Hon Chairperson and hon members, there have been several strands of work to review the workings of the civil service and the public sector in general, before and after the 2009 elections.
Since the inauguration of this administration, the Minister in the Presidency responsible for performance monitoring and evaluation was mandated by Cabinet to lead a process called the macro-organisation of the state. This built on previous reviews, which necessitated the creation of new departments aimed at improving effectiveness and streamlining government programmes.
Given the importance that government has placed on the transformation of the Public Service, we have included this project in the 12 outcomes designed to improve the performance of the state. The aim is to build an efficient, effective and development-oriented Public Service.
Government, led by the President, has had a number of engagements with public servants including school principals, municipal managers, police station commanders and directors-general. These engagements have focused precisely on the issues raised by hon Mokgobi, such as improving the capacity and performance of the state in relation to meeting the electoral mandate. In addition, these engagements have emphasised the need to strengthen intergovernmental relations since, in many instances, service delivery is slowed down due to poor co-ordination among the spheres of government.
The National Planning Commission has an important role to play in shaping the manner in which we do things in government. As Minister Manuel has said on countless occasions, his portfolio will help us develop a long-term plan which will impact on the organisation and capacity of the state as we seek to improve our ability to tackle the challenges of modest growth, employment, service delivery and human capital development. Thank you.
Chairperson, could the Deputy President tell us whether the government is considering implementing a single Public Service for all the three spheres of government, or is it considering engaging with other political parties to end the deployment of party cadres into the Public Service?
Chairperson, hon members, indeed, the government is seized with the matter of processing the establishment of a single Public Service; that's a work in progress. With regard to the second part of the question, in all countries parties go to elections, and the party that leads government has a right to deploy in strategic senior managerial positions those who are committed and understand the manifesto of that particular party. In countries such as the United States there is, in fact, a book the size of a telephone directory that identifies the posts that change with the change of governing party. Everyone understands that at that level, particularly at the senior strategic level, if the party that appointed them to those posts loses elections, they move out. It is understood; it's established.
In the United Kingdom, the public service bureaucrats prepare two booklets. If there are three parties, as was the case recently, they would prepare three booklets based on the manifestos of the parties contesting elections. They then lock up those books. Whichever party comes in, they pull out those books and say that that's the programme to be implemented.
Therefore this is not unique to South Africa. What we should perhaps be taking into account is the level because our senior management positions are at the level of directors-general, known as permanent secretaries in other countries. They are called permanent secretaries, and we call them directors-general. Our directors-general come in on contracts for a period of no less than five years. Some are able to stay on for 10 years and so on.
I think this is a very critical question, particularly with regard to the stability of the Public Service. There is a level at which we should always ensure that there is stability and a sense of permanence. However, there is an upper senior level which is really where the political appointees are located. At that level, there should be no debate about the right of any governing party to make appointments.
The assumption that people who are associated or related with one party or the other are inherently inefficient, inexperienced and of low skills is a wrong assumption. For instance, if we are - like we are in South Africa - a nation of activists, there would be no level at which you would not find people who have one preference or the other in terms of their political affiliation. The point, however, is that if they are public servants, they should act professionally. That is the point that we should all agree on as an important element in the consideration of appointments of public servants. Thank you.
Chairperson, the Deputy President is absolutely right about those senior appointments and I don't think one can argue about that; it's an internationally accepted norm. However, does the Deputy President then imply that the appointment of cadres to positions below those levels - regardless of how they are determined - is indeed a practice that should be looked at, and is the government looking at that?
Furthermore, could the Deputy President tell us whether the government is investigating the validity - or the bad practice, perhaps of the state doing business with employees of the state or their families? Thank you.
The question of deployment has been satisfactorily replied to by the Deputy President. I don't think we should begin to open a debate on that. If you want a debate, you can call for a debate. However, the Deputy President may want to respond to the last part of the question.
Well, I was responding to the question well aware that there are administrative requirements. Any public post is advertised and the requirements are stipulated in the adverts. There are panels and, for instance, even at the level of a director-general, Cabinet follows certain set protocols. For example, the interviewing panel would consist of no fewer than three Ministers, including a DG from another department, just to ensure that the successful candidate would have gone through a rigorous process. So those are administrative processes that cannot be overridden by simple political appointments.
However, there are posts are just filled by political appointments. As I said earlier, with regard to such posts, it's a given that the governing party would deal with them in that fashion. What was the second question?
What was the last part of your question, Mr Lees?
Chairperson, the question was whether the government is looking into the issue of public servants and their role in doing business with the state or members of their families who do business with the state as being a practice that should, perhaps, be outlawed.
Yes, that practice is wrong and steps are being taken to ensure that it does not happen. The report of the Auditor-General has revealed that there are public officials who do business or have an interest in companies that do business with their own departments. That is impermissible. It is something that must never be allowed, and there are processes to deal with that challenge.
That also goes for relatives. As you know, the Local Government: Municipal Finance Management Act also specifically debars relatives of public servants and public officials from doing business with the municipalities. So that's something that is being attended to. Thank you.
Hon Chairperson and hon Deputy President, thank you for the opportunity. In terms of one of the narratives of the Public Service Act, the President, the Deputy President, Ministers and pemiers are allowed to or provision is made for them to appoint special advisers in various capacities. In terms of an answer to a question that I posed to the Minister for the Public Service and Administration, a list was provided, which indicated that 72 special advisers had been appointed to various Ministers, including the President, the Deputy President and, naturally, the premiers.
Now, I'm happy to see that the Deputy President thought it wise to appoint only one special adviser, contrary to the President and some of the Ministers who have four. The question that I want to pose to the Deputy President is: In terms of the question posed, what is the role of special advisers in this new dispensation? [Interjections.]
Well, special advisers give special advice on special issues. [Laughter.] That is what they are there for. [Interjections.] These would be men and women who add value and enhance the capacity of the principals to perform because the responsibilities that lie on the shoulders of a head of state are quite onerous. Therefore it is important that there should be a team of people that can ensure that the country is given good and effective leadership. That is why there is no fixed number, as it were, with regard to special advisers. The President can appoint as many special advisers as is required. Thank you.
Visits to provinces as part of War on Poverty campaign and report on issues raised by communities 10. Ms M P Themba (ANC) asked the Deputy President:
(1) Whether he or the President visited any province as part of the Government's War on Poverty campaign or anti-poverty programme since the new government took office in 2009; if not, why not; if so, how many provinces were visited;
(2) whether the government (a) compiled a report of the issues raised by communities and (b) established mechanisms to (i) address and (ii) follow up on the issues; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether reports of this nature are discussed at Cabinet level or sent to provinces for consideration and action; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so,
(4) whether any of the Ministries and/or provinces have reported to the Presidency on their progress in addressing the issues; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what is the overall assessment of the responses of the departments and/or provinces in addressing the issues?