PANSALB interviews: deliberations; Committee Legacy Report

Meeting report

PANSALB interviews: discussion on procedure
The Chairperson said the meeting would focus on deliberations on the recent interviews to fill vacancies on the Pan South African Language Board (PANSALB). She sought advice from the procedural staff on how to proceed.

Mr Ajabulile Mtiya, Committee Secretary, explained that it was now up to Members to deliberate on the interviews conducted with the PANSALB candidates over the weekend. From these candidates, Members had to compile a nomination list for the Minister of Sports, Arts and Culture.

Ms Fiona Clayton, Parliamentary Content Advisor, echoed Mr Mtiya's comments and noted that the Committee had to submit a nomination list of no more than 20 nominees to the Minister. She proposed that Members considered the interviewees according to their assigned number.

The Chairperson thanked the Committee staff for their inputs. She recalled that after the conclusion of the interviews on Sunday 17 March 2024, Members were asked to finalise their scoring so that the final shortlist could be completed. Members should refer to applicants by their assigned number.

Ms V van Dyk (DA) said that the DA had categorised the interviewees into three categories. Excellent (5), very good (4) and good (3). She said it would be confusing if each Member had to list their scoring.

The Chairperson replied that Members had scored the applicants individually. She was not in favour of Ms van Dyk's proposal for scoring.

Ms V Malomane (ANC) suggested that Members should not use the interviewee's name but their number.

The Chairperson agreed and reminded Members the meeting was broadcast live on the virtual platform.

The Chairperson asked Ms Clayton for guidance but before she could comment, Ms van Dyk proceeded to list her scoring according to her suggested formula.

The Chairperson stopped Ms van Dyk and said that the proposed procedure was still under discussion.

The Chairperson asked Mr M Zondi (ANC) for his comments.

Mr Zondi apologised as he had experienced technical difficulties with his electronic devices. He eventually managed to access the meeting via his mobile phone.

Mr Zondi agreed that the Committee refer to the interviewee by number. He recalled that Members were asked to allocate scores from 1 to 5.

Mr D Joseph (DA) said that he had no objection to the prevailing view. He had followed the formula that was touted by Ms van Dyk.

The Chairperson agreed no names should be mentioned but rather use the interviewee number.

Ms Clayton was concerned that some Members' interviewee list might now differ from the official list utilised over the weekend for interviews. She saw no problem with Members using interviewee names as these were already in the public domain. The Committee would only be making recommendations to the Minister.

Chairperson Dlulane said that it was unfortunate that the deliberations were virtually conducted. Previous deliberations had been conducted in a closed setting. The Committee would not want to embarrass the interviewees. It was the Department’s responsibility to contact candidates. She did not want poor performers to learn about this through a virtual setting.

Ms Malomane said that it was common practice that numbers are used. She noted that the Committee only made recommendations to the Department.

Ms D Sibiya (ANC) said that she had just made a phone call to ascertain the process to follow. She was advised that Members should not mention names but instead their numbers.

The Chairperson asked the procedural staff to circulate the official interview list to Members again.

The Chairperson agreed to a five minute break to perform this task by requested by the procedural staff.

The Chairperson said that all views were respected in the Committee and that no one should feel as if they had made “stupid" comments.

Mr E Mthetwa (EFF) agreed with the Chairperson's views.

Break

PANSALB interviews: deliberations
 The Chairperson called each Member to read out their allocated scores.

Mr Zondi allocated the following scores:
Candidate 1:4
Candidate 2:5
Candidate 3:3
Candidate 4:4
Candidate 5:5
Candidate 6:5
Candidate 7:3
Candidate 8:5
Candidate 9:4
Candidate 10:3
Candidate 11:4
Candidate 12:5
Candidate 13:4
Candidate 14:3
Candidate 15:3
Candidate 16:5
Candidate 17:5
Candidate 18:5
Candidate 19:3
Candidate 20:3
Candidate 21:5
Candidate 22:5
Candidate 23:5
Candidate 24:4

Ms van Dyk allocated the following scores:

Candidate 1: 3
Candidate 2:5
Candidate 3:3
Candidate 4:4
Candidate 5:4
Candidate 6:5
Candidate 7:3
Candidate 8:5
Candidate 9:3
Candidate 10:3
Candidate 11:3
Candidate 12:5
Candidate 13:3
Candidate 14:3
Candidate 15:4
Candidate 16:5
Candidate 17:4
Candidate 18:5
Candidate 19:3
Candidate 20:3
Candidate 21:3
Candidate 22:4
Candidate 23:5
Candidate 24:4

Ms Malomane allocated the following scores:

Candidate 1: not scored
Candidate 2:5
Candidate 3:3
Candidate 4:5
Candidate 5:5
Candidate 6:5
Candidate 7:3
Candidate 8:5
Candidate 9:5
Candidate 10:4
Candidate 11:5
Candidate 12:5
Candidate 13:4
Candidate 14:4
Candidate 15:5
Candidate 16:5
Candidate 17:3
Candidate 18:5
Candidate 19:5
Candidate 20:5
Candidate 21:5
Candidate 22:5
Candidate 23:5
Candidate 24:4

Ms Sibiya allocated the following scores.

Candidate 1:4
Candidate 2:5
Candidate 3:3
Candidate 4:4
Candidate 5:5
Candidate 6:5
Candidate 7:3
Candidate 8:5
Candidate 9:5
Candidate 10:4
Candidate 11:5
Candidate 12:5
Candidate 13:4
Candidate 14:4
Candidate 15:5
Candidate 16:5
Candidate 17:3
Candidate 18:5
Candidate 19:5
Candidate 20:5
Candidate 21:3
Candidate 22:5
Candidate 23:4
Candidate 24:5

Mr Joseph allocated the following scores:

Candidate 1:3
Candidate 2:5
Candidate 3:3
Candidate 4:4
Candidate 5:4
Candidate 6:5
Candidate 7:3
Candidate 8:5
Candidate 9:3
Candidate 10:3
Candidate 11:3
Candidate 12:5
Candidate 13:3
Candidate 14:3
Candidate 15:4
Candidate 16:5
Candidate 17:4
Candidate 18:5
Candidate 19:3
Candidate 20:3
Candidate 21:3
Candidate 22:4
Candidate 23:5
Candidate 24:4

Mr Mthetwa allocated the following scores:
Candidate 1:2
Candidate 2:4
Candidate 3:3
Candidate 4:4
Candidate 5:5
Candidate 6:2
Candidate 7:5
Candidate 8:4
Candidate 9:3
Candidate 10:5
Candidate 11:5
Candidate 12:4
Candidate 13:4
Candidate 14:2
Candidate 15:3
Candidate 16:5
Candidate 17:4
Candidate 18:5
Candidate 19:3
Candidate 20:3
Candidate 21:4
Candidate 22:5
Candidate 23:4
Candidate 24:4

Ms Adams allocated the following scores:
Candidate 1:4
Candidate 2:5
Candidate 3:3
Candidate 4:4
Candidate 5:5
Candidate 6:3
Candidate 7:3
Candidate 8:4
Candidate 9:3
Candidate 10:4
Candidate 11:5
Candidate 12:5
Candidate 13:3
Candidate 14:3
Candidate 15:3
Candidate 16:5
Candidate 17:5
Candidate 18:5
Candidate 19:3
Candidate 20:4
Candidate 21:5
Candidate 22:5
Candidate 23:5
Candidate 24:4

The Chairperson thanked Members for their inputs and asked the procedural staff if she as Chairperson could also indicate her scores.

The procedural staff answered in the affirmative.

The Chairperson's scores were as follows:
Candidate 1:4
Candidate 2:5
Candidate 3:3
Candidate 4:4
Candidate 5:5
Candidate 6:5
Candidate 7:3
Candidate 8:5
Candidate 9:4
Candidate 10:3
Candidate 11:4
Candidate 12:5
Candidate 13:4
Candidate 14:3
Candidate 15:3
Candidate 16:5
Candidate 17:5
Candidate 18:5
Candidate 19:3
Candidate 20:3
Candidate 21: 5
Candidate 22:5
Candidate 23:5
Candidate 24:4

The Chairperson requested the procedural staff to pronounce on the next steps.

Mr Mtiya replied that scores would be consolidated and presented at the next meeting. It was then up to Members to make its recommendations.

Committee Legacy Report 2019-2024
The Chairperson said that she had read the draft Legacy Report. She asked Members to comment on the draft Report.

Ms Adams said that she had also read through the Report and that it was an accurate reflection of the Committee's work. She moved for the adoption of the Legacy Report.

Mr Mthetwa had not yet read the Report and requested that it be adopted at the next meeting.

The Chairperson did not accede to this request as the agenda for the next meeting was already finalised.

Ms van Dyk said that a lot of work has gone into the Report. The DA however would reserve its right not to vote on the Report.

Ms Malomane expressed support for the adoption of the Report.

Mr Zondi said that the Legacy Report “can't be a 100 perfect” . In his view the Report was an accurate reflection of the Committee's deliberations. He seconded the adoption of the Report.

The Chairperson said that the Legacy Report was duly adopted.

The Committee minutes of 11, 12 and 13 March 2024 were also considered and adopted.

Ms Malomane asked if the parliamentary staff could be given the opportunity to compile the minutes of today's meeting since the Committee still had time on hand.

Mr Mtiya said that would be possible but he would need time to consolidate all the inputs.

The Chairperson said the staff would need time for that and Ms Malomane's proposal would not work.

Mr Zondi said that the staff needed to be given time to collate the information on the scoring. This was vital as it would be sent to the Minister.

Ms Malomane withdrew her proposal.

The Chairperson said that democracy ruled. She did not want Ms Malomane to feel undermined but Members also respected the views of the secretariat.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting.