Chairperson, the year 2010 is a significant one for the continent of Africa and for our country in particular, as we prepare to host the most important event, the Fifa World Cup, in just 30 days.
Parliament's theme this year is also about one of our icons, who was released in February 20 years ago. It says: "Celebrating Mandela's Legacy - Nation-building". Throughout the world, the name of Mandela is echoed and reflected repeatedly.
We have a central role to play in ensuring that we exemplify his qualities of leadership, and it is necessary to draw on the relevant lessons learnt from this greatest icon of our time. We have learnt that he is firm in his convictions and consistent in his principles. He remained solid in pursuing the ideals of a nonracial, nonsexist, united, democratic and prosperous society. He put the interests of the nation above his own.
In a constitutional democracy such as South Africa, all arms of state are bound by the Constitution. The governance structure outlined in the Constitution provides the mechanisms through which governance, "based on the will of the people", is ensured.
We urgently need to develop a common understanding on oversight, what it is and what it entails, and we should not be having any pronouncements such as those witnessed recently on whether the executive or any other public entity should or should not account before parliamentary committees.
The Constitution is categorically unambiguous in Chapter 5, clause 92, which must be read with section 93, and I quote:
Members of the executive are accountable collectively and individually to Parliament for the exercise of their powers and the performance of their functions ...
And to -
... provide Parliament with full and regular reports concerning matters under their control and respond to recommendations or decisions of committees and the House.
However, the Constitution also compels Parliament to develop mechanisms and rules to execute its mandate of effecting accountability and overseeing the executive, or any organ of state. Such mechanisms exist in the form of portfolio, select and standing committees, with certain powers. It is therefore our duty to ensure that the authority of Parliament is asserted, respected and fulfilled. Members of Parliament must ask difficult questions, but those questions must be of quality, must question without fear or favour those issues arising from the reports that are submitted to Parliament, and if there is any wrongdoing, corruption or lack of delivery, such issues ought to be raised.
We need to maximise our value on oversight and accountability to include the scrutiny of reports coming to Parliament, as in the budget information; the performance information - the Auditor-General will be providing such audits with effect from this year - financial information, as in the monthly and quarterly reports, which is about the real money spent; and compliance information, which is about follow-ups, ensuring that there is compliance and that decisions that are taken by Parliament indeed are effected. Where there is undermining of such decisions, the Speaker should recommend that censure be applied to those responsible. We then also have to ensure that in the scrutiny of financial and other aspects, Scopa reports are also included.
We should also clarify the role of Scopa with regard to Ministers appearing before it. The Joint Rules Committee must enhance the Rules to reflect on the issue. The Public Finance Management Act says accounting officers are the officials in the departments, but in that Act emphasis is also placed on the fact that political authority and responsibility rests with executive members.
Therefore we should resolve these unnecessary tensions by proposing as follows. Firstly, Ministers should be invited to observe the proceedings, to take note on issues which sometimes they may not be aware of in their own departments, to enable them to take leadership on those issues as arising from the floor. Secondly, Ministers should appear before Scopa in instances when they are implicated in evidence before the committee, to come and answer questions on those implications. Thirdly, Ministers should appear before the committee if in two consecutive years, recommendations adopted by this House are not effected in their departments. Therefore, leadership will then be required from them to appear before Scopa to come and answer on these particular issues. [Applause.]
An amount of R45 million has been allocated to the committees of Parliament in the current budget, which covers a total of 54 committees, that is, 51 committees with oversight functions and 3 committees in-house committees, totalling 54 committees in both Houses. Only R45 million has been allocated.
We have also set aside an amount to cater for the new committee that is still to be established, a committee on The Presidency, whatever name it will assume. A task team has already been established and will be meeting next week to consider proposals from the NA Table and those submitted by parties, which will oversee The Presidency, in particular the Ministry on Performance Monitoring and Evaluation, including the National Youth Development Agency, the Ministry of National Planning, and other functions in The Presidency, such as the War on Poverty, Asgisa, Jipsa - if those programmes are still there - and so forth. The proposals will then lead to the establishment of a committee that oversees The Presidency. So, we have set aside that committee to be the 55th committee.
We welcome the increase from R135 million in the financial year 2008-09 to R145 million, which is R10 million more available to committees. However, the amount is not enough, hon Speaker, as committees ought to do oversight, oversight, oversight. [Applause.]
A number of only ten Bills have been submitted to Parliament this year, and therefore law-making is no longer an increasing activity for portfolio committees. Oversight ought to be the increasing activity for portfolio committees. [Applause.] Therefore, the amount of money allocated is not enough. Take the example of Gauteng. Gauteng has 11 oversight committees, and they are receiving R32 million. Each committee gets up to R2 million. Our committees, unfortunately, with the number that we have, some will get R600 000, some R700 000, R800 000, up to R1 million. Unfortunately, we cannot give you more, because the money is too little. So, we will try to engage the authorities that the money needs to be increased in that direction. It is not me who is allocating the money; so, don't blame it on me. I just receive and then allocate.
All committees will be able to spend their allocated money, hon Speaker. As you have raised, only 69% was spent. The issue here arises on programming itself. I have already engaged the Office of the Chief Whip. We hope that we shall work together - the Chief Whip in the NA, the Chief Whip in the NCOP and the Chief Whips in the provinces - for co-ordination so that when oversight happens, we don't stampede; as the Deputy President of the Republic always says, there is too much stampeding on oversight.
We seem to be oversubscribing and going to the same project or the same province so many times because there is no co-ordination. We shall have to work on that co-ordination so that as we increase our oversight, indeed we are able to address the stampeding that has been occurring. Programming must allow for more space for such visits to occur so that we don't prevent committees from exercising that function. That is why there is underspending because each time they apply, we say they can't go. Hence they were unable to spend their money.
Also, Speaker, the support that we give to the committees and to Parliament as a whole must be a professional service if we are ambitious about achieving on all these programmes. It must be the type of support that has quality. The current support requires overhauling and adaptation to be more efficient and effective, service-delivery oriented, professional and competent. My office has already raised the matter with the Secretary to Parliament in terms of what needs to happen. We hope that in August when we come back, we will be able to receive a report. I have proposed that there needs to be a skills audit, whether we have employed the right people for the right jobs, with the required skills that are needed, or something somewhere is not working. [Applause.]
Every week I receive two to three complaints from chairpersons and parties in Parliament complaining about services, lack of minutes, quality reports not being there and so forth. So we really need a turnaround strategy if we are to achieve on quality oversight going forward.
We also need to enhance the capacity of members, as we have already alluded to. I also want to say that the oversight model is pointing to the very issue of building capacities for MPs. One of my responsibilities assigned is the introduction and maximisation of e-Parliament towards an e-democracy programme. We have already sent information and forms to all parties to check among their own members whether all of us are computer literate or not. Based on the information when they were registering, 85% of members are not computer literate. We cannot have MPs who cannot access the internet, who cannot even engage on social networks - Facebook and Twitter - and other programmes that are available for us. You could then engage your constituency offices there, create a vibrant debate with society there as hon members ... [Interjections.]