Non Profit Organisations Amendment Bill; Films & Publications Board

SOCIAL SERVICE SELECT COMMITTEE
22 May 2000
NON PROFIT ORGANISATIONS AMENDMENT BILL: VOTING; FILMS AND PUBLICATIONS BOARD: BRIEFING ON FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Relevant documents
Non Profit Organisations Amendment Bill [B9-2000]
Financial Statements of the Films and Publications Board (see Appendix 1)

Chairperson: Ms L Jacobus

SUMMARY
The Non Profit Organisations Amendment Bill was unanimously agreed to.

The Film and Publications Board stated that the budget it received from Home Affairs was not sufficient to meet its programmes. The Board said it had come up with a strategy to deal with the backlog of sexually explicit film material it had to classify. Financial constraints have forced the Board to cut the time it would normally take to view a film to 15 minutes, and use only two examiners per film. The Board's CEO appealed for the appointment of inspectors to help monitor distributors' failure to classify films, child pornography, etc. The CEO called for effective fines to be put in place to discourage distributors from not classifying films.

MINUTES
Non Profit Organisations Amendment Bill
Ms G Smith, Deputy Director of Welfare's Non-profit Organisation Directorate, and Mr P Du Preez, Legal Advisor, Department of Welfare, said that according to the Non Profit Organisations Act, 1997, the Department is compelled to publish model documents which are basically constitutions of public organisations. The Bill seeks to do away with this requirement as it is seen not only as burdensome but unnecessarily expensive as comments are seldom received on the model documents by the Department (and when received such comments do not warrant the cost). The other clauses of the Bill seek to effect technical amendments to the principal Act.

The Department stressed that regulations would still be published for comment by interested parties. The Department has decided to go the NGO Coalition route in calling for comments from interested parties.

Clause 1
The clause provides for the deletion of section 6(2) of the principal Act. The effect of the deletion is that the Department would not longer be required to publish model documents for comment.

Clause 2
First, the clause removes a disparity in the number of subsections of Section 9 in the English and Afrikaans texts of the principal Act. The Afrikaans text had six subsections and is brought in line with the English text which has five.

Second, the clause corrects an error in the principal Act by providing that the Minister is required to "appoint" instead of "nominate" a person to the panel of arbitrators.

Clause 3, 4 and 5
The clauses effect technical amendments to the principal Act.

Ms N Ntlabathi (ANC) said she encourages the Department's route of consulting the NGO Coalition.

Responding to a question on whether the NGO Coalition route was provided for in the Act, Ms Smith said it is just an informal arrangement - not in the Act.

Vote on the clauses of the Bill:
Clause 1 agreed to.
Clause 2 agreed to.
Clauses 3, 4, 5 all agreed to.
The motion of desirability was agreed to.

The Committee agreed that no debate be held on the Bill when it was tabled in the plenary the following day.

It was later realised that a procedural error had been made. According to the rules, parties are required to declare their votes. The Chairperson then called for the parties to declare their votes. The DP (Ms E Gouws) and NNP (Mr J Horne) asked for permission to consult their parties on the issue. All the other parties supported the Bill. The Chairperson allowed the DP and NNP to consult their parties indicating that in 30 minutes the two parties should report back to her failing which the report would proceed for publication since they had already indicated their support for the Bill. She noted that all the parties had already passed the Bill in the National Assembly, therefore it was not likely that they would come up with a new position now.

Financial Statements of the Films And Publications Board
Ms Nana Makaula, the CEO and Mr I Chetty, the Senior Executive Officer of the Board, made the presentation.

Ms Makaula said when the Film and Publications Board budget was allocated in 1998/99 they were not in office yet. In March 1998 when they took office they had to do with the budget given by the Department. This was far short of what was needed by the Board to meet its requirements and carry out its mandate according to the Act. The Board was under pressure to make sure that it meets the requirements of the film industry.

There was a backlog in sexually explicit material of about 6000 films the Board had to classify. Because of budgetary and time constraints a strategy was devised to deal with the material in a speedy way. Instead of A committee viewing the material, the Board decided that two people view each film and the viewing time was slashed to 15 minutes per film.

The examiners would look for presence of underage participants, bestiality, extreme violence mixed with sexually explicit acts. In the first five minutes the viewers would look at what the film is about then view the rest of the tape in a "fast forward" mode. [This has raised complaints that this form of viewing damages the examiners' eyes and is robbing them of their pay as they earn per hour]. However in this way the Board has been able to complete the backlog. Half a million Rand was received to supplement the budget which "came in handy" as the Board was struggling to meet its programmes.

Mr Chetty said every film that has to be distributed to the public has to be classified by the Board. The Board does not censor films or published materials but only classifies them. Published material is not classified before distribution, its classification only takes place once the Board receives complaints from the public. The average cost per classification of a film is between R800 and R900. The Board has however not yet reached full cost recovery on the material it classifies.

The staff of the Board consists of 6 administrative staffers seconded from Home Affairs, 28 examiners and 3 members of the executive.

Questions
The Chairperson asked whether sexually explicit material should not be sold in sealed packaging because in Johannesburg there has been complaints that this does not happen and underage children view it. What steps would one take in such instances?

A.) Ms Makaula said publications are not classified and the Board unfortunately cannot act until there is a complaint from the public. She pointed out that child pornography is an offence and does not need classification.

What amount was the Board able to save through using its slashed form of viewing?

A.) Ms Makaula said the amount is difficult to quantify but the savings came in being able to view more films within the time that could be used to view one.

Ms E Lubidla (ANC - Northern Cape) asked whether there is monitoring to ensure that under 18's do not go into shops that sell sexually explicit material.

A.) Mr Chetty said although the Board has to monitor, staff constraints make it not possible. He believes that the Board should, like the Liquor and Gambling Boards, have inspectors. At the moment the Board depends on the vigilance of the public to alert it.

Ms Lubidla also wanted to know where the money from classification goes.

A.) Ms Makaula said the money goes to State Expenditure. The Board has tried to have this money given to it in order to improve its services. However, they have been informed that regulations make this not possible.

Ms Lubidla asked that the classification "Under parental guidance" be explained as it suggests that children may view material of a sexually explicit nature in the presence of parents.

A.) Ms Makaula said the classification means that parents should first find out what makes the film PG as some might be sensitive to any form of strong language, sexual scenes or violence, no matter how mild. Usually the classification is put where such scenes are minimal to allow parents to make an informed decision before viewing with children.

Ms Gouws wanted to know how many of the staff members of the Board are male and female as this is important since the genders view things differently.

A.) Mr Chetty said currently the Board has more females than males due to one staff member having left the board.

Ms J Vilakazi (IFP - KZN) wanted to know whether the Board also classifies TV material. She said she does not think the classification "not suitable for children" works because once children see this classification, they specifically seek to view such material.

A.) Ms Makaula said this serves to warn children so that they know they are stealing the material even if they view it, it was never meant for them. The Board has had to shelve a programme to educate the public, especially children, about the importance of classifying material and what it means.

Mr Chetty said the board raises about R1.9 million from registration and classification of films. He pointed out that everyone who wants to distribute films in South Africa has to register with the Board. He said age classification is sometimes used as a marketing ploy by distributors to increase viewing of their material. He stated that the Board has to classify video games as well.

He said the problem of not having inspectors leads to presence of pirated material that is not classified. Customs in South Africa no longer has to seize material coming into the country for classification by the Board unless in really big numbers.

Recently the Board held a national workshop facilitated by someone from the FBI in the USA which was attended by police, prosecutors, magistrates and NGOs to sensitise them to child pornography. He said there has been very few prosecutions relating to child pornography and the few have failed. The workshop sought to find out whether South Africa is merely fortunate not to have many prosecutions or whether there is something lacking in the criminal justice system.

Ms Makaula pointed out that the Board still has to embark on its educational programmes. She said she was shocked to find that there is such a high content of sexually explicit material in video games, and the Board needs to speed up its classification in this area. The Board is also working on getting fines in place for people who fail to classify. This is to make it less attractive not to classify. At the moment it is left to police to fine people and they get away with fines of about R200, way below the amount it costs to classify.

She also pointed out that it would aid the cause of children and the Board if the Act allowed for the appointment of inspectors.

She said the Board has distributed classification guidelines calling for inputs from the public until the end of June 2000. At the end of July 2000 the responses of the general public would be presented.

The Chairperson said the Committee would endorse the budget of the Board in its report. The meeting was adjourned.

Appendix 1:
FILM AND PUBLICATION BOARD ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 1998/ 1999

The audit was conducted in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards which encompass generally accepted auditing standards. These standards require that the audit be planned and performed so as to obtain reasonable assurance that, in all material respects, fair presentation is achieved in the annual financial statements. An audit includes an evaluation of the appropriateness of the accounting policies, an examination, on a test basis, of evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures included in the financial statements, an assessment of the reasonableness of significant provisions and a consideration of the appropriateness of the overall presentation of the annual financial statements. I consider that the audit procedures were appropriate in the circumstances to enable me to express the opinion presented below.

The opinion presented below should be read with my report to Parliament in terms of section 5 (f) of the Auditor-General Act, 1995 (Act No 12 of 1995).

In my opinion, the annual financial statements fairly present the financial position at 31 March 1997 and the results of operations and cash flow for the year then ended in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice and in the manner required by the Companies Act, 1973 (Act No 61 of 1973).

Cape Town, 31/03/99 Dr. N Makhaula

Chief Executive Officer

Cape Town, 31/03/99 Dr. N Makhaula

Chief Executive Officer

Cape Town, 31/03/99 Dr. N Makhaula

Chief Executive Officer

Cape Town, 31/03/99 Dr. N Makhaula

Chief Executive Officer

Cape Town, 31/03/99 Dr. N Makhaula

Chief Executive Officer

Cape Town, 31/03/99 Dr. N Makhaula

Chief Executive Officer

Cape Town, 31/03/99 Dr. N Makhaula

Chief Executive Officer