Chairperson, Minister, Deputy Minister and hon members, the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation was created in January 2010 with the intention of making a difference in governance.
Creating a transparent and effective oversight reporting tool to assist the President and Cabinet, its mandate is derived from section 85(2)(c) of the Constitution, which states that the President, together with members of the Cabinet, the executive, has the authority to co-ordinate the functions of state departments and administrations.
Policy pronouncements, such as the 2011 state of the nation address and the Green Paper in regard to the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation, as announced by Minister Chabane, outlined the department's mandate as being to further assist the President to put in place the following matters, and I want to mention just a few: performance agreements for Ministers, advice and support regarding Cabinet memorandums, and co- ordination and management of government's wide monitoring evaluation system. This is very noble! A compliment to government on its putting together a nice-to-have tool without teeth, a "super cop" without authority to arrest, redress or restore order!
The intention of this department is to aim at and reflect the use of a results-orientated approach to better governance across the three spheres of government and all state organs. What does this mean? Does it mean writing up a report using consultants at a cost of R10,7 million in 2012-13 and R15,8 million in the 2013-14 Medium-Term Expenditure Framework period, while the National Development Plan has pleaded for the creation of 11 million jobs? Something must be wrong with this approach and position. Let us take the Gupta manipulation, using the amicable weapon of name- dropping, to run their empire.
What effect is hon Minister Chabane's report on Performance Monitoring and Evaluation going to have on the Ministers and directors-general, and Ace Magashule of the Free State? The primary function of the department is to demonstrate government's commitment to securing its performance, and impacting meaningfully on the lives of the citizens.
This implies that the department will work closely with the National Planning Commission, using data generated as information to strengthen intergovernmental relations, planning and allocation. The question is: How successful and meaningful is this relationship, especially in monitoring and evaluating the performance of all other departments involved with the Department of Public Service and Administration?
Furthermore, what effective legal framework do they have in place to enforce compliance by the department? Think of it - each Minister has the power or right to report on success and failure, and of course there is always going to be an issue with another Minister's interference - the Robocop issue.
It is general knowledge that all the departments ... [Interjections.] I can hear you heckling! It is general knowledge that all departments offer an outcomes report to their directors-general. At the same time, is there current evidence that the escalation of these reports offers benefits to such departments and Ministers?
One can argue that the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation was created for a purpose that the government and Cabinet are aware of. The department's 2013-14 Annual Performance Plan indicates that there has been no policy shift, and priorities remain the same. Of course, a worrying factor is that some performance indicators are not going to be measurable. Using the test level of efficiency, accountability and sound governance principles, as the Green Paper suggests, with the hope of improving quality outcomes is, perhaps, too much to suggest. Ministers do not allow anyone to enter their domain, so the value of the report has little meaning for quality of service and improvement. Look at what the Auditor-General, Mr Terence Nombembe, said about the municipalities and their poor performance, or look at the National Youth Development Agency, NYDA, fiasco.
Deon Madyo, who is facing allegations of corruption, was appointed and he is serving under the provincial health MEC, Mxolisi Sokatsha. There are more than 5 000 sick teachers in the Eastern Cape who are receiving their monthly salaries without benefiting the children. There are mud schools in the Eastern Cape and, of course, there has been the textbook delivery fiasco in Limpopo. What is the "super cop" going to do about this? I raised some of these issues on the Presidential Hotline.
The political infighting on the executive of the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality prevents the new city manager from performing her duties and implementing financial management principles, and this is worrying. The municipal managers' hesitancy to follow the rules is also worrying. The filling of senior municipality management posts, which has taken up to 30 months so far, is also worrying. What is the "super cop" going to do about this?
Having given these examples, I would like to know what the hon Minister is going to do. Service delivery problems are growing daily. Some departments are administered poorly, for example, the Department of Women, Children and People with Disabilities.
People can see when things are falling apart, and the question must be asked: What recommendations are there to turn the situation around? The Minister is working very hard, but is very frustrated in regard to solutions and implementation. Furthermore, Minister, is it true that by using the evaluation report the President will be empowered to show poorly performing Ministers and directors-general the door? I don't think so.
The chaos in the country, from corruption to hiding behind name-dropping, tells a unique story in respect of capacity, accountability and honour. I thank you. [Applause.]