Mr Chairman, the DA welcomes the new, more focused desire of government to deliver on its mandate, as well as its candid assessment that it must become more effective in its actions, and that it must expand access to services and improve the quality of services.
Government's candour in understanding and accepting why it has, in the past, not met its objectives in delivering quality services is also welcomed, albeit an indictment of itself.
The document acknowledges that the reasons include lack of political will, inadequate leadership, weak management, inappropriate institutional design, misaligned decision-making and, importantly, the absence of a strong performance culture with effective rewards and sanctions. The last point is important as a performance management system works only if there is a mechanism to hold responsible persons to account.
The Minister states upfront that the government's performance has to be guided by a few non-negotiable principles: leadership making tough decisions, co-operation across the three levels of government, a partnership between government and civil society, transparency which demands truthfulness, dealing with limited funding and resources, and a skilled and motivated workforce. We endorse these principles.
There has often been, however, a disjuncture between these guiding principles and government's past behaviour. First is the acknowledged need for co-operation across the three levels of government. Co-operation is not co-option.
In respect to the performance management system, government's role is to indicate the required outcome and framework, but government needs to respect provinces' ability to mould policy according to a province's political mandate to achieve the outcome. Here, mechanisms need to be developed to enhance co-operation.
In respect of accountability throughout the service chain, we welcome the shift to focus on outcome, but we must walk the talk. Eskom's agreed outcome, surely, is a sustainable supply of electricity, yet when the lights went out across South Africa, no one was suspended, sanctioned or fired - from the Minister downward.
In exercising accountability, we welcome the agreed need for increased measurement and management instruments internal and external to government. Enhanced external citizen oversight can only be achieved, as the model suggests, by increased publication of outcome data. Critical, also, is improved data architecture. We endorse the statement that the proposed management system can only function if there is credible, validated, timely information on outcomes and other elements of the results chain.
We endorse also the statement that there should be a free flow of data rather than the current situation in which data is not adequately shared. Ironically, this means that crime statistics, a key police department outcome, have to be credible, validated - and, importantly - released timeously.
Ironically, also, we are still waiting for the Presidency to release a report on the 2009 development indicators mid-term review - key data to enable us to measure government's performance in a number of important areas. Yet the report is long overdue, and questions submitted to the Presidency remain unanswered. In any change management, monitoring and evaluation presents challenges, none more so than achieving compliance with regard to people, leadership and a shift in Public Service management culture that must take place. Tough, principled leadership is required that walks the talk, that requires accountability and sanction. This is difficult, even more so when the current predominant culture is one of cadre deployment, cronyism and nepotism.
In one of the examples in the document illustrating how the system works, the Department of Basic Education is cited. One of the key activities to achieve an outcome is teachers in class, on time, for seven hours a day. Here's the rub: Will government challenge Sadtu on this and will inspectors be allowed once again to re-enter schools and do their monitoring work?
Finally, let me comment on the link with the intergovernmental budgeting agenda. We welcome the Minister of Finance's signalled need for a comprehensive expenditure review. The point made in this section is that strategic and long-term development plans create incentives for organs of state to create plans they may not be able to afford in their budget.
This is particularly apt at present when government is struggling to maintain fiscal prudence in the face of declining tax revenues and burgeoning expenditure pressures. Debates around topics like the national retirement fund and, more recently, the national health insurance are particularly apt at this point in time.
Monitoring and evaluation is about promoting excellence. The essential precepts to achieve this are set out in the Minister's document, but the Minister in government must realise that these precepts can't be treated like a smorgasbord. To be successful, there has to be a commitment to all the principles enunciated. Government has to walk the talk. Thank you. [Applause.]
Hon Chairman and all the hon members, Cope once again acknowledges that the steps outlined in the monitoring and evaluation Ministry's paper are steps in the right direction. South Africans need to be assured that all public servants are held accountable, including Ministers, in their implementation of Vision 2025.
Our failures as a country, often characterised by high levels of corruption and failure to meet set targets, have to be eliminated. With the President's promise that his administration will not tolerate mediocrity and corruption, it is critical and essential that this department works swiftly to increase a sense of accountability in the Public Service while, at the same time, engendering an acceptable work ethic.
While the Green Paper on National Strategic Planning provides South Africans with adequate content to discuss and deliberate on, there is a greater need to pitch our standards higher when it comes to implementation. We cannot just be satisfied with the mantras and slogans which have purported to put people first and yet have not done much to put people first in actual service delivery.
We affirm the approach that we will seek to measure delivery, not only in quantitative terms but also in quality of output and its impact on envisaged outcomes. For instance, the quality of the RDP houses will forever remain an indictment of how we South Africans scale and measure the worth and dignity of our people. We would, therefore, wish to suggest from the outset that not only will the envisaged commission do the planning, but also that a similarly independent structure involving major stakeholders from civil society assists in monitoring the implementation of these performance principles.
It is imperative that this process involves our people at all levels of society so that we will have not only an all-embracing buy-in, but also meaningful monitoring of this process by the people of South Africa. It is imperative that even at local government level ways are found to make our people feel that they are monitoring that which is being done in their name and for them. I thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]
Hon Chairperson, though government has indeed achieved much over the past 15 years, its performance in many areas has been unsatisfactory. Many departments and institutions have failed in their attempts to deliver to ordinary South Africans and to fulfil the duties that they have been mandated to fulfil.
The service delivery protests which have been experienced in many parts of the country are evidence that the people are fed up with this unacceptably bad service they are receiving. Overspending and underspending, as well as mismanagement, are just some of the crises which need to be solved if government is to improve its performance. For this to happen, the oversight and monitoring mechanisms must be improved, and managers and staff who do not perform their duties properly must be dealt with accordingly. They must not be allowed to continue in their positions if they are not performing, and they must be held accountable for their failures.
A good starting point in this regard would be to improve and strengthen the mechanisms tasked with monitoring and evaluating performance. The IFP supports this initiative. It is critical to the success of government. I thank you, Chair. [Applause.]
Chair, the ID welcomes the new Cabinet structure and believes that if it can function effectively, it will hold the promise of delivering on the aspirations of our people. This new structure, however, also brings with it the threat that there could be a duplication of roles, turf battles and institutional confusion around who is responsible for what.
The ID, therefore, hopes that this new Ministry will take as one of its tasks the monitoring of how effectively all the Ministries work together and consider institutional changes wherever necessary.
The ID also welcomes the emphasis this Ministry has put on the outcomes of policies as opposed to simply outputs, particularly in the areas of education and health. We therefore look forward to a productive relationship with the Minister, and we hope that he will be open to the idea of us as MPs being the eyes and ears of his department by bringing some of our constituents' problems with government departments to his door. I thank you.
Chairperson, hon Deputy President and hon members, the UDM cannot fault the intention to improve government performance. South Africans have become deeply frustrated with poor service delivery. Communities have been wracked by violent protests.
We have also witnessed the personal tragedies of individuals, such as that of the young man in KwaZulu-Natal, who recently committed suicide because government repeatedly and maliciously failed to perform its duty of issuing him with an identity document.
The UDM welcomes the Minister's willingness to enter into a debate about the roles and functions of this new portfolio. We would like to caution against certain dangers. Firstly, monitoring performance should not mean that we set minimum standards and then tolerate mediocrity, as long as it meets these minimum standards.
A culture of excellence and continual improvement must become the hallmark of governance. The track record of Sars over the past decade serves as a shining example of what can be achieved.
Secondly, the existence of such a monitoring mechanism within the executive should not dilute the role of Parliament to exercise oversight over government. We hope that the Minister will foster a fruitful ... [Interjections.] [Time expired.]
Voorsitter, ek wil vir die Minister s dat ek dink as daar een ding is wat die mense van Suid-Afrika verwelkom, is dit dat daar behoorlike monitering en evaluering gaan wees van dienslewering.
Ek wil vir die agb Minister s dat hy eintlik 'n verrassing gaan kry, want hy gaan by party plekke wil evaluering doen en dan gaan hy agterkom dat daar niks is om te evalueer of te monitor nie, want daar is nie dienslewering nie.
Ek wil ook vir die agb Minister s dat ons daadwerklik sal moet kyk dat hierdie inisiatief tande het. Dit help nie die agb President Zuma, bring 'n verrassingsbesoek aan 'n munisipaliteit van die burgemeester wat vroeg geloop het, en dan kom die agb Minister op televisie en s daar is nie opgetree teen die burgemeester nie, want niemand het 'n klag gel nie. Minister, u moet nie wag dat daar 'n klag gel word nie, u moet optree. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Mr P J GROENEWALD: Chairperson, I want to say to the Minister that if there is one thing that the people of South Africa would welcome, it would be the proper monitoring and evaluation of service delivery.
I want to say to the hon Minister that he will really be surprised when he does evaluation at some places and will then realise that there is nothing to evaluate or to monitor because service delivery is nonexistent.
I also want to say to the Minister that we will really have to see to it that this initiative has the teeth. It doesn't help if the hon President Zuma pays a surprise visit to a municipality where the mayor has left early, after which the hon Minister announces on television that no steps were taken against this mayor because nobody has lodged a complaint. Minister, you should not wait for a complaint to be lodged, you should act.]
To ensure success, you have to be proactive not only reactive. I thank you.
Hon Chairperson, the ACDP welcomes hon Minister Chabane's reported admission that the billions of rands directed at service delivery since 1994 have not always resulted in better service delivery for citizens.
The Minister has to know that we appreciate the challenges that he will be facing when he will be required to demand acceptable outcomes, efficiency, productivity and value for money from all stakeholders.
The Minister will need courage and great determination to act against or remove popular nonperforming individuals and replace them, sometimes, with the not-so-popular but better qualified and able professionals.
The Minister will have to set an example for Public Service supervisors who have been reluctant to act against their subordinates, who either have contravened policies or were incompetent.
People out there are demanding service. Hon Minister, we are wishing you well as you demand quality service delivery for our people. Thank you.
Hon Chairperson, hon Deputy President, Ministers and members, in the recent past, our country has been engulfed with service delivery protests, and the serious challenges we still face as government were laid bare from the remotest villages to the urban centres. What was critical to note during these manifestations of our people's anger was the absence of councillors and provincial and national government officials to account to the people.
Invariably, those that the fingers were pointed at are some of the ANC cadres whom the ANC assumed would, of necessity, implement ANC policies. Alas, it was left to the ANC officials to engage directly with our communities to get to the bottom of their unbridled frustrations.
What these protests have demonstrated in no uncertain terms is the fact that accountability with regard to nondelivery of services spans across the three spheres of government, and that no sphere is more or less important than the other, as provided for in the Constitution. It has brought to the fore the reality of the serious disjuncture between our spheres of government.
This brings me to the fledgling Ministry for performance monitoring and evaluation. As the ANC, we have obviously followed the reams of media space that have already been spent on this Ministry. Its location in the Presidency is no mistake - just to remind most of you in this House. Its centrality, mandate and scope require that location in the Presidency.
It is appropriate that we provide a historical perspective in relation to the evolution of this critical service delivery-driven instrument. I want to emphasise, this is an instrument! Firstly, the ANC is a movement with a proud tradition steeped in evaluation, monitoring and consultation. A seminal moment in this regard was the congress of the people in Kliptown in 1955, which gave birth to the Freedom Charter. As the late giant of the revolution and the former president of the ANC, Oliver Tambo, then spelt it out, and I quote:
... because it comes from the people, it remains still a people's Charter, the one basic political statement of our goals to which all genuinely democratic and patriotic forces of South Africa adhere.
This vision was reaffirmed in Polokwane where specific and deliberate evaluation took place over five days. After that exhaustive evaluation, monitoring and consultation of the ANC policies and governance over the last 15 years, the ANC was given an overwhelming mandate by the people of our country in April 2009 to deepen this process.
This evaluation is reflected upon in detail in our election manifesto: the ANC's summary policy position. In our view this Ministry is evidence of an organic evaluation, always consultative and inclusive.
Monitoring, evaluation and performance management are not alien concepts to the ANC. On the contrary, if in the pursuit of the objectives of the national democratic revolution we abandon these, the people shall judge us harshly. This is, therefore, being imbued with the revolutionary morality. It is our duty to ensure that this fledgling Ministry is given the teeth to execute this government's mandate without fear or favour.
The broad objectives are obviously spelt out in the executive summary of the Green Paper together with the basic steps relating to the outcomes of performance management. And of particular interest to me - allow me to be subjective - is the fact that basic education is chosen as an example, which is where I am coming from.
Informed by these broad objectives, we would like to know from the hon Minister how he aims to engender a renewed value system and behavioural changes throughout our Public Service. Currently, as we all know, the Public Service is being crippled by a lack of work ethic and discipline, the cancer of corruption and the pervasive culture of entitlement. The ANC admits that, and that is why it has come up with this particular instrument.
These human pathologies have had an eroding impact on service delivery. Furthermore, we need to check whether an audit has been done in relation to the impact of this major lack of service. Having said that, we appreciate the critical underpinnings of interventions as provided for in the Green Paper to be transparent, but more importantly, that interventions will be corrective rather than punitive. But if necessary, we will have to be hard on everyone, even on ourselves here in Parliament. If necessary we will have to impose sanctions because we say this must happen across all spheres of government. Everyone must be accountable.
Moreover, we are optimistic that the emphasis of a revised paradigm of service delivery will clearly engender a spirit of dynamism in our civil society. Certainly, hon Rev Dandala, this will enhance creativity, not stifle it. This in turn will trickle down to our communities who have invested their faith in all of us.
The current scenario of oversight and monitoring of portfolio committees surely emboldens us to raise evidence of deviation from their mandates by departments and state entities, without encroaching on your turf. We are raising this as a question, not necessarily as a contestation of space.
As Parliament, we are expected to play our role constructively, not only to tabulate departments' achievements and underachievements, but more critically to assess their impact where our people live. I want to challenge the opposition, let's stop continuing like a scratched CD, talking about cronyism and nepotism. All we have to do is give evidence and use the law to challenge whatever we are having. We appreciate the support - not just lamentations - that you, as opposition, are giving on this one; but we want inputs to improve the document where there are gaps. We are open to you making inputs and not lamenting.
There is certainly no intention from the ANC to co-opt anybody, but we are talking about co-operation. It is in the Constitution and that is the spirit which this Green Paper is following. We are not going to co-opt you, but the national policy is there to be implemented by all spheres of government. You can't click and choose. [Applause.]
Please do not start talking about sanctions, this and that, and what is going to be done. Don't jump the gun. Make inputs so that you put all those in the document, which we are all going to follow. Thank you. Debate concluded.