Department of Correctional Services Budget: briefing

Meeting report

SECURITY AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS SELECT COMMITTEE
16 May 2005
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES BUDGET: BRIEFING

Chairperson: Kgoshi L Mokoena (ANC, Limpopo)

Documents handed out
Department of Correctional Services Strategic Plan 2005/6 - 2009/10
Departmental Estimates of National Expenditure for 2005/06 - 2007/8: PowerPoint Presentation
Monitoring of Offenders Placed Under Section 62 (f) of the Criminal Procedure Act: PowerPoint Presentation
Overview of Overcrowding: PowerPoint Presentation
Departmental Skills Development Programme: PowerPoint Presentation
Departmental Assistance Offered to Community Corrections Centres: PowerPoint Presentation

SUMMARY
The Department of Correctional Services began by presenting their Strategic Plan for 2005/6 to 2009/10. Specifically, eight strategic goals had been identified, which were to be met within the next five years. These eight goals were: implementing the White Paper on Corrections; implementing a seven-day establishment; establishing parole boards; reducing overcrowding; managing HIV/AIDS in prisons; improving nutritional services in prisons; managing development programmes; and improving security in facilities. The delegation also briefly discussed some of the Department’s objectives for 2005/6. These included: improving financial management, improving the administration of facilities, improving the care programmes offered to inmates; and enhancing the social reintegration programme.

The delegation then discussed the budget for 2005/6. The Department had been allocated a budget of approximately R9.2 billion for 2005/6. Most of this would be spent on administration and security. The delegation then briefly discussed the Community Correctional Centres initiative, and the Department’s skills development programme.

In the ensuing discussion, Members enquired about overcrowding in correctional facilities; corruption within Correctional Services; the implementation of a seven-day working week; the location of the four new correctional centres; the assistance that the Department offered newly released ex-offenders; the Department’s staff retention policies; the impact of gangsterism in prisons; the outsourcing of the three meal system; and the vacancy levels within the Department.

MINUTES

Department briefing
Mr T Motseki (Deputy Commissioner: Executive Management) began by outlining the Department’s strategic plan for 2005/6 to 2009/10. He noted that the Department would be focusing on eight broad strategic goals. These were:
- the implementation of the White Paper on Corrections. In accordance with this, the Department had selected 36 correctional centres that would be transformed into centres of excellence. Pilot needs-based corrections, development and care programmes would be implemented at these centres.
- the implementation of a seven-day establishment. The Department had negotiated the implementation of a seven-day establishment with the trade unions. This would be phased in over three years, beginning in June 2005, and would translate into Saturday, and eventually Sunday, being defined as normal working days. The reduction in overtime costs would be used to increase the Department’s staff complement.
- establishment of Supervision and Parole Boards. These were promulgated on 1 October 2004. These boards would be staffed by community members, and officials from the Department, the South African Polices Services, and the Justice Department.
- Reducing overcrowding. A national framework had been developed to alleviate prison overcrowding. Construction of four new facilities, to relieve overcrowding, would begin in the course of 2005/6. Ms J Sishuba (Chief Deputy Director: Development and Care) added that the sentences of certain offenders could be converted into correctional supervision. The Department could also help certain offenders obtain funds to pay fines. Another mechanism to alleviate overcrowding would be to ensure that offenders who qualified for parole were released from prisons. Existing legislation would be used to alleviate overcrowding. For example, Section 62(f) of the Criminal Procedure Act made provision for certain awaiting trial detainees, who were not a risk, to be placed under the supervision of corrections officials, as part of their bail conditions.
- Management of HIV and AIDS. This would be conducted within the framework provided by the Department of Health. The Department would be conducting a survey to establish the prevalence of HIV/AIDS amongst prisoners.
- Improving nutritional services. This would involve the implementation of the three meals per day system. The Department had already outsourced the three-meal system in seven areas.
- Management and development of programmes. This would include an evaluation of the Department’s existing rehabilitation programmes.
- Improvement of the security function. This would entail the roll-out of electronic access control measures at 60 facilities by September 2005.

Mr Motseki then discussed the Department’s objectives for 2005/06. These broadly fell under seven programmes, which were:
- Administration programme. This included improving financial management, accounting and supply chain processes. The Department would improve its compliance with legislation and work towards eradicating corruption. The Department’s overall human resource capacity and management would be improved. This would include recruiting 3 057 new employees.
- Security programme. Under this, the Department would aim to reduce escapes.
- Corrections programme. This would involve improving the management and administration of correctional centres. In order to achieve this, the Department would be undertaking offender profiles. Various sub-programmes would be implemented to help inmates deal with issues such as drug abuse and anger management. Measures would also be taken to ensure that society, as a whole, took responsibility for corrections.
- Care programme. This would include improving the care services offered to inmates.
- Development programme. This would involve encouraging inmates to become involved in education, sports, arts, culture and technical programmes.
-Social reintegration programme. Services that prepared offenders for their release would be improved. Indeed, supervision of ex-offenders in the community would also be enhanced.
-Facilities programme. This would entail an evaluation of the maintenance and repair work undertaken by contractors at correctional facilities.

Mr P Gillingham (Chief Deputy Commissioner: Finance) outlined the Department’s budgets for 2005/6 to 2007/8. For 2005/6, the Department’s budget would be R9 234 085 000, which would increase to R9 960 488 000 in 2006/7. The majority of the 2005/6 budget would be spent on administration and security. In terms of the 2005/6 provincial budget allocations, Gauteng would receive the largest portion (R1 231 652 000), while the Limpopo would receive the least (R108 937 000). Head Office would receive a budget of R 3 797 950 000 in 2005/6, most of which would be re-allocated by the Department to the provinces.

Ms Sishuba, in response to a written question from the Committee, highlighted the assistance offered to Community Corrections Centres. Through this, certain categories of offenders could serve their sentences in the community. Financial and material assistance was made available to offenders upon their release. Added to this, the Department would aid offenders in finding accommodation and work opportunities. This aided in ensuring that offenders were re-integrated into society. There were, however, a number of challenges facing Community Corrections Centres, such as a lack of vehicles, the inaccessibility of the centres, and a lack of marketing.

Mr V Petersen (Chief Deputy Commissioner: Corporate Services) outlined aspects of the Department’s Skills Development Programme. This involved the provision of training, and retraining, for members of Correctional Services. The skills development budget for 2005/6 was R 52 204 300. Entry-level training was provided by Zonderwater and Kroonstad Colleges. The Department had allocated R2 890 000 to the Policing, Security, Legal and Corrections (POSLEC) Sectoral Education and Training Authority (SETA) for training purposes. Added to this, bursaries were offered to employees. The Department would also be implementing learnership and internship programmes. It was planned that the POSLEC SETA would be amalgamated with other related SETAs. Mr Petersen added that the vacancy levels of Correctional Services were relatively high, and as such, four recruitment drives would be conducted in 2005/6.

Discussion
Mr M Mzizi (IFP, Gauteng) noted that awaiting trial detainees contributed to prison overcrowding. These awaiting trial detainees were partially the responsibility of the Police and the Justice Department. He therefore enquired whether the Police and the Justice Department contributed towards the budget, which Correctional Services spent on awaiting trial detainees.

Mr L Mti (Commissioner of Correctional Services) answered that the Justice Department and the Police, did not contribute towards the cost of holding awaiting trial detainees. However, there had been a debate in the Cabinet regarding who should be responsible for awaiting trial detainees. This debate needed to be finalised, but if Correctional Services was responsible, then it should receive funding for holding awaiting trial detainees.

Mr S Shiceka (ANC, Gauteng) noted that some correction officials failed to implement Section 62(f) of the Criminal Procedure Act. This was one of the reasons why awaiting trial detainees were contributing to overcrowding.

Mr Mzizi commented that some offenders, who had been released from prison, committed offences again because of unemployment. They would then be re-imprisoned. He asked whether the Department was addressing this problem.

Mr Mzizi questioned the seven-day week details and whether hiring more employees would reduce the Department’s overtime costs.

Mr Mti commented that Correctional Services staff had been receiving overtime payments for Saturday and Sundays. As of June 2005, Saturday would be considered a normal working day, which would mean that no overtime payments would be made. Sunday would become a normal working day in 2008. However, in order to implement this, the Department needed more staff to ensure that there was a rotation system over weekends. As a result, over the next three years, the Department would be employing an additional 8 900 people. The cost of employing these people would be less than the current overtime payments.

Mr A Manyosi (ANC, Eastern Cape) enquired whether Correctional Services had reached an agreement with the trade unions regarding Saturday becoming a normal working day. Mr Mti responded that an agreement had been reached.

Mr Mzizi questioned why the Department was building new correctional centres in areas that had existing correctional facilities. Mr Manyosi asked for more details on the criteria used to identify sites for the new correctional centres.

Mr Mti was unable reassure the Committee that the correct criteria had been used in deciding on the location of the new facilities. Indeed, the process whereby Department built new facilities in areas where there were existing facilities, needed to be reviewed. However, the Department did try to ensure that all the provinces benefited from the placements of correctional centres.

The Chairperson enquired whether broad-based black economic empowerment (BEE) companies would be building the new correctional centres. Mr Mti replied that BEE was a criteria in the awarding of contracts. Despite this, there was room for improvement.

Mr Manyosi asked whether the Inspecting Judge was remunerated by Correctional Services or the Justice Department. Mr Mti replied that the inspecting judge was remunerated by Correctional Services. In fact, Correctional Services allocated a budget of R13.4 million to the office of the inspecting judge.

Mr A Moseki (ANC, North West) asked how the Department planned to measure the effectiveness of its reintegration programme.

Mr Mti responded that the Department was in the process of formulating measurements to analyse its impact.

Mr Moseki enquired about the financial, and material assistance, that the Department provided to newly released ex-prisoners. Was the Department facilitating loans for these people?

Mr Mti noted that the financial assistance provided by the Department to ex-offenders was minimal. It related to such issues as paying the transportation costs, of released offenders, from the prison to their homes. The Department did not provide any large scale financial assistance. Upon release, the Department would also pay out the money owed to offenders for any work, which they may have provided to the Department whilst they were imprisoned.

Mr Moseki observed that the Department was working with various companies to provide ex-offenders with job opportunities. He asked which companies were involved in this initiative.

Ms Sishuba responded that prospective employers, of released offenders, were not necessarily companies. Some ex-offenders were employed by NGOs or even former employers. Private companies were also amongst prospective employers. Mr Mti added that the Department was considering establishing workshops, outside of prison, which could employ ex-offenders.

Mr Moseki asked how the Department dealt with newly released offenders who did not have any accommodation.

Mr Mti replied that the Department could not be held responsible for ensuring that every offender it released had accommodation. It was rather a responsibility of Social Development and the government as a whole. Ms Sishuba added that faith based organisations, and the Salvation Army, often provided accommodation to newly released offenders.

Mr Moseki noted that the Department had entered into partnerships with counterparts in other countries. He requested more detail regarding these partnerships.

Mr Mti responded that the Department had benefited from international conferences. The Department was guided by the United Nations standards on detention. The Department had also benefited from the work undertaken by various international NGOs on prison reform. Mr Petersen added that Correctional Services had partnerships with Lesotho, Zambia and Sudan. It also assisted other neighbouring SADC states to strengthen their correctional services. Correctional Services was also exploring possible training opportunities in Singapore.

Mr J Le Roux (DA, Eastern Cape) commented that, in the Eastern Cape, there were various empty buildings that could perhaps be used to house juvenile offenders. This would possibly alleviate prison overcrowding.

Mr L Mti responded that perhaps some of these facilities could be better utilised by the Social Development or Education, rather than Correctional Services.

Mr Le Roux enquired whether the Department was cooperating with other governmental departments to address overcrowding.

Mr Mti replied that the Department would strive for greater engagement with other governmental departments around this issue.

Mr Le Roux questioned when there would be parity, in terms of salaries, between the Police and Correctional Services.

Mr Mti responded that police officers received bonuses for making arrests. It was for this reason that police officers appeared to be better remunerated than correctional officers. Correctional Services did provide employees with group life insurance, which was one way that the salary gap between the Police and Correctional Services was being reduced. Mr Petersen added that Correctional Services was also implementing career paths for its employees.

Mr Le Roux observed that although the Department’s budget had increased, it had shrunk in real terms as a percentage of the overall budget of the country. Mr Le Roux enquired whether the Commissioner could ensure that the Department obtained a fair share of the overall budget in the future.

Mr Mti replied that the Department needed to use its existing financial resources effectively before it could request a larger share of the budget.

Ms F Nyanda (ANC, Mpumulanga) stated that in Mpumulanga, there were cases of fraud whereby advertisements were placed that called on people to enclose R3 000 when they applied for a post in Correctional Services. She asked what the Department was doing to address such cases of fraud. Mr S Shiceka asked whether the Department was serious about dealing with corruption. Was the Department making headway in its attempts to fight corruption?

Mr Mti acknowledge that the situation in Mpumulanga was unfortunate. The public needed to be encouraged to report such instances of corruption. The Department was committed to rooting out corruption. If Members had information on corruption, these cases would be investigated.

Mr Shiceka stated that: for as long as gangsterism existed in prisons, the Department’s goal of rehabilitating offenders would not be achieved.

Mr Mti agreed that gangsterism was a major problem in prisons. The Department had requested the Western Cape division to develop a programme to combat gangsterism. The Department would return to brief the Committee on these plans. However, the Department faced various difficulties. One major problem was that some Correctional Service employees identified with the various prison gangs. Another problem was that gangsterism in prisons was merely an extension of gangsterism in society.

Mr S Shiceka enquired whether the vision, outlined in the budget, would allow the Department to function at an optimal level. Could the Department run efficiently if it was centralised? Should it rather be decentralised?

Mr Mti responded that the nature of the Department meant that it was both centralised and decentralised. The Department would be working closely with local municipalities on a decentralised local level. The Department would also welcome any suggestions on how it could decentralise.

Mr Shiceka asked about the Department’s staff retention policies. Mr Mti answered that the Department had retention policies in place, but perhaps they were not completely effective. Indeed, all government departments were struggling to retain qualified people. Certain employees, such as prison doctors, felt that they were not being remunerated properly. However, the Department was guided by the Department of Public Services and Administration regarding the remuneration it provided to employees. Mr Petersen added that career pathing also formed part of the retention strategy.

Mr Shiceka enquired about the conditions that were attached to the awarding of bursaries to Correctional Services staff.

Mr Peterson responded that if a bursary holder failed, they would have to repay the bursary. The conditions of the bursary also stipulated that for every year that the bursary was given, the recipient would be required to work a year at Correctional Services.

Mr Shiceka asked how many learnerships the Department had initiated. Mr Mti replied that the Department had only recently begun to implement learnerships. Currently, no figures were available.

Mr Shiceka remarked that the Department had progressive policies. He asked what strategy the Department had to ensure warders adopted these progressive policies.

Mr Mti acknowledged that there was challenge in getting the Department’s 33 000 employees to adopt its progressive policies. One measure the Department had taken, was to set aside a budget for the reorientation of employees.

Mr Shiceka noted that provinces needed to play a role in implementing the Department’s strategic plan.

Mr Shiceka highlighted that the Department had stated that it would compile a number of qualified reports on its financial management over the next five years. Why would these reports be qualified? A qualified report suggested that certain financial management problems existed. Should the Department not strive for unqualified reports?

Mr Motseki replied that the Department was committed to ensuring that it did not receive any audit reports. Mr Mti noted that the Department would be working towards unqualified reports.

Mr Shiceka noted that there needed to be ongoing interaction between the Department and the Committee.

The Chairperson enquired why the three-meal system had been outsourced.

Mr Mti answered that the three-meal system would be introduced at all 241 correctional facilities. However, the Department had problems rolling out the system, as it was initiated at the height of the recent labour unrest. In the light of this, the Department decided to outsource the three-meal system at seven of its largest prisons. Outsourcing would, therefore, not take place at all the correctional facilities.

The Chairperson stated that the Department needed to improve its communications. For example, when it was announced that certain categories of prisoners were to be released, there was a negative reaction amongst the media and the public. Specifically, one radio station’s listeners had negative sentiments towards the proposal. A Department representative then spoke on the radio station, and the negative reaction subsided. This highlighted the value of effective communication.

Mr Mti acknowledged that the Department needed to improve its communications. There had already been an improvement with the appointment of the Chief Director. However, internal communications also needed to be upgraded.

The Chairperson asked how the Department compiled its offender profiles. It was important that Correctional Services did not release dangerous, unrehabilitated, offenders during the upcoming releases.

Mr Mti stated that the upcoming workshop was aimed at ensuring that the wrong people were not released.

The Chairperson enquired how many former inmates the Department employed. If the Department employed ex-inmates, it would contribute to removing the stigma that surrounds ex-offenders.

Mr Mti noted that in the past, prisons were not geared towards rehabilitation. The Department was also bound by the Public Service Administration, which stipulated that the Department could not hire people with criminal records. There were plans, however, to have some rehabilitated ex-offenders visit the prisons as role models for current inmates.

The Chairperson questioned whether it would take three months to fill the vacancies in the Department. Mr Petersen responded that the Department would not fill all the vacancies in the next three months. It was rather working towards a situation whereby once an individual post became vacant, it would then be filled within three months.

The meeting was adjourned.