ATC170503: Report of the Portfolio Committee on International Relations and Cooperation on its oversight on the facilities and premises of the headquarters building of the Department of International Relations and Cooperation, Protocol State Lounges, State Guesthouses and the Pan African Parliament, dated 3 May 2017

International Relations

Report of the Portfolio Committee on International Relations and Cooperation on its oversight on the facilities and premises of the headquarters building of the Department of International Relations and Cooperation, Protocol State Lounges, State Guesthouses and the Pan African Parliament, dated 3 May 2017
 

The Portfolio Committee on International Relations and Cooperation (the Committee), having conducted physical inspection oversight on the facilities and premises of the headquarters building of the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (the Department), Protocol State Lounges, State Guesthouses and the Pan African Parliament from 23 – 24 September 2014 and 17 October 2014, reports as follows:

 

1. Purpose

 

The Committee undertook the physical inspection oversight on the said premises, to ascertain that the facilities were adequate for their purposes. The Committee also looked at whether contingency measures were in place to cater for the expected and unexpected high volumes of dignitaries that would be accessing the facilities. The facilities should be of high standard, with adequate staff compliment. The ambience and the art of welcoming dignitaries in these facilities should reflect ‘ubuntu’ and a true South African welcome at all times.

 

The Committee further undertook an oversight visit to the Pan African Parliament for the purpose of:

• Familiarising itself with the temporary office accommodation afforded to Pan African Parliament, in terms of physical structure and relevant facilities at the disposal of the Pan African Parliament;
• Assessing the financial accountability of the Department regarding office accommodation for Pan Africa Parliament in Midrand; and
• Assessing the implementation and compliance by the Department, of the provisions of the Host Country Agreement between the African Union and the Government of the Republic of South Africa on the Seat of the Pan African Parliament signed in 2014.

 

The following members were part of the oversight visits:

 

• Hon MSA Masango (ANC)
• Hon BA Radebe (ANC)
• Hon LKB Mpumlwana (ANC)
• Hon TE Kenye (ANC)
• Hon DD Raphuti (ANC)
• Hon S Mokgalapa (DA)
• Hon S Kalyan (DA)
• Hon C Dudley (ACDP).

 

The Committee members present at the hearing on the petition were supported by the following Committee Officials:

• Ms L Mosala (Committee Content Advisor)
• Mr L Sigwela (Committee Secretary)
• Mr D Madlala (Committee Researcher)
• Ms N Mooi (Committee Assistant).

 

1. Oversight visit to the Cape Town State Protocol Lounge: Presentation by Mr C Moodley: Head of the Lounge

 

It was reported that the lounge was on lease between the Aviation Company of South Africa (ACSA) and the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (the Department). The Department took occupation of the structure in 2008. The purpose of the lounge was to assist government dignitaries with smooth facilitation through the airport. It was explained as a transit facility to provide expeditious services for dignitaries in outgoing and incoming flights.

 

With regard to the categories of people entitled to use the facility, Heads of State and Government, Deputy Presidents, Ministers, Deputy Ministers, and Premiers, made up the list. Courtesy processes were also extended to the Speaker of the National Assembly and Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly, the Chairperson and the Deputy Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces, Speakers of the Legislature, and the Metro Mayors.

 

Courtesies were also extended to heads of intergovernmental organisations such as the African Union (AU), United Nations (UN) and Southern African Development Community (SADC). There were also provisions for eminent people in South Africa, such as, the Chief Justice, Judge President and deputies, Arch Bishop Desmond Tutu, Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi, Special Envoys and other designated guests of the South African government. All applications for facilitation through the lounge were to be approved by the Chief of State Protocol, guided by the state protocol lounge policy. There was in place an Airline Operating Committee that has a process in place to expedite the process of checking in dignitaries.

 

The Department has assets in the form of vehicles used to transport dignitaries from the lounge to the aircraft and vice versa. The premises were leased from ACSA and that ACSA was responsible for the maintenance of the premises. Furniture in the lounge was the responsibility of the Department, and so was the cleaning of the lounge. All assets were reported registered in the Asset Register.

 

1. Observations by the Committee

 

The Committee thanked the lounge staff for a warm welcome and clear presentation on the facilitation processes through the lounge. The protocol services of the Department were commended for having made South Africa proud during the state funeral of the late President of the Republic of South Africa, Mr Nelson Mandela. It was said their efforts had not gone unnoticed.

 

More information was sought on the linkages between the offices of the Department, Department of Home Affairs and ACSA at the airport. The issue being whether there were agreed procedures between them on the provision of smooth facilitation of dignitaries through the airport.

 

1. Responses by Mr Moodley

 

It was mentioned that there were formal arrangements for all relevant departments working at the airport to coordinate their functions. The head of the lounge served on the Border Control Operation Coordinating Committee of the Airport. The committee is comprised of representatives from Home Affairs, Customs, South African Police Services, ACSA and it meets every two weeks. Also the Head of the Lounge also served in the local Airport Security Committee.

 

The building was regarded very small considering the amount of dignitaries passing through the Cape Town lounge. Catering was also very limited in scope.

 

1. Visit to the King Shaka State Protocol Lounge, Durban: Presentation by Mr H Ohlson

 

Mr Ohlson touched on the different categories of dignitaries who are received and assisted in the lounge. He further brought to the attention of Members that the state protocol lounge policy states that the lounge must be notified at least two hours before the departure and arrival of the dignitary. It was also reported that at times they are faced with a challenge where the lounge is notified on very short notice of a dignitary to be assisted.

 

1. Observations by the Committee

 

The lounge was located very far from the airport terminal for normal operations. There was a need for a medical doctor to attend to medical emergencies at the lounge. It was suggested that the lounge should serve snacks.

 

            Responses

 

There was an Emergency Command Centre where during and emergency all role-players go to their immediate operation. The role-players were the Department of Health, South African Police Services, Home Affairs and ACSA. Should there be a need for a doctor, one would be available. However, there was no medical doctor solely dedicated to the lounge.

 

1. Oversight visit to the OR Tambo State Protocol Lounge: Presentation by Mr Ohlson: Head of the Lounge

 

Mr Ohlson informed members that travellers were all aware of the hassle and pressure associated with travel through airports. The consequence of this was that the international community established a practice to facilitate departures and arrivals of dignitaries through or into other states through airports.

 

It was reported that requisite immunities and privileges were extended to the deserving dignitaries on arrival and departure at airports of host countries. These is meant to ensure comfort, security, a good first impression about the country and its people, the seriousness with which relations with such countries are taken, and to save dignitaries from long queues and hassles of travel through airports.

 

1. Observations by the Committee

 

Members noted that there should be a visible designation sign identifying the facility as a State Protocol Lounge.

 

Members further noted that the lounge should portray the strong, imposing image and leading role South Africa has assumed internationally. It must be a true reflection of a Proudly South African welcome even to discerning visitors. It should embody the ubuntu principles that can be easily make foreign visitors feel warmly welcomed.

 

1. Visit to the Pan African Parliament

 

The Committee was received by and met with Hon. Roger Nkodo Dang, MP, First Vice-President, from Cameroon representing the Central African Region. The oversight visit was welcomed and it was noted and hoped that more visits would be undertaken by the Committee.

 

Hon Dang handed over to Hon BA Radebe, Leader of the delegation, who outlined the purpose of the visit.

 

1. Input by Hon. Roger Nkodo Dang, MP, First Vice-President, from Cameroon representing the Central African region and Adv Madasa, Clerk of the Pan African Parliament

 

Adv Madasa drew the attention of Committee delegation to the Host Agreement between the African Union and the government of the Republic of South Africa on the seat of the Pan African Parliament (PAP). He said the Host Agreement was signed in September 2002 and it expired in 2009 and it has not been renewed since. One of the issues was security which was provided by the South African government through the security cluster. There was also a shortage of facilities to screen potential visitors to the Parliament.

 

It was also mentioned that the current premises of the Parliament were a temporary facility. Land was identified, however there was a delay due to environmental reasons. It was a concern that since then, no other place had been identified.

 

The presentation also touched on the official residence of the President of the Pan African Parliament. The property is situated in Pretoria under the custodianship of the Department of Public Works. It was said the residence was not suitable for the level of the Pan African Parliament, which hosts VVIP guests. The issue was raised with the Department of Public Works and the Department of International Relations and Cooperation in 2012. It was then agreed that the residence was not suitable for the status of the Pan African Parliament. The house needed to be refurbished and an alternative residence would have to be found. However no action has been take since.

 

Reference was made to the then installed ICT systems, which were said to be supported by the Department. The expressed frustration was that the Microsoft system had expired, and the internet was extremely slow, and in most instances not available. In most instances members were struggling to access emails and making it difficult to communicate to one another.

 

It was reported that in a series of meetings between the Department and the PAP, there was an agreement that perhaps going forward the Parliament should not be directly supported by the Department. It was proposed that to instead move towards a methodology of budget support and this would be audited and accounted for.

 

It was also mentioned that transport was supported by the Department with its conditions. This arrangement restricted the PAP in performing certain operations.

 

The presentation also touched on office accommodation and office equipment. Then there was a shortage of committee rooms. Members were also informed that security scanners and CCTV cameras were not working and this puts the security of the premises and the members of the Pan African Parliament at risk. The facility was also not user friendly to disabled people, there were no ramps and sometimes the lifts would not work.

 

It was also brought to the attention of the members of the South African Parliament that an identification card which used to be issued by the Department has been withdrawn. The benefit of the card was that it helped to identify that the traveller is a member of the PAP and has diplomatic immunities.

 

It was highlighted that emergency services remained an integral part of any security arrangements. The Host Country was supporting the PAP with these services up to 2008. However, from 2009, the Department stopped taking responsibility for this activity without any explanation to the PAP. As a consequence, the PAP was then directly paying the Gauteng Provincial EMS for the services they rendered to the PAP.

 

Hon. Roger Nkodo Dang added that the relationship between the Pan African Parliament and the South African Parliament needed to be strengthened going forward.

 

1. Observations by the Committee

 

The Committee welcomed the presentation on the state of affairs at PAP. The leader of the delegation pointed out that the information given confirmed what the Department had reported to the Committee.

 

A concern was also expressed on the non-renewal of the Host Agreement. The Committee undertook to raise the issue with the Department of International Relations and Cooperation and the Department of Public of Public Works. It was agreed that the issue of security needed to be addressed with extreme urgency.

 

The Committee welcomed the idea of the synergy between the Portfolio Committee on International Relations and Cooperation and the counterpart committee of the Pan African Parliament. It was agreed that this would indeed strengthen the relationship between both Parliaments.

 

1. Tour around the premises of the Pan African Parliament

 

During the tour it was observed that the offices of the members of the Pan African Parliament were small. The office equipment was not appropriate for the members to perform their duties. It was also observed that in the IT server room, wires were exposed and this was identified as an electric hazard.

 

During the tour it was also observed that the CCTV cameras and the security X-ray machines were not working. This compromised on the security of the Pan African Parliament. It was further observed that the premises were not user friendly for disabled people.

 

It was also noted that there were not enough meeting rooms. The ones available were regarded not well equipped for the work expected of a parliament.

 

1. Conclusions

 

The Committee concludes the following course of action regarding the oversight visit:

• The Committee should undertake a return oversight visit to the Pan African Parliament in Midrand, to assess the current situation and find out whether the concerns raised previously are still not addressed.