Madam Chair, hon Minister of State Security, hon chairperson of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, hon members, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen - and, of course, I would like to acknowledge my wife, Magda, in the gallery for her presence and support - I said in my budget speech on Wednesday, 5 May 2010, when I quoted from the final report to the Minister for Intelligence Services, the hon Minister Mr Ronnie Kasrils, by the Ministerial Review Commission on Intelligence, 10 September 2008, that: "It is a great concern that the intelligence services do not have their own Budget Vote with regard to the funds that are allocated to them by Parliament annually" and that they also "do not adhere to the Public Finance Management Act or the White Paper on Intelligence" of 1994.
Maybe the time has come for this report by the Ministerial Review Commission on Intelligence to be referred to the JSCI for consideration and for recommendation to the Minister of State Security for implementation.
This practice of not having a Budget Vote increases the risk of the abuse of funds for personal enrichment, a risk which is always present when large amounts of money are held by an organisation. This risk is particularly high when the money can be used for secret projects, and information is only shared on a strictly need-to-know basis.
The current budget for the 2011-12 financial year for State Security, as announced earlier this year by the hon Minister of Finance, is only R3,755 million, with R669 million for defence intelligence, and R1,948 million for crime intelligence, which gives us a total amount of R6,372 million. The question is: Is that enough?
Further, the absence of an adequate Budget Vote for State Security makes the oversight of the JSCI very difficult, to say the least. The JSCI is supposed to measure intelligence expenses according to their budget, but the JSCI has nothing to compare it with other than presentations by the agencies.
As I said during my 2010 budget speech, when I quoted from the final report of 2008 to the Minister, intelligence organisations are resistant to revealing their budgets on the grounds that foreign intelligence agencies will thereby gain an advantage over them. I believe that this argument is overstated. A foreign agency would obtain no benefit from knowing how much money another country spends on its intelligence services. It is only at a higher level of detail regarding targets, methods, sources and operational outputs and constraints that security could be undermined through disclosure.
In light of the above, I must quote from my learned friend the hon Adv P J Swart's budget speech on Safety and Security on Friday, 23 May 2008. He said:
... I have to mention the Minister of Finance, being the chair of the Secret Services Evaluation Committee on the Secret Services Account, from which the JSCI in terms of section 3(a)(ii) of the Intelligence Oversight Act 40 of 1994 has to obtain a report on the Secret Services. The committee once again failed to secure a meeting with him during the past year. We do not even know if this committee is functional.
I am of the opinion that this is not a matter of whether this committee is functional or not, but rather of whether this committee exists at all.
Artikel 6 van die Intelligensiedienste Oorsigwet van 1994 bepaal dat die Gesamentlike Staande Komitee oor Inligting, die Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, JSCI, jaarliks verslag oor die werksaamhede van die komitee aan die Parlement moet voorl. Daar bestaan egter geen erns om di verslag - wat die enigste bron van kommunikasie tussen die JSCI en die Parlement en, vir di rede, die enigste met die publiek, is - gedoen te kry en dit in die Parlement ter tafel te l nie.
Weens die feit dat die jaarverslag van 2009-10 nog nie ter tafel gel is nie, soos voorgeskryf deur wetgewing, en ook vir die rede dat intelligensiedienste nie hul eie begrotingspos het nie, is ek verplig om na ander aspekte te kyk wat die oorsig van die komitee benvloed. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Section 6 of the Intelligence Services Oversight Act, Act 40 of 1994, provides that the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, JSCI, should present an annual report to Parliament on the activities of the committee. However, there has been no earnestness to complete this report, which is the only source of communication between the JSCI and Parliament and, therefore, with the public- and to table it in Parliament.
Because of the fact that the 2009-10 annual report has not been tabled yet, as stipulated by legislation, and also because the Intelligence Services do not have their own Budget Vote, I am compelled to look at other aspects that could impact on the oversight of the committee.]
During the budget speech of our hon Minister of State Security on Wednesday, 1 July 2009 - and I quote from his speech as reflected in the unrevised Hansard of the same date - he committed himself by saying:
We will continue to ensure the full implementation of all elements of our vetting strategy, which contributes to enabling government to expose and root out criminals from the Public Service ... we will resubmit the draft Intelligence Amendment Bill to Parliament to address any gaps ... We will strengthen our co-operation with the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence.
With reference to the Minister's commitment to ensuring the full implementation of our vetting strategy, why is it that the City Press reported on 3 April 2011 on the appointment of Gen Mdluli as head of Crime Intelligence in July 2009, the same month that the Minister made his commitment? The question now arises: How serious is the Minister of State Security about correcting the shortcomings and ensuring that everyone, irrespective of association, be properly vetted, before he or she gets appointed?
We are still awaiting the submission of the draft intelligence Bill. Regarding the commitment by the Minister to strengthening co-operation with the JSCI, my question, with respect, Minister, is: How far have you gone? I say this because the Minister is hardly available to meet with the JCSI.
Further, with reference to the hon Minister of State Security's budget address on 5 May 2010, I quote:
Chairperson, last year, when addressing this House, we committed ourselves to embark on a review of our intelligence services with the aim of developing efficient and effective intelligence structures ... I am honoured to report that in September 2009, a single department, the State Security Agency, was established by a Presidential Proclamation ... In line with our undertaking to complete the reorganisation ... our goals for 2010 include the following: tabling of the National State Security Bill to effect the amalgamation ... redeployment of members into new structures.
He also said that 16 years after the advent of democracy, the White Paper on intelligence was due for review.
The restructuring of the intelligence community that took place in September 2009 is also a big concern. Besides the fact that none of the relevant legislation - a national state security Bill, the Intelligence Services Oversight Act of 1994 and the White Paper on Intelligence of 1994 - had been amended, the JSCI, which is responsible for oversight, was never consulted about the restructuring and only informed as a matter of courtesy. The incomplete restructuring process causes oversight problems, not only for the JCSI, but also for the Auditor-General.
A last concern that really restricts the competence and the efficiency of the JSCI is the composition of the JSCI. Currently, the members of the NCOP who serve on the JCSI are not allowed to participate in the budget debate. Secondly, NCOP business, which includes a lot of oversight visits to the provinces, results in NCOP members finding it difficult to attend the JSCI weekly meetings and even our oversight visits.
I am of the opinion that these problems need to be addressed without further delay to avoid incompetence within the intelligence service and to ensure the efficient operation of the JSCI. I want to take this opportunity to congratulate our hon chairperson Mr Burgess on his birthday tomorrow. I trust that his family hasn't classified his presents, otherwise he will not know what they are. [Applause.]