Chairperson, comrades, friends and colleagues, thank you.
If the things we face are greater and more important than the things we refuse to face, then at least we have begun to re-evaluate our world. At least we have begun to learn to see and live again.
But if we refuse to see any of our awkward and deepest truths, then sooner or later, we are going to have to become deaf or blind. And then, eventually, we will have to silence our dreams and those of others. In other words, we die. We die in life.
These words were said by Ben Okri, and they were quoted in this House at the beginning of this year by Minister Manuel. May I, on behalf of the ANC, reiterate them in support of this Green Paper. Those who have never been in power may not appreciate the need to reflect on the past 15 years which the ANC government has traversed.
A great deal has been achieved, given the enormity of the challenges that have faced that democratic government since 1994. As the ANC, we view this Green Paper in three stages: the developmental state, which I will later deal with; the impact assessment; and the integrated approach towards efficient service delivery.
The developmental state has an important role to play in defining a common national agenda and mobilising all of society to take part in its implementation. This requires effective systems of interaction with all social partners to exercise leadership informed by the popular mandate derived from the electorate.
Enhancing and developing the strategic management and leadership of government should be seen in the context of building a premise on a people- centred and people-driven change. In particular, the state must have, as its primary mission, the desire and commitment to improve the quality of life of all the people, especially the poor who constitute the majority of this country.
We do not only require strategic management and technical capacity to translate all broad policy objectives into real and concrete programmes and projects, but we should also ensure implementation, monitoring, evaluation and assessment of the outcomes. The ANC has always embraced a Public Service that responds efficiently and effectively to the needs of the people, as reflected in the RDP documents.
The process of democratisation requires modernising the structures and functioning of government in pursuit of the objectives of efficient, effective, economic, responsive, transparent and accountable government. We must develop the capacity of government for strategic interventions in social and economic development. We must increase the capacity of the public sector to deliver an improved and extended public service to all the people of South Africa.
The manifesto of the ANC further states that:
The developmental state will play a central and strategic role in the economy. We will ensure a more effective government; improve the co- ordination and planning efforts of the developmental state by means of a planning entity to ensure faster change. A review of the structure of government will be undertaken, to ensure effective service delivery.
The reconfiguration of Ministries did not come as an accident, but as a result of a realisation by the ANC of the need to improve government performance by introducing a new paradigm shift in traditional ways of doing things. Central to the success of these noble ideals will be the real activist parliament as envisaged by the President - a parliament that is geared to raise tough questions on nonperformance and failure to deliver on agreed key performance areas and outcomes.
This requires that Members of Parliament should be provided with sufficient tools of the trade. It means building capacity for committees to be able to interrogate reports, carry out oversight and ensure that Members of Parliament put into practice the oversight and accountability model adopted by this Parliament. It would mean that the constituency period does not become a holiday, but an opportunity to interact with our people.
Parliament has, over the years, enacted sufficient laws and regulations to ensure that public servants account for their work. Among the tools for oversight and accountability, are laws such as the Public Finance Management Act, PFMA, Act 1 of 1999; the Municipal Finance Management Act, MFMA, Act 56 of 2003; the newly elected Money Bills Amendment Procedure and Related Matters Act, Act 9 of 2009; the reports of the Public Service Commission; the Auditor-General's report; and National Treasury regulations.
The Money Bills Amendment Procedure and Related Matters Act was established in line with section 177 of the Constitution. This Act revolutionises the work of Parliament because it spells out procedures on how to amend budgets. Parliament needs to urgently empower all members to understand this Act as it impacts, in a big way, on their work and on society as a whole.
The South African electorate is not a passive recipient of services, as shown by the recent demonstrations. However, effective complaints channels must be created so that they can swiftly and effectively be addressed.
The President has already established a hotline where people can raise their complaints directly with the Presidency. The Gauteng legislature has legislated for a public participation and petitions procedure. National government and other legislators can emulate this procedure and improve on it.
One hopes that the recession we find ourselves in comes as a window of opportunity to work more economically and effectively, and to achieve more with fewer resources. The Auditor-General's reports are very important indicators of measuring the strength of our financial capacity in keeping books and financial documents.
The Auditor-General himself has raised reservations about the failure of senior officials to make themselves available when his office audits departments or public entities. If the officials are defying that office, Parliament has a duty to protect it.
We would like to welcome the evolution of auditing in our country as the Auditor-General intends embarking on auditing not only financial information, but performance information as well - that is, what the money has bought; the quality of spending; value for money; and the impact thereof. In other words, they audit the outcomes.
The financial information that has always been audited fell short on reporting on matters of service delivery. The issue of clean audits, as envisaged by the Minister for Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, is not the preserve of local government, but all stakeholders who play an oversight role on matters of spending, service delivery and the structures that we set up to support that.
The Constitution, and especially section 154 and section 34 of the MFMA, are very clear with respect to the responsibility that national and provincial governments should take towards supporting local governments.
In conclusion, all Members of Parliament need to ensure that they get their hands dirty so that our people's lives are changed. The resources are there to deliver services. Working together, we can make the issue of monitoring and evaluation succeed. I thank you.
Chairperson, the purpose of this debate is to discuss and identify those things that can be done to improve government's performance. This is a brave undertaking, and if it is a serious one, it is to be welcomed.
That said, the time allocated to this debate precludes a full and proper interrogation of the subject. Instead, I wish to address a particular aspect of government policy in practice which I believe to be a fundamental one. Accountability is a key constitutional principle. It is a cornerstone of our democratic state, a duty expected of our public representatives, and an obligation to which the executive must yield. Yet, despite the fact that accountability is a thread woven intricately through the fabric of our democracy, it remains ill-defined. Its meaning has been steadily denuded by the behaviour of progressive ANC administrations to the point where it now rings hollow - an empty reference to an ideal no longer respected by the executive and, outside of the opposition, no longer evoked by the legislature.
For those people who represent this government, it is argued that accountability means nothing more than explaining one's actions. It is true that this is a critical part of accountability, but it is only a part. There is a second component to this principle, one that holds equal weight with the requirement that public representatives should explain their actions. There is the necessity that, should that explanation be inadequate, it must be met with consequences. And here I would like the indulgence of Mr Shiceka in listening very carefully.
If consequences are overlooked in favour of explanations, the effects for accountability specifically and democracy generally are damaging. If a public representative does not have to fear consequences, irrespective of the nature of their explanation, there is no longer any reason for them to properly explain their actions in the first place.
Accountability is reduced to a farce, and those mechanisms intended to enforce it are made redundant. This is the ANC's legacy. Unless it is addressed, its effect will be to render any new initiative, again, redundant.
We are in the process of discussing the nature and form of a new Ministry in the Presidency, one premised on the idea that this government understands what accountability is. That is a mistake. The ANC's understanding of accountability is not the same as that set out in our Constitution.
The greatest challenge facing this administration and the Presidency is how to change that - how to install a new and proper understanding of accountability and its essential purpose in ensuring good governance and a sound Public Service.
The answer, of course, is that the Presidency must lead by example. If members of the executive fail to meet their targets - and this is the word that hon Shiceka couldn't quite squeeze from his lips - they must be fired.
HON MEMBERS: Viva!
If public representatives steal, they must be fired.
HON MEMBERS: Viva!
If members of the Public Service are incompetent or don't perform, they must be fired.
HON MEMBERS: Viva!
The South African public has a contract with these people. It has invested its faith in their ability to deliver, not in the pretence that they are able to explain their failures, but on the understanding that if they do not meet their obligations, action will be taken to correct those shortcomings.
The Minister of Finance seems to understand this. He stated last week that there must be consequences for failure in the same way that there are rewards for excellent performance. This is the government's ultimate test: whether it can restore accountability's meaning and place it at the centre of best democratic practice.
The DA supports any initiative that has this objective at its heart. Time will tell whether commitment to this principle will be matched with the appropriate behaviour. I thank you. [Applause.]
Chairperson and hon members, thank you very much. Let me say to the Deputy Minister of Transport that one of the reasons why we support the need for those workers to be out there is because we have always believed that a trade union federation must be a home for all workers regardless of political persuasion.
We hope that Cope members who are there will be welcomed as bona fide members of Cosatu and that they will not leave, unless they are asked to leave that federation, which many of them have built with their soil and toil.
We are all agreed on the need to monitor and evaluate government's work for a number of reasons: to see the extent to which the government is implementing its election promises; to see the extent to which it implements its election mandate as articulated during the inaugural state of the nation address; to determine the impact of such programmes in improving the lives of South Africans - many of whom have no water, sanitation, jobs and shelter, many of whom do not know where their next meal is going to come from, and are worried about the quality of the education and health of their children; to see whether the resource allocations match the rhetoric.
To ensure effective monitoring and evaluation, you need to set appropriate goals; goals that match the election promise, that raise the bar rather than merely complying with the injunction. For example, it is one thing to speak of the creation of half a million job opportunities between June and December; it's another to have a plan for attaining it. It is even more important to ensure that these jobs are not merely about digging and closing up the same hole, but that they add to the improvement of infrastructure.
Furthermore, such monitoring needs to deal with how a job opportunity is calculated. For instance, if I am employed for four weeks and later replaced over the next 11 months by 11 other people, we are calculated as 12 people with 12 job opportunities, yet all that happened was the amelioration of my plight for a month. Surely this is not how the half a million job opportunities by December are supposed to be achieved; at least I hope not.
No wonder two months after the statement was made from this very podium, government confirmed what we have always said; that this is but a pipe dream.
This is owing, in part, to the absence of planning appropriately, and being more concerned with scoring brownie points with the electorate.
Another example is the promise to reach 80% of the people who need antiretroviral treatment therapy by 2011. To come back within two months and say that such a goal will not be realised shows, once more, either poor planning or thumb-sucking of figures. Antiretroviral drugs are very important; but improving the quality of health care, access and employing more health workers, especially clinicians, is much more important.
Furthermore, one of the challenges in monitoring and evaluating is not only in terms of those areas that we have spoken about, Minister, it is about the one who is being evaluated. It is one thing to try and focus on the public servants, but another to be able to say that the contract that the President has is with the Ministers and Deputy Ministers. Put crudely, his contract is with the Cabinet. We must be able to say what the measure is to that particular Cabinet.
We need to rather focus on the real, hard issues - halving poverty and unemployment by 2014. To what extent does that become a reality? We can then focus on the number of jobs that need to be created - permanent jobs, decent jobs not as a slogan, but as a commitment, because that is how you alleviate poverty and unemployment. I thank you. [Applause.]
Chairperson, at the outset I want to say that the IFP welcomes the release of this Green Paper. We hope that the public is allowed an opportunity to make an input. We do know that Parliament has set up an ad hoc committee to deal with some of these issues, but we were told that we probably have to deal only with the issue that affects planning, and not monitoring and evaluation. We will probably need some guidance on that.
We also hope that this Green Paper will pave the way for the accelerated delivery of basic services to the poor, and that service delivery protests will become a thing of the past. We are having too many service delivery protests, and rightly so, because people and the promises that were made are not tying up together.
However, we do not think that the establishment of the Ministry will in itself be a panacea to a whole range of serious problems impeding government performance. These impediments relate to a wide range of issues such as corruption, unrealistic expectations, the top-down approach, unfilled vacancies, as well as the quality of leadership, to mention only a few.
This morning, we received a briefing from the office of the Auditor-General on what is going on within the SABC. It really made our hair stand on end. Everybody on that committee wondered if the SABC had any management at all.
The tragedy of it is that it is a post facto report. What we need, Minister, through your Ministry is to ensure that there is on-the-job evaluation. Whilst we have the office of the Auditor-General that focuses on performance of financial management, we need to consider a Chapter 9 institution that will monitor performance on a daily basis within departments. Alternatively, there is the Public Service Commission, PSC. Their role may need to be beefed up.
Lastly, or maybe even better, as hon Sogoni has said, members of Parliament need to play a more active role outside of Parliament than within Parliament where we have structured visits to see whether projects are really happening on the ground, or whether people are saying that they are spending R10 million and yet there is nothing happening.
We also need to ensure that key performance indicators of heads of department are adhered to. At the moment, there is a self-appraisal. We need as Parliament to appraise that.
Again, what we need to consider, hon Minister - and I know it's been on the table for some time - is creating a Public Service academy. All public servants should be put through a rigorous 6-month course where they know exactly how government functions, because the kind of reporting that comes from some of these officials leaves a lot to be desired. If they go through these kinds of schools, then they will know exactly what to produce.
In conclusion, Chairperson and hon Minister, what you need to create is a war room situation where, with a touch of a button in the Presidency, you will know what is happening in Nkandla, in Potgietersrus or wherever. Thank you! [Time expired.]
Chairperson, hon members, the Green Paper on Improving Government Performance, states, in the context of the global economic downturn, which is affecting all of us, that -
... the pursuit of value for money is imperative if government is to improve service delivery standards. We must do more with less. Wasteful and unproductive expenditure and corruption cannot be afforded.
In his speech to Parliament when tabling this Paper, Minister Chabane said:
I will ask Parliament to apply its mind in assisting the executive to make sure that we spend the public funds entrusted to us in ways that promote clear and directed outcomes we need to develop this country.
Service delivery is what this ANC government is committed to. Let us not minimise the successes that this government has already achieved since 1994. [Interjections.] From 1994 to 2008, nearly 19 million people received access to running water. Since 1991, 3,6 million houses have been electrified and almost 11 million people have access to basic sanitation. In 1996, only 3 million people, a mere handful, had access to social grants, but today 12,5 million receive social grants. [Applause.] Only 34 000 children had access to social grants then, but today 8 million children younger than 14 years receive social grants; and 3,1 million subsidised houses have been built, including 2,7 million free houses for the poor, giving shelter to an additional 14 million people. No mean feat, I would say!
Raymond Ackerman, addressing the Cape Times Breakfast Club towards the end of last year said:
It is only when one reflects on where we were in the darkest days of the last century and on the poverty, lack of opportunity and political and economic paralysis that characterised our society, that we are able to appreciate the overwhelming magnitude of the difficulties that have faced us in building a new society from the tragedies of the old and recreating ourselves as a normally functioning and thriving economy.
[Interjections.]
(Ms M N Oliphant): Order, hon member! Can the member ask a question?
Chairperson, no, I won't take a question.
(Ms M N Oliphant): She says no. Take your seat, hon member.
Chairperson, yes, we are going through difficult times, but we will weather the storm. Ackerman continues to say:
... we are well equipped to weather the storm. Every period of storm is followed by an era of revitalisation and reinvigorated energy in which our ability to rise to the challenges and remake the world is tested. Our country has time and time again demonstrated its capacity to respond with innovation and initiative to changing economic, political and social circumstances - and I have no doubt we shall continue to do so.
The Freedom Charter enjoins us to:
... pledge ourselves to strive together, sparing neither strength nor courage, until the democratic changes here set out have been won; and to fight for these freedoms, side by side, throughout our lives, until we have won our liberty.
The Green Paper on Improving Government Performance refers to non- negotiables to guide improved government performance: provision of principled leadership underpinned by making tough decisions; strengthening co-operation across the three spheres of government; building partnerships between government and civil society; complete transparency; the resolve to do more with less despite limited resources; and developing a skilled and motivated Public Service that takes pride in what it does and is recognised for quality service delivery.
In a book of the early 1980s entitled In Search of Excellence, by Peters and Waterman, they say that to be successful you need a champion. If you want to get something done, you need a champion.
Minister Chabane, to drive this initiative you will need to identify champions, people with proven track records in their own fields who will be committed to driving the process and getting the desired results. Setting targets, monitoring progress and holding public servants accountable will require strong leadership.
A good example is the Fifa World Cup. As soon as the announcement was made, planning was done and the targets set to run a successful event. All along the way there were deadlines that had to be achieved, progress was closely monitored, obstacles had to be overcome and problems worked through together with all the partners. As we stand now it looks as if we are just about ready to deliver on a very successful World Cup, and I encourage us to all wear those Bafana jerseys on a Friday - an excellent idea! [Applause.]
By securing the right to host the World Cup, Danny Jordaan and his team showed that he was a champion. It was right, therefore, that he should go on to steer the ship for organising the tournament proper. We need to appoint more champions like him in all fields. Having progressive policies and the interests of the poor and underdeveloped at heart does not necessarily translate into improved performance. The quality and standards of service have seen a significant decline over the past years despite the massive budget increases there have been. In fact, there has been much squandering and mismanagement of our scarce resources, and we acknowledge that. So, we welcome this Green Paper. [Interjections.]
In order to be more reflective, it is also important to identify some of the reasons that have contributed to government not delivering quality service. Again I refer to Minister Chabane's speech, in which he includes, amongst other -
... lack of political will, inadequate leadership management weaknesses ... The absence of a strong performance culture and effective rewards and sanctions has also played a part.
The Green Paper sets out a process which requires us to convert the inputs we have into those important outputs we want to measure. This part of the process is about improving our efficiency; it is about reducing the unit cost of the service we provide. It assists us with clarifying goals, quantities and time limits that are realistic so that we have something to monitor instead of waiting for the Auditor-General to pick up on poor, or worse still, a lack of delivery.
Unfortunately, the N2 Gateway Housing Project is a case in point. What started out as an exciting Breaking New Ground project has ended up with many unhappy beneficiaries.
Our commitment, as the ANC, is to ensure delivery to the people of South Africa, particularly the poor people, but it will have to be quality delivery. That is why this Paper indicates that the President, Cabinet and the rest of government would agree on 25 to 30 outcomes, based on the Medium-Term Strategic Framework.
It further introduces the concept of measuring outcomes. This involves identification of an outcome and definition of output measures, description of key activities and listing inputs. It should be noted that this process is outcomes-based and therefore the first link in the chain is outcomes. Inputs are made with clear outcomes in mind. This will increase the capacity of government to perform optimally and maximise its ability to deliver quality services to the people.
Parliament, in its oversight role, will need to be vigilant. If we fail we all fail, but if we succeed we all succeed.
In the ANC manifesto President Jacob Zuma said:
There is still much to do to reach our goals and new challenges have arisen. We have to ensure that we grow the economy to meet the needs of our people squarely. Lasting victory over poverty and hunger requires the creation of decent work opportunities and sustainable livelihoods. Education must be at the centre of our efforts to improve the potential of every citizen and enable each one of us to play a productive role in building our nation. The quality of services the government will provide must be improved.
[Interjections.]
We admit, as the ANC, that the people are crying out there and we dare not fail them. The ANC welcomes this Green Paper initiative on improving government performance. I think I need extra time with all this heckling! Thank you. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
Order, hon members! If hon members say something that you don't like, just listen to that member, because I think at the end of the day there are other speakers who can respond to those issues. I now call upon the hon Leader of the Opposition. [Interjections.] Oh, sorry, the hon S N Swart.
Chairperson, thank you for the promotion, with due respect. [Laughter.] Chairperson, the ACDP welcomes this initial debate on the Green Paper on Improving Government Performance. In the Green Paper, government correctly concedes that despite massive increases in successive budgets service quality and standards have deceased.
I actually said "deceased", but I believe the word was "decreased". This has resulted in widespread service delivery protests, as we are all aware, and there is consequently an urgent need to improve government performance at all levels and to reverse the trend of growing incapacity, corruption and lack of accountability.
The stacking of priorities will be the main challenge, as government Ministers will have to agree on 25 to 30 key outcomes in the areas of education, health, job creation, rural development and crime and corruption.
Now the central aspect of the outcomes performance management system relates to performance contracts of Cabinet Ministers and MECs to achieve deliverable and measurable outputs. As they are appointed by a political prerogative, they clearly can and should be held accountable and, I agree with the hon Davidson, fired for lack of performance, unlike in the past when Cabinet members were protected.
The previous performance management system for directors-general and public servants in general has been weak and erratic, for Ministers nonexistent. Whilst everyone in the Public Service is supposed to have a performance contract, many are either not in place or not monitored properly, this particularly at municipal level. Important matters have also been left out of such contracts, such as achieving a clean audit. How can we have the situation of directors-general and managers being awarded bonuses where there were qualified audits?
The Green Paper describes the process of translating government's mandate into a set of measures against which it can hold itself and be held accountable. We as the ACDP welcome the initiative and will contribute and add to the framework to ensure it is effective. I thank you.
Madam Chair, Minister Chabane, we are already on record as endorsing this initiative, and I'd like to reinforce that. And I would like to respect the fact that the ANC has acknowledged that government needs to improve their performance. For this plan to yield the desired dividends, however, you will have to ensure certain key imperatives are observed and implemented.
The three key aspects that the DA believes are essential when it comes to improving government's performance, and are therefore directly linked to the success of the Presidency's proposals, are as follows: firstly, appointing the right people to the right positions; in other words, people that are fit for purpose, people who can make Minister Shiceka's delusions a reality.
Secondly, as already mentioned by hon Davidson, the DA believes in demanding accountability at all times, and at all levels of responsibility. Failure should mean termination of service, not simply no bonus, hon Shiceka, and suspension without any action. It should mean termination of service, because they are letting the nation down.
Thirdly, we must insist upon increased decentralisation of power to the other two spheres of government. Regrettably, the Green Paper does not address any of these values. This proposal does not speak about ensuring that the best people possible are appointed to top government positions, including the executive, irrespective of which faction within the ruling party they support or to whom they have demonstrated their loyalty in the past.
It also says nothing about holding public representatives, especially Cabinet Ministers ... [Interjections.]
Hon member, is that a point of order?
Yes, Chair, I just want to check whether the hon member is aware that there is a faction within the ruling party.
Hon member, is that a question or what?
Yes, Chair.
But the member did not say that he would take a question. Can you please continue, hon member.
Thank you. I hope I will receive some injury time from people who don't know what this debate is actually about.
Chairperson, on a point of order: I understand English. I would like to know, by appointing people, how can you make a delusion a reality? [Interjections.]
Hon Pillay, can you please take your seat? [Interjections.] Continue, hon member.
Madam Chair, on a point of order: May I say that if the governing party is going to start taking these kinds of stupid points of order when our leader is speaking, we will do the same when their leader is speaking.
Hon Ellis, take your seat. Continue, hon member.
It beggars belief that people say they understand English and then ask questions about it. The Green Paper also says nothing about holding public representatives, especially Cabinet Ministers, accountable when they fail to fulfil their obligations. Minister Shiceka again missed a beat when he was asked what would happen to him if his objective is not met, and that is precisely where the stumbling block is in this Green Paper.
In fact, Minister Chabane, in response to my follow-up question in the House, you deviated from what was contained in your Ministry's proposal, less than a week after its launch. When I asked whether your Ministry would require government departments to release reports and indicators related to their performance on a more regular basis, especially whether the Department of Police would be required to release crime statistics on a more regular basis, you responded, and I quote:
We will, on issues that relate to us, be able to release information or reports related to the work that we are going to do. Obviously, with regard to reports that are compiled by other departments or other institutions, it is within the right of those institutions to determine how those reports are released and at what point.
I ask you, hon Minister, how does a system which allows departments to obfuscate propose to hold them to account? Minister, both this Green Paper and the Green Paper on National Planning appear to be intent on entrenching the centralisation of power in the national government and, more specifically, in the Presidency.
Among other things, the proposal that a delivery unit in the Presidency can intervene in any municipality and province could easily become a threat to constitutional democracy and the autonomy of the three spheres of government. In addition, I would like to add that it is quite clear that the Presidency ...
Chair, will the hon member take a question?
No, Madam Chair, I have no time.
In addition, I would like to add that it is quite clear that the Presidency itself has some difficulty in applying the above-mentioned imperatives. There was debate around the nomination letter of the Chief Justice and the lack of action taken against those staff who sent it, late and backdated, yet no action was taken against those people - no accountability whatsoever.
Furthermore, the Presidency is certainly not appointing the best people for the job. Instead, cadre deployment has defined the recent appointments of Jessie Duarte, Vusi Mona, and Ayanda Ndlodlo. The latest chaos in the establishment of the hotline and the fact that R2,3 million is unaccounted for in the late establishment of that hotline, is indicative of the fact that even the Presidency is not prepared to hold people to account according to the very best plans and intentions.
To redirect complaints from the public back to the sphere of government where the complaint arises is oxymoronic, because it is precisely those spheres of government where the people have been frustrated. Minister, it is like telling a complainant who is laying a charge of rape to go and complain to the rapist before they lay a charge with the police. It is simply unacceptable.
In conclusion, I'd like to emphasise that the DA believes that unless the aforementioned issues are seriously addressed, this plan on improving government's performance will remain just a plan.
Minister, I trust that you will monitor Minister Shiceka's promises that he made in the House today and evaluate them. If you don't, I hope Parliament will. If Parliament doesn't, the DA will. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
I want to raise a point of order, Chairperson. The Constitution says ...
Hon member, the member has left the podium.
I rose when he was still there. Can we ask him to come back? [Interjections.] But I am going to ask you to rule, Chair.
Hon member, can you please take your seat?
Chair, I would like to ask you to rule on a point of order.
Hon member, I can't rule on the member when he is already sitting in his seat.
Madam Chair, may I seriously address you on an issue?
Hon Mike Ellis, just take your seat.
But, Madam Chair, this is a very important matter.
Hon Mike Ellis, just take your seat.
Chair, may I ask you why you will not allow me to address you, Madam?
You are addressing me on what? The member who was speaking is now in his seat. So I have just called the next hon member - he has not even started. Can you please take your seat, hon Ellis? Hon Fransman.
Hon Chairperson ... [Interjections.]
Order, please!
Chairperson, I would really like to paraphrase my comments here today, and then I am going to leave my speech, because I think I must deal with the last speaker.
I want to paraphrase my comments with reference to a case study by the United Nations Development Programme, UNDP, called Money and Mambas - Listening to the People.
Our efforts over the past 15 years of democracy have been devoted to improving the lives of all our people. I cite the UNDP reference not because of the technical detail of the monitoring and evaluation process, but I think as I have seen in the Green Paper, Minister, for the insight that your strategy - the plan of government - is providing to deal with the realities of while we are doing monitoring and evaluation also to look at how the people are being engaged in that monitoring and evaluation, because that will be critical. At the outset I therefore want to acknowledge the Minister's role. He is going to be a bold and courageous leadership champion in this programme, because it is 15 years after our democracy and we have identified that as a strategic intervention required, both at Polokwane as well as in the state of the nation address.
But let me deal with the opposition speakers here. [Interjections.]
Order, please!
We have heard about accountability. We have heard about monitoring, we have heard about performance. We have listened earlier to what the ANC speakers were saying. The ANC speakers were in fact quite self- critical as to how we have moved as the state 15 years into our democracy. All we have heard here from the opposition was raising issue with the ANC. Now let's look at their track record. [Interjections.]
It was, in fact, the ANC that introduced, via Parliament, the Public Finance Management Act. It was, in fact, the ANC that introduced the Constitution. It was the ANC that introduced the mechanisms for delivery. [Interjections.]
Order, please! Order, hon members! Continue, hon member.
But we are saying that we now need to look at the further advancement of a national democratic revolution. But let me deal with the individuals, the hon members who were so critical. Let's do an accountability test, Minister, on where they are governing. Let's do a performance analysis on where they are governing. In fact, the DA has an executive government in the Western Cape, and 7 out of the 11 are white. [Interjections.]
Order, please!
We have just heard the hon Leader of the Opposition speak about "fit for purpose". Members, what is that? What do we define as "fit for purpose". [Interjections.] Let me tell you what the DA defines it as. [Interjections.]
Order, hon members! Order, please!
"Fit for purpose", hon Chairperson, is the fact that in the education department in the Western Cape there was a black male, a very competent male, and he was replaced not so long ago by a white individual. "Fit for purpose" - this is what you said - in terms of the DA's accountability, means replacing a black female that was in fact also part of the disability sector, and replacing her with a white male. [Interjections.]
Order, hon members!
"Fit for purpose" means replacing a black male, not so long ago, in the last three months, in public works with a white male. "Fit for purpose" means replacing a black female director-general with a white male director-general. That is what "fit for purpose" is. In fact, I also want to say ... [Interjections.]
Order, hon members! Hon member, is that a point of order?
On a point of order: The hon member is misleading the House. [Interjections.]
Order, members!
An hon member of the ANC stood here this afternoon to tell this House that when another party comes to government, they will get rid of those people and replace them with their appointees. [Interjections.]
Hon member, can you please take your seat? Continue, hon member.
Hon Chairperson, that is exactly the point. That is what I am saying "fit for purpose" means. With regard to their accountability and their performance assessment, it is to get rid of black people in the context of employment equity. [Interjections.] That is what we have seen in the Western Cape where they are governing. [Interjections.]
Order, hon member! [Interjections.] Order, please!
Madam Chair, I want to say, on a point of order, that I am shocked that you have allowed this debate to take this racial overtone that it has taken now ... [Interjections.] ... and I urge you to control the speaker at the podium and to prevent this from happening. This is bad for Parliament. [Interjections.]
Order, hon member! [Interjections.] Order, please! You may continue, hon member.
Hon Chairperson, I have unpacked what "fit for purpose" means in the context of the DA, that is what I have done. Can I also say service delivery in terms of performance assessment means, and I want to say to the Minister for Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affiars, the people's water has been cut in the Western Cape ... [Interjections.]
Order, hon member! Is that a point of order?
Yes, it is a point of order. The member seems to forget that this is not the Western Cape legislature. [Interjections.] This is the national legislature.
What is your point of order, hon member? [Interjections.]
The hon member Fransman is deliberately misleading this House. [Interjections.]
Order, hon members! Hon member, can you please take your seat.
He is doing it for the second time in less than two weeks, Madam Chair.
Hon member, can you please take your seat? Hon members, just take your seats, please. Hon members, the hon member that is at the podium right now is giving his own political view; therefore, we must allow that person to give his own political view. You may continue, hon member.
Hon Chairperson, it is, in fact, the analysis around performance management in governance ...
Madam Chair, is it parliamentary for the member from the other side of the House to say the member is deliberately misleading the House? [Interjections.]
Hon member, please, let us not disturb the member. Hon Fransman, can you please continue?
Can I also say that the point that the Leader of the Opposition made, just before he ended, about the constitutional democracy, is an interesting point. We must analyse it. Is there a strategy to say we do not want to be part of a national agenda in terms of the various spheres of governance - national, provincial and local - performance-managed?
In fact, it is interesting that we hear the premier speaking about something else in the national Cabinet engagements, and then we are seeing something different in the space here. And therefore, what is taking place?
Also, I want to say to hon member Shilowa - who has just left - speaking about accountability here, we do know that there is much to be answered for when it comes to accountability and delivery in Gauteng.
Let me go back, therefore, to say that as the ANC we are very supportive of this debate, and we believe that the debate should be dealing with the real issues. And the real issues for us currently involve the bureaucracy.
As we are moving forward, hon Minister, as you roll out the monitoring and evaluation in government, will the bureaucracy and the state machinery align themselves into that space? That is something that I believe needs a fundamental reskilling. So that is one area.
Another area is in fact dealing with what we define as the activist role of Parliament. As the government will be moving into communities, as an activist Parliament, we will have to be able to position ourselves also to make sure that the oversight role of monitoring, the oversight role of performance and the oversight role of implementation are being dealt with.
The second-last point: There is a notion that we are dealing a lot with surveys. So we can easily say what the percentage of unemployed people in this country is, we can talk about the percentage of poor people in this country. But we don't always know, Minister, who they are, where they are staying, what levels of skills they have, what delivery opportunities are there, and what I would suggest ... [Interjections.]
Order, hon members!
What I would suggest, therefore, in terms of some of the critical engagement, is to include some of the ground data analysis also in the national survey analysis that has been conducted.
The final point, therefore, is: Let's call on the public and let's call on the administration in government - national, provincial and local - and let's call on all the political parties to support this process. Let's not underplay the value of this process of planning, monitoring and evaluation. Minister, with that, we support your process. [Applause.]
Hon Chairperson, may we respectfully request from the side of the ANC that you do in fact make a ruling on the accusation that the hon member who has just left the podium deliberately misled the House?
Hon member, I was going to deal with that. Hon members, there are rules and conventions of this House. And I just want to appeal to all political parties to try and teach their members about the language that is used in this House, to teach them about the Rules of this House, including the conventions of this House. One of the conventions of this House is that a member cannot say that another member is deliberately misleading the House. Therefore, I want to appeal to the hon member to withdraw that.
Hon Chairperson, with all due respect, I will not do so. [Interjections.]
Hon member, I will repeat: There are conventions and Rules in this House, and therefore, as the person who is presiding, I want you to withdraw "deliberately misleading the House".
Chairperson, I find it quite disturbing that a member would stand here ...
Hon member, I said, just withdraw "deliberately misleading the House".
Well, in that case, Chair ...
Not "in that case". Don't withdraw based on reservations. I am saying that there are Rules and conventions in this House. Therefore you must withdraw: the legotla part.
Chairperson, I withdraw it.
Thank you, hon member. [Applause.] Order, hon members. I now call on the hon Minister in the Presidency. Hon Minister. [Interjections.] Order, please! The MINISTER IN THE PRESIDENCY - PERFORMANCE MONITORING, EVALUATION AND ADMINISTRATION IN THE PRESIDENCY: Chairperson, hon Ministers, Deputy Ministers and members, I would like to thank members for the support they have shown to this debate and for the issues raised related to the contents of the Green Paper. Members have raised very important points and we take those points as contributions to the process of strengthening what we are trying to do.
We would like to admit that we don't have all the wisdom and knowledge for the work we need to perform and we believe that our strength lies in the multitude of brains and experience which is available in the country as a whole. Therefore, the comments that have been made by the Members of Parliament will make a great contribution to improving both the contents of the paper and the effectiveness of the work which we will perform. I would like to allude to just a few issues that might have not been raised now but were raised before.
Firstly, we have received a lot of comments from interested parties - mostly in writing - which have been very valuable for us to improve the content of the paper and also the work which we must do.
There is a question that has been asked in the past about how we will relate to the audit between ourselves and the Auditor-General. I would like to add the Public Protector because some of the issues the Public Protector will deal with are complaints from the public with regard to the services which we have to deliver.
I would like to announce that we have agreed with the Auditor-General that there will be a quarterly meeting between our office and the Auditor- General. We will look at the issues which arise from the work they do with the various institutions and government. If there are necessary interventions that we need to make, these will be made even before the Auditor-General presents the report.
As I have said, it will include other institutions and the Public Protector. We are here to have a discussion with the Standing Committee on Public Accounts in Parliament and the legislatures, to understand how we are going to interface and how our work is going to enhance the accountability role which Parliament has to play and vice versa.
Other comments which we have received, in terms of the contents of the paper, include that we did not pay specific attention to the international experiences and to the work which is being done by various international organisations with regard to monitoring and evaluation. We have also not paid attention to setting proper benchmarks related to the international experience in order for our work and that of the country also to be benchmarked within the international experience. It is an area we need to strengthen, to ensure that we at least accommodate that view. The other area which has been raised is how we are going to work with the institutions. We have realised that, in the Green Paper, we did not go into detail with regard to how we are going to work with other institutions in the country. We have started discussions with universities to see what role they can play and what expertise we can tap from them as well as what amount of work and service they can do to assist us to undertake our work. We are doing so and consulting in that manner because we believe that the work we must do will be very valuable, not only for the Presidency but for all South Africans.
I understand the comments of the members of both the ruling party and the opposition parties, that all of us are committed to seeing an improvement in government performance. We all want to ensure that the priorities and services are delivered and all of us as members agreed that, together, we are going to strengthen those areas that need to be delivered.
I know that as time goes on, however, there will be a disagreement, particularly on one area of how we interpret accountability and especially with regard to various people who are supposed to execute other responsibilities. I hope that even in that area, all of us will be united, to see the improvement of the work we are supposed to do as government and to deliver a better service and quality of service to the communities that we serve.
An issue has been raised about whether we should not start in the Western Cape. I would like to warn against using the institution of performance and management, whether to settle political scores or to make a political point. It is very important for us to be aware that we have taken much care, from the beginning, to ensure that the work we do is aimed at improving the performance of government everywhere.
I can confirm that we had a number of discussions with various politicians in the Western Cape, including the premier, with regard to this work, both multilaterally and bilaterally. We have not seen any hostility with regard to the work we must do. I would like to confirm that at least for now, until we start to work, we should not judge people by where they stand but by what is supposed to happen.
There is an issue that has been raised with regard to the extent to which we want to provide information which will be available. We have said at the beginning when we have started that the work which we do is not underground, but open. Our performance targets are the ones which will be public, the ones which will be agreed to and which are supposed to be dealt with.
One member said that we should not set unrealistic targets. It is not our intention to set unrealistic targets. We think we will set targets jointly with the stakeholders who will be involved so that all of us commit ourselves to deliver a better service to our people.
A warning sign has been given with regard to what is called a delivery unit. The Green Paper is very clear and deliberate that a delivery unit is an intervention strategy for those who need assistance with regard to several areas where they need additional capacity, in order to deliver the type of service or to resolve a particular problem which might arise. We have said, even in the paper, it will be done in partnership and agreement.
Those who are involved in the line function and those spheres of government that will be responsible for their function, must understand that we are just providing support to ensure that a particular service is delivered properly or that a particular problem is resolved. It is not for us to take over the responsibility to deal with those issues.
One of the issues that have been raised relates to our approach to the hotline. We have said in the Green Paper that we are not a line function department and where problems arise we are not going to take over those functions. Our responsibility is to make sure that things are being done properly and efficiently and as fast as expected by the communities. Therefore, if issues are raised within the context of the hotline or within the context of any mechanism or any medium which will be used to interact with society, it is the responsibility of those departments or institutions which have to perform those functions.
That is why we have established a forum for ourselves and the various departments and the provinces. We will then be able to check and get people to follow up, to ensure that those things are attended to and responses are provided to the society out there.
We are currently busy with discussions with the parastatals and state-owned institutions. Sometimes it will probably help us to deal with some of the questions which you have raised such as how people will get bonuses, on the one hand, when the state institution is losing money on the other. Hopefully, we will be able to address those types of issues or find solutions which we believe will be beneficial not only to government, but also to society in general.
Finally, I would like to thank members for their contributions and would like to welcome those who have inputs in writing to bring them to us so that we can incorporate them into our work, as we finalise the work. We believe that we will continue to improve the mechanisms we are putting in place. It is not the final bite. We will continue to improve as we get experience and more information on how we need to conduct our work. I thank you. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.