Strategic Planning Workshop; Committee Programme discussion

Meeting report

Consideration and Adoption of Committee Programme
The Chairperson briefly outlined the main issues that would occupy the Committee for the remainder of the year. A significant portion of the time would be allocated to scrutinising annual reports submitted by the Department and its entities. Time would also be aside for the Committee to have its strategic planning workshop. The workshop would give the Committee an opportunity to develop its strategic plan for the five-year term. Amongst other issues, the plan would incorporate the Committee's vision and make provision for oversight work. The Committee would also have to attend to the issue of job creation in view of government's commitment to create 500 000 new jobs by the end of December 2009.

The programme had been tentatively approved. Most of the meetings were scheduled for 09:00 despite the fact that the House preferred meetings to start half an hour earlier than that. Committees were expected to make use of afternoon sessions and the programme reflected this. Members were also expected to sign an attendance register whenever they attended meetings.

Members approved the programme without amendments.

Discussion about the Strategic Planning Workshop
Mr S Masango (DA) asked if the Committee had already dealt with the annual report of the Independent Development Trust (IDT). With reference to the dates set for the workshop (23 and 24 October 2009), he indicated that he could not attend, as he was already required to plan for by-elections in Mpumalanga on those dates.

The Chairperson replied that the Committee had already dealt with the strategic plan of the IDT and would consider their annual report in this session. He also asked Mr Masango to negotiate with his party to allow him to attend the workshop.

Ms N Ngcengwane (ANC) informed the Committee that she would be out of the country with the Portfolio Committee on Science and Technology on the days set aside for the workshop.

The Chairperson responded that this was understandable. If there were too many apologies, the Committee may need to look at other dates.

Mr L Gaehler (UDM) asked if the Committee could re-schedule the workshop to the following weekend.

The Chairperson asked if the Committee was comfortable with continuing without the two Members. At the same time, he concluded that the Committee would consider the alternatives proposed and finalise the matter later.

The Chairperson asked Members to give suggestions about where the workshop should take place.

Mr B Radebe (ANC) suggested that it must be held outside of Parliament but not far away from Cape Town. He suggested Stellenbosch or Gordon's Bay.

Mr S Masango (DA) advised that as a cost-saving measure, Members should consider staying at their homes in Cape Town and commuting to a venue nearby.

Mr C Kekana (ANC) responded that if the DA really wanted to make an impact on the expenditure, it should focus on the fact that 95% of the resources in the country were still owned by a small minority. The point of the workshop was to allow Members an opportunity to concentrate on the important issues with minimal distractions.

Mr P Mnguni (COPE) recommended that the Committee should follow the example of other Committees. If that was in line with the general trend, he would support it.

The Chairperson responded that some Committees had taken up to four days to do their strategic plan. They had done this in different venues outside of Parliament, partly for the purpose of bonding as committees. The funds were budgeted for- Parliament had budgeted R70 000 for committee workshops. If the budgeted funds were not spent, it would be a problem. This was a matter of spending the money allocated by Parliament to do what Parliament wanted committees to do- develop a programme that was credible, defensible and doable.

Mr T Magama (ANC) noted that the DA's “cheap political points scoring” on expenditure issues had been raised before. He argued that the basis for their contention was useless and baseless. The central issue was how the interests of Parliament would be best served and how the Committee could create an environment conducive to having the best product possible. This issue was fundamentally different from the DA's cheap politics, adding that if one considered the way the DA spent money in areas where it had power, they were being hypocritical.

Mr Radebe responded that the debate was misplaced. It was a general trend that private enterprises and international governments held their strategic sessions outside of the workplace, as long as this was done within the budget.

Ms Ngcengwane added that they would be able to start earlier, finish later and be allowed more flexibility at an outside venue.

Mr Masango referred to the State of the Nation Address (SONA) statement that South Africa had to "cut the clothes according to the size of the cloth". The Minister of Finance - as a response to the recession, echoed this. This was not a case of cheap politics. Committees had to save as much as possible in the current economic situation.

Mr Kekana was also of the opinion that holding these sessions at outside venues was the general trend. He remarked that the country could be changed if the DA, which represented the interest of the rich and big capital, could address the issue of so few people owning so much of the resources of the country and the redistribution of these resources. Bringing fundamental change to the country was the purpose of the Committee's planning and the DA could assist in releasing resources for the poor.

Mr Magama replied that funds had been budgeted for this purpose. The Committee would not spend extravagantly and probably would not use the full R 70 000 allocation. He concluded that this point, in essence, nullified the argument and suggested that the Committee agree on the strategic plan.

Mr Gaehler agreed to hold the strategic planning workshop outside Parliament.

Mr Mnguni agreed on the basis that this was what other Committees had done. The Committee just had to stay within bounds on spending.

The Chairperson was mindful of the fact that the Committee had to use its resources prudently and intelligently. However, this should not be done to the point where it became paralysed and could not spend the money it was allocated.

In terms of what to discuss at the workshop, Mr Radebe suggested that the Committee look at the Expropriation Act. The Committee had an obligation to act and could not afford to leave the Act in its current form. Sections 25 (2)(a) and 25 (4)(a) of the Constitution clearly stated that in expropriation, public interest must also consider the country's commitment to land reform. In its current form, the Expropriations Act did not realise this Constitutional objective. If necessary, the Committee could conduct a study tour to Canada to learn how they have dealt with this issue.

The President had set a target of creating 500 000 jobs before the end of the year. These jobs would mainly be created through the Extended Public Works Programme (EPWP) and would be labour intensive jobs. If Government wanted to improve the economy, it would also have to expand the knowledge-based jobs, such as engineers, architects and land surveyors. It was necessary to ensure that these professions are transformed and that historically disadvantaged people are able to enter them. Finally, he was pleased that the Council for the Built Environment (CBE) would account to the Committee regarding their annual report.

Mr Kekana noted the estimate that South Africa had spent R 70 million on infrastructure. What percentage of this had been spent on labour? Standards and targets should be set for the amount of tenders awarded to labour. This should not be left to the discretion of business.

Mr Mnguni suggested that a draft document be circulated before the strategic planning workshop. New Members were not familiar with some of the issues that were being raised and such a briefing document allowed for experienced Members to pass on their thoughts.

Ms Ngcengwane stated that the Committee should raise the matter of the Government Immovable Asset Management Act (GIAMA) with the Department of Public Works. This should be discussed with reference to updating the asset register of government assets.

The Chairperson agreed that GIAMA was a very strategic issue for the workshop and this could be emphasised when the Committee dealt with the annual report of the Department.

Mr Masango asked what the Graaff Trust was and how money was allocated to this. There was no current reference to this.

Mr Radebe explained that the property in Acacia Park was loaned to government by the Graaff Trust and the Department of Public Works had to buy out this agreement in order to assume sole ownership of the Acacia Park property. He suggested the Committee should consider holding the strategic workshop after they had heard all the annual reports and had a better idea of what the important issues were.

The Chairperson responded that the Committee had time constraints. Parliament had set a deadline for Committees' strategic planning. It might not be possible to postpone the workshop.

Mr Kekana asked if the Committee could be briefed about what actually belonged to government, in terms of: property, livestock and mineral resources. He also wondered if this could be classified by province. This was important for government planning.

Mr Mnguni asked what the situation was with the government property in the former TBVC (Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Venda and Ciskei) states, adding that the Committee needed proper data on this issue. He noted that people were currently occupying property that belonged to government.

Ms Ngcengwane echoed the comments that the Committee needed to review the Expropriation Bill and GIAMA, as they contained serious issues. They had covered the national and provincial assets but had not dealt with the local government level.

Mr Gaehler responded that the Department of Public Works needed a proper asset register, especially for the TBVC states. Government assets were misused in some cases. This was important because the uncertainty about what government actually owned was found all over the country.

Regarding training, the Department of Public Works reported that it did training. This was not borne out by the amount of unemployed graduates (engineers, architects etc). The Committee had to address this. The Department should know how many students exited tertiary institutions with qualifications. This issue was made worse because this was happening in the poorest communities where parents often spent large amounts to educate their children and the children were then unable to work and earn a living. He agreed that the Committee needed more information on how tenders were awarded. The Committee should have a session with the institutions of architects and quantity surveyors to establish how these tenders were done.

Mr Kekana felt that they could not conclusively state that the country lacked skills in engineering. The goals for skills development were set in the Accelerated Shared Growth Initiative of South Africa (ASGISA) and the Joint Initiative on Priority Skills Acquisition (JIPSA). South Africa had a growing economy and could not continue this growth without engineers. The JIPSA goal was 1000 engineers per year. Currently South Africa produces ± 500 engineers per year. Engineers were very strategic people as they created development and jobs. He felt that the Committee should call the Engineering Council of South Africa to discuss apprenticeship. He added that the Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs) did not address what they were intended to: upgrading people's experience and helping them become qualified. Perhaps government could consider running SETA and apprenticeships concurrently. They also had to address the continued exclusion of black people from these professions. They should not have a system that perpetuated the old system, albeit in a more subtle way.

The Chairperson replied that the discussion was a good prelude to the strategic planning workshop. It also showed that the Committee could not do this on its own and would have to call for assistance from the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform on the land audit. The Department of Public Works had to help the Committee to review the asset register of local government. The Committee staff and researchers would assist in supplying Members with the relevant legislation.

It would be useful to look at JIPSA reports to evaluate skills acquisition in South Africa to date. On the subject of training, the Committee had to investigate the President's Graduate Programme and examine the work of professional councils in the relevant professions.
Members also had to familiarise themselves with the Expropriations Bill. This Bill would touch on the ideological matters of the Constitution and the property rights question and Members had to be ready for this discussion.

Regarding job creation, the Young Communist League had reported that 600 000 funded government posts were vacant. While the EPWP continues to fulfil an important role, it was nevertheless necessary to investigate the quality of jobs it creates and what opportunities people had after they had completed work in the EPWP.

The Chairperson concluded that the Committee staff would provide Members with a concept document based on the discussion. Members would then be able to make additions. The Committee could also follow up on the report of the Foreign Ownership of Land in South Africa. The issue was hotly debated, but never concluded.

Consideration and Adoption of Minutes
The Committee had four sets of minutes to consider: 11 June 2009, 23 June 2009,
1 July 2009 and 4 August 2009.

Apart from the minutes dated 23 June 2009, all the others were adopted without any amendments.

Minutes were tabled for the meeting that took place on 5 August 2009. It was decided that this could not be considered as minutes as there was no quorum for the meeting.

The meeting was adjourned.