Departments of Public Service and Administration (in presence of Minister), Performance Monitoring & Evaluation, National Youth Development Agency: Strategic and Annual Performance plans 2014

Meeting report

Department of Public Service and Administration Strategic Plans and Annual Performance Plans 2014/15 briefing
Mr Collins Chabane, Minister of Public Service and Administration, noted that the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA or the Department) would focus, in its presentation, on budget issues.

Mr Mashwahle Diphosa, Director General: Department of Public Service and Administration took the Committee through the attached presentation. He said that the presentation would focus on budget expenditure and allocations and touch upon use of consultants.

He noted that the Department was governed by the democratic values and principles enshrined in the Constitution in chapter 10, section 195(1).  The essence of these was endorsed by adoption of what was known as the Batho Pele principles. Section 195(1) of the Constitution set out basic values and principles that the Public Service should adhere to, and the Public Service Act of 1994, as amended, contained other requirements.

Mr Diphosa highlighted five strategic goals to be achieved as stated in the 2013/15 strategic plan:
- an effective and efficient public service and administration
-capable, equitable and professional public service and administration
- appropriate legislative frameworks for public service and administration
- an ethical and clean public service and administration and
- improved public administration in Africa and internationally.

The priorities for the 2014/15 Annual Performance Plan were informed by the 2013/15 Strategic Plan, National Development Plan as translated into the 2014 -19 Medium Term Strategic Framework (MTSF), and the new organisational structure.

The Department’s adjusted budget was R892 731 million. Actual expenditure as at 31 March 2014 was at R809 103 million, with underspending of 20 628 million. Overall, 97.51% of the budget was spent. The (unaudited) expenditure on consultants for 2013/14 was at R22 554 million. Training streams and related lead courses costs R46 800 per person trained.

The Department ran the Centre for Public Service Innovation (CPSI) programmes which were to investigate, pilot, demonstrate and mainstream sustainable models and solutions for innovative service delivery. The CPSI promoted good governance in the public service, nationally and internationally, through sharing of best practices in public administration and financial management. It also entrenched a culture and practice of innovation in the public sector through innovation platforms and knowledge exchange products.

Mr Diphosa said that the National School of Government (NSG) was aligned to the 2014-19 MTSF. The NSG was mandated to build capacity through learning and development interventions and improve quality of training (with focus on both technical and specialists professional skills); to develop mechanisms to help departments to improve their performance on Management Performance Assessment Tools (MPAT) assessments; develop mentoring and peer review mechanisms for senior managers; support departments in attracting and develop young talent and in inducting new public servants, capacity building and professionalising supply chain management, and strengthen institutional capacity to identify and address possible cases of corruption.

Discussion
Mr J McGluwa (DA) stated that the Committee should recall that the purpose of this Department’s work was to improve the lives of the South Africans. He welcomed the new mechanisms relating to public servants doing business with the State. Nothing was said about the entities reporting to the Minister and the Department, how they would pilot formal recruitment schemes and retain employees, or how the departments would be reformed for improvement of service delivery.

Mr McGluwa found the word “accountability” disturbing, in relation to the investigation of corruption, because he thought it was not enough to say only that the Department would investigate corruption. The Department should trigger interventions in order to act against corruption. He also felt it should do more in respect of monitoring and evaluation. Mr McGluwa also stated that the DPSA should be doing more to improve the facilities for people with disabilities, citing some examples of useful equipment.

Mr McGluwa believed that performance was still poor because officials were, in most cases, not suitably qualified. He asked the Minister whether there was any plan to address that problem.

Ms V Mente (EFF) asked whether there were intervention mechanisms to prevent possible or identified weaknesses and duplications. With regard to the Department’s statement on the creation of a minimum level of public service and administration, she asked whether there was a monitoring tool that the Department would be using to identify the weaknesses, because there was a high level of ignorance in terms of monitoring and evaluation.

Ms Mente sought clarity  on whether the previous solution with the General Public Service Sectoral Bargaining Council (GPSSBC) was implemented and sought clarification on how the Department differentiated between the GPSSBC and bargaining chamber, or whether there was a causal link between the two.

Mr S Mncwabe (NFP) expressed his deep concern that allowing public servants to do business with the State would open the way to corruption and was ethically wrong.

Mr M Ntombela (ANC) stated that the Department was not clear on how it intended to improve the front line staff. These were the people who, on a daily basis, interacted with the public. If they were to be improved, this would improve the State’s integrity and carry with it a strong message: “We belong; We care; and We serve.” He remarked that good efforts were needed in this area. Also, the Department should work on or improve the mechanisms in place to ensure that people with disabilities (who are public servants) were cared for and that any departments not complying be dealt with.

Mr M Booi (ANC) asked when the Public Administrative and Management (PAM) Bill of 2013 would be signed into law. 

Mr M Dirk (ANC) supported Mr Ntombela and stated that the local government is an integral part to public services and it was the sphere where the Department should focus to improve the quality of service delivery.

Ms Z Dlamini-Dubazana (ANC) stated that this Department previously requested more money, but pointed to the fact that R2 million was unspent. She asked why the Department should propose an increased budget and whether the Department could provide reasons behind the request for an increase of budget. She remarked that the R2 million unspent illustrated poor utilisation of the allocated money. She noted that many departments alleged that, owing to poor salaries, the departments were losing their competent workers to private sector companies. CPSI should help the Department to find out ways in which the Department could retain its workers, especially doctors.

Ms Dlamini-Dubazana was concerned with the money allocated to the School of Government and actually asked who the clients were. She also asked that if DPSA funded the School of Government, what the Department of Higher Education would do if the Committee approved the DPSA’s spending of huge amounts of money on education. She sought clarification on why the LRRM Division requested R33 million whereas it had requested R40 million in the previous financial year.

Ms R Lesoma (ANC) said that a clean audit did not necessarily translate into effective performance. She requested the Committee to investigate how the Department monitored and evaluated bargaining council and bargaining chambers. She mentioned that there was a court ruling that should have been implemented by a municipality but the municipality was not complying with the ruling. She praised the idea of mandatory training days but enquired about courses that could be embarked on.

Ms Lesoma, referring to the section100 intervention, asked where there were proactive mechanisms to prevent such interventions. She said that the Department was organised in multi-programmes that were overlapping and this would make it difficult for the Committee to be able to assess whether one programme was performing and another programme was not, asking how the programmes would be managed without losing sight of their aims.

Ms Lesoma pointed out that more than 50% of budget went to administration and it seemed that it was not well balanced, and asked how the Department would manage not to go overboard under this programme. Finally, she remarked that the departments would be empowered if the performance contracts were concluded. These should include the remedies for malperformance and non-performance.

The Chairperson, with reference to the finalisation of the pending 2013 Bill, also asked whether the Committee could have any indication of when the Bill could come into effect. She expressed her concern about the failure to consult local government in the drafting process.

Minister Collins Chabane said that he would respond to the general questions that were cross cutting. After elections, there were some changes that affected most of the departments. There were some programmes that were moved from one department to another and these changes would indeed have an impact on the budgets.

The Minister asserted that the issue of duplication was not limited to the DPSA, but also found within other departments and entities. For example, some issues were, simultaneously, dealt with the DPSA, the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME) or the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs. However, the essential point was that there was a single government, divided into small organs for better and effective functionality. These departments’ functions thus complemented each other and there would be guarding against duplications to avoid unnecessary expenses, and although there may be overlaps, departments ought to carry out their functions without challenging one another, but rather working as team.

As regards these issues of duplications, he had a discussion with the Auditor-General to understand the implications. He suggested that the Committee should not dwell upon issues that it was critical for the Department to do; this was not the right time to criticise but rather it was time to look at how the problems could be solved. There were many commissions that were tasked to investigate the departments and unearth the problems. The Committee shared a responsibility to help the DPSA to find solutions to the problems. The Department was not merely to focus on the identified problems but also to detect some other issues that might affects its functionality or improvement of services. The Department assisted the provincial and municipal governments to improve their services and that was where the Committee should rather focus, to assist in finding ways in which services can be improved.

With respect to performance contracts, the Minister responded that there was a need to change the content of performance contracts to see whether they would, at least, reflect the outcomes. That would apply from the Director General downwards. There were still questions concerning the content, of what exactly should be included in the performance contract. The performance contract did not mean that an individual would directly be held accountable if he/she was not performing in conformance with his/her performance contract. However, it would resolve some issues related to the delegation of power, for example, how could duties and functions be delegated to the police station office or police commissioner? What are the decisions can be made or not? The Minister said that the delegation of functions would be also crucial in strengthening the performance contracts, due to the fact that such developments would lead to accountability.

Commenting on the School of Government, the Minister responded that it was a good thing to invest in education. It should be noted that there was a workforce shortage in South Africa. Irrespective of this, it was highly unlikely to find other departments having skills enhancement project. In developed countries, departments also focused on breeding a new generation of workforce and having a capacitated workforce. The private sector did so, and public sector departments should also engage in this debate to unpack where the Department should be spending money, and whether education might be included in that. The Public Service Sector Education and Training Authority (PSETA) was an entity that helped the Department to educate, and trained public servants to meet the current and future needs. The School of Government helps the Department to have qualified civil servants.

The Minister stated that the Committee should be patient in regard to the Bill, which had been sent to the President for signature. He reminded the Committee that other legal issues must be considered, such as, for example, whether it was constitutionally compliant.

Mr Justice Kgoedi, Director: Public Service Commission stated that the Public Service Commission (PSC) had 11 Commissioners. The money spent by PSC was on remuneration of employees and monitoring and evaluation, and research projects. Any unspent money was returned to the National Treasury.

Mr Diphosa answered the comments on public servants doing business with government, stating that there might be challenges but it was not always illegal for public servants to do business with government.

The Minister was excused.

Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation: Strategic Plans and Annual Performance Plans 2014/15.
The Chairperson noted at the outset that the Committee should have been briefed by the Minister or Director General and neither was present. Ms Gasa Nolwazi, Deputy Director General, was present to give the briefing. She wanted comment from the Committee whether she could be permitted to proceed, or whether the briefing should be postponed. The underlying issue was that Ms Nolwazi may not be in a position to answer questions. She suggested that perhaps the briefing should be allowed, that questions be noted and asked, but that they should only be answered at a meeting at which the Minister and Director-General would be present – namely, that for adoption of the budget.

Ms Lesoma objected. She said that Deputy Director General could brief the Committee only if there was a letter stating that the Minister’s or Director-General’s duty and responsibility to brief the committee were delegated.

This view was seconded by Mr S Motau (DA), Ms Mente, Mr McGluwa, Ms Dlamini-Dubazana, Mr M Dirks (DA) and Mr M Cardo (DA).

Mr S Motau (DA) said that it was disappointing to see that the very leaders that should lead by example were breaching the norms and standards established by them. He was concerned that if the Committee took the briefing now, the questions would not be answered.

Mr McGluwa said that the Minister was an accountable officer who should be present during the briefing and who could respond to the questions.

Mr M Cardo (DA) cautioned that the Committee should set a balance between accepting the absence of the Minister (or DG) and setting a bad precedent. A clear message should be sent to the Minister or DG that the Committee was an organ of the State that must be respected.

Ms Dlamini-Dubazana said that there was no point in briefing the Committee now if questions would not be entertained.

Mr Dirks expressed his deep concern about the absence of accountable officers who should, in principle, report to the Committee. This was not the first such incidence, and he believed that the meeting be postponed at this point and send a message that no briefing could be made in the absence of the Minister or Director General (DG).

Ms Nolwazi apologised on behalf of the Minister and the DG. She stated that the leadership of the Department had recently returned from attending a meeting in Guinea, but on their arrival in South Africa, the Office of the President had notified the Minister and Director General to attend a President’s meeting. She presented a letter to the Chairperson, delegating power to her to brief the Committee in the absence of the Minister and the DG.

The Chairperson read the letter to the Committee and requested the Committee to focus on the brief.

Ms Nolwazi was requested to proceed with the briefing. She thanked the Committee for its understanding.

Presenting an overview on the work on of the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME) she noted that the DPME had a budget of approximately R200 million and had approximately 200 staff. From a practical viewpoint, it had to be strategic with its monitoring and evaluation work and make best use of its resources. It partnered with the Offices of the Premiers for implementation of performance monitoring and evaluation (PME) programmes, and had collaborated closely with National Treasury, DPSA and the Office of Auditor-General.

The focus of the Department included:
- Planning and monitoring and evaluation for priority outcomes
- Monitoring management performance
- Front-line service delivery monitoring
- Other Department work.

As regards planning and monitoring and evaluation for priority outcomes, there were 12 outcomes in the 2009-2014 strategic plan, including performance agreements between the President and Ministers and delivery agreements in the context of cross-departmental and inter-sphere plans. Amongst others, there was deep assessment done of the design, efficiency, effectiveness, implementation or impact of programmes, to identify necessary improvements. In the context of the national evaluation plan, the Department completed 38 evaluations, including those still underway, and six to eight would be completed in the following month. Two provinces and three departments had evaluation plans in place and the DPME was working on expanding this programme.

There were established monitoring management practices in all national and provincial government departments, known as Management Performance Assessment Tool (MPAT). The MPAT aimed to assist the departments to improve the quality of their management practices.

With respect to the front-line delivery monitoring, the Department conducted unannounced visits to front line services, including police stations, clinics, home affairs offices, and social grants offices and conducted interviews with citizens, front-line staff and management. The Department focussed on service standards, queues, attitude of staff, cleanliness of facilities and so forth. Over the last two years, about 400 sites were visited. She reported that from over 190 000 calls received via presidential hotlines, 94% were resolved and the customer satisfaction survey was still under way. The DPME had introduced the piloting system of citizen-based monitoring.

Ms Nolwazi moved on to the detail the budget and expenditure. The funds allocated were R96 202 million in 2011/12, R174 159 million in 2012/13, and R192 745 million in 2013/14. There was an increase of 81% in 2012/13 and 10.7% in the 2013/14 financial years respectively. 96.5% of the 2011/12 budget was spent, 92% in 2012/13, and 99.5% in 2013/14. Money was spent on Monitoring and Evaluation Policy and/or capacity building, FSDM and hotline, MPAT, Evaluation and research, local government, outcomes support, and administration.

She indicated that the Department’s work was affected by funding constraints. For that reason, only a limited number of staff could be employed.

She concluded her briefing by thanking the Committee for being given such an opportunity.

Discussion
Mr Booi said that the Committee was not satisfied that DPME was meeting its responsibilities and being transparent. He requested the DPME to assist the NYDA to be an efficient and effective agency. The NYDA’s spending ought to be clear.

Mr Ntombela asked Ms Nolwazi to brief the Committee on the progress of the provinces.

Ms Mente sought clarification why the Department was seeking money to develop website while there was other efficient and accessible mechanisms within the Senior Management structure. She said that a large number of the people would not have access to website. 

Mr Cardo asked how DPME might deal with questions of duplication.

Ms Nolwazi said that she would not be responding to all the questions. She said that the NPC (National Planning Commission) Secretariat would have to get a budget vote. It had a team of 11 staff who were responsible for planning and monitoring. To manage the constraints, the Department had to maximise performance, utilising the workforce available. Of course, there was no immediate implication on human resources as the Department relied on what it had at the moment. The NPC sent to the Department a breakdown of the budget in respect of each sector.

With regard to the website, Ms Nolwazi explained that the web-based programme was a programme of action. When individuals logged on to the website, it could be seen how many logged on and when. The website could help the Department to monitor or to track, for example, the HIV programme. She agreed with Ms Mente that the website might not be available to and accessible by a large number of the people in rural areas but it could help in curbing criminal activities and tracings various programmes such as basic education and access to service delivery.

National Youth Development Agency (NYDA) Strategic and Annual Performance Plan 2014/15: Briefing
Mr Kathu Ramukumba, Chief Executive Officer: National Youth Development Agency, set out that the vision of the National Youth Development Agency (NYDA) was to be a credible and capable development agency for South Africa’s youth, and to mainstream youth issues into society and facilitate youth development in all sectors of society.

The strategic plan had five key areas for 2014/2015:
- economic  participation
- education and skills development
- health and wellbeing
- policy and research
- governance.

He commented that in regard to economic participation, the NYDA target was to achieve the establishment of 500 youth own business enterprise. It supported 38 475 young and established entrepreneurs through NYDA Business Development Support Services. 16 communities were provided with community development facilitation support and it had created 2 750 jobs through placement in job opportunities.

The Chairperson interjected at this point, and requested Mr Ramukhumba to go straight to the budget.

Mr Ramukumba stated that the total revenue for 2014/15 was R443 842 272, which comprised income donated by various stakeholders, and total expenditure was R461 574 332. The money was spent on salaries of general staff, executive and senior manager, board members, provincial advisory board and temporary staff (R189 026 218); the NYDA operations (R157 783 520), project disbursement and donor funding disbursement (R269 646 251).

Discussion
Ms Lesoma sought clarity on grant income. She wanted to know whether the NYDA invested such money to get interest. She asked for more detail of the workforce under the Chairperson and Deputy Chair, noting that R8 million and R2 million were spent respectively under these headings.

Mr Cardo, with reference to R10 million allocated to the office of Chair and Deputy Chair, said that he would like to see a detailed breakdown of the salaries and other expenditures. With regard to the sum of R5 million dedicated to the Youth Development Research Institute, he asked why the NYDA was not partnering with universities’ research institutes to minimise costs.

Mr Dirks asked about the loan book and composition of the debt, as well as how much was collected from debtors. He noted that s NYDA was very popular but people did not have access to it. He commented that its money should be used in such a way that millions of the youth had access and benefited. He knew of no one he knew in KwaZulu Natal and Pietermaritzburg who had access to the NYDA services.

Mr Mncwabe also stressed the issue of the inaccessibility of the services of the NYDA by the youth living in the rural areas. He stated that there should be offices in most places for the people to be able to have access to the NYDA. Services were restricted to the youth living in urban areas.

Ms Mente asked for more detail on economic participation, and how the allocation of budget for the rural development programme and voucher programmes came about. The amount allocated to rural development appeared to be very little, suggesting that the NYDA had no interest in developing the youth in the rural areas. She sought an explanation of how R8 million would be spent on voucher programme and who would be the beneficiaries. She sought clarification on the funding criteria that were used when granting money to individuals, cooperatives and co-funding.

Ms Dlamini-Dubazana, with reference to the total revenue and total expenditure, sought clarification on why the total expenditure (R461 574 332) exceeded the total revenue (R443 842 274) and, if these figures were correct, where the money came from to spend more than was budgeted. She wanted to know why no financial officer from the NYDA was present to answer the Committee’s questions relating to the finances. She commented that the planning and development of the budget was very poor, and poorly tabled by the wrong person, and it was thoroughly confusing. It seemed that the budget was not well studied or prepared. The amounts requested were huge and the NYDA leadership could not explain how such amounts were calculated. For example, terms such as “special programmes” were used, contrary to what the Money Bills Amendment Procedure and Related Matters Act required. The NYDA should know that the Committee needed to know exactly how each cent would be spent. It was apparent that the NYDA was not putting money where it was needed. Again referring to “special programmes” she said that it would be difficult to conduct any oversight because the budget was not clear, and she wanted more precise details of what the special programmes in the office of Chairperson, Deputy Chair, and the Chief Operations Officer entailed.

Mr Yershen Pillay, Executive Chairperson, NYDA, responded that this was the first time NYDA had given a budget briefing to this Committee. The special programmes were related to the five key performance areas. They included, for example, programmes on art and culture, recreation, electronic media, website and so forth. The increase in the salaries was due to inflation, which was out of control of the NYDA directly, as well as labour costs.

Mr Kenny Morolong, Deputy Chairperson, NYDA, commented that the issue of accessibility was a major priority. So far, the NYDA had set up offices in all provinces and had 198 local offices. However, in most cases, the NYDA relied on partnership with municipalities and other stakeholders in order to function. Within the partnership framework, the NYDA worked with the youth coordinators based in the municipalities.

The Chairperson cut the NYDA answers short at this point. She remarked that it was not living up to the standards and practices of accountability. In whatever the NYDA did, it should be mindful of the interests of the 42% of the population it represented, and thus refrain from spending money as it wished, otherwise it would be difficult for this Committee to approve more funding. The Members of this Committee were agreed that the majority of the population had limited access to the NYDA services. She further remarked that the NYDA was a relevant agency but its leadership had, disappointingly, no focus. It was an embarrassment that the Chief Executive Officer was not able to do a presentation on the power point slides in line with the Committee’s requirements. This person was accountable for a lot of money and the position should be filled by a qualified person.

The Chairperson requested the NYDA leadership to go back and do some introspection. She was also disappointed that Minister was not there to witness the leadership’s ineffectiveness. Next time, the NYDA leadership should bear in mind that the members of the Committee were not clueless. Times had changed and the politics had to change; politicians were required to be knowledgeable or to have a particular expertise in order to take a right decision. She thanked the NYDA for its time but requested it to prepare for re-briefing the Committee to enable the Committee to vote on its budget.

The Chairperson said that further question sessions were needed for the NYDA and DPME before their budgets were approved.

The meeting was adjourned.