Department of Public Service & Administration & Public Service Commission: briefing on Strategic Plan & Budget

Meeting report

Introduction
The Chairperson accepted the Department’s apology for the late arrival of documents because of logistic problems.  She asked that all mobile phones be switched off, as they caused demonstrable interference to the sound system in the room. 

Public Service Commission briefing
Ms Odette Ramsingh, Director-General, Office of the Public Service Commission, stated that the Commission derived its mandate from sections 195 and 196 of the Constitution. In line with the Constitution, the Commission is comprised of 14 Commissioners, five of which are appointed on the recommendation of the National Assembly. One member is appointed from each of the nine provinces, after nomination by the Premier of the province. The Commission was accountable to the National Assembly. It must also report on its activities in each province to the Legislature of the province concerned.

Ms Ramsingh said that the Commission was staffed by 234 individuals. This staff was charged with the oversight of approximately 1.3 million public servants. Staff morale was currently at a low level due to the organisation’s demanding work load. The Commission was already stretched to the limit and this situation would worsen with the implementation of the unified public service.

Ms Ramsingh stated that the PSC had established itself as a key role player in the promotion of sound labour relations in the Public Service through its involvement in grievance resolution and research into labour relations and practices.The PSC also conducted investigative research into public administration practices with a view to promote best practice and had produced numerous reports on this subject. The PSC had since its inception been a flag bearer in the promotion of integrity and the fight against corruption (in the Public Service) and had created various mechanisms in support of this role. Cabinet requested the PSC to manage the National Anti-Corruption Hotline (NACH), which was operationalised on 1 September 2004. Over the years, the NACH had generated a steady stream of corruption and service delivery cases. In total, since its inception, 6578 corruption cases were referred to national and provincial departments. Implementation of transformation was a major challenge. Recognising that Batho Pele was the central policy framework for transforming public service delivery, the Public Service Commission had   conducted a series of evaluations on the implementation of the individual principles of Batho Pele. One of the mechanisms that the Public Service Commission used for this purpose was its programme of Inspections of service delivery sites.

Ms Ramsingh drew attention to the PSC’s study of public servants personal financial status. The financial disclosure framework of senior managers in the Public Service was managed by the PSC.  The purpose was to promote transparency and to avoid potential conflicts of interest. As at 31 March 2009, a total of 7127 forms (85%) were submitted and 1279 forms (15%) were outstanding. Following a process of consultation between business, civil society and government, largely facilitated by the Public service Commission, the National Anti-Corruption Forum (NACF) was established in 2001. The PSC as an independent body was appointed as its secretariat and during 2008 was instrumental in hosting the third National Anti-Corruption Summit

The Auditor-General had given the Commission an unqualified audit report the previous year. The PSC had continued to be exemplary in the management of its financial resources. It was clear from the demands being placed on the PSC and its resources that the strategic role it played was increasingly being recognized and the value that it added was being appreciated. Budgetary constraints would have to be managed by the Commission and would impact on its ability to execute its role and functions. The following strategies would  have to be considered: a freeze on the filling of critical posts; stricter application of the Performance Management and Development System in dealing with the consideration of merit and cash awards for outstanding performance; reduction of projects on the work plan;  limited outsourcing  or  none in respect of projects; cutting down on travel and  subsistence expenses; almost entirely eliminate funding for international trips; reducing  telephone and cellular telephone expenditure; limiting external training; and limiting catering.

As part of re-organising the structure of government in order to make it more efficient and service delivery oriented, President Zuma in May 2009 appointed a Minister in the Presidency responsible for performance monitoring and evaluation. The overarching purpose of the Ministry would be to track the performance of government and to provide timely advice to the executive regarding areas that need intervention. The PSC believed that this development was accompanied by important opportunities for raising the bar in monitoring and evaluation and for strengthening accountability of performance. It would however, be important to ensure that overlaps between the work of the Unit and that of the PSC were obviated. There was also the possibility that as the new unit took up its task; it might need to collaborate with the Commission, including requesting the PSC for assistance with some of its monitoring and evaluation products.

Discussion
Ms A Dreyer (DA) asked about the senior managers who had not submitted financial disclosures as required.

Professor Stanley Sangweni, PSC Chairperson, admitted that the disclosure framework was a difficult area to manage. A regulation under the Public Service Act provided that senior management must make such disclosures to their respective Minister first.  It was the function of the executive to ensure that these disclosures were made, since it was in execution of the regulatory framework. The onus was therefore on the respective Director-Generals, and to even greater extent, the Ministers to ensure compliance. It was the Minister who submitted the disclosure forms to the PSC for scrutiny. The Commission viewed this matter in a serious light and recommended that disciplinary action be taken against senior management staff that failed to or were otherwise unable to respond to disclosures.

Ms Dreyer asked if the PSC charged departments for the work that it did for them.

Professor Sangweni responded that there was no provision for the Commission to levy any charges for its services, investigations, or any work that it did for the department concerned. He believed that the Auditor-General was able to levy charges for services rendered, because that was provided for in the statutory instrument under which he operated.

Ms Dreyer asked about the Commissioners' terms of office.

Professor Sangweni noted that this was a valid concern in the light of current debate surrounding the South African Broadcasting Corporation. There were two positions that were due to become vacant at the end of June. As required by the Public Service Commission Act, the Committee was required to send its recommendations to the Speaker of the National Assembly who would then forward these to the President, who would in turn make the appointments. Professor Sangweni noted that his term of office would expire in the near future, and cautioned that the Commission would be in a similar position to that of the SABC board if his position was not filled after the 30 June 2009. Furthermore, he noted that the Commission did not have a deputy chairperson and that there were vacancies that needed to be filled in three provinces.

Mr E Rasool (ANC) believed that the citizen satisfaction surveys should distinguish between three types: citizens, clients and users, and lobby groups.

Professor Sangweni found the suggestion useful since the Commission had not considered such an approach before. The Commission indeed had received some comments on its work from interested organizations or individuals, which could be categorised as lobby groups. There were indeed many loopholes in the citizen satisfaction surveys and it would be worthwhile to take the comment into consideration.

Mr Rasool asked about the emerging Monitoring and Evaluation Commission, within the Presidency, as opposed to the PSC. The only difference that Ms Ramsingh had made between the two was the independence of the PSC. It was a R19 831 000 item in the Commission's budget. He asked if it was not the time to rethink its mandate with 'the hands and feet capacity and the eyes and ears capacity' being developed in government.  He asked if a supervisory role for the PSC might not be a more appropriate role that a 'hands and feet role' in that area and if the budget should not be re-orientated in a different way rather than asking for more money, and for the Commission to take the lead rather than in a sense becoming less relevant as time went on.

A member of the PSC delegation explained that the Commission had a broad mandate. There were always questions about whether it had done what was required of it cost-effectively or if it could have done things better. At present the PSC could not focus on becoming a specialist commission. Government had announced the establishment of a monitoring and evaluation instrument. Monitoring economic trends would be part of its scope. The PSC would assist this structure in its conceptualisation of monitoring and evaluation. It would be possible to say how this monitoring and evaluation should be done only when government had determined exactly that which it wanted to monitor and evaluate.  The Commission had issued a report on supply chain management.  This had examined the way in which tenders had been awarded. It might be asked if the Treasury could contribute to developing a monitoring tool for such processes. It was not possible, he told Mr Rasool, to obtain a straightforward answer.  It was necessary to discuss, on the basis of experience, how far one could go.

Ms L Odendaal (COPE) said that it was a matter of grave concern that some 1 279 senior staff were failing to submit a required regulatory document. Additionally, she expressed serious concern about the ongoing service delivery challenges and suggested that the Committee provide insight on how to manage these issues better in the Department. It was time for the Department to take responsibility and accountability for not providing the correct information to the PSC for them to be able to do their oversight work. She thanked Ms Ramsingh and looked forward to participating in the Committee's oversight function.

Department of Public Service and Administration Briefing
To begin with, Dr Roy Padayachee, Deputy Minister for Public Service and Administration (DPSA), made reference to President Zuma's State of the Nation Address, wherein he called upon everyone 'to seize the moment'. He explained that the Department's medium term strategic plan fitted well with Government's overall strategy of eradicating poverty and making sure that people had a sustainable livelihood. The Deputy Minister urged the Committee to expedite the processes for appointing a new chairperson for the PSC board, to replace the current chairperson whose term of office would end on 30 June 2009. He did not want a situation similar to that of the South African Broadcasting Corporation's board to arise.

He noted that the debate in the PSC on resources was quite an instructive one. To some extent it outlined the challenges faced by government. Government was acutely aware that it would be a challenge to deliver on its outcomes given that the world was in the midst of an unprecedented economic crisis, precipitated by the collapse of the world's financial systems. The Department’s main task would be to build an effective state machinery able to support the delivery of key outcomes. The state must be participative, interactive and accessible – easy to reach and responsive to building a caring society. The President had made an appeal to all South Africans to work together, irrespective of political persuasions. All South Africans had a patriotic responsibility to deliver and build a state that met the needs of all the people. In conclusion, he once more quoted the President: “so long as there were South Africans who died from preventable disease and in many other ways, so long as there were people who were unable to find work, one could not rest”.

Professor Levin, Director-General: DPSA, apologised for 'logistical blunders' that had delayed the arrival of his Department's report. For the benefit of the new Members, his presentation provided background into the establishment of the Department, its scope and control and its budget. DPSA was the central Department within the Ministry's portfolio and provided policy support to the Minister. The Department was also responsible for the Public Administration, Leadership and Management Academy which facilitated the training of public servants. The PSC was an independent constitutional body, which drew its budget via the Minister of Public Service and Administration.

With the onset of democracy changes occurred leading to the PSC’s classification as an independent body, with a role of monitoring and evaluation. The Ministry for Public Service and Administration and the Department were newly established and were tasked with policy matters, legislation and implementation.

Increasingly over time, the Department had evolved beyond policy making to providing hands-on support in the implementation of policy. One of the key issues that the PSC had raised in its presentation was compliance with the Public Service Act and Public Service regulations. One hoped for the emergence of a greater sense of the complementary roles of the Portfolio Committee, the Public Service Commission and the DPSA in order to ensure compliance with the various prescripts of the Public Service Act and Regulations.

The Department of Public service and Administration derived its mandate from different sources – the Constitution of 1996; various manifestos of the ruling party; the State of the Nation Address; the Medium Term Strategic Framework; the various decisions made by Cabinet in its May 2009 lekgotla; Cabinet decisions; various directives of the Minister; and legislative mandates, in particular the Public service Act of 1994 and to some extent the SETA Act and the responsibilities that the Department had with respect to that Act. The Constitutional values on public administration were very much part of the core business of both the Public Service Commission and the Department of Public Service and Administration. These were detailed in the presentation, including in particular the need to encourage people to participate in policy making, and the issue of representativity. The right number of personnel must be placed in the correct positions. Where this was not the case, government should have the means to implement corrective measures, through redeployment or retraining where warranted.

The structure of government had been reviewed. A new configuration of ministerial portfolios was implemented from 10 May 2009. The Department of Public Works and Administration was co-ordinating the new macro structure of the state. It was assisting with the legal and technical work required to effect name changes and transfer of functions. It worked closely with the National Treasury and the Department of Public Works. One faced changes of name, and splits whereby departments and even ministries were being divided. Also there were new configurations where, for example, functions such as forestry, which used to be part of the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, and was now part of the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries.

The Department aimed to develop a prototype to e-enable six services to benefit the poor: application for ID; birth registration; foster care grant; application for pensions; application for maintenance; and notification of death. It further aimed to connect 52 Thusong Service Centres to a centralised information and communications technology (ICT) infrastructure and install 45 new General Service counters. It was also intended to report on ICT expenditure patterns in the public service and make recommendations on strategies to save or reduce costs and expenditure.
 
The Department intended to report on the number of call centres, the utilisation and optimisation of infrastructure and spending, and on a consolidation strategy to create efficiency and better service delivery. It sought to develop an architecture blue-print for information technology (IT) in government, and develop a Government Wide Information Security Governance Framework. 

The Department recognised the need to hold departments to account for failure to meet targets for employment of persons with disabilities. Representation of women in senior management had improved to a level of 34.4%. However, the target was 50%. The Department believed that target was attainable if there was proper management of the recruitment process.

Discussion
Ms Dreyer thanked the Deputy Minister for his presence at the meeting. She had never before witnessed the attendance of a minister or a deputy minister in a portfolio committee or pubic accounts committee meeting. This was how it should be done. She hoped that the Minister would attend further meetings of the Committee. She said that it was not good enough that the failure of senior managers to return disclosure of financial interests was merely 'being discussed'. She wanted to know what specific steps had been taken against such senior managers.

Professor Levin stated that Cabinet was looking at how to respond to and manage the declarations of interest. It was the responsibility, as had been pointed out by Professor Sangweni, of individual executive authorities to obtain this information. Likewise individual ministers also had the responsibility to take action against those who did not submit disclosures. It was neither the responsibility of the Department not of the Commission. The responsibility of the Department was merely to ensure that there was a system which was as foolproof as possible, which would ensure that everyone concerned signed the declaration on time and submitted it. The Department was currently examining ways of modifying this framework.  However, under the present framework, action must be taken by the ministers concerned. The Commission did report on it because the disclosures were housed by the Commission.

Ms Dreyer noted that she had not seen the Department’s annual report. In the absence of an annual report, she asked what the Auditor-General (AG) had found regarding the Department's financial statements.

Professor Levin replied that the Annual Report for 2008-2009 was not yet finalized and that the AG was still completing his work. With respective to the previous financial year (2007-2008), the Department had achieved an unqualified report with no matters of emphasis. He would not speculate on the findings of the 2008-2009 report but was confident of a positive assessment.

Ms Dreyer found the Department's achievements very disappointing. It was 'all process, process, process'. She failed to see any tangible benefits to the citizens of South Africa. With regard to the call centres, she wanted to know how many more calls the Department could handle than before.

Professor Levin explained that much of the Department's work was to help gain understanding of what the problems and issues were so that the relevant parties concerned could intervene in their different ways. So when the Department completed a report, as Ms Dreyer had said, the Department did complete a report, but it was at least a start to addressing a problem. It was true that the Department did need to start measuring the impact of the various reports and interventions.

Lastly, Ms Dreyer pointed out that the PSC’s budget was insufficient. She observed that the Department’s budget did not mention any allocation to the PSC.

Professor Levin replied that the PSC’s budget was a separate vote. The budget that the Department had presented was for the Department with only the Public Service Sector Education and Training Authority’s (PSETA’s) and the Centre for Public Service Innovation included. 

Mr A J Williams (ANC) thanked the Department for its input, but said that in the course of door-to-door election campaigning it was obvious that there was a serious problem with service delivery on the ground. It would be a good idea if the middle and senior management, including the Director-General, of both the Department and the Commission, go on a door-to-door campaign and take with them to both the rural and urban areas the community development workers just so that they could get a real understanding of how difficult life was. They should visit the areas where there were no service centres within walking distance. The Department's reports were very attractive, but the reality was that 'service delivery on the ground was in serious trouble.' picture, he said, was not as happy as Professor Levin had implied. Secondly, he asked if it were not possible to engage directly with the larger unions.

Professor Levin agreed with Mr Williams on the need to get senior managers into the field. There was a project incubated in the Department to take senior managers to the coalface of service delivery for a period of time during each performance cycle. He agreed however that senior managers should have more interactive time with communities to understand better the service delivery challenges.

Mr Rasool believed the ability to act on the complaints was the critical matter. It was important to be able to direct the complaints to the relevant people and then to act upon them.

Professor Levin replied that Mr Rasool had made a fundamental point. It was not just about reviewing the centres but ensuring that there was follow up when complaints were made. The Department was focusing on the cost-effectiveness, and this related to Ms Odendaal’s point (see below).

Mr Rasool referred to an investigation that was being conducted by the AG. He enquired whether the issues (under investigation) were originally uncovered by the AG or by the government agencies – because that would show the matter in a completely different light.

Professor Levin replied that the AG had been working on this study since 2005. He had uncovered a major problem which needed to be dealt with.

Mr Rasool was pleased that there was a 2% representation of persons with disabilities, but said that the Department should 'front-up' to ensure compliance. He echoed Ms Dreyer's thanks for the Deputy Minister's presence, and also thanked the Department for its presentation. He believed that the Public Finance Management Act gave more power to the Ministry of Finance and to the Treasury than to the Department to enforce compliance. 

Professor Levin said that this raised the question of to what extent the Department could be expected to provide a support role as well as an oversight role.

Ms Odendaal asked how many call centres were serviced by outside service providers, and how many jobs were created within the public sector itself. She expressed concern that many rural areas did not have access to call centres. Many of the individuals who lacked access to structures had probably never seen a call centre.

Professor Levin agreed that call centres serviced by outside service providers could result in exorbitant costs. Due to this concern, a government portal had been established, called the Batho Pele portal. The Department was currently finalising an assessment of this.

Ms Odendaal said that the Director-General had referred to the Department of Home Affairs and to ID documentation. She had found it quite frightening on the campaign trail how many senior citizens had been unable to obtain their ID documents. So the statistics one would think needed to be re-examined. The senior citizens needed ID documents in order to obtain their social grants.

Professor Levin said that the Department of Home Affairs should be commended on the progress it had made thus far with accelerating the delivery of ID documents.

The Chairperson said that it had been a fruitful and worthwhile meeting, and thanked the Deputy Minister, the Department, and the PSC. The issues that had been raised would need further work by the Committee, the Department and the Commission. Further questions from Members would be forwarded in writing. The Committee was looking forward to its consideration of draft legislation for the unified public service.

The meeting was adjourned.