ATC180530: Report of the Portfolio Committee on Police On The 2018/19 Budget, Annual Performance Plan And 2017-2021 Strategic Plan of the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (Psira), dated 30 May 2018

Police

REPORT OF THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON POLICE ON THE 2018/19 BUDGET, ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN AND 2017-2021 STRATEGIC PLAN OF THE PRIVATE SECURITY INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY (PSIRA), DATED 30 MAY 2018:
 

The Committee examined the Budget, Annual Performance Plan for the 2018/19 financial year and the 2017-2021 Strategic Plan of the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (PSIRA).

 

The Committee reports as follows:

 

1. INTRODUCTION

 

The Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (PSIRA) was established in terms of section 2 of the Private Security Industry Regulation Act (2001). The entity is mandated to regulate the private security industry and to exercise effective control over the practice of the occupation of security service providers in the public and national interest, and in the interest of the private security industry itself.

 

1. Structure of the report

 

The Report provides an overview of the 2018/19 Budget Hearings of the PSIRA and is divided into the following sections:

 

• Section 1: Introduction. This section provides an introduction to this Report as well as a summary of meetings held during the hearings.
• Section 2: Strategic Priorities of the PSIRA for the 2018/19 financial year. This section provides a summary of the strategic focus areas for the Authority for the year under review.
• Section 3: PSIRA Budget and Performance targets for 2018/19. This section provides an overall analysis of the operating expenditure and revenue of the PSIRA for the 2018/19 financial year. This section also provides a programme analysis of the Authority.
• Section 4: Committee observations. This section highlights selected observations made by the Portfolio Committee on Police on the annual performance targets and programme specific issues during the 2018/19 budget hearings and subsequent responses by the Authority.
• Section 5: Recommendations and additional information. This section summarises the recommendations made by the Portfolio Committee on Police, as well as the additional information requested from the Authority.
• Section 6: Conclusion. This section provides a conclusion to this Report.

 

1. STRATEGIC PRIORITIES OF PSIRA FOR 2018/19

 

1. Legislative mandate

 

The primary objectives of PSIRA are to regulate the private security industry and to exercise effective control over the practice of the occupation of security service provider in the public and national interest and in the interest of the private security industry itself.

 

In terms of the Private Security Industry Regulation Act, 2001 (Act No. 56 of 2001), the Authority must:

1. Promote a legitimate private security industry which acts in terms of the principles contained in the Constitution and other applicable law;
2. Ensure that all security service providers act in the public and national interest in the rendering of security services;
3. Promote a private security industry that is characterized by professionalism, transparency, accountability, equity and accessibility;
4. Promote stability of the private security industry;
5. Promote and encourage trustworthiness of security service providers;
6. Determine and enforce minimum standards of occupational conduct in respect of security service providers;
7. Encourage and promote efficiency in and responsibility with regard to the rendering of security services;
8. Promote, maintain and protect the status and interests of the occupation of security service provider;
9. Ensure that the process of registration of security service providers is transparent, fair, objective and concluded timeously;
10. Promote high standards in the training of security service providers and prospective security service providers;
11. Encourage ownership and control of security businesses by persons historically disadvantaged through unfair discrimination;
12. Encourage equal opportunity employment practices in the private security industry;
13. Promote the protection and enforcement of the rights of security officers and other employees in the private security industry;
14. Ensure that compliance with existing legislation by security service providers is being promoted and controlled through a process of active monitoring and investigation of the affairs of security service providers;
15. Protect the interests of the users of security services;
16. Promote the development of security services which are responsive to the needs of users of such services and of the community; and
17. Promote the empowerment and advancement of persons who were historically disadvantaged through unfair discrimination in the private security industry.

 

2.2.Strategic Goals and Objectives

 

The Authority identified three Strategic Goals for the 2018/19 financial year, which extends over the medium-term. These are: 

• Goal 1: To ensure excellent service delivery (effective regulation) in the private security industry;
• Goal 2: Ensure effective training, registration and regulation within the private security industry; and
• Goal 3: Ensure good governance across the organisation.

 

The Authority identified seven strategic objectives for the 2018/19 financial year. These are:

1. Ensure effective financial management;
2. Ensure efficient and effective processes and systems;
3. To improve performance of the organisation;
4. Increased investigation and prosecution to enforce compliance with applicable legislation;
5. Increased awareness on the functions and role of PSIRA and its stakeholders;
6. Improve the integrity and the turnaround time of registration; and
7. Conduct research to inform development of policy and legislative direction of the private security industry.

 

 

2.3.Main policy focus areas

 

The main policy focus areas for the 2018/19 financial year include:

• Review funding model (Guarantee Fund and Levies Act);
• Organisational Review and Redesign to review its structure to ensure adequate capacity to support its legal mandate;
• Review of training standards for the Private Security Industry;
• Capacitating the Law Enforcement Programme to reduce inspector/security business ratio;
• Strengthening Corporate Governance through the establishment of Industry Sector committees; 
• Transformation of the security industry; and
• Continuous awareness of PSIRA brand.

 

2.4.Institutional Governance and Management

 

The Council of PSIRA consists of five members, of whom one is the Chairperson, another the Deputy Chairperson and the remaining three are ordinary members. Together the Council forms the accounting authority of PSIRA and thus takes ultimate responsibility for the Authority. According to section 51 of the PFMA, 1999, the accounting authority for a public entity must ensure that the public entity has and maintains the following (amongst others):

• Effective, efficient and transparent systems of financial risk management and internal control;
• A system of internal audit under the control and direction of an audit committee complying with and operating in accordance with regulations and instructions prescribed in terms of sections 76 and 77; and
• An appropriate procurement and provisioning system, which is fair, equitable, transparent, competitive and cost-effective.

 

1. PSIRA BUDGET AND PERFORMANCE TARGETS FOR 2018/19

 

1. Overall analysis

 

The Authority generates its own revenue through the collection of annual levies, and through money received from any legitimate sources, which has accrued to the entity in terms of the Act. The revenue collected by PSIRA, is estimated at R267.03 million in 2018/19, which is a nominal increase of 7.5% over the MTEF compared to the R248.6 million in revenue for 2017/18. Future estimates and plans indicates a higher growth in expenditure against revenue (budget) with the existing funding model. The Law Enforcement Programme receives the largest nominal increase of 25.9% from R89.1 million in 2017/18 to R112.2 million in 2018/19. In real terms, this is an increase of 19.37%.

 

The Communication, Training and Registration Programme receives a substantial decreased allocation in 2018/19 when compared to the previous financial year. The allocation decreases from R51.1 million in 2017/18 to R42.1 million in 2018/19, which is a nominal decrease of 17.62%. In real terms, the allocation is reduced with R11.2 million (21.92%).  

 

Table 1: PSIRA Expenditure Estimates 2018/19

Programme	Budget		Nominal Increase/ Decrease 2018/19	Real Increase/ Decrease 2018/19	Nominal Percent change 2018/19	Real % change 2018/19
R’000	2017/18	2018/19
Programme 1: Administration	108 181.0	112 675.0	4 494.0	- 1 380.1	4.15%	-1.28%
Programme 2: Law Enforcement	89 136.0	112 251.0	23 115.0	17 263.1	25.93%	19.37%
Programme 3: Communication, Training and Registration	51 111.0	42 104.0	- 9 007.0	- 11 202.0	-17.62%	-21.92%
TOTAL	248 429.0	267 030.0	18 601.0	4 680.0	7.5%	1.88%

Source: PSIRA 2018/19 APP

 

The table above shows the changes to the percentage of total budget per programme. The weight of the programmes shifted in 2018/19 when compared to the previous financial year. In 2017/18, the Administration Programme received 43.6% of the total budget, which decreased with 1.35% in 2018/19 to 42.2% of the total budget. The percentage of the total budget allocated to the Communication, Training and Registration Programme also decreased from receiving 20.57% of the total budget in 2017/18 to 15.77% in 2018/19.

 

These decreases allowed for the needed proportional increase in the allocation of the Law Enforcement Programme. In 2017/18, the programme received 35.88% of the total budget, which was increased with 6.16% in 2018/19 to give the programme 42.04% of the total budget. The Law Enforcement Programme is the core service delivery programme of the PSIRA. The revision of the proportional allocations brings the priorities of the Authority in-line with its legislative mandate. As an illustration, the Visible Policing Programme of the Police Vote, receives just over half of the budget allocation for 2018/19, because it is the core service delivery programme of the South African Police Service (SAPS). The PSIRA should aim to increase the proportional allocation of the Law Enforcement Programme over the medium term.         

 

Table 2: PSIRA Programme Estimates as a percentage of Total Expenditure Estimates

Programme	Budget	Percent of total budget/ programme	Budget	Percent of total budget/ programme	Change in percent allocation
R’000	2017/18		2018/19
Programme 1: Administration	108 181.0	43.55%	112 675.0	42.20%	-1.35%
Programme 2: Law Enforcement	89 136.0	35.88%	112 251.0	42.04%	6.16%
Programme 3: Communication, Training and Registration	51 111.0	20.57%	42 104.0	15.77%	-4.81%
TOTAL	248 429.0	100.00%	267 030.0	100.00%	0.00%

Source: PSIRA 2018/19 APP

 

1. Key spending drivers

 

The Authority highlighted several key spending drivers, including:

• Expenditure has increased by an average of 13% over the 4-year period. In the 2018/19 budget, personnel costs represent 59% of the total expenditure with rental expenses being the second highest cost at 11% and travelling the third highest at 6%. 
• Employee costs increased by 21% due to employee annual cost of living salary increase. Provision for additional 15 employees was made and they will be recruited in 2018/19 to capacitate core business units, including Inspectors, legal personnel and walk-in-consultants.
• Property Rental shows an increase of 35%, which is mainly due to the improvement of the geographical footprint of the Authority and to ensure efficient, accessible quality service. The Authority indicated that new offices will be established in Pretoria, Bloemfontein, Polokwane, Nelspruit and Empangeni.
• Expenditure on travelling costs is expected to decrease with 9% during 2018/19 when compared to the previous financial year. The expected decrease is mainly due to the review of the travel policy that supports and promote the Authority’s cost containment measures plan.
• The expected expenditure on stationery, printing, courier and postage decreases with 30% in 2018/19 when compared to the previous financial year. This is mainly because of cost containment measures in place through monitoring of costs and the reduction of overnight courier. 
• The expenditure on advertising is expected to increase by 72%, which is mainly due to the additional costs including the branding of new offices and media campaigns to ensure the awareness of the PSIRA brand.
• Coupled with the establishment of new offices, expenditure on security costs will increase with 22% for the provision of physical security, cash management services and armed response at the new offices.

 

The expansion of geographical footprint through new additional offices to bring service delivery closer to customers and improve quality of service is a major cost pressure during the 2018/19 financial year.

 

1. Cost containment measures

 

The Authority highlighted the following cost containment measures that will be implemented during the 2018/19 financial year to limit spending on non-core items:

• Minimise travelling through early bookings and by reducing the number of people travelling;
• Use of internal venues and other available government venues;
• The appointment of consultants to be done after an analysis of needs and a diagnosis of the skills gap;
• Spend Manager to manage 3G Data utilisation; and
• Utilisation of in-house official to configure systems and infrastructure. 

 

1. Programme Performance Indicators and Targets  

 

1. Programme 1: Administration

 

The Administration Programme is responsible to provide leadership, strategic management and administrative support to the Authority. In terms of measurable objectives, the Programme aims to ensure effective leadership, management and administrative support to the Authority through continuous refinement of organisational strategy and structure in line with appropriate legislation and best practices.

 

The Programme has three subprogrammes, namely:

• Sub-Programme: Finance and Administration;
• Sub-Programme: Business Information Technology; and
• Sub-Programme: Human Capital.

 

The table below summarises the performance indicators and targets for the Administration Programme, together with some comments and questions on the indicators. 

 

Table 3: Programme Performance Indicators and Targets: Administration Programme

Performance Indicator	2018/19 Target
Sub programme: Finance and Administration
Unqualified audit opinion with no significant findings	Unqualified audit opinion
% Revenue collected	80% revenue collected on billed annual fees
Establish and Implementation of the Guarantee Fund (New)	Final proposal developed and approved by Council
Sub programme: Business Information System
Critical IT infrastructure restored within the set timeline	Average of 12 hours
Implementation of business continuity and disaster recovery plan (New)	Business continuity plan in place
Sub programme: Human Capital
% of implementation of the performance management system (PMS)	100%
% of employee training interventions implemented as per Annual Training Plan (New)	80%
Establishment of an internal training academy for employees (New)	Internal Training Academy Established and Operation

Source: PSIRA 2018/19 APP

 

1. Programme 2: Law Enforcement

 

The Law Enforcement Programme is responsible for ensuring that there are effective regulations in the security industry and enforcement of law and compliance to the regulations. In terms of measurable objectives, the programme aims to ensure that Security Service Providers comply with the regulations by doing regular inspections for both security officers and security businesses. Additionally, to ensure that those who are not complying with the regulations are charged and prosecuted.

 

The Programme has three subprogrammes, namely:

• Sub-Programmes: Enforcement;
• Sub-Programmes: Compliance; and
• Sub-Programmes: Legal Services and Prosecution.

 

Table 4: Programme Performance Indicators and Targets: Law Enforcement Programme

Performance Indicator	2018/19 Target
Number of security businesses inspected to enforce compliance with applicable legislation	6 100
Number of security officers inspected to enforce compliance with applicable legislation	32 600
% of investigations finalised against non-compliant Security Service Providers (SSPs)	85%
% of criminal cases opened against non-compliant Security Service Providers (SSPs)	95%
Number of security businesses licensed to possess firearms inspected	1 350
% of cases of non-compliant Security Service Providers (SSPs) prosecuted per year	90%
Number of new draft regulations compiled on approved research topics (New)	2
% of debt collection files referred for litigation (New)	50%
Number of security businesses inspected that are using dogs (New)	60

Source: PSIRA 2018/19 APP

 

1. Programme 3: Communication, Registration and Training

 

The purpose of the Communications, Registration and Training Programme is to provide effective stakeholder engagement. Additionally, the Programme must ensure that training standards are adhered to and the registration process is done in accordance with the PSIR Act. In terms of measurable objectives, the Programme must:

1. Ensure effective and meaningful stakeholder communication;
2. Ensure that all training institutions are aligned to the required standard of training;
3. Ensure that the registration process is effective and authentic; and
4. Ensure continuous research to support core business initiatives and policy development.

 

There are four sub-programmes within this programme:

• Sub-Programme: Communications and Stakeholder Management;
• Sub-Programme: Industry Registration (CRM);
• Sub-Programme: Industry Training; and
• Sub-Programme: Industry Research and Development.

 

Table 5: Programme Performance Indicators and Targets: Communication, Registration (CRM) and Training Programme

Performance Indicator	2018/19 Target
Sub programme: Communication and Stakeholder Management
Number of public awareness campaigns	140
Sub programme: Registration
Average turnaround time of applications for registration meeting all the requirements for security businesses (working days)	Average 10 days
Average turnaround time of applications for registration meeting all the requirements for security officers (working days)	Average 10 days
Sub programme: Industry Training
Number of capacity building activities for SSP training institutions	12
Increased number of training security service provided currently registered and accredited with PSIRA	200 more registered
Sub programme: Industry Research and Development
Number of completed research topics	3 research topics
Number of completed surveys per year	4 surveys
Number of policy documents  completed	3 policy documents
Number of research studies published (New)	2 publications

Source: PSIRA 2018/19 APP

 

1. COMMITTEE OBSERVATIONS

 

The Committee made the following observations during the 2018/19 budget hearings:

 

Governing legislation: The Committee asked whether the Authority has engaged the Minister of Police on the status of the Private Security Industry Regulation Amendment Bill [B27D-2012] and whether the Minister has approached the Office of the President regarding the future of the Bill. The Amendment Bill contains numerous changes to the regulatory environment of the private security industry and enhances the mandate of the Authority in the current South African context. The Authority indicated that they approached the current Minister of Police, Hon Bheki Cele regarding the Amendment Bill. The Authority further indicated that they have met with the Civilian Secretariat for Police for further engagements with the Minister of Police.

 

Subordinate legislation (Regulations): The Committee had a lengthy discussion on the further development and implementation of subordinate legislation to enable the Authority to fulfil its mandate more effectively. The Committee asked whether the Authority is working with the Civilian Secretariat for Police in the development of regulations and policies. The Authority stated that there is an increased focus on the development of regulations because of delays in approval of the Private Security Industry Regulation Amendment Bill [B27D-2012]. The development of regulations is informed by empirical research conducted by the Authority. The current focus is on various sectors, including the use of security dogs, protective gear and firearms. In terms of the relationship with the Secretariat, the Authority indicated that it has established a working relationship with the Secretariat and works more closely with Secretariat, which it has not done in the past. 

 

Organisational Review: The Committee raised concerns about the organisational review and redesign that the Authority will embark on during the 2018/19 financial year. The Authority indicated that the Organisational Review was necessary to review its structure to ensure adequate capacity to support its legal mandate. The necessity was informed by significant paradigm shifts within the Authority and regulatory environment related to the inadequate funding model; establishment of a Guarantee Fund; enhancing the capacity of compliance inspectors and increasing the standards of regulation. The review includes identifying the skills sets needed to capacitate the Authority to fulfil its mandate, especially in terms of the establishment of a Guarantee Fund. The Committee further discussed the appointment and use of consultants related to the review.

 

Consultants: The Committee raised concern about the increase in expenditure on consultants during the 2018/19 financial year when compared to the previous financial year. The Authority indicated that a consultancy firm was appointed to conduct the Organisational Review and Redesign study, which lead to the increase in projected expenditure. In turn, the Committee raised further concern on the use of consultants to conduct internal reviews, especially organisational development, as consultants do not have a comprehensive understanding of the organisational environment and culture of the Authority. The Authority acknowledged that the use of consultants is often a double-edged sword, especially in terms of organisational development. The Authority gave assurance that consultants are only appointed after the completion of a needs analysis and diagnosis of the skills gap. The Committee reiterated the importance of following the correct procedures when awarding tenders to ensure that no third party or former employees are involved. The Committee was assured that a strict competitive bid process is followed and that no irregularities are allowed.

 

Funding model and revenue: The Committee raised concerns about the projection that future estimates and plans indicate a higher growth in expenditure against revenue with the existing revenue model. This projection could mean that the Authority will not be able to remain a going concern. The Authority indicated that the current funding model is redundant for all practical purposes and that it is currently under review to augment their sources of income and the collection thereof.

 

Expenditure: The Committee raised several issues around the expenditure of the Authority, including the increase in Compensation of employees, overdraft facility, and reserve funds. The Authority indicated that the increase in Compensation of employees relates to the capacitation of its core mandate and the intake of interns. In terms of the overdraft facility, the Authority explained that it is only a projected figure and required for an institution that has debtors. The projection will be augmented by the intensification of revenue collections and the review of the funding model. In terms of the reserve, the Authority indicated that reserve funds are not surrendered to National Treasury, because it does not receive funding for the State. The Authority further indicated that a deficit is projected for the 2018/19 financial year.     

 

Debt collection: The Authority indicated that they have entered into an agreement with the State Attorney to assist the Authority in litigation against defaulting security service providers. The Authority indicated that many successes have been achieved and indicated that it is expected that the value in debt collections will increase in future years. 

 

Research: The Committee requested additional information on the impact of research conducted by the Authority. The Authority indicated the key role that their research section plays in developing a deeper understanding of the private security sector, both nationally and internationally. The Authority indicated that there is currently a vacuum in research on the private security industry and that the Authority aims to develop future academics in the field through strategic partnerships with universities. The Authority indicated that the research products, currently produced by the research section, play a vital role in the development of policies to guide and strengthen the Authority’s ability to regulate the private security industry. It was further stated that the output of the research section is somewhat hamstrung due to insufficient funding. The section was established through donor funding, but now has to be funded internally. The Authority indicated that the research studies and survey findings would be published on the Authority’s website within the next month.

 

Cash-in-transit services: The Committee requested the Authority to explain its role, mandate and responsibilities regarding cash-in-transit services offered by private security providers. The Committee raised the increase of cash-in-transit robberies as a significant concern. The Committee further asked what proactive steps PSIRA is taking to mitigate against the scourge of cash-in-transit robberies and improve the regulation of cash management services. The Authority agreed that it is a major concern, but indicated that there are several role-players, notably the SA Reserve Bank (SARB) within this industry and that PSIRA is only responsible for the development of training standards and the standard required for vehicles. The Authority further indicated that the personnel of cash-in-transit services providers fall outside the Safety and Security Sector Bargaining Council (SSSBC), which compounds the challenges experienced in the regulation of the industry. In terms of proactive steps taken, the Authority has met with the National Head of the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI) to form a partnership to address the challenge. In conclusion, the Authority stated that research has been completed on this industry and that the empirical data collected will be used to develop policies to better regulate the cash-in-transit services and providers thereof.    

 

Vetting: The Committee raised concern about the lack of security vetting of security guards working in the cash-in-transit and other sensitive areas of armed protection. The Authority indicated that engagements with the industry will be enhanced to strengthen the vetting of security guards in high value logistics and cooperation with the State Security Agency (SSA) will be strengthened.  

 

Identity Fraud: The Committee requested an elaboration of identity theft as a threat to the Authority. The Authority indicated that this concerning trend was identified where registered security guards sell their ‘identities’ to undocumented foreign nationals, who are not allowed to become security guards in SA. It means that guards sell an original copy of their PSIRA certificates and identification (ID) documents to foreigners for up to R4000.00 and then get another ID and certificate from Home Affairs and PSIRA. The Authority indicated that they have entered into a partnership with the Department of Home Affairs to address this challenge. The Committee questioned the Authority on why it allows security guards who are not attached to a private security business to register. The Authority indicated that although the practice is discouraged, it is allowed. The Authority further stated that it has engaged the Department of Home Affairs to provide a live link on mobile devices to determine the status of suspected undocumented foreign nationals on-the-spot to avoid the current practice that compliance inspectors can only access the Home Affairs database at head office.        

 

Training Academy: The Committee asked the Authority to explain the need for the establishment of an internal Training Academy and whether the courses offered have SA Qualifications Authority (SAQA) accreditation. The Authority confirmed that the courses are SAQA accredited and that it focuses on the training of compliance inspectors. The Authority currently employs mostly previous members of the security services, from the SAPS and Correctional Services, as compliance inspectors. As there is no official training specifically designed for compliance inspectors within the environment, the Authority hopes to fill this gap with offering accredited training to inspectors.

Security dogs: The Committee had an in-depth discussion on the Authority’s focus on the regulation of security dogs, which was included as a new performance indicator in the 2018/19 APP. The Committee requested the Authority to elaborate on the nature of compliance inspections, specifically whether inspections will include the training, transportation and alleged abuse of security dogs. The Committee questioned the Authority’s mandate on the regulation of dog handlers. The Committee further warned the Authority not to consider security dogs as just biological assets and keep the close bond between dogs and handlers in mind.

 

The Authority stated that it has a mandate to provide accredited training to dog handlers and that other legislation governs the use of service animals. The PSIRA Act, 2001 stipulates strict standards with regard to security officers (guards), security service providers, dogs and clients/end users. The Authority indicated that it wants to establish a unit specifically focussed on dogs and further indicated that only handlers are registered, but that dogs should also be registered. The standards of dog training and handling should be enhanced to ensure more effective regulation of the environment.

 

In terms of the transportation of dogs, the Committee raised specific concern about security dogs transported in open vehicles (jumping off ‘bakkies’). The Authority indicated that specific standards apply to the transportation of security dogs and that no exceptions are allowed.  

 

In terms of the abuse of security dogs, the Authority indicated that it has received several complaints regarding the alleged abuse of security dogs. In such instances, inspections are conducted in partnership with the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA).

 

Crowd management: The Committee asked whether the Authority offers any training to security guards on crowd management. The Authority indicated that there is no accredited training offered to security guards on crowd management, as crowd management falls within the purview of the SAPS in terms of the Regulation of Gatherings Act, 1993 (Act 205 of 1993). 

 

Security at events: The Committee had an in-depth discussion on the security at sporting events and raised serious concerns about the role of security guards. Specific reference was made to the assault of a security guard at the Moses Mabhida Stadium in Durban by disgruntled soccer fans. More specifically, the Committee pointed out the seeming lack of training of the security guard to handle the situation. The Committee asked the Authority whether the current model that governs major events is adequate and whether the incident will lead to a review of the model. A question was asked about the use of protective gear and non-lethal weapons, like pepper spray and electroshock weapons, colloquially called tasers (Taser is a brand sold by Axon).

 

The Committee asked the Authority to explain their role in this environment and whether the Safety at Sports and Recreational Act, 2010 (No. 2 of 2010) assigns a responsibility to PSIRA. The Authority indicated that its role as regulator is limited, but stated that it is currently investigating the incident at the Moses Mabhida stadium and will provide a copy thereof to the Committee once completed. The Authority indicated that it does not have a seat on the Event Safety and Security Planning Committee in terms of the Safety at Sports and Recreational Act and that it only provides a seat for a security service provider. The Authority stated that it will consider what steps can be taken to play an active role in the security at events.      

 

In terms of the training provided to security guards on event management, the Authority stated that it offers accredited training to guards, which includes a five-module curriculum, including public relations and occupational safety (amongst others). 

 

The Committee further questioned whether sporting events are graded differently based on the type of event. The Authority indicated that it should consider whether different types of sports should be graded differently, for instance, golf, cricket, rugby and soccer that each draw different crowds.  

 

Gender equity: The Committee questioned the level of gender equity within the private security industry. The Authority indicated that females represent approximately 30% of the industry and that there is a shift in that more females are entering the private security sector. The Authority further indicated that the research on the transformation of the industry includes aspects of gender representation. The research will inform what further steps to take to elevate the role of females within the private security sector.

 

Internal audit capacity: The Committee questioned the outsourcing of the internal audit function and requested the Authority plans to establish the function internally. The Authority indicated that the auditing firm contracted to conduct the internal audit function has been appointed on a three-year contract, but mentioned that the Organisational Review also includes the capacitation of an internal audit function.      

 

Relationship with SAPS and NPA: The Committee asked whether the Authority has a good relationship with the SAPS and National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) and is satisfied with the quality of investigations by SAPS and prosecutions by the NPA. The Committee noted an increasing challenge in the SAPS/NPA interface and questioned whether the Authority is experiencing similar challenges. The Authority indicated that the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the SAPS is yielding successes. No formal relationship has been established with the NPA, but it has met with the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) to explain the work of the Authority. A challenge that was identified is with admissions of guilt, which negates strict sanctions and only allows for a fine for serious offences. The Authority indicated that this area should be addressed through amendments to their governing legislation to allow for on-the-spot fines. 

 

Geographic footprint: The Committee requested the Authority to explain the rationale for establishing a new office in Empangeni and questioned the location thereof. The Authority indicated that a work-study was completed to establish the reason for the high volume of clients visiting the Durban office, more specifically from where the clients visited. The study revealed that a high proportion of the clients/security guards came from the Empangeni and Richards Bay area. The Authority further indicated that both locations were considered, but indicated that office space in Empangeni was acquired due to the lack of office space in Richards Bay.  The Authority stated that the Free State office, located in Bloemfontein, is expected to open the following week. The Committee expressed their satisfaction that the numerous challenges, notably the lack of available office space, experienced with the establishment of the Bloemfontein office had been addressed.    

 

1. RECOMMENDATIONS AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

 

This section provides a summary of the recommendation made by the Committee and a summary of the additional information requested during the 2018/19 budget hearings.

 

1. Additional information

 

The Committee requested additional information through written responses to supplement the information gathered during hearings on the 2018/19 budget hearings of the PSIRA:

• The Authority must provide a report on the investigation of the assault on a security guard at the Moses Mabhida stadium once completed.  

 

1. Recommendations

 

The Committee made the following recommendations during the 2018/19 budget hearings:

 

1. The Committee recommends that the Authority should continue its engagements with the Minister of Police to ensure progress on the enactment of the Private Industry Regulation Amendment Bill, 2012.
2. The Committee recommends that the Authority should enhance the development of subordinate legislation/regulations based on empirical research to increase the regulation of the private security industry. The Committee further recommends that the Authority should enhance its relationship with the Civilian Secretariat for Police to use their legislative drafting experience and skills.  
3. The Committee recommends that the Authority prioritise the establishment and effective operation of Industry Sector Committees to enhance the corporate governance of the Authority.
4. The Committee recommends that the Authority must oversee the work of the consultants conducting the organisational review and redesign project to ensure value for money and quality of work. 
5. The Committee recommends that the Authority should fast track the review of the funding model to mitigate against the projected deficit at the end of the 2018/19 financial year. The Committee further recommends that the Guarantee Fund should be established and implemented as a matter of urgency.  
6. The Committee recommends that the Authority must adhere to the applicable prescripts when appointing consultants and contractors to ensure that no third parties are attached to the awarded tenders.  
7. The Committee recommends that the Authority must take proactive steps to enhance its involvement in the Event Safety and Security Planning Committee in terms of the Safety at Sports and Recreational Act, 2010 (No 2 of 2010).
8. The Committee recommends that the Authority work closely with the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI) and the South African Banking Risk Information Centre (SABRIC) to address gaps in the management of cash-in-transit to mitigate in security breaches and address the scourge of cash-in-transit robberies. Coupled thereto, the Authority should enhance engagements with role-players to ensure the vetting of security officers working in the armed response sector, specifically in cash management.
9. The Committee recommends that the cooperation between the Authority and the NPA should be enhanced to increase the number of prosecutions on contraventions of the Private Security Industry Regulation Act, 2001 (Act No. 56 of 2001).
10. The Committee recommends that the Authority intensify engagements with the Department of Home Affairs to ensure the real-time access to the Home Affairs database.
11. The Committee recommends that the Authority should continue its focus on the training and use of security dogs and handlers in the private security industry.        

 

1. Reporting requirements

 

The Authority should report the progress on the recommendations biannually. The first progress report should reach the Committee no later than two weeks after the end of the second quarter of the 2018/19 financial year. 

 

1. CONCLUSION

 

The Committee noted an overall improvement in the governance and performance of the Authority over the past financial year. The Committee is cautiously optimistic about the future of the Authority, based on the performance information shared during the 2018/19 budget hearings. The Committee encourages the Authority to intensify its activities to improve the regulation of the private security industry of South Africa. The Committee further encourages the Authority to focus specifically on the exploitation of security guards within this sector and bring non-compliant employers to book.    

 

Report to be considered.