Sentech Revised Strategic Plan & Executive Management Restructuring: postponed

Meeting report

The Chairperson noted that Members had only received Sentech’s documents at the beginning of the meeting. He asked Sentech to explain their late submission of the documents.

Mr Quraysh Patel, Chairperson: Sentech, apologised for the late arrival of the documents. There seemed to be some misunderstanding. He was under the impression that the documents would have reached the Committee Secretary by 2pm yesterday. He only discovered at the meeting that none of the Members had received the document beforehand. He accepted responsibility for the late submission.

The Chairperson asked if the Committee accepted Mr Patel’s apology.

Ms P De Lille (ID) stated that the meeting had been scheduled with Sentech for some time already. The Committee needed an explanation why the document had been prepared so late. Who was responsible for the late submission? Sentech put the Committee in an awkward position. Members had not even seen the document, which was a revised document.

Mr S Kholwane (ANC) agreed with Ms De Lille. The Committee needed comprehensive explanation for why the documents were submitted so late. This would help the Committee to decide whether they should continue the meeting or not.

Mr Patel explained that he had taken the responsibility as chairperson to compile the document. Most of the document had been completed by last week. However, by Thursday 26 August 2010 he realised that he would not be able to complete the document based on what Sentech wanted to tell the Committee today. He then asked for an extension and the deadline for submitting the document was extended to Friday, 27 August. By the following day, he had still not completed the document and had asked for another extension. He was given a Monday 30 August to submit the document. He was under the impression when he left Johannesburg that the document would be sent by 2pm. When he arrived in Cape Town, he discovered that it had not been sent. He made some enquiries and discovered the document was on its way to Parliament. He was told that the document reached Parliament between 2:30pm and 3:30pm. However, he had just been told that Members had not received the documents. He apologised for the delay.

Mr Thembinkosi Ngoma, Committee Secretary to the Communications Committee, replied that Mr Patel’s personal assistant had requested his address, as the document was too large to email and had to be posted to his office. On Thursday, 26 August, she called to say Sentech would not be able to submit the document on time. He told her she could send it to him on Friday morning and he would then send it to Members. On Friday evening, the personal assistant called him again to say they would not be able to meet their extended deadline. Mr Ngoma told her to send the document to his office on Monday morning, 30 August. However, he only received the document at approximately 4pm on Monday.

Ms R Morutoa (ANC) said that the late submission of documents was unacceptable. The Committee expected the documents a week before the meeting. If entities wanted Members to scrutinise their documents effectively then they could not send the documents a day before. This was a total failure of communication.

The Chairperson appealed to Members to allow the meeting to continue. He knew there were other Committees that took a tough stance on the matter and adjourned the meeting straight away, but he did not want to do this. He asked if Sentech could proceed with the presentation.

Ms J Killian (COPE) proposed that the Committee adjourn the meeting until 11am so that Members could have a look at the document before the presentation.

Mr Kholwane commented that the Committee could not continue the meeting without having looked at the document beforehand. This was unfair to Members, as they would not be able to apply their minds to the document. He proposed that the Chairperson adjourn the meeting so Members could study the documents. Sentech could return to present another day once Members had looked at the document. Parliament needed to protect its integrity as an institution.

Ms De Lille agreed with Mr Kholwane saying that the document was written in a way that did not show how the revised strategic plan was different from the original strategic plan. Members had to go back to do a comparison of what had changed. The main concern, however, was the cost of bringing the Sentech Board to Parliament. She thought that the costs incurred by Parliament had to be refunded by the individuals from Sentech that were to participate in the meeting.

Mr N van den Berg (DA) agreed with Mr Kholwane and Ms De Lille. He was very worried, as it was sixteen months into the fourth term of Parliament and all the Committee was still dealing with, were problems. He was not sure if Sentech was really trying to “turn itself around”.

Ms Killian withdrew her proposal. She supported Mr Kholwane’s motion instead.

The Chairperson noted that the Committee was in agreement that the meeting should be adjourned and Sentech would be called to present the document on another occasion.

Mr van den Berg suggested that Sentech’s board adjust their document so they could show how and where the entity revised its strategic plan.

Mr Patel appealed to the Committee to reconsider their decision. The Committee should not miss out on the opportunity to allow Sentech to give an appraisal on how things were going within the company. It could well be, after the Committee had heard Sentech’s presentation, that the Committee would ask Sentech to come back on another day because they needed specific information. The presentation was prepared based on the fact that he was going to elaborate on the points. It was easy to prepare a detailed document; however, the current presentation contained talking points. He did not mean to disrespect the Committee; he accepted that he was wrong. But, nothing had to prevent Sentech from continuing the presentation, if only for the Committee’s benefit. This was an opportune time for the Committee to hear what challenges Sentech was facing. If they did not give Sentech a chance, the problems would escalate. He asked that the Committee allow Sentech to give the presentation. If Members were still dissatisfied with the presentation, they could ask Sentech to return.

Mr Kholwane commented that the Committee was not playing around. Members could not accept late submission of documents. Members would read the document and analyse it themselves. Once the document were scrutinised, the Committee would engage with Sentech. He stated that the Committee would not be proceeding with the presentation.

The Chairperson noted that it was clear that the Committee was not going to listen to Sentech’s presentation. The meeting would be adjourned until further notice.