Amendments to Military Veterans Act and Military Veterans Benefit Regulations; SITA support to DMV to cleanse database; Progress of Presidential Task Team on Military Veterans; with Deputy Minister

Meeting report

Amendment of Military Veterans Act and benefit regulations

Ms Celeste Jordaan, Deputy Director: Legal Services, Department of Military Veterans (DMV), said the purpose for the amendment to the Military Veterans Act was to remedy the ambiguities and disparities in the Act and address the challenges that arise from dispensing the section 5(1) benefits. The amendment to the Act was a necessity and critical due to the challenges that had been experienced in dispensing the benefits as provided for in section 5(1) of the Act. These challenges were the definition of a military veteran, the means test and the inclusion of dependants.

Throughout the amendment process, it was imperative that a comprehensive consultative process be embarked upon to ensure that all stakeholders were included in this process. The DMV had already finalised the internal consultative process. The Bill was circulated to all the recognised military veterans' associations on 25 March to obtain their inputs and comments. The Bill was circulated to government departments on April 6, and the DMV was still await inputs and comments. The closing date was 28 April.

The Presidential Task Team had established seven work-streams, of which one was the legislative work-stream.  This consisted of Mr Tsepe Motumi, Special Advisor to the Minister of Defence and Military Veterans; Lt Col K Mashego, Defence Force Legal Services; and Ms C Jordaan, Acting Director: Legal Services. The DMV was still awaiting a representative from the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development.

Once the Bill was presented to the cluster meetings, the timelines for further steps leading to the tabling in Parliament would be determined. However, the DMV was attempting to table it to Cabinet by July and Parliament by August. For a Bill to be tabled in Parliament, a legislative programme must be received and completed for this purpose. The Amendment Bill for the DMV had not been approved for tabling in 2021, but due to the urgency of the amendments and the critical factors that caused challenges in dispensing the benefits, it was important for the Amendment Bill to be tabled in 2021. A motivation had been prepared by Mr Motumi and submitted to the Minister of Defence and Military Veterans for further processing to the Leader of Government Business, indicating the reasons for the urgency in having the Amendment Bill tabled in 2021.

Discussion

Mr M Shelembe (DA) said he was concerned about how military veterans were consulted, because the Committee would not want to get complaints from military veterans claiming that they had not been involved in the process. He asked how many associations had been representing military veterans in the different provinces, and how they were invited to be part of the consultative process.

Ms A Beukes (ANC) said that one of the challenges referred to in the presentation was the inclusion of dependents, and she asked for a comment on why it was still a challenge. She also asked about the small interaction of stakeholders in the process, and wanted to know if there had been a process to include other stakeholders.

The Chairperson asked for clarity on the challenges that had been raised in the presentation. Would the percentages of progress be provided to the Committee so that they would shed more information? The reason for amending the Bill was necessitated by the definition of a military veteran, together with beneficiaries and dependants. He wanted to know what the challenge being faced by the Department was, since almost everything had been identified.

DMV's response

Ms Jordaan responded that formal letters had been sent, together with the Act, to all the associations through the South African Military Veterans Association (SAMVA). SAMVA had confirmed that they had made contact with all the associations, and that this had been done via emails. The same communication procedures would be followed in the follow-up.

Complaints had been received from different sources on who was to be included in the definition, as they had been excluded, and the Department was working on making sure that everyone was included in the definition. There had been scrutiny on checking the inclusion of dependants, because they did not qualify for benefits as military veterans. The percentage on the amendment was about 50% now, and it was difficult to give more information.

Lt Gen (Retd) Derrick Mgwebi, Acting Director-General, DMV, said that the definition needed to be viewed in a way that reflected the intention of the legislation. The intention was to cover everybody, and what needed to be done was to categorise the military veterans for benefits, because they were not all on the same level. The issue of the military skills development system was that the younger generation finished their training within two years, and they were not recruited by the defence and reserve force, which meant that they qualified as military veterans, but then was it the intention of the legislation to include them at a tender age. Some of these young people registered with the reserve force, and they were not supposed to benefit from the benefits of military veterans.

Mr Shelembe asked a follow up question. He wanted to know about the dependents, especially as to what happened in the case of polygamy, and what the current status was.

Lt Gen Mgwebe responded that it was a matter of the recognition of customary law in South Africa, and they had not yet come across such a scenario on the ground.

The Chairperson asked Mr Shelembe if he was satisfied with the response.

Mr Shelembe responded that he was satisfied, saying it would be better for the Department to be prepared for such a scenario so that when it happened, they knew what to do.

The Chairperson asked the Deputy Minister to give his input on the presentation.

Deputy Minister's comments

Mr Thabang Makwetla, Deputy Minister of Defence and Military Veterans, said that there was nothing much to add to the presentations, but to draw the attention of the Committee to the contents of the amendments so that they could be consolidated when the comments of other government departments were received. The contents would then be presented to the Committee, including to the issues that were raised by Members. The presentation was merely targeting the process, and content issues would be dealt with in the next stage and would reflect on how much work had been covered. At the moment, the percentage of the work covered could not be provided.

With regard to the involvement of military veterans, the South African Cape Corps was part of the process, and there were other groups that were also involved to ensure that all the angles were covered.

SITA support to DMV

Mr Luvuyo Keyise, Executive Caretaker, State Information Technology Agency (SITA), said SITA had entered into a business agreement with the DMV in 2012. The aim of the agreement was for it to offer mandatory services, as per the SITA Amendment Act of 2002. SITA provided all the technology for the DMV with regard to Information Technology Service Management (ITSM) and Aspect Telephony services. This included professional services to guide the DMV on how to make use of the technology and how to establish a call centre service aligned to the best practice frameworks. The Department was responsible for the management of their own service to their customers. All system and telephony-related support calls were reported via the SITA toll free number (0800 11 55 75).

The DMV had requested SITA to develop a credible, secure and reliable national Military Veterans database/system (e-DMV) in order to ensure efficient and effective service delivery. The e-DMV system consists of 14 e-Services to be developed -- e-Registrations and 13 e-Benefits, and integration with internal and external systems. The project was established in June 2017, but since then the project had experienced numerous challenges before it was put on hold in January 2019.

It was then resuscitated on 21 September 2020. SITA and the DMV had held a project kick-off session during September to resuscitate the project, a project team was allocated, new project timelines were developed, and the project scope was reaffirmed. In October, a follow-up workshop session was held to with all key stakeholders, and agreement was reached on the governance sign-off of user requirements, specification, technical solution design, project plans and timelines, and confirmation of technical resources. The project team had now established weekly governance meetings to track progress. 

The DMV would have a central digital system to keep all Infrastructure Delivery Management System (IDMS) records, and it would have the ability to communicate with beneficiaries online. A central source of data repository would be ensured. Only clean data would be migrated to the new solution, ensuring data integrity and accurate transactions. The Integrated Military Database System would be enhanced with intelligence by integrating with external systems and the implementation of the DMV's business process and rules. The DMV would have the ability to fully automate its business processes by establishing memorandums of understanding (MOUs) for data sharing with key partners. Maintenance of a credible and secure national military veteran’s database would be ensured.

Critical modules would be delivered first. Weekly project governance meetings between SITA and the DMV had been established. Subject matter experts were concurrently being engaged to fast track the solution development process.

SITA would invest in the development of the solution for DMV with an understanding that a service level agreement (SLA) would be in place post-solution to go live. Services would be Software as a Service (SaaS). SaaS referred to software that was centrally hosted at SITA, and was used on a subscription basis.

Discussion

The Chairperson invited Lt Gen Mgwebe to give a comment before Members could ask their questions, since the Department was facing some challenges.

Lt Gen Mgwebe said that a similar presentation had been made before 2018, where commitments and promises had been made. There had been a break from the DMV side, because they were of the view that there had been no progress in the process. The presentation, timeframes and promises sounded good, but there had been changes from SITA on the leadership side. The DMV was tied to SITA, and they were willing to work together to make sure that the programme was a success.

Mr Shelembe said that Members wanted to see delivery being made available to military veterans. While the presentation had been good, the issues affecting military veterans were not being resolved. He was concerned about the time it was taking for the issues to be resolved, and supported what had been said by Lt Gen Mgwebe on the promises not being fulfilled. He said the Committee would be happy when the promises were fulfilled.

The Chairperson was concerned about the input from Lt Gen Mgwebe, because it painted a picture that showed there were no tangibles from the process. The Committee was worried because presentations were always made, but the outputs were not visible. He said that military veterans took to the streets because of the slow pace of resolving issues, and the Department had been struggling to deal with them for some time now. The presentation was impressive on paper, but the fact that there was nothing on the ground to show how things had changed meant there was a possibility of problems in the future.

Response by SITA

Mr Keyise responded that he was worried by the statements made by Lt Gen Mgwebe, because the DMV had to account as to when they could provide a clean database to SITA so that the process could be commenced.  The system being developed for DMV was simple, and they would put more resources into the project, but only when a contract had been signed between the DMV and SITA, because it was risky to do work without a contract at the moment. SITA was prepared to come back and make presentations to the Committee on progress with the process, but all parties had to work together to see the process being completed, and SITA would make its resources available. If needed, it would update the Committee every quarter on the progress.

The Chairperson thanked Mr Keyisa for SITA's commitment to the process. He pleaded with Lt Gen Mgwebe and SITA to have a meeting so that they could iron out any outstanding issues between them so that they could make presentations. The process must be successful, and both parties must work together instead of pointing fingers at each other. The process could not be prolonged any further, because the military veterans were suffering as a result of the slow pace of process. He said the next presentation should be done by the two parties as one team, not as different teams.

Mr Shelembe was concerned about the relationship between SITA and the DMV. He asked if Lt Gen Mgwebe would provide the Committee with a written response on the amounts that had been paid to SITA, and why they were not happy with the service that had been provided, The Committee would then look at how much the process was going to cost the Department.

Lt Gen Mgwebe said that there were no challenges between the DMV and SITA. He did not have a problem with the presentation, but the history of what had happened needed to be explained, especially on the matter of deliverables. The DMV did not have a problem in moving forward working with SITA.

The Chairperson said that SITA and DMV should meet up and work together in order to resolve any outstanding issues so that they could have a good working relationship and make presentations to the Committee as one team on the progress of the process.

Presidential Task Team on military veterans' grievances

Lt Gen Mgwebi said that during the course of 2020, the Presidency became increasingly inundated with a number of complaints from the military veterans' community about the quality of the delivery of services from the DMV. A group of marchers styled as the "Liberation Struggle War Veterans" (LSWV) had also marched to the Union Buildings on 10 November last year and presented a memorandum of grievances to President Ramaphosa. In response, the President had called for a high level briefing on the plight of military veterans, where he was briefed on the existing support package offered to military veterans as well as areas where there may be gaps.

Subsequently, he had appointed Deputy President David Mabuza to lead a Presidential Task Team to investigate the affairs of military veterans. This was composed of the Acting Minister in the Presidency for Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation, Ms Khumbudzo Ntshavheni; the Minister of Defence and Military Veterans, Ms Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula; and the Deputy Minister of Defence and Military Veterans, Mr Thabang Makwetla. Their mandate was to engage fully with all structures of military veterans and to endeavour to find plausible and lasting solutions to their problems.

From the outset, the Presidential Task Team (PTT) had called for the participation of other line function ministries in the resolution of the grievances, where the resolution resided within the purview of departments such as of Home Affairs; Human Settlements, Water and Sanitation; National Treasury; Public Enterprises; Justice and Constitutional Development; Correctional Services; Rural Development and Land Reform; Social Development; Transport and Small Business Development.

The PTT had had continuous interactions with military veterans in a bid to resolve the issues since last November. It had committed to work with all spheres of government in accelerating the much needed service delivery. Subsequently, it had started undertaking provincial visits in order to fulfill its commitments. Since the start of the engagements with different Military Veterans' Associations, the PTT had employed a technical task team to establish work-streams for the implementation of the issues contained in the consensus document. A lot of work had been done, and this report covered the progress so far.

There was a need to have the Cabinet endorse the work of the PTT to avoid an adverse audit finding against the DMV by the Auditor General. Expenditure had been incurred with respect to the PTT’s work with the Liberation Struggle War Veterans. A Cabinet decision would assist in coordinating the work of the PTT in all the provinces.

The efforts of institutionalising the relationship between the DMV and the three spheres of government, including state-owned entities (SOEs), was on-going and was being led at a work-stream and sub-work-stream level. To date, MoUs had been concluded with the provincial governments of Gauteng and the Eastern Cape, as well as a number of SOEs. Provinces such as Gauteng and the Eastern Cape had already established military veterans' help desks, and had adopted programmes of action and policies that seek to prioritise service provisioning for veterans.

On the matter of education support, since the decision to uplift the moratorium on new applications for education support, the DMV had received and processed more than 2 500 applications. Payments of school fees and the reimbursement of fees that had been paid by the parent were on-going at an accelerated pace. The involvement and the support of the provincial governments had been identified as a critical success factor.

The database the verification and cleansing process was under way, led by the relevant work-stream. Military veterans' associations were observers for the verification of members. A meeting to finalise the terms of reference and the working schedule was planned for next week with all the role players, including the military veterans' associations.

The abolishment of the means test and disbursement of the benefits was linked to the process of amending the Military Veterans Act (Act no. 18 of 2011), as well as its regulations.

The DMV had been meeting with the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA), the Department of Defence and National Treasury. These parties had refined and confirmed the service delivery model of the Department, and had also proposed a functional structure. It was envisaged that the organisational redesign work would be completed by the end of the first quarter of 2021 for final consideration by the DPSA.

The provision of health care to dependents had not progressed as envisioned. This implementation was linked to the amendment of the Act and regulations.

A programme to employ 500 military veterans (MVs) to assist on COVID-19 interventions in schools was being implemented with the Department of Roads and Transport across the five regions of the Gauteng province, in which the MVs were being paid a stipend of R5 000 per month.

The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development had furnished the Office of the President with files of military veterans who had applied for Presidential pardons dating back to the era of the second democratic President of the Republic. Further, the LSWV had to submit their list of individuals who were eligible for a Presidential pardon, and the reasons why, as well as provide a list of individuals who should not be considered for a Presidential pardon, and the reasons why.

The delivery of MV's housing and the rescue of distressed mortgages was on-going under the current legislative and regulatory provisions. To date, the DMV, working with stakeholders, had delivered in excess of 1 700 houses nationally and had settled more than 200 distressed mortgage bonds. The modalities of an enhanced specification, including the provision of an 80 sqm house, would be detailed by a relevant work-stream. The DMV and the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure (DPWI) had engaged, and an inventory and status of the houses was being verified to confirm which houses might be available, and their condition.

There had been ongoing consultations with National Treasury and its agencies -- the Government Pensions Administration Agency (GPAA) and the Government Employees Pension Fund (GEPF) -- and the Department of Social Development and its agencies -- the South African Social Security Agency (SASSA) -- aimed at finalising the draft pension policy. Recently a workshop was held, and a follow-up meeting was also held on 8 April to test the modalities of the draft policy and its implementation, and to provide the DMV with a stronger case based on the experiences of these Departments. It had looked at the current forms of pensions that accrued to MVs, checking on the "pros and cons" of the draft integrated military veterans' pension policy for improvements. The costing scenarios exercise, as well as proposed service delivery model, including institutional arrangements, were also being discussed with the GPAA and National Treasury.

A decision was taken by the Council on Defence to augment the unemployment grant of R350 given to citizens, by R850 for military veterans, making the total receivable by the veterans R1 200. A total of 982 MVs were receiving payment. To date, about R5.6 million had been spent on the top up. 527 (54%) were from non-statutory forces, while 455 (46%) were statutory members. The PTT had directed that these military veterans must be considered for an amount of R1 200 by the DMV within budget. Subsequently the DMV had received 1 200 applications, 614 of which had been verified by the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF), GPAA and SASSA. The South African Revenue Service (SARS) had been engaged to do the final confirmations before the payment could be made.

The process of Amending the Military Veterans Act was in progress, with the support of the Department of Defence, the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, and National Treasury. The consultation process with military veterans' associations and state law advisers took place on 30 March, and further consultations were also planned to include external and internal stakeholders.

On-going engagements were being held with the Department of Sports, Arts and Culture (DSAC) and its agencies such as the South African Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA), the National Heritage Council (NHC) and Freedom Park. A draft MOU was in place and was expected to be signed off by the respective accounting officers, as well as the attendant implementation agreements with the DSAC agencies.

The vacancies of Director-General, two Deputy Directors-General and two Directors: Human Resources and Legal Services, had been advertised and the period for applications was closed. Other recently vacant positions had also been advertised.

A military veterans' sewing project, in partnership with Hensoldt was under way, with 73 veterans and dependents attending training at Gauteng City College. Other projects included the training of veterans in security and protection services in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN), a fashion design programme in Limpopo, a welding programme in Palm Ridge (Gauteng), artisan programmes in Mpumalanga, computer programmes in the Eastern Cape, and in the Western Cape, Belhar military veterans had been skilled in plumbing.

Discussion

Mr Shelembe appreciated the presentation, and said its information helped the Committee. He was satisfied with the work done in Gauteng, where the numbers were looking good, and the same programmes should be implemented in other provinces. He asked for clarity on the issue of working relationships between the three spheres of government, commenting that only local government was close to people on the ground, so they needed to work with municipalities to get better results. He wanted to know whether the municipalities were supportive, and if there was a possibility of accessing facilities for military veterans. He wanted to know the response that would be given to military veterans when they went seeking assistance at municipal offices.

Ms T Legwase (ANC) said that the initiative in Gauteng should be extended to other provinces. She asked if there was any progress on the allocation of houses. There was nothing happening in the North West province, and she was concerned because the presentation does not corroborate the actual scenario on the ground. She suggested that presentations should include breakdowns of the benefits being received by military veterans. She was concerned about the fact that only one province was receiving the amount of R5 000, and the other provinces were not part of this initiative.

Ms Beukes acknowledged that there had been some progress, but wanted to see the time frames of other provinces because the rural provinces had military veterans who were suffering, and in some areas they had to drive more than 150 km to visit a doctor, and this was not a good sign. She said the Presidential task team should look at the local offices. She was concerned about the time that was going to be taken to verify the funds to be paid to military veterans for Covid-19 relief, and asked for a comment on the matter.

DMV's response

Lt Gen Mgwebe said that the PTT had taken it upon themselves to engage with provincial governments so that the Premiers and Members of Executive Councils (MECs) should know about the process and give directives to assist military veterans. There had been a request that military veterans should be at least represented by two individuals, including the SAMVA, so that information could be shared and there was transparency in the process. The Premiers had indicated there were offices in the provinces that would assist military veterans.

The Department would be able to present a breakdown on the housing to the Committee in their next engagement, because they had the information on the benefits, and those who had received such benefits.

The DMV was assisting military veterans through outreach programmes, and had been approached to include the provincial governments so that one voice was heard when it came to the matters that involved veterans. The task team was travelling to North West during the course of the week to try and resolve issues in the province. They had also reached out to SARS for assistance, and the response of the members in North West would determine how long the consultation process would take.

The Chairperson said that it was good that the Department was working with the provincial governments. They should make sure that the treatment received in all the provinces was the same to avoid unnecessary revolt because of preferential treatment.

Adoption of minutes

The Committee's minutes of 11 and 12 May 2021 were adopted.

The meeting was adjourned.