Chairperson, Ministers and Deputy Ministers present, hon members, distinguished guests, members of our intelligence community, intelligence veterans and fellow South Africans, on 2 May 1994, President Nelson Mandela called on all South Africans to "join together to celebrate the birth of democracy". He implored us to "build the future together ... to work together to tackle the problems we face as a nation". He said that "We must, together and without delay, begin to build a better life for all South Africans."
To us this includes fighting poverty, creating jobs, building houses, providing education and bringing peace and security for all.
Seventeen years down the line, as we table this Budget Vote, the nation has done much in redressing the socioeconomic inequalities caused by decades of apartheid and colonial oppression. We are therefore pleased to report to this House that our nation is prospering, stable and secure.
There are no discernible threats to our constitutional order. The strategic choices we have made as the ANC government have ensured that together we developed a strong patriotism and national identity, and strengthened and protected our democratic institutions. Notwithstanding the prevailing peace and security, we remain vigilant and united in our collective effort to uphold the national security of our young developmental state.
We are relentlessly pursuing this mandate by focusing on the following objectives: firstly, the development of an integrated and focused multisource collection capability that advances our national interests and mitigates against threats identified in our intelligence estimate; secondly, the development of a highly effective and target-driven counterintelligence capability to defend our country's national interests; and, thirdly, these priorities will be supported by focused skills development, improved analytic and technical capabilities, good corporate governance and accountability, and an organisational culture that carefully balances the secrecy required to achieve our mandate and openness based on the values of commitment to democracy, loyalty and professionalism.
The restructuring of the civilian intelligence structures into the State Security Agency has indeed taken off under the stewardship of the director- general, Ambassador Jeff Maqetuka. There is no going back and duplicating the past. It is also appropriate at this stage to thank Prof Sandy Africa - I'm not sure where she is - who was seconded by the University of Pretoria as head of our Corporate Services to guide the integration of different agencies. She has been the engine of this restructuring process. Prof Africa, as you go back to this outstanding African institution, kindly convey our gratitude to the senior vice-principal, Prof Chris de Beer, and the principal, Prof Cheryl de la Rey, for their patriotism, loyalty and partnership in building this new department. Indeed, "Working together, we can build a safe nation and a secure world."
We have concluded and approved the new structures of the agency. We have filled the critical posts of chief financial officer, chief information officer and head: internal audit. In addition, we have tightened up our regulatory mechanism by issuing the necessary directive and uniform conditions of service for the agency.
Owing to the different IT systems that were in place, the process of integration of these IT systems is taking longer than expected, but we are doing this in order to ensure that information is secured and migrated properly to maintain accuracy and integrity. However, we have made progress in that we now have a single asset register, payroll, budget management, financial accounting and procurement systems. It is envisaged that the system integration process will be finalised in the next financial year and will result in savings for the organisation.
As part of the next milestone, we have continued to make appointments particularly in the senior management of our agency. We will focus our efforts on addressing the imbalance in gender and ageing personnel profile.
In order to codify the Presidential Proclamation of 2009 that created the State Security Agency, we are completing preliminary consultations on the State Security Bill, which is due to be considered by Cabinet before tabling in Parliament this year.
In his 2011 state of the nation address, President Jacob Zuma declared 2011 as the year of job creation. We will focus on the retention of our members and recruitment of the young and unemployed in our society. This year we plan to fill approximately 300 posts. We shall prioritise the filling of all vacant funded posts in areas such as analysis, vetting, economic intelligence, border intelligence and IT security.
The restructuring process also involved the development and integration of our intelligence technology platforms. We have concluded the audit of technology resources at the National Communication Centre and at the Interception and Communications Security facilities.
We continue to provide lawful intercepts to law-enforcement agencies. In the last financial year, the quality of our information was further enhanced by the use of new positioning tools. This contributed significantly to our fight against crime. In this financial year, we intend to conclude policy on the electronic direction system and on the distribution network in order to improve service delivery and reduce the turnaround time. We will do this after consultations with the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence and Judge Khumalo, who is responsible for issuing directions on communications.
The State Security Agency has the responsibility of determining the national security posture within the organs of state. Comsec conducted security assessments of 135 organs of state, consisting of 32 national departments, 24 provincial departments, 28 municipalities and 51 public entities. This year we will be focusing on obtaining full international accreditation of our National Trust Centres.
We have made significant progress in finalising the National Security Strategy alongside our conceptualisation of the National Interest Doctrine. Consultations with critical role-players in and outside the security structures have been initiated to enrich these concepts. The State Security Agency has conducted research to address long-term challenges in the food, water and energy security sectors.
Another strategic sector that has been identified is dual use technologies that have both security and commercial applications. These technologies involve major aspects of our country's competitiveness and innovative capacity for commercial market access and national security. In this financial year, the agency will intensify its work of co-ordinating the interdepartmental task team that is conducting an assessment of resources and activities of the peaceful programmes related to the field of nuclear, biological, chemical, aerospace and missile technologies.
The task team is expected to develop a national strategy for promoting research, technological development, innovation, co-ordination, integration and oversight in the field of these dual use technologies in the Republic. The strategy will also ensure that these technologies do not find their way into the hands of criminals and terrorist networks.
In 2010, the National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee, Nicoc, led the work of stakeholder departments to prepare for the setting up of the Border Management Agency. This work was based on the understanding that the BMA would be a new structure with the requisite powers to enable the state to address long-standing problems of fragmentation, duplication and the ineffective use of resources in the border environment.
The model approved by the justice, crime prevention and security - JCPS - Cabinet committee is moving away from the current co-ordination model to an integration model that provides for the integration of functions, staff, infrastructure and the centralisation of authority around issues of security at our ports of entry. The migration to the new model will be completed by 2014.
Regarding the illicit economy, in 2010 we reported a loss in the gold industry amounting to about R6,7 billion. We have, with the co-operation and collaboration of other government departments, subsequently scoped the extent of the illicit economy, which is estimated to be about 10% of our GDP, quantifying a loss of about R178 billion for our economy. This illicit economy has the potential of seriously compromising our new economic growth path, and is costing South Africa hundreds of thousands of jobs. The scoping exercise revealed that this economic threat was rife in the mining, textile and tobacco industries. These illicit activities create unfair competition for legitimate businesses and industries, erode the corporate tax base, distort trade, violate foreign exchange regulations, and create conditions conducive to espionage. This year, the security and economic clusters of government will focus on attracting and developing specialised skills and sophisticated technologies to counter this illicit economy.
Coming to fraud and corruption: the eradication of fraud and corruption within the security cluster is an important prerequisite to fight this scourge in society as a whole. The State Security Agency, working together with the Financial Services Board, the FSB, completed an investigation relating to the management of the Group Life Scheme for our members of the civilian intelligence community. The report found that there were cases of theft, fraud and possible corruption by the insurance brokers, negligence by the insurance company, and mismanagement by the intelligence management.
The insurance company paid a significant ex gratia amount to compensate the fund. Those who committed fraud, particularly the broker, have been referred to the police and the National Prosecuting Authority for investigation and prosecution. In addition, the FSB withdrew the licence of the insurance broker and disbarred the owner for a period of five years.
Comsec will continue to focus on the protection of critical national infrastructure and information security. We have received positive feedback from the piloting of the early warning system conducted at Telkom and the State Information Technology Agency, Sita, indicating the need for a rigorous roll-out of this programme. I am pleased to note that the ad hoc committee on the Protection of Information Bill is progressing well, and I do hope they will consult and conclude this work in the near future.
This critical piece of legislation will be central to our resolve to deal with clear and present dangers that threaten our national security. We have commenced with the drafting of the regulations and directives to prioritise the implementation of the Bill when it becomes law.
We also seek to deal with the backlog on vetting, which is a critical aspect of the counterintelligence mandate, in the next three years. We intend to extend our vetting field units beyond the national departments to prioritised provincial and local spheres.
Accordingly, this endeavour will be accompanied by the exponential increase of our vetting and security advising capacity through recruitment and use of technology. We also intend to utilise intelligence veterans to improve the turnaround time. Particular focus will also be dedicated to the proper appointment and training of security managers across government departments and other state entities.
Securing major events has become the flagship programme of the agency. We continue to build on the lessons of securing events such as the 2010 Fifa World Cup. In May 2011, we conducted successful local government elections. The State Security Agency screened over 60 000 Independent Electoral Commission, IEC, officials and provided regular briefings and risk assessments to the IEC.
We have advanced plans to secure the 123rd International Olympic Committee General Council in Durban in the next few weeks. Similarly, we have commenced with the preparations to secure the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, COP 17, in Durban later this year.
We have also begun work to secure the celebration of 100 years of the ANC. This is turning out not to be an ANC or South African event, as it is being claimed by the whole of Africa and the democratic world. [Applause.]
We will intensify our efforts in strengthening our internal consultation mechanisms to make sure that an environment conducive to work is created for all our members.
Since the beginning of this year, Africa has had a number of developments, positive and negative, in its various regions. SADC continues to be the most stable region, despite challenges in Madagascar, Zimbabwe, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Lesotho and Swaziland. Our radar screen will focus on these countries in our quest for democracy, peace and stability. In addition, we have also now launched our SADC Early Warning Centre in Botswana.
In East Africa we have improved relations, particularly with Rwanda, which is a positive development after our heads of state met. We remain concerned by the situation in Somalia and the increasing threat of piracy, particularly on our eastern shores. We also remain seized with the situation in Sudan and support those who were involved in the negotiations.
The popular uprisings in North Africa and the Middle East have brought into sharp focus the quest for freedom. We thus call, in Africa and beyond, for the recognition of these legitimate democratic aspirations, and an end to the use of force and violence.
We would also like to reiterate the AU call for an end to all hostilities in Libya, and we call on all Libyan authorities to involve inclusive dialogue and the creation of democratic institutions in their transition to democracy.
We also call on Nato not to depart from what has been required by the UN Security Council Resolutions 1970 and 1973, in order to ensure that the shooting of ordinary citizens is stopped and that the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Libya is dealt with.
In Cte d'Ivoire we will continue to work with President Ouattara in ensuring that there is unity among the people of Cte d'Ivoire, and we will assist them as they require assistance with the reconciliation processes.
Chairperson, as you know we are now a member of the Brics - Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa - organisation, and we are co-ordinating with the Bric countries in order to intensify our efforts in restructuring the UN, particularly the UN Security Council, and as South Africa we would like to develop. I thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]
Hon Chairperson, hon Ministers that may be present in the House, hon members, members of the intelligence community, the Inspector- General of Intelligence, Ambassador Adv Radebe, and distinguished guests, the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, commonly referred to as the JSCI, in terms of legislation, has an oversight function over all intelligence entities that have been established in our country.
You are aware, as the hon Minister has now reminded you, that this Budget Vote relates, however, to the Ministry of State Security and the recently established State Security Agency, also known as the SSA, not CIA. This intelligence family, for which the hon Minister is responsible, is generally referred to as the civilian intelligence.
We do, nonetheless, have here in our presence today members of other intelligence entities. Firstly, there is defence intelligence, for which the hon Minister of Defence and Military Veterans is responsible. Also, there is crime intelligence, which is a division of the SA Police Service, and falls under the Minister of Police. I mention this, because a practice has developed in this Budget Vote in which speakers have used the opportunity to redress matters that also relate to defence intelligence and crime intelligence, and some of my colleagues will indeed be doing this.
Hon Minister Cwele has spoken well. Having regard for what he said, we are generally in agreement, particularly as he has concentrated on the question of national security of the Republic.
When I spoke during this Budget Vote debate last year, it was on the eve of the Soccer World Cup. I too spent considerable time speaking on matters of national security. At that time, I reminded the House that there were good people who work silently and dutifully out of the public eye, and who play a major role in protecting the people of this country by the nature of the work that they do. I said then that these people never get credit for the work they do. Yet, they are the ones that are at the forefront of producing the products that warn us of threats to our national security. I also said that we need to acknowledge their contribution.
Moreover, I made reference to section 198 of our Constitution, which sets out the principles which govern the national security of the Republic. One of these principles is:
National security must reflect the resolve of South Africans, as individuals and as a nation, to live as equals, to live in peace and harmony, to be free from fear and want and to seek a better life.
If our national security is to reflect the resolve of our people, as provided for by the Constitution, then it is essential that we, as a people, develop a deeper understanding of just what national security is. While this is a matter that impacts on all our people and in particular the masses, today it is the so-called legal experts, academics, political experts and commentators who are the ones that appear to drive the agenda of what really constitutes the national security of the Republic.
Yet, there is no single universally accepted definition of national security. If one were to take a typical dictionary definition, you could be misled. For example, the Farlex Dictionary defines national security as, and I quote: "the requirement to maintain the survival of the nation-state through the use of economic, military, political power and the exercise of diplomacy".
Today, it is generally accepted that the concept of national security remains ambiguous, since it originated from simpler definitions, which initially emphasised freedom from military threats and political coercion.
However, following the Holocaust of the Second World War, in which the estimated death toll was said to be in the vicinity of 55 million people, the international approach and thinking on national security changed. Accordingly, in the area of peace and security, there developed the concept of human security. This has probably been the most fundamental change in thinking on peace and the prevention of conflict.
This revolutionary idea of national security has resulted in a new approach, and more recent definitions have adopted a much broader approach to national security. Therefore, new definitions include elements such as political, economic and environmental security. And so we see a more modern and recent definition, which is freely accessible on the Internet, and I quote:
National security then is the ability to preserve the nation's physical integrity and territory; to maintain its economic relations with the rest of the world on reasonable terms; to preserve its nature, institution, and governance from disruption from outside; and to control its borders.
The point is that what constitutes the national security of a state differs from state to state. It is, therefore, important that we as South Africans give effect to section 198 of our Constitution and develop our own understanding of what we see as matters that affect our national security.
I have raised the matter of national security because there is a misconception amongst many people that national security matters are simply about guns and war. This is not the case. That is the approach that is adopted very often by the experts that we see on television, commentators and other academics.
The ad hoc committee dealing with the Protection of Information Bill has had to look very seriously at the question of national security. It now forms the sole basis on which information can be classified. I therefore urge the public and hon members to consider what the matters really are that affect our national security, as this could help in broadening your understanding of what the Bill is, in fact, trying to do.
One cannot end a debate on national security without having regard for the co-ordination of the work that is done by intelligence entities. Thus, it is essential for the National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee, commonly known as Nicoc, to function effectively. It is an area that we as the JSCI have noted needs considerable attention, hon Minister. Nicoc is an institution that is created by a constitution. In the past, Nicoc was responsible for producing wonderful work. We trust that the new Nicoc principles will attend urgently to bringing Nicoc back to its full operational potential, as a dysfunctional Nicoc is clearly going to affect our national security.
In conclusion, hon Chairperson ... I still have three minutes, hon members. [Interjections.] It appears that some of the hon members have no respect for what really constitutes our national security, and yet we have continual complaints from people about what is being done. You think only of crime; you think only of guns, and yet the threats that are facing our country, that are facing our national security, are much, much broader. It is a narrow-minded person that is going to reduce national security to the level that some of the commentators and some of the hon members that are here - whispering here in the background - are thinking.
Hon Chairperson, we have heard the Minister, we are in agreement with his speech and we are in agreement with his budget, and we support the Budget Vote. Thank you. [Applause.]
Hon Chairperson, Minister, members and guests, owing to the secretive nature of the operations of intelligence services, these services have often been abused for political purposes. This occurrence is not unique to South Africa, but it was certainly a feature of the security service during the apartheid era.
Unaccountable officials of immense power were able to abuse systems and distort outcomes, resulting in serious infractions of the rule of law. During the 1980s and early 1990s the securocrats created a parallel state known as the National Security Management System, which bypassed even those limited mechanisms of parliamentary oversight that were available. The culmination of this process was the declaration of successive states of emergency in the 1980s, in which people were detained, tortured and even killed. During the constitutional negotiations it was possible to insert into the Constitution provisions that guaranteed proper oversight by Parliament of the security and intelligence services.
Section 199(8) of the Constitution provides that, "to give effect to the principles of transparency and accountability, multiparty parliamentary committees must have oversight of all security services in a manner determined by national legislation or the rules and orders of Parliament".
The Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence was established in terms of section 2 of the Intelligence Services Oversight Act of 1994. The Act makes provision, subject to the Constitution, for the performance of oversight functions set out in the Act. Section 5 provides that, "The committee shall conduct its functions in a manner consistent with the protection of national security."
In practice, members must be security vetted by the National Intelligence Agency, NIA. Thereafter the committee meets in a secured facility across the road. All its sessions are secret. No information or documentation may leave the committee room, and no member may disclose any information obtained in the course of committee briefings or deliberations. Obviously, this severely limits our ability to debate issues relating to state security publicly, in any meaningful way.
One of the functions of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence is to obtain from the Auditor-General an audit report compiled in accordance with section 4(6) of the Auditor-General Act, Act 12 of 1995, and after obtaining the report, to consider, one, the financial statements of the services, the academy and Comsec; and, two, any report issued by the Auditor-General on the affairs of the services and the intelligence services entities and report thereon to Parliament, within two months after 31 March of each year, on the activities of the committee during the preceding year, together with the findings made by it and the recommendations it deems appropriate, and to provide a copy to the President and the responsible Minister. Then there is the so-called Secret Service Evaluation Committee, which is obliged to submit a report on the secret services budget and expenditure to the JSCI in order to ensure proper oversight. This committee has, however, not been established. Then, again, we are awaiting the annual reports from the services and entities.
During this year, the JSCI held budget discussions with the civil intelligence services and entities, crime intelligence and defence intelligence. These discussions form an integral part of our oversight exercise. All JSCI members are vetted in accordance with the prescribed Act, but we are still not in a position to obtain much-needed documentation. The JSCI should be in a position to oversee quarterly reports and be pro-active, but fulfil a role similar to that of Scopa in which we have to work with historic information.
The seriousness of oversight cannot be overemphasised. If we cannot get this right, we may easily find ourselves in the same situation as in the 1980s high point of unaccountability. Currently, the only available document from the Auditor-General to members of the JSCI was his pro-forma statement that audits were performed according to the necessary audit practices and according to a category, declaring his opinion. No financial statements were attached in order to do proper oversight prior to this Budget Vote debate. If we as a committee want to do justice to our task and provide a service to Parliament and our country, we should look at exploring mechanisms to change the practice from working without historic information to a committee that is proactive and deals with real-time information.
Since April 2011, the services and our Minister were dominant in local newspapers and abroad, whilst the following was published in the Mail & Guardian, South Africa, on 8 April 2011, and I quote:
Spooks Back to their Old Tricks Unfortunately the consolidation of immense powers in the hands of spies loyal to Jacob Zuma and the ANC likely signal worse to come, if not for the party then for democracy.
In the City Press of 3 April 2011 it was reported that, "Crime intelligence 'completely dysfunctional'" and that "tensions between Cele and Mdluli were running high after two police intelligence operatives paid an unannounced visit to Public Protector Thuli Madonsela's office".
This is only a small sample of behavioural actions by individuals in the security environment that have a negative impact on its functionality. Actions like these should not happen in an open and transparent society. It is precisely for this reason that I think the JSCI should be trusted with timeous information in order to assist with its oversight mandate. I thank you. [Applause.]
Chairperson, I am not a member of this committee, so I can speak more freely. I googled famous spies and came across the 10 most famous spies according to Google. It was clear that these men and women paid the highest price and many died young.
The most famous one was Mata Hari, the stage name for the Dutch-born Margaretha Geertruida Zelle, who was an exotic dancer and a high-class prostitute in Paris. She spied for Germany and was executed at the age of 41 by a firing squad. There is no South African connection on the top 10 list, but 5 out of the 10 famous spies spied for the Soviet Union.
When you are dealing with national intelligence and state security, it is all about trust. Today, I want to address the topic of whether the abuse of state security is not a serious challenge to the rule of law in South Africa. Since May 2008, we have experienced often confusing legal battles between what appears to be sectional interests in the legal profession.
Initially, the matter centred on accusations by constitutional judges that Judge Hlophe had tried to influence their decisions in the case against the President. The battles and debates that have raged since then had little to do with whether citizens could trust the independence of the judiciary, or whether Judge Hlophe did try to influence the judges or not. They were all about power; all about intelligence. The National Prosecuting Authority's decision to drop the charges against the President was a vindication for many ANC supporters who had argued that the NPA had acted unfairly to influence the timing of the trial to undermine the President's chances of being elected as leader of the ANC.
Serious questions were raised about how the evidence of the NPA's Leonard McCarthy's indiscretion was obtained by the President's legal team from the National Intelligence Agency. There are still unresolved questions. Why was it necessary for the NIA to monitor the National Prosecuting Authority's telephone calls? And, are they still doing it? Are they monitoring Members of Parliament's telephone calls? Are they monitoring Cabinet Members' telephone calls?
This is all about the threat to the separation of powers, which is the cornerstone of the rule of law. Let me remind this House what the meaning of the rule of law is. The rule of law provides that no person is above the law; that no one can be punished by the state except for a breach of the law; and that no one can be convicted of breaching the law except in a manner set forth by the law.
So, no Rex, Lex: the king is law, but rather the law is king. We are a Reichstag - call it a constitutional state in which the exercise of governmental power is constrained by law; in which you are transparent in all state acts and in which you can review state actions by independent organs. But is this the case?
The Institute for Security Studies puts it bluntly, and I quote: "The National Intelligence Authority appears to have bowed to political influence in both monitoring the head of the NPA and handing the tapes to President Zuma's legal team."
Exactly three years after the NPA incident, Human Settlements Minister Tokyo Sexwale called a press conference in order to respond to a purported intelligence report implicating him and other ANC leaders in a plot to get rid of President Zuma as party leader. [Interjections.] Minister Sexwale was also implicated together with ANC heavyweights Cyril Ramaphosa and Mathews Phosa in a plot to unseat Thabo Mbeki. [Interjections.] At that media conference, he asked pertinent questions as to why these rumours always coincide with the run-up to the ANC's conferences.
Minister Sexwale said at this media conference, and I am quoting him - I quote your Minister now - "The incident showed a serious abuse of state power and resources in the conduct of illegal and criminal activity by high- ranking members of the police." Now the question is: What is the NIA doing about this, and will the Minister assure us in this House that the NIA will not be involved again and that it will protect and honour the rule of law at all times? Only time will tell in the run-up to the 2012 ANC conference. I thank you. [Applause.]
Hon Chairperson, hon Minister and hon members, the number of intelligence structures that serve state security is a clear indication of how important and essential this portfolio is in government. These structures include crime intelligence, defence intelligence, the National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee, the SA Secret Service, both national and international, and the agencies. The focal point of all these services is national security, peace and stability.
On this point, it is imperative that they should all be united, co- ordinated and speak with one voice. They should jealously guard and protect all state secrets, as contained in secret documents and reports. It is accordingly disturbing and threatening if such secret reports are leaked to the media, as has been witnessed recently in this country. This sends a negative message, which is symptomatic of strife, conflict and distrust among members of our intelligence forces. The country simply cannot tolerate any signs of discord and disharmony among state security members. We appeal to the Minister to look into this matter.
The IFP is also convinced that internal peace and stability can never be guaranteed as long as instability and insecurity prevail on our borders and in the rest of Africa. On the issue of coastal piracy, what assurances can the Minister give us that this situation is being properly monitored and that all necessary resources are deployed to ensure that coastal piracy does not occur in South African waters? We are not here assuming that nothing is being done, but we are appealing that the Minister keep the citizenry informed and assured that something is being done.
Our government should be further compelled to commit to championing a course of democracy and political tolerance on the rest of the continent, particularly amongst our neighbours Swaziland and Zimbabwe. Our country's position as the economic powerhouse of Africa places on us a unique responsibility to assume a leadership role to support the success of our neighbours. This role should not be mere quiet diplomacy, but should be positive engagement with dictatorial African leaders, such as Colonel Muammar Gaddafi. On this score, I fully endorse what my leader, Mntwana Wakwa-Phindangene, said in his remarks on Africa Day on 25 May this year. He said:
Our continued silence on Zimbabwe has made us complicit in our neighbour's woes. Likewise, our government was slow to speak out on Libya, while the international world was swift to react and engage the problem. I do not think South Africa could be seen as interfering, when we on this continent have a long and shared history of struggle for freedom. It does not enhance solidarity to say that a government can rule our fellow Africans in whatever way it pleases, whilst we, on the other hand, turn the other way.
Indeed, we expect President Zuma to be quick to condemn and denounce dictatorial rulers anywhere in Africa.
However, I would like to compliment the President for his appointment of Adv Radebe as Inspector General of Intelligence on the strong and unanimous recommendation of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, JSCI. The lady is a typical new broom which sweeps clean. During her short period in office, she has managed to draft regulations which have been outstanding since 1994. The IFP supports the Budget Vote. I thank you. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Hon Chair, hon Ministers and Deputy Ministers present, hon members, distinguished guests, members of the intelligence community, intelligence veterans, and fellow South Africans, firstly, I don't want to discuss the question of Cope, which is deteriorating. I think they need to have intelligence in their company. [Laughter.] That is why they are deteriorating; disintegrating, in fact. [Interjections.]
When it comes to the DA, there were many brutal laws that were used against the people of South Africa. Amongst them was a 90 days of detention Act in terms of which people were tortured for a 90-day peroid, and they were silent - they supported that in Parliament. [Interjections.] When people were dying and thrown over ... Those were scandals, and they covered them up. They were silent. Fortunately, the hon Stubbe was among those intelligence people then.
We note the progress made in the establishment of the new department: the State Security Agency, SSA. We remain convinced that this is the way the department should be configured to ensure efficiency and entrenchment of the principles of cohesiveness, co-operation and interdependence within the intelligence agencies under the control of the Minister. The approval of the directives on conditions of service within this newly created department signals a milestone in the restructuring process. We trust that this achievement shall bring about the desired calm in the department for both leadership and members in this critical transitional phase, which might sometimes lead to frustration and raise anxiety levels in any organisation undergoing a process of change.
The ANC notes the gains made in the integration of operating systems into a single SSA operating system. We congratulate the Minister and his department's leadership on this achievement. It is, however, noteworthy to register our concern with the challenges that are reported to be hampering the process of system integration. We cannot overemphasise the importance of information integrity and the impact the system has in modern-day organisational performance. The Minister and the senior leadership of the SSA must prioritise this area, as critical management and reporting information is recorded and extracted from these very same systems. These reports become a performance measurement tool and are further utilised to set performance targets for the department on financial resource management matters. It is trusted that in his next address the Minister will report that there has been remarkable progress on this front.
The ANC notes the Minister's commitment to filling the positions at senior and middle-management levels with appropriately qualified personnel through a transparent process of open advertisement. We would like to stress the importance of this principle. One hundred percent adherence to this principle will go a long way in enhancing the members' morale and loyalty towards the organisation, its processes and the Republic of South Africa. Simple mathematical calculation holds that fairness is equal to good morale, and is equal to increased productivity.
We note the gender representivity challenge with the appointments made in the SSA to date. We acknowledge the Minister's commitment to addressing this challenge in the appointment of the next layer of management. We look forward to seeing the department do better in complying with the commitment of this government to the ideal of a free, nonracial and nonsexist society, with particular emphasis on the workplace. I am certain that this House will appreciate a report on the meeting of this commitment from the hon Minister.
In respect of the government's commitment to creating jobs, it is of extreme importance that every government department actively plays a role to advance employment opportunities for the unemployed masses of our people. It goes without saying that the creation of jobs will ensure the realisation of the SSA mandate, the realisation of national security.
As the literature will attest, employment has become an economic activity through which individuals engage by offering their labour and earning remuneration in return, from which they are able to live their lives, and raise and educate their children and families and realise all other goals they have in their lives. From this, it follows that the absence of jobs may have a detrimental effect on individuals and society, and may also create grounds for criminal activities and human rights abuses, which undermine and threaten national security.
We have witnessed growing disquiet of our trade unions in recent times, a reality we would all want to reverse. Job creation is believed to be a sustainable intervention to counter this societal dilemma. The department's focus on job creation should be directed at our unemployed youth. This will assist the department in transferring skills while addressing the ageing workforce challenge highlighted by the Minister. This is a national challenge, and only through a unified intervention can this be overcome.
While bringing the youth into the workplace, it would be important that management is well trained on how to engage, train and manage this group of employees for maximum retention and to ensure business continuity.
The government's programme on skills development faces a bleak future when government departments pay only lip service to this matter of national strategic importance. We appreciate the department's focus on capacity- building and revisiting the current approach to the transfer of skills and training. The strategic partnerships with our international counterparts will greatly assist our intelligence agencies in competing with the complex world of intelligence out there. The focus on training and the prioritisation of core-business employees should be bolstered. However, a balance must be struck so as not to reduce the support structures to secondary participants in the business. These strategic partners must be well nurtured and taken care of, because the management of organisations, its processes and resources: human, financial and logistical, is done by people.
We value and appreciate the department's continued determination to deliver on the country's national vetting strategy. We understand the capacity limitations that have created the backlog in this regard. With a resolve to utilise intelligence veterans, we hold that this shall assist in reducing the backlog and enable the department to deliver on its priorities.
We will support the Minister in the drive to strengthen the consultation mechanism in the SSA and trust that this will harness the employment relations in the department. The establishment of a consultation committee for the SSA, comprising equal representation of members and management, is a good start in this regard. We support the Budget Vote. Thank you. [Applause.]
Chairperson, Minister and hon members, gone are the days when state security was employed to serve the interests of a minority group that viewed the majority of this country as a threat to their security. Was the late Steve Biko a threat to state security? I don't know what the answer is. Today we believe we have a State Security department whose role it is to protect all the citizens of South Africa irrespective of colour, gender, creed and political affiliation. This important department has a constitutional obligation to observe the utmost impartiality in the execution of its duties.
It is important for the State Security department to adhere to the important principle of impartiality in carrying out its duties, however intense the political pressures of the day. As citizens of this country, we therefore, quite correctly, expect the State Security department to serve us with impeccable diligence.
The UDM would like to urge all the employees of the State Security department to adhere to the principle of political neutrality at all times in service to the people of South Africa. This will go a long way towards ensuring that the State Security department wins the faith and confidence of the people of South Africa.
The UDM would also like to urge the Inspector General of Intelligence to speed up and complete the restructuring of state security units under her control for the purpose of effective service delivery in the intelligence environment. The UDM supports this Vote. I thank you. [Applause.]
Hon Chairperson, it is perhaps pleasing to note that South Africa's debt levels remain relatively low in comparison with that of developed countries and in line with those of other developing countries. It is said that we are recovering from a recession and that we are better placed to take growth opportunities.
I would like to know whether we have identified such growth opportunities and how they are translated in order to respond to the current problems that we face, such as unemployment and the escalating levels of poverty. I am pleased with the attention that is focused on investment in infrastructure projects, and concur that there is a need to develop better capital planning, more efficient budget allocations and improved capital expenditure.
I would like to point out, though, that the National Treasury has been consistently improving in their planning. However, other departments at national level and provincial level and the local sphere of government have been seriously lagging behind. I am of the opinion that unless the skills that are in the Treasury are transferred to other departments, provinces and the local sphere, there will be very little difference to what we, as citizens, experience as the end product.
I applaud the move to establish a specialised audit services unit and am of the opinion that this would enhance the Treasury's oversight role. I hope the commitment to zero tolerance of fraud and corruption will equal a commitment to stand and support principles over people. The outcry on fraud devouring state institutions is fuelled when little or nothing is done when acts of corruption have been exposed. Tender-related fraud and corruption continue to delay our progress on infrastructural development and have reached grossly unacceptable levels in all spheres of government.
I noted from the annual report that the Legal Services Unit managed more than 100 litigations, and I would be interested in knowing generally what such litigations related to. There is an interesting contradiction that I picked up in the annual report. The audit committee stated that there had been no material deviation in the functioning of controls, procedures and systems. However, there is recorded an irregular expenditure of R2,7 million relating to a tender process not being followed. I am curious to know how you can have an irregular expenditure when you have not deviated from controls and procedures.
With these inputs, the UCDP supports the Budget Vote on National Treasury (State Security). [Applause.]
Hon Chair, thank you for allowing me to speak in this important debate. However, I do want to make a confession in advance. The confession is that the stuff I am going to say here comes from my most reliable resources: one, the Freedom Charter; two, the notes supporting the Auditor-General's presentation to the Association of Public Accounts Committees' annual conference on the theme "Measures for Improving Public Sector Governance"; three, parliamentary oversight of the security sectors, principles, mechanisms and practices by the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces, together with the Inter-Parliamentary Union; and, the last resource comes from my heart, out of my passion and love for the ANC and my country, South Africa.
I want to thank the ANC for liberating this country and for allowing even rural women like myself to express their mind on issues of state security. For many years women were relegated to house chores, with the result that their humble wisdom was never sought on important matters of state. The result is that many South African brains have lived and died without getting any opportunity to contribute to the security of their own country. What a waste of brains! What a shame! Long live the ANC! Long live!
HON MEMBERS: Long live!
The ANC has tasked me to come out in support of this budget, and I support this Budget Vote because the ANC supports it.
I want to express my heartfelt gratitude to the entire intelligence community. You have proved beyond a reasonable doubt that you love your country, South Africa. You proved many prophets of doom wrong during the 2010 Fifa World Cup. Fears of insecurity in South Africa were canvassed day and night. Alarm bells were rung by some unpatriotic individuals and institutions in order to discourage visitors from coming to our beautiful country. But you, the intelligence family, worked quietly and fearlessly day and night to restore the integrity of the full independence of the state of the Republic of South Africa.
As your committee, we sometimes got very scared and summoned you to check on whether there was and would be security on our shores. Defence intelligence said: "Fear not." Crime intelligence said: "We have our eyes on the ball; don't panic." And all of you, working together, restored our confidence and indeed delivered the Fifa World Cup to South Africa and Africa. Well done! [Applause.] May God, our Maker, give you grace. We cannot thank you enough. You have indeed served your country with distinction. May God give you more strength.
The ANC, as the true vanguard of the people of our country, is trusted and loved by its citizens because it listens to the people. It is directed by the will of South African citizens. When the people of South Africa spoke in one voice at the Congress of the People in Kliptown on 26 June 1955, they said:
There Shall be Peace and Friendship!
South Africa shall be a fully independent state which respects the sovereignty of all nations;
... Let all people who love their people and their country now say, as we say here: 'These freedoms we will fight for side by side throughout our lives, until we have won our liberty.'
Yes, indeed, government, Parliament and all the people of South Africa, let's stand together and ensure the security of our country, South Africa.
In order to sustain the good work done by government on security issues, Parliament must do its oversight work efficiently and effectively. The Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence will have to demand strict compliance with financial management in the security sector, because a central feature of good governance is maintaining the use of available public resources for efficient service delivery and the creation of public value.
In 1999, South Africa moved from the Exchequer Act to the Public Finance Management Act, Act 1 of 1999. This Parliament, in its wisdom, passed that piece of legislation in order to do two things. The first thing was to allow management to manage and to keep them accountable to this legislature. The second thing is that the Public Finance Management Act insists on timely reports - quarterly reports.
The thinking behind the regulation of reporting on time is to enable the administration to detect challenges in time and to report to Parliament in time. This is so that, at the end of the financial year, this Parliament can have good, accountable and transparent information for the owners of the resources, that is the general public of the Republic of South Africa. For the citizens of South Africa, financial news will only be good news if at the end of the year the Auditor-General can confirm that the audit evidence and financial statements prepared by the accounting officer are sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for his or her audit opinion. It is necessary for the department to co-operate with the work of the Auditor-General in his audit queries. We must always remember that the preparation of financial statements is the responsibility of the department. The audit by the Auditor-General assists in enhancing public confidence in the credibility of the financial statements. In the discipline of accounting, we believe that financial statements are management tools. Therefore, the department should prepare these almost monthly for itself because it can be done. This will assist management to take informed decisions at all times.
Our advice to the department is as follows: respond timeously to the management letters from the Auditor-General's office; give frank explanations to the Auditor-General's queries; remember to come to your committee and explain, and seek opinion and advice for any unforeseen circumstances in the expenditure of your allocated budget. It is better to come before the time, but, if it is not possible, come immediately thereafter. What is more, come at least once per quarter, in line with the Public Finance Management Act's quarterly reporting requirement.
Although the inherent nature and dynamics of the security sector represent a real challenge to effective parliamentary oversight, there is sufficient political will from members of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence to hold the intelligence community to account.
From time immemorial, national sovereignty and security have been considered essential to a viable state. Nowadays, the part that is played by those whose job it is to provide security is undergoing considerable change. Today, effective parliamentary oversight has thus become all the more crucial. Therefore, it is imperative for the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence to be hands-on with issues affecting state security.
We are always combat-ready to do our work. Therefore, when we insist on compliance with the legal framework, it is in good faith. We will always be ready to do our job for which we have been elected and for which we are paid timeously every month by this Parliament. So, we will do our work without fear or favour. Our job is to hold this government to account, because that is what our employers, the voters, want from us. A job is a job, Minister. We will hold you to account. Thank you. [Applause.]
Madam Chair, hon Minister of State Security, hon chairperson of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, hon members, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen - and, of course, I would like to acknowledge my wife, Magda, in the gallery for her presence and support - I said in my budget speech on Wednesday, 5 May 2010, when I quoted from the final report to the Minister for Intelligence Services, the hon Minister Mr Ronnie Kasrils, by the Ministerial Review Commission on Intelligence, 10 September 2008, that: "It is a great concern that the intelligence services do not have their own Budget Vote with regard to the funds that are allocated to them by Parliament annually" and that they also "do not adhere to the Public Finance Management Act or the White Paper on Intelligence" of 1994.
Maybe the time has come for this report by the Ministerial Review Commission on Intelligence to be referred to the JSCI for consideration and for recommendation to the Minister of State Security for implementation.
This practice of not having a Budget Vote increases the risk of the abuse of funds for personal enrichment, a risk which is always present when large amounts of money are held by an organisation. This risk is particularly high when the money can be used for secret projects, and information is only shared on a strictly need-to-know basis.
The current budget for the 2011-12 financial year for State Security, as announced earlier this year by the hon Minister of Finance, is only R3,755 million, with R669 million for defence intelligence, and R1,948 million for crime intelligence, which gives us a total amount of R6,372 million. The question is: Is that enough?
Further, the absence of an adequate Budget Vote for State Security makes the oversight of the JSCI very difficult, to say the least. The JSCI is supposed to measure intelligence expenses according to their budget, but the JSCI has nothing to compare it with other than presentations by the agencies.
As I said during my 2010 budget speech, when I quoted from the final report of 2008 to the Minister, intelligence organisations are resistant to revealing their budgets on the grounds that foreign intelligence agencies will thereby gain an advantage over them. I believe that this argument is overstated. A foreign agency would obtain no benefit from knowing how much money another country spends on its intelligence services. It is only at a higher level of detail regarding targets, methods, sources and operational outputs and constraints that security could be undermined through disclosure.
In light of the above, I must quote from my learned friend the hon Adv P J Swart's budget speech on Safety and Security on Friday, 23 May 2008. He said:
... I have to mention the Minister of Finance, being the chair of the Secret Services Evaluation Committee on the Secret Services Account, from which the JSCI in terms of section 3(a)(ii) of the Intelligence Oversight Act 40 of 1994 has to obtain a report on the Secret Services. The committee once again failed to secure a meeting with him during the past year. We do not even know if this committee is functional.
I am of the opinion that this is not a matter of whether this committee is functional or not, but rather of whether this committee exists at all.
Artikel 6 van die Intelligensiedienste Oorsigwet van 1994 bepaal dat die Gesamentlike Staande Komitee oor Inligting, die Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, JSCI, jaarliks verslag oor die werksaamhede van die komitee aan die Parlement moet voorl. Daar bestaan egter geen erns om di verslag - wat die enigste bron van kommunikasie tussen die JSCI en die Parlement en, vir di rede, die enigste met die publiek, is - gedoen te kry en dit in die Parlement ter tafel te l nie.
Weens die feit dat die jaarverslag van 2009-10 nog nie ter tafel gel is nie, soos voorgeskryf deur wetgewing, en ook vir die rede dat intelligensiedienste nie hul eie begrotingspos het nie, is ek verplig om na ander aspekte te kyk wat die oorsig van die komitee benvloed. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Section 6 of the Intelligence Services Oversight Act, Act 40 of 1994, provides that the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, JSCI, should present an annual report to Parliament on the activities of the committee. However, there has been no earnestness to complete this report, which is the only source of communication between the JSCI and Parliament and, therefore, with the public- and to table it in Parliament.
Because of the fact that the 2009-10 annual report has not been tabled yet, as stipulated by legislation, and also because the Intelligence Services do not have their own Budget Vote, I am compelled to look at other aspects that could impact on the oversight of the committee.]
During the budget speech of our hon Minister of State Security on Wednesday, 1 July 2009 - and I quote from his speech as reflected in the unrevised Hansard of the same date - he committed himself by saying:
We will continue to ensure the full implementation of all elements of our vetting strategy, which contributes to enabling government to expose and root out criminals from the Public Service ... we will resubmit the draft Intelligence Amendment Bill to Parliament to address any gaps ... We will strengthen our co-operation with the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence.
With reference to the Minister's commitment to ensuring the full implementation of our vetting strategy, why is it that the City Press reported on 3 April 2011 on the appointment of Gen Mdluli as head of Crime Intelligence in July 2009, the same month that the Minister made his commitment? The question now arises: How serious is the Minister of State Security about correcting the shortcomings and ensuring that everyone, irrespective of association, be properly vetted, before he or she gets appointed?
We are still awaiting the submission of the draft intelligence Bill. Regarding the commitment by the Minister to strengthening co-operation with the JSCI, my question, with respect, Minister, is: How far have you gone? I say this because the Minister is hardly available to meet with the JCSI.
Further, with reference to the hon Minister of State Security's budget address on 5 May 2010, I quote:
Chairperson, last year, when addressing this House, we committed ourselves to embark on a review of our intelligence services with the aim of developing efficient and effective intelligence structures ... I am honoured to report that in September 2009, a single department, the State Security Agency, was established by a Presidential Proclamation ... In line with our undertaking to complete the reorganisation ... our goals for 2010 include the following: tabling of the National State Security Bill to effect the amalgamation ... redeployment of members into new structures.
He also said that 16 years after the advent of democracy, the White Paper on intelligence was due for review.
The restructuring of the intelligence community that took place in September 2009 is also a big concern. Besides the fact that none of the relevant legislation - a national state security Bill, the Intelligence Services Oversight Act of 1994 and the White Paper on Intelligence of 1994 - had been amended, the JSCI, which is responsible for oversight, was never consulted about the restructuring and only informed as a matter of courtesy. The incomplete restructuring process causes oversight problems, not only for the JCSI, but also for the Auditor-General.
A last concern that really restricts the competence and the efficiency of the JSCI is the composition of the JSCI. Currently, the members of the NCOP who serve on the JCSI are not allowed to participate in the budget debate. Secondly, NCOP business, which includes a lot of oversight visits to the provinces, results in NCOP members finding it difficult to attend the JSCI weekly meetings and even our oversight visits.
I am of the opinion that these problems need to be addressed without further delay to avoid incompetence within the intelligence service and to ensure the efficient operation of the JSCI. I want to take this opportunity to congratulate our hon chairperson Mr Burgess on his birthday tomorrow. I trust that his family hasn't classified his presents, otherwise he will not know what they are. [Applause.]
Hon Chairperson, I don't understand why we have hon members behaving like crybabies here. Nevertheless, hon Minister of State Security and deputies present, hon Members of Parliament, beloved guests in the gallery, let me greet you in the name of our Lord.
In 14 days' time we will be commemorating 35 years since the 1976 uprisings. This was more than just an event; it was a patriotic achievement that helped our country take a different shape. As a result of those uprisings, we are today enjoying the benefits of the gains they fought for. Today I stand in front of you as an hon Member of Parliament all because of their dedication and heroism. It is now my generation's responsibility to follow in their footsteps in a way that seeks to improve and better what they achieved.
Hon members, it is because of those that came before us that today we talk of the right to information and to other services. As we engage in different struggles that seek to better the present, let us not forget that a country's democracy is not safe until its people feel secure, and that cannot be completely achieved without protection of state information. In paying tribute to the generation of 1976, let me highlight a few points that we must all consider as we fight and demand certain rights and privileges.
Compatriots, transformation is impossible until it happens; then it becomes inevitable. South Africa has long been trembling between the impossible and the inevitable, and it is in this singularly unstable situation that the question of human rights in postapartheid South Africa demands attention.
As we consider the Budget Vote of the Department of State Security, it is important to reflect on the now constitutionally entrenched Bill of Rights. Judge Sachs said that two widely opposing views on a Bill of Rights argue in summary that a Bill of Rights is necessary because if you grant the legitimate rights of the black majority, you must also give reasonable protection to the rights of the white minority; or a Bill of Rights is a reactionary device designed to preserve the interests of whites and to prevent any effective redistribution of wealth and power in South Africa.
In 1991, the learned judge went on to say:
The most curious feature about the demand for a Bill of Rights in South Africa is that initially it came not from the ranks of the oppressed, but from a certain stratum in the ranks of the oppressors. The principal objective is precisely to give guarantees to the present oppressors, to protect them against the revindication of the oppressed; to do so in advance of and as a bulwark against rather than as a prescription in favour of change.
The question the learned judge asked is worth repeating:
Who would the proposed Bill of Rights protect: the victims of the unjust conduct, which has been condemned as a crime against humanity by all humankind, or the beneficiaries?
Perhaps exposing the intention of the fathers of our constitutionally protected Bill of Rights might be tantamount to closing the stable door after the proverbial horse has bolted. However, if at any time the Bill of Rights is put to use by any stratum of society to block transformation, we ought to ask why. Why do some professed patriots use this purportedly progressive document as a bulwark against change? Why do people who shout service delivery until their voices are hoarse, use the Bill of Rights to hamstring the democratic government from discharging its mandate?
As we debate issues that impact on this Budget Vote, let us reflect on our desire to protect these rights. Our approach to the debate on the Protection of Information Bill should be based on the premise that it is imperative to balance competing rights of openness and national security as provided for in international best practice. Section 32(1) of the Constitution guarantees the right of access to information as follows: Everyone has the right of access to - a) any information held by the state; and b) any information that is held by another person and that is required for the exercise or protection of any rights.
It is in this spirit that this Parliament passed the Promotion of Access to Information Act of 2000 to give effect to this right. That was driven by the ANC, hon Maynier. However, the need to balance openness with national security demands of us to accept that no right is absolute and all rights can be limited. The question therefore is whether the limitation of the right of access to information imposed by the Protection of Information Bill is reasonable and justifiable in an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom.
According to section 36(1) of the Constitution, there must be regard for, among other factors, the nature of the right limited; the purpose of the limitation, including its importance; the nature and extent of the limitation; the efficacy of the limitation, that is the relationship between the limitation and its purpose; and whether the purpose of the limitation could reasonably be achieved through other means that are less restrictive of the right in question.
We should reiterate that we as public representatives need to assist South Africa, inter alia, to protect legitimate national intelligence structures; to legitimate operational methods, doctrine, facilities and personnel of security structures; to be sensitive regarding confidences in international relations; to have ongoing investigations of state security structures; to provide details of criminal investigations and legitimate police and law- enforcement methods; and to protect economic, scientific or technological secrets vital to the Republic's stability, security, integrity and development.
Without derogating from the right of access to information, we need to be frank and resolute in indicating that in order to ensure that classified information is not leaked, we must ensure that penalties are proportionate to the damage the unauthorised disclosures will cause and the harm they are likely to do. We want to put on record that it is our considered view that the right of access to information is not in conflict with the right to protection of information. This brings us to the question of why certain strata of our society are against protection of information.
Using both the straw man and the slippery-slope fallacies, the opposition and sectors of the media bombard South Africans with misinformation in that the intention behind the Bill is to classify information in order to obviate public accountability and to conceal corrupt practices. What the opposition and certain sections of the media are not telling South Africans is that the protection of classified information will impose discipline on their wayward tendencies. Fellow South Africans, a question must be asked whether those who are driving the so-called right-to-know campaign and their fellow travellers are well informed, thoughtful, and objective observers of the process, or are they being biased, hypersensitive, cynical, suspicious opportunists who blow hot and cold when it is expedient for their cause. [Interjections.] Careful examination of this new generation of protectors of minority rights, at the expense of the aspirations of the black majority, reveals that these people have no regard for fairness or justice in their application of double standards. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
They seek information not because their motive is to build South Africa, but because their motive is to portray our state as a failed state in order to - de facto - stealthily usurp political power. To those that enjoy terrorising our people through unverified information and faceless sources, your days are numbered and you will not prevail. [Interjections.] Whilst we welcome and encourage public participation and vibrant and robust debate, we believe and remain convinced that it must not be at any cost.
Hon Minister, we appreciate the development and adoption of the strategies, but without clear and progressive leadership those strategies mean nothing to our people. There are a number of critical posts that have not been filled in your department, and I am sure this has a negative impact on the operations of the community. As the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, we are not just going to sit and listen to your reports, but we'll also make sure that you deliver on the objectives you committed yourself to.
Hon members, as the ANC we are tasked with governing the country, unlike the members on my left who have the responsibility of analysing media reports. [Applause.]
In conclusion, we are resolute and we will not turn back. We shall boost national security to negate hostile acts of foreign intervention, negate terrorist and related activities, prevent espionage and avert unlawful acts against the constitutional order.
As part of the programme of the Ministry of State Security, we note that with the passing of the Protection of Information Bill, we will bequeath to future generations a future in which there is a statutory framework for the protection of state information in all organs of state; that criteria and processes are set out in terms of which state information may be protected from unauthorised alteration, destruction and disclosure; that criteria and processes are set out for classification, and for upgrading and downgrading classification and declassification; and that there are offences and sentences in relation to a failure to heed the provision of the law, especially espionage and information peddling.
The ANC is committed to ensuring access to information. However, that right is not absolute. National security is a valid consideration and does not conflict with the rights in question. Your right is your right for as long as it does not violate my right. The ANC supports the Budget Vote. I thank you. [Applause.]
Chairperson, let me begin by thanking all the members who gave us advice and made positive comments. We will definitely take them seriously. Let me also thank those who work with us in this committee, particularly our oversight bodies: Judge Khumalo, who is responsible for interception directions, the Auditor-General, Mr Nombembe, and the Inspector-General, Adv Radebe.
We would also like to express thanks for the continual interaction we have with the members of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence and for the work they do in ensuring that we don't falter in this sphere of government. We particularly thank you, chairperson, and the members of the JSCI who work tirelessly to remind us of the course we must follow. We must also take this opportunity to thank our intelligence veterans. I saw some of them there at the back. They continue to assist us, volunteering their services and giving advice in order to enhance our activities.
We would also like to thank the members of our staff council. As you know, we don't have unions, only the staff council. They continue to work with our management to ensure that the conditions of service of our members are improved. I would also like to thank the Director-General, Ambassador Mzuvukile Maqetuka and his executive, Mr Gibson Njenje, who is sitting at the back. I thank those who support me in the Ministry, led by the chief of staff, Dr Mavhungu; our advisory team, led by Dr Sam Gulube, commonly known as "Dr Scientist Manifesto"; and Mr Thokozani Dlomo for his work in assisting me in the office.
I would like to agree with the chairperson of the committee that in dealing with this important challenge of developing our national security doctrine and our national security strategy, it will be important to engage all South Africans or stakeholders, because one thing that unites all of us is defending our young democracy.
In terms of the overimportance of the oversight structures, particularly the JSCI, the annual reports of the State Security Agency structures - in my recollection - were separate last year, but were tabled together with the financial statements to the JSCI. In my recollection, the reports of the Auditor-General and of the Inspector-General, which are critical oversight structures, were also tabled in the JSCI in the last financial year. Committee chairperson, please make sure that members get access to these reports, so that they can scrutinise them.
The hon Coetzee raised the issue of the figures of the budget and whether we should publish them, I will not confirm or deny those figures, but they sound very strange to me. They are not the figures which we presented to the JSCI. Again, chairperson, please invite the members to read the reports we table in your committee.
Regarding my attendance of JSCI meetings, it is true that my programme has been quite hectic this year, because we were supporting our foreign policy, led by Dico: the Department of International Relations and Co-operation, and the Presidency, particularly in resolving conflicts in Africa. That has put a strain on my side of things. I would like to assure the members that whenever I am invited by the JSCI, I always attend. I don't remember a single meeting the JSCI invited me to that I didn't attend.
Hon Koornhof, thank you for your inputs, and we welcome you to this environment. Let me also say that we miss the hon Shilowa because he played a very critical role. He had a very deep understanding of issues of national security. I hope we will see him soon. [Laughter.]
You raised the old issue of the dropping of the charges against the current President. Let me put it on record that those charges were dropped by the National Prosecuting Authority once they realised that those who were heading the Directorate of Special Operations committed crimes. Yes, there were tapes. They did commit crimes. The tapes were declassified. They are available. They were declassified and handed over to the National Prosecuting Authority.
What is of more concern to me, particularly from you as a Member of Parliament, is that you were very silent about the crime committed by those officials. That was a threat to our national security - where officials cook reports to the extent that we can send somebody to jail on false information. [Interjections.]
There has been a lot said about crime intelligence and issues between Mr Mdluli and the commissioner or the general of the police, to the extent that the integrity of our vetting system was being questioned.
I can assure you that our vetting system is intact, and that we are increasing our capacity. The vetting of the police is delegated to the SA Police Service's Crime Intelligence Division, and the vetting of the Defence Force is done by the Defence Intelligence Division of the SA National Defence Force. They work together with the domestic branch of the State Security Agency in ensuring that policies are adhered to.
I would like to say that, to my knowledge, those processes were done, but the vetting process is a dynamic one. You will remember that the crimes the person concerned was charged with were committed years ago. The investigations which were done initially cleared those people. A current investigation would then necessitate revetting those members. There is nothing wrong with our vetting process, because vetting is a dynamic process.
Hon Msimang, it is true that our resources are focusing on piracy. We are working with the Southern African Development Community to ensure that our eastern shores are protected from this scourge. But the fundamental issue to address this problem is the political situation inside Somalia. We need a democratic government which is respected by the people. We need democratic institutions that are developed in order that they are respected by the people. As South Africa, we are deploying resources to protect the waters. Our strategy also includes the engagement of the industry, because when it comes to some of those involved, it looks like we have to ensure that there are no incentives for people to assist or promote piracy. We are working with our countries in SADC, particularly Tanzania and Mozambique, and with islands in the region to uproot this scourge.
The hon member from the UDM talked about the importance of political neutrality. Other members asked if we continued to monitor others. We monitor those who are involved in unconstitutional or criminal activities. We will continue doing so because that is part of our mandate. But we do not and we have no intention to interfere in the domestic affairs of political parties. Yesterday I met the hon Holomisa, who reported on some incidents, and I'm glad about this as we agreed that this was a serious thing to us. We will encourage Adv Radebe, the Inspector-General, to look into that matter.
I am still awaiting an appointment with my friend the Premier of the Western Cape, who previously made some remarks as if we are also involved in the interference or monitoring of politicians. Our officials know that those who engage in such activities will be dealt with appropriately. But we are also encouraging political parties not to abuse the intelligence. When the tactical response teams have problems, it is very easy to blame the intelligence. We will co-operate where our officials are doing the wrong thing and, really, we will deal with those transgressions.
A lot of members commented that we must finalise the restructuring and make the appointments. Unfortunately, I have just received these confirmations. As you know, when it comes to some of the senior management, we have to consult the relevant authorities, particularly the Presidency.
I am pleased to announce that we have finalised the appointments of at least some of the key posts in senior management. Ms Nozuko Bam will be the Deputy Director-General in Domestic Intelligence in the domestic branch. Mr Moruti Nosi will be the Deputy Director-General in Counterintelligence in the domestic branch. Ms Joyce Mashele will be the Deputy Director-General in the Intelligence Management in the foreign branch. Ms Cindy Mhlambo will be Deputy Director-General in Collection, in the foreign branch.
Ms Yvonne Sethugi will be head of our Intelligence Academy. Ms Muvhango Lukhaimane will be the chairperson of the National Intelligence Council. Dr Kulube will continue assisting me in my office as an adviser, because he is responsible for jewel-used technologies, until we finalise the structures in consultation with the Minister of Defence and Military Veterans. Bob Mhlanga will continue being my adviser and my fire extinguisher, and he will be deployed where his assistance is needed.
Dennis Dlomo will also continue assisting us in our office. We will finalise some of these key appointments, particularly now that Sandy has gone back to the University of Pretoria, such as the Deputy Director- General of Corporate Services and the head of Nicoc - the National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee. I have heard concerns from a member about the management of the national communication centre. I am in consultation with the director-general and the President to address that matter. I thank you very much. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.