Committee Reports on ICD & Department Budgets & Strategic Planning Workshop

This premium content has been made freely available


26 May 2006
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.

Meeting report

26 May 2006

Ms MM Sotyu (ANC)

Documents handed out
Department of Safety and Security Budget Vote 24 for 2006/07: Part
1, 2 & 3
Independent Complaints Directorate Budget Vote 22 for 2006/07
Strategic Planning Workshop Draft Report: Part
1, 2 & 3

The Committee considered three documents for adoption: two Budget Vote Reports relating to the Department and the Independent Complaints Directorate (ICD) respectively as well as the Draft Report of the Strategic Planning Workshop. As per norm, the Chairperson systematically surveyed the documents (page-by-page) and asked Members to comment and make amendments. This exhaustive process resulted in the adoption (with amendments) of the Draft Report of the Strategic Planning Workshop and Budget Vote 22 of the ICD. The other document was provisionally endorsed but not adopted as there were outstanding issues.

Department of Safety and Security Budget

Mr. Ndlovu (IFP) voiced his perplexity regarding the origin of the R498 million listed in the report.

The Chairperson answered that this figure was arrived at by the Research Unit.

Mr. King (DA) observed that there were a number of places (in the report) where additional information had been added that was not in the presentation.

The Chairperson acknowledged this point. She stated that all supplementary information was included by the Research Unit and that they were therefore present at this meeting to answer any queries.

Mr. Jankielsohn (DA) sought clarity in respect of the amount of new recruits that would be allocated to sector policing and to detective services and crime intelligence services.

Mr. Ntuli’s (ANC) explanation that the reference to 30% was specific to detective services and that the 90% was general was universally rejected.

The Chairperson echoed the puzzlement shared by the other members concerning this point and asked Nadia, who is a member of the Research Unit, to expound.

Nadia was equally bemused. She also perceived the amounts as a contradiction and would investigate to find answers.

Ms. Van Wyk (ANC) weighed in that the figures provided did not make sense. She alleged that the numbers appeared inflated and that the drafters of the report were hoping that this Committee would not notice that.

The Chairperson asserted the need to clarify this issue before adoption. She remarked that this Committee would be failing in its duty if it did otherwise.

Mr. Jankielsohn (DA) declared his party’s abstention from supporting the ‘Recommendation’ section of the report. He requested that this be noted accordingly.

The Chairperson responded that Mr Jankielsohn’s party was entitled not to support any part of the document and that this would be noted as such.

The Committee resolved to adopt the report at the following meeting once its questions had been satisfactorily answered.

Independent Complaints Directorate Budget for 2006/07
Mr. Jankielsohn (DA) inserted the number 24 in the sentence to read: Establishment of 24 satellite offices.

Mr. Ntuli (ANC) stated that the word ‘personal’ should be corrected to personnel. It would now read: Implementation of the Personnel Development Plan.

Ms. Van Wyk (ANC) replaced the word ‘increased’ with ‘upgraded’.

Mr. Jankielsohn (DA) declared his party’s abstention from supporting the ‘Recommendation’ section of the report. He requested that this be noted accordingly.

The report was subsequently adopted with amendments.

Draft Report of the Strategic Planning Workshop
Mr. Jankielsohn (DA) was responsible for creating some humour. He said that he did not understand what the word ‘rote’ meant. After Nadia explained its meaning, he remarked that he studied English Linguistics at tertiary level and never came across this word before. To much laughter, he admitted that he studied it at the University of Free State.

Ms. Van Wyk (ANC) wanted the report to reflect that the South African Police Services (SAPS) trained with Sweden.

Nadia pointed out that this fact is mentioned in the report.

Ms. Van Wyk (ANC) referred Members to page 25, the first sentence of paragraph 4. She felt that the part that said: ‘as it can…’ should be excluded. She argued that the inclusion of this part of the sentence was an excuse for the police not to be accountable.

The Chairperson buttressed the sentiments of Ms. Van Wyk.

The report was adopted with amendments.

The meeting was adjourned.


No related


No related documents


  • We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: