Department of Correctional Services Budget 2008/09: preparation

Meeting report

Department of Correctional Services Budget 2008/09
Two parliamentary researchers, Mr Mpho Mathabathe accompanied by Ms Nadia Dollie, took the Committee through the Budget. Some of the questions he raised about budget allocations were:
 
▪ R300 million had been set aside for staff at Kimberley Prison over the Medium Term Expenditure Framework. When would the R50 million assigned to 2007/08 be spent if there were less than two months left before the new financial year?
▪ The Security and Administration programme took 60% of the total DOCS budget.
▪ It was a concern that the Corrections programme had been reduced by 2.5% when the issue of repeat offenders was a key focus.
▪ The Development programme had been increased by the relatively small amount of 0.6%, yet offenders needed to leave prison with sufficient skills to sustain a life outside.
▪ In Programme 6, had the training set out in the 2007/08 Strategic Plan taken place and what steps was the Department taking to implement community-based sentencing?
▪ There was a decrease in the Budget.
▪ There should be a balance between the programmes, and more focus on the rehabilitation of offenders.

Ms Nadia Dollie reiterated that the percentage increase in the Budget was small, and in real terms was a decrease. All the background work had been done and the 2008/09 was to be the year of implementation, but the budget did not reflect this. This the Department should be asked how they were going to deliver in terms of their priorities, the government's priorities and the priorities set out in the State of the Nation Address (SONA).

The Chair thanked Mr Mathabathe for a well-researched document. He noted that the President had given all departments six months to fill their vacancies and he wondered if departments would be able to do this. The Committee should ask DCS this question on 11 March.

Ms W Ngwenya (ANC) thanked the researcher for the briefing document which had opened her eyes. As the ANC, they had a lot of work to do. There were a lot of questions they needed to ask the Department so they would need a lot of time for that meeting. The Chair agreed that they would interrogate the Department between 10 and 1pm on 11 March – and the Committee would need to do their homework prior to that.

Ms W Ngwenya proposed that they visit a centre in order to assess the problem of awaiting trial prisoners.

Ms L Chikunga (ANC) raised the point that old people, when released from prison, were not employable. The employability of such prisoners should be prioritised.

Mr E Xolo (ANC) agreed that the presentation had been very good. He asked for clarity on 'compensation'. Two days ago, the Commissioner had not been able to tell the Committee what the percentage increase in salary of the Department's employees was.

Rev L Tolo (ANC) disagreed that there was a shortage of nurses, nationally and internationally. There were nurses who could help. He liked Minister Manto Tshabalala Mshimang who supported African doctors – in the past someone had taught us that black was not the answer. He had visited Baviaanskloof Prison, and referred to an incident there where four people had been killed inside the hospital, but urged that the Committee should not be scared to visit prisons.

The Chair observed that at Pollsmoor, the Correctional Services staff used to do the work of nurses. Ordinary Correctional Services' officers gave inmates tablets and medicines, yet nurses came from college trained to do this job. He urged members to make a stand and not take a soft approach. The Committee were the lawmakers; they should report to Parliament what the Committee wanted the Department to do.

Ms Chikunga asked if the term 'university student' as used in the research document was a distinction made by the researcher or DCS, as she preferred the term 'tertiary'. In response, Mr Mathabathe said it was his language use – 'university' included colleges.

Mr Mathabathe referred to the 91% that went to employees' salaries, and asked the question: did this translate into officials getting extra pay or not? This question needed to be raised. Another important issue had been raised around employability. Why put old people in prisons if the emphasis was on rehabilitation? Why not use those facilities for juvenile offenders? How could money for training be decreased yet more funds be allocated for building Kimberley Prison? He had also struggled with this.

Ms Chikunga said that she wanted to ask the Department to unpack the words '100% access to comprehensive HIV/Aids programmes and services for offenders'.

The Chair observed that '100% access' was a very dangerous statement.

Ms Dollie distinguished between the R300 million used over the three-year medium-term expenditure framework and the allocation of R50 million for this year for the Kimberley Prison. The salary used for training DCS officials had decreased from two percent to one percent. It was surprising that the training budget had decreased – one would think that with the priorities of the White Paper, the training budget would increase not decrease.

The Chair asked for clarity on the R50 million for staffing.

Ms Dollie replied they should ask what the R50 million would be used for. If the Kimberley Correctional Centre would be opening in February 2009, would they train staff before the centre opened or would it be a rollover?
 
Rev Tolo asked whether other countries were using professional nurses and if the Committee could be informed about this.

Ms Chikunga noted that South Africa had its own legislation and health professionals acted within that legal framework. It was extremely wrong that people who were not trained were rendering health care in the DCS. Other countries did not have these three categories of nurses (staff, assistant and professional nurses). The Committee had been asking these questions for years and the Department was not providing answers.
 
The Chair agreed wholeheartedly.

Ms Chikunga asked if the researcher had checked the spending patterns for the previous year.

Mr Mathabathe said that he expected that an increase in the budget would be informed by a particular decision. Reasons would also have to be given if there was under-spending.

Ms Dollie thought it a good idea to ask the DCS for the Expenditure Report for each programme for 2007/08.

The Chair thought this a good point to start the 11 March meeting by asking what their spending had been in 2007/08. In the previous financial year, R200 million had been given back to Treasury. In each and every program they were to show what their spending was up till the present; perhaps they were under-spending. They always gave the Committee excuses, saying that it was too 'short notice'.

Noting time constraints, he said that the Committee would not finish their discussion on the research document that day and they therefore had homework. He reiterated that '100%' was a serious, dangerous commitment. He asked if the Secretary could change the venue for the 11 March meeting as it would be too small since all the programmes would attend.

The meeting was adjourned.