Hansard: NA: Unrevised hansard

House: National Assembly

Date of Meeting: 26 Oct 2011

Summary

No summary available.


Minutes

UNREVISED HANSARD

 

WEDNESDAY, 26 OCTOBER 2011

____

 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

____

 

The House met at 15:03.

 

The Speaker took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers or meditation.

 

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS – see col 000.

 

QUESTIONS FOR ORAL REPLY

 

PEACE AND SECURITY

Cluster 1

 

MINISTERS:

 

Particulars regarding departure of certain individuals before end of contracts

 

200.      Mr L S Ngonyama (Cope) asked the Minister of State Security:

 

(a) What were the reasons for the sudden departure of a certain person (name furnished) before the end of his contract in three years’ time and the similar departure of two other persons (names furnished), (b) what amounts will be paid out and (c) how does he intend to ensure that staff with scarce skills in this field are retained?                                                                             NO3785E

 

The MINISTER OF STATE SECURITY: In response to (a): The resignation of this person before the end of his contract on 30 September 2012 is not linked to any political interference.

 

This person was appointed in terms of the Public Service Act, 1994, and his conditions of termination of service are guided and regulated in line with Chapter 8 of the Senior Management Service Handbook on Employment of Heads of Departments.

 

I am in consultation with the Minister for the Public Service and Administration to ensure that the financial settlement is in line with the prescribed guidelines.

 

The departure of this person is not seen as a waste of much-needed rare skills. Whilst heading the Domestic Branch of the State Security Agency, he was responsible for providing leadership and strategic direction to the Branch under the supervision of the Director-General: State Security Agency.

 

Whilst his departure leaves a vacancy in the hierarchy of the State Security Agency’s senior management, this will not have a negative impact on peace and security or service delivery of the agency since operational plans for the Domestic Branch are in place and line function management and operatives will continue to implement these.

 

In response to (b): The continuous rumours regarding the likely similar departure of the two other persons are just that: rumours. It would be appreciated if political parties abstain from making unconfirmed statements as these might have a negative impact on the morale of management and members within the State Security Agency.

We maintain that, because of some contractual confidences, we will not engage our employees through public platforms, but will rather use internal processes as provided for by the regulations.

 

We would like to seek guidance on how the current Parliament would like to deal with questions that may have an impact on national security. In about 2001, former President Mbeki raised similar concerns in this House. The approach adopted then was to answer such questions in full in the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, that had the responsibility to inform the relevant members of Parliament, if they were satisfied with the response, or of any additional measures they were undertaking. This has been the convention followed, pending the final formal response by this Parliament.

 

This is further compounded by the fact that, while the initial question may appear normal, the devil usually lies in the details of follow-up questions. I thank you, Mr Speaker. [Applause.]

 

Mr L S NGONYAMA: Well, hon Speaker, I listened to the Minister attentively, but the Minister completely failed to give me the reasons that I have asked in my question. I do understand the issue that he is referring to of sensitivity on certain security information, but there is still the question of the reason for the dismissal of an individual. So much is said in the newspapers, even about some proposal that was made to the said official and his refusal of it. The Minister is failing to give us the reasons and satisfy this House. It is also very important that the Minister understand that officials, including the Minister, are accountable to this House. We have a responsibility to articulate these reasons for dismissal of some of the very important officials who handle state security, and the Minister has failed in this regard.

 

The MINISTER OF STATE SECURITY: Mr Speaker, I really fail to understand the concern raised by the hon Ngonyama, because I have been answering ... [Interjections.] I will repeat the question if you don’t have the question from the ... [Interjections.]

 

The SPEAKER: Order! Order, hon members! Order!

 

The MINISTER OF STATE SECURITY: Firstly, Mr Njenje was not dismissed so we can’t give a reason for dismissal. Mr Njenje was not dismissed by the State Security Agency. [Applause.] We agree, however, with the hon Ngonyama that we are accountable to this House. That is why we have come here to give the answers, and that is why we are also raising issues of national security. We have not refused to give an answer. I would just like to say that we believe we have answered, because the question referred to “the sudden departure”, but there was no sudden departure of intelligence agent Gibson Njenje. Njenje is not an intelligence agent.

 

Before the end of his contract of three years, Mr Njenje was the head, was the leader, of that intelligence organisation. As to whether the likely departure of Mo Shaik and Jeff Maqethuka is linked to political interference and influence, I have answered that question. There was no political interference in that departure. We have no intention of interfering politically. I have also explained the substantive legal and procedural processes followed. These members are appointed in terms of the Public Service Act and in consultation with the Minister for the Public Service and Administration. I thank you, hon Speaker. [Applause.]

 

Mr D J STUBBE: Thank you, Speaker. The departure of Mr Njenje as Chief Director: Domestic Branch of the State Security Agency, the SSA, has created leadership instability. It is now a common rumour that the Director-General of the SSA, as well as the Chief Director: Foreign Branch are also leaving. Could the Minister tell us whether this is true, and what steps will he take to restore leadership stability in the agency? Thank you.

 

The MINISTER OF STATE SECURITY: Hon Speaker, firstly, Mr Njenje was not the Chief Director of the SSA. He was the head of the Domestic Branch appointed at director-general level. Secondly, regarding rumours about others leaving, I have answered that question. In my reply I said that it was just that: a rumour, and ours is not to engage in any rumour-mongering because we engage our members directly in the agency. We have direct access to them. We do not have to engage in rumour-mongering. So that remains purely a rumour. Thank you.

 

Mr T W COETZEE: Thank you, hon Speaker. Hon Minister, with due respect — and you know that I have great respect for you — I can’t agree with what you said this afternoon. I think you must agree with me that, owing to your absence — your regular absences from this country — that your relationships, not only with the agencies, but also with your community, have failed. We can also speak about terms of directors-general or heads of departments resigned or not resigned, but the fact is that Njenje has resigned or has taken a package. As I said, there are many ways of resigning, of making a person resign.

 

I now want to ask the Minister, through you, hon Speaker: How will the Minister replace the knowledge, skills and experience of those that are going to leave the agencies, especially of security? How is he going to go about reinstalling the trust between them and the Minister? In addition, Minister, with all due respect, wouldn’t you agree that it would be better for the security of the country that you as the Minister step down, rather than losing this knowledge, skills and experience. Thank you, sir.

 

The MINISTER OF STATE SECURITY: Thank you, hon Speaker. Let me remind the hon member Coetzee, as he is a member of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, that the function of the State Security Agency is to support and advise government. We have domestic functions, and we also have international functions in order to support our foreign policy. My absence from the country is never a holiday; rather, it is doing work for this government. I don’t understand, because this has been explained repeatedly to the members of the joint standing committee.

 

On the issues of skills and knowledge, of course, within the intelligence community, we have the philosophy of intelligence officer for life, where these members can be deployed, redeployed and recalled to do their work. So, we value our current and past members who have worked within this community. At this stage I would like to point out the hypocrisy, particularly of the DA. On 2 October 2009, when we made these appointments, the hon member who has just spoken, lambasted all three appointees at that particular time, accusing them of being partisan and incompetent. We did not respond in the media, but we came to explain the capacities of these members in the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence.

 

Again, on 4 October of the same year, the DA accused some of these members of being factionalists and lacking expertise, the very same expertise they are now saying, hypocritically, is there. We always recognised that they did have expertise. As I have explained, we will always find a use for these members in the country that are leaving now at the State Security Agency. Some of your friends in the media, on 9 October, were accusing the very same members of lacking skills and being involved in companies that they were no longer involved with, which were being investigated by the state. I would like to say it is important that we stand by the principle that, as the State Security Agency, we regard our members as intelligence officers for life, and we will always value their contribution and find ways of utilising them in our new democracy. I thank you very much. [Applause.]

 

Particulars regarding cause of backlog in sections of SAPS Forensic Science Laboratory

 

176.      Mrs L S Chikunga (ANC) asked the Minister of Police:

 

What (a) was the cause of the backlog in the biology section and other sections of the SA Police Service's Forensic Science Laboratory and (b) has happened to the persons or companies who had been responsible for the specified backlog?                      NO3459E

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Thank you, hon Speaker. The backlog in the biology section and other sections of the SA Police Service’s Forensic Science Laboratory was caused by a combination of the following factors: one, poor management, including failure to prioritise the processing of exhibits within the laboratory; two, failure by management within this environment to set targets and timelines for the purposes of managing the performance of the laboratories; three, the high rate of loss of experts and/or personnel in search of greener pastures; four, the downtime of instruments in the laboratory; and, five, the increase in the number of exhibits received by laboratories with limited expert capacity, making speedy processing impossible.

 

The divisional commissioner responsible for forensic services in the SAPS left the Police Service in July 2010, and Gen Phahlane was appointed divisional commissioner for this environment. One major-general and a brigadier were also exited from the service during this period.

 

As part of the turnaround strategy developed by the new divisional commissioner, managers were given specific targets and shorter timeframes within which the backlogs were to be eradicated during the 2010-11 financial year. Since July 2010, managers were also subjected to periodic performance reviews during which they had to account for the performance of their respective environments with regards to the eradication of backlogs and the processing of exhibits without delay.

 

Given the problems that existed with the previous management of the forensics services, it has been difficult to charge the actual suppliers. However, there are certain areas involving suppliers that are still being looked into and action may be taken based on what comes out of that process. I thank you, Speaker. [Applause.]

 

Mrs L S CHIKUNGA: Thank you, Speaker.

 

Siyabonga, Ngqongqoshe, ngempendulo yakho. Kuyiqiniso ukuthi lo Baba owahamba wayenza ngamabomu ukuthi kube nomsebenzi osalele ngemuva kwa-forensic ngoba wayenza isitatimende sepolitiki. Emuva kokuphuma kwakhe yasala yalunga le ndaba. [Thank you for your response, hon Minister. It is true that the past divisional commissioner deliberately left work incomplete which resulted in backlogs in the forensics services because he was politicking. After he left this issue was resolved.]

 

I have a follow-up question. With the interventions highlighted by the Minister in his response, what is the progress to date regarding the implementation of the turnaround strategy, and have there been findings about the suppliers that have been looked into, I think, since 2010? I thank you.

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Hon Speaker and hon member, overall the backlog in the forensics field has declined by a whopping 66% from 1 April 2010 to 31 March 2011. In essence, what has happened is that even the turnaround time of 35 days has been met with the new situation, and we are very happy that there is great improvement in this very environment. Thank you very much. [Applause.]

 

Ms D KOHLER-BARNARD: Thank you, and through you, Mr Speaker, Minister, when we look at what the laboratories have gone through – a situation that had many of us on the portfolio committee tearing our hair out – those backlogs were enormous and it has taken the work of someone of the calibre of Brigadier Shezi – who travelled with us on the study tour – to look at the DNA database legislation, to pull this down.

 

What I would like to know is: How on earth did it come about that people were hired who patently ran the place into the ground? Who was responsible for hiring them? Was nepotism at all a factor? Has it been weeded out, if it was?

 

During my visits there I wrote my name in the dust on boxes of multimillion-rand machinery. Those boxes were still there over a year later when I went back, still with my signature on them. I would like to know if that type of mismanagement has now been weeded out and whether those who ordered and then abandoned that multimillion-rand machinery have been brought to book and been held responsible for that major mismanagement and expenditure. Thank you.

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Thank you, hon Speaker. Yes, hon member, things are being turned around there, as you are correctly pointing out, and, from time to time, the division would also interact with yourselves as the portfolio committee. We are as worried as you are about how this very sensitive environment of our work has been run in the past. That is why everything possible is being done internally. In terms of these internal processes and criminal procedures, even those people who got away with murder, are being followed up.

 

But we are not going to leave anything to chance. We will ensure that, indeed, when people are employed to do a job, they do just that, and if they don’t, consequences will be faced. Thank you so much.

 

Mr P J GROENEWALD: Agb Speaker ... [Hon Speaker ...]

 

Hon Minister, last week or the week before we heard that only 52% of criminals are actually detected, and that only about 31% of those people have completed documents or dockets that can be sent to the courts for criminal hearings. I want to ask the hon Minister ...

 

Agb Minister, siende dat ’n misdadiger basies ’n 85% kans het om weg te kom met misdaad in Suid-Afrika, en dat forensiese toetse ’n kardinale rol speel in die skuldigbevinding van misdadigers, wil ek weet waar op u prioriteitslys u hierdie probleem van die forensiese en biologiese toetse en alles wat daarmee saamgaan, geplaas het. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

 

[Hon Minister, considering the fact that a criminal basically stands an 85% chance of getting away with crime in South Africa, and considering the important role that forensic tests play in the conviction of criminals, I would like to know where on your list of priorities you have placed this challenge with regard to forensic and biological tests and everything that goes with it.]

 

Because that is the new buzzword. If we have problems, we say we have challenges. Hon Minister, we have had challenges since 1994, but I don’t see those challenges being resolved. Thank you.

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Hon member, you won’t see those solutions if you are not in South Africa, if you are elsewhere. In South Africa you will see some of the progress made since 1994. The issue you are raising is a very important one, because you will recall that I have of late been placing emphasis on the need to go beyond apprehending criminals in our country, to also ensuring convictions. This area of the Forensic Science Laboratory is crucial in ensuring that, at the end of the day, we secure convictions.

 

The reasons for declining prosecutions vary, hon member. In some instances it would be because the police have not done a thorough enough job to ensure that the case is taken up. In other instances, decisions are taken at a prosecution level, which, after being taken, there is nothing that can be done. You can only wish that it continues. Indeed, we are turning the tide, hon member. You also ... no, don’t say this; this is not going to help you. You are a witness to the fact that indeed we are turning the tide. Thank you very much. [Applause.]

 

Mnu V B NDLOVU: Ngiyabonga, Somlomo, ngiyabonga nakumhlonishwa uNyambose ngempendulo. Okokuqala, mhlonishwa ukhulume ngokuphatha okungakuhle. Kuzothatha isikhathi esingakanani ukuthi laba bantu baboshwe ngoba benze umsebenzi wahlehlela emuva. Okwesibili, umhlonishwa we-DA ubuze ukuthi kwakukhona yini ukuhlobana phakathi kwabo? Zikhona yini izihlobo ezaziqashiwe kulesekshini mhlonishwa? (Translation of isiZulu paragraph follows.)

 

[Mr V B NDLOVU: Thank you, hon Speaker, and I also thank hon Minister Nyambose for his response. Firstly, hon Minister, you spoke about maladministration. How long will it take for these people to be brought to book because they caused the regression of work? Secondly, the hon member from the DA asked if they were related. Were there relatives who were appointed in this section, hon Minister?]

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Thank you, hon Speaker.

 

Mhlonishwa, Baba uGatsheni, cha asazi ukuthi bayoboshwa nini. Kodwa esikwaziyo ukuthi abenza okubi bayalandelwa njengoba namhlanje sikhuluma ukuthi icala le-forensic selisebenza kahle noma siyabona lapho eliya khona, ngenxa yokuthi ubuholi bamaphoyisa buye bangenelela bathi akufakwe abantu abazosebenza.

 

Mhlawumbe kukhona ukuhlobana asazi kodwa nakhu ezinye izinto zisaphenywa, Boyabenyathi, asithembe ukuthi zizovela ngokuhamba kwesikhathi. Siyabonga. (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)

 

[Hon member, hon Gatsheni, no, we do not know when they are going to be brought to book. But what we do know is that those who are doing bad things are being monitored because today we are saying that the forensics services unit is doing well and that we can see progress since the police leadership got involved and instructed them to appoint people who are willing to work.

 

They might be related; we do not know, but there are some things that are being investigated, Boyabenyathi. Let us hope that they will come out in the open in the long run.]

 

Official policy position vis-à-vis statement made by Deputy Minister Ramatlhodi

 

188.      Ms M Smuts (DA) asked the Minister of Correctional Services:

 

(1)        Whether the statement by her Deputy Minister, Adv N A Ramatlhodi, on 1 September 2011 that the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, is tilted in favour of forces against change (details furnished), reflects the official policy position of her department; if so, what are the relevant details; if not,

(2)        whether she repudiates the statement of her Deputy Minister; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?                                                                                                 NO3770E

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Thank you very much, hon Smuts. I must start by mentioning that the question refers to an opinion piece which was written by Adv Ramatlhodi. I want to say that in that opinion piece the Deputy Minister expressed his political views. And, of course, he was exercising his right to freedom of expression and speech in this country — as a political leader.

 

I would like to request the Speaker — if he agrees — that Deputy Minister Ramatlhodi responds to the question that has been raised, because it really has nothing to do with the work that we do in the Department of Correctional Services. Thank you.

 

The SPEAKER: Thank you, hon Minister. We will not ask the hon Ramatlhodi to answer because the question was not directed at him. It is directed to Correctional Services. Hon member?

 

Ms M SMUTS: Sir, may I just place on record that I had, in fact, put this question, in the first place, to the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development, and it is as a result of the intercession of the Questions Office that it went to this hon Minister. I personally would be delighted to debate this matter with my very good friend, the hon Ngoako Ramatlhodi.

 

It is not enough, hon Minister, to say that he was exercising his rights to free speech and giving his own political view. He is, as all of us are, sworn to uphold the Constitution of this country. He is, moreover, under section 92 - as are you, hon Minister — under an obligation to act in terms of the Constitution.

 

The question therefore is whether the hon Minister is harbouring an anti-constitutionalist in her Ministry. This is a very serious matter, because what the hon Ramatlhodi argues is that our Constitution, as negotiated, emigrates power away from the executive and the legislature, and towards the courts, and that the old order has built a fortified line in the courts.

 

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Hon Speaker, I wonder whether we want to use this afternoon to deal with things that are irrelevant ... [Interjections.] ... because the Minister ... [Interjections.]

 

The SPEAKER: Order! Order, hon members! Order! Hon member, finish your point of order.

 

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Speaker, the Minister has responded, and the matter must rest there. [Interjections.]

The SPEAKER: Order, hon members! Order!

 

Ms M SMUTS: Hon Speaker, the hon Chief Whip of the ANC, as it happens of course, holds views distinctly similar to those of the hon Ramatlhodi in as much as he has told people inside and outside this House that they may not say that they can take the Secrecy Bill to the Constitutional Court if it does not comply with the Constitution.

 

Your mistake is exactly the same as that of the hon Ngoako. Ma’am, the question is: Are you harbouring an anti-constitutionalist in your Ministry? Do you accept or does he accept the separation of powers? If not, he is a democratic centralist. [Applause.]

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Thank you very much, hon Speaker and hon Smuts. In my view, there is not a single member of the ANC, the ruling party, who would not be loyal to the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. We all are. [Interjections.] Not only have we pledged our loyalty to this Constitution, but, in fact, we actually are architects, together with you, of this very Constitution.

 

The fact that Comrade Ngoako has expressed his views about some elements or an aspect of this Constitution, does not mean that he must be construed as a person who is not loyal to the Constitution of the Republic. He is. However, I think that all of us have a right at one point or another to begin to engage, to examine, to assess, and to analyse the situation around us.

 

In fact, remember, by the way, that the Constitution was drafted in 1996 and it was a Constitution in which all of us were prepared to give and take - to give and take if only to heal the nation, if only to build the nation, and that is exactly what happened.

 

Therefore, if one of us today, together with you, identifies some elements of the Constitution to be problematic, there is nothing wrong with that. It is important to continue to examine, to continue to assess our surroundings and make sure that at some point we are in line with our needs in this country. [Applause.]

 

Mr D A KGANARE: Thank you, Speaker. Following your initial response, Minister, are you genuinely standing in this House and saying that there are times when you speak as a Minister and there are times when you do not speak as a Minister on the same issues which affect your own department? [Interjections.]

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Thank you very much, hon member. The two of us come from here. [Interjections.] No, don’t say, so what? You don’t do that. [Laughter.] I need to remind you about something: yes, I am a Minister, and yes, I am a Member of Parliament. But remember that I am, first and foremost, an activist of the ANC and it is my struggle credentials that have put me where I am today. That is why I am in this Parliament together with you, by the way. [Applause.]

 

Mr M G P LEKOTA: Speaker, it is very important that all of us remember that we took the oath of office to uphold the Constitution, so we are here on those grounds. Now, for a Minister to assert that the Constitution is tilted in favour of the enemies of this country is also an assertion that those of us who not only participated in its construction, but who also swore allegiance to it, are working with the enemies of this country. [Interjections.]

 

It is important that a department of government led by a Minister cannot be led by someone who believes that we are working with the enemies of this country — under this Constitution. We are here to defend this Constitution, negotiations on which were led by the icon of this nation, Nelson Mandela.

 

This Constitution is not a sell-out Constitution. [Interjections.] Therefore, we need to know that those ...

 

The SPEAKER: Hon member, your time has expired.

 

Mr M G P LEKOTA: We want to know that those who are leading government hold it ... [Interjections.]

 

The SPEAKER: Your time has expired, hon member. Hon member, take your seat! Your time has expired. Don’t you understand simple English? [Applause.] [Interjections.] Order, hon members! Order! Order! Order! [Interjections.] Order, hon members!

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: What is it that I must explain? Speaker ... [Interjections.]

 

Mr M G P LEKOTA: In case you did not hear ... [Interjections.]

The SPEAKER: Hon member, please take your seat!

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: The point is that I will not repudiate what Adv Ngoako Ramatlhodi wrote in that opinion piece. For all I care to know, you, Terror, sitting there, you may probably agree ... [Interjections.]

 

The SPEAKER: He is called “honourable”. [Interjections.]

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Hon Terror Lekota ...

 

The SPEAKER: Please take your seat, hon member. Thank you very much. That brings us to the end of questions.

 

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Sorry, on a point of order, Mr Speaker: There is one more question to be asked. We have only had three follow-ups at this point in time.

 

Ms M SMUTS: Hon Minister, it is true that we all gave and took whilst we negotiated, but there are some things that are utterly fundamental to this Constitution. And it is news to me what the hon Ngoako says, that it was a substantive and fundamental concession on the part of the ANC to accept the separation of powers. Is that your position? Is that the position of the Cabinet?

 

Moreover, later in the same piece he describes as a fatal concession the desire of the liberation movement to create a society bereft of any form of discrimination, that is, the right to equality. Was the Bill of Rights therefore also a concession? Is that the position of the Ministry and of the Cabinet? [Applause.]

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Thank you very much, hon Dene Smuts. I think that in my culture where I am, and where I come from, we all have a right to engage and debate issues. And we actually have a right to differ at times. I am sure this also applies to the DA. When you debate, you do not expect that you will all agree on a matter.

 

We all hold different views about different matters, but the most important thing is that Comrade Ngoako sitting there has pledged his allegiance and loyalty to the Constitution of the Republic. The fact that he is able to be introspective about some of the processes that we have gone through in this country, and the fact that he is able to be critical of some of the elements in the Constitution is his right - as it is yours. [Interjections.]

 

Mr M G P LEKOTA: He is violating the Constitution.

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: So is your right to express this ... [Interjections.]

 

The SPEAKER: Hon member, please! Order!

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Could the hon Terror ... hon Lekota ...

 

Mr M G P LEKOTA: [Inaudible.]

 

The SPEAKER: Hon member, you are out of order. Please stop heckling!

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: If you are not a good listener, you will never learn. I listen to you because I want to learn from you, and I think it is important that you listen so that you can begin to appreciate other people’s points of view. Thank you. [Applause.]

 

Steps to entrench victim-oriented emphasis in criminal justice system

 

184.      Mr J B Sibanyoni (ANC) asked the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development:

 

(1)        What steps has he taken to entrench a victim-oriented emphasis in the criminal justice system to ensure an equitable balance between the rights of the accused or convicted persons and the rights of victims (details furnished);

 

(2)        whether he has taken any steps to ensure compensation of victims; if not, why not; if so, what steps?                 NO3702E

 

The MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Speaker, in answer to the first part of the question, government has adopted a victim-oriented approach in the criminal justice system. The department has led the development of the Service Charter for Victims of Crime and the Minimum Service Standards for Victims of Crime within the Justice, Crime Prevention and Security cluster, JCPS.

 

The Minimum Standards were developed as a guideline for the implementation of the Victims Charter and therefore set the framework within which the various departments implement the Victims Charter. Led by the Department of Social Development, this Victims Charter is implemented as part of the Victims Empowerment Programme of the JCPS.

 

In answer to the second part of the question, I wish to point out that the department is still investigating the viability of the proposed victims’ compensation in the more general sense. In this regard, the SA Law Commission did an investigation and made a report on a possible compensation fund for victims of crime. In terms of the legislation, the commission makes recommendations to the Minister of Justice for consideration on investigations it has carried out in terms of a programme approved by the Minister.

 

After studying the report under discussion and after obtaining advice, my predecessor was of the view that a number of critical aspects needed further investigation. I endorsed this approach, as did Cabinet. On that basis, I requested the commission to consider investigating the aspects in question and possibly to address them by means of a supplementary report. The commission has informed me that my request in this regard would indeed be considered by it in terms of their criteria for the inclusion of the new programmes. Thank you very much.

 

Mr J B SIBANYONI: Ngiyabonga, Bhungane, for the response that you have given. All I need to ask as a follow-up question is this: Although there is section 300 of the Criminal Procedure Act in terms of which the court can order a convicted person to pay compensation, it is very rare that one finds the courts doing this. What can be done to encourage the courts at the moment, while we are still busy with the Victims Charter, to make use of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act? Is it possible that perhaps either the government or Parliament could have dialogue with the judiciary, while respecting their independence? Thank you.

 

The MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: I think the hon Sibanyoni has already alluded to a possible approach to this matter. As we know, our courts are independent and subject to the Constitution and the law. So, when people make representations in courts, I am sure the courts will consider that, but their decisions are independent. Perhaps Parliament may consider making legislation to make it more direct as to what is intended to be done. Thank you.

 

Mr P J GROENEWALD: Speaker, the hon Minister just said that he is still investigating, and is going to ask the commission for this and for that. But the fact of the matter is that the first thing a criminal does when he or she is caught, is to call on his or her constitutional rights. In South Africa today, we get more and more situations where victims of criminals are becoming the criminals, and I will give you an example. You are asleep in your house at one o’clock in the morning and criminals come into your house trying to kill you. You close your bedroom door, they start breaking down the door, you shoot with your firearm through the door and you kill one criminal. You are then arrested because you tried to defend yourself! And the example I gave you is a real one.

 

We do not have the balance between the interests of victims and those of criminals and I want to ask you this: How quickly are you going to speed up the process, because it must also go further in looking into this matter?

 

Dit is onaanvaarbaar dat ’n slagoffer van misdadigers die misdadiger word omdat hy of sy homself of haarself beskerm het. Dit kan nie so aangaan nie. Dankie. [It is unacceptable that a victim of criminals is regarded as a criminal due to the fact that he or she protected himself or herself. It is an untenable situation. Thank you.]

 

The MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Speaker, as I have indicated, the matter is before the SA Law Commission, and as soon as they give me a supplementary report, I will gladly report to Parliament, but I think we need to exercise patience. We have to go in accordance with the Constitution that all of us in the previous debate solemnly declared that we abide by. That is the Constitution of the land, so I will wait for the commission’s report in this regard.

 

Mr G B D MCINTOSH: Mr Speaker, I would like to ask the hon Minister Radebe the following: Regarding victims who are being considered, such as Bishop Jack Tolo and the 70 SA Police Service members who have already been murdered this year, what is the Minister applying his mind to in terms of dealing with this problem, because they cannot speak for themselves?

The MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Well, Speaker, I have already answered that question. I cannot add more to what I have said than to wait for the supplementary report of the commission which we have appointed.

 

Mrs D A SCHÄFER: Mr Speaker, could the Minister please explain to Parliament why the report of the SA Law Reform Commission was buried in his department for seven years before being released in May this year, and whether we can expect the same kind of delay when he receives the updated report; and secondly, can he advise whether the Law Reform Commission has given him any indication of when they will be ready with their updated report, as requested by him? Thank you.

 

The MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Speaker, I cannot answer to what happened previously, but I think the report is a matter of public information at the present moment in time and we are dealing with it. When the supplementary report comes, we will further advise on what needs to be done. So, I have no idea what happened previously, but the important thing is that the information is in the public domain.

 

Steps to improve conditions at 1 Military Hospital

 

164.      Mr A M Maziya (ANC) asked the Minister of Defence and Military Veterans:

 

With reference to the concerns raised by the Interim National Defence Force Service Commission regarding 1 Military Hospital (details furnished), when does she intend to take steps to improve the conditions at the hospital?                                               NO2970E

 

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE AND MILITARY VETERANS: Speaker, the hon Maziya wants to know what I am doing about the condition of 1 Military Hospital. He furnished me with the details, about which concerns were also raised by the Interim National Defence Force Service Commission. Hon Maziya, the condition of 1 Military Hospital is as much a concern to me as it is to the interim commission, as it is to you. The 1 Military Hospital was actually given a prohibition notice as far back as 2002, by former Minister Lekota. It has taken us this long to ensure that we can correct that situation.

 

We have started some work. [Interjections.] Do you want to say something?

 

The SPEAKER: Continue, hon Minister. I haven’t stopped you from speaking.

 

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE AND MILITARY VETERANS: Thank you. We have finished the first part of our repairs to 1 Military Hospital. Unfortunately, the work was not done to the satisfaction of the department. We have since been in discussion with the national Department of Public Works, and they have agreed to come back and conclude the work. We hope that perhaps the work will be completed by the end of the 2011-12 financial year. From our side, what we have done is to reprioritise R40 million to make sure that this work is done.

 

To the hon Maziya, the problem that we have with the decaying infrastructure of Defence is that it is, indeed, not in our hands. It is in the hands of the national Department of Public Works. This is something that we have said over and over that we would like to take over. This is because we have the competence to do so; we have the engineers; we have the energy. We would like to take over this responsibility. We have been in discussion with the former Minister to ensure that this responsibility is handed over to us legally, so that we are able to repair our own infrastructure. This has not as yet happened. What I would like to request of the hon Maziya and the committee is perhaps to have discussions with the Portfolio Committee on Public Works to see whether we can’t fast-track this process, because I am certain that if this was in the hands of the Defence Force, we would be able to look after our infrastructure better. Thank you.

 

Mnu A M MAZIYA: Ngiyabonga, Ngqongqoshe, kuyajabulisa impela uma ufika esibhedlela e-1 Military uyabona impela ukuthi uma ungena ngamasango aso uyaphola ngendlela esisihle ngayo. Nempendulo yakho iyajabulisa, Ngqongqoshe, noma-nje sewubeka enye ingqinamba le esizoyifeza thina singamalungu eqembu elifundisanayo nekomidi lezokuvikela. Umbuzo olandelayo yilona othi uma sithatha imali le obufuna ukwenza izinto ezithile ngayo bese uzama ukuqedelela umsebenzi osele ngabe akuzukuba yinkinga lokho na? Futhi, akuzukukubangela yini ezinye ezinkinga ngokohlelo lwezimali na? Ngiyabonga. (Translation of isiZulu paragraph follows.)

 

[Mr A M MAZIYA: Thank you, hon Minister. It is very satisfying to enter the gates of 1 Military Hospital because you are really instantly healed because of its beauty. And your response is also satisfactory, hon Minister, although you have tabled another challenge that we are going to tackle as the members of the education team and the committee on defence. The follow-up question is: If you use the funds that were meant for other things to finish this project, wouldn’t that be a problem? And wouldn’t this cause other problems as far as the financial programme is concerned? Thank you.]

 

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE AND MILITARY VETERANS: Thank you very much for your follow-up question, hon Maziya. By the time you meet with the Portfolio Committee on Public Works, you will understand that we actually hope to save money by taking over the responsibilities of Public Works and doing the repair work ourselves. Of course, we are going to have to reprioritise, which means that we are sacrificing R40 million from something else to put into the work that has not been done properly by the Department of Public Works.

 

However, this is a priority, because 1 Military Hospital is a flagship hospital for us. It is a place where we treat our Presidents, should they need any treatment, and it is a place where a lot of our people work under the section of military health services. So, we are willing to sacrifice the R40 million and reprioritise it to ensure that we are putting it in the right place.

 

Yes, I am putting a challenge to you, because, hon Maziya, making sure that we make the lives of our people a little better is not only my responsibility, but yours as a Member of Parliament as well. So, in this case, I am asking you to help me make sure that we can make it better in the shortest time possible. Thank you. [Applause.]

 

Mr S J MASANGO: Speaker, we compliment the Minister on the intervention at 1 Military Hospital, which is in a state of collapse. However, the fact is that the entire SA Military Health Service appears to be in a state of collapse. This year’s annual report tells us that the SA Military Health Service cannot even maintain a combat-ready conventional medical battalion. Minister, you may have a plan to save 1 Military Hospital, but the question is, since there are so many of them, whether you have a plan to save some of the SA Military Health Service. Thank you.

 

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE AND MILITARY VETERANS: Hon member, there are two things that you are putting together: one is the military infrastructure, the hospitals themselves; and the other one is the capability of the SA Military Health Service, the SAMHS.

 

Well, I would like to take you on a tour of 2 Military Hospital, because we actually have managed to revamp that. It is looking very good right now, and we are hoping to keep it in that shape. However, we are running short of resources for the SAMHS, and this is a matter, again, that is in your hands, hon member. I am certain that you know, as we have said over and over again, that our biggest problem and biggest challenge is the budget. If we are able to overcome that, nothing is beyond us, and we would be able to make sure that we do what is necessary. Thank you.

 

Mr M A NHANHA: Thank you, hon Speaker. Hon Minister, I accept your assertion that 1 Military Hospital is our flagship hospital. That is true, but to me, secondly, it is closest to my heart, because 1 Military Hospital, with the help of the hon Mluleki George, treated my late king, King Sandile of the amaRharhabe in the Eastern Cape. For that, as an amaRharhabe, I will be forever grateful to your Ministry.

 

Secondly, hon Minister, with all the good work that you have already done in refurbishing 1 Military Hospital, could you provide us with details of the current cost of the refurbishment and confirm whether the amount spent to refurbish it to date is in line with the original tender budgeted for? Thirdly, this could be a side question, and feel free not to answer it, if you like: What is the current state of the seven-star wing, which was envisaged in 2002 at a cost of R6 million? Thank you.

 

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE AND MILITARY VETERANS: Hon Speaker, I did not realise that the hon member would use this opportunity to try to ramp up the flagging reputation of Cope. [Interjections.] However, yes, 1 Military Hospital is a flagship hospital and, indeed, it has saved the lives of many of our upstanding citizens and amongst them is the late king of the amaRharhabe, King Sandile. Perhaps, yes, at that time it was due to the support of the hon Mluleki George here, but it is a government policy as it stands.

 

I am not able to give you the breakdown of the details that you are asking for because, as I indicated, the support of the infrastructure of the Defence Force is entirely in the hands of the national Department of Public Works. What I could do is ask for the breakdown and provide it to the portfolio committee. Thank you.

 

Particulars of circumstances surrounding visa application for Dalai Lama

 

192.      Mr S Mokgalapa (DA) asked the Minister of International Relations and Co-operation:

 

(1)        Whether she had received any notification from the People's Republic of China not to grant a visa to His Holiness the Dalai Lama of Tibet; if so, (a) when and (b) what are the further relevant details;

 

(2)        whether she had any discussions with the government of the People's Republic of China regarding the visa application; if so, (a) when, (b) with whom and (c) what was the outcome of the discussion;

 

(3)        whether she had received any other notifications from any other government regarding the visa application for His Holiness the Dalai Lama; if so, (a) when and (b) what are the further relevant details?                                                  NO3776E

 

The DEPUTY MINISTER OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND CO-OPERATION (Mr E I Ebrahim): Mr Speaker, the matter pertaining to the visa application of His Holiness the Dalai Lama is sub judice ... [Interjections.]

 

The SPEAKER: Order, hon members!

 

The DEPUTY MINISTER OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND CO-OPERATION (Mr E I Ebrahim): ... after the IFP and Cope instituted a court proceeding in the Cape High Court on Monday, 18 October 2011. Therefore, the Minister is, regrettably, not in a position to reply until the pending court proceedings are concluded. Thank you.

 

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Sorry, on a point of order, Mr Speaker ...

 

The SPEAKER: Please take your seat. I haven’t given you the floor. Hon Deputy Minister, just to seek clarity: Is the specific matter raised in the question what is before the court? If so, which court is it before?

 

The DEPUTY MINISTER OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND CO-OPERATION (Mr E I Ebrahim): Mr Speaker, it’s before the Cape High Court and it is the matter concerning the visa application of the Dalai Lama. So, it does relate to this question.

 

The SPEAKER: Thank you for the clarity.

 

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Mr Speaker, my knowledge as a lawyer of the sub judice rule is that it can only be of effect if the proceedings in this House have a direct effect on the proceedings of that court. Now, quite rightly, the proceedings in this House cannot have an effect on the court, which is an independent institution, and we ourselves are an independent institution. So, it cannot be sub judice in that context.

 

The SPEAKER: Thank you very much, hon member. We have an undertaking by the Deputy Minister that the question is, indeed, before a court – the Cape High Court.

 

Now, according to the Rules, and in view of the undertaking given by the Deputy Minister, I am obliged to rule that the question cannot be proceeded with. This is in terms of Rules that this House has imposed upon itself. Rule 67 clearly states that no member shall refer to any matter on which a judicial decision is pending.

 

May I also say, Deputy Minister, before I move on, that should we be given the wrong information or should you give the wrong information to this House, you may be acting in contempt of Parliament - if it is the wrong information. This is just to advise you. But I would like to proceed.

 

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Mr Speaker, this is very much in line with the context which you have just indicated, and I would like you to actually find out whether, in fact, papers have been served in this context, because judicial proceedings only take place once papers are served ... [Interjections.]

 

The SPEAKER: Order, hon members! Order!

 

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: ... and prior to papers being served, the matter is not before a court. And I do not believe the papers have been served in this context.

 

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Hon Speaker, I wonder whether it is the duty of this Parliament to find out which papers were served when and where. [Interjections.]

 

The SPEAKER: Order! Order, hon members!

 

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: I rise on a point of order, Mr Speaker. It is absolutely necessary, because the Deputy Minister may be misleading the House, and we have a duty to find out whether or not the Deputy Minister is misleading the House.

 

The SPEAKER: I have already made a ruling on the matter in terms of Rule 67. I have also indicated to the Deputy Minister that, should we have been given the wrong information, then that certainly would be contempt of this House. I would like to move on.

 

Particulars regarding provision of services by, and alleged tender irregularities involving, a certain company

 

182.      Mr L Ramatlakane (Cope) asked the Minister of Correctional Services:

 

(1)        Whether a certain company (name furnished) is the service provider for most generic services at correctional centres; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;

 

(2)        whether the previous alleged tender irregularities involving the said company have been resolved; if so, (a) which services are being  provided by this company and (b) what is the cost thereof;

 

(3)        whether any money have been recovered in respect of the irregularly awarded tenders; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?                                                     NO3697E

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Thank you very much, hon Speaker, and thank you to hon member Ramatlakane. The answer to this question is no, Bosasa is not rendering most generic services at most correctional centres. But they are rendering full food provisioning services, full maintenance of food services unit equipment, cleaning services of the food service units and training of offenders at eight management areas, namely Pretoria, Krugersdorp, Pollsmoor, St Albans, Durban Westville, Modderbee, Johannesburg and the Waterval management area.

 

Yes, we have a contract: HK14/2007-8, which commenced on 1 February 2009, and will expire on 31 January 2012. The estimated value at the time of awarding this contract was R839 million. The second one in this area is contract: HK5/2006, which commenced on 16 February 2007 and will expire on 15 February 2012.

 

With reference to the second aspect of your question, we are awaiting a court decision, hon Ramatlakane, on this matter. Of course, part three of the question will then depend on the outcome of that court process. Thank you.

 

Mr L RAMATLAKANE: Thank you, hon House Chair, and thank you to the Minister for the response. Minister, I am sure that you must be concerned, as much as we are concerned, particularly about the money which you say you are awaiting a decision on. I just want to find out what the monthly payment to Bosasa is with regard to these contracts that you are talking about.

 

Secondly, we all know that the late Director-General Petersen was fired from the department as a result of the particular tender. After he was fired, the tender was then awarded to him in that he should continue. Bosasa then received that contract. You should be very worried about the linkages and the connectivity of the people who are directors of Bosasa. I am worried about the slowness and the continuation of this long relationship with Bosasa and, of course, the connection of the directors like Njenje and Watson, who were part of that. Aren’t you going to consider taking other steps to make sure that the relationship with Bosasa is terminated?

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Thank you very much, hon member. I have just reported to Parliament now – just informed you - that, in fact, the first contract commenced on 1 February and is due to expire on 31 January 2012. Secondly, I cannot say that I want to terminate the contract before the court processes have been completed. The courts will decide on this matter, and once they have decided we will then comply. Thank you.

 

Mr J SELFE: Thank you, Chairperson, and I thank the Minister for the reply. Minister, you know very well that these are highly controversial awarding of contracts. The contracts and the awarding of the contracts have been the subject of an investigation by the Special Investigating Unit, the SIU. We have had a report from the SIU. I am also aware that your department got a legal opinion that said it should not oppose the review proceedings that were launched in the North Gauteng High Court into the awarding of this contract.

 

I would really like to know from the Minister why the department ignored that legal advice to go along with the review proceedings. Secondly, because this doesn’t only concern the late Vernie Petersen’s role, I would like to know whether she is prepared to investigate the role played by the former Minister of Correctional Services in the awarding of these contracts, and if not, why not.

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Hon Selfe, you are aware that indeed you have just made reference to the SIU report, and you know exactly where that process is. So, it’s not as if we are keeping the SIU report under wraps. There is a process under way which seeks to unpack and investigate each one of the allegations which is mentioned in the SIU report. That process is not with us in the Department of Correctional Services.

 

Obviously, if a need arises for further investigations to be conducted into people who are in the department, the police will have to do that and not the Minister of Correctional Services.

 

Lastly, I should say that yes, you are saying the contracts were awarded in a very suspicious or controversial manner, but that is your opinion and it is a view that is expressed in the SIU report as well. One of the reasons why that matter is currently under investigation is precisely because of the allegations contained in the SIU report. Beyond what we have done – the work that we have done with the SIU - I don’t think, personally, at a departmental level, that we have the capacity to conduct that kind of investigation, including an investigation into the former Minister.

 

Mrs M N PHALISO: Hon Minister, has the department received any value for money for this contract? Have any skills been transferred as a result of the outsourcing of the nutrition services? I thank you, hon Chair.

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Madam Chair, my sincere apologies, but could the hon member repeat the question, please?

 

Mrs M N PHALISO: Hon Minister, has the department received any value for money for this contract? The second supplementary question is, have any skills been transferred as a result of the outsourcing of the nutrition services? Those are the two questions.

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Thank you very much, hon Phaliso. The answer is yes, we have received value for the money that has been spent on these contracts, in that if you look at the number of people who have acquired skills from the training that has been provided by Bosasa in the various centres, they suggest that indeed it was worthwhile.

 

I think we should separate these issues. How it was acquired should be one matter, and it should be treated differently from the benefits of this project for the department. I think that a number of inmates have benefited from the training that was granted by Bosasa. [Applause.]

 

Mr G B D MCINTOSH: Thank you, Madam Speaker. May I first of all congratulate the Minister on her frank and open response to questions, particularly her first reply. We have three months, according to what the Minister says, until the one contract expires at the end of January 2012. What I’m interested in is: What process is in place to invite new tenders, and when will they be awarded?

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Thank you very much, Chairperson. Hon McIntosh, I’m surprised that you are even mentioning the awarding of a new tender for this kind of work. I’m sure you heard me before calling on the department to take responsibility for its catering services. So, what is currently going on in the department is that we are doing an assessment to determine how many centres are ready to have their own catering services. If they are not ready, how much time are we giving to those centres? Is it going to be months or a year? That will assist us in preparing our inmates to do their own cooking. After all, these are things which were done in the past.

 

I must also say that we are actually in a similar position as the Department of Defence and Military Veterans. Portfolio committee members have made an observation that most of our kitchens are in a state of dilapidation. Therefore, we require the Department of Public Works to come in and do some renovations. So, to a certain extent, having these people on site doing the catering for us has been very useful. Thank you.

 

Steps taken to implement recommendations of NA Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report 2010 and to ensure implementation of JICS

 

26.        Ms W Ngwenya (ANC) asked the Minister of Correctional Services: [Question standing over from Wednesday, 23 March 2011 in accordance with National Assembly Rule 115(1)(a)]

 

(1)        a) What progress has she made with regard to implementing the recommendations of the National Assembly’s Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report 2010 (details furnished) of 17 November 2010 and (b) what steps has she taken to ensure that the recommendations of the Judicial Inspectorate of Correctional Services (JICS) are implemented;

 

(2)        whether she intends allocating a fixed percentage of her department’s budget to JICS in the event of JICS not being able to secure their own independent budget; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?                NO995E

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Thank you very much, hon Chairperson and hon Ngwenya. The department is currently engaging National Treasury with regard to a separate allocation of budget for the Judicial Inspectorate of Correctional Services.

 

The Judicial Inspectorate of Correctional Services is not a department or constitutional institution, or listed as a public entity in terms of the Public Finance Management Act. So, the Auditor-General of South Africa audits it as part of the Department of Correctional Services, and it follows all the Department of Correctional Services’ policies and procedures for administration.

 

The office of the inspecting judge is treated like other branches within the Department of Correctional Services. When funds are allocated, the available budget for programme administration is considered and any adjustments for inflation, as indicated by the National Treasury, are taken into account.

 

I should say that during any financial year internal budgetary processes are followed to allow cost-centre managers to register their budget shortfalls or surpluses. And within available funds, any request for additional funding will be considered.

 

In 2008-09, for instance, this office reported a shortfall of R800 000 on goods and services; and R233 000 on capital and additional funds, as requested, and these were allocated. This past year, 2010-11, a shortfall of R850 000 on capital works was reported and additional funds, as requested, were allocated.

 

So, it should be noted that we depend on the consultations between ourselves and National Treasury to determine the processes of budgeting for the office of the Inspecting Judge. Thank you.

 

Ms W NGWENYA: Thank you, Chairperson. Minister, when is the term of office of the current Inspecting Judge coming to an end, and are there plans to extend his term of office? If yes, why; and if no, why not? Thank you.

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Thank you very much, hon member. The term of office of the current Inspecting Judge ends on 31 October 2011, in a week’s time actually. There are no plans to extend his contract. There has been a process in place to appoint a new Inspecting Judge, and the President has since appointed Judge Tshabalala as the new Inspecting Judge. Thank you. [Applause.]

 

Mr J SELFE: Chairperson, thank you very much, and I thank the Minister. The Minister would be aware that this report contains a number of recommendations also about the judge. Amongst those was the filling of vacancies, the alignment of the budget, the long periods of suspension of officials, and so on and so forth.

 

One of the strategic objectives or priorities contained in that report was to produce a White Paper on Remand Detention. Now in this year’s annual report, it is reported that the actual performance of the department includes the widely consulted White Paper on Remand Detention, and widely consulted with the Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services. In point of fact, the portfolio committee has never been consulted about the White Paper on Remand Detention. I would like to know from the Minister why it was not consulted; and whether this does not, in fact, constitute contempt of Parliament? Thank you.

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Hon Selfe, my sincere apologies, but I seem to remember — and if I am wrong, please correct me — that I led a team that briefed the portfolio committee, on, one, the amendments to the Act; and, two, that there was indeed a White Paper on Remand Detention which was in the process of being drafted at the time by an interdepartmental task team. I seem to remember that very well. I may not remember the dates now, but I seem to remember that I am the one, in fact, who appeared before the portfolio committee to report on that matter. Thank you.

 

Mr E M SULLIMAN: Hon Chair, somebody pressed my button by mistake. I don’t have a follow-up question. [Laughter.]

 

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs F Hajaig): There seems to be a lot of mischief going around. Thank you. The next question has been asked by the hon M S Motimele to the Minister of Defence ...

 

Mr J SELFE: Hang on, Chairperson, I don’t believe that we have exhausted all the supplementary questions yet.

 

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs F Hajaig): I think we have. You had your turn.

 

Mr J SELFE: Yes, but I am asking for another turn.

 

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs F Hajaig): Alright, you may have another turn seeing that Mr Sulliman hasn’t pressed his button.

 

Mr J SELFE: I did press my button.

 

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs F Hajaig): No, he hasn’t ...

 

Mr J SELFE: Oh, alright. That’s fine.

 

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs F Hajaig): ... but his name appears here.

 

Mr J SELFE: Chairperson, through you, thank you very much indeed to the Minister for that reply. It is indeed so that the Minister appeared before the portfolio committee to brief it on the amending Bill. But the annual report talks about a “widely consulted White Paper on Remand Detention”. I have never seen the widely consulted White Paper on Remand Detention and, as far as I know, neither have any of my colleagues in the portfolio committee.

 

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Please, there is a White Paper on Remand Detention. Could I just say, as you are aware, hon Selfe, we set up a team; that team produced the White Paper; that White Paper on Remand Detention went through a Cabinet process; and that paper was referred to Parliament. That White Paper was referred to Parliament along with the amendments to the Act.

 

Now, I would have expected — and I am sure you can check this matter with your team when you are at your portfolio committee meeting — that there would have been a process of consultation from the side of the portfolio committee. But from our side, you know very well that on the day – in fact, that day we came from Cabinet — I came here and presented to you the fact that the Act was now ready for you to process and that the White Paper was also ready, which was of course as a result of broad consultation amongst government departments at the time.

 

So, regarding that process of consultation with civil society, I would have expected that it would have been a process that would have been undertaken by the portfolio committee. [Interjections.] I hear somebody saying study group. Of course things go to the study group, but I know that I appeared before the portfolio committee. Thank you.

 

Plans for revitalisation of ageing SANDF materiel and car fleet

 

168.      Mr M S Motimele (ANC) asked the Minister of Defence and Military Veterans:

 

Whether there are any plans in place regarding the revitalisation of the ageing SA National Defence Force materiel and car fleet in order to ensure efficiency and effectiveness of defence operations; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?                                                                                                NO2974E

 

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE AND MILITARY VETERANS: Thank you, Chairperson. Hon Motimele, the answer to this question is a very detailed one and I will give it over to you at the end of this session. However, within the time available to me, I would like to indicate that we do have plans to revitalise our ageing materiel and car fleet in order to ensure efficiency and effectiveness of the defence operations within the four services of the Defence Force.

 

Within the Army, for instance, a detailed Scamp - Strategic Capital Acquisition Master Plan - is in place, although only partially funded. As far as operational vehicles are concerned, there is a project in place to replace the ageing Casspir and Mamba fleets. For your own edification, Chairperson, Casspir is not the friendly ghost; it is an armoured vehicle.

 

Another major renewal programme addresses the supply support of the cargo vehicles’ system and, as far as the light support vehicles - buses and bakkies - are concerned, last year we set aside R166,8 million for this, and in the current year we have set aside R74 million for this.

 

In the Air Force we are concentrating on a number of areas in which we would like to ensure that there is renewal. The first area is the very, very important person, VVIP, capacity; the second area is the light air transport system; the third area is maritime surveillance, seeing that we have adopted a maritime strategy; the fourth area is the air traffic control system in support of command control capability and the radar systems; and the last area is the ground support system, that is, the refuelling of vehicles, fire engines, rescue vehicles, etc.

 

We also have a detailed plan for the Navy, and this is available for you to peruse. We have another detailed plan which is in place for the SA Medical Service, the Sams. A number of issues need our attention and these have to do with the hospitals — which we have dealt with just now — and the facilities that support the hospitals. Thank you, Chairperson.

 

Mr M S MOTIMELE: Hon Chair, the Minister has sufficiently answered my question. There is no follow-up. Thank you.

 

Mr D J MAYNIER: Chairperson, the hon Minister has a well-earned reputation for turning the Department of Defence and Military Veterans into a state within a state. The previous Minister of Defence routinely replied to parliamentary questions concerning the Defence Force’s strategic capital acquisition master plan, the Scamp.

 

We were provided with details concerning the Defence department’s capital acquisition projects, but not any more. The Minister now claims in a reply to a recent written parliamentary question that the department is not at liberty to release this information to the public as it may compromise the security plans of the SA National Defence Force, and generate undue speculation within the country and the industry. The fact is that information was available on the Scamp, but now it is not. Would the Minister tell us what has changed?

 

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE AND MILITARY VETERANS: Thank you very much, hon Chair. What has changed is that traditionally the Portfolio Committee on Defence respects the integrity of the defence systems of this country. Traditionally, the Portfolio Committee on Defence has acted in the national interests of the country. We now have people who are more interested in their own profiles — that is what has changed.

 

However, we do have in place now the Joint Standing Committee on Defence at which all of this information is available. This information is available in full to the Portfolio Committee on Defence, and it actually works in the interests of the country that we have a portfolio committee that has the integrity to go through most of the matters that we are dealing with, which are operational, so that we are assisted in ensuring that we can jointly secure the country. Thank you. [Applause.]

 

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs F Hajaig): Thank you. Question 196 ...

 

Mr M A NHANHA: Sorry, Chairperson, I had pressed the “to talk” button.

 

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs F Hajaig): Okay. The hon ... Nhanha from Cope.

 

Mr M A NHANHA: From Cope, indeed, Chair. [Laughter.] Thanks, Chairperson. Firstly, I would like to raise with the Minister the issue I have. If I heard you correctly, you seemed to be generalising that the committee is full of people that are unpatriotic. For the record, I am patriotic, Minister.

 

Secondly, Minister, on the ageing fleet of our military: at what cost would you estimate that we as a country would spend to refurbish the fleet and the materiel of Defence? Also, after having spent so much money and you are satisfied that indeed we have a well-equipped military, what is it that you would put in place to ensure that we don’t fall into the same situation we find ourselves in today in which we are sitting with equipment and fleet 35 to 40 years old? Thank you.

 

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE AND MILITARY VETERANS: Thank you very much, hon member, and for the record: yes, I want to take that statement back. I did not intend to imply that all of you are unpatriotic; some, however, I am not sure of.

 

The point I wanted to make, which is a very important one, is that in all democratic countries there are certain areas, such as defence, which are a national responsibility. They are not party-political matters, but matters of national responsibility. And that is what I wanted to point out that has changed in this Parliament since 2002 to 2009. Then we did not have this. We had very good co-operation between ourselves, as multiparty Members of Parliament, with the Ministry of Defence.

 

And how would I want to make sure that what happened in the past does not happen again? I am depending on you to assist the Ministry of Defence to ensure that whatever we get now for the Defence Force, you will be there, first, to approve it; second, to make sure that we have the resources; and, third, to make sure that jointly, with me, you monitor that it is put to good use.

 

I am unfortunately unable, hon member, to give you the total figure of what we would need to recover and make sure that we can revitalise our fleet. Most of what we have - our vehicles and our aircraft - are ageing. We really need a great deal of injection of resources into this, because this is where we experience most of our difficulties in ferrying around our personnel and in ferrying around those people who need to be ferried from one place to another. The fleet that we have is truly aged. We need to make sure that we can direct the resources, and, with your help and, perhaps when we have had the opportunity to give you a breakdown of what we have in the review, you will be able to support us in this venture. Thank you.

 

Mr G B D MCINTOSH: Chairperson, I want to assure the Minister of Defence that if she thinks of me as being unpatriotic, it does not worry me at all, because Gen Magnus Malan also thought I was when I was an MP in this House previously. [Interjections.]

 

At the moment there is a counter-piracy conference going on in Cape Town, and I would like to ask the hon Minister whether she has included on this list the requirements that we would need, not only for us, but perhaps for Southern African Development Community countries as well, in order to deal with this very serious and growing global problem of piracy at sea.

 

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE AND MILITARY VETERANS: Thank you very much, hon member. There is a difference between what Magnus Malan meant as unpatriotic and what a democratic state would mean as unpatriotic.

 

Yes, there is a counter-piracy conference taking place. It starts on Thursday. If the hon member has time, it would be very good if he went to it because we will be giving a very good presentation on the work that we are doing.

 

We have taken time, hon member, to study the issue of piracy. We indicated that at some point it seemed a very distant problem — a very distant threat — to us, until we started counting the cost of what it would mean to us and our economy and the economies of the countries around us. We have now put in place a SADC strategy to deal with piracy. We presented it to the SADC heads of state in Angola a few months ago, and it was adopted. It is now binding on all the countries of the SADC region to ensure that this strategy is funded and that it is supported.

 

We offered to host the first centre for this strategy, and we are very glad that we are having the conference here. We have budgeted for the fleet that we would need to support the strategy, because it is very important for us. We have also had to reprioritise this, because it was not on our agenda, but we are fully covered for the current year. Thank you.

 

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs F Hajaig): Thank you, Minister. Question 196 has been posed by the Rev Meshoe, who is not present, to the Minister of Police. Mr S N Swart will take up the follow-up question on his behalf.

 

Particulars regarding police officers arrested for selling confiscated drugs

 

196.      Rev K R J Meshoe (ACDP) asked the Minister of Police:

Whether any police officers have been arrested for selling confiscated drugs; if so, (a) how many police officers have been arrested, (b) from which provinces were they and (c) how many of these police officers have been suspended with pay?                                                                                                                                                 NO3780E

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Hon Chair, I was about to ask where the Reverend was. The requested information is not readily available as the selling of the confiscated drugs could relate to various crimes that could have been committed, such as theft, corruption, dealing in prohibited drugs, etc. The requested information, hon member, will be obtained from provincial commissioners. When it has been obtained, it will be readily available for you. Thank you.

 

Mr S N SWART: Thank you, Chair. Well, then we should possibly hold over this issue. But could I just ask the Minister the second part of the question about the issue of the suspended officers; could I ask him just a general question then as to whether it’s possible to speed up disciplinary processes when police officials are suspended? Obviously, it’s very important that we finalise those matters, particularly where police officials are suspended with full pay. Thank you, Chairperson.

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Hon member, are you asking in relation to this question or are you asking generally?

 

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs F Hajaig): I think he is asking another question. If you do not wish to answer that question, it can be requested to be put on the Question Paper for another time.

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Let me think how to answer you. Let me just apply my mind on how to answer you. I will come back to you when I’m ready. Thank you. [Laughter.]

 

Mr S N SWART: Chairperson, the Minister is welcome to hold it over, if he prefers. Thank you.

 

Ms D KOHLER-BARNARD: Thank you, Chair. Minister, 11 bags of narcotics seized at O R Tambo International Airport were taken to the Pretoria Forensic Science Laboratory and promptly disappeared. The value was over R50 million, and this happened after the laboratory had installed CCTV cameras. My knowledge is that the person who was allegedly identified by CCTV tapes taking bags of drugs – I have the dates – and who works for the laboratory in an administrative capacity, has since been promoted and has allegedly purchased a house valued at R3 million. Now, have arrests been made in connection with the missing drugs? If not, it is quite obvious that this matter really isn’t being effectively investigated. And is there any reason I should not call in, for example, the Special Investigating Unit, to do the job for you?

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Sengathi uthanda izindaba, mhlonishwa. [Uhleko.] [It seems you are inquisitive, hon member. [Laughter.]]

 

The fact of the matter is that it’s not one, but six people. The matter was then taken to the Director of Public Prosecutions, who declined to prosecute. Thereafter, the police ... [Interjections.] ... Why are you asking me? Do you think I’m a prosecutor? [Interjections.] I’m not a prosecutor.

 

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs F Hajaig): Please be quiet. Let the Minister finish.

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: I’m not the Director of Public Prosecutions. So, that’s what happened. After that, internally, the police put in place their own disciplinary processes. So from the point of view of those people being charged, that’s what happened. Thank you very much.

 

Ms A VAN WYK: Thank you, Chairperson. Thank you, Minister. Minister, the chain of evidence is an important aspect of the criminal justice system. Yet, we found during our oversight visits that there was a lack of control at the SAPS Silverton stores and of the evidence that is kept in those stores, especially in as far as drugs are concerned. National instructions are not followed in dealing with drugs at the police station level. In your opinion, Minister, what can be done to improve the situation and to minimise the associated risks in respect of these SAPS Silverton stores?

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Well, hon member, I thought, as an expert in the field, you were going to help me by telling me what needs to be done. But in this instance - as you say that there are national instructions - what we have said, from the point of view of the national commissioner’s office, is that that should be followed up. This is because what has been happening is that national instructions are issued to local levels without any follow-ups. So we wanted that to be followed up. It’s not just the communication of national instructions. But I’m sure you will come up with other suggestions, won’t you? [Laughter.]

 

Mr L RAMATLAKANE: Thank you, hon Chair. I thought that the Minister was requesting that this question stand over because of certain information that he did not have readily available. I agree with the Minister that this question stand over because there are important elements of the question that we could probably benefit from in the Minister’s report at the next sitting. I think that at the moment we are going to be asking what the Minister is not going to be able to provide. It’s only fair that we agree with the Minister that this question should stand over and be posed again later.

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Hon member, when you don’t have a question, you must say that you don’t have a question. There is no question to answer. It was a very general question by the hon Swart — in fact, ebezithathela ichance nje [he was just taking a chance]. But, if you have a question, ask the question.

 

Particulars regarding action taken by Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (Hawks) in connection with new information on the arms deal emerging in Sweden and Germany

 

3.         Mr D J Maynier (DA) asked the Minister of Police: [Written Question No 2630]

 

(1)        Whether officials from the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (Hawks) have approached the (a) National Anti-Corruption Unit in Sweden and (b) Serious Fraud Office in the United Kingdom in connection with the new information (details furnished) on the arms deal which is emerging in Sweden; if not, why not, in each specified case; if so, what are the relevant details, in each specified case;

 

(2)        whether officials from the Hawks have approached (a) any prosecuting authority in Germany and (b) a certain company (name furnished) in connection with the new information (details furnished) relating to the arms deal which is emerging in Germany; if not, why not, in each specified case; if so, what are the relevant details, in each specified case;

 

(3)        whether the Hawks have launched a preliminary investigation into the new information on the arms deal emerging in (a) Sweden and (b) Germany; if not, why not, in each specified case; if so, what are the relevant details, in each specified case?

 

(4)        whether he will make a statement on the matter? NO3081E

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Hon member, the answer is no. As you would know, the President has announced a commission of inquiry. So the answer is no. Thank you.

 

Mr D J MAYNIER: Speaker, the Minister will be aware that Gen Anwar Dramat, Head of the Hawks, undertook in a letter dated 27 July 2011 and addressed to the hon Themba Godi, chairperson of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, that two officials would approach Sweden’s National Anti-Corruption Unit  and Britain’s Serious Fraud Office to follow up on the allegations relating to arms deal corruption. Would the Minister tell us why this undertaking was not honoured by Gen Anwar Dramat?

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Thank you, hon member. I will be very kind to you, hon member, and won’t say that you are unpatriotic. What you forgot to say is that that interaction happened, and the letter was written, before the commission I’m talking about. This commission supersedes whatever is happening, including your question. If you had any other information, you would then be going through this commission. It is a matter of time; it happened before. Thank you very much.

 

Mr G D SCHNEEMANN: Thank you very much, House Chairperson. I don’t actually have a follow-up question. The Minister has answered very clearly. I would have expected that the hon Maynier would have listened to him, and not bothered to try to ask further questions. So I just want to say that we are quite satisfied with the answer from the Minister. Thank you. [Applause.]

 

Progress made in establishing a single, integrated fingerprint database and a DNA database

 

174.      Adv A H Gaum (ANC) asked the Minister of Police:

 

What progress has been made to (a) have a single, integrated fingerprint database by, inter alia, accessing the database of the Department of Home Affairs for this purpose and (b) establish a DNA database?                                                                        NO2981E

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Hon Chairperson, the Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Act, Act 6 of 2010, does not allow for a single, integrated fingerprint database. The department is in consultation with the Department of Home Affairs and other departments within the Justice, Crime Prevention and Security cluster, developing mechanisms to ensure the exchange and sharing of information critical to an effective and efficient criminal justice system. I would refer the hon member to the Portfolio Committee on Police, as they would be able to give the hon member clarity on the deoxyribonucleic acid, DNA, legislative process. I thank you.

 

Adv A H GAUM: Thank you, Chairperson. Minister, given the importance of physical evidence from the crime scene in establishing a link with the criminal or criminals, in particular in the absence of witnesses, it is of paramount importance that the police get access to the vast fingerprint database of the Department of Home Affairs and that a comprehensive DNA database is developed as soon as possible.

 

By when does the Minister aim to complete these consultations with the Department of Home Affairs and other departments to establish access to the relevant fingerprints? Secondly, what is the Minister’s timeframe for having such DNA legislation - that, I assume, will make provision for a DNA database - operational? Thank you.

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Thank you, hon member. The consultations are continuing with the Ministry of Home Affairs and generally within the JCPS cluster. But there are other things, as I said, with regard to the portfolio committee in terms of the processes of this Act in particular. Remember, this is an Act of which part was passed, and the other part still has to undergo the process. I am not the spokesperson of the portfolio committee, but I know that together with the department they have been undertaking study tours to ensure that this process continues. Thank you.

 

Ms D KOHLER-BARNARD: Thank you, Chair. Minister, on our trips, both as the portfolio committee and individually, to police stations around the country, we have discovered that there is virtually no knowledge at all about the so-called fingerprint legislation — the Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Act — and the ability that that Act gives to our police to forward the fingerprints that they don’t recognise from the police database to other databases, such as that of Home Affairs. There is no knowledge of it at the stations we visited.

 

Could you explain how it is that at the station level there is no knowledge of what was, for us, a very gruelling process to get this legislation through and passed? Also, have the relevant regulations been drawn up yet? I know, for example, when it comes to the Second-Hand Goods Act, which we passed here about three years ago, that they haven’t even finished the regulations yet. It feels to me as though the legislation we work day and night to pass never gets past these doors. And I am finding that extremely disconcerting. Thank you.

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Thank you, hon Chair. Part of the job of public representatives like yourselves is to inform the public. [Interjections.] It is your job to do that, much as it is the job of everybody else. Generalising about the knowledge ... [Interjections.] You see, the problem is that when you talk, we listen, but you must also listen. We will give you some cold water here to cool down, because there is a problem with the temperature. [Laughter.]

 

They will know in due course. But, firstly, we would want to know: Who does not know in the police stations and at which police stations? Generally, people are going to know about the process as it unfolds, and there is no rush at all. If you rush such an Act, you are going to leave a lot of people outside the process, and you in particular will come back and make a lot of noise here about people not being consulted. [Interjections.] So, people are going to be consulted. [Interjections.] The very reason ... You must listen here. The very reason that you undertook study tours says that the process is at a particular level, and it will continue. Thank you very much.

 

Ms D KOHLER-BARNARD: It’s just another Act you haven’t implemented as yet!

 

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs F Hajaig): Hon Kohler-Barnard, there is no need to scream across the floor.

 

Reasons for department not expediting visa application of Dalai Lama

 

198.      Mr G B D McIntosh (Cope) asked the Minister of International Relations and Co-operation:

 

What are the reasons for her department not expediting the visa application of His Holiness the Dalai Lama of Tibet in light of his standing in the world and of his previous visit to South Africa that took place without any incident?                  NO3782E

 

The DEPUTY MINISTER OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND CO-OPERATION (Mr E I Ebrahim): Hon Chairperson, I think this question also relates to the Dalai Lama question. Earlier we said that the matter was sub judice, and the Speaker gave a ruling on the matter. So I think that also applies to this question.

 

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs F Hajaig): Thank you, Deputy Minister. The Speaker has indeed ruled that the matter is sub judice.

 

The next question is Question 169, which has been posed by Mr Lekgetho to the Minister of ...

 

Mr G B D MCINTOSH: With respect, Madam Chair, I wish to ask a supplementary question, but it has nothing to do with the sub judice element at all. I think you will realise that when you hear the question.

 

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs F Hajaig): Regarding the question that has been put on the Question Paper, the Deputy Minister has said that it is sub judice, according to the Speaker’s ruling. So, I don’t know what question you want to ask, but it would appear to me that it’s another question.

 

Mr G B D MCINTOSH: Madam Chair, it won’t relate to the visa, and then you can make a ruling, Madam Chair.

 

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs F Hajaig): All right, ask the question, hon McIntosh.

 

Mr G B D MCINTOSH: My question to the hon Minister is: Is the hon Minister aware that the Han Chinese majority of the People’s Republic of China are at the moment creating a classic colonial situation in the province of Tibet?

 

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs F Hajaig): Hon McIntosh, that has nothing to do with this question.

 

We will now go on to the next question, which is Question 169. And, next time, hon McIntosh, don’t abuse the chance that you are given to speak when you know that the question isn’t related.

 

Position regarding intention to introduce severe penalties for persons convicted of police killings

 

169.      Mr G Lekgetho (ANC) asked the Minister of Police:

 

Whether, in light of the high number of SA Police Service (SAPS) officials who have been killed since 1 January 2011 and the potentially negative effect it has on the morale of the members of the SAPS, he intends introducing any severe penalties for persons convicted of such police killings; if not, why not; if so, what (a) penalties and (b) are the further relevant details?                                                                                      NO2975E

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Hon Chair, section 51(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1997 provides for a minimum sentence of imprisonment for life in respect of a person convicted of an offence referred to in Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the said Act, which includes, inter alia, murder when “the victim was a law-enforcement officer performing his or her function as such, whether on duty or not”. The courts will take this into account in all cases where a police official is a victim of murder. Thank you, Chair.

 

Mr G LEKGETHO: Thank you very much, Chair and hon Minister. Minister, the section that you have mentioned is not sufficient as a deterrent. Following and emanating from the summit on the killing of policemen and policewomen this year, what measures will be put in place to reduce the killing of police members? Thanks.

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Hon Chair, perhaps one can understand the sentiments expressed by the hon member here because this matter of police killings has been of concern to most of the people in our country. Because of that, as we said, we really understand the sentiments expressed.

 

The hon member would know that we had consultations with many sectors of society from different backgrounds in order to come up with mechanisms to deal with this scourge of police killings. And as a result of that, a 10-point plan was developed, which, amongst other things, looks at the situation of the police both physically and psychologically.

 

The 10-point plan looks at the additional role that the government has to play. It looks at the role of civil society. The contributions made at that very summit helped us to understand the significance of the matter, as well as the need to highlight it to the public. We think that we should and will always continue to highlight it because it becomes a problem for the rest of us if those who are charged with the responsibility of protecting us are targeted by criminal elements in our society. Thank you.

 

Mr M M SWATHE: Thank you very much, Chairperson, and thank you very much, Minister, for your answer with regard to the question. The killing of police officers on duty is a painful loss and a serious threat to the state. Minister, what action have you taken to address this problem? Why is this problem continuing? When are we going to see an end to the fear of our police being targeted? This is a serious threat. People are now starting to have a problem with our police members being targeted. Aren’t you going to make sure that you appoint a commission to investigate what is actually happening? Thank you.

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Thanks again, hon member, for your concern. But, no, we wouldn’t need a commission of inquiry because most of these killings happen when police respond to criminal activities. There has been research done on this matter over a period of time. What becomes important is that the outcome of the summit, which, as I’ve said, included a lot of people, places an obligation on everybody, including the police themselves.

 

You would have noticed that in recent months most police members used bulletproof vests, which in the past have been more than sufficient. It is just that people sometimes have taken things for granted. But there is a whole host of comprehensive programmes emanating from the summit. I must take this opportunity, Chairperson, to thank everybody who participated — from politicians to academics and everybody else, because it really indicated that society is taking this matter very seriously. Thank you.

 

Mr M A NHANHA: Thanks, hon Chairperson. Indeed, Minister, I can bear testimony to your assertions that the police these days do wear bulletproof vests, and we hope this will decrease the number of fatalities. But, besides that, hon Minister, would you consider introducing a debate that will, it is hoped, end up with an amendment to our Constitution so that a suspect or criminal found guilty of having killed a police officer faces a firing squad?

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Thanks, hon Chair. Are you serious, hon member?

 

An HON MEMBER: Yes!

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Are you serious?

 

Mr M A NHANHA: Chairperson, I am not here to play.

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Well, hon member, this would be difficult with the Constitution we have. Firing squads! Heyi, ngenye indaba leyo! [Hey, that is another issue!] Thank you.

 

Mr L RAMATLAKANE: Thank you, hon House Chair. Hon Minister, I think that this issue about police killings is an issue that we, as South Africans and parliamentarians, should all agree must remain condemned. The police are the defenders of our democracy, so this is one issue on which we must stand together to condemn it.

 

The question I want to pose, Minister, relates to the training of the police. Are you accelerating the so-called streetwise training for the police as a way to try to minimise this particular problem?

 

The MINISTER OF POLICE: Thanks, Chair. Thanks to the hon Ramatlakane who has raised these points and concerns — even in the past — about the killing of police. As you would know, hon member, this is ongoing. This is really similar to the road to social progress — it’s always under construction. On issues of training, you can never say that you have arrived. It has to continue all the time, not only from the point of view of some examples you have made, but generally. Up-skilling the police is always important. The very fact that we had to make a call urging the police to wear bulletproof vests says something about very fundamental issues. That says something about the police protecting themselves, because that is their duty as much as it is their duty to protect us. Thank you very much.

 

See also QUESTIONS AND REPLIES.

 

NOTICES OF MOTION

 

Mr G R MORGAN: House Chairperson, I hereby give notice that I shall move on behalf of the DA:

 

That the House —

 

(1)      debates whether the legal international trade in rhino horn should be permitted; and

 

(2)      comes up with recommendations to government in this regard.

 

Mr P VAN DALEN: Madam Chair, I hereby give notice that I shall move on behalf of the DA:

 

That the House —

 

(1)      debates the pay structures of executive-level employees of state-owned enterprises; and

 

(2)      comes up with recommendations to ensure that the taxpayer gets value for their money in this regard.

 

Chief Z M D MANDELA: Chair, I hereby give notice that I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

 

That the House debates the setting up of an inclusive demarcation board and processes that are capable of deracialising and integrating communities.

 

Ms M V MAFOLO: House Chairperson, I hereby give notice that I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

 

That the House debates mechanisms of dealing with challenges around special pensions.

 

Mr L RAMATLAKANE: Hon Chair, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of Cope:

 

That the House discusses the corruption around the Fifa World Cup tickets in the Free State department of sport.

 

Mr M A NHANHA: House Chairperson, I hereby give notice that I shall move on behalf of Cope:

 

That the House debates the need to focus urgently on the disastrous consequences of the continued practice of appointing unqualified or lowly qualified personnel as school principals in disadvantaged areas.

 

Mr N D DU TOIT: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that I shall move on behalf of the DA:

That the House —

 

  1. debates the effectiveness of compliance measures by the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries to protect our country’s fish stocks; and

 

(2)      comes up with recommendations to improve the situation.

 

Mr G D SCHNEEMANN: House Chairperson, I hereby give notice that I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

 

That the House debates mechanisms to strengthen our maritime and air borders to provide protection from illegal immigrants.

 

CELEBRATION OF DIWALI, “THE FESTIVAL OF LIGHT”

 

(Draft Resolution)

 

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Hon House Chair, I move without notice:

 

That the House —

 

  1. notes that on 26 October 2011, the Hindu community celebrates one of the biggest and most important festivals for Hindus, the festival of Diwali/Deepavali;
  2. further notes that while Diwali/Deepavali is popularly known as the “festival of light”, the most significant spiritual meaning is “the awareness of the inner light” and symbolises the victory of good over evil; and

 

  1. extends its well wishes to the Hindu community during their celebrations.

 

Agreed to.

 

CITY OF CAPE TOWN AWARDED TITLE OF WORLD DESIGN CAPITAL 2014

 

(Draft Resolution)

 

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Chair, I move without notice:

 

That the House —

 

  1. notes that today, 26 October 2011, the City of Cape Town was awarded the prestigious title of World Design Capital for the year 2014 in Taipei, Taiwan;

 

  1. further notes that with more than half the world’s population now living in urban areas, design has become an increasingly fundamental tool in making cities more competitive, attractive, liveable and efficient;

 

  1. acknowledges that the World Design Capital designation is a city promotion project that celebrates the accomplishments of cities that have used design as a tool to reinvent themselves and improve social, cultural and economic life, the City of Cape Town exemplifies these ideals;

 

  1. further acknowledges that the designation provides a distinctive opportunity for cities to showcase their accomplishments in attracting and promoting innovative design, as well as to highlight successes in urban revitalisation strategies;

 

  1. recognises that this award is one of many awards previously awarded to the City of Cape Town, to name but a few: Best World City in the 2008 Telegraph Travel Awards, One of the World’s Top 20 Cities – Condé Nast Traveller Readers’ Travel Awards in September 2010, and Africa’s Leading Destination – World Travel Awards for the years 2010, 2009, 2008, 2006, 2005 and 2003;

 

  1. commends the bidding committee and the Cape Town partnership for their selfless dedication in bringing the prestigious title home, where it belongs; and
  2. congratulates the people of Cape Town, the City of Cape Town and the Provincial Government of the Western Cape on this great achievement, because all they do is win.

 

Agreed to.

 

INDIGENOUS ANNUAL THANKSGIVING CEREMONY FOR RAIN AND SOIL FERTILITY

 

(Draft Resolution)

 

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Hon House Chair, I move without notice:

 

That the House —

 

  1. notes that in October every year the Khoisan communities and the Queen of Balobedu, Modjadji, holds thanksgiving ceremonies for rain and fertility of the soil;

 

  1. recalls that these ceremonies were part of ancient African community practices from time immemorial, wherein communities had special astronomer priests (Mukuapasi) who observed the movement of celestial bodies and their effect on the climate and weather;

 

  1. further recalls that even our national and international heritage site at Mapungubwe was an observatory site where astronomer priests observed celestial bodies and climate change and when the climate changed they moved to establish a new settlement at Great Zimbabwe, and even today Mapungubwe remains the principal rainmaking centre;

 

  1. believes that the indigenous knowledge system played a very important role in determining climate and climate change;

 

  1. urges the Government to celebrate these annual thanksgiving ceremonies;

 

  1. further urges the organisers of COP 17 to tap into this indigenous knowledge system by engaging with the indigenous communities in preparation for COP 17; and

 

  1. wishes the Khoisan communities and the Queen of Balobedu, Modjadji, success in their thanksgiving ceremonies for rain and fertility of the soil.

 

Agreed to.

 

COMMEMORATING THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS

(Draft Resolution)

 

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Chairperson, I move without notice:

 

That the House —

 

  1. notes that on 24 October 2011, the International United Nations Day was celebrated, which since 1948, commemorates the anniversary of the Charter of the United Nations;

 

  1. further notes that this day celebrates the achievements of the United Nations and draws attention to the aims of this organisation;

 

  1. asserts its commitment to the pivotal role that this organisation plays; and

 

  1. calls upon all South Africans to respect this organisation and to honour the function that the United Nations has within the international sphere of governance.

 

Agreed to.

 

The House adjourned at 17:16.

________

 

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

ANNOUNCEMENTS

 

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

 

The Speaker and the Chairperson

 

1.      Classification of Bills by Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM)

 

(1)      The JTM in terms of Joint Rule 160(6) classified the following Bill as a section 75 Bill:

 

  1. Skills Development Amendment Bill [B 16 – 2011] (National Assembly – sec 75).

 

National Assembly

 

1.      Referral to Committees of papers tabled

 

  1. The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on Rural Development and Land Reform for consideration and report. The Report of the Auditor‑General on the Financial Statements and Performance Information is referred to the Committee on Public Accounts for consideration:

 

  1. Report and Financial Statements of the Ingonyama Trust Board for 2010-11, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements and Performance Information for 2010-11 [RP252-2011].

 

  1. The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on Rural Development and Land Reform:

 

  1. Letter from the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform dated 4 October 2011 to the Speaker of the National Assembly, explaining the late tabling of the Annual Report: Ingonyama Trust Board: 2010-11.

 

  1. The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on Water and Environmental Affairs:

 

(a)        General Notice No 501, published in Government Gazette No 34487, dated 29 July 2011: Draft Biodiversity Management Plan for Pelargonium Sidoides, published to request written representations or objections in terms of section 43(3)(a), read with section 100, of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No 10 of 2004).

 

  1. Notice No 515, published in Government Gazette No 34493, dated 5 August 2011: Proposed National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Particulate Matter of Aerodynamic Diameter Less Than 2,5 Micron Metres, published to request written representations or objections in terms of section 57(1)(a) of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (Act No 39 of 2004).

 
<>(c)
  • General Notice No 538, published in Government Gazette No 34520, dated 11 August 2011: Invitation for the nomination of suitable persons for appointment as members of the board of the South African Weather Service (SAWS), published in terms of section 5(3) of the South African Weather Service Act, 2001 (Act No 8 of 2001).

 

  1. General Notice No 586, published in Government Gazette No 34558, dated 26 August 2011: Invitation for the submission of written comments on the National Environmental Management Laws Amendment Bill, 2011.

 

TABLINGS

 

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

 

  1. The Minister of Correctional Services

 

  1. Report and Financial Statements of the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services for 2010-11 [RP 99-2011].

 

COMMITTEE REPORTS

 

National Assembly

  1. Report of the Standing Committee on Finance on the Protocol between the Republic of South Africa and the Republic of Austria, dated 26 October 2011

The Standing Committee on Finance, having considered the request for approval by Parliament of the Protocol and additional protocol amending the convention between the Republic of South Africa and the Republic of Austria for the avoidance of double taxation with respect to taxes on income and on capital, recommends that the House, in terms of section 231 (2) of the Constitution, approve the said agreement.

 

Report to be considered.

 

  1. Report of the Standing Committee on Finance on the Agreement between the Republic of South Africa and the Government of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas, dated 26 October 2011

 

The Standing Committee on Finance, having considered the request for approval by Parliament of the Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South Africa and the Government of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas for the exchange of information relating to tax matters, recommends that the House, in terms of section 231 (2) of the Constitution, approve the said agreement.

 

Report to be considered.

 

  1. Report of the Standing Committee on Finance on the Agreement between the Republic of South Africa and the Government of Bermuda, dated 26 October 2011.

The Standing Committee on Finance, having considered the request for approval by Parliament of the Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South Africa and the Government of Bermuda for the exchange of information relating to tax matters, recommends that the House, in terms of section 231 (2) of the Constitution, approve the said agreement.

 

Report to be considered.

 

  1.    Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of the Portfolio Committee on Transport on the performance of the Department of Transport for the 2010/11 financial year, Dated 20 October 2011

 

   The Portfolio Committee on Transport, having assessed the service delivery performance of the Department of Transport, reports as follows:

 

1.    INTRODUCTION

 

Section 77(3) of the Constitution stipulates that an Act of Parliament must provide for a procedure to amend money bills before Parliament. This constitutional provision gave birth to the Money Bills Amendment Procedure and Related Matters Act (No. 9 of 2009). The Act gives Parliament powers to amend money bills and other legislative proposals submitted by the executive whenever the executive deems it is necessary to do so. The Act therefore makes it obligatory for Parliament to assess the Department’s budgetary needs and shortfalls against the Department’s operational efficiency and performance.

 

Section 5 of the Act compels the National Assembly, through its committees, to submit budgetary review and recommendation reports (BRRRs) annually on the financial performance of departments accountable to them. The report must be informed by a committee’s interrogation of, amongst others, the medium-term estimates of national expenditure of each national department, strategic priorities and measurable objectives, expenditure reports published by National Treasury, annual reports and financial statements, as well as observations made during oversight visits.

 

The Committee appreciates that the manner in which the Department structure itself, relates to the different modes of transport.

 

  1. MANDATE OF THE COMMITTEE

 

The mandate of the Committee is to consider legislation referred to it and to consider all matters referred to it in terms of legislation, the Rules of Parliament or resolutions of the House. The role of the Committee is to represent the people and to ensure that government fulfills its service delivery mandate.

 

3.    MEASURABLE OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT

 

  1. Measurable objectives
    1. Programme 1: Administration

The purpose of the Administration programme is to coordinate and render an effective, efficient, strategic support and administrative service to the Minister, Deputy Minister, Director-General and Department.

  1. Programme 2: Transport Policy and Economic Regulation 

The purpose of this programme is to effectively manage a national innovative research and development programme, develop and analyse strategic policies, develop appropriate legislation and to provide economic advice and analysis for all modes of transport.

 

  1. Programme 3: Transport regulation and Accident and Incident Investigation

The purpose of this programme is to create an enabling regulatory environment in the areas of safety, security and environmental compliance and to manage accident and incident investigations for all modes of transport.

 

  1. Programme 4: Integrated Planning and Inter-sphere Coordination 

The purpose of this programme is to manage and facilitate integrated planning and intersphere coordination for infrastructure and operations.

 

  1. Programme 5: Transport Logistics and Corridor Development 

The purpose of this programme is to manage the implementation of the transport logistics strategy and the development of freight movement corridors.

 

  1. Programme 6: Public Transport

The purpose of this programme is to develop practices and norms that will increase access to appropriate and quality public transport.

 

  1. Programme 7: Public Entity Oversight and Border Operations and Control

The purpose of this programme is to develop appropriate mandates and monitoring mechanisms to oversee public entities and border control operations and control.

  1. Outcomes
    1. Outcome 1:  An effective and integrated infrastructure network that serves as a catalyst for social and economic development
  • Key transport facilities developed;
  • Maintenance and preservation of critical roads improved;
  • Priority passenger rail corridors developed and upgraded;
  • Efficiencies and reliability in rail freight sector enhanced.

 

  1. Outcome 2: A transport sector that is safe and secure
  • Safe rail infrastructure and equipment ensured;
  • Accident and incident rates on roads reduced;
  • Road Accident Fund transformed into the Comprehensive Social Security System;
  • Maritime transport safety and security improved;
  • Air transport safety and security improved.

 

  1. Outcome 3: Improved rural access, infrastructure and mobility
  • Non-motorised transport (NMT) facilities, infrastructure and services improved;
  • Integrated Rural Public Transport Networks rolled out in rural districts;
  • 15 000 bicycles procured and distributed.

 

  1. Outcome 4: Improved public transport system
  • Integrated Rural Public Transport Networks rolled out;
  • Public transport industry formalised;
  • Public transport integration and intermodal planning committees in all provinces and metros and an active Public Transport Integration Committee Forum established at national level;
  • 2010 transport arrangements coordinated.

 

  1. Outcome 5: Increased contribution to job creation
  • Job creation targets for transport sector set and achieved;
  • National procurement promoted.

 

  1. Outcome 6: Increased contribution of transport to environmental protection
  • Impact of transport on climate change reduced.

 

4.       ANALYSIS OF THE 2010/11 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT

 

  1. Introduction

South Africa has a relatively sophisticated transport infrastructure which ferries millions of people and goods daily, keeping the wheels of business and industry turning to promote the country’s socio-economic development. It is against this backdrop that the Department of Transport (the Department) depicts itself as “the heartbeat of South Africa’s economic growth and social development”. Accordingly, the Department is making some strides in translating this vision into reality by paying attention to all modes of transport to create an efficient and reliable transport infrastructure that will promote greater social cohesion in the country.

 

The analysis seeks to establish whether the Department has achieved its aims and objectives, as set out in the 2010/11 Strategic Plan, as well as whether it continues to fulfill its constitutional mandate. The analysis will highlight the key achievements made, as well as challenges encountered during the 2010/11 financial year, as reported in the Department’s Annual Report.

 

The review of the Annual Report is in accordance with section 55(2) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, which empowers Parliament to provide mechanisms to “ensure that all executive organs of state in the national sphere of government are accountable to it”. In addition, Parliament has a constitutional obligation “to maintain oversight of the exercise of the national executive authority, including the implementation of legislation”. Moreover, section 65(1) of the Public Finance Management Act (No.1 of 1999) stipulates that “the executive authority responsible for a department …must table in the National Assembly … the annual report and financial statements … and the audit report on those statements, within one month after the accounting officer for the department … received the audit report”.

 

  1. The Legislative Mandate of the Department

The Department is entrusted with maximising “the contribution of transport to the economic and social development goals of [the] country by providing fully integrated transport operations and infrastructure”. The main roles of the Department of Transport and its public entities in relation to the transport sector are:

  • Policy and strategy formulation in all functional areas;
  • Substantive regulation in functional areas where the Department has legislative competence;
  • Implementation in functional areas where the Department has exclusive legislative competence;
  • Capacity-building in all functional areas;
  • Monitoring, evaluation and oversight in all functional areas; and
  • Stimulating investment and development across all modes.

 

  1. Mission Statement of the Department

The Department of Transport strives to “lead the development of efficient integrated transport systems by creating a framework of sustainable policies and regulations and implementable models to support government strategies for economic, social and international development”.

 

  1. Government Strategy and Objectives

The transport sector has received significant attention from Government in the recent past and is being recognised as a driver of overall economic growth. In the 2010 state-of-the-nation address, President Jacob Zuma highlighted the following as key priority areas for the transport sector:

  • Spending R846 billion on public infrastructure;
  • Maintaining and expanding the road network;
  • Ensuring that the rail network is reliable, competitive and better integrated with sea ports;
  • Implementing the Comprehensive Rural Development Programme;
  • Investing in youth to ensure a skilled and capable workforce to support growth and job creation;
  • Eradicating corruption and fraud in the application for drivers’ licences;
  • Ensuring that Ministers sign a detailed delivery agreement with the President.

 

  1. Department’s Key Strategic Objectives

The Department’s key strategic objectives are:

  • Providing an effective and integrated infrastructure network that serves as a catalyst for social and economic development;
  • Providing a transport sector that is safe and secure;
  • Improving rural access, infrastructure and mobility;
  • Improving public transport systems;
  • Increasing contribution to job creation;
  • Increasing contribution of transport to environmental protection.

 

  1. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
    1. Achievements

During the reporting period, the Department made a steady and significant progress towards achieving its aims and objectives. In an endeavor to expedite economic growth with a view to creating jobs for the greatest number possible, the Department used the 2010 Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) World Cup as a launch pad or a springboard. Though not meant for the World Cup, the R25 billion Gautrain Rapid Rail Link created over 90 000 direct and indirect jobs while road construction for the same period created over 5 000 jobs.

 

At the same time, the R2.2 billion Central Terminal Building at OR Tambo International Airport was completed. The flagship OR Tambo international terminal was complemented with the recently completed pier and apron developments that allow the country to accommodate new generation large aircraft being the first in Africa to provide the capacity for parking the Airbus A380.

 

Improvements at Cape Town International Airport led to its complete transformation. By April 2010, the redeveloped airport boasted a common use of central terminal, with vastly improved retail, food and beverage offer, an additional 4 000 bays in a second parkade, as well as a significantly improved road network. Moreover, the new R6.8 billion King Shaka International Airport in Durban was completed as planned and commissioned in May 2010.

 

Perhaps more importantly, the Department led consultations with the taxi industry that was affected by the Rea Vaya Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system and evolved an ownership scheme by the operators themselves. The BRT system is now majority-owned by the taxi industry and has become a model for the roll-out of these systems in other municipalities.

 

While the Department met most of the targets it had set itself during the period under review, it encountered challenges in certain areas as reported below.

 

  1. Challenges
    1. Challenges experienced with Outcomes:

 

  1. Outcome 1: Providing an effective and integrated infrastructure network that serves as a catalyst for social and economic development
  • Production of a Research Report Outlining the Cost of Doing Business in the Transport Sector

A task team for the cost of Logistics Study Framework was established and the macro-economic and industry analysis reports were finalised. However, the research report outlining the cost of doing business in the transport sector could not be produced by 31 March 2011. At the time of tabling its Annual Report, the Department stated that the analysis was taking longer than anticipated due to consultation with stakeholders.

  • Development of a Proposal for a Mobile Weighbridge Unit

The pilot mobile weighbridge unit at the Durban-Gauteng corridor was not rolled-out. This activity was reportedly transferred to the South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL).

 

  1. Outcome 2: Providing a transport sector that is safe and secure
  • Transport Sector Disaster Management Plan

The Plan could not be developed owing to financial constraints.

  • Publication and Implementation of All Applicable Regulations for Amendment to National Road Traffic Act (No. 65 of 2008)

At the time of tabling its Annual Report, the Department stated that it had published the Draft Regulations for the National Road Traffic Act but it did not state whether the Regulations were being implemented.

 

  1. Outcome 3: Improving rural access, infrastructure and mobility
  • Finalisation of Non-Motorised Transport (NMT) Policy and Draft Legislation

In its 2010 Strategic Plan, the Department had undertaken to finalise the NMT Policy and draft legislation during the period under review. However, at the time of tabling its Annual Report, it reported that the Policy was at a draft stage pending the approval for the migration of the Policy from the Department of Basic Education to the Department of Transport and also subject to the support of the Education Minister and Members of the Executive Council (MINMEC).

  • Roll-Out of NMT Facilities and Infrastructure in Six Districts

No progress was made in this regard. The budget allocated for this purpose was reportedly shifted to the Rural Grant because the priority changed to Road Asset Management Systems (RAMS) development.

  1. Outcome 4: Improving public transport systems
  • Creation of the Project Management Unit (PMU) to Facilitate the Integrated Public Transport Networks (IPTNs) Implementation

This did not take place due to delays in the procurement process.

  • Coordination of Enterprise Development within the Taxi Industry and Small Bus Operators

At the time of tabling the Annual Report, the Department reported that all available provincial data was captured on its database but it was still awaiting a response from the Western Cape.

  • Approval and Implementation of the National Scholar Transport Policy

During the reporting period, consultations took place with the parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Transport, as well as the Free State Province. Notwithstanding this, the Policy could not be approved and implemented owing to the “non-availability of key external stakeholders”. At the time of tabling its Annual Report, the Department stated that consultations on the draft document were still underway.

  • Formulation of Scholar Transport Migration Policy

No progress was made in this regard as the Department was still in the process of engaging with the Department of Basic Education to clarify lines of responsibilities..

 

  1. Outcome 5: Increasing contribution to job creation
  • Number of Jobs and Work Opportunities Created

The Department had undertaken to agree with the Airports Company South Africa (ACSA), South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL), Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA) and Air Traffic and Navigation Services (ATNS) on job-creation targets. Although the Department reported that it did set targets with the provinces, no specific information was provided in this regard.

  • Development and Approval of the Maritime Policy and Strategy

Due to capacity constraints, the Department only managed to develop the first draft of the Maritime Policy and Maritime Strategy.

 

  1. Outcome 6: Increasing the contribution of transport to environmental protection
  • Compiling Green House Gas (GHG) Inventory

The literature review for emissions was completed and a Business Plan was developed. However, due to the unavailability of funds, the GHG Inventory could not be complied.

  • Developing Ballast Water Act and Regulations

The process of appointing a specialist service provider was halted owing to limited funding.

  • Developing a Strategy for Noise Reduction in all Transport Systems

The Department did not have sufficient funds for the development of a Strategy for noise reduction in all modes of transport.

 

  1. Challenges experienced with the following programmes:

 

  1. Programme 2: Transport Policy and Economic Regulation

The Transport Policy and Economic Regulation Programme manages a national innovative research and development programme. It also develops and analyses strategic policies, In addition, it develops appropriate legislation and provides economic advice, as well as analysis, for all modes of transport.

  • Innovation Strategy

The target could not be achieved due to the unavailability of funds and lack of capacity. It was reported that funds could not be shifted within the programme and that attempts to appoint a consultant were unsuccessful.

  • Knowledge Management

The target could not be achieved owing to the shifting of funds to other programmes earmarked by the Department for urgent delivery.

  • Research Studies

The development of a rural accessibility index for 12 districts as a management and monitoring tool was not achieved. The funds intended for this project were reprioritised.

  • Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) Road Shows

Only six provincial Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment road shows were held instead of nine due to insufficient budget allocation.

 

  1. Programme 4: Integrated Planning and Inter-Sphere Coordination

The Integrated and Inter-Sphere Coordination Programme manages and facilitates planning and inter-sphere coordination for infrastructure and operations.

  • Roll-Out of the Shova Kalula Bicycle Programme

During the reporting period, the Department procured 15 000 bicycles but only 1 340 of these were distributed.

  • Promotion of Animal-Drawn Transportation

The target of distributing 20 carts was not achieved. This was attributed to financial constraints at a national level. However, 30 carts were distributed at a provincial government level.

 

  1. Programme 6: Public Transport

The Public Transport Programme develops practices and norms that will increase access to appropriate and quality public transport to meet the socio-economic needs of both rural and urban passengers.

  • Rolling-Out of the Integrated Public Transport Networks (IPTNs)

No progress was registered in this regard at Nelson Mandela Bay (NMB). However, the Department reportedly wrote to the NMB outlining a specific methodology that it needed to undertake in order to engage in meaningful negotiations with affected operations.

  1. Financial Management

For the fifth consecutive year, the Department received an unqualified audit opinion. Matters of emphasis were, however, identified by the Auditor-General pertaining to the following:

  • The accounting officer did not take effective and appropriate steps to prevent irregular, wasteful and fruitless expenditure, as per the requirements of section 38(1)(c)(ii) of the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) (No. 1 of 1999).
  • The irregular expenditure incurred was in contravention of Treasury Regulations 16A6.1 and National Treasury Practice Note No. 8 of 2007/08 issued in terms of section 76(4) of the PFMA.
  • Fruitless and wasteful expenditure was incurred as a result of accommodation and flight tickets not being cancelled timeously.
  • Leadership did not exercise its oversight accountability and related internal controls. This resulted in irregular, wasteful and fruitless expenditure being incurred.

 

  1. HUMAN RESOURCES

By the end of March 2011, the Department had 677 posts (677: 2010) on its establishment and 524 (529: 2010) were filled. The vacancy rate stood at 22.60 (21.86: 2010) per cent. The highest vacancy rate was in Programme 4 (Integrated Planning and Inter-Sphere Coordination) which stood at 27.06 per cent. This was followed by Programme 2 (Transport Policy and Economic Regulation) which stood at 25.37 per cent. The Public Entity Oversight and Border Operations and Control Programme had the lowest vacancy rate at 16.67 per cent. The main reason for staff leaving the Department was said to be as a result of transfers to other public service departments. The Department employed eight persons with disabilities, translating into 1.52 per cent. Of these, 4 were African (two females and 2 males) and 4 White (all females).

 

  1. TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THE REPORT

The Report is credible and presented in a clear and logical fashion. However, for all the outcomes, the planned and reported targets were not time-bound in specifying the time period or deadline for delivery. The absence of time-frames makes it almost impossible to establish whether the Department achieves its aims and objectives and to hold it to account. There are also instances in the Report where the Department has failed to meet the performance targets. The reason that is repeatedly advanced by the Department for this aberration is that the funds were not available for it to execute some projects or that there has been reprioritisation. This is a cause for concern because it suggests poor planning on the part of the Department during the formulation of its Strategic Plan. In an endeavor to avoid this anomaly in future, the Department should ensure that the performance targets that it sets itself are realistic and achievable. An additional concern is the report on a lack of capacity in a number of programmes. The Department should evaluate its organisational structure to ensure that it has the appropriately skilled personnel to fulfill its mandate.

 

  1. ANALYSIS OF EXPENDITURE REPORTS

In 2010/11, the Department was allocated R25.2 billion which included the adjustment of R211.7 million made by the Department during the period under review. Of this amount, the Department spent R25.1 billion at the end of March 2011. This amounted to an under-expenditure of R148.2 million mainly due to notable under-expenditures in Programme 2 and Programme 3 which amounted to a total under-expenditure of more than 15% per programme.

 

  1. Programme 1: Administration

The Administration Programme was allocated a total budget of R213.9 million before the adjustment period. During the adjustment period, this amount increased to R233 million. At the end of the reporting period, the Administration Programme had over-spent on its budget by 4 per cent. This was attributed to higher than anticipated travelling costs, legal costs incurred by the Department, media campaigns and information technology (IT) infrastructure, including enterprise content management.

 

  1. Programme 2: Transport Policy and Economic Regulation

The Transport and Economic Regulation Programme received R49 million which subsequently decreased to R45 million during the adjustment period. Notwithstanding the decrease, by the end of the financial year, only 84.7 per cent of the budget allocation had been spent. The 15.4 per cent under-expenditure was due to late appointments of service providers by the Department.

 

  1. Programme 3: Transport Regulation and Accident and Incident Investigation

For the 2010/11 financial year, the budget for this programme before adjustments totalled R196.2 million. After adjustments, it increased to R391 million. Despite the increase of R194.8 million, the programme recorded an over-expenditure of 101.1 per cent owing to the payment made to Tasima, the supplier that maintains the electronic National Transport Information System (eNatis).

 

  1. Programme 4: Integrated Planning and Inter-Sphere Coordination

Programme 4 was allocated a total budget of R7 billion in the 2010/11 financial year before the adjustment period. During the adjustment period, an amount of R29 million was shifted from this programme to other programmes. At the end of the reporting period, the Integrated and Inter-Sphere Coordination Programme had spent 99.6 per cent of its budget.

 

  1. Programme 5: Transport Logistics and Corridor Development

During the reporting period, the Transport Logistics and Corridor Development Programme was allocated R30.1 million. However, after the adjustment period, the allocation for this Programme decreased to R28 million. Of this amount, the programme spent 74.6 per cent at the end of the financial year. The under-expenditure was mainly due to delays in the implementation of the Freight Master Plan, Border Optimisation Strategy and the implementation of the Freight Logistics Strategy.

 

  1. Programme 6: Public Transport

During the period under review, the budget for the Public Transport Programme before and after adjustments stood at R17.4 billion. At the end of the financial year, it had spent 99.3 per cent of its budget. The 0.7 per cent under-expenditure was as a result of less than the anticipated taxi recapitalisation for the financial year.

 

  1. Programme 7: Public Entity Oversight and Border Operations and Control

In 2010/11, the Public Entity Oversight and Border Operations and Control Programme received an appropriation of R149 million which remained unchanged after the adjustment period. Of this amount, the Programme spent 97.3 per cent by the end of the reporting period. This reduced outlay on the anticipated expenditure on goods and services mainly related to the delays in the implementation of the Electronic Performance Management System (EPFMS).

 

  1. CONSIDERATION OF OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION

The Committee considered the following reports as part of the Budgetary Review and Recommendations process:

  1. State of the Nation Address 2011: Report by the Parliamentary Research Unit dated 28 February 2011.
  2. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Transport on the Budget and the Strategic Plan of the Department of Transport and its entities, dated 24 May 2011.
  3. Draft report of the Portfolio Committee on Transport on its oversight visit to the North West, KwaZulu-Natal and Eastern Cape Provinces, 27 June-1 July 2011.
  4. Draft report of the Portfolio Committee on Transport on its oversight visit to the South African Maritime Safety Authority, 2-5 August 2011.
  5. Report from Auditor-General of South Africa on 2010/11 Audit Outcomes of the Department of Transport and the accompanying narrative, 11 October 2011.
  6. Mandates of the Department and its entities.
  7. Analysis of 2010/11 Annual Reports of the Department of Transport and the following entities: Airports Company South Africa (ACSA), Cross Border Transport Agency (C-BRTA), South African Maritime Safety Authority (SAMSA), Road Traffic Management Corporation (RTMC), Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA) and South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL).
  8. Strategic document, SAMSA, 20 October 2011.

 

  1.  COMMITTEE OBSERVATIONS DURING 2010/11 ANNUAL REPORT BRIEFINGS

The Committee made the following observations during the Annual Report briefings by the Department and its entities:

 

  1. Report of Auditor General of South Africa on 2010/11 Audit Outcomes

The Committee noted the report from the Auditor-General on the Audit Outcomes for 2010/11 and the performance of the Department and its entities. The lack of findings in the performance of the Department was acknowledged, but the Committee noted the cases of non-compliance by some of the entities raised in the 2010/11 Audit Outcomes of the Auditor-General.

 

The Committee expressed concern at the instances of non-compliance in relation to supply chain management in terms of government priorities of crime reduction in terms of service delivery. Adequate measures should be applied to address challenges around procurement processes for the Department and entities.

 

The Committee noted that the key areas raised as a concern by the Auditor General reflected on the responsibilities and performance of the Boards of the entities. The Committee is of a view that Boards are not as robust in executing their roles on governance and holding officials accountable. The Committee therefore requests that Boards increase their oversight of the entities for which they are responsible. Chairpersons of Boards are requested to come up with measures to address non-compliance.

 

10.2   Maritime

Incorporating: SAMSA, Ports Regulator of South Africa

The Committee noted the strategic approach by SAMSA which focuses on the repositioning of the maritime industry. The strategic goals are: the development of South Africa’s Maritime Industry, the establishment of South Africa’s Maritime Transport Capacity, the upgrading of maritime transport capacity and performance, the improvement of commercial shipping services, the improvement of maritime governance and enforcement capacity and the improvement of maritime research innovation and technologies.

The Committee also noted that South Africa is not currently participating in the maritime industry and is therefore losing out on job creation opportunities.

 

10.3      Rail

Incorporating: PRASA, RSR, Autopax, Intersite Asset Investment

The Committee noted the congestion of trucks entering the Port of Durban and, during a   presentation of Transnet, found that approximately 30% of the goods from the ports was transported by rail while approximately 70% of goods was transported by road. The Committee expressed its concern at the damage caused to the road infrastructure. The focus should be to reduce the transportation of goods by road and increasing transport by rail to avoid more damage to the road infrastructure and to reduce fatal accidents, traffic congestion and carbon emission by trucks.

 

There should be a meeting between the accounting officers and political heads of the Departments of Transport and of Public Enterprises to attend to the issue of Transnet that has a tendency to transfer its primary mandate (transportation of freight through rail) to the Department of Transport, through shipment by road, as this poses problems for the Department of Transport as it has to maintain the deteriorating road infrastructure.

 

Areas of under-expenditure were noted with concern, especially in the area of rural transport. The Committee is of the view that the resuscitation of railway lines in rural areas should be explored in line with the rural and agricultural government agenda.

 

  1. Aviation

Incorporating: SACAA, ACSA, ATNS

The Committee noted the balance sheet loss of Airports Company South Africa (ACSA) due to investments made for the Soccer World Cup 2010. Legislation to address aviation tariffs should be prioritised, including the need to appoint a permanent economic regulator.

 

The Committee noted that the incidence of baggage pilfering remains high at South African airports despite money spent on security. The Committee recommends that ACSA relook the effectiveness of its strategies if incidents of pilfering remain high.

 

The Committee noted that a stable and predictable economic regulatory framework was necessary for the aviation industry. The Department was urged to look into the establishment of an economic regulator within the transport industry, including aviation.

 

  1. Roads

Incorporating: SANRAL, RAF, C-BRTA, RTMC, RTIA

The Committee noted the under-spending in the taxi recapitalisation programme, especially the decrease in implementation in the provinces and noted the Department’s response in this regard. The Committee wanted clarity from the Department on whether there were mechanisms in place to counteract possible abuses of the programme.

 

During its oversight visit to the North West Province it was discovered that the Provincial Department of Transport had employed 110 consultants. This raised the question whether the right people were employed in the Department and its entities and to what end consultants are used and how expenditure could be reduced in this area.

 

The Committee noted that more than 70% of the country’s road network has reached the end of its life span and that the South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL) is increasingly asked by provinces to assist with the maintenance of provincial roads, which leaves the entity with funding difficulties. The Department of Transport should consider exploring a funding model for road maintenance.

Strategies to reduce usage of roads should be pursued. The use of rail for the transportation of goods and passengers should be prioritised.

 

The Committee further noted with concern the economic and social impact of a user-pay system on South African road users due to the toll roads.

 

The Cross Border Road Transport Agency (C-BRTA) requested the Committee’s assistance to resolve challenges with regard to Lesotho–South Africa cross-border transport as it is currently hampering the movement of passengers between the countries.

 

There have not been sufficient efforts to alleviate cross-border transport impediments with specific reference to border post delays that negatively affect the cost of trade and regional integration.

 

  1.  Governance

The Committee recommends that the Minister of Transport ensure that Board members are timeously appointed to the Boards of the entities and that the Committee is advised in accordance with the relevant Act, where applicable.

 

  1.  General

Institutional capacity and human resources in the Department should be strengthened. The Committee noted the number of vacancies in the Department and urged the Department to establish time frames for the filling of these vacancies as it impacted on service delivery and the performance of the Department.

 

There should be a relook at remuneration packages at entities in relation to its capacity, staff and turnover.

 

  1. RECOMMENDATIONS

 

The Committee noted that the four modes of transport, namely rail, road, maritime and aviation transport, were not yet integrated and that there was a call to integrate the modes. The modes of transport were not developed at the same pace and there was an uneven level of investment by Government in theses modes. In response, the Committee made the following recommendations:

 

  1.      Maritime
    1. At the dawn of democracy, South Africa’s fleet was sold which negatively affected the maritime industry. Because South Africa has no fleet it could therefore not benefit in terms of revenue, job creation and skills development in the maritime industry.

 

  1. The Committee noted the strategic approach by SAMSA which focuses on the repositioning of the maritime industry. The strategic goals are: the development of South Africa’s Maritime Industry, the establishment of South Africa’s Maritime Transport Capacity, the upgrading of maritime transport capacity and performance, the improvement of commercial shipping services, the improvement of maritime governance and enforcement capacity and the improvement of maritime research innovation and technologies.

 

  1. The Committee also noted that South Africa was not currently participating in the maritime industry and is therefore losing out on job creation opportunities, The Committee therefore recommends that the Minister and the Government support the strategic approach presented by SAMSA, and invest accordingly. The investment should also assist with the re-opening of redundant shipyards.

 

  1.      Roads
    1. The Committee’s finding was that the Road Traffic Management Corporation (RTMC) had developed a strategic plan which seeks to intervene in its challenges. The RTMC would require funding to execute its turnaround strategy. The Committee also found that the RTMC operated without a Board and that there was a case pending against the Chief Executive Officer. The Committee finally noted that there was a need for an institutional arrangement that would create a conducive environment for the RTMC to operate in.

 

  1. The Committee therefore recommends that the Shareholders Committee provide clear directives for establishing the Board in line with the RTMC Act. The Department is also requested to speed up the process to amend the National Land Transport Act.

 

  1. The Cross Border Road Transport Agency’s mission is to spearhead social and economic development within the SADC region through facilitating unimpeded cross-border road transport movements. This mission has, however, not been realised in the previous financial years due to funding and institutional challenges. One of the key strategies of the Agency is to position itself as a facilitator to alleviate cross-border road movement impediments.  The strategy will include the planning of a collaborative border management system. The Agency’s expenditure framework increased from R55 million to R182 million to align its resources with the execution of the newly developed strategy.

 

  1. To further ensure that the Agency remains a going concern and is able to cover the increased expenditure framework, permit tariffs were increased significantly on 1 April 2011. To implement the principles of a user-pay system and not to overburden the cost of cross-border trade, it is imperative that certain functions of the Agency are covered by national funding.

 

  1. The Committee supports the C-BRTA’s strategic plan and therefore recommends that the Minister and government support investments accordingly.

 

  1.      Rail
    1. South Africa has 22 000 km of railway lines, but only 7 000 km thereof is utilised. This impacts negatively on the road network as cargo is mainly transported by road and not by rail. The transportation of goods by road also contributes to the accident rate.

 

  1. The Committee therefore recommends that legislation be put in place to move the transportation of goods from road to rail. The Committee further recommends that the focus should be on the development of rail as a mode of transport. The Committee recommends that the Department consider putting investment in place for the upgrading and rehabilitation of dormant railway branch lines.  A budget was needed to revitalise the railway and upgrade the current infrastructure from narrow to standard gauge.

 

  1. Government is finalising plans to invest approximately R123 billion towards the replacement of the rolling stock fleet for Metrorail and Mainline Passenger Services.  The investment will be for new rolling stock and the modernisation and upgrade of associated infrastructure such as depots, signaling and electrical works amongst others. The investment will create an estimated 65 000 jobs over an 18-year period, starting with 5 000 jobs at the commencement of the fleet renewal programme and general infrastructure upgrades. PRASA has developed a plan for the manufacturing of trains in South Africa, with a focus on under-developed and rural areas in order to reduce the influx of citizens into cities and urban areas, eradicate rural poverty and create jobs. This will contribute to job creation and beneficiation, which is in line with the New Growth Path and the economic transformation agenda.

 

  1. The Committee recommends that this approach be supported by the Departments of Higher Education and Training as well as Science and Technology so that scarce and critical skills are developed in line with the development of the railway industry.  The Committee further recommends that the development of the railway industry be aligned to job creation and poverty reduction with specific focus on the location of manufacturing plants in under-developed areas.

 

  1.      Road infrastructure
    1. The Committee noted that there were uneven levels of development in road infrastructure development.  The Committee found that national and  some provincial roads were generally in a good condition, but that municipal and rural roads were lacking and, in many cases, sub-standard. The programmes and the budgets of the Department did not relate to this state of affairs.

 

  1. The Committee recommends that a workshop be held with provincial portfolio committees on transport, relevant officials from the national and provincial departments of transport, as well as the South African Local Government Association (SALGA) to empower all portfolio committees to have a uniform approach with regard to oversight. In this same forum, the issue of a funding formula that relates to the backlog should be discussed by Treasury for implementation by the relevant departments.

 

  1. During the Committee’s strategic planning workshop with the Department and its entities, the South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL) presented a funding model and acknowledged that the roads are beyond their lifespan, but no alternative solution was given. The Committee recommends that SANRAL and the Department provide an alternative solution to this issue before the beginning of the new financial year.

 

  1. The Committee recommends that the Department consider developing an effective and holistic strategy to reduce fatal road accidents, thereby contributing to the reduction of death-related expenditure of the Road Accident Fund and instead use such financial resources for development. The Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences (AARTO) and the Road Traffic Infringement Agency (RTIA) should be part of the strategy.

 

  1. The Committee should also undertake study tours to countries that had effectively reduced road accidents.

 

  1.      Scholar Transport
    1. The Committee observed that it has taken the Department more than four years to draft the scholar transport policy. In drafting the policy, the Department did not outline the challenges experienced in scholar transport and the changes that are needed to be effected.  The Committee noted that the Department had not consulted other stakeholders.

 

  1. The Committee recommends that the scholar transport policy address the following issues: location of the function, safety of scholars, condition and features of vehicles, competency and life skills for drivers, the accessibility and conditions of access roads to schools and the role played by the Department of Basic Education.

 

  1.      Shova Kalula
    1. The Committee noted that the Department had to be more strategic in the distribution of bicycles and not only respond on request. In order to successfully implement the project, the Department should consider compiling a database of schools located far from residential areas.

 

  1. The Committee recommends that the Department consider the establishment of bicycle manufacturing plants in under-developed areas so that the project relates to poverty reduction and the 2020 job creation target.

 

  1.      Upgrading of Rural Road Network
    1. The Committee recommends the upgrading of the rural road network from gravel to low-volume ceiling so that the roads can be utilised in all weather conditions. The formula for allocating funding should not only focus on population, but also on the existing backlog.

 

  1. The Committee recommends that the Minister consider establishing a fund for the upgrading of the rural road network in the same way that the Road Maintenance Fund was established. The Committee also recommends that the Department of Transport and the Committee lead a process for developing a model for the upgrading of rural roads in the manner of S’hamba Sonke.

 

  1.      General
    1. The Committee notes that the Department could not develop the Transport Sector Disaster Management Plan due to budgetary constraints. The Committee recommends that National Treasury consider providing the required budget to enable the Department to implement the plan.

 

  1. The Committee finally notes that in terms of outcome 5 of the Department’s programme, no specific information was provided for job creation targets. The Committee recommends that the Department set specific targets for 2012/13 and align job creation with skills development with the aim of reducing dependency of poor families on government grants, and facilitate the creation of self-reliant and self-sufficient families.

 

  1. CONCLUSION

While the Department arguably continues to fulfill its constitutional mandate, there is still room for improvement pertaining to, in particular, the attainment of the targets it sets itself. This largely necessitates that the targets set should be in tandem with the financial resources that the Department has at its disposal.

 

Report to be considered.

 

Signed:

 

 

 

________________                                                                    _______________

Ms NR Bhengu, MP                                                                   Date:

Chairperson: PC on Transport