Department of Community Safety & Western Cape Liquor Authority 2017/18 Annual Report

Meeting report

Mr M Wiley (DA) was standing in as Chairperson in the absence of Ms M Wenger’s (DA) absence.

The Chairperson confirmed that Mr R Mackenzie (DA) was standing in for Mr B Kivedo (DA).

The Chairperson asked attendees representing civil society organisations to introduce themselves.

The Chairperson confirmed that the meeting was a public hearing, therefore, members of the public could participate at the end. He suggested a change in the agenda, that the Western Cape Liquor Authority (WCLA) present their report before the Department of Community Safety (ComSafe).

Mr Daniel Plato, Member of the Executive Committee (MEC): Department of Community Safety introduced himself and greeted attendees.

Adv Thembalihle Sidaki, Chairperson, WCLA expressed gratitude for being able to present, and thanked the Department for it support to the Authority/WCLA.

Discussion on the 2017/2018 Annual Report of the Western Cape Liquor Authority
Mr F Christians (ACDP) asked which challenges the WCLA Board referred to in the Report’s foreword, where it concerns the Alcohol Harms Reduction White Paper Policy.

Mr R Mackenzie (DA) welcomed the new Chairperson of the Authority, Adv Sidaki. He inquired about the key contributors to the successful enforcement cases mentioned on page nine.
 
Mr D Mitchell (DA) asked how the focus of the Authority, and the Communication, Education and Stakeholder Relations component will change to intensify its awareness campaigns on the harms of alcohol in game changer areas.

Mr Mackenzie asked how many of the 119 enforcement cases were successful prosecution cases, and is there certainty as to the number of those shut down.

Mr Ronald Kingwill, Deputy Chairperson, WCLA said that the key issue of the White Paper is that it is a provincially driven initiative, therefore, the Authority is not the initiator of the policy but has a responsibility with regards to education and communicating with various stakeholders. They will be part of informing legislation and will help with the process of funding. 

Adv Sidaki said that the Authority must balance the interests of the industry and the interests of society. The White Paper illustrates this and helps identify competing interests.

Mr Luzuko Mdunyelwa, Chief Executive Officer (CEO), WCLA said that the Authority’s shift from a formal area approach to one based on admission of guilt has been a contributing factor to successful enforcement cases. Therefore, license holders who transgress attend a formal hearing, enter into a settlement agreement, a fine is proposed to the Liquor Licensing Tribunal (LLT) and the transgression is expunged. This has been successful, as more people are willing to come forward, without those fined not taking the matter to court. However, a challenge to this is that when licenses are revoked, the responsibility shifts to the South African Police Service (SAPS), not the Authority.
Mr Mackenzie asked whether the 119 enforcement cases are individual cases or whether these are repeat offenders.

Mr Mdunyelwa confirmed that some include repeat offenders. He then went on to discuss the shift in communication and campaigns in game changer areas. The Authority is spreading its resources across these areas and has increased its efforts in those areas more so than in the past 34 years.

On Communication, Education and Stakeholder Relations, Mr Mitchell asked what more is going to be done, and if the target has already been met.

Ms T Dijana (ANC) asked how many inspectors were appointed to the alcohol reduction game changer.

Mr Mackenzie asked if the Authority advertises in areas that are most affected, and how do they ensure that areas that need it most are reached.

Mr Mitchell asked why staff resign because of the flat organisational structure even though training opportunities are provided. With regards to labour relations and misconduct, he asked which transgressions resulted in the issuing of verbal warnings, written warnings and so forth.
 
The Chairperson remarked that inducements from role players in the industry are prevalent and asked the Authority about the protection against bribes.

Mr Philip Prinsloo, Communication, Education & Stakeholder Relations, WCLA said that impact on game changer areas should be prioritised over the numbers. For the first six months of the financial year, the Authority focused on the Western Cape, and for next three months it will focus on game changer areas. Regarding radio stations, the Authority partners with radio stations, police go on door-to-door visits and the Authority engages with communities. In 2017, the Authority partnered with more than 20 radio stations. The Authority encourages employees to partake in training, therefore, resignations are probably due to other opportunities within the organisation.
Mr Mdunyelwa confirmed that three inspectors were appointed in the game changer areas. He added that upstream prosecutions are carried out in game changer areas because the Authority tracks supply from the South African Breweries (SAB) to delivery points. Most problems start at delivery points. Instead of a formal hearing, the Authority issues a transgression notice, after which a fine is issued. Fines have been paid, and most people/businesses that are fined do not transgress again. With regards to inducements, the purpose of the Liquor Act is to separate power between the administration and the LLT. Management reports allow the Authority to monitor the application process. Mr Mdunyelwa added that the LLT is not accessible to the public as it only focuses on adjudicating applications, whereas the administration handles queries.

Mr Christians asked what the role of the Authority is in the passing of the Western Cape Provincial School Amendment Bill. He also asked whether progress is being made regarding illegal outlets.

Ms Dijana asked whether the Authority conducted its own research, and is there a possibility for the Authority to assist illegal outlets to become legal because the numbers appear to be increasing.

Mr Mdunyelwa emphasised that the Authority’s role is to regulate, therefore, the Authority enforces the Liquor Act regardless of the entity involved and without discrimination. Regarding new regulations, the game changer programme seeks to assist those who wish to apply for licenses and meet requirements to do so. This includes illegal outlets who apply for licenses.

The Chairperson thanked the Authority and closed the discussion on the report.

The MEC informed the Committee of the Department’s engagement with various role players, including Non-governmental Organisations (NGOs), religious organisations, the Human Rights Commission (HRC), and the Commission for Gender Equality (CGE). He explained that the Department works closely with SAPS as it cannot make arrests. The biggest issue in the Western Cape government is violence in disadvantaged communities, especially the prevalence of gangsterism. The possession of guns is also a big problem, and more needs to be done to eradicate ‘shebeens’, which is dealt with on a regular basis. SAPS have helped establish base camps that are situated in communities, however, there is fear around when these will be taken away.

Mr Gideon Morris, Head of Department (HOD), Department of Community Safety, DoCS told the Committee that the Department prepared an additional document which the Committee received prior to the meeting but was for members only.  

Discussion on the Department of Community Safety Annual Report (2017/2018)

Ms P Lekker (ANC) expressed her disappointment that the additional document had been given in short notice of the meeting, as it should have been given in advance, especially due to its length. She asked the MEC how safety has increased and whether this includes safety at Western Cape schools.

Ms Lekker asked how much of the budget is allocated to schools.

Ms Lekker asked how is the clean audit of the Department linked to safety on the ground. Is the clean audit talking to crime, and deteriorating safety in communities like Nyanga, Khayelitsha and Mitchells Plain. She asked which communities were visited, which safety needs were identified, and how did the Department meet them.

Ms Lekker asked how infrastructure such as CCTV cameras and street lights, or lack thereof in informal settlements contribute to unsafety. She asked if the MEC has consulted with relevant role players.

Mr Mitchell congratulated the Department on its clean audit for nine years in a row. He asked which monitoring and evaluation mechanism is in place to make sure that police oversight is carried out. He also asked about the link between the Department and the Department of Social Development in terms of service delivery. Regarding the accreditation of NHW, he asked what training and resources are provided, and what is the status of the implementation of recommendations in Khayelitsha, how it is monitored and how often, and what kind of monitoring and evaluation is there for the impact of school holiday programmes during June and July, and why there is no plan for December and January.

The MEC remarked that there is an impression that the Department must stop violence in communities and solve the drug problem, therefore take over role of SAPS, however, the Department focuses on the safety of communities. He acknowledged that the Department must engage and collaborate with SAPS. There has been a 4000 drop in violent crimes in the Western Cape, and interventions by state departments, SAPS and NGOs have helped to achieve this. When the MECs met on Saturday, they raised the issue of the police needing to do more in getting rid of drugs and guns. The MEC added that the Department achieves results by working with communities through outreaches and meetings with community leaders about partnership structures with the religious sector. Every week approximately 40 guns are confiscated in the Western Cape, and the Department works with the Department of Education (DBE) to ensure safety at schools.

The Chairperson reminded the MEC that the Department is not operational since it does not employ police, but serves an oversight function.

The MEC remarked that the Department works closely with SAPS, therefore, the Department plays a meaningful role. The number of violent crimes has dropped in the province. In response to Ms Lekker he said that infrastructural problems are reported to municipalities and role players are contacted.

Mr Morris told to Ms Lekker that the details of the communities visited by the MEC were in the extra document handed out.

In response to Mr Mitchell, Mr Morris again referred to the extra document listing the results of court-watching briefs. The Department has had to engage with SAPS legal department when they did not respond. Community Policing Forums (CPFs) are provided with resources and funding, which has yielded positive results.

With regards to the Department’s role of oversight, Mr Morris referred to the extra document and added that links between the Department of Community Safety, Social Development and Health have Executive Committees that meet monthly, and several projects have been started such as the Wines of South Africa (WOSA) project. He also listed the contributions made to the accreditation of NHW. In order to accredit NHW they will incur costs, but the Department will make functionality and project payments to them. The Khayelitsha Commission is used as a blueprint of oversight.

Regarding youth involvement, December and January are also included. R4.2 million has been given towards December and January school programmes. Mr Morris referred the Committee to the pages listing programmes and noted that some applications are still being reviewed. With regards to monitoring and evaluation, he added that at least 83% of institutions were visited unannounced. Impact studies were conducted and those who failed to submit reports did not qualify for the next year. Empowerment programmes are also done with those institutions.

Adv Yashina Pillay, Secretariat: Safety and Security, DoCS confirmed that programmes run in June and July and will do so in December and January.

Mr Mitchell commented that areas such as ‘Nuwerus’ do not exist.

Ms Lekker commented that a safe community is prepared and equipped with safety mechanisms. She added that no information about Nyanga was included, and asked to what extent the Department is willing to tend to communities. She also asked how the Department provides support if youth in Nyanga and backyard townships are not included in religious programmes, and how does a clean audit ensure that communities are taken care of.

Ms Lekker asked what plan is in place to address the prevalence of drugs in communities, and what the MEC doing about drug trafficking?

Ms Dijana commented that several communities in the Central Karoo and rural areas have been excluded. Referring to page 12 of the report, she asked about the number of active buses operating in the province. She asked how the successes relating to learner safety and safety at schools are measured, and what the Department, especially the MEC, has done to address gangsterism and drugs.

Mr Christians asked whether the Department is serving its Constitutional mandate of oversight, and if it is overseeing the efficiency and effectiveness of the police. The Department has CPFs and NHW, and should not do the police’s work. He asked why the Department does not do more where it has a role to play. Safety is worse than before, and townships are a problem because schooling and health are affected.

The MEC responded by acknowledging that systemic problems in SAPS have been identified. He added that the gang and drug units have been brought back. Furthermore, the police made a mistake by letting go of reserves, leaving a void. However, communities are happy about base camps.

In response to Ms Lekker, The MEC said that 85% of police stations are under-resourced. To illustrate, statistics reveal that there is only one police van per sector. There were previously two to three. Therefore, police responses take two to three hours after complaints are reported. Ward councillors have received a budget of R850 000 for spending needs in communities, however, ward councillors do not spend money on safety issues. This raises the question of what ward councillors regard as important. Lastly, the gang and drug unit will be reinstated in November 2018.

Mr Morris said that the Department is concerned about the issues raised by the Committee regarding the Youth Safety and Religion Programme (YSRP). He added that the Department allocates resources according to priority areas.

The Chairperson asked whether projects are initiated by communities or the Department.

Mr Morris confirmed that they are programmes of the CPFs, which the Department advertises. The Department advertises school holiday programmes. The number of approved projects exceed those that do not get approved. Projects do not get approved because they do not comply with the requirements. If areas are not on the list, they are not gang areas.

Mr Mackenzie inquired about the process related to the quarterly release of crime statistics. He also asked whether community organisations are invited, and what is the public participation process?
 
Mr Mackenzie asked if SAPS did not respond to other requests and concerns. He asked how many of the 150 police stations were visited by DoCS, and how many are properly resourced.

Mr Mackenzie asked if there has been a reduction of crime where ‘Walking Buses’ have been introduced, and how resources are allocated since they appear quite skewed, such as 65% towards Khayelitsha and 35% towards Mitchells Plain?.

Mr Christians expressed concern that sometimes police do not accompany NHW. He asked what is behind increasing NHW if the police is not accompanying them.

Ms Lekker, referring to page 14 of the report, asked how the successes of the YSRP are measured. She asked if the programme captures the experiences of the youth, and what the probability is that there might be a pattern of negative behaviour.

Ms Lekker asked what kinds of services are offered at the programmes, and if beneficiaries give feedback.

Mr Morris responded that the National Minister of Police committed to making crime statics available to Ministers and Members of Executive Councils (MinMECS) on a quarterly basis. Mr Morris added that section 19 of the Community Safety Act requires that they do so. Release of crime statistics is awaiting a decision on how often these will be released. DoCS has hosted two sessions on the Policing Needs and Priorities (PNP).

Ms Han-marie Marshall-Van Zyl, Director, DoCS said that the CPFs are invited, as well as the cluster Chair, accredited NHW, partners, commanders, SAPS provincial office, legal services, the Department of Correctional Services, the Mayor, the Prosecuting Authority, and the  Liquor Authority are invited to PNPs.

Mr Morris said that reports are sent to the Standing Committee, detailing individual reports on police personnel. When these have not been provided, DoCS reports it. The National Secretariat helped devise a tool, and the Department’s detailed reports have been compiled on thorough inspections that have been submitted the Committee.

Mr Deon Oosthuizen, Director: Monitoring and Evaluation, DoCS confirmed that most of the 150 police stations visited by the Department have varying resources allocated to them, with 85% of them being under-resourced.

Mr Morris said that the Department will come back to the Committee on the issue of allocation of resources. He said that money is allocated according to the budget, and priority projects play a role.

With regards to Mr Christians’ comments, he confirmed that NHW have the same power as private security. The Western Cape is the only province to formulate accreditation of NHW as certificates of accreditation are awarded. In poorer communities, NHW fulfil an important role.

Regarding successes of the YSRP, Mr Morris said that independent impact assessments are conducted. The holiday programmes do not target behavioural change but take youth off street and busies them. After each programme, a service provider must submit a report. A strict process of monitoring and evaluation ensues as payment of the final 20% are made after receiving reports.

Ms Lekker expressed concern about the murder rate in Nyanga, and asked what the Department is doing to deal with this, and asked why CPFs are not participating in the Expanded Partnership Programme (EPP).

Mr Christians asked what the Department is going to do differently about overseeing the efficiency of SAPS.

The Chairperson asked whether the Department has any intelligence capacity.

Mr Morris said that the Department has no intelligence capacity and only receives information from CPFs when they ask what the five main safety challenges are. Other information is generic information.

The Chairperson clarified that he meant to say operational intelligence in relation to drug houses.

Mr Morris said that the law requires that the Department passes information on to SAPS. Regarding the performance of CPFs, the information provided is an overview, and the Department of Social Development owns that information. Regarding CPFs not participating in EPPs, the extra document handed out describes the amounts of money paid out to CPFs in 2017. These amounts have been increasing. Non-participatory CPFs are listed in that same document. Some have refused to sign the agreement, such as the Athlone CPF. The EPP is the measurement of functionality, and the Department has no authority to dissolve a non-functional CPF. The Department reports this to SAPS.

The Chairperson asked if the reasons for CPFs’ refusals to participate have been determined, and if there is any arbitration that takes place to encourage their participation.

Ms Marshall-van Zyl said that the reasons vary and are mostly related to who has been elected to the executive. Internal conflict in the executive makes CPFs dysfunctional, and others do not want to be accountable to the Department. A decision was made to put a protocol in place by the Department and SAPS, and the process is underway. If a CPF does not function properly, incremental steps are taken until the election of a new CPF.
The Chairperson commented that if a CPF is a statutory body, it is unlawful for them not to participate and to act as an autonomous organisation.

Mr Morris confirmed the Chairperson’s comments, citing Section 18 of the Police Services Act. He added that the Department has reached an agreement with SAPS to measure transparency between SAPS and the community.

Ms Amanda Dissell, Director: Policy and Research, DoCS said that the MEC has outreach programmes that focus on Gender Based Violence (GBV) and that the focus of PNPs for 2018 has changed to focus on four crime issues. Communities and organisations engaged have been engaged.

Mr Christians asked what the Department is going to do differently regarding police efficiency.  

Mr Morris responded that the Department will deal with the detail by going to the police and dealing with systemic problems such as under-resourcing problems. He added that the police are only one element of the criminal justice system. There are 1600 vacancies in the prosecutor’s office which is a gap in the criminal justice system. Therefore, prisons are 30% more full now than they were at this time in 2017. The Department will amplify programmes that it believes are working. A full audit of the 150 police stations is underway and will be complete by the end of the year.  

Ms Lekker asked why the standard operating procedure was not developed, and how many CPFs were capacitated. She also expressed that the Committee would like a progress report.

Ms Dijana asked why the Department only trained 1515 youth.
  
Ms Marshall-van Zyl responded that CPFs are capacitated by workshops, and they are allocated to field workers and regional workers who engage and assist them with implementation.

Mr Morris responded that the number of meetings attended is listed. Furthermore, the number of youths trained is determined by the budget. The Department has negotiated with Chrysalis Academy for capacity as Chrysalis now qualifies for extra funding.

The Chairperson asked whether monies can be claimed from Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs).  

Mr Morris confirmed that they can claim money back, and said that the Department is in consultation with the Department of Economic Development. The Department hopes to have all HODs from other provinces to look at the Chrysalis Programme because of its full-accredited programme offered.

Ms Dissell added that the standard operation procedure was an indicator from 2015, and the methodology has since been changed because the project plan constantly changed. The Department has safety reports for all PNPs from the last year, which are now on the Department’s website. Two consultative workshop sessions were held across all WOSA areas.

Ms Lekker asked whether there is feedback on how the WOSA initiatives were implemented.

Ms Dissell confirmed that monthly reports are received.

Ms Lekker asked how the Department will address the challenges that the NHW component experiences.

Mr Christians inquired about the impact of the advisory forum and why they were appointed.  

The Chairperson asked what their terms of reference are.

Ms Dijana requested the Department to provide details of the Security Resilience Scorecard and in which schools it was piloted.  

Mr Simeon George, Director: Security Risk Management, DoCS said that an implementation development plan was devised for the Western Cape Community Safety Development Act. The Department has identified personnel and resources, and has formulated an interim structure, therefore, those positions have been filled on an interim basis. Other elements of the Act allow for the facilitation of the application process. He added that it was registered as a risk on the Department’s risk register and would like to finalise the structures.

Mr Morris added that in the Community Safety Act and National Secretariat Act, additional functions have been allocated to the Department. Regarding the advisory committee, the extra hand-out entails the details of the members of the advisory committee. Terms of reference are set out in the Community Safety Act. Lastly, the emphasis should be on the legal functions.
 
Mr D Coetzee[HN1] , Director: Provincial Security Operations, DoCS explained that the Department was asked to come up with a risk-rating tool. Therefore, the Resilience Scorecard considers processes in the school system and provides risk ratings for schools. This determines assistance that they need from departments, and which surpluses are given to the school. An implementation is being piloted at approximately 56 schools with interesting statistics being measured around occupational health and safety, gang activity, and so forth.

Mr Morris added that a Safer School Priority Committee has also been established. Therefore, the tool is transversal.

Mr Christians asked how professional policing is determined, and if the Department does effective oversight. He commented that communities are not resilient, and criminal activities are still uncontrollable.

Mr Morris responded that the concept of professional policing comes from Chapter 12 of the National Development Plan (NDP), and only the Western Cape has an Act stipulating what is being done to improve professional policing. The Department is working with tertiary education institutions like the University of the Western Cape (UWC) to conduct research dealing with softer issues of professional policing.

Adv Pillay added that the Department sent the Committee the policy draft report which they would be happy to present.  

Mr Morris said that a common complaint is that police do not raid ‘shebeens’ and confiscate alcohol, however, systemic problems exist which include admission of guilt payments. The perception of the community that the police do nothing is not true. The Department is in consultation with the Chief State Law Advisor on the confiscation of alcohol.

Mr Mackenzie asked what the legal framework for repeat offenders is.

Mr Morris replied that the legal framework needs to change because it is not financially viable for police to confiscate liquor.

Ms Lekker asked how effective the programmes that form part of provincial policing functions are, and what is the impact on communities. She asked how much is spent on these programmes and why the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) budget has not been used to pay stipends to NHWs and CPFs.

Mr Morris responded that stipends are used and the EPWP grant too. Furthermore, equitable share has been used to pay for CPFs and the Department is willing to roll out to NHWs, but it does not want to pay individual stipends.

Ms Lekker asked why a stipend can be paid to Chrysalis youth but not members of CPFs or NHWs.

Mr Morris responded that that would not be financially viable.

Ms Dijana recalled that the municipalities are paying youth. She asked why they cannot pay NHWs.

Mr Morris responded that payment by municipalities happens in some cases, but the Department pays Chrysalis youth for the first 12 months. All the money received from the EPWP is used.

Ms Lekker asked whether programme four: Security Risk Management considers the safety properties during service delivery protests.

Ms Dijana requested that IYM reports be sent to the Committee and asked the Department to explain the reasons for the under-expenditure stipulated on page 49 of the report.
 
Mr George responded that risk assessments have been done on risks identified, and the Department will develop a mitigation plan. He added that the Department would like facility managers to own the risk and is willing to deploy a support team if needed. For the long term, the Department has along with Treasury developed a strategic procurement process to procure services as needs arise.

Mr Morris said that IYM reports are submitted to the Liquor authority, and the Committee should request these from the CEO of the Liquor Authority. Furthermore, underspending is due to the cost of employment and vacancies in the office of MEC.  

Ms Lekker asked what the role of the organisations is in promoting good relations between communities and the police. She asked if they only work on religious programmes, and if they are expected to report back on issues emerging in communities. She requested that the Committee be given the list of the 1000 organisations. Regarding paragraph five, she asked how many CPFs were delayed in submitting EPPs and what challenges were involved.
 
Mr Morris responded that registration on the database is voluntary, and PNP sessions are used for this purpose. He added that community structures should be engaged during times of peace.

Ms Marshall-van Zyl added that delays in payments for EPPs result when CPFs who must sign a new Trading Partner Agreement (TPA) every year and provide new original bank statements take time to submit these.

Ms Lekker inquired whether a memorandum or a contract between Departments and the organisations exists, or there is a register taken. She asked if there is a formal record.

Mr Morris responded that no formal memorandum exists and that the register is automated.

Ms Dijana requested that the Department provide the Committee with the findings of the stakeholder workshops and details of high-risk schools. Additionally, she asked which strategies have been implemented to prevent youth from joining gangs.

Ms Lekker asked how many complaints and compliments has the Department received.

The Chairperson asked whether the Ombudsman must release a report.

Mr Morris agreed to share the reports with the Committee. The President will be in the Western Cape on the first of November 2018 to announce the launch of specialised units. The extra pack includes an anti-gang strategy which gives insights on how these issues are dealt with. A national anti-gang strategy is required whilst the Western Cape provincial response is required, and an inter-provincial committee needs to be established.

Ms Lekker asked about the reasons for overtime pay (table 3.1.3, page 100) and the reasons for four vacancies not being filled (page 102).

Mr Morris responded that overtime is driven by security staff, which includes the deployment of security support when the MEC’s outreach programmes are done.

Mr George added that an overlap exists in security staff’s hours. Managing operations deployed is also included.

The Chairperson asked whether the Department has developed a type of ‘incident-based reserve’ of security, and whether this does not interfere with other security provides

Mr George confirmed there is a lot of structured intervention because the Department will go to areas it has not been to before and where security has not previously existed.

Ms Dijana asked why so many employees leave the Department, and how there can only be four vacancies.

Ms Dijana asked why contracts are not renewed, and what the ages of those who retired are.

Mr Christians asked whether the Department conducts exit interviews, because several employees provided no reasons for leaving the Department.
 
Ms Lekker requested that details be provided on the reasons for termination and asked what the impact of this on the Department’s work was.

Mr Morris responded to Ms Dijana by referring to Table 3.4.4 on Page 107. Reasons for leaving include further studies, health problems, employment opportunities and insufficient progression possibilities. Exit interviews are conducted, but are not compulsory. Three people who left the Department were under disciplinary matters. He does not know the exact ages of those who retired, but no one could retire early. They all qualified and were older than 56 years old, therefore, the Department did not have to pay any penalties.

The Chairperson said that if the persons who had disciplinary charges against them resigned, their disciplinary charges would fall away, unless they had criminal charges against them.

Mr Morris confirmed this. He added, if the person wants to return, the disciplinary procedure would be restarted.

Ms Lekker commended that if there are people who left before disciplinary processes could be carried out, this is cause for concern. She requested that the Department provide the Committee with details on resignations in another closed meeting. She went on to ask what the grievances listed in Table 3.12.4 on page 132 were about and why these were not resolved.

Mr Morris responded that a few grievances refer to those not resolved at the end of the financial year. One dispute upheld was under unfair dismissal and the person lodged a grievance and Department had to pay R92 000 in damages. Furthermore, a number of disputes were dismissed and became a grievance because of disciplinary action taken, resulting in the resignation of the person.

Mr Titus[HN2] , Department of the Premier (DoTP) confirmed that all seven grievance cases were finalised. Three were related to performance related issued, another two were related to organisational issues, and those not resolved had to do with salary issues.

The Chairperson opened the floor to the public.

Mr Biko, a member of the public submitted a document.

Mr Biko mentioned that he had a meeting with Mr Morris and Mr Roberts from the City of Cape Town in 2017. They had promised to undertake a programme – a joint operation between the Department of Police and Department of Education – in Nyanga. He asked what the status of this operation was. The Department of Education informed him about the anti-gang programme but he wanted to know about the safe schools programme.  

Mr Morris asked how NHWs can be mobilised to provide security at schools and to partner with schools on safety. The Department has had a meeting in Khayelitsha as part of Programme ‘Whoza’. The City is present, and they report on programs and interventions monthly.

The Chairperson remarked that Mr Biko sets a good example for citizens and requested that DoCS, the Department of Education and Nyanga CPF report back with a progress Report in six months.

Mr Morris expressed his commitment to that and said that Mr Biko and the CPF would be invited to attend the next priority committee meeting.

Ms Lekker asked whether the Committee could also be engaged in Mr Biko’s request.

Ms Titus from the People’s Rights Party asked the Department whether they liaise with other departments and local government when they performs oversight.

The MEC said that when it concerns service delivery issues, the municipality is always present. The Department informs the Mayor, and ward councillors are engaged to accompany the Department.

The Chairperson recognises the amount of the work the Department gets through and congratulated the Department on its clean audit.

The meeting was adjourned.
 

 [HN1]First name not available on departmental documents and organogram. Only initial is provided.

 [HN2] Can monitor provide initial/first name of Mr Titus as well as his job title. It would make it easier to identify him