South African Development Partnership Agency: briefing by Department on International Relations & Cooperation
International Relations
13 September 2011
Chairperson: Mr T Magama (ANC)
Meeting Summary
The establishment of The South African Development Partnership Agency (SADPA) represented a major development in the architecture of South Africa’s foreign policy. The Department was looking for the Committee’s views on how
One of the limitations or shortcomings that the Department of International Relations and Cooperation had noted was that all the spheres of government had been involved in outbound developmental assistance but the work had not been coordinated between the three tiers of government. Also, there was no overall development cooperation policy. The Department had identified the need to plug in these gaps and SADPA provides the appropriate opportunity to address these coordination and policy gaps. By entering into this sphere of interstate relations, it did not necessarily transform
The Department had also performed a review of similar development partnership agencies in other countries Such as
SADPA needed systems and processes to engage in complex funding and financial procurement arrangements. These would be the responsibility of SADPA itself, and not DIRCO, because SADPA would have its own administrative capacity to manage its programmes, projects and finances. Just like the ARF, SADPA would be governed in accordance with the existing schedule 3A of the Constitution. The Minister would delegate the oversight responsibility to one of the Deputy Ministers and policy direction and oversight would be provided by DIRCO. The head of SADPA itself would be its accounting officer; the Director General of DIRCO would not be the accounting officer. SADPA would have to issue its own annual report and present it to Parliament. SADPA would be audited as an independent entity by the Auditor General.
Committee members raised questions as to why the Department sought to dissolve the ARF brand and establish SADPA now. Members asked questions of clarification as to how SADPA would help
Meeting report
Opening Remarks
The Chairperson noted the apologies from Committee Members Ms R Magau (ANC), Ms C September (ANC), Ms W Newoudt-Druchen (ANC), Mr E Sulliman (ANC) and Mr K Mubu (DA), all of whom could not attend for various reasons. He noted that there was a draft bill concerning the establishment of the South African Development Partnership Agency (SADPA)- it had not yet been formally introduced to the Committee. It was coincidental that the Committee would have a briefing while the process of the draft bill was underway. The briefing from the Department would be a preliminary briefing that had nothing to do with the formal processes of introducing the bill into Parliament.
The Chairperson invited Mr Mxolisi Nkosi, Deputy Director General: Africa Bilateral, Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO), to present the briefing.
Briefing by the Department on the establishment of SADPA
Mr Nkosi stated that the establishment of SADPA represented a major development in the architecture of
One of the limitations or shortcomings that DIRCO had noted was that all the spheres of government had been involved in outbound developmental assistance but the work had not been coordinated between the three tiers of government. Also, there was no overall development cooperation policy. DIRCO had identified the need to plug in these gaps and SADPA provided the appropriate opportunity to address these coordination and policy gaps. Development cooperation was an important instrument in promoting
By entering into this sphere of interstate relations, it did not necessarily transform
Early assessment work had been done with the National Treasury to manage all inbound development assistance. Treasury had the experience and capacity to manage the official development assistance that flowed into
The conceptual framework that DIRCO developed was approved by Cabinet in 2009. Essentially, Cabinet decided that SADPA needed to be an entity within DIRCO. It would be established in terms of the Public Service Act and would be staffed by a combination of diplomats and technical experts. Some attention still needed to be given to the financial arrangements and the task of establishing SADPA resided with the Minister of International Relations and Cooperation. Having looked at a number of elements, the Department was currently developing a model for the operationalisation of SADPA. The guiding principles were on the focus of integration, rather than initiating a new process, given that SADPA was the successor to the ARF and would be established through a bill that would come before the National Assembly and would repeal the existing ARF Act.
SADPA needed systems and processes to engage in complex funding and financial procurement arrangements. These would be the responsibility of SADPA itself, and not DIRCO, because SADPA would have its own administrative capacity to manage its programmes, projects and finances. The proposal was for the SADPA fund to retain the Schedule 3A status, which referred to the public entity status. Just like the ARF, SADPA would be governed in accordance with the existing schedule 3A of the Constitution. The Department hoped that the Committee would agree to repeal the ARF, which was a critical step to establishing the SADPA fund bill and setting up the Board of Trustees. This would ensure that SADPA was managed in accordance with accepted principles and standards of good governance financial management and procurement principles. SADPA would be established as the Government component for purposes of administration of the fund and would be a separate component within the Ministerial portfolio. The Minister would delegate the oversight responsibility to one of the Deputy Ministers and policy direction and oversight would be provided by DIRCO. The head of SADPA itself would be its accounting officer; the Director General of DIRCO would not be the accounting officer. SADPA would have to issue its own annual report and present it to Parliament. SADPA would be audited as an independent entity by the Auditor General, who would issue a report of his findings based on an assessment of SADPA’s use of public and other funds that were placed at its disposal for discharging its mandate. The Board of Trustees were to be appointed by the Minister, and a minimum of seven and maximum of 15 members that could be appointed.
Mr Shoayb Casoo, Chief Director of Intergovernmental Affairs, DIRCO, stated that the SADPA bill had three basic elements. The bill dealt with the establishment of the agency as a component of government under the Minister’s portfolio. The bill discussed the objectives, which were to coordinate and implement
Discussion
The Chairperson opened the floor for questions.
Mr B Holomisa (UDM) asked whether the ARF would be “done away with” all together. The ARF was a strong brand and was still needed. What was the position of the African Renaissance Institution? Was DIRCO changing it “just for the sake” of changing it, and would it not be more expensive to do so? What national interest was
Ms L Jacobus (ANC) asked what the current programmes were around the IBSA poverty alleviation fund.
Mr S Mokgalapa (DA) asked what would happen to the New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD) institutional arm of the ARF. Was the Department creating centres of soft power in
Mr M Booi (ANC) asked what DIRCO defined as development. What informed South
The Chairperson asked what would be the posture of SADPA. Would SADPA be a tool of foreign policy to advance
Mr Nkosi responded that there was a strong relationship between SADPA and the ARF. SADPA would be the successor to the ARF. The establishment of SADPA represented the next phase of
Mr Holomisa interjected with the question of why DIRCO did not “beef up” the ARF and what were the circumstances that led to the change from the ARF to SADPA? The Committee wanted to understand the rationale.
Mr Booi added that
Mr Nkosi replied that he was a “humble civil servant” so elements of Mr Booi’s question would better addressed at the appropriate level. He could only answer questions that were within his mandate as a civil servant.
Mr Nkosi reaffirmed that the concept of the ARF was rooted in
The IBSA poverty alleviation fund was a trilateral agreement between
Mr Holomisa interrupted and said that there were some areas where the Committee needed to engage the political head of the Department so that before it moved on to substantive issues, the issues of national interest could be clarified with the Minister. The establishment of SADPA would fit well if there was a white paper that articulated how
Mr Nkosi replied that there would be a symbiotic relationship between SADPA and NEPAD. SADPA would also strike strategic partnerships with institutions such as the African Development Bank, and the regional economic communities on the African continent. The relationship was complementary and it sought to reinforce the development agenda of the African continent.
The criteria to assess the countries that qualified for developmental assistance would be determined by the Board as well as the SADPA administration. Broadly speaking, SADPA would pursue projects that sought to promote democracy, good governance, capacity and institution building. About the modality, DIRCO had explored structures that were independent of the Department such as the Canadian, American, French and Swiss models. SADPA decided to go for a hybrid model that sought to retain SADPA within government and at the same time ensure that SADPA was unencumbered by the bureaucracy. DIRCO looked at a model that sought to balance between the two extremes.
SADPA would coordinate efforts of provincial and local authorities by establishing a forum that coordinated outbound development assistance and ensured that there was information sharing and that duplication of efforts was eliminated. In response to question of project consolidation, IBSA would continue to exist on its own, as it was an independent fund. But the hope was that the two institutions would complement each other.
The appointed members of the board would not receive any additional remuneration. The SADPA board was not a “typical corporate board”.
Regarding the role of the private sector, the Minister underscored the roles of non-state actors in the speech that she had delivered. These actors were free to make contributions in kind, so that SADPA could implement its programmes. Also the private sector was free to deploy experts from various fields.
The conceptual difference between a ‘donor country’ and a ‘development partner’ was that donor countries were traditionally developed, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries. For example,
The Chairperson thanked DIRCO for their presentation. The Committee would engage with the bill when it was formally tabled. Hopefully the Minister would be present to engage on the political issues surrounding the SADPA bill. The Committee had engaged with the establishment of SADPA in the past. He stated that the white paper on foreign policy was inextricably intertwined with the establishment of SADPA and they should be looked at in conjunction to one another an not as separate issues.
Mr Mogakapla asked whether it was a formal Committee resolution to see the Minister before the bill was tabled in Parliament.
The Chairperson stated that the technical difficulty with taking a formal resolution was that the Committee did not constitute a quorum. However the Committee would leave it with the Department to engage the Minister and the Chairperson would also extend an invitation to the Minister to attend a Committee meeting and find an appropriate time to engage on the issues surrounding the SADP bill.
The Chairperson closed the meeting.
Audio
Documents
Present
- We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting
Download as PDF
You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.
See detailed instructions for your browser here.