Mr Chairman, would we all agree that in a budget debate it is appropriate to ask probing questions? Should a professional Public Service not be staffed with competent and dedicated professional officials? Does effective service delivery by all public departments, including Education and Health, not rely on the commitment of appropriately qualified officials, and how well they are managed?
Does this department not receive R690 million to achieve exactly this purpose? Is it thus not appropriate to enquire how this department is managed?
Did the then Minister for the Public Service and Administration, Geraldine Fraser-Moleketi, not emphasise the importance of human resource planning five years ago? If this is the norm, with which the DA agrees, how is it possible that the 2010 State of the Public Service Report by the Public Service Commission found that the Public Service is still facing considerable challenges in the area of effective human resource management?
Why did the Public Service Commission find that just 16 out of 144 departments - a compliance rate of only 11% - submitted human resource development plans? Is that why the chairperson of the Public Service Commission, Dr Ralph Mgijima, concluded that the Public Service was not at a point where it could confidently say that most of its managers were adequately competent in human resource management?
Meneer die Voorsitter, is dit nie waar dat die korrekte aanstellingsprosedure noodsaaklik is vir doeltreffende bestuur nie? Erken Minister Richard Baloyi dit nie inderdaad nie as hy verwys na ...
... the right people, with the right skills, at the right place at the right time, all the time.
Is dit nie so dat doeltreffende aanstellings akkurate posbeskrywings vereis nie, Minister? Hoekom bevind die Staatsdienskommisie dan dat talle basiese beginsels nie nagekom word nie, soos dat poste geadverteer word sonder posbeskryings, en dat daar vir slegs 36% uit 122 poste posbeoordelings gedoen is?
Kan ons saamstem dat een van die basiese beginsels van doeltreffende departementele bestuur is om werknemers verantwoordelik te hou vir die nakoming van hul pligte? Hoe word dit anders gedoen as deur die gebruik van pligstate, prestasie-ooreenkomste en prestasiemetings?
Nou, hoekom word hierdie meganismes, wat op papier beskryf word, dan nie gemplementeer nie? Hoekom bewys ons slegs lippediens aan prestasie- ooreenkomste? (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Chairperson, is it not true that the correct appointment procedure is essential for effective management? Is Minister Richard Baloyi not, in fact, acknowledging this when he refers to ...
... the right people, with the right skills, at the right place at the right time, all the time.
Is it not true that effective appointments require accurate job descriptions, Minister? Why, then, has the Public Service Commission found that several basic principles are not being complied with, such as posts that are advertised without job descriptions, and that job evaluations have been done for only 36% out of the 122 posts?
Can we agree that one of the basic principles of effective departmental management is to hold employees accountable when it comes to discharging of their duties? How can this be done differently than through the use of duty sheets, performance agreements and performance assessments?
Well then, why are these mechanisms, which have been mapped out in writing, not implemented? Why are we only paying lip-service to performance agreements?]
Why is there a Performance Management and Development System, if senior managers simply do not submit the performance agreements requested from them? If heads of departments do not comply with requirements, how can you expect their subordinates to comply? In addition to that, why are so many heads of departments never formally evaluated? Furthermore, is it surprising that the level of compliance is declining, if performance incentives are paid without evaluations being done? If fewer grievances are finalised, is it surprising that there is more and more resentment amongst employees?
Therefore, won't we all agree with President Zuma, who said that "we face a crisis of accountability"? If officials are not held accountable, is it not logical that financial mismanagement and corruption will follow?
To fight corruption, is it not essential that senior managers entrusted with public funds should maintain a high standard of professional ethics? Should their integrity not be beyond reproach? Does it not make sense that they must disclose their financial interests by the end of April every year? Is it not worrying that the compliance rate of senior managers in the whole Public Service over the past three financial years has never been more than 50% and that it has been declining? How can a Minister enforce compliance in other departments, if in his own not one of the 98 senior managers submitted their financial disclosures by due date?
Is it surprising that voters have more trust in a government that complies? Is anybody surprised that the Western Cape government has ... [Interjections.] [Applause.] Is anybody surprised that the Western Cape government has a 100% compliance rate? [Applause.]
Why should officials have the discretion to decide whether or not to investigate cases of alleged corruption? Why is it that half of all departments have no anticorruption strategy at all? Is one of the most basic principles of effective management not to maintain discipline?
Did the Public Service Commission not recommend to Cabinet that they should charge noncompliant officials with misconduct in terms of the Code of Conduct? Why has no feedback been received from departments on 63% of cases referred to the National Anti-corruption Hotline? If even Minister Baloyi's own acting director-general did not submit his financial disclosure by due date, how can we expect the Minister to enforce compliance in the rest of the Public Service?
Why are officials suspected of fraud or corruption often just suspended from duty for long periods with full pay? Why are so many senior managers lenient in imposing disciplinary action against the guilty? Why do they only give written warnings and not dismiss the guilty? Does the Public Service Commission not recommend that all fraud is reported to the police?
Why did the Minister make so many promises today? Why did he not tell the House whether or not he has fulfilled last year's promises? In conclusion, is it now clear why on 18 May 2011 the support of the voters for a certain party declined while that for another party grew significantly. [Applause.]
Why should the DA support this Budget Vote, given the disintegration of human resource management, of appointment procedures, of accountability, and of financial discipline in the Public Service? [Applause.]