of this meeting, more so that even the budget lies with them, and we don't get to know who and where they account for this budget; they have servicing Parliament.

She was confused about the slide that talks about the number of employees. HR, where do you advertise your positions and vacancies? And obviously I don't want to apply for a vacancy in Parliament, but I'm just asking because we want to know how people get here. Maybe we are just going to get Numsa comrades to come here, but let's get to know where are you advertising so that we can also share that information with our people at home to apply otherwise, we are going to accuse you of not transforming Parliament when the information does not get to our people in rural villages.

You then listed challenges on your slide on the human capital division, but again, there's no meat to eat. What are these challenges? And what are we doing to address those? Otherwise, we'll permanently have challenges that don't go away. Maybe we'll get that information at a later stage.

ICT, you're saying you are not responsible for content, but you are responsible for broadcasting services. Can you explain to us what you mean by that? And there's also this Parliamentary Monitoring Group, PMG – what is their relationship with Parliament? It's a very good platform, by the way, because it details the meetings, questions and everything. When you go there, you get all the necessary information, even about Members and everything. It's a very interesting platform, but who owns it? Is Parliament owning it, or is it a private service provider?

She then asked about broadcasting services and the debate about having a parliamentary channel on the SABC. Our people want to watch Parliament, and if it takes them to subscribe to DSTV to access this channel, it's not for free. It's advertising. It's Parliament advertising its work on behalf of MultiChoice. So let's have that channel on the SABC. But there is also talk of Parliament building its own channel in-house. How far are we with that?

My last question is an overall question: the Speaker yesterday presented the vision, the mission of Parliament, the impact, what we're looking to achieve, etc. So, the strategy of all these departments should be to support the vision and mission presented by the Speaker. I get very worried when it says their mission and vision, and then there's a point that says 2030, the impact is to alleviate poverty, unemployment and inequality. It's well and good, but how does that tally up with the overarching strategy of Parliament, which is what the Speaker has presented, because we can't be working in silos. We need departments that support the overall vision and the mission of Parliament. So we need that synergy across all the departments.

Mr C Dugmore (ANC): as Members of this Joint Standing Committee on the Financial Management of Parliament, the presentations we've received up to now are quite general, but I suppose that as we get into the year and as an oversight committee we begin to look at the detail of the budget, each particular component of the budget, we will be getting more information. And I know that from the programme, other divisions still have to report tomorrow, including communications, knowledge and information management, NA and NCOP, etcetera. That brings me to the one point we can pick up tomorrow, which the previous speaker raised about parliamentary TV, maybe when those colleagues come and report to us tomorrow. Open View seems to be an open platform with many different channels, including SABC, and it's free to air. I wonder if we could just have a sense of that, because I think that issue is very clearly contained in the three priorities that the Speaker outlined, strengthening oversight, enhancing the legislative process and public involvement. Regarding the issue of broadcasting and all other components of public involvement, I think we need to begin to see the amounts of money attached to these particular priorities, as the Speaker outlined, to achieve certain outcomes.

One thing that is of immediate concern, and maybe we could have a response to this, is that, if you look at chapter three, linking to the strategy presentation, it says that within six months after an election of the NA or by another date determined by Parliament, the accounting officer must prepare and present to the Executive Authority a draft strategic plan for Parliament's administration. So that's the issue of another date determined by Parliament. I'm unsure whether Parliament has passed a resolution to deal with this six-month challenge. If another date is to be determined by Parliament, then that probably has to be by way of a resolution. I know we are getting a presentation on the strategy on Friday, but I think we need to ensure that we are aligned to the legislation governing us.

And then, in terms of the annual performance plan, the annual budget, and the submission of these issues, as in chapter three, and the process of consultation that the Executive Authority has with the Minister of Finance, I think it seems to me that with where we are, with the current budget, we know that the budget will only be presented touch wood, Inshallah, God willing, on 12 March. As a committee, we will not have much say – we will just have to deal with Parliament’s budget. If you look at the work of this committee and all these presentations we've had here, Members have asked about who’s acting, who’s not acting, vacancies etc. so we almost have to go through a process where we can begin to construct a budget that will help Parliament achieve these three outcomes. When you hear what ICT is saying, when you look at Member support, the vacancies, etcetera, it just seems that we've almost got to, as a committee, be part of helping Parliament to develop a budget that is actually going to be able to meet those objectives. Because I think at this stage, we're going to be given the first budget without any input. And I was hoping that one of the things we could consider agreeing, in terms of our programme for the year, is to get actively involved in the budget for 2026/27 so that we can actually deal with many of these challenges which these presentations we received this evening have already pointed to, because to achieve those objectives, we don't have the support services properly financed, we're going to hit problems.

 Regarding submitting claims, and turnaround time, I also discovered in speaking to some of the staff that they clearly need to give more support to that division, because some people are still acting, and it seems that some of the staff have to work into the early hours of the morning just trying to deal with claims. This involves the organoram and getting our staff talking openly about the things that make it difficult for them to actually meet these objectives. So basically the key thing that I'm trying to propose here is that if we look at our role as an oversight committee, I think unless we really get into the budget, it should not be the case that Treasury tells Parliament who's supposed to have oversight. Surely, we as the Parliament need to say that these are our objectives. This is what we need to achieve those objectives. And then we should never forget that Parliament itself, according to the Constitution and the law, has the right to amend the Money Bill. And I'm not suggesting a confrontational approach, but we cannot get whatever Treasury gives us. So I'm saying, I think this committee, in line with becoming an activist Parliament, we need to be that committee that is going to fight for a budget that will allow us to achieve, and we shouldn't hold back in terms of seeing that as a key thing.

On human capital, there's a reference to unresolved legacy topics. I don't know what that means. If there are unresolved legacy issues, it would be useful to get a sense of them.

All these issues about public works and the villages ultimately go to Parliament. There are laws which govern, laws that this Parliament passed about Parliament. There's a law that Parliament passed long ago about the villages. So, if we're going to change that and have Parliament responsible for the villages, the transport issue, and so on, we need to look at the actual laws we need to pass to sort those things out. Because unless we change those laws that function, for instance, the parliamentary villages, the matter will stay where it is.

Ms H Neale-May (ANC): Thank you very much for the presentations. I wish to concur with Mr Dugmore, especially when he spoke about the budget, because I think I mentioned it last night regarding the budget for Parliament. I'd like to make a few comments regarding strategic management and governance, which is the division that was presented with the paper-based challenges it was facing. And my question is, can AI not assist? And I'm going to add that question to the question on ICT when I looked at the key considerations from the Sixth Parliament for the Seventh Parliament. I think when we look at the strategic plan that will be presented on Friday, we need to upgrade in a smart way, not the old traditional way, because AI can assist in many areas, and would probably cut our costs by half on the ICT, if you're going to look at another system that would increase, that would bring in AI. And I think that is something that we need to look at, maybe not the traditional upgrade, but how AI, a new AI system, will enhance Parliament in many areas. AI can even collate all your information and write speeches. It is incredible, and I don't even think everybody knows how useful AI is going to be. But at the same time, we need a policy on AI, and how will we manage that?

The next presentation, institutional support services. I won't comment on the villages, because we now have committees. We were all there lobbying, and we have our mayors of our villages, and we are definitely going to get involved, because I also considered buses versus combis and the costs. It's actually useful to have combis pick up your portfolio committee, especially if you're meeting earlier or staying later than staying in town all day until the last bus leaves for the villages.

Regarding catering for special needs, we are now eight months into the new Parliament and there is no gluten- or dairy-free option. You can go anywhere in the world, there's a table in any of the government restaurants, and it says there's gluten free. You can have gluten-free bread. You can have nondairy milk, soya milk. You can have coconut yogurt. For this whole time, we have tried to get coconut yogurt, from the committee secretaries and myself. It's just not possible. And I really do think that there are a lot of people that are gluten intolerant, and there's a lot of people that are lactose intolerant, and it's not a very hard thing to do, just to have a table or two that has the items.

She asked about the artwork and courier services for it. I'm looking at our constituency offices, but then we would have to have security there because Members can request artwork and give it back at the end of the term for their offices.

What overtime amount are we currently sitting on for the overtime policy? I came from a labour forum where I was the chair of a labour forum in a metro. Who are the stakeholders of the labour forum? Do you have a labour forum here? I see that was one of the areas in the legacy report that one needed to look at. Who are the stakeholders who chair the labour forum? Is there one established? Although everybody looks at the overtime budget and would look at that for savings, it's not necessarily feasible, because you will always have overtime if you look at the services that Parliament renders, coming through to Member support.

In our members’ dependents, you allow parents, who are probably staying with you or traveling with you. They only have two tickets per year. So if you're going home during recesses or whatever, your parents will go with you, but you still end up paying for the airfares. Can one not transfer their own airfare savings to their parents or their biological parents? I think that is something we need to look at.

Ms H Denner (FF+): Thank you chairpersons, and thank you for the presentations, and good evening to all the colleagues and the administration. I'll be brief. Some of my questions have been covered. I just have five on my list, but let's see how it goes. First, I would like to give credit where it's due. I think the Parliament staff are excellent. They're very helpful, well-trained, always friendly. And I think we should mention that, especially to that administration here - you should know that your staff is very well-trained, and I am very impressed with them.

On human capital, there was mention of historical human capital-related issues that have been solved. I would just like some more details on that. What historical human capital issues have been solved? I think it would be good to have an organogram to see where everyone fits in and how they fit in everywhere.

What budget is needed for the outdated ICT infrastructure? What, in a perfect world, would the ICT department need if they had to replace all of that outdated infrastructure, and how long can we still go with it? I think we've been in quite a crisis if everything just crashes all at the same time.

Much has been mentioned about catering. I'd like to know if there is a limit. Are there any limits to committee catering? I've been to committees where there is quite an offer of catering, which I think isn't needed. I think we can really save some money on committee catering.

Lastly, there are many options for broadcasting, open view, etc. I don't know how many of you have seen it, have it on your phones, or downloaded it, but the SABC Plus app is quite nice. I'd like to know if that has been investigated as a way of bringing Parliament to the people because it's free, as far as I know, and it's very accessible. It's a nice app.

Mr B Radebe (ANC, Free State): We appreciate all the reports presented this evening. I think they are succinct in dealing with the issues affecting us. But I'll go to the issue of the provisions of facilities for Members. To start with the issue of the offices, when you go to the office, is there any routine plan for the maintenance of the offices? You reported that artwork can be loaned to the various offices of the Members. But sometimes when you go to the other offices, you can see that the offices are almost dilapidated. Water was coming in. How regularly is maintenance done so these offices are livable spaces conducive to productive work for the Members of Parliament?

Regarding the transport issue, it is very good that we have our own fleet. But let's say, as a Member of Parliament, can I go to any of those offices and request the manual for which car is due for service at what time? Sometimes, you can look at the car and see that it is not serviced properly. It can be a danger to the people it is supposed to serve. Are there any logbooks in those offices to ensure that those cars are maintained properly? Why am I raising that? Because some cars are so dirty, how can Members of Parliament be ferried using such cars? I wonder whether the maintenance is done because, you know, maintenance is hidden and cannot be seen by the naked eye.

And then on the issue of the cleaning services themselves, let's be straight, how many times are the toilets looked upon per day? When you go to a mall, you go to the garages outside the filling station. It's very clear that every hour, someone comes in and looks at whether things are still in order. Sometimes, when you go in the afternoon, it leaves a lot to be desired. So is there some sort of mechanism to monitor such a thing? This is a key national point, and we are receiving international guests. So, if we have international guests, it leaves a lot to be desired when they have to go to a dirty bathroom. So I think we need a routine or a manual on how many times per day the toilets are monitored, and then the necessary papers are replaced on time. Sometimes, when you go in there, you find that the papers are not there.

The Member Support Division is a marvel to work with. When we require something, it is there on time and precisely as it's supposed to be. How I wish all the other divisions could do that. But as we are the new administration starting afresh, I think the administration could put mechanisms in place to ensure that we treat the MPs as the clients of Parliament. They must be treated like that as honorable.

Is there any service level agreement between Parliament and Public Works so that the services they provide at those parks are on par with the status of the MPs? Because you can go there and look at the tennis court; there's nothing. How were things allowed to deteriorate to that level? Who maintains Parliament?

Ms D Dlakude (ANC): Thank you very much, co-chairpersons. Good evening, Speaker and colleagues, for this meeting. I want us to respond to this question - what is Parliament? Is it one of the three organs of state or not? If so, why is Parliament being treated like a step child? I think most of the problems that Parliament is experiencing, we wouldn't have these problems if we were one of the two other organs of state, including municipalities. If a minister, judge, or councilor passes away, you can see that person was a public servant. The coffin will be draped with the South African flag. Even our soldiers, we saw that. But with Members of Parliament…it's a disgrace. It's like you have never rendered service to the country. So I think we need to start there. When we revisit and review our policies, we must go there so that Parliament, wherever it is, is lifted in the same power as the other two arms of state.

Then I'll join my colleagues in appreciating the work that this division is doing for Parliament, including the presentations that were received, not the ones that were presented here today, Cindy [the Committee Secretary] sent us the documents in a link, and also said that we must download those documents. Those are detailed presentations. I've seen them. So today they are just giving us an overview. They are giving us brief presentations of the thick documents that they sent to us. I will request that Cindy send that link, because there was a timeframe for when the link will expire. Sometimes we are lacking as Members of Parliament. I don't know. Maybe it's because of the workload. We don't really read. We don't really go through the details of the emails sent to us.

Regarding the maintenance issue, I agree we need to have DPW in our meetings. Some of the lifts will not be working. 6 months will go by without the lift being serviced. Then you ask yourself, what will happen if maybe there is fire or there is something? Yes, I know that there are exit points in case of fire. But what will happen if someone gets stuck in there? And when you are stuck in a lift, sometimes your phone doesn't work. Sometimes you will want to run to an office next door, leave your phone in your office, get into a lift, and get stuck. I really don't know. We used to benchmark a lot and do study tours. I was once in China where the escalators were not working, but they were up and running within five minutes. So I really don't know whether we as departments need to go there to learn something or not? Do we really send the relevant people to go out there for them to learn the best practices? We need public works to be part of our meeting.

Then, regarding the presentation by ICT, I fully agree with the budget costs. The budget cuts are problematic. I saw that in the Sixth Parliament, when we were doing public hearings in the provinces, dealing with the general intelligence laws amendment bill in one province, you could hear from the people who were making inputs, they were talking about service delivery issues, nothing related to what we went there to do. It was after that visit to that particular province that we took it upon ourselves to go on the radio to try and explain things so that people in the next province would be there because they heard what we were talking about. They made those meaningful submissions and inputs. So I'm trying to say that there is a need for strengthening these services so that as Parliament, we can do what is expected of us and our communities out there will be well informed.

Mr K Ceza (EFF, Mpumalanga): you very much. Chairperson. Greetings to the speaker, greetings to the Secretary of Parliament and yourselves and colleagues. I'm listening to the members and the presentations. And what occurs to me, very clearly, is the issue of the reduction of Parliament's budgets and the determination of budgets elsewhere, instead of Parliament determining its own budget. I just wanted to check the state of that budget determination and perhaps the Appropriation Bill. You are hearing these reductions across the board, and I don't know where we decided to take the route of austerity measures vis-a-vis expansionary budgets. I don't know what informed it, but it cuts across all departments and sectors, and if you calculate that, it's R5 billion right off the budget. And I don't know how the public value will ever get to a point where it's qualitative.

Regarding the ISSD, it talks about the graduates. I met a group when I came here yesterday that was talking about the issues of payment and all those things. I wondered whether it is the one that was not paid in January 2025, because I'm worried about staff morale. Then I'm worried about the retention of staff and institutional memory. Because if people are not paid, it speaks to the issues of morale, of being motivated to come to work and so forth. What instruments are available to curtail that situation of staff motivation? I agree with the staff's diligence, especially at ITC and elsewhere in the kitchen. They are very charitable, for lack of a better word, they are very friendly.

I agree with the issues of insourcing. Members of Parliament were on their way to Laboria, and the bus just stopped before the robots. It just stops; there was no contingency, but another bus was following behind. I think they were communicating. If there was no contingency, I think we would have been exposed to the wolves there. This was just last week, when we came from the budget speech, we were on the Cape Flats and would have been exposed to the wolves. But thanks to the contingency plan that they've made…because the bus is having problems. I think it was the discs that were finished. So I think we should look at the safety issues there.

ITC speaks about cyber security issues. What preventive instruments does it have at its disposal to mitigate against the issues it has raised?

I also looked at the legacy reports because I'm quite new. There's a reduction for 2023/24, which amounted to 202 114, resulting in the removal of all the accumulated retained reserves. I just wanted to check what the status of that is currently in the year under review. Looking at the total reduction implemented by National Treasury in 2020, 203/24 up to 2026/27, which amounts to R986 million, I just want us to be clear about what informs such reductions.

Mr N Hadebe (IFP): Thank you so much. I am mostly covered by contributions and questions by Members. There is one question that I have that I want to pose on the issue of the oversight mechanism, to check if the Joint Standing Committee, like other committees that go out to do oversight, if this Joint Standing Committee can be able to practicalise all what we are talking about here by physically going to all the areas that have been identified by Members within Parliament and within the villages. I'm saying that knowing very well that, on the part of villages, there are committees that have been set up, but to physically see the conditions that Members are sharing here, so that this Standing Committee will be in a position to swiftly act and put more emphasis and pressure on all those that are responsible for the implementation of whatever we are talking about here. For example, in many of our boardrooms, air conditioning is not properly functioning. I may raise that here, but not all Members might experience it, so it could only affect one Member. But if we can set up a mechanism that someday the Standing Committee would physically see all the areas that Members have raised so that we can practically implement the issue of fixing and implementation.

Co-Chairperson Lekganyane: I agree with Members who say the presentations were high level. I think that resonates with the preparations for this meeting. This is the first time we are meeting with the units and we wanted to get an idea of what they are doing exactly so that we can oversee them. But it's through the comprehensive reports that were uploaded and the link was also provided. Maybe what we will do next time is keep reminding members when we have such a problem so that we do not lose sight of those reports. But above all, the engagements were arranged for us to have a better understanding of the scope of the work that we will be doing as the Joint Standing Committee. in case there may be other issues that fell within the cracks, Members must find comfort that we are still going to have time with the Office of the Secretary and his entourage anytime they appear before us, or even before they come, we can always advise on which issues we want them to come and present before us. However, that does not mean that the members' issues should not be given attention. I think the point that the Deputy Chief Whip raises here about the welfare of Members is a very critical point that we should address immediately when we come out of this meeting. Some Members have been in this Parliament for 30 years, some even more than that. There was a member of the DA, I think, who holds the record for having been here for 35 or 37 years. Regardless of the length of time they could have been here, some Members have made a huge contribution to the transformation of this Parliament and the Republic of South Africa. And they die in silence, and they are buried in silence. And what is even worse is that Parliament may not even know that honorable so and so is no more, not even a statement is made in the plenary of Parliament. So, I think that is a very, very sore point that we need to look at.

Some of the things can be done incrementally. But what is important is that a policy be put in shape and we look at those things. I think one Member said yesterday that Members of Parliament find themselves in a very stressful situation. Sometimes if you have children at a tertiary institution, you don't qualify for NSFAS, or your children don't qualify for that, and you may find that you don't even have a house. In my previous responsibility, I remember that one Member had to move from the Limpopo Provincial Legislature to Cape Town, and he had just married. The wife stayed with him at the parliamentary village, under the impression that the house belonged to the Member. When the Member had to leave for Cape Town, he came to the office to ask where my family would stay. So these are some of the frustrations that Members go through.

So I think let's do our best so that members have less frustration wherever they stay and have a productive Parliament. If there are facilities that have to be kept in shape, let’s do that. I was on the bus, Mr Ceza spoke to, and when that happens, your mind just jumps to many places - what will happen to us, are we safe here? We've been told that the surroundings are very dangerous. Yeah, you just get worried. I think those are some things we should discuss at the committee level. They are not matters of strategy for the transformation and development of this country, but we are saying them because if at this level, as Members of Parliament, we can have frustrations like this. What about ordinary people that we represent? Because when we are here, we are supposed to be the voice of the voiceless. But if we have to start by speaking for ourselves, it will take time to speak on behalf of those we must represent. So let's get those matters given attention.

Maybe co-chair, we need a joint meeting with the Portfolio Committee of Public Works, the DG of Public Works and his or her administration present. That's exactly what will happen. We will not have a meeting with the portfolio committee alone. They won't have the answers, but they oversee the department's work.

Responses

Mr Xolile George, Secretary to Parliament: Thank you very much, co-chair. Good evening to both of you as members, and thank you very much for the various inputs you have provided. We will share the responses with the rest of the team I lead. Indeed, regarding the presentations we have made, we sent the details, but we got guidance on the outline given to us. It said we must largely cover the mandate, budget challenges and mitigating strategies. That's why you find it covers consistently those, but the detail goes into each of our various divisions, even divisional organograms. What we only did was to say the vacancy rate is 20%, the attrition rate is 2% etc., but when we go to each of the divisions, it will then disaggregate accordingly. I'll just touch on four points, and my colleagues will cover the rest. Regarding the difference between the strategy for the administration of Parliament that it develops versus the strategy for Parliament as a political institution - there is no difference in terms of this outline of the strategy, the FMPLA. It gives timelines. The outer timelines for each transition, for example, are six months. So within six months, after each transition, a strategy must outline the priorities for the new Parliament. In our case, the timelines we counted were up to the end of November and latest, by 12 December, for us to ensure that it is tabled in both Houses, and that was achieved after a thorough process was done in each of the respective Houses, where there was a committee established for the NA and a committee established for the NCOP to drive the priorities immediately after induction. Then there was a joint sitting for those committees to agree on those priorities. They were then taken to the EA as required and tabled. So the administration of Parliament then drives the support services in terms of that work. But given the multifaceted nature of strategy, execution at a political level, at Parliament’s programming committees for each house, they determine the execution in terms of priorities for the agenda of each of the Houses. Joint priorities are determined through those mechanisms. So the administration does not define what Parliament must do. The opposite happens. We get guided, and then practicalise how oversight, public participation, or the rebuilding project, must be supported.

Who owns Parliament's facilities? Public Works owns them, and Parliament uses them from a custodial point of view. Legislation guides this, and that law defines the various roleplayers as an immovable asset of the state. Hence, it then places custodial authority on Public Works. Parliament then has these facilities, but they are maintained and capitalised by Public Works. So, with respect to the rebuilding project and refurbishments, we work with Public Works to ensure access to those facilities.

In respect to the rebuilding of the NA and NCOP, in 2022, a formal request was made to the Public Works Minister, Minister De Lille, who officially authorised Parliament to proceed with the rebuilding of the project. So from a regulatory point of view, in terms of the law, we followed the process regarding the issue of facilities management in Parliament. It’s a structured relationship, at least on paper. We have an SLA with Public Works for the villages. That SLA also governs how they prioritise the execution of maintenance here in the precinct. So they've got outsourced services, and those contracts run over five years. So they have just done one recently in 2023 - the one we see cleaning outside, and we meet with them regularly around those areas. So from expectations, we do outline, but the difficulty is not only about SLAs. It is the overall architecture of the relationship, from governance, budgeting and accountability. Parliament is part of the prestige portfolio but it is not known how much of that prestige budget is for Parliament. So it will be important as we deal with the overall review of the relationship. Parliament makes a determination around that. So far, we can see elements like buses, elements like villages and what needs to be done to service Members, but it's not done ideally. If you enter as we leave, there's no aircon in the lifts in the Marks Building. So if it were to be stuck for three or five hours, I don't know, but given the summer season, we have had instances of Members or staff being stuck there. So the regularity of maintenance and the standards required for maintenance require a lot of improvements. So last year, we took an assessment as a team Parliament to the villages on 18 May, just to assess all the villages, the compliance with Ohasa (Occupational Health and Safety Act) standards and other things not complied with in the villages. But we don't manage the villages. We only manage the members that have been assigned and so on. So, many fundamental reviews need to be re-examined around the structure of that relationship and its governance. So, the legislation needs to be reviewed to deal precisely with the better servicing of Parliament in these matters. Some of those things are very basic to us. Still, they are not currently happening at this point, so a lot of revisiting of the overall structure of the relationship may be very important around better management and better servicing of Members of Parliament.

Regarding the issue of management reports by the AG, those reports are indeed available from previous years and are as recent as the last parliamentary audit. Should Members require them, we can send them to the secretariat. Interpretation services will be dealt with when the knowledge management division presents tomorrow.

Parliament is a national key point if we have any relationship with intelligence services domestically or internationally. Regarding the security apparatus managing the entire precinct, there's an interplay between SAPS, our internal security, and national intelligence agents of the Republic. So they all operate from here. They have coordinating mechanisms where they interface in managing security, but there's no specific relationship between our ICT and these bodies monitoring the precinct operations.

The last point I would like to raise is the issue of honoring Members. Towards the end of the previous Parliament, the policy regarding honoring Members during their funerals and all other components was reviewed. Perhaps in the subsequent meeting, our Member Support Services can present the details to ensure we can implement and operationalise that.

The budget question is a critical matter, as we presented yesterday. It has gradually been eroded, impacting the investments we want to make in ICT and other divisions. But we take courage that as we rebuild the new Parliament, we have made provision for almost close to R1 billion for ICT modernisation of Parliament as part of the contractual obligations for rebuilding Parliament. So we intend to leverage that capacity to ensure we can revamp the overall ICT modernisation strategy for Parliament.

Adv Phindela: I was encouraged by Mr Dugmore's comments about the budget and this Committee's role in ensuring that Parliament has sufficient resources to carry out its constitutional mandate. I hope that's the role that the Committee will also focus on some of the issues, in addition to overseeing the financial management of Parliament.

We shall examine issues related to facility maintenance, catering, etc. I think those need improvements.

We are discussing with Telkom about providing broadband and Wi-Fi at the parks. Telkom will be assessing in the villages in the near future, and we hope that Telkom will assist in that regard.

Regarding servicing the full fleet, yes, we have the log books, and the fleet is serviced regularly. We also have a service provider who provides cleaning services for the fleet.

Regarding the issue of the ownership of the buses or the contractual arrangement between Parliament and Public Works, I think [the buses] are part of that relationship. I think it should be considered in that broader context.

There is a courier service if Parliament or its committees have activities, oversight activities, or other activities anywhere else. We courier Parliament's branding to ensure that Parliament is visible at those activities.

As I have indicated, issues related to general maintenance are the areas for improvement. We shall look at those issues. I'm sure part of that is when our finance division presents all the issues relating to financial management. So far as catering is concerned, those issues will also be made available. He spoke to a slide related to numbers that one Member asked about.

Ms Harper: I'll respond to the Member Support Services related queries. A lot of the stuff we've just noted concerns the supporting documents submitted by Members. We do have a challenge with the legibility of the documents. So, what we will also do when we have our engagement over the next couple of days in the re-induction session, we will also just look at the options on the phones that give us the best quality, where you take a scan rather than a photograph. But we'll have some of our staff there to reinforce that as well, to get the quality documents we're looking for.

The village Wi-Fi issue has already been addressed. It is on the agenda for the Member support forum.

The allocation for parents is also a matter to be referred to the Member support forum. It will require a discussion and a potential policy amendment, which the forum would then consider and either recommend or not.

Public Works attends all the member support forum meetings. So many of the things being discussed here can be discussed in detail at those forums where Public Works has representatives, and they report back at those Member support forums. I think we've also got the co-chair of the Member support forum here, so we can make sure that we don't deal with things in two places. Thank you, Chair.

Chairperson Lekganyane noted there were four members present from the committee who sat on the members' support forum. But you don't represent the Joint Standing Committee when you go to that forum. And we said here that there must be a joint meeting with the Portfolio Committee of Public Works, the Department, and the delegation from the Secretary, so that when you go to the Members support forum, you will go there with a full mandate.

Mr Mgaga: I'll start by asking whether a labour forum is in place. Yes, there is one that meets monthly between organised labor and management.

Is there an overtime policy in place? Yes, it is also one of those that we are reviewing to enhance.

The question around the organograms—there are two stages around them. Both EAs have approved the highest level of organograms, and the STP normally approves the divisional organograms in his jurisdiction. However, there was a question about making them available. We shall do that and share those.

What are the historical issues? Typically, these are operational issues that relate to employee relations, harmonisation, and standardisation of pensions, just to mention a few important issues. They need to be resolved.

Concerning workforce planning, we are kick-starting that process to determine the capacity required by Parliament, given the work that needs to be delivered. In the next month or so, we should be able to complete it by winter time, June, or July. The Terms of Reference have been drafted to guide that process.

Regarding acting people versus employment equity, yes, we do have an employment equity structure in place that is reviewed quarterly. We comply with labour in terms of reporting.

With regards to recruitment, of course we take that into consideration as we recruit.

Yes, we do have vacancies in some areas where we have acting colleagues—the number of acting positions can be provided to the Committee.

Mr Pieterse noted the first question to ICT was do we have enough money? I just wanted to put you in the picture. For the last three years, our budget has decreased, and we have received almost only two-thirds of what we've asked for. So that gives you an idea of whether we have enough money. We have enough for the bare essential services. So we keep the lights on, but if you ask if the services we provide you with are on par with other parliaments and best practice – the answer is no, we don't have enough money.

The next question was about the negotiations with Wi-Fi and fibre at the parks—that process is well underway. The STP has expedited that process. They have finished, I think, the negotiations in terms of costs and things; they just need to be finalised. But I think they've made great progress, and you can get more information soon.

The secretary has answered that question regarding the intelligence service provider. I just want to mention that data sovereignty is very important to us, especially in light of the latest things, where you see what Trump has said to us, South Africa and our President's reaction. We must look at where our data is stored and what they do with our data when using AI. I agree that AI is very important, but everything you put into AI can be used elsewhere. So we have to be very clear when we consider using AI in Parliament, we must be mindful of where the information is stored. So whatever information we put in there must stay in South Africa. And even if it stays in South Africa, the service providers should not have the right to share that with anybody else or third party. And that is quite difficult, but we do manage that, and we have the processes in place to deal with that.

There was a question on ICT not being responsible for the content with broadcasting. What does it mean? It means that ICT ensures the infrastructure is there so that we can broadcast. But the parliamentary communication services that you will meet with tomorrow, and the knowledge information services, they determine what needs to be broadcasted. What do we need to be broadcasted? Which committees need to be broadcasted? We only execute on that. So that's why we say we're not responsible for the content. We carry that content, but we're not responsible for what is broadcast on it.

There was a question about how the vision and mission tie up with Parliament's overall vision and mission—done deliberately. So that's why we're waiting for Parliament to finish its strategy and for a strategy to be signed off, and SMG might be able to shed even more light on it.

On the digital transformation strategy of Parliament, because the strategy of Parliament directly drives the priorities, we test the requirements against the strategy to say if it fits into the strategy. And that determines how we put resources into a project and how we prioritise that project in terms of time. Can AI assist? Yes, we can agree that AI has enormous potential, but as I've said, AI also has a lot of risks. I was part of a team in Brazil to participate in the International Parliamentary Union AI forum. We are on par with other parliaments in terms of our thinking. However, we still have a lot to do. In the last year, we've focused on putting a baseline instead of saying, what's the infrastructure we need, what's the skills and resources we need? How do we secure our data so that we can set up our plan going forward? That's input into our digital strategy going forward. But we are well aware that when we talk about big data, big data, we talk about big data analytics and AI as one component because you need to have the data before you can leverage it with AI.

I sent the CIO a message to confirm the outdated infrastructure budget. He says we want to replace the data centre, which will cost R87 million. I can provide more details if members need them.

How long can we go with the current infrastructure? If I can put you in the picture, the standard for replacing this type of technology is about five years. Our technology is sometimes seven, eight, or ten years old, so we are way past the standard to replace these technologies. That's why we say it's not outdated. It's obsolete, meaning we can't replace something if it's broken. We can't revamp or upgrade something so that we can integrate it because the protocols that it works with, such as connectivity, are outdated, too. As newer technologies are developed, they can't integrate with that infrastructure.

Regarding the budget cuts and public hearings, there are just some things we can’t do. For example, we have to send a limited staff to the presentation. We do the basics that need to be done. And I can compliment our CIO and our infrastructure manager for the work they've done to keep the lights on with the budget that they do have.

Then, how do we mitigate cyber security? We have all the things. I think we should prioritise cybersecurity. So wherever we need to do patches, where we need to put in intelligent end points, firewalls, virtual private networks to secure your information, we prioritise it. We mitigate it by having extensive monitoring and tracking tools that continuously track and see who is linking and who's trying to log in. We also have locks that we process for every action, and everything that some person needs to do. So that’s one to prevent somebody from getting in. After things have happened, we go through the logins to see if there was anything suspicious. So there's a proactive and a reactive way of mitigating cyber security, but that remains a priority because it's one place where we cannot slip up. Thank you, Chair, I think that has covered all the questions.

Mr Van Rooyen: Maybe I should start by apologising for indicating that we don't have a detailed presentation. I've been proven wrong by other MPs that they are there. So, based on that one, we will have to go through those and maybe be allowed to submit the written questions, because, yeah, I think one wouldn't have done justice if you don't look into that via-a-vis what is presented here. Thank you. But I'm grateful for the response received so far. Thank you.

Ms Maotwe: Thank you. I'll be very quick. It's just…I wasn't sure if my question regarding the role of the ISSD regarding the rebuilding of Parliament was answered because, as the five pillars indicate, one of the pillars is the management of infrastructure and space development projects. So I just want to check if they are involved in rebuilding Parliament. Where do we send the written questions to? Because this is not a ministry before us. In what format do we send the questions? How do I send written questions to the Speaker if she is not a ministry? If you get what I'm saying, it, it. How do we submit it? Because any other way, it's weekly questions of written reply to ministries, right? The other questions to answer are about the broadcasting issue, the PMG issue and all that. So I hope that the Secretary has taken note, and then those departments will respond when they come for their presentations. Thank you, Chair.

Mr Dugmore: I just wanted to say that my understanding of this Financial Management of Parliament and Legislatures Act, which a colleague is referring to, it's that we are the oversight mechanism, and that in meetings like this, we are entitled to ask questions, whether to the Secretary or the Speaker and so on. So I'm not aware of any mechanism, through the Chair, where you can ask a question for a written reply or anything. And I would just suggest as a way of operating, through the Committee, we can submit questions to the STP. But I think as an oversight body, we, the parliamentary sphere, are not the executive or the judiciary. This is a very specific law to provide oversight over Parliament itself, and this is what we've got to follow. But I would suggest directing questions to the Secretary of the Committee.

Chairperson Lekganyane: We are proceeding tomorrow at 14h30, and there is a proposal that the Friday meeting should go virtual.

Mr Radebe: Thank you, Chairperson, I think that will work, because once we say hybrid on a Friday, the Office of the Secretary of the Committee will be expected to provide for the refreshments here, but it might end up having two people or three people. So if it is fully visual, it will work. But then it is the responsibility of the Members to ensure that wherever they are, there's a good signal to connect.

Mr George: Thank you very much, co-chairs. Just for a brief indulgence by the Committee, the presentations we prepared are based on the guidelines sent by the Committee. Parliament has 21 departments, as we presented yesterday. So, if you look at the guidance for today and tomorrow, there are three divisions that are not here. So we just wanted to check, maybe it was just an error not to itemise them.

To answer the questions raised yesterday, the question was on security. Does the security of Parliament work with the police? We do have a security department in Parliament, but there's no provision for this presentation. The presentation is ready, yes.

The second one concerns member capacity building. As I mentioned yesterday, we do have a division that provides member support. It's called LSS.

The third one involved questions about risk and audit. We do have a risk management unit and internal audit. So, those three [divisions] are not cited here. Maybe you could guide us if you want us to add those, and they are also ready.

Ms Dlakude: Thank you, co-chairpersons. I appreciate that the STP says the presentations are ready, but I propose that they be done tomorrow, at least tomorrow.

Chairperson Lekganyane: I want to check if we can take the draft strategy tomorrow instead of having it virtually on Friday.

Mr Dugmore: If I could just ask, is your proposal that Friday falls away if we do everything tomorrow?

Chairperson Lekganyane: no, we start with the presentation on the draft strategic plan tomorrow.

Ms Dlakude: Chairperson, I'll support that if they are ready tomorrow, then we can deal with Parliament's strategic planning face to face. Then, if we don't finish tomorrow, we can deal with the other items on Friday. But I think it's going to be a long meeting tomorrow to do everything, but we can start with the strategic planning if they are ready tomorrow.

Chairperson Lekganyane: Maybe let's hear from the secretary about whether there is comfort with that proposal.

Mr George: We will be ready for the strategy and the rest of the other presentations, chairperson.

Chairperson Lekganyane: do we support that? We start with the presentation on the draft strategy tomorrow?

Mr Dugmore: We support with an incentive to try and finish everything tomorrow, if possible.

The meeting was adjourned.