Integration of Refugees; Refugees Amendment Bill: NCOP Amendments; “Who Am I Online” project investigation by Auditor-General

Home Affairs

26 August 2008
Chairperson: Mr. H P Chauke
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The Committee discussed the interim Constitutional Court ruling, which stipulated that government had the right to consolidate refugee camps and the drive to integrate the remaining refugees by the end of September. They then discussed the minor NCOP amendments to the Refugees Bill which had been necessitated by drafting errors. They adopted the Bill with these amendments. Finally, the Committee decided to meet with the Auditor-General and the Minister of Home Affairs to resolve the Committee’s concerns about the relationship between the State Information Technology Agency and the Department regarding the “Who Am I Online” project.

Meeting report

 

Opening Remarks by the ChairpersonThe Chairperson observed that the xenophobic attacks had subsided, and that the existing challenge concerned the reintegration of a small percentage of remaining refugees into the communities from where they were displaced. While he acknowledged the critical role played by the Department of Home Affairs (DHA), he contended that other government spheres had an equal responsibility in helping to alleviate the problem. He referred Members to the recent interim Constitutional Court (CC) ruling, which stipulated that government had the right to consolidate refugee camps. The aim was that all the camps be disbanded by the end of September. In view of that, he expressed concern about what should happen to the refugees (still in the camps) if the question of integration had not been addressed satisfactorily by then. In addition, he explained that most migrants, from neighbouring countries, entered South Africa due to the political instability, social problems and general economic meltdown in their respective countries. The current developments in Zimbabwe had helped to ease the influx of migrants from that county. Lastly, he declared that South Africa could not deal with migration in isolation of its neighbours.

Mr S Swart (ACDP) suggested that the Committee investigate the reason why the bodies representing the refugees approached the CC on an urgent basis. He noted that the CC had ordered the parties (the Gauteng Provincial Government and the bodies representing the refugees) to talk, which implied that there had been little or no consultation between the two critical role-players. Secondly, he disagreed with the Chairperson’s assertion that the influx of Zimbabweans had lessened. Finally, he expressed concern regarding the health situation and lack of services at the camps.

The Chairperson gave an assurance that all the issues would be reviewed at a later meeting.

Ms H Webber (DA) wanted some feedback on how many of these refugees had been supplied with access cards (with their photographs and fingerprints) and how many had refused to be provided with such cards and their reasons therefore.

The Chairperson replied that such questions would be relevant when the Committee engaged with the Minister of Home Affairs in the near future.

Proposed NCOP Amendments to Refugees Amendments Bill
Advocate Tsetsi Sebelemetija, Acting Director: Legal Services, DHA, indicated that the Select Committee had considered the Bill, and had proposed a couple of minor amendments, which were both contained in clause 14.

The first amendment was on Page 8, line 40, where it was proposed that the word “the” be substituted with “any”. The second amendment related to the omission of the words “that processed his or her application”, which was also found on Page 8, in line 40.

The Chairperson pointed out that those changes had already been agreed to by the Portfolio Committee.

Mr Sebelemtija admitted that there had been an omission by the drafters, and that the version of the Bill that the NCOP had considered, did not contain these amendments of the Portfolio Committee.

In light of this revelation, Mr P Mathebe (ANC) felt that the Committee would have to review the entire Bill to ensure that there were no further omissions. He also criticised the drafters for being unprofessional.

Kgoshi K Morwamoche (ANC) suggested that the Committee should “forgive” the drafters, and accept the amendments.

Mr M Lowe (DA) understood the rationale behind the amendments to the Act. However, he expressed concern about their implications. He wondered whether the Department had the correct systems to deal with the physical realities of the change. He further pondered whether the Committee would be adding to the problems of the Department and whether the systems would be “talking to each other “

The Chairperson recalled that the Committee had appropriated approximately R500 million to the Department to ensure better coordination and to rectify all any deficiencies in the systems.

The Committee agreed to the two amendments.

The Chairperson enquired whether there were any further proposed amendments.

Mr Sebelemitija introduced a further consequential amendment (see proposed amendments document).
The Chairperson noted the Committee’s concerns regarding drafting quality and recommended to the Department to strengthen their capacity in this

Voting on the Bill
The Committee Secretary read out the formal Motion of Desirability, which the Members agreed to. The Committee voted unanimously in favour of the Bill, with amendments.

Letter from the Auditor-General
The Committee Secretary read out the letter from the Auditor-General regarding the investigation into the “Who Am I Online” project (see document).

Discussion
Kgoshi Morwamoche indicated that he was happy that the Auditor-General had corresponded with the Committee. However, he preferred that the Committee arrange a meeting with him the following week, to discuss all the issues in detail, instead of communicating via letter.

Mr Lowe agreed with this proposal.

Mr Mathebe noted that the Committee had been waiting for further clarification from the CEO of SITA, who had subsequently resigned. For that reason, he felt that it would be better to communicate with the AG in person on all the issues that were of concern the Committee.

Mr M Sibande (ANC) suggested that mechanisms be developed to hold officials accountable, particularly those that have resigned from departments.

Ms M Maunye (ANC) referred to a newspaper article where Minister Geraldine Fraser-Molelekti had discussed the rollout of the smart cards. Consequently, she asked if the rollout of the smart cards had been transferred to another department.

Mr Morwamoche clarified that the Minister had made those specific comments as leader of the Social Services Cluster.

Mr W Skhosana (ANC) pointed to other instances where Minister Fraser-Moleketi had made pronouncements about issues that had concerned the Department of Home Affairs.

The Chairperson proposed that the Committee engage with the AG as well as the Minister of Home Affairs on all the issues. He advised Members to study the Committee’s Report on their meeting with SITA and make any additions to it. He sugggested that the Report should be adopted before the meeting with the AG and the Minister.

Mr Mathebe questioned why the Director General would not be involved in the Committee’s meeting with the AG and the Minister of Home Affairs because he had signed the project.

The Chairperson felt that only the principals should be involved at this stage.

Mr Morwamoche argued that arising from the meeting that the Committee had with SITA, it was clear that SITA and the Department had not followed the correct procurement rules. Accordingly, he suggested that the Committee take a decision to disband the “Who Am I Online” project.

The Chairperson disagreed with this approach. He advised that the Committee should present its case to the AG and the Minister based on its findings and understanding. He added that the Member should hold off on making a decision until after it had interacted with the relevant authorities.

Mr Morwamoche sought a guarantee that no money would be spent on the project in the meantime.

The Chairperson explained that nothing would be spent because when the Committee had passed the strategic plan of the Department, no mention was made about the project concerned.

Mr Morwamoche recalled that SITA had indicated that they had a “gentlemen’s agreements” with the Department.

The Chairperson reiterated that the report was confidential, and indicated that the Committee would engage on the findings of the report at a later stage.

He reminded Members to go through the Report on the Committee’s meeting with SITA. Lastly, he thanked all those that contributed during the processing of the Bill. He was confident that the Bill would address some of the current challenges that the country faced regarding refugees and asylum seekers.

The meeting was adjourned.

 

 

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: