It is the application of the various budgets that requires us as legislators to apply our minds to evaluating the optimal utilisation of state resources in achieving the developmental agenda of the state. Collectively, we need to drive a progressive transformation agenda towards a state that is developmental in character and form. We must not undermine the progress that this government has made in the past 19 years of democracy. Being the progressive government that we are, we must also provide meaningful responses to the glaring challenges that we face.
It is appropriate, therefore, to reflect on a number of areas that may inhibit the implementation of national policies across the spheres of government driven by the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation.
Chapter 3 of the Constitution, dealing with "Co-operative government", states in section 40(1) that:
... (the) national, provincial and local spheres ... are distinctive, interdependent and interrelated.
It requires the 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 that the various spheres would work together to achieve the national agenda, whilst recognising the distinct and separate roles of each sphere.
The Division of Revenue Act, which this Budget Vote ultimately forms part of, allocates revenue raised nationally among the three spheres of government. The provincial and local spheres are allocated their share of national revenue by virtue of transfers and grants.
The provinces' equitable share is crafted into a provincial budget in the form of an appropriation budget, and is subject to provincial legislative processes prior to being enacted.
There are a number of government co-ordinating structures, established at the national level, which facilitate the alignment of the national budget to achieve national priorities by all the spheres of government. These structures have the ability to influence the allocation of funds broadly in meeting national policy objectives. However, their influence is limited in respect of aligning specific allocations to specific objectives pertaining to national policies within a provincial budget or a local government budget.
The result of this is that it can transpire that departments established in the national sphere and those established provincially with concurrent competencies do not utilise the revenue raised nationally to effect policy implementation in an integrated, co-ordinated manner. So, hon George, maybe it is a structural problem rather than a corruption problem. [Interjections.]
The net result of this is that service delivery is compromised and the state does not extract from the fiscus the optimum utilisation of its resources. The department is therefore currently bound by agreements in reaching its objectives with and between departments and spheres.
The department's responsibility to establish systems to monitor and evaluate the implementation of budgets and policy objectives takes place currently in this context. Besides relying on the provisions of co- operative government, the national sphere of government has no power over provincial departments other than to persuade provincial government to ensure that the national policy is implemented at the provincial level, in effect creating a quasi-federal system within a unitary state.
Compounding the problems associated with implementing a seamless system of government between the national and provincial spheres, both horizontally and vertically within and between the spheres, is Chapter 5 of the Public Finance Management Act.
This chapter sets out the functions and responsibilities of accounting officers pertaining to their role within departments or constitutional institutions. These functions and responsibilities are contractually specific to the department or constitutional institution the accounting officer is employed by. In effect, this contract-specific employment of accounting officers creates a measure of autonomy and independence. This results in entrenching a silo-based approach to governance and leads to a fragmentation of service delivery.
No central administrative authority is currently empowered to co-ordinate any integrated action across and between the spheres of government. Government relies on accounting officers embracing the letter and spirit of co-operative governance to implement government policies in a unified co- ordinated manner, leaving much to chance and in effect hampering the department's ability to co-ordinate and manage its mandate.
To this extent the committee recommended that the department begin with exploring a legislative framework that will govern its operational and reporting requirements through all spheres and departments of the state.
The department is beginning to develop strategies to work with various organs of people's power, such as community police forums, ward committees, school governing bodies, hospital boards, and clinic committees. The committee recommended that the department continue to strengthen these relationships to place the citizens at the centre of policy application and the provision of services.
The department continues to develop an ever-increasing base of knowledge and applies that knowledge in defining its strategies to meet its obligations to both state and citizens. We are confident that the department will find solutions to the challenges within the superstructure of governance as legislated currently and will continue to deepen direct citizen participation. Strategic relationships in partnering with the organs of state responsible for public participation will furthermore assist in resourcing democracy and place the citizen at the centre of the developmental agenda of the state.
A system of democratic government which is accountable, responsive and open attests to the importance placed by the Constitution on government and legislatures' obligation to interact with the citizenry by creating a framework that promotes interaction and social partnership. 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 state and citizen.
The democratic partnership is further concretised in the Preamble to the Constitution which states, amongst others, that the people of South Africa, through their freely elected representatives, adopt the Constitution to establish a society based on democratic values, in which 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 are, through their functioning, 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.
Chapter 10 of the Constitution deals with "Public administration", setting out the "basic values and principles governing public administration". These values and principles are re-enforced through the provision in section 195(1) that "Public administration must be governed by the democratic values and principles enshrined in the Constitution ..." These include the following, in the same section:
(c) Public administration must be development-orientated. (d) Services must be provided impartially, fairly, equitably and without bias. (e) People's needs must be responded to, and the public must be encouraged to participate in policy-making. (f) Public administration must be accountable.
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 the foundation for a working partnership. This partnership introduced to the Public Service a politico-administrative style of governing the provision of services. The department must play a central role in this regard and it is critical that it inculcates its culture throughout the Public Service.
Public Service managers have to date been preoccupied with the analysis and implementation of policy with respect to its impact on institutional functioning. This has resulted in the structured implementation of policy in regard to service delivery being placed somewhat on the back burner. Managers have not been driving the social transformation aspects of policy in a sustained and measurable manner. Here, the department's involvement would be welcomed and encouraged.
The necessary management structures that would facilitate the setting of service standards and inform organisational design throughout the Public Service need to be developed. It is critical for aspects of good governance and the morale of stakeholders that these 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 department's evaluation of outcomes and its advisory role in improving other departmental outcomes, linked to their structural re-engineering in implementing improvement plans, will have a positive effect on the functioning of departments. Furthermore, the department, in analysing government departments' annual performance plans prior to their submission to Parliament, will greatly assist in aligning priorities and strengthening oversight.
Citizens have not been educated to any great depth regarding their expected roles, nor capacitated to play any measurable role so far in the functioning of structures established to give voice to their needs. It is not implied here that the citizens have 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.
A holistic approach to service delivery, which recognises the barriers to accessing services, such as social, cultural, physical and attitudinal, needs to be taken into account. Service delivery programmes should therefore specifically address the need to progressively re-address the disadvantages of all barriers to access in a continuous dialogue with stakeholders. Here, the department is to be commended on its initiative.
As the department rolls out its citizen-based monitoring of service delivery programme, it is encouraged to put in place the requisite resources to educate citizens about their rights, roles and functions in this programme. As access to resources results in access to power, the majority of citizens are currently access-dependent on the state to play their envisaged role effectively. The resources made available for participation are limited and the manner in which these are budgeted for does not place emphasis on resourcing democracy at present. The National Treasury should therefore, going forward, consider an incremental increase in the budget for this particular programme.
The ANC supports the Budget Vote of the department. Thank you. [Applause.]