Department Budget & Strategic Plan: response to public hearings

This premium content has been made freely available

International Relations

16 May 2007
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.

Meeting report

FOREIGN AFFAIRS PORTFOLIO COMMITTE
16 May 2007
DEPARTMENT BUDGET & STRATEGIC PLAN: RESPONSE TO PUBLIC HEARINGS

Chairperson: Mr D Sithole (ANC)

Documents handed out:
None

Audio Recording of the Meeting

SUMMARY
The Director-General of the Department of Foreign Affairs presented three major initiatives which the department had been focusing on in the past week: the African Agenda (AA); the meetings between the African Union (AU) and the European Union (EU); and the issues raised by the public hearings on 8 – 9 May 2007. These issues could be grouped into the broad categories of: compatibility of domestic and foreign goals, the AA, South-South cooperation, North-South Cooperation, global governance, bilateral commissions, the Department’s interface with the public and the capacity of the department.

Concerns expressed in the discussion included South Africa’s dual membership to SACU and SADC and the EU’s perception of this; the issue of vacancies within the Department and the measures to fill these vacancies; SA’s leadership role on the continent and the difficulties this presented; and SA’s interaction with Swaziland in terms of regional democracy. Of particular concern was the lack support given to and promotion of transfer officials and the measures taken to address these problems.

MINUTES
Response by Department to issues raised during public hearings
Mr A Ntsaluba (Director-General: Department of Foreign Affairs) explained that his presentation was to focus on the three major initiatives which the department had been focusing on in the past seven days ­-firstly the African Agenda; secondly the meeting with the EU and thirdly issues raised in earlier public hearings.

The first of these was the African Agenda. This had been raised in meetings with the African ministers, held in Durban on the 8 to 10 May 2007. Central to this meeting was to where South Africa was leading the continent. The ministers had reflected over three issues regarding the AA:
-The common challenges faced by the continent.
-The challenges faced by South Africa and the rest of the continent with regards to a need for regional integration.
-The capacity needed in order to bridge the gap been lofty ideals and objective reality in order to achieve goals. All leaders were in agreement that a greater African unity was necessary so that Africa could occupy a proper place in the world system. However, in reality, African countries faced different levels of development to one another and tended to slide back into the comfort of their colonial past when faced with difficulties. This led to the question of whether there is in fact common ground between countries in the continent which warrants unification.
These issues relate to how South Africa conducts its foreign policy.

The second major issue the Department had to deal with were two sets of meetings in Brussels. The first was a meeting between the AU and the EU. These centred on the need for the AU to have a far more structured relationship with the EU and the need of the EU to work with the continent with regards to challenges to Africa which affect EU countries, such as migration by African citizens to EU countries. On the EU side, it was important to address the increasing role played by the East in Africa which was formerly the EU’s playground.

During the meetings, SA had an opportunity to sign a strategic partnership with the EU. At the heart of this partnership is recognition of the leadership role SA has on the continent. The implications of this for SA’s foreign policy is two-fold: SA has the opportunity to leverage this to its advantage on the one hand, but on the other, it has to deal with how this makes it look to the other African countries. SA should leverage this support to advance its African Agenda and its implementation.

The DG then stated that he would respond to and/or make comments on the issues raised during the public hearings. These issues could be grouped into the broad categories of: compatibility of domestic and foreign goals, the AA, South-South cooperation, North-South Cooperation, global governance, bilateral commissions, the Department’s interface with the public and the capacity of the department.

Domestic and Foreign goals
The DG felt that this derived its mandate from the strategic framework guiding the government. This framework has assigned the central task as growing the economy in order to address issues of poverty and underdevelopment through job creation. This had informed the emphasis foreign affairs had placed on economic diplomacy. Questions had been raised as to the capacity of SA diplomats to deal with this economic diplomacy. The DG felt that this was lacking. Most investors interacted with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in order to invest, so members needed to be able to cope with these issues.

National interest: The issue of national interest in South Africa occupied the DFA. The DG felt that whilst SA was investing a lot in the continent to promote peace and stability but was the only one not benefiting. SA would not be able to grow a sustainable economy if it was carrying the deficit of so much of the continent.

Investors from SA sometimes undermine SA’s foreign policy. This relates to national interest. The Department is working on an investment image for South Africa in order to establish what it is that gives South Africa a comparative advantage.

African Agenda
The DG raised the question of whether Africa was ready to accept that there would be countries within Africa which may lead development at some stage or would this be regarded as unwanted domination.

Related to this was AU funding. On the one hand, South Africa was able to fund the AU to a larger extent than other countries. As such, organs such as the Pan African Parliament were well developed. Such funding was necessary in order to develop the AU and the economies of Africa. However, this ability to fund was seen as a threat by other member states who did not want the AU budget to be overly dependent on one country. The DG stated that the AU was hugely under-funded but SA could not be seen to dominate. SA was subsequently funding different projects, such as the Commission on Human Rights, which it believed was necessary for development on the continent.

The DG said that no members of government would go to the AU due to the lack of remuneration in such positions. The government was trying to improve this. The problem was also due to a lack of facilities in Addis Ababa in comparison to SA – such as health care officials. Officials would often leave their families behind.

The DG stated that in general the AA was comforting. One of the problems was how to pull other less developed countries forward – especially on issues of human rights. This, however, was not always an easy thing.

Concerning the issue of Western Sahara, SA tries very hard to make sure the UNSC Resolution of Western Sahara was adhered to but also attempted to make sure it was not too much in favour of Morocco. The DFA was trying to manage the feelings of anger at SA from Morocco.

South-South Agenda
SA belonging to SADC and SACU: The ultimate aim of RSA was to establish a SADC-based custom union. However, the experience gained from SACU was necessary in the formation of this union. Thus, there was currently no basis for the dismemberment of SACU. In any event, the WTO would not allow any country to belong to two customs unions. There is much debate about the practicality of a SADC-wide customs union. However, it is necessary to have congruent economic and political regional integration.

Regional Democracy, particularly in Swaziland: this had been covered in previous committee discussions.

Strategic partners in South-South Agenda: RSA had both a trilateral agreement with India and Brazil (IBSA) and bilateral agreements with both of these countries. The DG explained that this was because there were some things which only related to one of the countries. The trilateral issues tended to relate to multi-lateral trade issues.

Strategy towards the East: The countries in the East fall into 3 categories: Countries which are strategic partners, due to their scientific knowledge and or position as countries which are the leaders in the region; countries which played a central role in NAM and the G77; and countries in the South such as South Korea and Japan where the major issues dealt with by the DFA were those of trade and economic issues, the volume of trade with these countries necessitated the relationship. India, Brazil, China, Venezuela, Mexico, Argentina and Malaysia were cited as strategic partners in the South - Argentina, Venezuela and Mexico due to their position of prominence in South America and Malaysia in the Asia.

North-South Cooperation

SA must engage far more with countries which are active on the continent, such as France. In Cote d’Ivoire, France’s actions were both a result of French foreign policy and of the policies of President Chirac. They would have to wait to see what the effect of his exit from the presidency would be. There is also a tendency in Southern Europe to promote cooperation with the northern, Arab African states, which would have implications for SA’s policy. In terms of the EU, RSA needed to consolidate its relationship with the EU which is SA’s major trading partner. There are significant values shared by the EU and SA which would help SA to gain support for its African Agenda. SA can also use its position of support from the AU to direct the direction of the continent, in terms of its own interest and in advancing the African Agenda.

NEPAD: The DG said that it was necessary to accept that there were some challenges with respect to NEPAD. Firstly, in moving from the conceptual to the implementation stage, strong organs were needed and these were lacking. Secondly, the transition from one head to another had not been smooth. Thirdly, it was uncertain what the transition from NEPAD being SA-based to AU-based entailed. Philosophical issues and debates which had always surrounded NEPAD were still cropping up. SA was also in difficult situation regarding the funding of NEPAD. On the one hand, funding was necessary in order to ensure the viability of NEPAD. On the other hand, NEPAD was already seen as a South African driven initiative and funding from RSA only served to provoke this view. However, the DG felt that the decisions taken in Algiers with regard to NEPAD had helped with some of these issues.

Global Governance

Millennium Development Goals (MDGs): The issue around MDGs is at the heart of the DFA’s programme. At the beginning of the debate surrounding development, human rights and security, the more developed countries focused on security. However, RSA was attempting to shift this to development through the stance it takes on issues such as trade negotiation and debt cancellation.

Terrorism: South Africa’s policy on this is clear: no cause can justify terrorism.
SA is at the forefront of countries which are against terrorism. There needs to be a clear understanding on the difference between a right to fight for self-determination and terrorism
I
UN Security Council: SA membership. The DG stated that in practice, there was confusion over which position RSA wished to take. Whilst criticism from the media should not be used as a benchmark of success, it was sometimes an indication of issues which needed to be addressed – UNSC membership was one such issue.

Resources: The DFA was attempting to increase resources in terms of calibre of people working for the department.

Bilateral Commissions (BNCs)
The DG stated that he felt that there were too many bilateral commissions which SA was struggling to maintain. Most of the BNC’s were with African countries, who defined the strength of their relationship with other countries as being dependent upon the existence of a BNC. There was sometimes a contradiction been what SA wanted to do by reaching out to other countries and how it sought to maintain these commissions.

Outreach to training and research institutions: The situation is not as bad as it used to be. Ambassadors are now training and mentoring new members of the department. The DFA is currently working on advisory panels made up of members and former members of the department, which will be able to give experienced advice. The Department does work with the Africa Institute. Due to difficulties which had existed at the Institute this collaboration had not previously occurred to such a great extent.

Capacity
Ms M. Nompozolo (Acting DDG: Human Capital) then addressed the issues surrounding capacity. There were two aspects to capacity: skills and numbers of officials.

In terms of skills, there was a focus on trying to address some of the gaps in terms of skills:

Firstly, much work had been done on the FSI since 2003 and 2004, which has regularly been reported to the committee:
There was a restructuring of the FSI, where it was elevated to head of DDG.
There was a new directorate which focused on quality assurance.
There was another directorate looking at research and development which worked closely with the policy and research unit.
The directorates focused on at accredited training.

There were new programmes within the FSI:
-The FSI was involved with the DTI and other departments
-There was cooperation between the FSI and the governments of other countries such as the DRC and Mozambique which aimed to improve the diplomatic skills of those governments.
-A cadet training programme had been introduced.
-Experts such as Dr Landsberg and Dr Zondi were used as lecturers by the FSI.
-There was a focus on expanding the language programmes.

There had been several new initiatives, such as how to operate within universities. There had been briefings with institutes about training programmes. These issues had been addressed by Dr Landsberg and Dr Zondi in the Public Hearings held on 8 May.


In terms of numbers: There were a large number of vacancies. The department was attempting to address these throughout the year. Twice a year it undertook a recruitment drive. It was currently trying to fill 225 positions. A general lack of skilled professionals was making this difficult. It took part in the SABC career fair, went to institutes country-wide and participated in private career exhibitions. Many of the positions appointed were done so internally, which created gaps further down the Department.

The DG commented that the DFA was in a position to appoint three DDG’s. However, all of these candidates were men which posed a challenge in terms of equity.

He also commented that DFA teams had been sent to the Centre for Conflict Resolution in Cape Town for training in peacemaking
.

Budget: The major issue is how to link budget allocation to the priorities of government.

Exchange rate: The rand fluctuates but it is of no consequence to the DFA due to an agreement with the President. If significant fluctuations occur, the figure has to be adjusted in September.

African Renaissance Fund: Up until now it has tended to be used for peacemaking but it should be used for development purposes – a shift which is likely to be seen this year.

Discussion
The Chair commented on the issue of SACU and SADC. He said that the DG assumed that the definition of SADC in the future is the same as it is now. However, the EU defines it differently. The economic partnership with the EU impacted on the political integration of SADC and on the economic agreements with the EU.

The DG replied that this was a constant battle with the EU. However, the DFA believed that once SADC expanded the customs union and the benefits which accrued became apparent, countries would be able to make their choice more easily. The Strategic Partnership which had been signed would facilitate cooperation from the EU and prevent them from hindering integration on the continent.

The Chair commented that the DG had not addressed what the role of civil society was in Foreign Affairs – one of the key issues raised at the public hearings, particularly by COSATU and SANCO. The Chair questioned what the DFA’s interactions were with civil society. He asked how COSATU, who sat on the body of major international organisations, could engage with the DFA so as to work in accordance with SA’s foreign policy.

The DG replied that the focus of the DFA so far had been to focus on the interactions with the institutions. The DFA’s interaction with SANCO and COSATU had been extremely limited and there was no structured relationship with them. He also commented that COSATU was beginning to develop its international agenda but had not previously done so, which could account for the lack of interaction.

The Chair raised the issue of transfer officials and how the DFA could get them to benefit and develop within the department. They could also only get a promotion when they came back home.

The DG replied that Revenue Services had been approached in this regard on numerous occasions. He said that it would be appreciated if the Committee would approach the Revenue Services, especially since they did not really understand what it was based on.

The issue of promotion for the transfer officials was a major problem for numerous reasons. Posts higher than Assistant Director General needed to be advertised to everyone – both internal and external. If posted officials decided to apply for promotions, they would need to come back to SA – it would be too costly for the Department to have them doing the work that needed to be done in SA from a different country. A second method and one which sometimes encountered some resistance amongst officials, was to prevent back-to-back postings to allow officials to be promoted and to gain a feel for the country again. The growing capacity of the DFA allows for a greater rotation of officials posted to various countries.

Mr W Seremane (DA) asked what plan could be put in place to overcome the unending vacancies. Related to this was the question of for how long department officials should be retained – some mobility was necessary.

Mr M Sibande (ANC) requested that statistics regarding vacancies be given.

The DG replied that the DFA was uncomfortable about the 400 vacancies within the DFA. However, it was not looking to fill these 400 vacancies all at once – it had nowhere to house 400 new employees, and it was filling the positions incrementally. However, it kept the figure of 400 in order to demonstrate what the capacity of the DFA should be in order for the DFA to achieve its mandate. Some officials are lost to other departments. The Department can also not compete with the high salaries offered by the private sector.

Mr Seremane suggested that students should be engaged during their vacation time.

The DG replied that this is an idea which should be taken up by the Department.

Mr Seremane commented on the DG’s explanation of the three DDG’s of which none were female. He questioned whether it was best for the country to place a skilled male in that position or to leave it open until a skilled female came along.

The DG replied that he may have phrased this incorrectly. The position would be filled by the male. However, this difficulty accounted for the delay in filling the post.

A member requested that the DG send the Committee the documents relating to the Algiers meeting.

The DG said that he would send the documents.

Mr Sibande raised the issue of Swaziland. He realised that SA was doing something about Swaziland. However, on Workers’ Day, a lot happened, yet the media did not cover this. Swaziland refugees were concerned.

SA has told Swaziland what is constitutional standings are. Swaziland sometimes expects SA to intervene in contradiction to SA’s constitutions which it is unwilling to do. Swaziland is a complicated situation and there are discussions taking place.

Ms A Zuthuli (ANC) stated that there was a problem with SA playing a role of leadership within the continent, which in turn presented the Department with a lot of problems. The DFA would need to make a firm decision on how it was going to handle this problem. SA was already in a leadership position, it was a question of to what extent SA embraced this.

The DG replied that this is what the DFA would be attempting to address at the meetings on 4 June by bringing all the entities together. At the same time, did South Africans understand that what they said outside the country could have major impacts for the way SA was perceived?

Ms Zuthuli asked how to get a grip on the interaction between the department and people not in the department. She raised the issue of the media as a specific concern.

The DG stated that it was a big dilemma. One of the encouraging things he had gained from the meeting of ministers is that people were raising issues which were previously cagey issues. He said that they want to do it in a more consultative way so that it does not feel so bureaucratic and facilitates interaction.

The Chair commented that SA was not giving its diplomats sufficient support given their sacrifice for the country. This related specifically to financial support given to the dependents of diplomats.

The chairperson mentioned that an opportunity to stay in another country for a young person could be an exciting event however he also felt that there could be challenges, he suggested that there could be a way to assist the young people in dealing with their situations when they are deployed. This could help when they come back so that they would be marketable and be able to survive.

The chairperson said that he does not believe that the diplomats are given sufficient means to survive as individuals outside their normal work. Benefits should be given towards the dependants of the diplomat as a means of financial assistance.

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.

Share this page: