Chairperson, chairperson of the portfolio committee, Deputy Minister in the Presidency for Performance Monitoring and Evaluation as well as Administration in the Presidency, hon members, honoured guests, friends and comrades, members of the department's management and staff, members of the media, ladies and gentlemen, I'm pleased to present another Budget Vote of the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation. Hon members, it was as recent as last week that we had to bid a sad farewell to and grieve the loss of a serving Minister of this administration, Comrade Roy Padayachie, and a former Minister, Sicelo Shiceka. It was also in the same week that Parliament lost one of its own, hon Florence Nyanda. Allow me to dedicate this Budget Vote to their selfless struggle and dedication to the people of South Africa.
Last year I outlined measures to improve the performance of government. Since then we have institutionalised quarterly monitoring of delivery agreements by the Cabinet. In addition, we reviewed the annual performance plans of national departments to ensure that their contents are in line with the delivery agreements. Much has been learnt from the past year and Ministers, premiers, members of executive council, MECs, mayors and officials are currently in the process of reviewing and refining the delivery agreements on the basis of this experience. Where targets have been achieved, the review process involves setting higher targets. In instances in which monitoring and evaluation has indicated that our activities are not having the intended results, we are making changes to these activities so that we can achieve the desired results.
South Africa is faced with very complex socioeconomic challenges, for which there are no simple and uncontested solutions. For this reason this administration has started a process of turning the government into a learning organisation which does not just keep doing the same things in the same old way, regardless of whether they are working or not.
We are changing government into an organisation which constantly collects evidence on whether or not its policies and programmes are working, and we use this evidence to inform the interventions we make. The primary role of the department is to change the culture and develop the skills of the public service in monitoring and evaluation, so that all managers at all levels regularly monitor and evaluate their own work and improve their performance. This is the only way that we will get government to work faster, harder and smarter.
In this regard, we are engaged in a range of monitoring and evaluation capacity-building initiatives, including managing national and provincial monitoring and evaluation forums, learning networks and data forums, and developing guidelines and training courses for officials.
On the international front, we have engaged with and learnt from many countries, including Mexico, Columbia, Indonesia, Malaysia, the United Kingdom, Canada, the United States of America and Australia. In March this year we hosted a workshop with our African counterparts from Benin, Burundi, Uganda, Kenya, Ghana and Senegal. The workshop agreed that we would continue to share and learn from one another's experiences. We have also established working relationships with international organisations, which provide support in this field, including the Centre for Learning on Evaluation and Results, the International Institute for Impact Evaluation and the World Bank.
As the President announced earlier this year, the development of infrastructure to enable economic growth and to meet the basic needs of our people is a key priority. In this regard we have been focusing on monitoring the implementation of the economic infrastructure delivery agreement. Our monitoring indicates that much progress has been made, but that more attention needs to be paid to areas such as the acceleration of the electrification programme, increasing demand-side energy savings and improving the maintenance of municipal electricity distribution infrastructure.
Further improvements in productivity are required at the ports, and we need to put in place an appropriate pricing strategy for water. In addition, the sanitation programme will need to be improved and accelerated if we are to meet our 2014 target of 100% access to safe sanitation facilities.
The Presidential Infrastructure Co-ordinating Commission has been created to accelerate infrastructure progress and to oversee efforts to address these challenges. We have been contributing to the work of the commission directly and through our monitoring of municipal, social and economic infrastructure delivery.
We have also been working with the National Treasury and the Construction Industry Development Board to put in place a mechanism to monitor progress with infrastructure projects at all levels of government. The Construction Industry Development Board is now in the process of establishing the projects register which will serve this purpose.
Following the report of the Human Rights Commission on the open toilets saga, we have, in collaboration with the Department of Water Affairs, completed a review of the state of sanitation in the country. The review indicated that while we are increasing access to safe sanitation by approximately 300 000 households per annum, there are challenges with the operation and maintenance of the sanitation system. The study found that this was caused by a combination of weak municipal management and a lack of clear responsibility of the sanitation policy at national level. The Human Rights Commission has indicated that it is pleased with the study and is currently consulting with civil society regarding the recommendations. After these consultations, recommendations for improvements will be taken to Cabinet.
We have produced the 2011 development indicators, which provide a broad picture of the state of our country's development, with 83 socioeconomic indicators based on data sourced from government systems, official statistics and research done by local and international institutions.
Both the development indicators and the results of our monitoring reinforce the need for us to continue to focus on the priorities which we identified at the beginning of the term. For example, in basic education, we have increased the number of children benefiting from early childhood development, with enrolment in Grade R doubling between 2003 and 2011. Seventy percent of learners are now in no-fee schools and the overall pass rate for Grade 12 increased in 2011.
However, while the development indicators show that we have achieved a high school enrolment rate, they also show that we have not yet overcome the legacy of apartheid in the basic education system. The system is still not performing at the level of other middle-income countries. In this regard we have identified a number of areas for improvement, such as strengthening the teaching of literacy and numeracy in lower grades, strengthening school management and increasing the accountability of school principals. The Department of Basic Education is implementing plans to address these issues.
Similarly, while there have been improvements in a number of health indicators, such as the stabilisation of HIV and Aids, there are areas for concern, such as the high maternal mortality. In the fight against crime, the indicators show that public feelings of safety have significantly improved and that crime is coming down. The murder rate per 100 000 of the population has halved since 1994, but crime levels remain unacceptably high. Again, we have identified the speeding up and the finalisation of cases before our courts, thus further improving the investigative and prosecutorial capacities of the police and the National Prosecuting Authority. We also have to secure more convictions for corruption.
November 2011 marked the mid-point of this electoral term and we have carried out a mid-term review, the contents of which will be elaborated upon during the Presidency Budget Vote. The mid-term review provides a detailed assessment of our progress and challenges with regard to the implementation of the delivery agreements.
Monitoring is necessary, but not sufficient. It only asks whether we are doing what we planned to do. In order to assess whether or not our plans are resulting in their intended impacts and the reasons for this, we need to carry out evaluations. Evaluations involve deep analysis of issues such as causality, relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, value for money and sustainability. In this regard the finalisation of the National Evaluation Policy Framework has been a major milestone for the department over the past year.
Our evaluation framework sets quality standards for evaluations based on best international practice. The focus of the evaluations will be on programmes related to government's priorities. The framework also provides for the development and monitoring of improvement plans to address the recommendations from the evaluations.
In terms of the framework, we will work with other departments and provinces to identify key programmes to be evaluated. We are taking the first annual national evaluation plan, with eight recommended priority evaluations, to Cabinet next week and we will take the first three-year national evaluation plan to Cabinet later this
Programmes under consideration for evaluation this year include: the national school nutrition programme and the Grade R Programme in the Department of Basic Education; the integrated nutrition programme in the Department of Health; the Recapitalisation and Development Programme and the Comprehensive Rural Development Programme in the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform; the Business Process Outsourcing Services Incentives Scheme in the Department of Trade and Industry; and the Integrated Residential Development Programme and urban settlements development grant in the Department of Human Settlements.
We have completed an evaluation on early childhood development, ECD, with the Departments of Health, Basic Education, and Social Development. The findings of the evaluation are informing the current review of the early childhood development policy. The evaluation found that many elements of comprehensive ECD services are already in place and some are performing well. However, the evaluation also identified a number of required changes to ECD policy, including extending home and community-based programmes, ensuring food security and adequate daily nutrition for the youngest children to avert the life-long damaging effects of stunting; and increasing parent support programmes. The evaluation found that the current co-ordination mechanisms for ECD were not working adequately.
The achievement of all of our targets for all of our priorities is dependent on the creation of a developmental state, supported by an effective and efficient public service. The need for a capable state is also highlighted in the draft National Development Plan produced by the National Planning Commission.
With the aim of contributing to the development of a capable state, we have worked with other transversal departments and institutions to develop and pilot the monitoring of management performance in departments. The purpose was to increase our focus on the capacity of departments to effectively and smartly convert inputs such as money and staff into outputs such as infrastructure and services. We have obtained Cabinet's approval for widespread application of the tool.
Working in partnership with the offices of the premiers, we facilitated assessments of the quality of management practices in 103 national and provincial departments so far. This involved assessing the quality of management practices across a comprehensive range of management areas. By carrying out these assessments, the Presidency and the offices of the premiers are sending a strong message to managers that improving the quality of management practices is also important.
In each management area, performance is assessed against the management standards established by the relevant transversal departments. The process includes self-assessment and internal audit validation by the departments, external moderation and feedback by our department, followed by performance improvement by the departments themselves. We draw on data produced by the Auditor- General, the Public Service Commission, the Department of the Public Service and Administration and the National Treasury.
In general, in line with findings by the Auditor-General, the assessments indicate low levels of compliance with some aspects of legislation, particularly relating to supply-chain management, human resource management and information technology governance amongst the majority of departments.
The assessment of results also indicates that departments are generally not working as smartly as they could. For example, in their own self- assessment, 86% of the departments assessed indicated that they were not carrying out evaluations of major programmes periodically and using the results of such evaluations to inform improvements. This is why we have put in place the National Evaluation Policy Framework. For service delivery improvement, 69% of the departments indicated that they do not have a service charter, service standards and a service delivery improvement plan in place, as required by Public Service Regulations. Sixty-seven percent of departments assessed themselves as noncompliant with the required policies and systems for promoting professional ethics.
The assessments will be repeated annually so that improvements can be tracked. Although it is too early to speak conclusively of the impact of this monitoring of management, the indications are positive. The self- assessment exercise was generally enthusiastically received and many departments carried out a frank and honest assessment and used the process to identify their shortcomings and put in place improvement plans.
The Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation will interact with departments that have demonstrated smart management practices to write up their case studies so that other departments can use them as a model to improve their own management practices. We will be reporting to Cabinet shortly on the results of the first round of management performance assessments.
We are also involved in the monitoring of a range of key indicators of the management performance of government through the Forum of SA Directors- General, Fosad. These relate to management areas over which directors- general have control, and which are of concern to citizens, labour, business and Parliament. They include, for example, reducing waiting times and turnaround times for a range of services, reducing the time taken to finalise disciplinary cases in the public service and the filling of vacancies. In addition, we are monitoring the responsiveness of departments to the anticorruption hotline. Members would also be pleased that we are paying particular attention to the responsiveness of departments to requests from Chapter 9 institutions and the timeous submission of quality strategic plans, annual performance plans and annual reports to Parliament.
We collect information on these indicators from departments, and progress reports per department are regularly presented to Fosad. In some areas this intensive monitoring of management issues is starting to bear fruit. We have seen significant improvements in waiting and turnaround times recorded at the Department of Home Affairs and the SA Social Security Agency. The SA Police Service has also improved its reaction times to serious crimes.
With regard to the payment of suppliers within 30 days, national and provincial departments are required to submit monthly reports giving details of all the invoices which have not been paid within 30 days and the reasons for this to the Treasury. Bimonthly progress reports on this issue are presented to our department and also to Fosad. This new monitoring process is enabling us to obtain a better understanding of the extent of the problem and its causes. So far the monitoring has confirmed that the outcry amongst small businesses regarding this issue is justified. Departments are reporting thousands of invoices which have not been paid within 30 days and most of the reasons for this relate to weaknesses in internal management practices. Our expectation is that the focus of the Forum of SA Directors-General, Cabinet and the Presidential Infrastructure Co-ordinating Commission on this issue will result in accounting officers paying attention to monitoring and addressing the problem in their own departments.
We are aware that to date our focus has mostly been on national and provincial government. We are now paying more attention to monitoring municipalities. We will include municipal customer service centres in this year's round of unannounced frontline service-delivery monitoring visits. In addition, we have started to develop an appropriate tool to assess the management of municipalities, in collaboration with the Department of Co- operative Governance and the Traditional Affairs and the National Treasury. This tool will be completed and piloted by the end of the financial year and will be widely applied to municipalities in the following year. This, we hope, will help us to effectively respond to the frustrations of our people at the local level.
Turning to the budget, the department has been allocated R174 million for the 2012-13 financial year. Of this, R93 million will be spent on compensation of employees, R67 million on goods and services, and R14 million on payments for capital assets. The department has four budget programmes which correspond with the four branches of the department, and the budget has been allocated to these programmes as follows: Administration: R60 million; outcomes monitoring and evaluation: R38 million; monitoring and evaluation systems co-ordination and support: R19 million; and public sector oversight: R57 million.
We have submitted a revised strategic plan as well as our annual performance plan to Parliament this year ...
Hon Minister, your time has expired.
... taking into account the transfer of the Presidential Hotline to the department, as well our new additional focus on the National Evaluation Policy Framework. We are starting to show how monitoring and evaluation can contribute to building a capable and developmental state which delivers services. Thank you very much, hon members. [Applause.]
Hon Chairperson, Comrade Minister Chabane, Comrade Deputy Minister Bapela, hon members, the Director-General of the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation, and the team, the National Youth Development Agency - I don't see them here; oh, the colleagues are there - my discussion will cover broadly both the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation and the National Youth Development Agency.
The Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation presents our government with the rare opportunity to be the champion of service delivery, the opportunity for the centre to streamline the planning of government priorities from a national level to a provincial level, and may include the municipalities as the Minister has indicated. The co-ordination from the Presidency to the premiers and the leadership of clusters will be responsible for prioritising and not for any further reprioritising in different spheres.
The Constitution of the country says that South Africa is a unitary state, thus doing away with the yearning for balkanisation of our country. The work of citizenry becomes important by monitoring frontline service delivery and raising queries with the Presidential Hotline, thus fulfilling the aims of the Freedom Charter that, "The people shall govern," and that our government is a people-centred government. Whilst the President has entered into performance agreements with the Ministers that require focusing on 12 priority outcomes, Parliament needs to understand these 12 priority outcomes in order for Parliament to do effective oversight over the measurable objectives. The 12 priority outcomes are based on the five broad strategic priorities for government.
The ANC commends the ANC-led government for closing the monitoring and evaluation gap amongst the tools of oversight, such as the Public Service Commission, the Auditor-General, the National Treasury, etc, each of which performs a different function. Some colleagues from the opposition parties are still sceptical about the establishment of this department. The reasons are simple: They still yearn for the past, hence South Africans coming to the Western Cape are called refugees in their own country. [Interjections.]
This department will be central to service delivery and co-ordination of government work. The research informs us that in countries in which monitoring and evaluation departments exist, the service to the people is bound to improve, but we should accept that there is little experience in our country around monitoring and evaluation.
As Parliament we need to monitor the performance of government versus the strategic or the annual performance plans. Though many departments receive unqualified audit opinion reports from the Auditor-General, in many cases there is a gap between expenditure and set predetermined objectives, which remain low, with some departments achieving less than 50% of their set objectives, and other departments scoring as low as 37%.
The Public Service Commission believes that this misalignment can be attributed to a lack of capacity and skills, and to a lack of culture of reporting on performance. Another area of concern between expenditure and predetermined objectives is value for money. A glaring example in terms of value for money is when departments spend about 50% at the end of the third quarter - that is, December - but by the end of the financial year, three months later, they are able to exhaust the budget of the department. This begs the question as to whether the money has been translated into predetermined objectives.
The committee notes the 2012-13 annual performance plan of the department and looks forward to working with the department in achieving these predetermined objectives. The department is still new and needs to build capacity as soon as possible.
The ANC commends the department for the work that has been done by the Presidency in dealing with calls to the hotline. The hotline continues to play an important role in engaging with the citizenry and we appreciate the improvement in the responses to the queries, from 39% to 80%. Again, with the Presidential Hotline there are certain issues that need to be addressed, like call throttling and the cost of calling, as well as the slow responsiveness of the municipalities.
The ANC welcomes the commitment of the executive to focus on monitoring the frontline service delivery and appreciates the visits that have been done by the President and Ministers to institutions such as hospitals, schools, police stations and municipalities. The institutions and the public also benefit from these visits.
The ANC supports the department in its endeavours to co-ordinate sectoral data forums based on the outcomes, with the aim of improving data collection in the departments, to enable evidence-based reporting on progress with the implementation of delivery agreements for the outcomes.
Hon Minister, we recommend that the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation look at its budget closely as the administrator's budget is the biggest amongst the four core programmes. Some of the functions not belonging there must be accordingly allocated. Clearly, the budget of this department has to be attended to over the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework period in order for the department to build sufficient capacity to monitor and evaluate other departments.
I will now address myself to the National Youth Development Agency, NYDA. The ANC would like to take this opportunity to express our profound gratitude to the former chairperson of the NYDA and his colleagues on the board for steering this ship to where it is today. These comrades must be congratulated on the work that they did in founding the NYDA from the Umsobomvu Youth Fund and the National Youth Commission for it to become the formidable force that the NYDA is today. The work has not been easy and they have sometimes received undeserved criticism, because the public has not understood the intricacy of integrating these two institutions. [Interjections.] Some of those very people are those that are grumbling now!
The ANC continues to support the growth and development of the young people as evidenced in supporting the National Youth Development Agency. This is in line with O R Tambo's view that no nation can afford to neglect its youth. The ANC has not said that there are no challenges in the NYDA. South Africa currently experiences a high unemployment rate, and research reports indicate that the majority of those people who are not employed are the youth, some of whom have never been or may never be employed.
Therefore, the role of the NYDA in empowering the young people of the country cannot be overemphasised. So, the establishment of the NYDA is a deliberate intervention by the government to mitigate the challenges such as poverty, unemployment and lack of resources, and to aid the youth to complete their schooling. The Congress of SA Trade Unions, Cosatu, is not the government. [Interjections.]
The NYDA received a lot of negative publicity related to the international youth festival that was held in South Africa. I would like to highlight a few points, whilst Comrade Mkhulisi will expand on the submission of the NYDA. The NYDA informed the committee about the values which, amongst other things, include the developmental nature of our society; service orientation and excellence; integrity and ethics; transparency and fairness; and prudence in looking after their resources.
We are aware that the youth constitute the bulk of the unemployed population in our country. As part of addressing this unemployment and prioritising the youth, resources have been made available to the NYDA. Except for the 2012-13 allocated budget, their budget will grow over the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework period from R376 million to R449 million, excluding donations. The ANC commends the programmes that the NYDA has set out to empower the young people by promoting economic freedom.
A whole range of programmes are provided to support their overarching goals such as an enabling environment mandate, amongst other things; lobbying and advocating for integral and mainstreaming of youth development in all spheres of government - private sector and civil society; and initiating, implementing, facilitating and co-ordinating youth development programmes.
The NYDA reported that it has presence in all the provinces and many municipalities. The committee hopes to support the NYDA by visiting the centres and projects they have around the country. The ANC supports Budget Vote 6. I thank you. [Applause.]
Chair, hon Minister, hon Deputy Minister, the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation performs, or is supposed to perform, a management function. Management consists of four elements which run in sequence. They are planning, leading, organising and control. All four elements are vital for good management. If only one of them is missing, poor management results.
Good management therefore starts with a good plan. An excellent example of a good plan is the National Development Plan, the NDP, recently publicised by the National Planning Commission, NPC. Although the DA has some reservations about certain recommendations contained therein, it nevertheless forms a perfect backdrop for the future growth that is so desperately required in South Africa in order to redress the injustices of the past and to achieve reconciliation for the entirety of our diverse population.
Unfortunately, in South Africa we have become accustomed to some excellent plans by government, only for these to be followed by a lack of leadership, poor organising and poor control. The result is management at standards way below acceptable norms. [Interjections.]
The element of control is of particular importance. This is a function to be exercised by the directors-general of the departments but, as a result of the government's policy of jobs for pals, the control function is often neglected, resulting in failed management. No wonder, then, that the President saw fit to create the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation, at great expense, to start performing a function which should ordinarily have been performed by the director-general, together with the relevant Minister.
The Standing Committee on Appropriations has been tasked with performing the function of a portfolio committee for the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation. This in itself is a misnomer, as it is imperative that there should be a portfolio committee for the whole of the Presidency, inclusive of this department and the National Youth Development Agency, about which my colleague the hon Dion George will have something more to say.
To date, the Standing Committee on Appropriations has not received copies of any reports on performance management and evaluation conducted in state and/or provincial departments by the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation, and it is unclear whether any such reports will be made available to the committee in future, or only to Cabinet. Oversight by the committee is therefore impossible.
From what the Appropriations committee could ascertain, the department has, in any case, finalised only one evaluation report on early childhood development since its inception more than two years ago, in January 2010. I was pleased to hear, Mr Minister, that more reports will be forthcoming.
No work is done by the department at municipalities, and I am pleased that the Minister also mentioned that this will receive attention. This is where most of the service delivery functions take place and where control by way of performance monitoring and evaluation is more important than anywhere else.
The department proposes a budget of R174 million for the 2012-13 financial year, increasing to R204,4 million in the 2014-15 financial year. The major portion of expenditure envisaged by the department goes towards the compensation of employees. The department currently employs 130 employees and more than 53% of expenditure will go towards the compensation of employees.
The position will worsen as the department envisages the employment of 170 staff members in 2013-14, later increasing to 190. [Interjections.] To hide the ever-increasing salary bill, the department has started using the services of consultants more and more. This is an even worse scenario.
Een van die probleme wat hierdie departement in die gesig staar, is dat baie van die werk wat hulle doen, eintlik mag lei tot die oorvleueling van werk wat reeds deur ander instansies soos die Ouditeur-generaal, interne ouditkomitees, die Staatsdienskommissie en die Nasionale Tesourie gedoen word. Die funksies van die departement in hierdie verband moet dus duidelik omskryf word.
Die departement het geen magte om op te tree teen departemente of provinsies wat nie na behore presteer nie. Wetgewing om die departement die nodige tande te gee, sal eers in 2015 deur die departement ter tafel gel word. [Gelag.] Wat hul verslae intussen veronderstel is om te bereik, bly onduidelik. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[One of the problems facing this department is that much of the work they do may lead to the overlapping of work that is already being done by other bodies such as the Auditor-General, internal audit committees, the Public Service Commission and the National Treasury. The functions of the department in this regard should therefore be clearly defined.
The department does not have the power to act against other departments or provinces that are not performing properly. Legislation to give this department the necessary teeth will only be tabled by the department in 2015. [Laughter.] What their reports are supposed to achieve in the meantime remains unclear.] Maybe the department should start its work in its own backyard, by monitoring and evaluating its own handling of the NYDA, which reports to the same Minister, especially as far as it relates to the organising of the exorbitantly expensive international youth festival.
The department has, generally, not produced any reports in the public domain in which poor performance and management by national departments and provinces is encountered, or in which corruption has been unearthed by them, or in which poor service delivery by civil servants is the order of the day. They have also not come up with recommendations on how they propose to deal with problems of this nature. Yet, in its strategic and annual performance plans, the department states that it will make progress visible to the public. The absence of such reports and recommendations threatens the very existence of the department, and making a budget available to the department becomes questionable.
The Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation states that measuring results achieved by national departments and provinces will work as a catalyst for change in government. Indeed, the introduction of results measurement, if introduced as a measure of control, could go a long way towards drastically improving service delivery, but then only if action plans are instituted and controlled to rectify what is wrong. Results measurement will also prove that excellent results are achieved where the DA governs. The Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation is a relatively new department, and it will have to pull out all the stops to prove that its existence is justified and that the department was not formed with the intent of merely giving a loyal supporter of the President a ministerial position. I thank you. [Applause.] [Interjections.]
Hon Chair, hon Minister, in my speech I will only focus on the youth and a bit on monitoring. During the annual Chris Hani Memorial Lecture in 2007, President Jacob Zuma said that political intolerance and lack of debate had resulted in the disintegration of democratic values and the destruction of nations, as witnessed elsewhere in the world. He went on to say the following.
A climate in which we resist open engagement on issues of national interest due to political intolerance or fear will never allow the growth of political consciousness.
He proceeded to quote Chris Hani, saying: We as the ANC-led liberation alliance have nothing to fear and everything to gain from a climate of political tolerance. We do not fear open contest and free debate with other organisations. Open debate can only serve to uncover the bankruptcy of our political opponents.
The events of yesterday are a contrast to Chris Hani's view. The events reminded me of the two great leaders of our struggle, President O R Tambo and President Nelson Mandela. President Nelson Mandela, at the funeral of O R Tambo, said the following as a tribute to this outstanding revolutionary of our time:
We want to know - when powerful, arrogant and brutal men deliberately close their ears to reason, and reply to the petitions of the dispossessed with the thunder of the guns, the crack of the whip and the rattle of the jail keys, is it not right to bring down the walls of Jericho!
Dear brother, dear friend, dear comrade:
You did all this and continued to maintain tolerance for your detractors and a healthy scorn for your enemies.
Today we stand watching the dawn of a new day.
We can see that we have it in our power to remake South Africa ... He also said:
Let all who value peace say together - long live Oliver Tambo! Let all who love freedom say together - long live Oliver Tambo! Let all who uphold the dignity of all human beings say together - long live Oliver Tambo! [Interjections.]
Yesterday's events remain an indictment of the core principles of the liberation of all South Africans. Our liberation struggle was based on the principle: "Fight against the domination of one race by another, one class by another, and one people by another." The Congress of SA Trade Unions incident undermines the founding provisions of our Constitution ... [Interjections.]
Hon members, let us listen to Mr Bhanga.
... which are human dignity, the supremacy of the law, a multiparty system of democratic order. Neither the DA nor Cosatu is above criticism.
Why are the youth of our country being used for petty political squabbles? Why are the youth used for adventure? Why are the youth instigated to fight one another? Why do South African ...
I have a point of order, Chairperson. I think the hon member has brought the wrong speech. We are talking about monitoring and evaluation here. [Interjections.]
Why do South African leaders continue to use the youth for their battles? [Interjections.] The time has come for this to end. All of us are expected by those who fought for freedom and died for this freedom to build and nurture our youth behind a common vision of creating a united South Africa. Have you forgotten what happened in Rwanda? Have you forgotten about the incident with Azapo in Port Elizabeth? I remember the blood of ordinary people in Shell House. I do not want my generation to be subjected to this hatred.
Hon Minister, what all of us ... [Interjections.]
Hon members, let us protect the member. This is the first time he is speaking in Parliament. [Interjections.] It is a maiden speech. He has the right to say whatever he wants to. Could we allow the hon member ... We must not intimidate him. This is the first time he is speaking in Parliament. Allow him space to speak, hon members.
Hon noisy members ... [Laughter.] ... what all of us should be doing is fighting youth unemployment together, not killing each other. This is something we should be doing as a common programme. The challenge for us ... [Interjections.]
House Chairperson ... [Interjections.]
Hon members, let us listen to the hon Mabasa.
Ngicela ukubuza baba ukuthi umuntu omusha othi efika emzini omuhle afike ngenhlamba nje athi sibanga umsindo. Abantu abadala njengathi athi sibanga umsindo. Makasihloniphe ukuze nathi sizomhlonipha..
MGCINISIHLALO WENDLU (Mnu M R Mdakane): Mhlonishwa uMabasa, akuyona inkulumo ekhalimayo. (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)
[Mr X MABASA: I would like to ask, how come a new member can come to this august House and hurl insults by saying that we are making a noise. How can this member tell grown-ups like us that we are making a noise. He must respect us in order for us to also respect him.
Hon Mabasa, that is not a point of order.]
Hon Bhanga, continue.
Hon Minister, Statistics SA's estimate of the total population in 2011 was 50,6 million, of which 13,1 million people were employed. The official unemployment figure stands at ...
On a point of order, Chairperson ...
Hon member, if my understanding is correct, when a member is making a maiden speech, no member should disturb the member, but the member making the maiden speech cannot raise controversial matters. We should really respect that. Hon Sunduza, I am not tempted to give you the floor. Let us allow the member to read his speech and conclude.
I am just correcting something, Chairperson. I know it is his maiden speech, but I do not think it is parliamentary, even if he is a new member - I understand he is wearing a new suit - but ...
... angasikhombi. [... he should not point at us.]
It is not parliamentary to point at the Minister and say, "You, Minister". I think we must raise corrections as well. Thank you.
I am not sure why we are so worried. Let us allow the hon new member to finish his speech. [Interjections.]
More than 70% of the youth in this country are among the 25% that are unemployed. The youth are predominantly unemployed. We have an unemployment crisis in this country, Minister. My question has always been: Is the National Youth Development Agency the correct vehicle to address the question of youth unemployment? [Interjections.]
Furthermore, Minister, as Cope we believe that the allocation given to the National Youth Development Agency to address the scourge of unemployment is not enough. In addition, the same National Youth Development Agency, instead of addressing the plight of the poorest of the poor at Cofimvaba - abantu cannot be taken anywhere - they spend and send money to contribute towards the leadership squabbles in this country. The youth of the ANC, the youth of Cope and the youth of the DA and the youth of all our people continue to suffer. [Interjections.]
The National Youth Development Agency is a disgrace to Anton Lembede.
Conclude ...
We call on the Minister to disestablish the National Youth Development Agency and form a youth Ministry. [Interjections.]
Hon members, let us proceed. I think what we should really request is that the Whips of parties should assist new members with their maiden speeches. Let us make that appeal. The hon Bhanga is still going to come here for many more months and debate some of the issues. The Whips should really assist members in not raising issues that make it difficult for us to listen to them.
Hon Chairperson, on a point of order: This is just a small correction that the hon Bhanga was supposed to make. The hon Bhanga was supposed to tell the Chairperson the truth - that this was not his maiden speech. He has spoken before. This was not a maiden speech. [Interjections.]
Chair, I did not say in this House that this was a maiden speech. It was the Chairperson who chose to say it was a maiden speech. [Interjections.]
Let us proceed. Thank you very much, hon Bhanga.
Chairperson, hon Minister, Deputy Minister, this is certainly not a maiden speech and I would like to speak from here, because I want the chairperson of the disciplinary committee, the hon Derek Hanekom, to protect my back. [Laughter.]
Hon Minister, in your own words, as you concluded your address to this House, you said, "We are starting to show how monitoring and evaluation can contribute to building a capable and developmental state which delivers services effectively and responsibly to its citizens."
We agree that this department is starting to show how they could do exactly this, and they are certainly making progress. But we believe that they are not making sufficient progress because, for all intents and purposes up until now, we have relied very heavily on our Chapter 9 and Chapter 10 institutions like the Auditor-General, the Public Protector and the Public Service Commission to monitor, evaluate and inform the public out there about what exactly is happening within government.
When this department was set up in the Presidency, we all had hoped that at last we were going to have a department residing within the Presidency that would do self-monitoring and evaluation of all other government departments. Now, I wonder to what extent that is happening. If we need to have a capable state, if we need to have a developmental state, then we need to have people that are capable of managing that state on the political and administrative levels.
The report that we received yesterday from the Public Service Commission does not say that to us, and the hon Sogoni, the chairperson of our committee, referred to this in his speech. When you look at expenditure versus performance of departments, it leaves much to be desired. The Department of Health, for example, spent 96,6% of their budget, but in terms of performance they were at 37%. The Department of Labour spent 99,5% of their budget, but their performance is at 43%. What is happening here? Departments are spending their money, but they are not performing according to the predetermined objectives which they themselves set in their annual reports and when they presented their budgets.
Now, Mr Minister, through you, Chairperson, this is an area in which I think the Minister's department really can do much more in ensuring that it acts as a policeman over the other departments. We heard in the corridors that Ministers and other heads of departments do not favour the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation being the big brother policing them. But I think it is about time, because we need that. For that to happen, we need to ensure that we have either the support of the President and the Cabinet or have legislation in place.
To that end, we noted from the strategic plan that the results Act, which is going to be a piece of legislation that governs what this department can and cannot do, is going to be passed, probably, by this House in 2015. Now 2015 is far too long a time, and my appeal to you, hon Minister, is that this piece of legislation be accelerated so that it can come before the respective committees and Parliament to be approved. You have the necessary muscle to deal with all recalcitrant public servants and even Ministers that are not performing. So what I am saying is that we need more aggression from the department. It has our support - from the IFP. I have one minute left to speak about the NYDA. The NYDA is an acronym for the National Youth Development Agency, and it is a four-letter acronym. But the NYDA has become like a four-letter word; a four-letter swearword. This is because of the amount of money that they have allegedly spent. That's what I said in the committee, R100 million, and also the exorbitant salaries they pay themselves. We need to know whether these salaries are benchmarked against any other public entity or benchmarked against officials within government departments. They pay themselves exorbitant salaries. There is also the perception of political bias. Chairperson, I have 20 seconds according to the clock here.
I think that we need to take the NYDA into our bosoms. The Standing Committee on Appropriations has been given this responsibility because every other committee threw them out. They were a hot potato.
As the Appropriations committee and the IFP we are prepared to take them into our bosoms and work with them. The chairperson of the IFP Youth Brigade, the hon Hlengwa - a new member and he sits next to me - asked me to remind us, hon Minister, that the NYDA is a holding exercise.
What we would like to see is a Ministry for the youth as we move forward. So, Chairperson, we support the Budget Vote and we trust that you can be more aggressive as a department in ensuring that there is good governance and good delivery. Thank you. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Agb Voorsitter, dit is ironies dat di departement, wat deurgaans aan die monitering en evaluering van prestasie toegewy is, direk onder die Presidensie val, gegewe die feit dat die Presidensie self in gebreke bly om hom aan enige soort gereelde monitering en evaluering van prestasie, hetsy direk of indirek, deur hierdie Parlement te wil blootstel.
Dit wil ook voorkom asof die Presidensie genoe neem met die feit dat dit toesig hou, asook 'n oorsigrol speel, oor die res van die regering, maar self weier om toe te gee sodat sy eie aktiwiteite van naby deur 'n toegewyde portefeuljekomitee onder die loep geneem kan word. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Mr J J MCGLUWA: Hon Chairperson, it is ironic that this department, which is dedicated to the monitoring and evaluation of performance all the time, falls directly under the Presidency, given the fact that the Presidency itself remains in default of exposing itself to any kind of regular monitoring and evaluation of performance, whether directly or indirectly, by Parliament.
It would also appear as if the Presidency is content with the fact that it is supervising, as well as playing an oversight role over, the rest of the government, but that it is refusing to have its own activities subjected to scrutiny from close up by a dedicated portfolio committee.]
It seems that the Presidency is happy to watch over the rest of government, but is not so inclined to have its own activities closely scrutinised. And why would it, with a bloated budget and reputation for reckless spending, and with the National Youth Development Agency being one of them? Far from seeking to set an example in terms of accountability and transparency, the Presidency goes about its business free from scrutiny by a dedicated parliamentary committee.
This lack of respect for accountability is an attitude that has permeated this government from the Presidency downwards. This government may establish a department devoted to performance monitoring and evaluation, but if it were serious about improving service delivery, it would have taken tough decisions necessary to ensure that nonperformers were held accountable.
A culture of accountability should extend from the President to his Ministers, to every official in their departments. If government employees are not held accountable for misconduct and inefficiency, service delivery will never improve, no matter how much performance monitoring and evaluation take place. We need action where noncompliance exists.
Part of holding government accountable involves the public knowing the targets according to which our Ministers and their teams are appraised. Minister, much has been said about the performance agreements this department has rolled out to Ministers, whilst most of your speech was about monitoring. But these Ministers should have been compelled to publicise their agreements so that we, as South Africans, could see what standards they were being held to. You have rightfully said, Minister, that this is of great concern to the citizens. These performance agreements seem to be little more than a public relations exercise - the Presidency's attempt to create an illusion of accountability.
In the same way, the Presidential Hotline, which is run by this department, has cost the South African public millions of rands with little to show for it. Its primary function seems to have been acting as a backdrop for a PR exercise with pictures of President Zuma taking calls from the public.
Initiatives which seek to improve government's responsiveness should be welcomed. However, with a history of questionable performance statistics, the R62 million allocated to the hotline in this year's budget seems hard to justify.
More than two years ago the DA proposed that a presidential portfolio committee be established to oversee the activities of the Presidency. [Interjections.] Yes, I am John McGluwa, divorced from the ANC, married to Helen Zille's DA. [Applause.]
We will not give up on getting this presidential portfolio committee established to oversee the Presidency. We will not give up our fight of putting this proposal back on Parliament's agenda, because one of the greatest impediments to the Presidency in terms of improving the performance of Ministers is the absence of regular oversight by a dedicated portfolio committee.
The splurging of millions on the President's lifestyle and the pricey PR exercises must come to an end. If there is going to be a change, Minister, it needs to come from the top and that means a more accountable Presidency, a portfolio committee for this Presidency, and a more accountable President. I thank you. [Applause.]
Chairperson, hon Minister Collins Chabane, chairperson of the Standing Committee on Appropriations, hon members of the committee and other hon members, esteemed guests, comrades and friends, ladies and gentlemen, let me start with a quotation by Raanan Weitz, a renowned economist: "While humanity shares one planet, it is a planet in which there are two worlds, the world of the rich and the world of the poor."
It is important, therefore, that the South African people know and understand why things happen as they do in the world and how they have an impact on us as South Africa, and how and what their government is doing in order to better their lives. The Minister has already presented an account of what the Ministry is achieving.
I am quite shocked that some people are still arguing about the nonexistence of this particular Ministry. They argue that it was a case of jobs for pals in order to create space for certain people to be Ministers. The governments of the United Kingdom, Canada and Mexico - countries that are regarded as having advanced democracies - have established such Ministries. Malaysia, South Korea, and Indonesia - most of you quoted Malaysia, and it is performing and doing well - have also established such a Ministry. Therefore, this Ministry is not about jobs for pals, but about perfecting government systems. [Applause.]
Let me also quote other economists: Michael P Todaro and Stephen C Smith, in one of the editions of Economic Development, said:
As people throughout the world awake each morning to face a new day, they do so under very different circumstances. Some live in comfortable homes with many rooms. They have more than enough to eat, are well clothed and healthy, and have a reasonable degree of financial security. Others, and these constitute more than three fourths of the earth's 6 billion people, are much less fortunate. They may have little or no shelter and an inadequate food supply. Their health is poor, they often cannot read or write, they are often unemployed, and their prospects for a better life are uncertain at best.
This is a true reflection of the lives of the people of Africa, Latin America and Asia, a reflection which they experience daily. Added to that are the current developments in the world, such as the economic meltdown in 2008 and the current Euro crisis, which are having a negative impact on their lives.
The government of the ANC endeavours to ensure that our people have shelter, a food supply, health and social services, water, sanitation, housing and security. A Ugandan woman is quoted as saying: "When one is poor, she has no say in public, she feels inferior. She has no food, so there is famine in her house, no clothing, and no progress in her family."
However, in South Africa there are multiple platforms for poor people to express themselves. In response to the call for a more responsive, interactive and effective government, our President, His Excellency Jacob Zuma, launched the Presidential Hotline in 2009, which, until now, has been criticised. The hotline aims to provide mechanisms for citizens to interact directly with the President about service delivery matters. It is only in South Africa where citizens have direct access to the President or the Presidency through the hotline.
Two and half years later, after its establishment, the Presidential Hotline has indeed become an important monitoring and evaluation tool to gauge the quality of service delivery by the various arms of government and state- owned institutions. People call in numbers and tell us their stories. There are more than 130 000 cases logged at present, and the resolution rate is more than 80% - I hope the hon McGluwa is listening. This is a resolution rate that we can be proud of, given that we started from a low base of 39% in November 2009.
Since its inception, the Presidential Hotline has made a difference to the lives of many South Africans. This is therefore a platform for quite a number of our people. For example, the hotline has facilitated the unblocking of delayed pensions, and it has ensured that actions are taken when community members alert us to cases that require the intervention of social welfare services and other departments. We are a caring government that serves the needs of the poor and the needs of ordinary South Africans and others who have issues to raise with government.
The hotline received more than 8 000 complaints and queries about the Johannesburg metro billing system crisis. As the Presidency and the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation, DPME, we responded and undertook a visit to the metro of Johannesburg to engage with the leadership and to assess the situation and identify bottlenecks.
The metro leadership assured us that their current interventions would bring positive relief to many citizens who had voiced their concerns. The issues raised both by the rich and the poor, by black and white citizens of Johannesburg, are all various issues such as the billing challenges, the responsiveness which was perceived as slow or inadequate, the long queues at the service points, the rate of the turnaround strategy to resolve their problems, and also the uncaring officials who did not apply Batho Pele principles.
We are currently assessing and monitoring the situation. Besides the unannounced visits that are being carried out as we speak, we will be going back to the Johannesburg metro to get feedback on the progress made in resolving the issue.
It was through the Presidential Hotline that we were alerted to the most important element - of 8 000 complaints being made - and we could not ignore 8 000 voices. That is why we had to respond, because of the Presidential Hotline in place. [Applause.]
There are good stories to be told about the usefulness of the hotline by ordinary South Africans. Most recently, a caller complained that her mother was receiving a foster care grant for her two grandsons. The grant had expired in March 2010 and she went to renew it at the SA Social Security Agency, Sassa, but she was told that the renewal forms had not been available since March 2010. Then the people decided to phone the Presidential Hotline.
The officials at the hotline referred this case to the national Sassa offices. This resulted in them sending a national official and a social worker to visit the household. After observing the dire poverty that this family was living in, Sassa officials found that the children suffered from trauma as a result of the death of their parents. The family also did not have enough food, only surviving at times on the help of their neighbours. The children did not have school uniforms and lunch food, and were reluctant to attend school - they were refusing to go to school. The family was immediately assisted as a result of the intervention by the Presidential Hotline.
It is clear from this case that the hotline represents our determination to do things differently in government. These and other stories reflect the importance of the role played by the Presidential Hotline in addressing the needs of ordinary South Africans.
In addition, from this and other stories, we are able to identify some service delivery trends and key challenges that should be unblocked by various spheres of government. The management of the Presidential Hotline was transferred to the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation last year in October. I hope, therefore, that from time to time you will call them to give reports, so that we are then able to understand the nature of the work that they do.
In the Budget Vote speech last year, the department undertook to place more emphasis on "on-site monitoring of frontline service delivery". I am pleased to announce that, since June 2011, we have conducted 122 unannounced monitoring visits to five provinces: Gauteng, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, the Free State and the Northern Cape. The monitoring teams consisted of staff of DPME as well as staff from the offices of the premiers. We monitored the quality of services delivered in selected offices such as Sassa, Home Affairs, drivers licence centres, health facilities, courts and schools.
During each of these visits, we interviewed community users and staff and produced a score card which suggested improvements, and the reports were then given to Cabinet. We hope, therefore, that these on-site visits will be increased. This year, for example, we aim to monitor more than 150 new sites in all nine provinces. We have included municipal customer service centres on our list of sites to be monitored. We are hard at work in ensuring that service delivery does improve.
Regarding the National Youth Development Agency, I just want to say that the term of office of the board expired on 30 April 2012. Parliament is currently considering a new board, and we hope that process will deliver new people. The chairperson has already thanked the outgoing chairperson for a job well done, together with the board members.
Hon Deputy Minister, try to conclude.
Yes, I can see my watch, Chair, so you have disturbed me now. [Laughter.]
Next month, June 16 celebrations take place in Port Elizabeth. We need to organise and mobilise young people in their thousands - black and white, Coloured and Indian - to embrace the National Youth Day. The youth challenges are continuing to grow. The African youth is burgeoning and we need to ensure that we are able to respond to their problems and their challenges. Hon members, because of time, I want to thank you very much. The Budget Vote is therefore presented. Thank you. [Applause.]
Hon Chairperson, hon Ministers, hon members, the Presidency has to be commended for introducing, for the first time in South Africa's history, a Ministry that is responsible for the monitoring and evaluation of government departments, both horizontally across the spheres of government and vertically between these spheres.
Besides the budget process, I wish to focus primarily on Programme 4: Public Sector Administration Oversight, and in particular on the new initiative of citizen-based monitoring of services that is to be driven by the department and informed by the Constitution, an initiative that gives true meaning and substance to the principle of "the people shall govern".
The Constitution states that "The Republic of South Africa is one, sovereign, democratic state", established on a number of values. The Bill of Rights guarantees the citizens certain rights and the Constitution recognises a common South African citizenship, which is entitled to those rights. Besides these various rights aimed at developing a common citizenship, the Bill of Rights provides for socioeconomic rights of citizens such as housing, water, sufficient food, social security and health care. The Constitution states further that the state must take reasonable legislative and other measures within its available resources to achieve the progressive realisation of each of these rights.
Chapter 2 places responsibility on the state to respect, protect, promote and fulfil its obligations in terms of the rights of all South Africans in a democratic state.
A system of democratic government, which is accountable, responsive and open, attests to the importance placed by the Constitution on government's and legislatures' obligations to interact with the citizenry by creating a framework that promotes interaction and social partnership. Section 1(c) makes provision for the supremacy of the Constitution and the rule of law, and section 2 further stipulates that the Constitution is the supreme law of the Republic, and that "law or conduct inconsistent with it is invalid, and the obligations imposed by it must be fulfilled". It is to be noted that in these provisions, the principals of good governance is promoted and protected, which will become a core function of the department.
The Constitution, while establishing the rights of the citizen, also expects the citizen in return to be subject to the duties and responsibilities of citizenship; in effect creating a partnership between the state and the citizen. The democratic partnership is further concretised in the preamble to the Constitution which states, amongst other things, that the people of South Africa, through their freely elected representatives, adopt the Constitution to establish a society based on democratic values in which the government is based on the will of the people.
South Africa's constitutional framework establishes a complex network of institutions that are independent of one another, but through their functioning are interrelated. The constitutional obligation on each ensures that the relevant checks and balances are put in place to safeguard democracy and promote the principles of transparent, accountable government which is informed by and accountable to the citizenry. The department's efforts to introduce, for the first time, in my opinion, the citizen into government are applauded.
Chapter 10 of the Constitution deals with public administration, setting out in section 195 the basic values and principles governing public administration. These values and principles are re-enforced through the provision that "Public administration must be governed by the democratic values and principles enshrined in the Constitution", that "Public administration must be accountable" and that the public is to be encouraged to participate in policy-making.
The Constitutional Court, in its ruling pertaining to the right of the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Amendment Bill, tested its constitutionality in respect of public-participation processes. It stated that the legislature has as much of an obligation to facilitate public involvement in the legislative process as it does to educate the citizens on their rights and how these rights can and should be applied in democratic processes and structures.
In delivering its ruling in favour of the applicant, the court, on behalf of the citizen, recognised that the citizen, through the processes of the legislatures, was entitled to be empowered to participate effectively. The court noted that the legislature has an equal responsibility to educate the citizen on his or her rights and how these are to be effectively applied, as well as consulting the citizen on matters of policy. One can, therefore, deduce from the above that public participation in the functioning of the executive and the Public Service, while carrying out their mandate, would be subject to the principles contained in the judgment. Therefore the department is going to have to expend a huge effort on educating the public through its envisaged role within the department's programmes.
Constitutional and policy prescripts pertaining to public participation and the expected role the citizen is to play in informing the state's developmental role lays a foundation for a working partnership. This partnership has introduced to the civil service a politico-administrative style of governing the provisions of services. The framework has been defined in which the new civil service is required to operate. Focus has shifted to the task at hand to deliver on the expectations of the citizens, based on sound policies and principles of good governance. Public managers have the responsibility of translating these policies into action plans and strategies to achieve policy goals - and the department has the responsibility to oversee this.
This means essentially taking responsibility for implementation, a factor which, to a certain extent, has been lacking. The capacity of government to facilitate and stimulate co-operation amongst and between role-players within the social partnership has not been applied adequately to date. This can be attributed to a number of factors, including available resources, structural frameworks, and defined roles and functions between state and citizen. The department will be required to find solutions to these challenges when rolling out its citizen-based monitoring programme.
In order to simplify a complex and technical process, a budget is the aligning of figures to policy within a legislative framework. It is this framework that specifies the process and procedures of how the budget is to be passed and allocated. Various mechanisms are legislated regarding how they are to be allocated and ultimately accounted for.
It is our responsibility as the portfolio and standing committees to be able to ensure that the department's budget does not become a budget that is incrementally increased based on percentages, but one that is crafted in a manner that would fulfil the department's mandate. Therefore, we do not believe that over the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework period and the outer years, the budget is sufficient to be able to drive the department's mandate.
Chapter 3 of the Constitution, which deals with co-operative government, states that the national, provincial and local spheres are distinctive, interdependent and interrelated. It requires these spheres to provide effective, transparent, accountable, and coherent government for the Republic as a whole. It is clear from the intention of these provisions that the drafters of the Constitution envisaged various spheres to work together to achieve the national agenda, whilst recognising the distinct and separate roles of each sphere. The Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation will play a significant role in co-ordinating, evaluating and monitoring the alignment of national and provincial departmental budgets. This will be done with a particular focus on achieving the objective of the 12 priority outcomes of government.
This is a very confusing clock. I thought it was counting down, but it is counting up. [Laughter.]
There are a number of government co-ordinating structures established at a national level that facilitate the alignment of the national Budget to achieve national priorities by all spheres of government. These structures have the ability to influence the allocation of funds broadly in meeting national policy objectives - you see, that is a practical example of how we educate to be able to assist each other. However, their influence is limited in respect of aligning specific allocations to specific objectives pertaining to national policies within a provincial budget, the result of which can transpire in departments established at a national sphere and those established provincially, with concurrent competencies, not utilising the revenue raised nationally to effect policy implementation in an integrated, co-ordinated manner. The net result is that service delivery is compromised, and the state does not extract from the fiscus the optimum utilisation of its resources.
The approval of the National Evaluation Policy Framework by Cabinet in November 2011 and the soon-to-be-introduced results Bill by the department will significantly assist the department in achieving its envisaged mandate, ensuring that the state and its spheres work in closer collaboration with each other.
Through interaction with the citizen, public representatives are able to accumulate first-hand knowledge and information pertaining to the roles of the various stakeholders at grass-roots level and apply this knowledge in conducting oversight. Public representatives are obliged to ensure that the department's budget progressively achieves the provisions contained in the strategic plan and annual performance plans of the department.
The executive and, in particular, the Office of the Presidency, is to be applauded in that, through the establishment of this department, they will have the tools at hand to monitor and evaluate, on a scientific basis, the impact of government policy on service delivery - due to the oversight role the department will play in partnership with us.
It is quite unique at the moment that we are tasked with oversight over all departments of government, and now the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation has been given the same mandate. So, somewhere we need to be able to find a manner in which we can partner ourselves to be able to achieve what we, as the ANC-led government, set out to do on behalf of government and on behalf of all citizens of the country.
Public Service managers have, to date, been preoccupied with the analysis and implementation of policy in terms of its impact on institutional functioning. This has resulted in the structured implementation of policy in terms of service delivery being placed somewhat on the backburner. Managers have not been driving the social transformation aspects of policy in a sustained and measurable manner, nor has there been any concerted effort to take on board departmental staff in this process. Managers have a responsibility to conscientise internal stakeholders of their envisaged roles in developing and implementing departmental frameworks in consultation with external stakeholders.
The necessary management structures need to be developed that would facilitate the setting of service standards and inform organisational design. It is critical for aspects of good governance and the morale of internal stakeholders that they are informed by and evaluated against performance indicators and deliverables that are crafted in consultation with them and informed by the service delivery needs of the citizen. The co- ordination of these aspects will need to be done by the department and it will not be easy.
The department's evaluation of outcomes and its advisory role to improve other departmental outcomes, linked to structural re-engineering of themselves in implementing improvement plans, will have a positive effect on the functioning of departments. The department, in analysing government departments' Annual Performance Plans, APPs, prior to their submission to Parliament, will greatly assist in aligning priorities and strengthening our partnership in oversight.
Citizens have not been educated to any great depth as to their expected roles nor ...
Hon Snell, could you sit down for a moment, please. Two hon members, could you kindly lower your voices. There has been a continuous murmuring from this side. It is difficult to hear the member. Thank you.
Chair, citizens have not been educated to any great depth as to their expected roles, nor capacitated to play any meaningful role in the functioning of structures established to give voice to their needs. It is not implied that the citizen has been excluded entirely. To date, however, it could be argued that the depth to which they participate has been capped. To seek opinion from another and not capacitate the other to give an informed opinion is mutually detrimental and contrary to the envisaged mutually beneficial governance model that is taking shape. The current relationship with the citizen in a partnership is a shallow one, which will not in its current form optimally assist the state or the citizen. A holistic approach to service delivery, which recognises the barriers to accessing services such as social, cultural, physical and attitudinal services, needs to be taken into account.
Service delivery programmes should, therefore, specifically address the needs to progressively readdress the disadvantages of all barriers to access in a continuous dialogue with all stakeholders.
The department is encouraged to continue with its innovative approach to solving complex challenges associated with governance in its effort to create a better life for all. In developing the White Paper that will guide the drafting of the results Bill, the department should take into consideration the words of Albert Einstein who said, "Problems cannot be solved by the level of awareness that created them."
Isn't it then an ideal opportunity to take a deep hard look at the negotiated legal framework that prescribes the functioning of government in and between spheres and between departments to come up with a solution that is practical, long lasting and functional, a system that best serves the interests of the state and all her citizens? I thank you. [Applause.]
Hon Chairperson, Minister and hon members, a key impediment to service delivery in South Africa is the Public Service and bureaucracy that are created around it. Front-line public sector workers complain about the red tape that they have to comply with before they can render services. Even the President of this country has lamented how long it takes to have something done in government.
While we, in the UCDP, welcome the establishment of this department, we are astounded that government concedes that service delivery is a problem even in high offices. We note that the President has no time for business as usual, where people feel entitled to positions even if they behave like place holders.
The work ethic of government officials has to improve to see them depart from setting date stamps for hours before they sit behind their desks. The UCDP believes that the success of the country depends on hard work. Excellence is wrought through diligence, not indolence. It is this department that has to ensure that payments to all government service providers are effected within 30 days. We noticed that even yesterday, as the President was addressing this constituency, little progress had been made in this regard, despite what the Minister said here earlier.
We appreciate that the department is striving to ameliorate working relations among departments to avoid the silo operations which, in some cases, end up in duplication of half-done projects.
As the department's oversight cuts across all spheres of government, we put it to you, hon Minister, to prevail upon municipalities to ensure that, as they develop new residential areas, they do not leave out naming the streets accordingly. One notices, for example in Pretoria, that there are places that were established post-1994 and have street names that may in future be changed to what is usually termed appropriate. This is a waste of resources. There should be no need to undo what has been done in the present, taking into account what is going on at present regarding this matter. Let us nip the matter in the bud.
The 12 priority outcomes of the government, as listed, indicate that basic education needs urgent attention. We should move away from producing semiliterate and seminumerate products. We argue that if government has a department to monitor the performance of other departments, why should the Department of Basic Education develop cold feet at the slightest sneeze of the SA Democratic Teachers' Union, Sadtu, against education officers or inspectors of schools?
It is disconcerting that, up to this point, senior managers in government have not complied with the simple issue of declaring their interests. We maintain that it is the duty of this department to follow up on this matter and find out why the 8% or so are not complying - 8%, because the Department of Public Service and Administration, DPSA, yesterday indicated that only 92% had complied. And, if the DPSA can't do it, then we believe that it is this department that should do it. Let us strive for consistency and not harbour some holy cows.
While we do not want to sound prescriptive, we notice that some areas, as indicated by the Deputy Minister - Gauteng, Free State and the Northern Cape - that had disruptions because of poor service delivery have had visits of reassurance from the highest office in the land. Yet, there have been quite a number of these instances in the North West, but no such visitation. This creates the impression that the province is forsaken, taking into account that it is one of the poorest and the only one without flight facilities in this country.
We hope political heads will have the will and decisive leadership to implement the strategic plans with acceptable and impressive objectives that departments always present, and not call to be policed by this department. I thank you. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Hon Chairperson, Minister and Deputy Minister, hon members and guests in the gallery, I greet you all. The participation of youth in the struggle for the liberation of South Africa is well documented and remains vivid in the collective memory of the South African populace.
The establishment of the National Youth Development Agency, NYDA, as a successor to the National Youth Commission, NYC, the Umsobomvu Youth Fund and provincial youth commissions must be celebrated as a major milestone in our quest for sustainable youth development interventions. It is not surprising that there has been a continuation of the mobilisation of youth participation in the democratic order, both in government processes and civil society.
The establishment of the National Youth Development Agency should be viewed as a significant step towards realigning the youth development institutional framework to address the challenges facing our youth more effectively and aggressively. But how did we get here? We pose this question to give an account of the transformation of the landscape of youth development and to locate the mandate of the NYDA within the context of the youth development trajectory in South Africa.
The NYDA mandate is clear: It is to accelerate interventions on youth development and to ensure that our youth are both custodians and beneficiaries of our democracy.
In his state of the nation address, President Jacob Zuma called on the NYDA to establish its structures throughout the country. The NYDA is already responding to the call by the President. They have advertised posts in all nine provinces for the establishment of provincial advisory boards.
The NYDA was established through an Act of Parliament, the National Youth Development Agency Act, Act 54 of 2008, and it was formed through the merger of the National youth commission and the Umsobomvu Youth Fund. The NYDA derives its mandate from the legislative framework, including the National Youth Development Agency Act, the National Youth Policy of 2009 to 2014 and the draft integrated youth development strategy, as adopted by the Youth Convention of 2006. From these documents, there is an overarching theme that delineates the role of NYDA in that it has to initiate, implement, facilitate and monitor youth development interventions aimed at reducing youth unemployment and promoting social cohesion.
In achieving these goals, the NYDA is performing, among other things, the following responsibilities: To lobby and advocate for the integration and mainstreaming of youth development in all spheres of government, the private sector and civil society; to initiate, implement, facilitate and co- ordinate youth development programmes; and to monitor and evaluate youth development interventions across the board.
The National Youth Development Agency Act of 2008 closed a chapter on the national and provincial youth commissions, alongside the Umsobomvu Youth Fund, and ushered in a new era that builds on the successes of earlier interventions with a more focused and integrated approach, underpinned by a new sense of urgency, in order to ensure that South Africa's youth are an integral part of their sociopolitical and socioeconomic advancement.
The most important feature of the agency is its ability to integrate all youth development interventions. The institution exists as a single integrated entity in all spheres of government, and it is able to exert influence on the public sector, the private sector and civil society. This has been achieved through the instruments it has at its disposal to hold institutions in these sectors accountable for their interventions in advancing youth development.
On an annual basis, the agency publishes national youth development priorities, which should be implemented by all organs of state, the private sector and civil-society organisations concerned with youth development.
The founding legislation of the NYDA grants it significant regulatory powers over organs of state, the private sector and civil society in relation to matters that fall within the ambit of its mandate. All these sectors are required to submit reports to the agency reporting on how they have implemented these priorities and what progress has been made. The priorities are therefore serving as a yardstick to measure the extent to which the nation is making progress in youth development.
The NYDA hosted the 17th World Festival of Youth and Students in South Africa for the first time, bringing together more than 15 000 young people from across the globe. Consistent with festival deliberations, the declaration was clear in condemning imperialist policies which attack the full development of education and young people, preventing them from accessing free and quality education. We defend and struggle for education as a public and social good, a universal human right, whose gratuity must be ensured by the state.
We must remember that the NYDA received an unqualified audit opinion in their first financial year. Despite the most negative criticism once again in the past financial year, the NYDA attained an unqualified audit opinion from an independent audit by the Auditor-General of the Republic of South Africa.
For the financial year 2010-11, the NYDA incurred expenditure to the value of R67 649 297 that was not in accordance with the requirements of the Treasury regulations. Of this irregular expenditure incurred, R26 million relates to expenditure incurred for the World Festival of Youth and Students. This was as a result of the late withdrawal by a service provider, who was awarded the contract for managing the World Federation of Democratic Youth festival on behalf of the NYDA. The second reason relates to having received a late commitment from funders to fund the activities of the festival.
It is important to note in this regard that the Auditor-General has satisfied himself that, other than the procurement processes not being followed, no misappropriation of the funds occurred and no other unbecoming conduct in relation to these expenses in question occurred. Thus, this remained a matter of emphasis without amending the clean audit opinion of the Auditor-General.
It should be noted that the due diligence conducted by the National Treasury on both the Umsobomvu Youth Fund and the National Youth Commission recommended that the NYDA operate optimally and, to make it successful, it had to be capitalised by R600 million on an annual basis.
For the 2010-11 Medium-Term Expenditure Framework submission, the NYDA requested R930 million. However, the organisation was allocated R370 million, which is 39% less than the recommended amount. The organisation was allocated a budget of R385 million for the 2011-12 MTEF. This has not discouraged the NYDA from doing what is most needed by the youth of South Africa. The audit report received speaks volumes. The NYDA also continues to engage with various stakeholders for more funding.
Perhaps it is important to reflect on some of the key functional areas of the NYDA. With its limited resources, the NYDA has worked hard to ensure that our youth are trained to take advantage of today's opportunities and are integrated into the mainstream economy to create opportunities for others. Many young people have been assisted since the NYDA's establishment, including 7 593 loans that were disbursed to microfinance enterprises to the value of R23 million; the disbursing of small and medium enterprise loans to the value of R3 057 354; the disbursing of 4 224 business consultancy services vouchers to the value of R33 467 520; and engaging 16 093 young people under the National Youth Service programme.
The agency has disbursed 10 021 microfinance loans worth R28,8 million, and small and medium enterprise loans valued at over R24,6 million. It has issued 4 220 business consultancy services vouchers worth over R33 million.
The NYDA has assisted young entrepreneurs to access business opportunities worth R77,6 million. A total of 33 008 jobs were created for young people by programmes of the NYDA. These jobs were created through programmes such as micro, small and medium enterprise financing, the National Youth Service, business consultancy services, jobs and mentorships.
A total of 39 813 beneficiaries were enrolled in skills development and community service programmes. The National Youth Service programme has enrolled 16 093 young people in a number of projects. Most recently, in the 2010-11 financial year, young volunteers built 76 houses for indigent families, symbolising the year 1976. A total of 152 342 young people were provided with information on products and services through NYDA branches.
The 2007 ANC Polokwane conference resolved that government should progressively introduce free education ... [Interjections.]
Hon member, one moment, please.
Chair, where is the 42% spent by the NYDA on salaries? [Interjections.] Where do you get this money if you spend 42% on salaries?
Will you please take your seat? That's not a point of order. Please continue.
The 2007 ANC Polokwane conference resolved that government should progressively introduce free education for the poor up to undergraduate level. Consistent with this resolution and the ideals of the 1976 generation, the Progressive Youth Alliance, the ANC Youth League, the SA Students' Congress, and the Young Communist League have been resolute in calling for the speedy implementation of this resolution. The NYDA continues to work closely with government and institutions representing the interests of young people in general and students in particular on this very question of access to quality, free education.
In conclusion, the National Youth Development Agency is not only shaping youth development in South Africa. The organisation is making waves in youth development sectors across the globe. Recently, the NYDA participated in the 45th session of the United Nations Commission on Population and Development at the UN headquarters in New York. The ANC supports the Budget Vote. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Chairperson, R174 million is budgeted to improve government service delivery through performance monitoring and evaluation. A further R376 million is budgeted for the National Youth Development Agency. To test whether previous allocations of the people's money to these functions have been wisely spent, we need to ask whether service delivery is improving and youth unemployment is decreasing. Unfortunately, the answers are no.
The DA agrees with the National Planning Commission that we require urgent measures to address our most pressing needs, particularly the high levels of unemployment, especially among the youth. The DA's 8% growth project will soon set out how economic activity in South Africa can be accelerated, so that there is an open opportunity for all of our youth to find a place in our economy.
With 70% of our population aged under 35, we have an enormous competitive advantage to harness if we make the right policy choices. The National Youth Development Agency isn't one of them. Youth unemployment continues to increase. More than 50% of young people aged between 18 and 25 are unemployed, and 73% of the unemployed in South Africa are below the age of 35, the worst statistic among comparable economies. This pattern must and can be broken.
In the Western Cape, the DA government has implemented a youth apprenticeship scheme that will kick-start the economic activity of thousands of previously unemployed young people who would otherwise remain on the sidelines, trapped in the ideological minefield that prevents the National Treasury from implementing a youth wage subsidy scheme, and that will throw open the doors to employment opportunities for 423 000 young South Africans.
Instead of funding a bloated bureaucracy, in which 46% of the budget is paid to overvalued and underperforming cadres in the National Youth Development Agency, the people's money could be better spent on extending a youth wage subsidy and adding value to the lives of youth on whose behalf they claim to be operating.
Instead of funding drunken parties under the pretext of social cohesion, the people's money could be better spent on bursaries for deserving students and on educational facilities for learners still emerging from an education system fundamentally damaged by apartheid and which has still not been fixed, as mentioned by the Minister.
The DA Youth have championed the implementation of a national youth wage subsidy, and yesterday marched legally and peacefully to highlight Cosatu's opposition to a youth wage subsidy that has paralysed government's action on its promised implementation. The Congress of SA Trade Unions, Cosatu, yesterday demonstrated its disdain for democracy. Freedom of expression and freedom to protest peacefully did not reign yesterday. Instead, it rained rocks, like this one ...[Interjections.] ... thrown by Cosatu's thugs that I picked up next to an injured and bleeding young man after it had struck him in the face, a young man who dared to exercise his rights that the apartheid police would have crushed in the past. [Interjections.]
Now, it is Cosatu that tries, illegally and shamefully, with rocks, to crush the rights to which we are all entitled. [Interjections.] Cosatu yesterday assaulted every South African ...
Hon George ... Hon George, would you just be quiet for a moment. What is your point of order, hon member?
Chairperson, is it parliamentary for the member to carry stones into the House? [Interjections.]
I can assure you, I will not be throwing them at you, hon member. It is Cosatu that tries illegally and shamefully with rocks to crush the rights to which we are all entitled. Cosatu yesterday assaulted every South African. It won't succeed, and our marches will continue.
The NYDA cannot properly account for loans it provided for so-called business start-ups, yet plans to spend R43 million more than its budget because it believes it will collect on outstanding loans. [Interjections.] This is creative accounting and an example of the low standards in managing the public finances to which the Auditor-General referred last week.
The Standing Committee on Public Accounts, Scopa, has heard 14 government departments and entities since February this year. Seven annual financial statements were qualified, three were disclaimed and one was adverse. The findings from this small sample of annual financial statements scrutinised found that there was R7,6 billion in irregular expenditure, where the people's money was spent without compliance to the applicable laws and regulations, and R201 million in fruitless and wasteful expenditure of the people's money that would not have occurred if reasonable care had been exercised.
The pattern emerging from Scopa hearings is that few Ministers consider their attendance to be high priority, given that only two out of nine Ministers were present for the full hearing. Last week the Minister of Mineral Resources failed to appear and never submitted an apology. Her deputy wasn't present either. Officials from the department were present, but were unable to account for fruitless and wasteful expenditure, a common theme across departments. Accounting officers pass through the revolving doors of government departments at breathtaking speed, creating a vacuum in accountability, not filled by the executive.
By the time the financial statements reach Scopa ...
House Chairperson, is it parliamentary in a maiden speech for the hon member to raise the Constitution in the House, whilst debating ... [Laughter.] Is it parliamentary?
No. That's not a point of order. Continue, hon George.
By the time the financial statements reach Scopa, the director-general has already left the service of the department and escapes accountability.
Hon Bhanga, will you please put your copy of the Constitution down, and stop brandishing it around. [Laughter.]
I hope you are not eroding my time. A variation on this trend is the rotation of Ministers, as evidenced in the Department of Public Works. The Minister appeared before Scopa, stated that his department was dysfunctional, and promised that it would be turned around.
The previous Ministers were not held to account and neither are the officials. There is also no sign of the collective accountability that the executive is expected to uphold. This needs to change. Scopa will invite the Minister for a discussion on the matter of executive accountability, and I hope that you, Minister, will attend.
Minister, are you evaluating the performance of government in the management of the people's money? The Special Investigating Unit says that R30 billion leaks from the public financial system every year.
We know that all public financial systems are leaky buckets, but the South African system is starting to more closely resemble a spaghetti strainer, rapidly draining the people's money into the troughs of politically connected cronies where they feast at the expense of the most vulnerable members of our society who are denied the service delivery that the people's money is intended to pay for.
Last week the Auditor-General expressed his concern that government and public servants were weakening the pillars of governance protecting South Africa's democracy and that his office was vulnerable because of the lack of support from government. My experience of the Auditor-General is that he is not an alarmist and that his timely warning should be taken seriously by the executive. In your performance monitoring and evaluation, Minister ...
Hon George, your time has expired.
No, it has not. [Interjections.]
Yes, it has.
Minister, how do you rate executive support for the Auditor- General? [Interjections.]
Will you please take your seat.
Government has no money of its own. It all belongs to the people, and the executive must spend it wisely to deliver services to the people. [Interjections.]
Could you please take your seat. [Interjections.]
If it continues to fail them, the people's voices will be heard, no matter how hard the ANC and its alliance partner, Cosatu, try to crush them. Thank you. [Applause.] [Interjections.]
Hon George, when the person who is presiding asks you to sit down because your time has expired, then that's what you ought to do. If you want to take the regulations and the Rules of this House into your own hands, then that becomes a problem.
Chairperson, the timing was not wrong ...
And then you started to shout louder and louder. Your emotions just went out of control.
On a point of order, Chair ...
In future, when you are asked to take your seat, please do so. Thank you.
On a point of order, Chairperson: I was interrupted several times and stopped. I did not exceed my time. [Interjections.] And what I would suggest is that if you would like to check, you can do the timing of the time that I was actually speaking. Your timing was not correct. [Interjections.] I know that. Thank you.
That's what we did. [Interjections.] Order! Could you all settle down now. I know you are all tired and looking for some kind of amusement. This is not the place for amusement.
Chairperson, hon Minister, hon Deputy Minister, Members of Parliament and guests, members have all received strategic plans in the parliamentary committees which outlined how the departments were going to address service delivery issues. The departments detailed their Medium-Term Expenditure Framework and annual performance plans. This gives the assurance that government has kept to the ANC's 2009 election manifesto.
A lot of questions were asked by relevant committees to ensure that communities received proper services. These questions were based on Members of Parliaments' constituencies and the effects of poverty, unemployment and inequality. Parliament does oversight on these departments and entities as part of its constitutional obligation, but the question is whether this is enough. We all know that the ANC-led government has made great progress in addressing the needs of the people of South Africa, but a lot still has to be done to bring about a better life for all. In the booklet titled "Government's Year of Delivery: 2011-12", the President stated that one of the key factors that has shaped our progress as government was the performance monitoring and evaluation approach that this fourth administration had introduced.
He further stated that this approach has enabled us to identify loopholes in the government-wide system and to hold government departments accountable. This is a significant move on the part of government as it shows that we are acknowledging and addressing the challenges that impede our people from living a better life.
The hon Snell addressed Programme 4, which I am also going to address but from a different view. He discussed extensively the rigorous evaluation of the programme, which deals with the management of performance assessment of all our national and provincial departments and municipalities over the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework period.
The Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation looks at gaps within all the departments and addresses them. It does not replace the departments, but does the audit of services by these departments, although still not replacing the Auditor-General. The hon Sogoni has referred to some of the issues during his overview. Monitoring and evaluation of the frontline services is what I will focus on as this is where practical activities happen - where we see everything that is happening. When we talk about front-line services, we are talking about a government institution, which can, for example, be a hospital. The Minister has addressed this. Who are the people in the front line? It is the people who receive the services, the people who give the services and the desired product. This means this can be medical professionals and patients at a hospital. The products here would be medicines and the people who produce this service - and if is a quality service rendered.
Out of all this, we will assess the accessibility of that product of that institution. Is the institution accessible? How far away is it? Is there transport to take people to that institution? Are there signs within the institution that lead people to the relevant department so that they can receive attention quickly? Are there people or staff who address these issues and make sure that the people receive services? Are there emergency services? Is the community given attention when they get there? What is the attitude of the people - do Batho Pele principles apply? Do people appreciate what they get from the staff or whoever gives the government service?
I am going to speak about the aims of the front-line delivery services. These aims are, among other things, that service delivery standards should be in place and therefore monitored by the department; that basic information is available to the communities and users of the service; that the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation and offices of the premiers, which the Minister has referred to, are able to identify where improvement initiatives should be targeted; and that evaluation of the performance of government and departments is also one of the aims of front- line service delivery.
The surprise visits were already referred to by the speakers before me. Officials from the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation, DPME, and the premiers assess the level of service delivery. Officials interview, as already mentioned, staff and people who are there, and do an observation of the situation that exists there.
The hon Snell has referred to citizen-based monitoring and evaluation. So I will not talk about it. I turn to the presidential hotline. This is an effective, toll-free line for service delivery and an important source of information for government-wide performance monitoring and evaluation. It enables government to track important issues for citizens as well as its responsiveness to citizens. The statistics have already been mentioned: 122 509 cases were logged between September 2009 and 31 January 2012, and between 500 and 1 000 calls are recorded per day. Responsiveness, as mentioned, has improved from 39% in November 2009 to 80% in January 2012.
It is a fact that community members know about the Presidential Hotline and refer each other to the hotline. The Thabazimbi Local Municipality once received a referral from the hotline in my presence, which shows how widely spread and utilised this service is. They even referred to it during our community meetings.
This programme has shown that reconstruction and development is people- driven. It links democracy, development and the people-centred approach, which has been the programme of the ANC. The department discussed its focus areas for 2012-13 and the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework with the committee. The highest increased budget allocation falls within this Programme 4, which we both dealt with.
The findings that we all know about and that were received by the department were both positive and negative. Visits of officials from the department and offices of premiers were appreciated by the communities. To mention a few negative findings: There was no internal signage for users to be able to reach their destinations within the institutions; there were long waiting times and long queues; neglected facilities; and a lack of maintenance. These are the gaps which, when identified, are being addressed by one particular department, which is given the opportunity to address and close the gaps that are seen in the other departments.
The Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation also includes national youth development. As a result, there is no way we can say that we need reports from them. From where we are, we agreed that both presented their strategic plans and annual performance plans to us. We agreed and acknowledged that it was the first time that we saw them and we are going to organise workshops at which we will be able to understand and follow their mandates and operations.
As a result, hon Swart, this is where we are going to go deep into the matter and ask for their reports. They will definitely present us with reports, because they are new to us. We did not have time to refer to their reports.
Another issue that I want to refer to is the National Youth Development Agency. This agency was addressed intensively and clearly put to us by the hon Mkhulusi. We all know that it is a Polokwane resolution in terms of wanting to look at all the youth of South Africa, not only the youth from a certain particular party, hence the composition of that board is a multiparty one. [Interjections.]
Two of the nine identified challenges, as listed in the diagnostic report of the National Planning Committee, are that there are too few people who work and that the standard of education for most black learners is of a poor quality.
Hon member, your time has expired.
No, the clock is wrong! [Laughter.] [Interjections.]
I now call upon ... Will you please sit down?
We would like to tell Cope that ...
Hon speaker, will you take your seat?
... you went to the National Youth Conference where you should have sat down and listened to ...
Will you please sit down?
... what the youth were saying instead of coming and complaining here. You said nothing. You definitely said nothing. [Applause.]
Hon Chairperson, this is just a comment: An hon member wanted to lend me his tie because I am not wearing one. This T-shirt is in support of Eskom in its energy-saving campaign.
I have just two main issues. The first is that I hope, as we proceed to do our work, that this work of the department will not be turned into a political football. It is critical that all of us understand this principle. That is why I will not respond to some of the political comments which have been made as I would normally do. It is critical for us to put our heads together to improve the delivery of services to our people.
Secondly, there is a requirement by other committees in Parliament - not only this one. All portfolio committees come to us and brief us about this department. This is something which does not happen with any other department. Therefore we will have to work in partnership with Parliament to ensure that we improve the system of governance. Bickering around the issues we are dealing with will not help the nation.
Then we come to the issue which has been raised: Whether this department is necessary. Well, it depends. If you are in government you may decide to abolish it and nothing will happen. But I can tell you, from our experience now, all nations and all governments in the world, particularly in developing countries, are beginning to go the route we are going. That is why we are called from time to time to discuss things with them - what we are doing and how we are doing it. Therefore, we think it was a good decision for the President to have identified this as a weakness in the administration.
With regard to our reports, let me start with the issue of the Act. We are building a new system. There is a lot of debate on evaluation theory out there by international academics. People are still experimenting with a number of issues they need to deal with. We are part of that debate. It would be wrong for us to want to put into legislation systems things which are not tested, because to undo them, once they are set in place, is a problem. That is why, when forming policies, we pilot them first, confirm the theory, make sure that every system is in place. And, at that point in time, we begin to roll them over to other areas of implementation.
We think we are not far from concluding that process. Allow us to go through that process, because the moment you put in place a piece of legislation, you are going to tie yourself up in a system which may collapse at a later stage without your knowing. As one of the members said: Problems cannot be solved by using the same thinking that led to the problem. You have to do it differently. I think that was a good way to address that.
Normally there is confusion around the terminology and processes we are engaged in - oversight, monitoring, evaluation, supervision, auditing, and I can name other activities that are there. It is important for us to understand that all the institutions we are referring to - the Auditor- General, the Public Service Commission, the department of this and that - have their own functions and we don't have to duplicate them. The police deal with corruption. This one deals with that. We don't have to duplicate the same functions. That is why our role is very specific, and we work in a co-ordinated manner with all the role-players who are dealing with these issues.
We have not been doing evaluations because you only evaluate after you have monitored. Obviously, there is still a debate in the academic world among professionals in that for every programme you do you must start by evaluating first, then you implement, then you monitor, and then you evaluate again. It is a debate that is still there; it has not been concluded.
With regard to evaluation processes, we don't want to use our own personnel to do the evaluation of critical issues. That is why we do internal evaluations; we do moderation; we also do external moderation and evaluation of processes and programmes. So, the reports we produce must be credible and must be trusted by anybody - not only ourselves, but even by international institutions. That is why we have to work in partnership.
With regard to the issue of the NYDA and their salaries, I'm not sure how long we must continue to answer these questions. The salaries of the NYDA have been authenticated by the Treasury. When the NYDA applied, we went to the Treasury and asked if the salaries were appropriate. After doing due diligence, the Treasury agreed. If we don't trust our own institutions that we have established, what more do you want? What is it that you want to do? That is why we proceeded in that way.
I now come to the role of the Chapter 9 institutions. Let's allow them to do their work. We are working in partnership with them. We said in our report that part of the work we were going to do was to monitor the implementation of the recommendations of the Chapter 9 institutions as part of assisting Parliament to accomplish its task of oversight - and we are going to do that. But we need to leave them to do their work without interference from us, or we should not try to do their work ourselves.
There are two issues we need to look at with regard to our budget - that is the programme's budget and the personnel budget. The first issue is yes, in theory there may be a disproportionate allocation between personnel and programmes. But, at the same time, there is also a disproportionate allocation between the outcome of the work we are doing and the budget of the department. If you look at the amount of work we have on our hands and at the amount of progress we are making, you will realise that it's completely disproportionate to the budget allocation that we have. So we have more work in terms of outcome, but a smaller budget to work with. I think we need to look at this in a holistic way without having to focus on one small issue. [Applause.] On the issue of unemployment, it's not a football to play with. We are facing a very serious problem, not only as a country, but as the world. That is why the International Labour Organisation is holding a conference this month to discuss, amongst other things, youth unemployment worldwide.
Now, it doesn't help us to want to blame the NYDA for job creation. They are not meant to create jobs. [Interjections.] The NYDA was created by legislation of this Parliament. At the moment we are sitting with an NYDA which does not have a board. The board has expired. Parliament must finalise the board of the NYDA. The NYDA's role is defined in terms of the law passed by this Parliament, not by the executive, not by the youth. It was passed by us here in Parliament for it to operate. I think we must go back and look at that law and see to it that we understand what the role of the NYDA is. [Interjections.] It is not job creation.
The last issue I would like to address is that we will deal with most of the issues as we go along. We are still going to get to the President's budget, when we are going to debate some of the issues that have not been covered here. I can guarantee you that the reports we produce will be available on the website, but they have to go through Cabinet first. We have to follow the processes. They will go through Cabinet. Once Cabinet has discussed them, looked at the remedial action we are taking, they will be available to the public, as some of them are available now in the public domain. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.