National Electronic Media Institute Budget & Strategic Plan 2007/08 briefing

COMMUNICATIONS PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
30 March 2007
NATIONAL ELECTRONIC MEDIA INSTITUTE BUDGET & STRATEGIC PLAN 2007/08 BRIEFING

Acting Chairperson: Mr G Oliphant (ANC)

Documents Handed Out
Nemisa Strategic Plan 2007/08 presentation
Nemisa Strategic Plan 2007/08

Audio Recording of the Meeting (Part 1) , (Part 2) , (Part 3) and (Part 4)

SUMMARY
The National Electronic Media Institute of South Africa noted the challenges faced by the Institute since its inception in 1998. The new business plan was implemented from September 2006. The Institute looked to firmly establish itself as a respected and advanced institution of higher learning in training and development as well as content generation for multimedia applications in the ICT sector. The key objectives were outlined. It had to make a strong brand statement, develop training relevant to market needs and to the highest standards, repeat the skills study, and follow the awareness and branding strategies. It was to find new revenue generating activities, interact with industry, and form strategic alliances. The products were offered through generic and customized programmes, projects and workshops. The programmes covered broadcasting, broadcasting engineering, telecommunications engineering, graphic design, animation and information technology. Nemisa anticipated to break even with a grant of R25.6. Details were given of the structure, the new marketing plan and objectives, and the strategies being used.

Discussions centred on the fees and financial assistance, the affordability of training programmes, the types of courses, the breakdown of the targeted student population, the critical skills in the industry, the reason why it still had financial constraints, and the likely budgetary growth. The Committee requested a profile of the students in each course and noted that it would visit Nemisa in May

Some detail was given on the future vision of the institution, as mapped out by government in 2003. Some detail was also given on Nemisa’s corporate objectives, which included the establishment of a new Nemisa, the expansion of the Student Profile as well as an expansion of the selection criteria.
 
MINUTES
National Electronic Media Institute (Nemisa): 2007/08 Budget and Strategic Plan Briefing
Mr Peter De Klerk, CEO, Nemisa began by outlining the history and corporate objectives of the organisation. The new Nemisa was launched in July 2006 and the business plan implemented from September 2006. NEMISA was positioned as a multimedia skills generator and content producer. It was to establish structural partnerships and be the electronic content generator for the government.

Mr De Klerk noted that the 2006 business plan had placed emphasis on the establishment of the new Institute, creating new business opportunities for sustainability, creating learnerships and expanding the profile and selection criteria for students, fostering partnerships and marketing itself. Nemisa looked to firmly establish itself as a respected and advanced institution of higher learning in training and development as well as content generation for multimedia applications in the ICT sector. The key objectives were outlined. It had to make a strong brand statement. It must develop training relevant to market needs and to the highest standards, repeat the skills study, and follow the awareness and branding strategies. It was to find new revenue generating activities, interact with industry, and form strategic alliances.

NEMISA noted its product range and service delivery through generic and customized programmes, projects and workshops. The programmes covered broadcasting, broadcasting engineering, telecommunications engineering, graphic design, animation and information technology. It was registered with the Department of Education (DOE) and through the Council for Higher Education (CHE). Registration was in the process for assessors and moderators.

The new structure of Nemisa was outlined, and the budget and costings were tabled. It anticipated to break even with a grant of R25.6. Nemisa detailed its operational controls and procedures, which included a Risk Management Plan, Implementation Plan, Fraud Prevention Plan and policies and procedures for financial management, supply chain, management and human resources. There was an internal audit report and Charter and a control culture environment profile. Brief details were given of the plans, the new marketing plan and objectives, and the strategy.

Discussion
The Acting Chairperson asked what the rates were for students and asked how expensive they would have to be in order to remain competitive.

Mr De Klerk replied that the fees were market related, but were about 10 to 15% lower than market prices.

The Acting Chairperson asked what the medium to long-term outlook was in terms of fees at the institute.

Mr De Klerk replied that, because the Institute had started out with very low credibility as a newcomer in the market, it obviously could not price itself too highly. Over the next three years, it was likely to raise its costs to meet market standards.

Mr R Pieterse (ANC) asked whether the marketing power was such that Nemisa was able to make itself accessible to the people. He asked in particular whether the rural population was addressed. He also asked if all students had to be fee-paying.

Mr De Klerk replied that these issues were addressed in the mission statement and a full breakdown of the targeted student population would appear there. Nemisa intended that at least 40% of their students should have financial assistance.

Mr M Mohlalonga (ANC) stated that it was difficult to engage fully when the Committee had only just seen the strategic plan, which he would prefer to be sent in advance. He further stated that when the SABC had spoken to the Committee, it had advised of problems that it was having with regard to skills, particularly for digital migration. He therefore enquired if Nemisa had done an analysis of the critical skills shortages in the industry, and were preparing a response.

Mr De Klerk replied that the strategic plan was sent to the Committee eight days prior to the meeting, and he was thus unsure why the Member had not received a copy. He added that a detailed skills study had been completed at the end of 2005. Nemisa had a good idea of what the needs were. These tended to be engineering oriented. A copy of the study could be sent to the Committee. In addition to this, there was an advisory body that kept the board up to speed regarding skills shortages.

The Acting Chairperson stated that the Committee had indeed received a document a week or so prior to the meeting, but was told it was a draft. The Committee only received the current presentation the evening prior to the meeting.

Mr De Klerk replied that the document sent eight days prior to the meeting was the final document.

The Acting Chairperson commended Nemisa in now managing to get on its feet but asked why it still had financial constraints

Mr De Klerk replied that Nemisa had demonstrated what would be needed to deliver on the mandate. In the industry the needs were growing substantially and so the funding needed to match an ever-growing mandate. Nemisa was breaking even for the moment, but if it was going to keep up with the demand, investment in it would need to grow.

The Acting Chairperson asked how much growth was needed in investment.

Mr De Klerk replied that it was difficult to say. On the equipment side, it was around R4 million to R5 million a year. The building in which the institution was now based was rapidly filling and there could be a need to find bigger premises. The curriculum may also need revision, which would also require added funding.

Mr M Kholwane (ANC) enquired about the time lines in the strategic plan. He further stated that he would like clarity on what precisely was meant by 40% financial assistance, and whether this related to each course, or the total student body. He wondered if those in need of financial assistance would be relegated to certain courses that were not as costly or advanced, and thus would in effect stay disadvantaged.

Mr De Klerk replied that the schedule provided was for the particular financial year. With regard to the criteria for the different courses, the Institute looked at the student’s particular needs and talents. The member’s concern was however valid. Animation, for instance, needed a particular natural skill, regardless of a student’s background. For each course, there would be no less than 40% of students that were being assisted financially.

The Acting Chairperson asked that the Committee be sent a profile of the number of students in each course. He noted that the Committee was coming to Johannesburg in May and would meet Nemisa, and spend some time at the institute.

Mr De Klerk stated that his organization was very sensitive to the disadvantaged issue. It looked forward to sitting with the Committee and examining the issue in depth.

Committee business
The Acting Chairperson stated that the Committee would be visiting Pretoria in the second week of May to see the Department of Communications, the Board of the Post Office, Sentech, and Nemisa.

The meeting was adjourned.