Chairperson, I would just like to say: Don't throw stones when you live in a glass house. [Interjections.] And I've got 12 minutes, by the way.
Chairperson, on Friday we celebrated 18 years of democracy. While it is important to honour our past, it is equally important that we look forward and own our future by ensuring that we provide the best possible services to vulnerable children.
Apartheid certainly left many scars in our society and any government would have been hard pressed to heal them. However, we have exacerbated our social problems through the decade of denialism with regards to HIV/Aids where hundreds of thousands of children lost their mothers and fathers unnecessarily. Unfortunately some of them are sitting here today creating a second lost generation. My speech today is dedicated to those children.
Chair, the DA envisages a country where every child can reach their full potential. We call this vision an open opportunity society for all. We have to ensure that the barriers that had held children captive in perpetual poverty are reviewed and that the stepping stones out of poverty are laid by this government.
Social development is not the only department that plays an integral role in ensuring that a child reaches his or her full potential. However, our role is a significant one. The department's responsibility is to ensure that children who are abused, neglected and at risk or vulnerable are protected and receive the necessary support and services. The Children's Act is probably the most important piece of legislation that empowers and compels the department to support children in need.
The act is one of very few pieces of legislation, where a comprehensive costing report was conducted in order to inform the department and government of what human resources and finances would be needed to ensure that every child is protected and receives the right services at acceptable levels of quality.
The costing report gives two scenarios, a low and a high. The low scenario is described as good practice norms and standards for priority services but significantly lowers norms and standards for nonpriority services and activities. The high scenario is described as a uniform standard of all services and would ensure that all children across the country, irrespective of province, would receive quality services.
Unfortunately for millions of children and for the future of our country, government chose to opt for the lower option. This is not giving our children the best possible start in life. I would like to highlight the difference in the number of social workers that is needed according to the costing report.
The lower option states that we need 16 500 social workers and the higher option is 66 300 - a difference of nearly 50 000 social workers. Clearly services and standards are compromised between the two options and the losers are the children. In a reply to a parliamentary question, the Minister admitted that the total number of social workers currently registered is 16 740 for the entire country. She also mentioned that, according to the costing done to implement the Children's Act, 16 500 social workers are required to provide social welfare needs for children.
What the Minister fails to understand or acknowledge is that the low scenario is what she is using as the benchmark and not the high scenario. This excludes other services that social workers have to render, which range from anti-substance abuse; services to older people and persons with disabilities; crime prevention; and support for HIV/Aids infected and affected persons. Why is it that government has decided to take the low and not the high road when it comes to our children?
If the costing report only gave the high scenario as an option, Minister, you would have had no choice but to strive for the 66 000 social workers. We have taken the easy way out. What is a point of having the costing done on a very good piece of legislation, and not offer the best services to our children? We all know that the current number of social workers is simply not enough and that many children are being failed by the system. The ratio of one social worker to 60 cases is a dream for most. But, Minister, if this is the ratio your department has set, as you stated in the parliamentary reply, then you have an obligation to see to it that it becomes a reality. I recently visited the Boksburg Child Welfare and their caseload is 1 500 cases to one social worker, not 60.
Chair, the department will say that they are offering bursaries, as the Minister has mentioned, to people wanting to study social work. However, two weeks ago we witnessed that many graduates could not be absorbed into the department despite the chronic shortages of social workers. This is a reflection of extremely poor planning on the department's side. Why waste taxpayers' money on bursaries if you cannot place the graduates?
I am pleased to inform the House that the Western Cape accommodated all those who graduated and they have also introduced a mentoring programme to ensure that all social workers are competent in writing reports for courts. [Applause.]
Another important aspect of the Children's Act is that of the Child Protection Register. It only has a shameful 22 names on it and has cost the taxpayers R1,7 million thus far. That is over R77 000 per entry, which must make it one of the most expensive registers in the world.
Minister, you are giving a false sense of security to parents who have placed their confidence in the register. They believe that safeguards are in place to ensure that no person who could be a threat to their children will be allowed to work with them.
It is estimated that around 30 000 children per year are victims to sexual abuse. You need to explain to this House, Minister, why it is that only 22 names appear on the register and what do you intend to do about it. The children deserve better.
It is high time that the enthusiasm placed on the public relations exercise we witness from the ANC every time a new piece of legislation is debated in the House is carried through to the funding and the implementation of the legislation.
Substance abuse has reached epidemic proportions, particularly amongst youth. This government continues to fail to prioritise substance abuse, despite having a seminar. South Africa faces some of the highest statistics with one-third of all crime being related to alcohol or drug misuse. The World Health Organisation Global Status Report on Alcohol and Health for 2011 reports that South Africa is one of the leading countries in alcohol abuse disorder, consuming well over 5 billion litres of alcohol per year.
The recent findings by the Bureau for Market Research indicate that 80% of Gauteng high school pupils surveyed stated that they regularly consume alcohol. This clearly highlights that government's prevention strategy with regards to substance abuse is a dismal failure. In addition, three out of every 10 pupils surveyed admitted to using illicit drugs, with dagga being the most popular.
The Department of Social Development is the lead department in this regard and have poured millions into the "Ke Moja" [No thanks, I'm fine] campaign with very little benefit. I challenge anyone to bring the evidence of the outcomes of the campaign here today and mention them.
The continuing use of a universal prevention message or a one-size- fits- all approach is simply not working. Research from across the world shows that targeted prevention, which is community- and evidence-based, and takes both risk and resilience factors of each community into consideration is needed. Simply put, we must strive to have a more scientific approach to our substance abuse pandemic.
The Western Cape government has mainstreamed drug education by bringing it into the Life Orientation curriculum for the Grade 11s and next year it will also be extended to both Grades 5 and Grade 9.
The Central Drug Authority is useless and needs to be scrapped. It's exact effectiveness is not known to anyone and again I challenge anybody and the Minister to come forward with evidence of their outcomes. They cannot expect to be taken seriously if they do not take themselves seriously. They submitted their annual report late again this year and as a result have not appeared before the portfolio committee.
The National Drug Master Plan, which is one of the Central Drug Authority's, CDA's, major responsibilities, is flawed with many departments that are supposed to give input simply not doing so or not attending CDA meetings resulting in little or no co-ordination strategy across government.
In a reply to a parliamentary question, the Minister stated that only five out of 14 departments submitted their mini drug master plans to the CDA. Some of the departments that failed to submit include Basic Education, Justice and Sports. We simply cannot continue with a toothless authority while everyday an increasing number of children's lives are ruined.
Lastly, I want to speak about the issues around the SA Social Security Agency, Sassa. On 18 April Sassa came before the committee. Hon Pam Tshwete did a fantastic job chairing the meeting as hon Botha was ill at that time. At that time I raised the issue of the R10 billion tender and asked if Sassa officials along with the bid evaluation and the bid technical committees could come before the committee to clarify matters to members. In response the chief executive officer, CEO, did offer to answer questions but the acting chair said: We are saying the bid committees are not here and other people are not here. We want everyone to be here when we discuss it because it is a serious matter.
The chair also went on to say:
... in that context it would mean that before we go for debate on 2nd May, which is today, we will ask if they can come and present so we can get answers. I will talk to the Minister and the chairperson about it.
The following week, on 24 April we dealt with the report from the previous week's meeting. Hon Botha, who was absent from the original meeting, refused to capture the decision taken by the acting chair and the committee. I have looked in the Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, ATC, of 25 April and it is not reflected.
I must point out that I walked out of the meeting in disgust. Pertinent questions need to be asked and answered. I will not be dictated to by someone who misleads the ethics committee. Chair, the questions that need to be asked are firstly, what was the reasoning in terms of which the CEO of Sassa issued Notice Two on 6 June, which had a material effect on the tender, making biometric verification a requirement - and that is a preference - which excluded all but one tender; and secondly, whether the winning bidder, Cash Paymaster Services, CPS, paid any monies to any individual on the technical and evaluations committees, or paid for any overseas trips including those to Malaysia or gave a R25 million donation to the ANC?
I have written to the Public Protector in this regard in order to ensure that all South Africans, especially those who rely on social grants to survive, are confident that the tender process was in accordance with all regulations and the principle of an open opportunity society for all and not the few politically connected.
In conclusion, if we are to allow every child to achieve their full potential in an open opportunity society they need to know that they can become whatever they desire and that no stepping stones will be removed along the way to prevent them from becoming their very best. It is this vision of providing every child the best possible start in life that motivates the DA. We believe that every child can and must own their future. I thank you. [Applause.]