ID Campaign and Legislation; Sita on IT Support: briefing

Meeting report

HOME AFFAIRS PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
11 November 2003
ID CAMPAIGN AND LEGISLATION; SITA ON IT SUPPORT: BRIEFING

Chairperson: Mr H P Chauke

Relevant Documents
Provincial Study Tour Report on North-West Province
Alteration of Sex Description and Sex Status Bill [B37B-2003]
Select Committee on Social Services Report on Alteration of Sex Description and Sex Status Bill
Films and Publications Amendment Bill [B61-2003]
Internet Service Providers Association presentation
South African Citizenship Amendment Bill [B55-2003]
State Information Technology Agency (SITA) presentation

SUMMARY
The Director General, Department of Home Affairs presented the successes, failures and challenges of the ID campaign in relation to the voters registration which took place on the weekend of 8, 9 November 2003. The ID campaign had largely been a success. Home Affairs had been expected to roll out IDs to ensure that citizens who were eligible to vote were able to do so.

The amendments to the Alteration of Sex Description and Sex Status Bill were presented to the Committee as adopted by the NCOP. The Film and Publications Amendment Bill amendments and the South African Citizenship Amendment Bill was discussed.

SITA briefed the Committee on their role and relationship with the department of Home Affairs in regards to IT service. This was a result of the lack of information technology within Home Affairs offices nationally, provincially and locally. The relationship between Home Affairs and SITA was clarified.

MINUTES
ID Document - Department of Home Affairs
Mr B P Gilder (Director General of Home Affairs) stated that M D Mamabolo (Director Identity Documents) would do the main presentation. The ID campaign had been successful. He pointed out that for the Home Affairs department the ID campaign was ongoing although voter registration had occurred. The statistics showed that 1.7 million new IDs were issued with 1.1 million applications had been received for reissues. As of 10 November 2003 2.2 million ID books had not been collected. The backlog of uncollected and undelivered ID books based on statistics from three weeks ago showed that there had been a reduction from 300 000 to 100 000 through the use of provincial, local, the Independent Electoral Commission and other key players to find the owners of IDs.

Mr Mamabolo (Director Identity Documents) said that although the campaign had been a success there were various challenges. The department had been faced with the predicament of the late arrival of application forms because applications collected by mobile units had to be put through a check and balance system which was time consuming. Another issue was the application for two IDs by the use of different names or birth dates. The aim of this was not clear but the department was trying to deal with the issues. On a positive note the report from head office was that the turnaround time of eight weeks had been reduced to the target of six weeks to receive an ID. There had been a problem with public awareness because the individual in charge of the communications strategy of the department was on suspension. In the limited time another person was appointed which seemed to be working well. The Department had received an increase of funding for R30 million for the campaign. The funding had been received late therefore the Department had not used big posters and advertisements. Eleven public radio stations had been included to assist in the campaign for the collection of IDs. The Department had agreed to waive the fees for TICs and photographs.

As part of the campaign Home Affairs offices remained open for the same period of time as IEC offices. However the offices had been generally quiet. The distribution of IDs used radio stations and a project with the South African postal service. This had been used in areas where addresses were available. Rural areas were highlighted as role players in the task team project. There were still serious problems with Kwa-Zulu Natal and the Eastern Cape and the assistance of the Committee was needed. The plans and programs of the task team had included all key players regarding collection and distribution. It had been discovered that not all key players had been participating therefore there had been many uncollected IDs. The Department hoped to deal with the issues of applications being sent to head office with wrong fingerprints or insufficient data by the end of the week. The status of IDs was also being looked at because currently IDs could only be stored at the provincial office for one year. This had been extended to 18 months but there were still IDs that were two years old which was mainly the case in the Eastern Cape. The issue of the payment of photographers had been dealt with and it seemed to be working well.

Discussion
Mr Chauke requested that in future Home Affairs provided written submissions instead of oral ones alone.

Mr S R Pillay (NNP) said that although the presentation had been good he was still not satisfied. Specifically in the Eastern Cape on the provincial visits they found many staff intimidated because the photographers had not been paid. What steps had been taken to deal with this issue? He pointed out that in Pietermaritzburg they had found similar ongoing intimidation. What was the department doing about forged IDs and what steps had been taken to ensure that forged IDs were not being used?

Mr Mamabolo said that problems of the payment of photographers had been highlighted. There had been a continued misunderstanding but that up to date it had been sorted out. The issue of photographers had been a national problem because the department had naively required the photographers to have bank accounts instead of focusing on vendors being able to deliver the service.

Mr Gilder admitted that he was concerned to hear about the problems of photographers because it was issue that had plagued the department from the beginning of the campaign because of the bureaucratic processes. A management decision had been taken to disperse cash to provincial offices to pay the photographers direct and it seemed to be working well. He asked the committee to share other instances where they had come across this. In relation to forged IDs it was a difficult issue to deal with. He explained that as one part of the turnaround strategy the department was working on making it impossible to forge IDs. However current practice was that the current nature of IDs made it possible for a good forgery to be used. He repeated that there were strategies in place for the future where it would be difficult and impossible to use forged IDs.

Prince N E Zulu (IFP) asked what magic the Department used to turnaround the situation at home affairs because the Committee had been unhappy with the performance of the department for a long time. How did the department solicit the support from councillors and traditional leaders? He pointed out that in his province there was a belief that traditional leaders and councillors should not distribute IDs because it was the function of Home Affairs to distribute.

Mr Chauke remarked that the key of the success of the campaign was that all the stakeholders had been involved. He pointed out that in the case of KZN one person had taken over Home Affairs instead of including all the key stakeholders in the discussions. There were still many problems but that as partners of Home Affairs everyone had to help with finding solutions. He said that if the Department had conducted the ID campaign alone it would not have been such a success. It was clear that the success of the campaign was because it had been driven by the Committee. The intervention in the campaign had been good together with the co-operation of the Department.

Mr P M Mathebe (ANC) asked about limited personnel distributing IDs. He explained that in the Limpopo Province there had been one official responsible for the distribution of IDs. It was a disturbing situation because the official could not leave the IDs at the different stations because he had to physically distribute them. He said that a memo should be sent out that public representatives could be of help to officials.

Mr Chauke agreed and said that officials should be encouraged to work with all identified stakeholders.

Mr K W Morwamoche (ANC) asked about the R30 million that the Department had received . He asked if that R30 million would be used to increase computerisation in the rural areas. He enquired about the feeling of funded staff.

Mr Chauke ruled that the computerisation issue would be dealt with by SITA as that was their area and mandate.

Mr Morwamoche asked a final question about the extensive time that Home Affairs took to fix mistakes made by the Department.

Mr Chauke asked the DG to deliver a report on funded staff and to respond to the mistakes made by Home Affairs.

Mr Gilder pointed out that he was responsible for the lack of a written report by Mr Mamabolo. He said that in future it would be dealt with more effectively. He said that what had enabled the turnaround was thorough planning and persistence of Members of Parliament, Committees, governing bodies and the like. On the issue of the delivery of IDs there had been pressure to give uncollected IDs to councillors and Members of parliament. Although the department was meant to take full responsibility for distribution there was a clause that allowed the Director General to devolve the distribution of IDs to other organs of state. This was an approach that the department had not agreed to take. There had been a misunderstanding about the R30 million. This amount had been an addition from the national fiscus. The Department had asked for R60 million but they had received R15 million. They had managed to get an additional R30 million that was not for computerisation but just for the ID campaign. On the issue of funded posts 370 posts had been filled. In order to speed up the process provincial bodies had been mandated to fill the posts. The Department had a target to fill the remaining posts and additional posts before the end of the financial year.

Mr Mamabolo said that the slowness of the rectification of mistakes was attributed to process still being a manual one. Changes that needed to be made involved the manual process of going back to original data to ensure relevant data. The problem was two fold because Home Affairs and individuals made mistakes. The Department had to be very specific but because the system was manual there were documents all over the country. Birth certificates needed to be computerised to speed up the process.

Mr Chauke said that this was a question of time. At what point would this happen because the storage of records was very problematic. He used Market Street as an example. He asked what the plan was and he hoped that SITA would be helpful in this. He asked Mr Mamabolo about IDs being sent to the wrong places which had been raised with head office.

Mr Mamabolo said that this was an area that continued to have mishaps. Home Affairs was a national office and people did not deal with movement correctly because one had to apply to have ones ID sent to another address.

Mr Chauke explained that he had misunderstood the question. He said that the question referred to the mix up of similar names. He recommended that that Mr Mamabolo must look into the issue instead of responding. It was agreed that if there were any other questions they would be forwarded to the department.

Mr Mathebe asked about the stakeholders.

Mr Chauke said that the project had been launched in KZN where there were 29 traditional leaders. There were still worries in KZN that traditional leaders could do the work of Home Affairs. The issue was at the point it would be expanded. How long would it go on because the devolvement of power required a change in legislation.

Mr Gilder explained that the project of traditional leaders was an attempt to try and develop a consistent approach. The understanding of the legislation was that the DG through the other organs of state could do the job of Home Affairs under the supervision of the DG. There was a strong co-operation of provincial, local and key stakeholders and the department was using that.

Mr Chauke reminded the Department to get the message to the provinces that the campaign was ongoing. He asked the department to look at the issue of security because it was common to hear that a South African ID was the easiest to get.

Alteration of Sex Description and Sex Status Bill
Mr Gilder introduced Advocate K R Malatji (Chief Director Legal Services) to deal with the bills.

Advocate K R Malatji (Chief Director Legal Services) pointed out that Mr S Mogotsi (Director Legal Services) would present the amendments.

Mr S Mogotsi (Director Legal Services) said that the Alteration of Sex Description and Sex Status Bill (ASDSSB) had been deliberated on by the Portfolio Committee and adopted by the NCOP therefore was it necessary to go through them. The amendments were a result of the public hearings held by the Committee. He said that the amendments had been deliberated upon extensively by the Committee and they just had to be adopted by the committee.

Mr Chauke ruled that Mr Mogotsi should recap the amendments for the Committee.

Select Committee on Social Services Report on Alteration of Sex Description and Sex Status Bill
Mr Mogotsi summarised the amendments which dealt with issues like the exclusions of intersexuals and the focus on transsexuals, expanded definitions of words such as gender formations and medical practitioner and included definitions of words such as sexual characteristics. These were based on the public hearings held by the Portfolio Committee. See presentation attached.

Discussion
Advocate O Kellner (Chief State Advisor) said that the presentation had captured the discussion and the mandate. He pointed out that the amendments from the NCOP were based on the Portfolio Committee and the process was at a stage where the committee needed to adopt them.

Mr Pillay (NNP) asked for an explanation regarding the appeal process on (4) (1) which gave the applicant 14 days to appeal to the Minister if an application was rejected. He asked if it was realistic to get help in 14 days. He asked why it was not 21 days.

Mr Chauke reminded Mr Pillay that it was an issue that he brought up with Mr Mogotsi.

Mr Malatji explained that the reason behind the 14 day period was that the period normally given was 14 days because it was an in house process. It was not a process that required a lawyer because it was not a formal meeting. He said that the 14 day period was there to purely indicate any disagreement. This time frame was not cast in stone and 21 days would be acceptable.

Mr Mathebe indicated that he did not understand because if an application was rejected and applicant would need assistance to structure and appeal.

Mr Chauke said that the Committee was bringing up an issue that had already been dealt with.

Mr Mathebe explained that he was responding to Mr Malatji because an applicant would need legal assistance to structure an appeal.

Mr Chauke asked for a concrete suggestion.

Mr Mathebe suggested 21 days

Mr Chauke ruled that if members wanted 21 days the suggestion would be taken. He said that after the amendments had been printed as part of the Bill the Committee would then move to adopt the bill. This period would give members a chance to look at the amendments in detail because they had been read to them.

Mr Pillay was pleased with the successful conclusion. What were the Acts mentioned in relation to the definition of medical practitioner were.

Mr Chauke pointed out that it was the responsibility of members to read up on the Acts then bring up issues. He ruled that the committee would move to adopt the bill after it had been printed in its correct form.

Mr Mathebe asked whether an applicant could take the issue to court if the Minister turned down the appeal.

Mr Mogotsi explained that it was quasi-judicial therefore the applicant could take the matter to court.

Mr Chauke repeated that the Bill would be adopted in its correct form with the included issues from the public hearings. Mr Mogotsi apologised for the lack of a written report.

Mr Chauke expressed deep displeasure at the lack of a written report and refused to have the presentation.

Mr Mogotsi explained that he was reading the amendments as they stood.

Mr Chauke stressed that Mr Malatji and Mr Mogotsi had to improve their act when it came to presentations to the committee. He told Mr Mogotsi to go ahead.

Films and Publications Amendment Bill [B61-2003]
Mr Mogotsi dealt with the provision of child pornography through the Internet based on the problems facing the police sector in securing convictions for possession of child pornography. The amendments defined a total ban for child pornography. See Internet Service Providers Association presentation attached.

Discussion
Mr Pillay pointed out that the amendments dealt with Internet providers and not individuals. He asked what would happen if an individual perused child pornographic material in an Internet Café. What would happen to the shop owner and how did the Department envisage this working.

Mr Malatji said that the framing of the clauses made many people responsible. It included distributors and any other person who might have knowledge that an offence was being carried out which would include a shop owner. It was the responsibility of the shop owner.

Mr Chauke asked if the amendments were advocating for a total ban of child pornography.

Mr Malatji confirmed this.

Mr Chauke observed that it brought responsibility to ordinary people like parents. He was interested to know what would be said in the public hearings.

Mr Pillay asked the department to look at the aspect of Internet shop owners. He mandated Mr Mogotsi to look at what other mechanisms could be put in place because the Bill referred to providers and not shop owners. He said that the department should work on it and then report back to the committee.

Mr Chauke said that the sole holder of access was Telkom and that Telkom had a responsibility to report as soon as they realised an offence was taking place.

Mr Mathebe asked about those guilty of offences and the report of knowledge on suspicion. On the issue of suspicion what would happen if the suspicion is incorrect the person could be sued? The Department had to look into that issue.

Mr Chauke explained that this was a report that had to be taken to study groups for discussions. Public hearings were to be held on the 18^th and the Committee still had time to deliberate the amendments at a later stage.

South African Citizenship Amendment Bill
Mr Mogotsi dealt with the 1995 bill and said that the amendments were an attempt to bring the Bill in line with Section 20 of the Constitution which said that no citizen would be deprived of citizenship as far as dual citizenship was concerned. The amendment imposed penalties on the use of foreign citizenship within South African boundaries. He pointed out that this bill was going to cause a lot of debate. Please refer to presentation.

Discussion
Mr Chauke asked who would debate.

Mr Mogotsi said that it would be at the public hearings

Mr Morwamoche requested that there should be no more verbal submissions.

Mr Chauke agreed. He said that Home Affairs was meant to provide a service to the people. Therefore he asked SITA to outline a clear way forward in the relationship between themselves and Home Affairs. He stated that some Home Affairs offices had no technology and operated under extreme dire circumstances. The Committee wanted to see a clear working relationship between Home Affairs and SITA to deal with these issues. SITA was providing a service to Home Affairs which was their biggest client.

State Information Technology Agency (SITA) Presentation
Mr M Radebe (Group Executive) outlined the guiding principles of SITA, the IT House Values, the corporate structure, Services rendered, projects outside SITA domain, DG's vision of an ideal home affairs and how SITA could assist with that. See presentation attached.

Discussion
Mr Morwamoche asked about the vision to use Lindela as a pilot site. Secondly he asked why service points, entry points and mobile not being computerised were not mentioned in the presentation.

Mr Chauke agreed that a very serious issue was the lack of computerisation in mobile units. He pointed out that he did not pick up the relationship between Home Affairs and SITA which had collapsed. How had SITA become involved? Was the presentation the new relationship and what was the relationship before? The new DG of Home Affairs had a plan and had SITA come in and where was it starting from? HANIS had been in place for a couple of years but it was not working. How was SITA going to help?

Mr P M Sibande (ANC) said that on paper SITA looked marvellous but in practice what was on the table was not convincing. The study tour around South Africa revealed a dire situation therefore what was the role of SITA in assisting?

Mr Pillay asked when the last IT audit was done and whether SITA had the capacity to conduct it and did SITA have the capacity to take on HANIS. On the basis of the Master System Plan how long would the evaluation take and did SITA have the capacity for that?

Prince Zulu asked whether the DG would provide other alternatives if HANIS was in place.

Mr Chauke asked what role the person deployed to Home Affairs from SITA played. Was there a programme at that level.

Mr Gilder said that the Department had reviewed technology in the Department and a strategy for technology was a strong factor. He stressed that the committee could not blame SITA for the IT problems of the department. The problems that had been identified by the Committee's provincial visits were related primarily to a lack of funding to computerise all the offices. There was a plan in the works because an IT system was wanted but there was no money.

Mr Chauke stressed that on the issue of the budget a presentation would be made to national treasury. Thereafter the budget would come to the Committee which would then pass the budget. If the DG was saying that there was no money then the Department did not budget for IT. He said that the last budget did not have money but this new budget had money.

Mr Gilder explained that he was saying that the Department was under resourced. They had been given less than they asked for. He had been trying to put the discussion into context. The Committee was concerned about the computerisation of offices and computerisation and connectivity was SITA's problem. The critical challenge was the connection between all the offices. It was difficult to answer the relationship between SITA and Home Affairs before five months ago. The relationship had been summarised as slow delivery, lack of delivery with systems basically crashing. Under new systems the new CEO of SITA and DG of Home Affairs had been working very close together. The DG indicated the three thrusts of IT strategy for Home Affairs - it was described as an IT revolution because they were overthrowing the old system. The first thrust was the aim to have a single database for all Home Affairs staff to deal with. This database would have all South African citizens and foreigners on one system. Currently there were little databases all over the country which allowed for the manipulation of the system. The second thrust was an Integrative Client Consul where all client details would be on the computer. With this system the advantages would be better, quicker, more secure for the client and less corruption. With this system up and running it would take 48 hours to issue and ID.

The third thrusts include quick wins like the Lindela pilot site which would be implemented in the new financial year. Treasury had also already agreed to fund 67 fully computerised mobile units which would give clients in the rural areas a more efficient system. The system for Lindela and refugee centres would improve vastly and repeat illegals would reduce. A big maternity clinic would be chosen to register births immediately on computer to introduce the system. The public service had large IT sections managed collaboratively with SITA thus the relationship should be collaboratively controlled because the issue of the relationship had to be worked on.

Mr Chauke asked for a response from SITA. What was happening with the person who was deployed to Home Affairs from SITA?

Mr Mandla Motshweni (Client Interface Manager) said that he welcomed that the DG had involved SITA at a strategic level. He pointed out that the relationship had been rocky and that it had not been at a strategic level. Under the previous relationship the issues had been dealt with at an explosive level and not at a strategic plan level. The new relationship was an excellent way in finding the capacity needed for Home Affairs. SITA had just completed a MSP for the Department of Public Enterprise. A MSP would take about 3 months to complete and look at IT capacity and assets. A MSP would provide a road map and a budget for the department. On the issue of the capacity of HANIS, this was difficult to predict. He did not know the contractual obligations of HANIS with the current suppliers. He pointed out that joint capacity was needed.

Mr Chauke brought up a final issue of the status of Home Affairs offices and security. The vision of the DG that would show the direction of the Home Affairs needed to include these issues. He suggested that at the end of the meeting that the Committee give the department and SITA three months to meet on certain issues and then report back on these small things. He also suggested that the DG of Home Affairs and Public Works would be invited to look at office space. SITA provided computers but not office space. All the stakeholders needed to be brought together for offices (public works), computers (SITA) and money (Treasury). The planning in the department needed to improve because there was no proper planning. All the issues such as late bills and refugees could be addressed through a proper working relationship with SITA because ordinary citizens were suffering due to the standard of service delivery.

Mr Pillay proposed that the HANIS issue be resolved through the Department and SITA depending on whether an IT audit could be done and secondly the planning of a training program of Home Affairs officials being put together by SITA.

Mr Morwamoche asked for the reason that DG did not budget for IT and how it would be dealt with.

Mr Gilder asked for the opportunity to present his turnaround strategy to the Committee because it would give the Committee a clearer understanding of where the department was heading. He asked the Committee to call on public works because there were issues there. The presentation would give clarity on the role of SITA to HANIS and the planning of the department. The department had set up IT rejuvenation programs which was managed by a board that SITA sat on and project teams where again SITA was represented. He pointed out that external consultants were an issue that his department was also dealing with. He discussed the budget and said that that the department was not getting the R3.1 billion they asked for. They would be getting R2.4 billion instead of R1.9 billion. Currently there was an IT rejuvenation costing project and the relocation of funds to start projects now. IT had currently been budgeted for.

Mr Chauke said that the Committee had some influence with Treasury so they would assist the Department there. The Committee agreed that they would invite Home Affairs and Public Works to a meeting. The Committee also agreed to give Home Affairs and SITA time to work on new relationships. There would be a report back in February 2004. That would be the way forward.

Prince Zulu reminded the Committee that a provision should be made for the DG to present his vision for Home Affairs.

Mr Chauke indicated that a provision had been made.

Meeting was adjourned.