Thank you very much, Chairperson, and thanks to hon members for allowing me an opportunity to respond.
Starting with the Petersen matter, which has been raised by both hon Selfe and hon Blaai, I think we should now accept that we have a Commissioner. How the Commissioner arrived and landed in the Department of Correctional Services is another matter. There was a process within government which ensured that there was a swopping of two directors-general, one deployed to Sport and the other to Correctional Services, and now she is the Commissioner in the Department of Correctional Services. I want to appeal that we don't start on that note, but rather look at what it is that she is bringing to the department. [Applause.]
The government has a redeployment policy and if it doesn't work, the President will have to see what to do, because he appointed her. I just thought I needed to clarify that from the onset.
The second matter is the matter of Mr Shabir Shaik. Can I just indicate that with regard to parole issues - and this is not the only parole issue - as the Minister who has taken over from my predecessor, I wouldn't want to find myself in a situation where I have to review decisions of my predecessor. [Interjections.] Just allow me, sir, to continue. If you provide me with compelling evidence which says to me "review", we will review. But where there are no compelling reasons provided to the Minister, it becomes difficult for the Minister to review a parole decision.
I have also interacted, I must say with due respect, with Judge Desai. We've discussed. We've engaged. Yes, the matter has been in the media and it has been controversial. However, there hasn't been any advice given to the Minister that there should be a review. As you know, with regard to issues of parole, the Minister is advised to review or to take whatever decision is necessary.
In the case of Shabir Shaik, I hope we can close this matter so that we can look forward, look to the future and look at all the other cases which are coming our way, which the Minister may actually have to come and present to the portfolio committee.
I am glad you are talking about other people dying. It is as though you didn't listen when I said one of the things I've already directed should be done, is to look at issues of policy with regard to medical parole, precisely because there is no medical parole in this country, right? Yes, of course, there is no medical parole. If you are a member of the portfolio committee, you would know that there is no medical parole. There is no medical parole and therefore there is a need for us to have a medical parole. What we have in place is for a person who is terminally ill to be released from prison. So, it doesn't cater for all the other categories of people who are sitting in prison and are dying. It is in law. It has nothing to do with the parole board or even with the Minister. So, you help us amend, so that we can produce a policy and assist Judge Desai. I think he is here and he will be very glad to listen to your input.
The third matter is that of food nutrition and the Sondolo contract. That, too, as you know, is a matter which is under investigation. I am sure you are aware that the Special Investigating Unit is working with the Department of Correctional Services, amongst others, to investigate these matters. Can we await the outcome of the investigation? Standing here as the Minister, I have been in office for only six weeks and I have not been briefed as yet by the SIU about what is likely to come out of that investigation. Once the report comes out, again, I'll come back to Members of Parliament, through the portfolio committee, to give that report.
On the issue of repeat offending, colleagues, I think that we should use this opportunity to appeal to society to assist us with regard to this particular matter. It cannot be a problem of the Department of Correctional Services, it cannot be a problem of government and it cannot be a problem of the NGOs. It is a societal challenge.
Yesterday we met young girls, as the Deputy Minister said. There was an 18- year-old. She's been there and she is now there for the second time for swiping credit cards; others of the same age for drug-trafficking, etc. They were manipulated by boyfriends who are part of gangs. This group was between 16 and 20. If you have young girls of 16, 17 and 18 years who are likely to do a second term in prison - these are awaiting-trial detainees, by the way - it is a call to society to do something about the challenges which we have in our society.
What I have picked up is that the majority of those children are from dysfunctional families. There's no mother, no father, or father is married to another woman or there's a drinking problem at home. These are societal problems. Indeed, the President is correct to say that we need to forge partnerships to ensure that government and civil society work together to deal with these problems.
The other issue which we raised earlier on is that of inmates who come out of prison. Of course, they have a criminal record and they are not likely to get jobs anywhere. And once they don't get jobs, they get frustrated and the only way for them to survive is to go back to prison.
And of course, going back to prison, there is a whole community there. I find that prison is a whole community living in its own world. So they go back to the community where they are going to be accepted, rather than stay in a community where they are rejected. So, our responsibility with regard to social reintegration, all of us, is to ensure that these people find jobs and utilise the skills by which they have benefited while in prison.
On the video link, hon member Fihla mentioned the creation of courts in prison. I am sure, hon member, as one of the oldest members of the committee, you are also aware that there are no courts in prisons. But there is currently a process which has been introduced through the justice, crime prevention and security review process of video linkages between our courts and some of our correctional centres. Obviously, we'll not be able to cover all the centres at the beginning, but I think it is a step in the right direction. This will help prisoners who are still standing trial and who are on remand - who shouldn't be going to prison - and those who are not allowed to leave the premises and go to courts. So the video link is a step in the right direction.
Then, of course, there is the matter of the call for youths to be separated from adults. Yes, that is one of the standing rules. Young people serve in their own facilities; children serve in their own facilities. But of course, in some areas you may find a situation where a child is actually serving with adults. One of the matters I raised in my speech, if you remember, was that of people who are mentally disturbed, who are serving with people who are very normal, who are very criminal, under very difficult conditions. Imagine the abuse they must be subjected to. That applies to children; it applies to people living with disability.
I am not saying people living with disability should not serve their sentences, but I am sure there is something that can be done. One cannot expect that a blind man should serve in the same cell with 140 to 150 people and hope that there will be no abuse in the process.
So there are certain things we need to do to try and correct the situation at the facilities. I am glad that all of us seem to speak with the same voice on issues of labour, that inmates must work. Whether in terms of the Correctional Services Act they should have a choice as to which job they want to engage in, is a matter you must help us deal with. It is my view that they must work. That they must have a right of where to work, is a matter which all of us must look into by amending the Correctional Services Act.
Of course, there would have to be engagement as well with other stakeholders, such as unions and so on, because I am aware that in the past there used to be a problem of unions feeling that inmates were taking their jobs. My view is that they should plough back into society. If there is no school in an area where a correctional centre is situated, there is nothing preventing us from having them doing other work. This is for purposes of skills development, artisan skills, but also ploughing back into society and to show society that they regret what they did - restorative justice. There is a whole lot of progress I believe we can make.
I am concluding. I also learnt that with regard to this repeat offending, the majority of the people who are serving sentences are not visited by their families. I am told that plus-minus 26% are visited, but the majority of families don't visit; obviously because families, society, are angry. But equally there are problems regarding the visitors' areas, as those in the portfolio committee may be aware. It is our responsibility, through our constituencies, to go and mobilise societies to go and visit their families so that they look forward to going out and leaving the prison walls, rather than staying in prison and becoming part of the gangs.
Thank you very much for your support with the budget. I nearly said I didn't understand half of the things you were saying because you were so emotional! But certainly, we have to spend some money, but we can equally save by making sure that we prevent incidents of crime. Our problem has been that we have not been preventing crime. It has happened; it happens and we take people through the process of courts and we send them to correctional centres. Thank you, hon members. Thanks to all of you for the constructive debate, and thanks very much, Mr Selfe. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.