Consideration of Request to Extend Contract of DDG, Foreign Affairs; Government Wide Monitoring & Evaluation System & Public Ser
Public Service and Administration
18 October 2006
Meeting Summary
A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.
Meeting report
PUBLIC SERVICE AND ADMINISTRATION PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
18 October 2006
CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST TO EXTEND CONTRACT OF DDG, FOREIGN AFFAIRS; GOVERNMENT
WIDE MONITORING AND EVALUATION SYSTEM & PUBLIC SERVICE AMENDMENT BILL
BRIEFINGS
Acting Chairperson: Mr M Baloyi (ANC)
Relevant Documents
Draft Report on
Application for the Extension of the Employment Contract of Mr Minty
Government-wide
Monitoring and Evaluation System Department of Public Service and
Administration Powerpoint Presentation
Public Service
Amendment Bill, Department of Public Service Powerpoint Presentation
SUMMARY
The Committee deliberated on the Department of Foreign Affairs’ request to
extend the contract of the Deputy Director General, Mr Minty, for a period of
five years. It was resolved that the request be approved, with inclusion of
specific conditions requiring the Department to develop a clear sustainability
strategy to be mainstreamed within the Department’s Strategic Plan, and to
ensure that the Department reported, on an annual basis, on the strategy to the
Portfolio Committee on Foreign Affairs.
The Department of Public Service and Administration briefed the Committee on
two key areas; the design and implementation of the Government wide monitoring
and evaluation system and the public service amendment bill. The Committee was
encouraged by the notable progress in implementing the Government wide
Monitoring and Evaluation system. IT stressed the need to ensure clarity of
roles and responsibilities of the various stakeholders within the system and to
strengthen the role of the Department of Local Government’s Monitoring and
Evaluation systems.
The Committee noted that this was the first briefing on the Public Service
Amendment Bill, and due processes of consultations and deliberations would need
to follow. Preliminary issues that were discussed centred on the timing of the
amendment bill and the role of proposed Government Agencies within the public
service.
MINUTES
Consideration of extension of contract of Deputy Director-General, Department
of Foreign Affairs
The Acting Chairperson referred to the deliberations of the Standing
Committee on Local Government and Administration on 6 October 2006, and stated
that there was a need to take a Resolution on extension of the contract of Mr
Abdul Minty, Deputy Director General, Department of Foreign Affairs. He
stressed that it was important that this case be looked at without setting
precedents, and that the Department must be tasked with building a monitoring
and evaluation mechanism for sustainability into the extension. He proposed
that the Committee take a resolution:
- to recommend to Parliament that the extension of the contract of Mr Minty be
ratified with effect from 1 November 2006;
- that the following conditions be included, namely that the Department should
prepare a succession plan to be mainstreamed within the Strategic Plan within
six months, and that the Department should report, on an annual basis, progress
on this succession plan to the Portfolio Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Discussion
Mr M Sikakane (ANC) commented that Mr Minty’s case required no debate. His
immense knowledge required that the Committee endorse this Resolution without
attaching any specific conditions.
The Acting Chairperson believed that it was imperative that the Resolution
include some form of conditions for sustainability, and the principle was not
negotiable.
Mr I Julies (DA) said that he had expected the Department of Foreign Affairs to
employ similar principles to those of the private sector. He recommended that
Department should ensure that Mr Minty had a deputy immediately. The fact that
the Department had not put in place sustainability mechanisms after securing
the two-year extension was unacceptable.
Ms P Mashangoane (ANC) commented that the context and sensitivities at hand
warranted an approval for this Resolution. However, she stressed that the
Committee had to be clear that it was not setting precedents.
Mr K Khumalo (ANC) observed that South Africa had recently secured a
non-permanent seat at the United Nations Security Council. This portfolio was
an important one, and it ought to be efficiently managed. He said Mr Minty’s
expertise was therefore more crucial now than ever before. He would support the
extension.
Members adopted the draft resolution proposed by the Acting Chairperson,
including the sustainability arrangements. Committee secretariat would
therefore produce and circulate the final report in accordance to due
processes.
Briefing by Department of Public Service and Administration on the
Government-wide Monitoring and Evaluation System
Mr Richard Levin, Director General, Department of Public Service and
Administration (DPSA), briefed the Committee on the Government Wide Monitoring
and Evaluation system. He highlighted that this system was a framework that
encompassed a number of systems and brought together a range of stakeholders.
It was driven by the need to link Strategic Plans with annual reports and to
establish a menu of common indicators to measure progress and performance. It
hence adopted a modular approach, and its three phases also overlapped with
each other. He highlighted that the overall achievements of this system
included ppublic commitment and political support to creating the system, shown in
Cabinet’s adoption of the Strategy and Implementation Plan. There was consistent,
sustained membership and involvement of core task team members. There had
recently been agreements on appointment of task teams and identification of
members to facilitate reporting on the programme of action 2006, and
development of indicators.
Discussion
Mr K
Khumalo (ANC) observed that it was encouraging to observe that this Strategy
was developed in response to the Public Service Review undertaken in October
1999, which raised key issues facing the Public Sector, including weak
monitoring and evaluation systems.
Dr U Roopnarain (IFP) observed that the Government Wide Monitoring and
Evaluation system seemed to be adopting a “one-size fits all” approach, whilst
the reality was that Departments operated differently. She also enquired if
there were plans to roll out this system to Local Government level.
The Director General responded that this system was not adopting a “one size
fits all” approach. That was why it is a framework and not a single system. He
stressed that it was important that the Public Service must develop a single
data repository. This framework would not replace existing systems. Rather, it
was interactive and modular, and it filtered both horizontally and vertically.
The Community Practice Mechanism would ensure that lesson learning and
experience sharing was encouraged, to avoid prescriptive approaches. He
stressed that Government had a set of common principles, therefore, efforts
should be made to develop common modalities of measuring progress towards this
common goal.
The Acting Chairperson asked if the Framework was clear on the constitutional
mandates of various actors, especially the Public Service Commission, and the
involvement of the Commission in the system as a whole.
The Director General clarified that this Framework had not led to conflicting
roles and responsibilities. The Commission had been involved in the development
of this Framework. Like other bodies, the Commission also had its own systems
and instruments, but would share common information that was readily available,
and not create new systems. He stressed that this was a partnership based
Framework, with a clear emphasis on linking Departments’ Strategic Plans with
Annual Reports.
Mr I Julies (DA) observed that local government performance management systems
were very weak. He enquired if this Framework would support the bolstering of
these systems.
The Director General responded that the involvement of Local Government was
important. The Department of Public
Service and Administration and the Department of Local Government would work
together to ensure that there was integration at provincial and local level.
The Acting Chairperson thanked the Director General and endorsed Parliament’s
interest in ensuring linkages between Departments’ strategic plans and their
Annual reports.
Briefing on the Amendment of the Public Service and Administration Bill
Mr Richard Levin, Director General, Department of Public Service and
Administration (DPSA), briefed the Committee on the draft amendments to the
Public Service and Administration Bill. These amendments were geared to address
organisational and human resource areas that directly or indirectly hampered
service delivery. He stated that the Department had opted to amend the existing
Bill, given that work is underway to submit a draft bill for Single Public
Service, which was expected to come into effect in 2009. This would entail
substantial policy shifts. Therefore, it was seen as not desirable to introduce
a new Bill in existing format at this stage.
Discussion
The Acting Chairperson highlighted that there is need to observe due
process for this Bill. The Committee considered this briefing as a preliminary
process. He said the Committee would request clarification on proposed
amendments as required. He encouraged members to raise questions, but stressed
that they need not be exhaustive, given that more dialogue would follow.
The Acting Chairperson asked the Director General to provide an indication on
the preferred timing for the passage of the Bill, and sought more clarification
as to why these amendments could not be included into the Single Public Service
bill.
The Director General agreed that due processes and procedures must be followed,
and the Department would make itself available to the Committee for further
questions.
Mr Sikakane agreed that the most important issue was when the Department would
like to see the Bill passed.
The Director General responded that the Bill was urgent; but he recognised that
due processes had to be followed. The Department would like to see the Bill
passed between May and June 2007.
Dr U Roopnarain and Mr K Minnie (DA) asked the Department to clarify what the
Government Agency Model was, and how it worked in practice.
The Director General responded that the Government Agency model should be
workshopped. He gave a brief background, stating that post 1994 entities and
agencies were created to achieve service delivery objectives, in response to
global evolution of Public Sector Reform and the assertion that Government institutions
were not best placed to deliver this agenda. This led to the creation of
outsourced agencies. However, many challenges ensued, especially on the
institutional structures, accountability arrangements, and growing distance
between these entities and their political heads.
Adv A van Schoor, Chief Director, Legal Services, DPSA, added that the Agency
model should be viewed within the broader context of the review of public
entities. In the draft Act, it was proposed that the request for such an Agency
would come from the Minister or Premier; and this would be followed by an
evaluation conducted by Treasury, the Department of Public Service and
Administration and the Department involved. Finally, the President will be
asked to ratify this recommendation. The Agency would have direct
accountability to the Department and it would maintain links with principal
departments on oversight. Its resources would be ring-fenced and dedicated for
the related functions.
The Acting Chairperson stated that a workshop would be convened as soon as
possible to address the key issues that had been raised.
The meeting was adjourned.
Audio
No related
Documents
No related documents
Present
- 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.