Export Strategy Design and Implementation: Department’s briefing
Public Service and Administration
14 November 2007
Meeting Summary
A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.
Meeting report
PUBLIC SERVICE AND ADMINISTRATION PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE14 November 2007
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WORKER PROGRAMME: BRIEFING; ID & PASSPORT SYSTEMS: INPUT BY SITA
Acting Chairperson: Mr R Baloyi (ANC)
Documents handed out:
State Information Technology Agency (SITA) Presentation
The Impact of the Community Development Worker Programme Presentation
Relevant document:
Briefing to Portfolio Committee, Limpopo: The impact of the Community Development Worker Programme
Audio recording of meeting
SUMMARY
The Committee heard a briefing by the State Information Technology Agency on its support to the Department of Home Affairs on identity document and passport systems. The Agency explained that its prime function was enhancing the security of official documents, systems and printing of documents. It was assisting the Department upgrade and integrate more than 36 applications including the National Population Register. It sought to improve Home Affairs’ networking and web capabilities, and prevent unlawful access. The Committee examined the especially cordial relationship between the Agency and the Department of Home Affairs since the appointment of the new director-general who had previously served at the Agency, and suggested that there should be an equally cordial relationship between all government departments and the Agency. Allegations of poor service delivery and lack of support to departments was examined, and the Committee sought robust debate on the issues.
The Department of Public Service and Administration briefed the Committee on the impact of the Community Development Worker programme, and there was extensive interaction between the Committee, the Department and representative community service workers who shared their experiences, insights, challenges, and accomplishments in the provinces The matter of tense relations between community development workers and ward councillors in some areas, notably the Western Cape, was given special attention. Other challenges included insufficient political championship, lack of attention paid to CDW reports, budgeting problems, inability to contact other stakeholders, and lack of understanding of their role, which was complementary to that of traditional public servants. Members were grateful for the format of this meeting, which had enabled the Committee to get a full sharing of knowledge.
MINUTES
The Acting Chairperson explained the purpose of the meeting as furthering Parliament’s function by inviting delegations to engage to assist Members to form an opinion and reflect on the issues under consideration.
He noted that the State Information Technology Agency (SITA) presentation would assist the Committee in evaluating progress, challenges and accomplishments. The Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) would share views on the impact of the community development workers. The Committee believed it was important that the community development workers should participate in the debate on the community development workers programme to reach an honest assessment of it.
State Information Technology Agency (SITA) Presentation
Mr Moses Mtimunye, Chief Strategic Services, State Information Technology Agency (SITA), tendered apologies from the Chief Executive Officer for his inability to attend. He said that the security of official documents was the crux of SITA’s assistance to the Department of Home Affairs (DHA), a custodian of information pertaining to the identity of all persons present in South Africa, including citizens, permanent residents, temporary residents, refugees, and asylum seekers. The main processes of Home Affairs centred on the collection and lawful dissemination of information. This was done through a national network of branches and offices. DHA also used foreign missions and mobile units, and sometimes it used other agencies, such as the South African Post Office. Its mandate was to maintain the integrity of the South African state and facilitate citizens’ access to their rights under the constitution through issuing of their documents. It also issued documents relating to movement control of persons entering and leaving the country and maintained the National Population Register.
DHA had more than 36 applications (computer programmes designed to deliver business functionality to end users). Ten could be considered critical to the functioning of the Department, including the National Population Register, issuing of passports, visas and refugee documents. These were managed jointly by SITA and Home Affairs, and some were hosted within SITA. This required the maintenance and reliability of networking capabilities. SITA was responsible for the networking, but not the computers themselves.
There was a need for grouping and prioritisation of information technology initiatives. The 2009 Confederations Cup, culminating in the 2010 World Soccer Cup, was a tremendous challenge to DHA as custodian of national security in relation to movement of foreigners. There was also a need to restore the confidence of the public in the integrity of documents issued by DHA. The Home Affairs Portfolio Committee’s intervention had brought SITA and Home Affairs closer together. The current Director-General and some other key staff of DHA had previously worked at SITA, and the relationship now between SITA and Home Affairs was very cordial, with close collaboration in a number of initiatives. SITA had a standing invitation to attend meetings with the Department on strategic planning, and was collaborating in the execution of key projects, that were outlined in the presentation. SITA was embarking on a request for information as to what South Africa really needed as a reliable means of identification. It had decided independently to solicit information from industry and test as to whether current thinking favoured an embedded chip or a smartcard.
SITA provided Home Affairs with comprehensive printing services. SITA was providing voice over internet protocol communications in a foreign missions project. The track and trace system enabled queries on the status of any application. SITA was trying to obtain a better bandwidth and web capability for DHA. DHA had bought a new passport issuing machine, which would be imported in 2008. There was a need to consolidate Home Affairs’ hosting environment and all its web servers. A third party was appointed to implement the ‘Who am I on line’ project. There was a need for security in the issue of any key or enabling documents.
There were a number of major challenges. Some of the applications might not meet all DHA’s requirements for speed and accuracy, which could impact critically on the economic or social empowerments of individuals. There was lack of sharing of information between systems and duplication in the collection and storage of information in DHA. Duplicated records reduced the quality of the data, which could lead to fraudulent transactions. The bulk of the technologies were heterogeneous, there was no standardisation, and some servers were not optimally secure. These were being addressed urgently. The shortage of information technology skills was not just a national problem. All this had to be underpinned by proper information and communications technology business practices.
SITA printed the identity documents, and refugee certificates, and it was important to use bar-coding and serialisation and to control strictly the management of the bar-coding machinery. Criminals always ‘kept ahead of the game’. Stricter controls were being introduced as to which Department officials were allowed to order and handle the documents that SITA printed. It was intended to move SITA to level three of the ISO standards within the next 18 months in terms of quality control.
SITA believed that there was a serious need for portfolio management discipline within Home Affairs in terms of reviewing and prioritisation of projects. The improvement of the virtual private network was also very important. There had to be proper tracking of improvements.
Discussion
The Chairperson observed that the presentation gave the impression that the relationship between SITA and Home Affairs had begun recently, without mention of the history prior to the appointment of the new Director-General. The Committee expected SITA to help other departments also, not just Home Affairs, and there should be no special relationships just with that Department.
Mr B Mthembu (ANC) also asked about the relationship between SITA and Home Affairs
Mr Mtimunye said that SITA, as an information technology provider, was an enabler of business. The relationship with DHA under previous directors-general was not on the same level as at present, and had been centred on what the Government Information Technology Council (GITO) expected of SITA. Hence there had been fluctuations in the revenue. The new Director-General was more specific in defining his expectations and requirements of SITA. There had in fact been interaction between SITA and Home Affairs since 2002, when the Portfolio Committee had requested them to work together. Before 2002 there had been a relationship, which was less satisfactory, and SITA had then had problems with its own image.
Mr Mthembu also enquired about corporate governance. Each time there was a new Director-general appointed to DHA there was a new turnaround strategy, but nothing had actually happened. Members had been told that the new identification system was more innovative and would bring about a turnaround in the whole issue of identity documents. He asked for SITA’s comments on the new identification system and its expected contribution to the turnaround strategy, particularly with regard to the critical task of issuing of identity documents
Dr U Roopnarain (IFP) asked what the relationship between SITA and Home Affairs would mean for somebody who was applying for an identity document. Members were constantly hearing complaints of long queues at Home Affairs offices. She asked for an estimate how and to what extent the waiting time could be curtailed.
Mr Mtimunye said that the current ‘Who am I on line’ was a rewrite of the programme used for documentation for personal identification and status. It was premature to predict to what extent SITA could reduce the standing time in queues. There were a number of initiatives in place to decentralise Home Affairs offices. It was believed possible to reduce the time taken to process identity book applications from 28 days to about 15 days. The quality of the document as the end product reflected on the quality of South Africa as a nation.
Dr Roopnarain said that the Department of Labour procured its services from Siemens, as it had told her that its relationship with SITA was fraught with difficulties, and a better discount could be obtained from Siemens. She asked SITA to comment on the alleged strained relationship with the Department of Labour.
Mr Mtimunye said that Siemens had won a particular tender to provide service to the Department of Labour (DOL). The Minister of Labour had complained 18 months ago about the services received from Siemens under that particular contract and wondered how his Department had managed to bind itself to such a lengthy and expensive contract. One of the DOL executives had asked SITA to help, but there was very little that SITA could do, least of all take over the contract. SITA was not in agreement with the service levels that Siemens had put together. There was a public perception that SITA was not providing the necessary goods as and when required, and SITA had tried its best to improve. SITA’s recent financial results showed a positive surplus for two years running. Its clients appreciated its services and were prepared to pay. There was a challenge with the Department of Labour, but it was difficult to apportion blame to SITA, as it was not involved.
Mr A Nyambi (ANC) asked how long it would take to print one identity document. He asked if there was manipulation of the system by persons who had advanced knowledge of technology. He was concerned about correctness of data. He asked if it was SITA or DHA who managed the system of SMS queries. He asked what SITA was really trying to tell the Committee about the integrity of Home Affairs documents. He also asked that SITA should tell the Committee what had happened prior to the appointment of the new Director-General. The previous challenges should have been included in the challenges that were outlined in the presentation.
Mr K Khumalo (ANC) reiterated Mr Nyambi’s question on data, and asked from which country would SITA be obtaining the engineering skills.
Mr Mtimunye noted that fraudulent documents had been accepted by South Africa’s own immigration officers but later detected by immigration officers of foreign countries. He agreed that this reflected on South Africa’s national integrity.
Mr Mtimunye said that the leader of the smartcard technology was currently Israel, but there was also movement in India, and also in the former countries of the USSR, such as Estonia.
Mr K Minnie (DA) asked about the financial value of the relationship between SITA and Home Affairs.
Mr K Julies (DA) said that he wished to know if people were well-informed about what they needed to do to use the SMS query system.
Mr Mtimunye said that DHA had embarked on a marketing drive, especially concerning the SMS project. It was still too early to know whether it had been effective. One of the ways of reducing the queues was to advise cell phone owners to use the SMS service to query the database to determine the progress of their applications.
Ms P Mashangoane (ANC) asked about fluctuations in the financial value of the relationship between SITA and Home Affairs, and what it meant in terms of applications.
Mr M Sikakane (ANC) asked if Home Affairs owed money to SITA for its services.
Mr Mtimunye said that DHA had owed SITA much money, but the Department had paid. Invoices disputed by DHA had caused fluctuations in revenue in 2005-2006, when SITA had faced service delivery challenges and had been unable to provide Home Affairs with documents that it requested. Some of those monies had now been paid in the current financial year.
Mr Sikakane said that he was pleased that his question had been answered, since he had always maintained that departments owing money to SITA should be obliged to pay. He was glad that his campaign had been successful.
The Chairperson said that SITA’s recommendations were not time-bound. The Committee and Mr Sikakane in particular, would be happy if SITA set itself timeframes and adhered to them.
Mr Julies said that everyone knew that for the past few years the DHA had had a very bad record of corruption, qualified audit reports, and other complaints. He had seen a Special Assignment television programme in which people had been standing in queues to pay R250 for temporary passports, or for a death certificate, just to claim insurance money. He asked SITA to assure the Committee that it would try to curb corruption.
The Chairperson said that perhaps SITA’s response to Mr Nyambi’s question had not been adequate since this question posed vital concerns. The Chairperson expressed concern that SITA’s service delivery was not sufficiently governed by what was expected of it in terms of service level agreements, but was centred on individual personalities. Service level agreements were mandatory. The Chairperson felt that SITA’s remark ‘time will tell’ was an unacceptably weak response to a Portfolio Committee. He would have expected SITA to be willing to be tested on its delivery. The Committee must be able to rely on SITA to execute its mandate, and this Committee believed in robust engagement. If SITA felt that to be unfair, he wanted SITA to express itself at this meeting in concluding remarks.
Mr Mtimunye said, in response to Mr Nyambi’s question, that he would investigate the matter. Unfortunately, whatever measures SITA put in place to combat corruption, some unscrupulous people would always try to find ways to bypass those measures. All that SITA could do was to try to make systems as secure and foolproof as possible. SITA’s regulations set out that before engaging with a government department, there must be a business agreement and a service level agreement in place. Every time SITA was audited, the auditors always asked about the service level agreement, since it was a known requirement.
Mr Mtimunye undertook to research answers to any remaining questions in anticipation of his next visit to the Committee. He stressed that SITA in the past four years had made great strides to become a public entity of which Africa could be proud, and sought to improve constantly.
The Chairperson noted Mr Mtimunye’s frequent use of the word ‘secure’, and noted that the Committee would put SITA to the test.
The Chairperson said that the SITA’s previous and current experiences with cooperation of the DHA perhaps told a story about the extent to which there may have been a buy-in to SITA services, and to what extent it had been informed by consciousness of what SITA could do. He suggested that there perhaps should be further discussion to try to establish equally cordial relationships between SITA and other government departments.
The Impact of the Community Development Worker Programme Presentation
The Chairperson reminded the Committee that President Mbeki, in the State of the Nation address of 2003, had said that the Government would create an echelon of multi-skilled community development workers who would maintain direct contact with the people to improve the outcomes of public expenditure and raise the standard of living. In principle, it should not be expected of people that they should have to come to government and pay for transport to get there. Community development workers must be recruited, trained and supervised effectively to deal with the people, to increase the effectiveness of the system of local government, and to strengthen the awareness of its capacity to respond to the needs of the people at a local level. This meeting was intended to assess the impact of the programme, and the debate would be led by the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA).
Professor Richard Levin, Director-General, DPSA, said that the community development worker programme was an initiative to improve service delivery, to broaden access to government services by the masses of the people, and ultimately to deepen democratic participatory governance. It was also an inter-departmental programme, with DPSA and the Department of Provincial and Local Government (DPLG) playing the leading roles.
Ms Florence Maleka, Chief Director: Community Development, DPSA, conveyed an apology from the Northern Cape community development workers who had been unable to attend. The community development worker programme had commenced four years previously, and there were currently 2 954 community development workers, deployed across the wards of most parts of the country. There were community development workers in more than 2 000 wards.
The main focus of the community development workers was on social upliftment, and increasingly on local economic development. Most of the community development workers were located within the local government and housing departments, except in Limpopo, where they were located within the Office of the Premier.
A study was commissioned by the DPLG and another by the Foundation for Contemporary Research in Cape Town. The first was to examine the implementation of the programme. The study by the Foundation for Contemporary Research was focused only in Cape Town, and on the relationship between community development workers and other stakeholders in the communities. Both studies indicated that community development workers were really making an impact in many respects, but relationships with government structures were uneven. This was partly because of differences in governmental structures between provinces. The studies agreed that there was a lack of common understanding about the programme across government, leading to a negative impact on the functioning of the community development workers.
It was also necessary to put in place mechanisms for evaluation and monitoring of the programme. The community development workers programme had now progressed beyond the stage of incubation that had addressed institutional frameworks, training and the like, to a stage where community development workers must consolidate their roles in their wards.
The community development workers were of a special type because, unlike other public servants, they were not office bound, and had to have direct contact with their communities. They went on a door-to-door basis to the wards. They functioned separately from the normal public servants and interacted with the three spheres of government. Inter-government relations were a new concept in South Africa and had considerable impact on the work of the community development workers. However, mechanisms of inter-governmental awareness of the programme were still insufficient. It was known that there were some tensions between the community development workers and some other stakeholders, mainly because of misunderstandings around the programme. Community development workers mentioned that they felt left out from planning and decision making. In order to create that broad awareness of the community development workers programme, the DPSA was embarking on a programme ‘Know your CDWs’. This would assist greatly to promote the community development workers in the various levels.
The fact that community development workers were operating at ward level also brought them into contact with ward councillors, with whom there had been some reports of tension. Where misperceptions remained, relationships were difficult. For instance, the study said that in the Western Cape and the Eastern Cape there was a smaller impact of the community development workers on the citizens, because the relationship between community development workers and ward councillors was not satisfactory. This in turn impacted upon the perception of the ward committees around the work that community development workers were doing. There was, however, a very positive impact in Limpopo and Mpumalanga. Here, the two studies agreed that the community development workers had made an impact on the lives of ordinary citizens by means of a door-to-door service in the communities, providing information about government services, assisting with disaster management, and promoting government campaigns. Where there was a good relationship with government structures that were functioning well, community development workers were able to work effectively.
Community development workers were also assisting in community projects. Citizens, as a result of this programme, had gained confidence in engaging government. In social development, the focus of the community development workers’ work had been in facilitating citizens’ access to housing, social grants and government benefits. They were collecting information on the number of orphans in communities. They also had played a major role in bringing to the attention of the authorities the needs of poorly resourced schools. T hey had supported the establishment of food gardens. Earlier in 2007 DPSA prepared a handbook called CDW innovation, which had described all the work done by community development workers in their communities. This had been distributed to Parliament in June 2007.
The Chairperson observed that a copy had been stolen from his office. Mrs Florence Maleka said that she would provide a replacement.
There was a need for the community development workers to increase their work in local economic development. There was co-operation between the Department of Trade and Industry and the community development workers. 300 community development workers had been trained in the development of co-operatives.
A master plan was being developed to strengthen and better co-ordinate the programme. To this end a meeting would be held on 19 November 2007 in Pretoria. It would also assist to prevent duplication of projects. In the Eastern Cape there was a perception that the community development workers duplicated the work of other government employees, although they were appointed not to replace other public servants but to work with them.
Various challenges faced the community development workers. One of these was insufficient political championship, including insufficient contact with local mayors. Community development workers’ reports were sometimes ignored and their hard work unnoticed. They lacked many of the tools needed for their work, because of budgeting problems. They were often unable to contact their stakeholders. Because the work of the community development workers straddled all spheres and levels of government, there were bound to be tensions until the various parties concerned came to an understanding of their role, which was complementary to that of traditional public servants.
A visit to Cuba had revealed the social workers there were doing similar work to that of the South African community development workers but managed to work very effectively in the communities with just pen and paper, and would then meet at a centralised location to update their computer databases.
Capacity development was very important for community development workers to enable them to do the work that they were employed to do. It was also important to mobilise resources.
Discussion
Mr Nyambi commended the presentation. He asked if the DPSA could provide an explanation for the accommodation of community development workers in the Premier’s office in Limpopo. He asked what the impact of that specific exception was.
Mr Nyambi noted that the community development workers were indeed a special cadre. It was said that knowledge was power. A community development worker’s expertise in providing information to the community could make conventional public servants jealous. It would be very interesting to have a round table discussion where these issues could be taken further. In the absence of a common understanding, there would obviously be misunderstandings, especially in the case of the ward councillors. The presentation had not addressed challenges from traditional leaders, even though they were everywhere.
Mr Julies wanted to make it clear that it was not his intention to scrutinise or criticise the community development workers. However, he wanted to make it clear that the people of South Africa deserved better services, and it was the role of the community development workers to bring government services to the people, following Batho Pele principles. He was very concerned that there was no monitoring and evaluation of community development workers. In the Western Cape there were huge problems. Whenever community development workers talked to Mr Julies, they tried to play politics, rather than delivering services to the people.
Mr Julies said that in his constituency, few people knew about community development workers, so it seemed that no door to door work was taking place, even four years after inception of the programme. Members of the Committee received criticisms that they were not performing their oversight role. It was essential to see that the people received services, especially those who were the poorest of the poor. He pleaded that all should come together. He would like to see the problems in the Western Cape in particular sorted out.
Mr Khumalo commended the community development workers’ report, but asked why the Northern Cape was not present.
Mr Mthembu commended the DPSA on the presentation, which had given the Committee much valuable information on how to strengthen local government, as it was originally intended to ensure accessibility of government services. He noted that there were challenges at local level, but lessons could be learned, and it was important to involve mayor and councillors. Limpopo located community development workers in the premier’s office. One of the success indicators was co-operatives. He noted that lessons could be drawn from the successes in Limpopo and Mpumalanga, where there was less tension between community development workers and councillors.
The Chairperson quoted the President as saying that it was important to recruit the right people into the cadre of community development workers and train them properly. Although they seemed to be dealing effectively with the softer issues, there remained the need for expert training and supervision to enable them to interact with the different spheres of government, parastatals and the private sector. He asked about the future of the community development workers and their service conditions of service. He asked if there was a clear definition. He commended the ‘Know your CDWs’ campaign as part of deepening the culture of debate.
Ms Florence Maleka said that the Northern Cape representatives could not afford to travel to Cape Town. This was being investigated.
Ms F Tema, Chief Director, CDW Monitoring and Evaluation, Ministry of Public Service and Administration, said that she was charged with establishing monitoring and evaluation systems. The higher profile of community development workers in Limpopo might be attributable to their connection with the Premier’s office. In other provinces, there was a tendency to think that their role was limited to the department in which they were physically housed. On 19 November 2007 there would be a meeting to discuss a master plan. All government departments would be invited to contribute their views on a training programme for community development workers. Gauteng already provided the example of a monitoring system whereby the community development workers monitored social development in an area.
Mr Ben Cele, Manager: Public Participation, DPSA, said that the President’s statement made it clear that government services should be accessible, and therefore community development workers should be guided by terms of reference. The problem was now to move towards consolidation. Whereas ward committees were unpaid volunteers, the new community development workers were paid. This presented an opportunity for DPLG to examine the functionality of ward committees, and how they could be funded in a proper manner to enable them to function properly and do their work without viewing community development workers in a negative light. DPLG had prepared a report and had prepared a ward committee training programme to enable ward committees to understand the role of community development workers, and the fact that this programme complemented other government programmes to promote social development and poverty alleviation.
A community development workers representative from the Western Cape responded to Mr Julies’ criticisms of political motivation amongst community development workers. There were 30 municipalities in the Western Cape of which only four had outright political party majorities. Not all municipalities supported the community development workers programme, and this presented real problems. In Cape Town and Stellenbosch there had been attempts to dispel perceptions that community development workers were politicised, and work plans were developed in collaboration with municipalities on their specific needs.
Mr John Ovis, Community development worker, Department of Provincial and Local Government & Housing, Western Cape, responded to Mr Julies’ complaint about the Western Cape. Not all the wards were served by community development workers, so maybe that was one of the reasons for Mr Julies’ complaint. In other wards, community development workers had been introduced to ward councillors, and were visible in Thusong Service Centres. Community development workers were busy with a public phones programme for small towns and agricultural areas in the West Coast. There was also a programme to establish food gardens and to collect rain water. These were some examples of various programmes undertaken by community development workers to better the lives of people living on the West Coast.
A representative from Limpopo made a distinction between ward councillors, whose roles embraced political accountability and responsibility, and CDWs, who co-ordinated administrative matters and intervened to ensure that matters were taken up. CDWs must ensure that the ward councillor was kept informed to assist him or her in the role of political oversight. In that relationship it should be possible for the two parties to find an understanding. Co-ordination and engagement were important both a provincial level and at a local level. It was important to give due attention to local development issues.
Ms Hlanganani Nkosi, Provincial Co-ordinator, Mpumalanga Department of Local Government and Housing, said that the recruitment process was designed to select community development workers from the wards where they would work. They underwent a 12 month training period. Presentations were made to all Councils to acquaint them with the CDW programme and to dispel the tensions apparent when the programme was first introduced. There were workshops with all the ward councillors and committee members, together with the community development workers, to clarify the relationship between the community development workers and the ward councillors. Mpumalanga’s community development workers were placed within the Department of Local Government and Housing, and there existed a memorandum of understanding with the municipalities and other departments. The MEC and the Premier gave their full support. Community development workers worked with all departments throughout the province.
Mr Julies said that it was easy in the other eight provinces to administer the community development workers, but in the Western Cape it was a huge problem because of its diverse society. The ruling party administered the programme, while most of the councils were run by opposition parties. Mr Julies offered that if community development workers found problems in the Western Cape, they should contact him and he would bring the matter straight to the Committee and to Parliament.
A representative from Mpumalanga said that councillors that had been members of the ward committees understood the problems and supported the community development workers thoroughly. The CDWs had problems mainly with the ward councillors from the business sector. The constituency offices were also co-operating well with the community development workers. There was a working relationship with the local magistrate to assist every Wednesday with the backlog of grant applications. If any provincial department wanted to hold an imbizo, CDWs would mobilise the community to participate. There were only problems in small areas governed by personal interest. Community development workers also had co-operation from the mines and with the private sector. In door-to-door visits, community development workers had identified individuals who could be assisted by businesses to find employment.
A representative from the North West explained the work of community development workers in rural areas and the difficulties experienced from lack of resources.
Another representative from the North West explained that he had been intimidated by people whom he was trying to help while on door-to-door visits.
Mr Vusi Tshabalala, a community development worker from the Department of Local Government, Gauteng, said that the objective of the community development workers programme was to make government work effectively for the people. It was important to persuade the Departments of Home Affairs and Social Development to go into communities to assist people with identity documents and grants. Intergovernmental delivery service forums had been a success in Gauteng, where community development workers identified key government departments that had a presence in communities.
Ms Thozama Lande, a community development worker from Gauteng, said that, as an entry point after finishing their learnerships, the community development workers firstly compiled a community profile, a ‘know your ward’ campaign. This could be considered an audit of the ward. In the Thusong Service Centres there were offices assigned to community development workers. However, they were fully aware that they were not office-bound and did not keep office hours except on Mondays. On other days, they did field work and door-to-door visiting. They reported to supervisors on a weekly basis and received strong support from them. Moreover, there was a supportive regional manager as well as the director. The Monitoring, Evaluations, Referrals and Communications Unit had designed reporting forms. They also had the benefit of a human resources department within their directorate, which also gave training support. CDWs were involved in local income generating projects, and they strove for synergy, not duplication. Community development workers participated in ward committees and once a week would meet with his or her ward councillor. With that level of trust established it was easy to minimize the tensions that community development workers had elsewhere reported.
Mr Duze Simelane, a community development worker from Limpopo, said that there were other structures such as the tribal authority, to whom the new community development worker should introduce himself when starting work. It was the responsibility of the individual community development worker to introduce himself to the various government departments and official bodies and explain his role. Having established a body of contacts, he would then be in a position to assist new colleagues.
Mr M Sthembiso, a community development worker from KwaZulu-Natal, said that in his province community development workers had identified the Expanded Public Works Programme as a way of assisting poor rural communities.
A representative from the Free State said that community development workers had initiated income generating projects and worked closely with the Department of Education, also with non-government organisations concerned with rehabilitation of drug abusers.
Mr Mthembu said that he was most grateful for the kind of engagement that the Committee had just concluded. This had been an ideal opportunity to have a face-to-face interaction with those cadres that were deployed to deepen participatory democracy. Annual reports were not sufficient, it was important to have meetings such as this one to share knowledge through dialogue. The Committee regarded it as its duty to take note and follow up the matters raised.
Professor Levin appreciated the way in which the Chairperson had introduced the meeting; he also endorsed the remarks of the delegate from Limpopo who had said that the community development workers programme was a national programme of public service transformation, not just the programme of a particular sphere of government. It was about presenting government as a single window to the citizen. All the experiences shared by the community development workers were most highly appreciated.
The meeting was adjourned.