Hon Speaker and hon members, in addressing the issue of redress regarding the discrimination and alienation of some of our South African languages, which were reduced in status in the past, we are guided by section 6 of the Constitution. In section 6(5), we are mandated to create the Pan South African Language Board, PanSALB, for the promotion, development and use of all official languages, including the Khoi, Nama, San, and South African Sign Language, and to further ensure the promotion and respect of indigenous languages historically diminished in status.
In pursuance thereof, PanSALB is being assisted in its intended purpose to achieve the appropriate balance in the work it was discharged to carry out.
Flowing from the Constitution, as our legal framework, as I have already said, we are obliged to take measures to ensure that national and provincial language policies are in place for all official languages to enjoy parity of esteem and to be treated equally. As a result, the National Language Policy Framework was developed and adopted by Cabinet in 2003.
Apart from the promotion of equitable use of all 11 official languages, this policy also aims to facilitate equitable access to government services, knowledge and information, and also encourages the learning of other official indigenous languages to promote national unity, as well as linguistic and cultural diversity as required by the democratic dispensation. It also ensures working in collaborative partnership with other government structures to promote all languages.
Arising from the Constitution and based on the National Language Policy, the Department of Arts and Culture is finalising the South African Languages Bill, as well as a draft South African Language Practitioners' Bill, which is also in the process for the purpose of promoting language practitioners in all our indigenous languages. Furthermore, in collaboration with other national departments and provincial language units, the department has projects and programmes in progress to advance the development of indigenous languages historically diminished in status.
The department develops literature by way of reprinting African language classics, provides translation services for government departments in official and foreign languages, and produces and co-ordinates terminologies in various technical domains in all official languages. The department has also instituted capacity-building for language facilitation through the human language technologies, producing applications like spell checkers for all our languages. Our department also instituted a bursary programme focusing strategically on scarce skills, such as translation, editing, terminology development, interpreting, human language technologies, language planning, etc.
Universities that have benefited from this scheme since its inception in 2004 include the University of Limpopo, University of KwaZulu-Natal, University of Zululand, University of Pretoria, Stellenbosch University, University of the Free State, Rhodes University, and the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University. Thank you.
Speaker, hon Deputy Minister, thank you for mentioning the issue of the South African Languages Bill. I must really commend the department for taking the issue of language very seriously. As we have said, if you want to destroy a nation you start by destroying the language because you destroy the identity.
However, on the issue of the legislation that you have just raised, there is a fear which you have addressed briefly, especially regarding minority groups. Lately, Afrikaans-speaking people have been saying that we are trying to alienate other languages. Can you just help us to allay the fears, in terms of the legislation you mentioned? Thank you.
Hon Speaker and hon Sunduza, the aim of the Bill which we have tabled is the promotion of all 11 official languages. In cognisance of the mandate of the Constitution to promote all languages, there is no way in which Afrikaans would suffer because, unlike other indigenous African languages, Afrikaans is already well developed. The idea there is to make sure that all government departments, national and provincial, will be legislated to make sure that when we print documents we do not only print in two languages or sometimes even in one language, but that we increase the minimum number of languages in which various government documents will be printed.
At the moment, we are looking at a minimum of three languages, which, inevitably, would mean that even if a department was to use English and Afrikaans, it would be compelled also to use an indigenous African language. I know that a number of submissions have been made with the suspicion that in that process Afrikaans will be disadvantaged, but I can assure hon members that Afrikaans will be treated like any of the other 10 official languages and will be promoted accordingly. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker, I want to thank the hon Deputy Minister for his answer. I think a lot of people will feel very encouraged by what he has just said.
In your first answer, hon Minister, you said there are specific programmes that the Department of Arts and Culture uses to try to enhance all the different languages. You talked about the interpreters, translators and everything, and it is very good that all these programmes have been done. But, there is just one thing I want to ask you: Why does the National Language Service supply a term equivalent to HIV/Aids in only two African languages? As we know, HIV/Aids is very important, so the terminology pertaining to it must be accessible to all the language speakers, so that they know exactly what is going on, and are enhanced by it. Thank you.
I think what the hon member has just said confirms the legacy of what we are dealing with - in the sense that over the years only two languages were developed properly - in order to be able to have most of the terminology, even in various specific areas such as medical language, legal language, technical or scientific language and so on. So, that is the only shortcoming we have. Therefore, we have to plough more resources into making sure that we can train more language practitioners, so that they can also specialise in various areas, such as medicine and science, so that we can develop terminology in all 11 our languages. It is just a legacy of the underdevelopment of the majority of our indigenous African languages. Thank you.
Speaker, hon Deputy Minister, has the Minister undertaken or considered undertaking research into whether or not and how ethnic and linguistic minorities have benefited from radio and television policy changes in this new democratic era? If so, what are the results or when are they expected? Some are arguing that in spite of the change from apartheid to democracy the indigenous African languages remain marginalised on television. Thank you.
Hon Speaker, while we have not specifically done such a study, we are aware of the fact that the use of most of our indigenous African languages has not enjoyed the same opportunities as English, predominantly, but also Afrikaans. So, these efforts which I am talking about, working together with PanSALB in terms of promoting the rest of our 11 official languages, are specifically to make sure that those shortcomings can be addressed. Thank you.
Hon Speaker, hon Deputy Minister, thank you for all the programmes that you are going to introduce at universities.
My problem, however, is that since the introduction of the outcomes-based education system, students, especially at universities, have been lured away from the humanities and attracted to commercial sciences and information and communications technology, to the point where researchers in African languages are virtually nonexistent. Are there any plans in place to attract university students back to African languages departments to make your programmes viable? Thank you.
Hon Speaker, I think the challenge which the hon member is illustrating here is broader, in the sense that, as we have said, the promotion of other essential skills at our tertiary education centres has had what may be termed unintended consequences, where the humanities, generally, have suffered and the language sector, specifically, has suffered. I believe it is because of that that the Minister of Higher Education has been very vocal about the fact that African languages need to be promoted more at tertiary institutions.
It is also because of that, as I mentioned in my response earlier on, that as a department we also do offer bursaries at universities to make sure that there are more language practitioners produced at tertiary institutions because it is only through that that we will be able to capacitate our education system.
As we have also alluded to earlier on, the South African Languages Bill's intention is to make sure that even government departments are forced to use more languages. Once that is adopted, it will create more opportunities for language practitioners to be employed in various government institutions, and facilitate the promotion of all 11 languages. Thank you.
Review of school principal employment system
90. Mr A M Mpontshane (IFP) asked the Minister of Basic Education:
Whether she intends reviewing the employment system of principals of schools; if not, why not; if so, what new system is her department considering? NO525E
Hon Speaker, I would like to thank the hon member for his question. We must recognise that the role, responsibilities and functions of principals are somewhat unique and distinctive. To that end, there is a strong argument that principals, being professional leaders and managers of schools, should have special skills, particularly with regard to governance, implementation of the curriculum, financial management and the ability to liaise with communities.
There is also a view that the locus of a principal is an extension of a head of department in the sense that he or she acts as a functionary of the department in fulfilling its strategic objectives. Most political parties, if not all of them, share the view that there should be a distinction in the appointment of principals, as opposed to educators, given the importance of that particular role.
For these reasons, the Department of Basic Education, having listened to the political parties and other stakeholders, as well as analysts, is of the view that a review is necessary in terms of ensuring that we look at a procedure where the efficiency and competence of the principal becomes a pre-eminent function, rather than the choice of a governing body, especially where it does not have the capacity to distinguish between an efficient and competent leader and manager and one that is more competent and efficient. I thank you.
Hon Speaker, I must say that I am happy that the Deputy Minister acknowledged that there will be different laws and rules governing the appointment of school principals. Having said that, the Deputy Minister will agree with me that many principals who are manning our schools are products of what we call politification, rather than qualification.
Politification allows no room for experience and merit. In 2007, to be specific, the former Minister proposed that any person to be promoted to the position of principal must have taught for at least nine years - five as a post level one teacher, two as a head of department, HOD, and two as a deputy principal. It seems as if this has not been implemented. Why?
Hon Speaker, as I have indicated in my principal reply, the skills that a principal requires would be, amongst others, the ability to govern efficiently and competently, to have the skills for fiscal and financial management, to be able to implement the curriculum, to liaise with the senior management in a democratic way, and to liaise with communities given his or her role and responsibility as a professional leader and manager.
To that end the Department of Basic Education established an Advanced Certificate in Education, Ace, course more than five years ago which looks at these particular areas. More than 3 000 principals and deputy principals have already been beneficiaries of such a course to enhance the capacity.
The discussion and the discourse that is taking place now between the national department and the provinces is whether indeed there should be an additional requirement to being a principal, other than having been a teacher for a particular period of time. It is a combination of experience and skills. That matter is currently under review by the MECs of Education and the national Ministry. I thank you.
Thank you, hon Speaker. My question to you, Deputy Minister, is: You spoke about the incapacity of the school governing bodies, SGBs. Is that the only reason for the review or are there others? Thank you.
Hon Speaker, there are many reasons. With regard to the school governing bodies, there are those that have the capacity and ability to make the appropriate selection, choice and recommendations, but there are also those that can be influenced, as the hon member from the IFP correctly indicated, for reasons of community, political and other choices.
Given the importance of this particular functionary, it is important that we choose a person on the basis of merit and experience someone who would be able to lead the institution appropriately. That is also the approach of Public Service and Administration that is being proposed in relation to officials who assume certain responsibilities.
Yes, we do have difficulties, but the legislation, as it stands now, does not distinguish between the appointment of an ordinary educator, deputy principal and a principal. For that reason, the review has indeed been called for and is being responded to. Thank you.
The last two supplementary questions will be asked by the hon Steenhuisen, to be followed by the hon Madisha.
Hon Speaker, the hon Steenhuisen is in fact myself, Mrs Lovemore. I pushed the wrong button by mistake. May I speak?
Yes, you may continue. Go ahead and speak.
Hon Speaker, through you, Deputy Minister, there is a proven direct link between the professionalism and performance of a principal and the performance of learners at the school that he or she manages. This country has at least two options to ensure that we rid our education system of underperforming principals. One that you certainly have alluded to was that of competence. You have also spoken about the review that has been called for.
A study conducted by a consortium including the Human Sciences Research Council recommended that competency tests be introduced. These should be completed and passed by any person applying for the post of a principal before appointment to that post can be countenanced.
Secondly, the Western Cape has implemented a performance management system for principals, holding them directly accountable for learner achievement or otherwise at their schools. They must perform or face being managed out of the system. In fact, in January this year Minister Motshekga promised to hold principals exactly so accountable for underperforming schools. She said that if schools' poor performance was found to be due to weak leadership or management, those principals will be demoted. That was in January 2012.
Will the Ministry now consider and implement either or both of these options? If not, why not? Thank you.
Hon Speaker, you may well be aware that the initiative to have principals sign performance agreements is presently with the Education Labour Relations Council and the unions are considering that. There is such an initiative that has taken place.
Long ago, the issue of performance management has received the collective support of all provinces. It might well be that before the process unfolds and is formalised in the Chamber the Western Cape had already started implementing it informally. It is indeed the intention of the Department of Basic Education.
We have often spoken quite publicly about the relationship between performance functionality of a school and the leadership and management of schools, so we cannot disagree with you in that particular regard. What we can say is that we can take heart from the fact that there are 18 institutions of higher learning that are providing opportunities for the Ace programme to be followed. The uptake is increasing year by year, because communities, educators, deputy principals and principals, in particular, recognise the value of those skills that should be a requisite for a person leading an institution as complex as a school. I thank you.
Hon Speaker, I think it needs to be taken further. When the Minister announced the annual results of the national assessment in July 2011, she gave an indication that all school principals and deputies would in future enter into performance contracts with clear targets.
We supported that indication because it would help to identify principals with proper management skills. It would further identify principals who have the capacity to help in the assessment of educators, where such principals are heads. It would help in the proper learnership programmes. Our question is whether the Minister has gone on with the implementation of that and how far that has happened.
Secondly, we would like to know whether there has been any consultation with various structures, like the Principals' Forum, principals associations and the unions.
Hon Speaker, more than anybody else the hon Madisha as a former president of a very big teachers' organisation would have known that you can't arbitrarily implement a policy without consulting with the unions. As I have indicated, the matter is up for discussion and decision in the bargaining chamber. With the feedback that we are getting, it does appear that it is going to be supported by all and sundry. Therefore, we are just awaiting the formalisation and finalisation of the process which has been agreed to between the Department of Basic Education and all the unions and the stakeholders - as alluded to by the hon Madisha - the governing bodies as well as the unions. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mechanisms under proposed NHI to deal with failure of provincial departments to spend funds
76. Mr D A Kganare (Cope) asked the Minister of Health:
Whether the proposed National Health Insurance (NHI) has developed mechanisms to deal with the failure of provincial departments to spend funds earmarked for (a) vital infrastructure and (b) health care improvement; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?