Poverty Reduction Programme Audit, & National Anti-Corruption Hotline Effectiveness: assessment by Public Service Commission
Public Service and Administration
13 June 2007
Meeting Summary
A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.
Meeting report
PUBLIC SERVICE
AND ADMINISTRATION PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
13 June 2007
POVERTY REDUCTION PROGRAMME AUDIT, & NATIONAL ANTI-CORRUPTION HOTLINE
EFFECTIVENESS: ASSESSMENT BY PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
Chairperson: Mr P Gomomo
(ANC)
Documents handed out:
Evaluation
of the National Anti-Corruption Hotline
An Audit of the
National Anti-Corruption Hotline
National
Anti-Corruption Hotline Toolkit
Report on the Audit
of Government’s Poverty Reduction Programmes
Measuring the Effectiveness of the National Anti-Corruption Hotline (NACH)
(available at www.psc.org.za)
Audio
Recording of the Meeting
SUMMARY
The Public Service Commission presented the Report on the Audit of the
Poverty Reduction Programme, which it said was a first phase in studying and
evaluating the effectiveness of these programmes. South Africa had previously
had no measurement method or standards, norms or indicators. International
measurements would be used but there was a need for South Africa to create its
own. There had been challenges as many definitions of poverty existed, and one
was proposed by the PSC for relevant stakeholder to consider and make further
input. There was also no central project database from departments. Project
databases existed in various formats, but were not updated. The Commission had
now created the first database that departments would be encouraged to use and
update. Members asked questions on the minimum per capital measurements, the
need to develop own standards, whether there was a widening or lessening of
poverty, linkages to local and provincial governments, the need to recognise
access also as a poverty issue and the context of the studies in relation to
the Millennium Development Goals Poverty Reduction Programmes.
The Commission then presented its evaluation of the National Anti-Corruption
Hotline, which was set up in 2004 to detect incidents of corruption and to
raise awareness that government was serious about combating corruption. The
hotline was not well known but 2 296 cases of alleged corruption were reported,
76% of calls being in English. 60% of reporters chose to remain anonymous. The
Commission had developed a toolkit, and felt there was a need to educate public
servants more about the Protective Disclosure Act. It would like to have
investigative powers even if only in some limited cases. National departments
were slow at giving feedback on the cases referred to them. Questions by
Members related to the status of the Commission's investigative powers, the
high percentage of dismissals for corruption in Limpopo, whether any
rehabilitation was carried out on those suspended or dismissed, the need to
educate public servants into the scope of corruption, and to define it, and
positive attempts to instil good work ethics. Members suggested that trends at
different levels should be investigated separately. Further questions were
raised on financial mismanagement and reporting of sexual harassment.
MINUTES
Report on the Audit of the Poverty Reduction Programme: Public Service
Commission (PSC)
Mr Andrew Naidoo, Chief Director: Public Service Commission, said that the
government had shown a great commitment to addressing the many inequalities.
The PSC decided to take an audit of the poverty reduction programmes, and this
report was the first phase. The methodology involved local and international
literature that was used to establish how poverty was defined.
The overall aim of the audit was to gain a better understanding of the
definitions and criteria used to describe poverty, and of the interventions
implemented to address it. The PSC faced a number of challenges when the audit
was conducted. They could not contact all government officials responsible for
the programmes, and there was no central project database. The Commission
created the first database. There was also a lack of standardisation and key
variables and indicators in project databases.
The PSC found that different definitions of poverty existed, all of which tried
to reflect its multi-dimensional nature. Based on the audit, the PSC proposed
that the following broad definition be considered:
“An individual/household is said to be in a state of poverty when they have no
income or income below the standard of living, or are unable to meet their
basic human needs”.
Different categorisations of poverty reduction initiatives existed. The study
explored two main categorisations. The first categorised initiatives by the
type of poverty they sought to address (income poverty, services poverty, asset
poverty and capabilities poverty). The second categorised initiatives by the
types of activities or programmes (social security, free or subsidised basic
household services, subsidised individual services, housing, land reform,
income generating projects, and public works programmes).
Of all these services, social security had the biggest number of projects and
therefore a major share of 55.7% in budget allocations. Overall, there were 29
966 projects.
The report recommended that the term “poverty reduction” be used to describe
programmes and projects that had a focus on improving the livelihoods or
quality of life of individuals and households with no income, or with an income
below the standard of living. The definition of poverty proposed in the report
should be communicated to relevant stakeholders for their consideration and
further input. The database developed by the PSC should be updated on an annual
basis, until the government had been able to implement an appropriate system.
The report also recommended that a national strategy and norms and standards
for the implementation of poverty reduction programmes be developed. Processes
also needed to be developed to ensure the proper recording of information.
Discussion
Mr M Sikakane (IFP) asked Mr A Naidoo what the minimum per capita measurements
for this study were.
Mr Naidoo said that there was a lack of agreement on what the measurement was
within the PSC but in the meantime international measurements would be used. He
pointed out that the report highlighted the contextual issues to be dealt with.
South Africa did not have a measurement line. The Treasury and Stats South
Africa were working on this.
Dr Norman Maharaj (Deputy Chairperson, PSC) said South Africa was a signatory
to the United Nations Resolution to halve poverty by 2050. Therefore there was
a need to understand what the country was supporting. The Millennium
Development Goals focused on one aspect of income poverty. There were many
others, like access poverty, where people did not have access to basic
services. Internationally income poverty was the main focus, and the PSC wanted
to make the definition broader.
The Chairperson said it was good to measure this on international standards,
but South Africa needed to have its own standards.
Mr M Sikakane (IFP) said that people often claimed that the gap of poverty had
widened since 1994. He had always wondered how people could reach such
conclusions without any measurement method.
Ms J Ntlake (ANC) said that she would be more interested in knowing whether the
reduction programmes were successful. She commented that this was a good
starting point and asked if this was going to lead to a better understanding of
what measurements were needed.
Dr U Roopnarain (IFP) asked whether this exercise by the PSC was working, as
public resources were being used. She also wanted to know whether the PSC, from
its research, thought poverty was decreasing in the country.
Dr Maharaj said the PSC could not say whether poverty was going down, as there
was no database, standards, norms or clear indicators with which to compare.
The current database with 30 000 projects was the first of its kind. If the
departments could assist more, further comparative information would be
available. He was surprised that universities had not come up with anything.
Economists used all sort of terms to measure the situation, but there was still
no answer to the fundamental question.
Mr A Harding (ID) asked whether the audit was done in all communities in the
country.
Mr Naidoo said the PSC already had a sample from the report that was almost
finished. He promised that the Commission would come back to show the Committee
the sample.
Ms Ntlake asked how these projects were linked to what was happening on the
ground, at local government level. She noticed this was done at provincial and
national departments.
Mr Naidoo said that the information on projects was under provincial
governments in the report and the local government sector had been the source.
Mr B Mthembu (ANC) said key concepts like reduction and alleviation were in the
report. He noted that the PSC said these should be used separately. He wanted
to know how the Commission had contextualised this in relation to the
Millennium Development Goals’ Poverty Reduction Programmes. He said these
programmes needed to be categorised.
Mr Mashwahle Diphofa, Deputy Director General, Office of the Public Service
Commission, said the PSC needed to continue the debate and it would be useful
to go back to the fundamental issues that the report brought up. It showed that
poverty manifested itself in many ways. Access was also an issue, and poverty
was also about access to basic services and not only about how much money
people had in their pockets. Mr Diphofa said eradication of poverty was the
long-term goal and alleviation of poverty in the short term was a process to
reaching that goal.
Dr Maharaj pointed out that 55% of budget allocations went towards social
security and that more resources should go towards other projects like land
reform, health and education.
Ms Ntlake said she was not sure whether the country would get to a stage where
poverty ceased to exist.
The Chairperson commented that under a capitalist system, poverty could never
be eradicated completely.
Evaluation of the National Anti-Corruption Hotline (NACH): Briefing by
Public Service Commission
The PSC was given a mandate to run this hotline and it had operated since
2004.The main objective of the hotline was to detect incidents of corruption
and to raise the awareness that government was serious about combating
corruption.
The PSC conducted an evaluation of all information available from the PSC call
centre, PSC database and through workshops conducted at national and provincial
levels with senior managers and investigators who were involved in managing
hotline cases in their respective departments.
The PSC noted that a worrying rate of 60% of reporters were anonymous. 76% of
the cases had been reported in English. People were allowed to report in their
home language, so as to report freely. A total of 4182 cases of alleged
corruption were reported during the period 1 September 2004 to 30 November
2006, but after an evaluation, the PSC found out that only 2 296 were related
to corruption.
Gauteng Province had the highest number of cases of alleged corruption reported
via the NACH, followed by the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu Natal and Mpumalanga.
Gauteng and KwaZulu Natal also had not given enough feedback on what had been
done about the cases referred to them. At provincial level, the alleged abuse
of government owned vehicles had the highest frequency of all cases reported.
More public servants were reported at national rather than provincial level in
respect of the soliciting of bribes. National departments were submitting
feedback on progress with the investigation of cases at a very slow pace.
The PSC had developed a NACH Toolkit. The commission believed that if the
departments applied the principles contained in the toolkit, the hotline would
be improved. The PSC recommended that the provincial protocols also must be
reviewed to relieve bottlenecks and determine whether direct referral to
provincial departments would be effective. Departments were obliged by the
Minimum Anti-Corruption Capacity requirements issued by Cabinet to create
investigative capacity. The PSC also hoped to create more investigative
capacity for itself. The Hotline would be marketed better in future.
Discussion
Mr A Harding (ID) said that people were scared to blow the whistle
Mr M Sikakane (IFP) enquired what the status was of the Commission’s
investigative powers.
Dr Maharaj said that cases were referred to departments and the South African
Police Service (SAPS), but there was a need for some cases to be investigated
by the PSC itself. He reminded the Committee of the Protective Disclosure Act
and said that 60% of the reporters chose to remain anonymous, which meant that
many people did not feel they were protected by the Act.
Ms J Ntlake (ANC) asked what was meant by the statement that all the 20 cases
of dismissals had taken place in Limpopo.
Ms P Mashangoane (ANC) also asked why it was only Limpopo that had been
mentioned.
Dr Maharaj said Limpopo was serious about dealing with corruption. Great
leadership had been displayed in the province with regard to dealing with
corruption. The PSC had come up with an initiative called the Minimum
Anti-Corruption Capacity Requirements to help departments deal with corruption.
DPSA had done a study on whether the departments met and applied the
requirements. PSC would now use this when evaluating departments.
Ms V Mentoor (ANC) said she was grateful for the establishment of the hotline,
and for the calls, which showed that there was an avenue for public to raise
complaints and report corruption. The fact that public servants knew there was
a reporting mechanism was in itself a great achievement, and these must be
commended even before looking at the trends. She was disappointed that national
departments were the slowest in terms of reporting and felt that Cabinet
Ministers and Heads of Departments should account. With regards to the reported
non-adherence to official office hours, she said it had been agreed that these
hours should be flexible (although this should not be abused) because of the
challenges women faced in their domestic situation.
Ms L Maloney (ANC) asked what happened to the people who been suspended or
dismissed from work. She felt there was a need to rehabilitate the people who
had been dismissed so they did not suffer psychologically from this experience,
and to prevent recurrence of the offences.
Dr Maharaj said there was nothing done to rehabilitate offenders. They were
simply suspended and might face charges in the near future. They would then be
exposed to rehabilitation through that system.
The Chairperson agreed that the monitoring of programmes and initiatives like
NACH was important. He asked how corruption was defined.
Dr Maharaj said corruption was not well defined, and this resulted in people
acting in ways that they did not realise amounted to corruption. Corruption was
not only about money being stolen, as failing to keep regular and proper office
hours without valid excuse was corruption through stealing of time.
Mr A Harding (ID) agreed that the definition of corruption was broad. He also
suggested that those who performed well in the public service must be
commended.
Dr Maharaj said the PSC would look at whether departments were doing something
to instil a good work ethic or good behaviour and commend those who had done
well, such as initiating “Employee of the Month” rewards and the likes.
Ms V Mentoor (ANC) believed it was a mistake to conglomerate the public service
into one. Trends at senior management, middle management and lower levels
should be looked at separately. She said the Commission would probably find
more dedication and integrity at lower levels. She also suggested peer
counselling for the offenders. Some managers inherently believed they could do
as they pleased and not adhere to the ethical codes of the public service.
Ms Caroline Mampuru (Chief Director, PSC) said that financial mismanagement was
common at lower levels of government.
Dr U Roopnarain (IFP) asked whether sexual harassment cases had been reported
via the hotline.
Dr Maharaj said that he knew that harassment was one of the most difficult
matters to deal with, as people were usually uncomfortable about reporting it.
Mr A Naidoo said he did not remember issues of sexual harassment being
reported.
Ms Mampuru pointed out that sexual harassment cases went to the Gender
Commission only. She suggested that there was a need for PSC to educate public
servants about this.
Ms V Mentoor said that even if the Gender Commission received sexual harassment
cases, the PSC still needed to know about them. The education of public
servants was very important so an environment for people to report freely could
be created.
Ms C Mampuru stressed that the fact that no complaints had been sent through
the hotline did not mean that there were no complaints. Some came through the
Complaints Roll.
Committee Business: Budget Vote of the Minister of Finance
The Chairperson asked Members to briefly discuss the Minister of Finance’s
Budget Vote. He felt the Budget Speech should be debated before it was voted on
in the House.
Ms V Mentoor asked why the Minister of Finance’s budget passed without debate,
as members did have the power to raise questions and withhold a vote until some
issues were addressed.
Dr Maharaj said the process of making proposals to the Treasury would start in
July. The PSC would make its submission to the Treasury and it was willing to
work with committee in the submissions.
Mr K Minnie indicated that the DA would support the vote and the Chairperson
commended this.
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.