Chairperson, hon members, let me apologise on behalf of the Minister for Public Service and Administration. She is abroad and has asked me to present the Bill. I also need to apologise that I will not be able to make closing remarks on this debate, because I have another commitment at 3 o'clock.
I trust that we all agree that effective service delivery requires an efficient and accountable administration devoid of red tape, with strong anticorruption and compliance measures. The regulatory framework for the administration should, whilst embedding stability and certainty, also facilitate dynamic innovation to allow for the use of new institutional and technological instruments to enhance the provision of services.
The Bill before you today for the second reading provides an opportunity for Parliament to strengthen the democratic values and principles governing public administration - as contained in Chapter 10 of our Constitution - with respect to national and provincial departments.
These values and principles include a high standard of professional ethics, efficient economic and effective use of resources; a development-orientated public administration; impartial, fair, equitable and unbiased provision of services; and responding to the people's needs.
We need to recognise that certain organisational and human resource practices in the current Public Service Act directly or indirectly hinder service delivery. In broadening access to services for the masses of our people, we must continuously identify innovative ways of delivering services. Currently some government functions are provided by national or provincial departments, away from the points of service delivery and without direct accountability and decision-making by those functionaries responsible for their delivering. Other government functions are provided by entities outside the Public Service without being directly accountable to a political functionary.
We have also come to recognise that compliance with Public Service prescripts does not meet the desired standards. The weakening human resource management results in time-consuming and costly litigation. Employees dismissed by departments for corruption-related and other types of misconduct are often reappointed by other government departments soon after dismissal, which means that misconduct does not carry effective sanctions. Employees suspected of transgressions sometimes resign and are appointed in other departments without disciplinary steps being instituted against them or, if they are instituted, they have been instituted without being sustained.
The primary aim of the amending Bill is, therefore, to improve the organisational and human resource framework for national and provincial departments to address these obstacles to service delivery. This includes facilitating the easier day-to-day administration of the Public Service Act by addressing certain legal difficulties, simplifying or clarifying several provisions, removing obsolete provisions and aligning the Act with other legislation.
The Bill proposes the introduction of a new institutional form, separate from departments but within the Public Service - a government component as well as specialised service delivery units ring-fenced within departments. The heads of government components will serve as accounting officers in terms of the Public Finance Management Act.
The component model is suitable for an institution with a unique identity that has specific measurable functions that can be logically grouped in terms of a particular service delivery model. Such a component may have original statutory functions or be assigned to delegate the statutory functions, or a combination of these.
The assignment of statutory functions of the executive authority to the head of a component, with accompanying shifting of accountability, is proposed to be subject to Parliament's approval. Government components may, however, not engage in socioeconomic functions to give effect to the rights envisaged in sections 26 to 29 of the Constitution.
A government component is partnered with a principal department, which will assist the executive authority or third department, that is the responsible Premier or MEC in the case of such an Office of the Premier, or a provincial department with oversight of such component.
The advantages of using this organisational form in the Public Service include the customisation of the administrative and operational arrangements designed to suit a particular service delivery environment, better governance through direct accountability and decision-making as close as possible to the point of service delivery which will be an added advantage.
Political heads will also have more direct control and influence over service delivery outcomes without the need to necessarily create entities outside the Public Service. While proposing this alternative service delivery model, it is important to stress that it is not intended to fragment the state. On the contrary, it responds directly to forms of fragmentation that have already occurred through the establishment of public entities. Indeed the government component model will also be an institutional mechanism to reincorporate some public entities, where appropriate and if required, into the Public Service. The responsible Minister or political head of that component could also, if required to, create an advisory board to advise on service delivery matters or to accommodate stakeholder interest.
In addition to the government component model, the Bill also proposes an enabling provision for the establishment of specialised service delivery units within departments. The features of these units are similar to those of government components except that they may, unlike such components, perform services pertaining to constitutional socioeconomic rights. Moreover, these units will operate within departments while government components will be separate accountable institutions outside departments.
Provision is also made that when the executive authority or head of the relevant department delegates human resource functions affecting specialised service delivery units, these functions must be delegated to the heads.
Subject to the Treasury's approval and special arrangements regarding accountability, the Bill also provides for compulsory financial delegations to the unit head.
To assist with the enforcement of the provisions of the Public Service Act, executive authorities are compelled to take disciplinary steps against heads of department transgressing its provisions and heads of departments to take such steps against transgressing employees. They are also required to report transgressions to the Minister for the Public Service and Administration and the Director-General of the department respectively.
The Minister for the Public Service and Administration may also report transgressing national executive authorities to Cabinet and transgressing provincial executive authorities, through the relevant Premier, to the provincial cabinet in question. That Minister must also annually report transgressions to the relevant committees of Parliament and of the provincial legislatures concerned.
A further important measure to improve compliance with the Public Service Act is the compulsory implementation by political administrative heads of the directions of the Public Service Commission regarding certain human resource matters.
The Bill also proposes the institution of disciplinary steps against the employees at their new departments for alleged transgressions at departments where they were formerly employed.
Anticorruption measures are to prohibit the re-employment of persons in the Public Service dismissed for specific kinds of misconduct. Examples of misconduct involving corrupt activities are also contained in the Bill. It is proposed that the prohibition on re-employment should endure for a stipulated period, and the different periods may be prescribed by regulation in respect of different types of misconduct.
A number of the amendments in the Bill will enhance employees' rights, which include compliance measures that extend to collective agreements. These measures will assist employees where departments fail, to the employees' detriment, to comply with collective agreements and other Public Service prescripts.
Provision is made for a fair process before employees may be transferred to other government departments in the public interest. An employee may make representations on why she or he does not want to be transferred. These representations must then be considered and weighed against the public interest, and that is to better serve the needs of the people.
Employees of government institutions outside the Public Service who voluntarily join a national or provincial department will be transferred in order to recognise their years of service and certain benefits, for example pension and leave credits.
Under the current Act employees need permission to undertake remunerative work outside of the Public Service. The Bill proposes criteria that the employer must consider when deciding whether to give such permission, namely that such outside work should not interfere with the relevant employee's functions or be in conflict with the code of conduct applicable to public servants.
Certain restrictions on political rights of employees are removed and employees are permitted to participate as candidates in elections. They may be candidates without resigning from the Public Service during the election period. Only when they are elected and accept such election will their employment in the Public Service terminate.
Provision for disciplining employees moving from one department to another will enhance the morale of compliant employees. That means that transgressing employees cannot avoid being disciplined by simply resigning and obtaining employment elsewhere in the Public Service. Similarly, the prohibition on the re-employment of employees dismissed for particular categories of misconduct, including misconduct relating to corrupt acts for a specified period, would assist the morale of honest and otherwise compliant employees.
If this Bill is adopted by Parliament and signed into law by the President, I submit that it will contribute to the efficiency and effectiveness of the organisational and human resource framework for national and provincial departments. This it will do by introducing new service delivery models and enforcement mechanisms, as well as by improving the day-to-day administration of the Public Service Act. While compliance in itself does not guarantee efficient and effective service delivery, it is a necessary step in ensuring improved performance, which is what all of us seek in public services. Indeed all the measures proposed in this Bill are designed to enhance governance, accountability and compliance that I am convinced will lead to better service delivery.
I would like to thank the Select Committee on Local Government and Administration for its vigorous engagement on the proposed measures in the amending Bill. Their participation was aimed at ensuring that these measures accord with the constitutional values and principles of public administration. I also thank them for facilitating public participation through the provincial legislatures.
As hon members are aware, government intends to propose draft legislation to create a single Public Service and administration in the three spheres of government for consideration and debate by Parliament during 2008. I urge all stakeholders to analyse the provisions of the draft legislation for the Public Service to ensure that interest groups and the general public are correctly informed about its scope and purposes. We should all debate this legislative initiative in a robust yet innovative and constructive manner in order to create the conditions for a better life for all our people. Thank you very much, Chairperson and hon members. [Applause.]
The Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces, Ministers present, colleagues, special delegates, comrades and friends, today is another milestone where this House is passing a Bill, a Bill that is aimed at building structures and systems that will accelerate the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals. As we all know, government in this country is the single biggest employer. It employs over a million people. Today, we are developing the rules of the game that must govern these more than a million employees; manage, co-ordinate and facilitate what has to happen.
As we all know, the development goals are about halving poverty and unemployment by 2014, but they are also there to ensure that we address a range of constraints in this Bill that include skills, the demands of the second economy, public administration and economic matters. These instruments are aimed at ensuring that we have a better Public Service; a service that is responsive and a service that is friendly to the people.
The state is enjoined constitutionally to ensure that high quality service to the people is delivered. The state has to find the most innovative methods and channels to deliver services within the system of government. The state should have a prerogative to optimally utilise resources in the most effective and efficient manner. The state is reliant on the strength and capability of systems of government in place to ensure successful implementation of a range of programmes designed to respond to developmental challenges.
The current delivery initiatives are hampered by weaknesses in the system. One of them is the continuing silo approach in the delivery of services, resulting in poor co-ordination, poor integration and therefore affects the collective efforts of government. There is a lack of protocol even when you want to co-ordinate services. There is no protocol that ensures that the approach of integration around service delivery is attained.
There is a lack of administrative integration and poor co-ordination between departments and spheres of government. There is an inconvenience to citizens because they have to travel long distances to get to many of the service delivery points. Research has shown that government institutions are not citizen-friendly and Batho Pele principles are far from being implemented as required. The question that we must ask ourselves is: Whereto from here?
The committee agrees to the Bill in as far as it addresses these issues that we believe are important: The creation of a strong centre of government that is in a position to hold service delivery vehicles together and to provide support, guidance and advice where needed; the creation of seamless and integrated service delivery through a single-window approach; the convenience to citizens, integrated service delivery platforms and front offices; the creation of a shared vision with a common culture of service delivery and a systematic sharing of knowledge, expertise, resources and best practices to preclude weak links.
Therefore, we believe that special payment regimes have to be developed so that we are able to attract scarce skills and not only attract them, but also retain them within the system. There should be an optimal utilisation of the limited resources underpinned by the creation of government institutions that are accessible, efficient, representative, accountable, sustainable and responsive to the service delivery needs of people.
Before we came to the Chamber, we had a meeting with the Department of Defence. They are raising an issue of interoperability between systems. They are unable to ensure that systems speak to each other in terms of information and communication technology. Not only that, they are also getting a lot of qualified audits because of systems that are obsolete and old, 25 years old, but at the same time these systems are not helpful in ensuring accountability in relation to resources.
We believe that this Bill is going to create a platform where these things are addressed. Among others there is the issue of mobility of staff. Staff members can be taken wherever they are required. For example, one can take a director-general from a particular department and make him a municipal manager in another area, so that people are able to access skills that are required in a particular area where there is need. To us that is very important.
The police are putting that into practice. In Botswana this system is also in operation. When an official is employed by government he knows that he is employed by the state and not by the department. An official can be moved wherever the need is.
In conclusion, I want to say that when the single Public Service is being discussed we'll require the department to involve the committee a bit earlier. I also want to thank my colleagues for their contribution, which has been valued, but also thank the Ministry and the department for their insightful engagement with us and say that we are looking forward to the engagement, which will be robust, on the single Public Service. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr Chairperson ...
Jy moet mooi praat, hoor! [You should speak very nicely.]
Ek praat altyd mooi. [I always do.]
Chairperson, firstly I wish to thank the Minister and her department for the presentation and in particular, the Minister for attending our committee briefing on the Public Service Amendment Bill. The Bill seeks, amongst other things, to improve staff mobility arrangements for the Public Service and introduce government components as a new institutional form within the Public Service, as well as specialised service delivery units. It also seeks to enhance compliance with the Act through compulsory discipline of transgressors and reporting on such matters.
Government components have evolved from government agencies. A government component will only be established after a feasibility study has been conducted. It is not clear what its purpose will be as it cannot perform functions related to the delivery of a service such as housing, health care, food, water, social security, etc.
The Minister, through a regulation, may also establish a consultative body. This body will consist of prescribed employees. The connotation of these prescribed employees is open-ended and it is not clear who these employees are. This body will either be consultative or advisory. It would have been expedient to categorically say that the function of this body would take one form or other, that is, consultative or advisory and not either of these. Consultative would mean that the Minister would not act before she consults and they have given her a directive. Advisory capacity could mean that the Minister is not obliged to take the advice.
With regard to the functions of the specialised service delivery units, the functions are clear because the units can perform specific functions that would enhance service delivery of a department within a department. An executive authority may delegate human resource powers to the head of a unit and not to the head of department. The unit head operates on delegated powers.
The Bill also makes provision for the transfer and secondment of heads of departments. This is a political matter because the head of department executes policy of the government in a national or provincial department.
In all cases of the appointment of a head of department, a Cabinet committee comprising of the Minister under whom the head of department will serve recommends the candidate to the President. In the case of a province the procedure is different, as the Premier or MEC decides who this is going to be, because the province is another sphere of government.
This, of course, is a potential for conflict if the President were to transfer a head of department to a province where the Premier belonged to a party other than the President's political party. It might be said that the appointment of a head of department is an administrative matter, but this is not so. It remains a political matter.
Whilst the Bill is a good regulatory mechanism regarding conditions of service and service delivery, this Bill will be repealed soon after the draft Single Public Service Bill becomes law, as there will be bulk transference of sections from the Public Service Act and the Public Service Amendment Bill to the draft Single Public Service Bill.
As the hon Minister said, "You ain't seen nothing yet". The creation of a single Public Service is nothing more than placing the Public Service under one central control leading to a central bureaucracy. The DA would rather strengthen our local, provincial and national governments to improve service delivery.
More sinister, however, is the draft proposal being circulated of a Public Administration Management Bill, PAMB, which may become law in 2009. This Bill is set to curtail municipalities' autonomy by transferring decision- making to central government and bringing local public sector employees under Pretoria's control.
As the Minister said, and I repeat: "you ain't seen nothing yet". The DA cannot support the centralisation of power and a single Public Service, and therefore not the Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]
Chairperson of the House and my colleagues, following in the footsteps of my other colleagues, may I say that, as the legislature of Limpopo, having read and looked at the inputs made by the public and knowing pretty well that it is our function as politicians to make sure that we harmonise all our laws, we see this as one of the Bills which will be able, if passed, to take this country forward. If passed into law, the Bill will improve service delivery through the establishment of government components and specialised service delivery units within departments.
It will further determine employee candidates in the legislatures and municipalities. The Bill will require the exhaustion of internal remedies before external legal remedies in the case of disputes of a labour nature. This Bill, if passed into law, will also effectively address the question of employees who take pension from the age of 55 without losing pension privileges. It will also address the redeployment of people with scarce and special skills to where they are most needed by our people.
The Bill will also adequately address the changing of departments by employees without any negative effect on their pensions and salaries. The Bill, however, as it attempts to do, should clearly stipulate that employees in management and senior administrative positions shouldn't occupy public representative positions, as this has proved to be an impediment to service delivery.
In conclusion, the legislature of Limpopo, having considered and supported the provisions of the Bill, and taking into consideration the inputs made by the people out there, urges this House to pass this Bill into law, as this is one of the best ways of unlocking blockages in the Public Service administration and as it is one of the ways which will enable us to move swiftly towards the delivery of effective service on the ground. We support the Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr G B BHENGU (KwaZulu-Natal): Hon Chair of the NCOP, hon Ministers present, hon members of the Council, colleagues, I have been mandated by the KwaZulu-Natal legislature to support this Bill. The mandate was conferred by the majority of the legislature on 15 November 2007. The Bill tightens up a number of problem areas in conditions of service for public servants, and I not going into details.
The most important areas that have been problematic relate to the transfer, retirement, discipline, dismissal, outside work, assignment of power, grievances and political rights of employees.
The Bill also makes provision for alignment of conditions of service of the general Public Service and sectors with their own employment laws such as educators, SAPS, Defence, Intelligence and Correctional Services. A committee of Ministers will need to concur with the determination of annual salary adjustment. Perhaps most importantly, the Bill makes provision for two new structures known as a government component and a service delivery unit.
A government component is a separate institution within the Public Service; answerable to the Minister and partnered with the department, it is subject to the Public Finance Management Act. Its employees are public servants and it will have a ring-fenced function allocated to it, which will either be assigned or delegated or statutory. The advantage of the government component will be that services will be streamlined closer to the point of delivery and, where deemed necessary, they can re-incorporate some public entities. A component can be established by proclamation of the President or the premier of the province, which must be preceded by a feasibility study.
Service delivery units are similar to government components, but, unlike government components, are able to perform services related to socioeconomic rights, which government components are not able to do. The objective behind government components and service delivery units is thus to customise administrative and operational arrangements to soothe the service delivery environment. There will be better government via direct accountability and decision-making as close as possible to the point of service delivery. Political heads will have more direct control over service delivery outcomes without the need to create entities outside the Public Service.
In conclusion, it gives me pleasure on behalf of the KwaZulu-Natal legislature to support this Bill.
Modulasetulo, mo?omo wo mont?hi o ?etse o dirilwe ke maloko ao a tlilego pele ga ka. [Chairperson, a lot of work has already been done by the members who came before me.]
I am not going to go back and repeat what they have said. However, there are important points that I think need clarification, especially to help Mr Worth. I think it is extremely important for members who serve in this House to always be honourable so that they can help our people to better understand the laws passed by this House, and not mislead our people - which is exactly what Mr Worth has done.
Mr Worth says that this Bill intends to centralise power. What Mr Worth is not telling the people of this country is that this Bill addresses challenges faced by government - the bottlenecks that block speedy delivery and the problems of skills that need to be shared by all spheres of government. He is not telling the public that. This Bill is actually intended for that. Having said that, Mr Worth should also, as an hon member, have the honour to tell our people that South Africa is a developing state. As a developing state, we have a responsibility to change things that were done by the previous government which are not helpful for the state to develop as expected.
But what also becomes important for us to communicate to the public is that the government of the day has an agenda - an agenda to transform the country. Mr Worth is not telling the people that. Mr Worth is not telling the people that this Bill is one instrument that is being used to ensure that this country is speedily and effectively transformed. I think as hon members we must learn to do that.
Having said that, I want to mention as I stand here that this Bill was tabled before the select committee. The select committee deliberated on the Bill and saw an urgent need for this Bill to support the existing Act in order to transform the state as expected, particularly in view of civil servants - to clarify certain roles that were not clarified by the Act. Therefore, as members of the ANC serving in the select committee, understanding the need to transform and understanding that we are a developing state, we have agreed that this Bill be passed by this House. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
I shall now put the question in respect of the Second Order. The question is that the Bill, B31B-2006, be agreed to. As this decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I need to ascertain very clearly whether delegation heads are present in the House.
In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declaration of vote if they so wish. Is there any province that wishes to make a declaration? There is obviously none.
We shall now proceed to the voting on the question. I shall do this in alphabetical order per province. Delegation heads must please indicate to the Chair whether they vote in favour or against or abstain from voting. Eastern Cape?
Siyayixhasa. [We support.]
Free State?
Vrystaat ondersteun. [Free State supports.]
Gauteng?
Ke ya rona. [We support.]
KwaZulu-Natal?
KwaZulu-Natal votes in favour.
Limpopo?
Limpopo ondersteun. [Limpopo supports.]
Mpumalanga?
Mpumalanga ondersteun. [Mpumalanga supports.]
Northern Cape?
Ondersteun. [Supports.]
North West?
North West ke ya rona. [North West supports.]
Western Cape?
Elethu. [Supports.] [Interjections.]
You said it correctly. Don't mind what they are laughing at. The nine provinces have voted in favour. I therefore declare the Bill agreed to in terms of section 65 of the Constitution.
Bill accordingly agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.