Madam Deputy Speaker, hon Ministers and hon members of this Assembly, maybe we should start off by indicating that education has been declared a national priority and then indicate what the amending Bill seeks to do.
The administrative functions and powers entrusted by the Further Education and Training Colleges Act, Act 16 of 2006, were transferred to the Ministry of Higher Education and Training by Proclamation No 44 of 2009, published in the Government Gazette No 32367 of 1 July 2009. All this could not have been done if there was confusion about education in our country. This was done in terms of section 97 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. This process was driven by Parliament and to all intents and purposes further education and training, FET, colleges fell under higher Education and Training. There is no confusion in this regard. This means that further education and training colleges are an exclusively national competency instead of a concurrent competency between national and provincial education departments.
The Bill wants to remove all reference to provincial authority in the Act and insert national authority in the form of the Minister and director- general in the place of a head of department. The criticism that is being levelled at the Bill indicates a preference for the status quo to remain and therefore there is no need for the amending Bill. In a nutshell, this suggests that we must have a federal approach to FET colleges. The problem with this approach is that it says authority must be given to provinces but the Minister should be held responsible for FET colleges. The MECs account to provincial legislatures and the Minister accounts to Parliament. Simply put, Parliament cannot give authority to the Minister and hold MECs responsible.
The other area that has invited criticism is that of governance in these institutions. For instance, conflict of interest is an issue that must be dealt with in all public institutions. The opposing sentiment has it that there may be unintended consequences if these institutions are not allowed to contract their members of staff and other employees.
It is also understood by us that the opposition has a different view with regard to ministerial intervention in instances of maladministration and crippling corruption. The Bill is suggesting that the Minister must appoint an administrator in such situations. What we hear is that this is giving the Minister too much power. These institutions must have some independence and/or autonomy. Apparently this independence relates to procurement and deployment. Despite the fact that FET colleges are a national competency, procurement and deployment should be the preserve of these institutions in the name of academic independence or autonomy. It is difficult to reconcile with this sentiment.
Lastly, the amending Bill wants to deal with duality in the conditions of employment and related matters. One would imagine that collective bargaining processes would finally settle the matter and protect those who are exposed to discriminatory and exploitative practices.
Apha sithetha ngeemeko ezingamkelekanga. Kukho abantu abasebenza ishumi leminyaka nangaphezulu, abaphuma neebhatyi zabo kuphela xa bephelelwa okanye kufike ithuba lokuyeka impangelo. Lo Mthetho uYilwayo uthi: "Izibonelelo mazifane ngomsebenzi ofanayo nolinganayo. (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)
[We are talking about unacceptable conditions. There are people who work for 10 or more years, who retire without any benefits, but only take their jackets when that time comes. This Bill states that the benefits must be the identical for equal and same duties performed.]
There is an issue that I cannot ignore. The folks that have been put in charge of the ship will have to be capacitated by law to co-ordinate the sector and attract the best skills to public institutions, instead of their being attracted to the private sector, as was suggested by the official Opposition.
Secondly, all the unpalatable things that are happening in the sector currently are not happening because of these amendments to the Act, but are issues that have invited the amending Bill we are debating currently. For instance, one of my colleagues indicated that in some instances it is difficult for the Minister to act because authority lies with provinces in those cases. Now the authority is given to the Minister. If he does not act, Parliament will have to act. [Applause.]
UNGQONGQOSHE WEMFUNDO EPHAKEME KANYE NOKUQEQESHA: Ngiyabonga kakhulu Sekela Somlomo namaLungu ePhalamende ahloniphekile, ngicela ukuqala ngokubonga kuwo wonke amaqembu aseka lo Mthethosivivinywa njengonegxathu elibalulekile ekutheni sikwazi ukubhekana nodaba lokuthi ikakhulukazi intsha yakithi kanye nabantu abadala bathole amakhono, bakwazi ukuziphilisa noma bakwazi ukuzisebenza.
Ngicela ukubonga kumbutho wami uKhongolose ngokuthi weseke lo Mthethosivivinywa, ngibonge nakwi-IFP ne-Azapo namanye amaqembu asisekele. (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)
[The MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING: Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker and hon Members of Parliament. I will start by thanking all the parties that support this Bill as it has an important role to play in the development of the skills of our youth as well as adults, in order for them to fend for themselves or to be self-employed. I would like to thank my organisation for supporting this Bill, as well as the IFP, Azapo and other parties that have supported us.]
I think it is important to say this: Being in opposition must not mean being opportunistic or hypocritical. The MEC here in the Western Cape has been at all the meetings with us and fully endorsed the measures that we are taking today. Now, just because we are here in the House, in front of the media, he is taking a completely different position. That is opportunism, not opposition.
It is also not true that, in order for this Bill to become an Act and be effective, it has to be preceded by a constitutional amendment. That is not true. Laws that vest administration in a national department are allowed within the context of our Constitution.
There is no contradiction between national competence and responsiveness to local and regional needs by FET colleges. In fact, our strategy is simply that it must be a nationally driven, but locally responsive strategy. I am not surprised that hon Dexter has forgotten about this, because you can't jump from the SACP to Cope and forget about this. [Interjections.] If properly managed, the national and local spheres can actually make a much bigger impact. For Cope to come and say that things have gone from bad to worse is not true. I am not surprised because hon Dexter, who is saying this, has not even attended a single committee meeting discussing this. As a matter of fact, some of the interventions that we have made in the FET colleges, like the fact that poor learners who are doing national technical education, Nated, courses and national certificate vocational, NCV, courses now do not have to pay a cent, have actually increased the number of poor students who want to attend these FET colleges.
I don't know what his problem with the sector education and training authorities, Setas, is. Again, in the main, in the Setas we are really and surely chasing away the tenderpreneurs - unless hon Dexter has a problem with that. There is already improvement and better relations between the Setas and the FET colleges. So, all that we have touched thus far has turned into gold.
The necessity for FET colleges to be a national competence is also so that we can align them with other national institutions, like the universities and Setas. Then you won't have a disjuncture whereby national institutions can't align properly with institutions that are a provincial responsibility, because it's an uneven situation - a situation, by the way, that also faces the Minister of Health. That is something that we will need to address.
I think that it is also unfortunate for hon Dexter that he was a board member of the National Student Financial Aid Scheme, NSFAS, at the time when this scheme was getting qualified audits. For the first time this year, over the past financial year, the NSFAS received an unqualified audit, which shows that we are making progress. [Applause.]
Bab'uMpontshane siyabonga kakhulu, ngiyayizwa yonke lento oyishoyo. Sizobambisana ekutheni senze isiqiniseko ukuthi izinto zisetshenzwa ngendlela eyiyo kulawa makolishi. Lawa makolishi abaluleke kakhulu ekusaseni lezingane zethu kanye nakwelabantu abadala.
Elungeni elihloniphekile uRadebe, udaba lwase-Motheo, eFree State siyalubheka. Sizoqhubeka futhi sizibheke izinkinga ezikuleliya kolishi. Sengathi-ke sithi kubo bonke abantu bakithi ngalo mthetho, masibambisane ikakhulukazi abasebenzi nabantu bakithi abangena lutho ukuze sikwazi ukuthi isizwe sakithi sithole amakhono afanelekile. Ngiyabonga. [Ihlombe.] (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)
[Hon Mpontshane, thank you very much, I understand everything you are saying, and we will work together in ensuring that things are done properly at these colleges. These colleges play a very important role in our children's future, as well as that of the adults.
To hon Radebe, we are looking at the issue of Motheo FET College in the Free State. And we will continue looking into the challenges that college faces. We are, therefore, saying to all our people that, with this Bill, we need to work together with the staff and our people who are poor so that our nation can receive appropriate skills. Thank you. [Applause.]]
Debate concluded.
Bill read a second time (Democratic Alliance, Congress of the People and Freedom Front Plus dissenting).