Speaker, hon Deputy President, hon Minister of Science and Technology, hon Ministers and Deputy Ministers present here, hon members and the guests of Parliament present today, CEO of the HSRC, director- general and your delegation - if at all they are here - please allow me, on behalf of my Portfolio Committee on Science and Technology, to present to this honourable House a reconstituted shortlist of candidates for the board of HSRC that will govern this important research institution. This institution forms part of the Department of Science and Technology family of entities.
The list of candidates who are being presented before this honourable House today is a culmination of a painstaking exercise by the Portfolio Committee on Science and Technology over a period of about a year to date. With this exercise we sought to update section 2 of the Human Sciences Research Council Act of 1968, Act No 23 of 1968, through the repealing of section 8 of the Human Sciences Research Council Act of 2008, Act No 17 of 2008.
The objective of this latter amendment has been to promote human sciences research of the highest quality in South Africa in order to improve the understanding of social conditions and the process of social change connected with the political transformation processes that have been happening in our country since the advent of democracy, as led by the ANC, in 1994.
The HSRC board will, in accordance with this amending Bill, consist of a chairperson designated by the Minister and no less than six but no more than nine members plus the CEO, who is a member by virtue of his or her office.
The Minister, after appointing a panel of experts to compile a shortlist of no more than 20 persons from the nominees, will then refer the shortlist to the portfolio committee for concurrence, in accordance with the provisions of this Act.
Indeed, the portfolio committee recommended that the list of candidates be revisited in order to reflect the few recommendations advanced by the portfolio committee on that day of the presentation. The Department of Science and Technology indeed addressed those concerns and submitted a revised list to the portfolio committee. The portfolio committee then concurred with the revised list.
As an institution of research, the HSRC is tasked with a variety of responsibilities to promote research in the field of human sciences in order to improve the quality of life of all our people. These range from research analyses of housing delivery problems to children-led households resulting from the HIV and Aids pandemic challenges, poverty and unemployment challenges, analyses of economic and social gains arising from the 2010 Fifa soccer games, political and economic stability challenges for our African region, etc. There's a long list of what the HSRC does.
It is indeed an important research institution when it comes to research on the sociopolitical or economic challenges facing our nation and the world. It is therefore imperative that we establish a board of capable men and women that would be up to the challenge. We think that the shortlist presented to you today consists of people who are up to that challenge.
It is, therefore, my pleasure to appeal that this House ratify the shortlist of candidates for the board, as presented in the ATC of 9 July 2009, page 48, as it is only when we work together that we can do more. I thank you and especially my fellow portfolio committee members, who have worked so hard over the said period to conclude this task. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
There was no debate.
Declarations of vote:
Speaker, the chairperson of the portfolio committee has outlined the role of the HSRC board, but the DA would like to use this opportunity to raise a few matters of concern.
First of all, the contracts of members serving on the board expired on October 2008 and owing to parliamentary delays, the matter was only referred to the Speaker for consideration on 15 April 2009, by which time the third Parliament had already risen.
Was it a case of passing the buck or a case of the failure of Parliament to do its oversight work efficiently? The x-criterion for representivity was initially not applied, and the department noted these concerns and came back with a more representative list.
Some of the qualifications of the shortlisted candidates do not comply in the strictest sense with the requirements as stipulated in the Act. Questions for the Minister to consider when making her final choice are: What value do persons who serve on a wide range of boards add? Does such a board member have time to do justice to the task at hand or might not a possible conflict of interest arise?
The DA also asks the Minister to consider it very carefully when appointing members who have served on other boards and whose performance has been questionable. Last, but not least, the Minister should guard against political appointments.
The portfolio committee has made specific recommendations both to Parliament in respect of its oversight, and to the Minister to review legislation regarding the processes leading to the appointment of members of the board. We sincerely hope that this matter will be properly addressed, and urgently.
In conclusion, the DA wants to place on record its appreciation to the current board for agreeing to stay on despite the end of its term, and wishes the new board well in its deliberations. [Applause.]
Speaker, colleagues, just from the IFP's perspective, I would like to say that in the end, all the parties agreed to the names proposed. However, I must say that the processes leading up to that was less than ideal.
We were presented with a list of names through the internal processes of the department and the committee, which were frankly ridiculous. The Minister is entitled to make the choice herself. The function of the process before then is to provide her with a short list of sufficient names for her to be able to exercise her mind. And what, in fact, we received was something that would have almost compelled her to take all the names on the list, bar one or two, and that is completely unacceptable.
The list was not balanced in respect of the legal requirements of what had to be included in the list. It was not racially balanced; it didn't adequately deal with skilled incumbents who might have been kept on to do another term.
So we are happy with the outcome, but I do think that in future we should reflect upon the processes that go astray. So we wish the Minister well in choosing from the list that she has.
I do think that she could have had a few more options, but what she has is a good, sound basis. Thank you.
I shall now put the question.
Question put: That the following shortlist of candidates be approved for consideration for appointment to the Board of the Human Sciences Research Council: Ms P N Gasa, Prof R Hassan, Prof M T Leshabari, Dr P Gobodo- Madikizela, Mr T P Masobe, Dr F G Netswera, Ms P Ntombela-Nzimande, Prof T Pillay, Prof L Qalinge, Mr A Samassekou, Prof A Sawyerr, Dr S Zinn, Prof P Zulu, Prof A Lourens, Dr B O Tema, Prof P Naidoo and Prof E C Webster. Question agreed to.
Shortlist of candidates accordingly approved.