Small Enterprise Ombud: deliberations & recommendation

Meeting report

The Chairperson replied to a query about the absence of Ms D Ntshaba of the MK party at the 1 April interviews, and the person who should have replaced her in her absence. The Chairperson asked the Committee Secretary what the National Assembly Rules state.

Ms M Mafagane (MK) said that how she understands the alternative member rule is that alternate members can only alternate for a member of their own political party and not another party.

The Chairperson thanked her for her input and said that the Committee must hear clarity from the secretary and then make a decision on the matter.

Mr King Kunene, Committee Secretary, agreed with Ms Mafagane and said that alternates are only alternates for members of their own political party. It is different for smaller parties who have one alternate representing all of them. He noted that alternates from yesterday were from a larger party, which had its full number of members present. If there was a vote, she would not be eligible to vote.

The Chairperson thanked the secretary for the explanation.

Ms Mafagane said that the scores of the alternate member must be withdrawn because the scoring of that alternate member would not represent the position of the MK Party.

Ms S Singh (DA) said that the scoring of the alternate member cannot be part of the meeting. The meeting agenda does not have Ms Mmolotsane as an alternate member of the Committee. The member should not have been allowed to participate in the proceedings of the Committee; this was highly irregular.

Ms L Sapo (ANC) said that the members have to calm down. The member in question is an alternate of the ANC, this in the Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports (ATC). The member's omission from the agenda as an alternate member of the Committee was an error of the secretariat. The member was not an alternate of the MK party yesterday; she was there as an alternate member of the ANC. The alternate member will indeed not vote, but the power of the alternate member to be part of the discussion will not be taken away.

The Chairperson added that the member's omission from the agenda as an alternate member of the Committee is a discrepancy of the secretariat, saying that she does sign the physical register every time there is a meeting.

Mr C Malemajta (ANC) said that the ATC is the final authority on the status of any Member of Parliament. He said that the secretary must correct his register.

Ms N Bilankulu (ANC) said that any big party has alternates, and should the alternate member be free to attend a Committee meeting where they are an alternate, they are free to do so. Only voting is not allowed for alternate members. Each alternate represented their political party and the questioning of her attendance was wrong.

Ms B Mathulelwa (EFF) asked for more clarity from the secretary. The issue of alternate members has been raised several times in the past, so she requested clarity.

The Chairperson said that, from her little knowledge, she knows that in the big Committees, the alternates of the Committee are not just the political party. She asked the researcher for clarity so the Committee may know if Ms Mmolotsane should be removed from the discussion.

Ms N Hlazo-Webster (BOSA) read out the rule that governs the status of an alternate member, but she read from the Joint Rules.

The Chairperson stated that this is a National Assembly portfolio committee so the Joint Rules do not apply.

Ms Mafagane said that according to the rules of the meeting, scoring is voting which is what she was disputing. The ANC had all their regular members present yesterday and its alternate member; thus, the score of the ANC alternate member must be dismissed.

The Secretary said that what is important is the signing of the physical register which is guided by the ACT. In the register, Ms Mmolotsane is reflected as an alternate member of the Committee.

Ms Mafagane said that she had sent a dispute letter to the Committee about the inclusion of the scoring record of the ANC alternate member.

Ms Singh stated that the Rules support the conclusion that says the alternate member's scoring should not be included. Yesterday, they did not even sign the physical register. For whom did the alternate member alternate – considering that the ANC had all its regular members available? The scoring of candidates is equal to voting because it has an impact on what will be recommended.

Ms Sapo disagreed with the definition and interpretation of scoring as being the same as voting. The Committee must move forward with the deliberation on the candidates' scores.

Ms Bilankulu said that the alternate can participate if there is no voting, but if there is voting, she is excluded.

Mr Malematja said that the scoring must be quarantined for now until this issue is resolved by an authoritative body.

Mr H Kruger (DA) said that English is not his first language and asked Mr Malemajta what he meant by “quarantined”.

Mr Malematja explained that the scoring of the alternate member must not be used until an opinion from the relevant authority is received on whether she was eligible to be part of the meeting and to score the candidates.

The Chairperson asked the Committee content advisor for an opinion.

Mr Sibusiso Gumede, Committee Content Advisor, said that he would like the Committee to look at the ranking of the candidates according to the scoring of the permanent members of the Committee to decide on how many candidates will be sent to the Minister for consideration. The results from Ms Mmolotsane could be quarantined but that would not change the ranking of the candidates. The Parliamentary Legal Services Office must be consulted to ascertain the correct procedural process that ought to have been followed.

The Chairperson said that the score of Ms Mmolotsane must be omitted for now until further advice from the legal advisor.

Ms Mafagane said that she had a party emergency and asked to be released

The Chairperson released the member.

Ms Sapo supported the decision to quarantine the score of Ms Mmolotsane.

Ms Nwabisa Mbelekane, Committee Researcher, said that they have re-calculated and have a revised total without Ms Mmolotsane’s score.

Ms Singh proposed to defer the meeting due to the proximity of the constituency period as clarity on the issue would come only after the constituency period.

The Chairperson noted that she did not agree with this recommendation.

Mr Malematja said that the Committee is working well together and said it is too early for a deferral proposal. The Committee should wrap up this decision.

The Chairperson added that the people in the Northern Cape need this ombuds person to start immediately with the work, thus a deferral of the meeting would get in the way of that.

Ms Bilankulu said she did not agree with deferral, saying many of the issues have been dealt with through discourse. She stressed that the work of the Committee is not for them but for the people of South Africa. She saw no reason for postponing the meeting.

Ms Mathulelwa suggested that the scores of the alternate member not even be completely excluded for the combined scores of the members.

Ms Sapo said that members must not take each other for granted, stating that this was a very mischievous proposal.

The Chairperson said that the proposal had been rejected

Ms Singh interjected and expressed that she was formally withdrawing the proposal. She said that she made it in good faith.

The Chairperson asked the Committee content advisor to present how the members scored the eight candidates

The Content Advisor outlined the scores and noted that the top three candidates according to the total scores were:
1. Mr Lufuno Nevondwe

2. Adv Sonwabile Mancotywa

3. Mr Lucky Rebotapi

Mr H Kruger (DA) complained that the scoring of Adv Mancotywa was irregular. He was scored above the total scorable points. The total score each candidate could get was 55 while Adv Mancotywa was scored 65. This might be fixed.

This was brought to the attention of the Chairperson, who was the one who scored the candidate more than the total value scorable. She directed that the score be rectified to 55 instead of 65.

To this effect, Adv Mancotywa, who ranked position one initially, dropped to position two after this irregularity was rectified.

Ms Singh said that all the scores of the members should be double-checked for similar discrepancies.

The Chairperson said members can double-check each other's scores

Ms Sapo interjected that Ms Singh was undermining the members’ intellect. She opposed the double-checking of scores.

Ms Hlalo-Webster said that the job of the Committee is to pick up any irregularities in the scores. The Committee should be careful not to impose a process that suggests dishonesty from the members. She said the job of the Committee is to look at the mathematical correctness of the score.

Ms D Ntshaba (MK) apologised for her absence at yesterday’s interview session. She concurred with the meeting deliberations on the recommended candidates.

The Chairperson invited members to discuss the attributes of the top three candidates.

Ms Hlalo-Webster said that Mr Nevondwe showed great knowledge of the relevant legislation and has written many academic articles on issues that relate to the duties of the position. He had knowledge on the private sector and many spheres of governance, which would both have to be consulted in this job. Hence she scored him highest.

On Adv Mancotywa, she said that he had a good theoretical background but lacked practical experience. From a legal perspective, he was solid but lacked in matters that were directly related to the Small Business environment. The allegations of funds misappropriation were damaging. This candidate was not part of her top three.

On Mr Rabotapi, she said he was her second highest candidate. He showed solid experience in legal management expertise and showed great understanding of the environment. He responded well to the questions and seemed ready to start with the work immediately.

Ms Singh said that Mr Nevondwe was her highest-scoring candidate. The fact that everywhere he went, there were clean audits, speaks to his leadership skills.

On Adv Mancotywa, Ms Singh rated him second highest. However, she had a serious concern over this candidate’s response to the allegation of misappropriation of funds; the Office of the Ombudsman needs a clean start. She noted that this candidate’s response was so similar to the provided answers that the Committee members were given that she became a bit uncomfortable.

 On Mr Rabotapi, she ranked her third due to his previous experience.
Ms Singh commented on the fourth-ranked candidate, saying that she lacked experience but was enthusiastic and she would like to see her name included in the top three.

The Chairperson said the proposal would be looked at.

Mr Kruger said that his number one candidate, Mr Nevondwe, was the only person who mentioned the rule of law, which will be integral to the position of an ombud. The fact that he is an academic is impressive. He is very happy with candidates one, two and three. He added that he would not mind if candidate four is moved up to three.

Mr Sapo said that it is unfortunate that there were no females in the top three. Candidate 1, Mr Nevondwe, gave satisfactory responses on the legislation. On Candidate 2, Adv Mancotywa, she was pleased by his understanding of legislation and his legal experience. On the allegations, she was happy to hear that he was not formally charged. Moving Candidate 4 to position three would be unfair to the third candidate. However, she recognises the need for a female candidate to the sent to the Minister. She suggested that the Committee send four names to the Minister.

Ms Mathulelwa said that for the bottom-ranked candidate, she could not find one point to give her. She noted that she was implicated in the VBS scandal. She said that Adv Mancotywa was misleading the Committee when answering about the criminal allegations and she gave her a low score.

On Mr Nevondwe, Ms Mathulelwa said that he has no criminal allegations and has the necessary experience which was good. She is happy with his being ranked number one. On the fourth candidate, she proposed that four names should be sent to the Minister. She said that it is triggering for women candidates to be bypassed over candidates who have dark clouds of corruption hanging over them like Candidate 2, Adv Mancotywa.

Ms Bilankulu said that she was disappointed with the responses of some of the female candidates. She had hoped Adv Mancotywa would be number one; however, she is happy with the conclusion of the Committee.

Mr Malamtja said that Members of Parliament must not believe unfounded allegations. People destroy each other’s careers based on false allegations. The Committee must deal with what has been reported and found to be factual. Allegations should remain allegations until proven otherwise. He scored Adv Mancotywa highest because of his understanding of legislation and experience with what this office wants to achieve. He noted that Mr Nevondwe only has academic qualifications and opinions but he does not know if he will be able to implement his academic findings. He supported the addition of a fourth candidate on the list to be sent to the Minister.

The Chairperson thanked the members. She was listening to their opinions; she was learning. Many people have been wrongfully convicted of crimes they never committed.

The Committee resolved to send four names to the Minister of Small Business Development. The four names were:

Mr Lufuno Nevondwe
Adv Sonwabile Mancotywa
Mr Lehlohonolo Lucky Rebotapi
Ms Nande Neshe

The meeting was adjourned.