International Relations and Cooperation BRRR

Meeting report

As the Chairperson was boarding a flight to attend a meeting with the Western Saharan delegation, he requested Mr Nkosi chair the meeting in case he loses network connection. He said the Committee content advisor will present the Committee BRRR Report and its recommendations for DIRCO. He Committee extended condolences to Mr Mpanza who had a bereavement in his family.

Mr Bergman said there have been a few times where the Democratic Alliance has been excluded from the meetings with Western Sahara and they would appreciate being included in the delegation in future. They would be willing to meet with both sides; Morocco and Western Sahara is high on the DA’s priorities. On behalf of DA, he extended condolences to the Mpanza family.

The Chairperson said he will ensure that all members get invited to these delegation meetings.

Budgetary Review and Recommendations Report (BRRR)
The Committee’s Content Advisor Ms Lineo Mosala, presented the BRRR to the Committee.

Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report 19 October 2022

Discussion
Mr W Faber (DA) said the Portfolio Committee consist of multiple political parties and when a Committee Report is presented, it should include the views of all committee members and not just the views of a few members. The report is easy and soft and not all the concerns raised are included in this report. He asked who drafted this report because this report is not a true reflection of all concerns raised by parties, including some raised by members of the ruling party. The audit outcomes are respected but he is concerned about the findings, it should concern the Committee and there is no consequence management at ARF and DIRCO. Ex-officials are still not being held accountable and this will continue; there are no real investigations. Investigations are not happening and the Committee is not getting outcomes on most of these cases.

In the Annual Report meeting, Members had raised that a forensic audit should be done at ARF and DIRCO but that has not been mentioned in the report. That is one of the most important recommendations made in that meeting. He asked why that recommendation is not in the report. Irregular expenditure at ARF is not being investigated and the ARF annual performance plan (APP) is not in line with SMART principles. This happens every year and nothing gets fixed. Cuba is a non-African country that receives funding from the ARF and that has not been included in the report. The report states the reason for funding to Cuba "is based on the long-standing respectable, cordial and political relationship the two countries share". That is not true and there is no political relationship between South Africa and Cuba; it is a relationship between the ANC and Cuba. When will this previous historical connection between the ANC movement and Cuba come to an end? South Africa gets nothing in return from Cuba and Committee members have asked before when will funding to Cuba stop. South Africa needs to focus on its people on the ground who are hungry and the ARF funding is not being used for that.

There has been irregular expenditure on the ICT network contract. There are two providers and he understands that one flows into the other but there are supply chain management problems; a report said there has been financial mistakes and these are continuing. If DIRCO supplies ICT tools to all embassies from one service provider, does that not open the gateway for corruption to happen again? This will also cause irregular expenditure in the next financial year. If these ICT tools are all coming from South Africa, how will they be serviced in other countries such as in China? These concerns of the Committee and not political parties are not even addressed in this report.

There has been no consequence management and the Committee has seen no outcomes on investigations, the report should take this on. The ARF reported that irregular expenditure from 2018, 2019 and 2020 has not been investigated – four years of no consequence management. It remains a concern that no investigations are happening on this. All these matters should be in the Portfolio Committee’s report and not just certain issues.

Mr D Bergman (DA) said he cannot believe members sit in meetings for hours to give input and this is what the outcome is. There is frustration because the Portfolio Committee is going nowhere. This is the problem – the same things are raised every year but when the report comes, it is never a true reflection of what was said and discussed. If the Committee wants to hide information, they can do it but the truth is right in front of it. The Committee has to act because it has more information than the general public. The Committee has to do its job and do far more than what the general public can do. Everyone in the Committee is fighting for a better DIRCO.

The ARF is a concern and the precedent it has set is a concern – funding should be for Africa but Cuba which is not on this continent gets funded. There is no country in Africa called Cuba. When there is flooding in KZN and there is no fiscal money to send to KZN but money is to be sent to Cuba, it makes a mockery of the Committee. The Committee talks about an African Renaissance Fund, not an African-American Renaissance Fund. He knows the ARF terms of reference and there is money that is wastefully expended or has unintended consequences that never ends up in the right avenues. It was not by mistake that he asked for a forensic audit. There must be a forensic investigation into the ARF for the last five years because funds are missing and there is misuse of funds. Auditor General South Africa (AGSA) works with the information given to them by the ARF and cannot investigate on an in-depth level. AGSA is trusted and Members asked that it do an in-depth forensic investigation of the African Renaissance Fund. The Democratic Alliance will not support this report if that is not included in this report.

Currently tourists are scared away because of the crime levels. South Africa is a few weeks away from being grey listed which will further hurt the economy. The Russia-Ukraine war is further hurting South Africa and there is a problem in Ethiopia that DIRCO is not addressing. There is huge loss of life happening in Ethiopia and the Committee should get together and put a resolution through to the UN to investigate what is happening in Ethiopia.

Everyone received the letter about what is happening in South African embassies in America and Committee members should be there finding out what is happening in New York, Los Angeles and Washington. Members should be at DIRCO finding out what is happening with the legalisation department with a six week delay that affects those needing this for jobs. There are many DIRCO officials in acting positions and that should be addressed.

When the Framework Document on South Africa’s National Interest was released, it was thrashed because DIRCO does not even stick to it. The Committee needs to agree on the basics and ensure what is reported to the Committee by DIRCO is correct. If the Committee cannot do its job of basic oversight, then why is this Committee even here and why are Members getting paid?

Virtual committee meetings must stop and should happen in person. There should be no tea parties and the Committee must stop talking about nonsensical agendas and talk about the running of DIRCO, the lives of people in Africa, people in SADC and bread and butter issues that affect South Africans and this continent. The Committee should get on planes and do oversight.

The DA will not support this report until a forensic investigation is included in it.

Ms T Msane (EFF) said the report is a clear indication why there was a change of chairpersons in August 2021. It was to derail the mandate and progress made by this Committee. It gives DIRCO leeway and makes the Committee lose all the progress made. The Committee is regressing – it is back to 2019 at the start of the Sixth Parliament when she first came to the Committee. This is evident by the report. This report says the Committee commends DIRCO and yet Members still have to refer to issues that have been raised since 2019. Members have always said DIRCO is failing and there is no consequence management and to date AGSA has said not enough has been done on consequence management. It is not enough that the former DG that was used as a scapegoat and fired. The report is not as fierce as it should be and does not address what DIRCO need to focus on. This report contradicts everything the Committee stands for. She agreed that it does not even represent what ANC members have contributed. Some of the issues raised by ANC members are not even in the report.

This report should be revised; it does not reflect the frustrations of Members. There is a huge problem with property management but there is no clear recommendation on it. The report does not cover what the Committee stands for.

Ms Msane said that AGSA found nothing wrong with funding Cuba. There have been many investigations into the squandering of ARF money and that did not include funding to Cuba. For the DA to say South Africa gets nothing out of Cuba – it is relations that are being built; international relations are being formed. Those Members cannot relate because only a few Members here were oppressed. Cuba came to their defence. Only a few Members had no healthcare when Cuba brought doctors to assist, and only a few Members can have a relationship with Cuba. Members need to get the facts straight. The current government was oppressed by white people and Cuba was able to assist the African continent as a whole for South Africans to get the freedom it enjoys today. Cuba assisted and helped those that were oppressed. The Committee cannot allow the abandonment of those who supported Africans when they were oppressed. There is squandering of money at ARF but AGSA found the Cuba funding was not part of that.

Mr M Chetty (DA) said the former Committee chairperson paid the price for the Committee's robust oversight. The axing of the former chair was a turning point for the benefit of officials who could continue their arrogant and total disregard for the Portfolio Committee and South Africans. It's clear that Portfolio Committee members who were in the discussions and deliberations were in a different meeting from what is contained in this document. Members were highly critical and to read a report that says Members are commending DIRCO is devoid of the truth.

He referred to the New York office accommodation finding and recommendation. The DIRCO CFO was asked to send a letter within seven days to the Chair about the New York rental agreement with the British Consulate. A week has lapsed and that letter has not been received. This shows the arrogance DIRCO has towards the Portfolio Committee.

On the recommendation that DIRCO submit a report on the implications of the decision to request National Treasury for condonation of the R118 million New York pilot project payment, there should be a timeframe for this. In fact DIRCO has already engaged National Treasury and received condonation. DIRCO does not need more than a week to submit that report to the Committee because they have it.

Ironically, the Committee is being told that BT Communications will provide services for another six months which will lead to further wasteful and fruitless expenditure in 2022/23. DIRCO's rationale is to safeguard against cyber-attacks yet the very same system has been exposed as having former employees on the system. It does not take a rocket scientist to know the Committee is being misled. This is beyond belief. He asked for a deadline for the BT Communications contract ending. When will the six months end?

On the consequence management recommendation, it is not the Minister that went out boldly to enforce consequence management. When she suspended and fired the former DG and CFO, that happened because of the pressure from the Committee that forced the Minister to take that action. The Minister herself has erred that she used the former DG as a scapegoat and suspended him when the main culprit was the CFO. This report makes it seems like the Minister acted on the matter, the Minister was forced to do this after pressure from this Committee. This is one of the reasons why the former Chairperson of the Committee was removed. The Committee must be very clear- in DIRCO it is the tail wagging the dog. Committee Members have tried to get oversight right and those that newly joined the Committee could not understand how is it that for the last ten years this Portfolio Committee was given the run-around. DIRCO can manipulate what they want and how they want it without any consequences.

Diplomats are being sent abroad and don’t have the necessary qualifications; people are being sent abroad to represent this country’s interest knowing that they don’t have the proper skills. This exposes the incompetence that DIRCO officials do not know how to handle financial issues but are being sent abroad to represent South Africa, this is something as simple as running a spaza shop. Those officials that are transferred abroad will only sign contracts with acknowledgement of debt for the renewal contract, he asked why must DIRCO wait until the next posting surely DIRCO’s human resource unit can do a one-pager and email it to all those officials requesting them to sign an acknowledgement of debt; that if upon the departure of their properties that DIRCO will reclaim those funds. There should be a timeframe for DIRCO to compile a report on all properties and leases and that should be given to the Committee within 30 days. He knows that DIRCO has a such report with them and just needs to send it to Members and all officials abroad must send an acknowledgement of debt immediately. So, when the Committee looks at next year’s AG report there will not be another R29 Million that is written off.

Mr T Mpanza (ANC) welcomed the well-written report by the content advisor which is a true reflection of the issues raised when the Committee interacted with AGSA and DIRCO’s Audit and Risk Committee. it was previously stated that the Portfolio Committee is very objective when it deals with matters and credit is given where it is due; Members criticise when needed and come up with constructive recommendations to assist DIRCO. The Committee’s mandate is not to fight with DIRCO or the executive but it is to assist DIRCO and work with the Department so that at the end of the day there is a better Department of International Relations and Cooperation that the Committee can be proud of. In doing this, Members will not nurse the feelings of DIRCO officials or the executive. Members are here to fulfil a mandate of ensuring issues in DIRCO are addressed.

Members must not play political marbles. Everyone comes from different political parties and far-opposing ideologies cannot be reconciled sometimes. This articulation of the removal of the chairperson is wrong. South Africa is coming from a very painful past where there was divide and rule and there was even the term of black-on-black violence. He appealed to the opposition in particular the DA not to play political games with this Committee and try and divide and rule. He can see what the DA is trying to do – there was nothing wrong with the former chair and there is also nothing wrong with the current chair. The issue of former and current chair is neither here nor there. The issue is oversight and that is the responsibility of the Committee. This must be corrected so this point on the current and former chair does not prevail as truth. It is far from the truth.

The Cuba / ARF matter was made clear by the AGSA – there was nothing untoward with the Cuba funding. The African Renaissance Fund is not only for African countries. It does focus on African countries but it includes a component of international relations. He fully agrees with Ms Msane. There are different funds in different countries focusing on different things. For example, USAID does not only support US or European countries - it supports all countries globally. For Members to reduce the ARF to focus only on Africa is misleading. Members must go and check what the fund was established for. There is nothing that warrants a forensic audit or investigation.

He welcomed constructive criticism from Members and the Committee should move in that direction. The report covers the issues and it will not help shooting the messenger by saying the report is poorly written and revised. Members must deal with DIRCO. The elephant in the room is DIRCO not doing what is required of it. Members must not be all over the place and chase everyone. That will confuse and make the Committee lose direction. The legacy that the Committee wants to leave will not be achieved. Members must engage on the report. He has engaged on the report and thinks the report captures exactly what was raised by Members. He said Members must enrich the report and not throw away the bath water with the baby. He is happy with the report and it should include amendments made by Members.

Mr Bergman clarified and said the DA has no problem with the current chair and Members can request a forensic audit. Requesting an ARF forensic audit has nothing to do with Cuba. Cuba is only one component of the audit. There are enough people within the Foreign Service that have said there should be a forensic audit at ARF and there have been two reports done by independent service providers submitted to two Ministers and which have never been seen by the Committee. DIRCO has not given a clear reason why these reports are not given to the Committee. These factors should be enough reason to request a forensic audit. And if it is not AGSA doing it, the Committee is within its rights to request an independent audit. It must be put in words in the report that Members request AGSA to do a forensic audit. If AGSA is unable or does not find enough reasons, the Committee calls for the Minister to take an independent forensic audit. It not about Cuba; it is about the ARF funding in general.

Ms B Swarts (ANC) welcomed the comprehensive BRRR and accepted the report with amendments. The Committee has asked DIRCO for a very long time to train managers and hire staff that are qualified to handle financial matters. This has been a longstanding issue and it impacts the audit outcomes. When this is raised with DIRCO they speak about their systems and policies that are in place but these have no impact. Nothing DIRCO said it has done has come to fruition.

The audit outcomes deal a lot with what the missions submit and how they compile and handle their financial statements. How officials get placed at missions has also been raised. Anyone at DIRCO can be placed in a senior position regardless of their skills. If you are making tea, you can get placed at a mission and work in supply chain management or with finances.

Ms Swarts said that it is like the Committee is starting from scratch with DIRCO. Until DIRCO shows the Committee it has a strategy in place that talks to skills, there will not be any improvement. DIRCO represents South Africa throughout the world. The DIRCO responses are just words and no action. DIRCO must still submit a report to the Portfolio Committee and outline which Portfolio Committee recommendations have been implemented and adequately addressed. Corporate service managers at missions have no skills and are supposed to deal with finances. What is DIRCO doing about this?

Ms Msane said the issues raised by Ms Swarts are exactly what Members have been saying that the change of the Chair was meant to derail and make this Committee start from scratch with DIRCO. Everything that has been raised by the Committee has not been addressed. Unfortunately, the true discussions of the Committee are not what will be tabled and adopted. What will be tabled in the BRRR does not cover everything raised and what has frustrated Members. The BRRR has not addressed the DIRCO properties, money being squandered and irregular contracts being extended. Thus, the report addresses none of the issues the Committee has raised before and this is why Members want the report to be amended. This report cannot say the Committee commended DIRCO's consequence management. It has never been said by the Committee because there has never been consequence management. To date, the property management unit is still run by the finance unit and the Committee has asked DIRCO to address this since 2019. The report that gets tabled in the National Assembly must include and reflect everyone's view in the Portfolio Committee. It might be said Members are playing politics and are politicians but the report must be a true reflection of what the Committee has raised.

Mr Mpanza said the report is a true reflection and if Members want to, they are welcome to say so as the report is not cast in stone. To say it is not a true reflection is untrue and he does not agree with that. He does not support the forensic audit suggestion as AGSA has stated it is not a problem. He moved for the adoption of the BRRR findings and recommendations and the content advisor can make amendments where need be that Members have raised. The report covers everything that has been raised by the Committee. It may not be written as Members want them to be captured. The content advisor cannot include and write everything that was said in the meeting as that report would not be able to be understood.

Mr Chetty said a lot of comments were made but he made specific recommendations and has asked for them to be included. He does not agree with the report. Mr Mpanza said this report is a true reflection but four other Members have disagreed with him and surely this must be taken into consideration. There is an ANC majority in the Committee but other parties have a right to place on record that this report is not a true reflection of what has been happening in Committee meetings. There are mistakes and they must be corrected. All matters must be included before Members approve the report.

Chairperson Mahumapelo remarked that he keeps losing connectivity and did not hear everything that was raised by Members. DIRCO spoke about a process for evaluating properties abroad with the objective of disposing some of them. He recommended that DIRCO submit a database on the specifics of all properties. The Chairperson lost connection and was inaudible

Acting Chairperson Nkosi asked the Committee Secretary to let him know he had been heard.

Mr Mpanza wanted to correct what Mr Chetty said. He moved for the adoption of the report with amendments. He did not say adoption as the report is. He even said the content advisor must write in Members' concerns.

Mr Bergman stated that Members who say others must not be political, become the most political. There must be a consensus and the DA will not be bullied into supporting this report. The DA will reserve its rights until it sees the final report with amendments, for it to change its position.

The Acting Chairperson said the report must broadly reflect what was discussed in last week’s meeting. There has been a specific request for amendments which will not change the content of the report. On the ARF, Members do not agree but what the Auditor General has reported will be reflected in the report. The Committee will request an impact assessment of the ARF projects which was agreed upon broadly by the Committee last week. The ARF matter and all matters flagged will be monitored by the Committee through the audit management letter and audit action plan. This should be done robustly and the DG must take responsibility for doing so. On the repeat audit findings, the Committee needs an engagement with the DG and Minister to check what is being done on that and the repeat recommendations. There needs to be an active way of monitoring. The Committee will not cast aspersions on current and past chairpersons of the Portfolio Committee and their capacity to do oversight and provide leadership.

Ms Msane said no one was casting aspersions; it was an opinion raised that the change in the chair has led to this report.

The Acting Chairperson said the opinion is noted. He asked if the Chairperson could be reached.

The Committee secretariat replied that they could not reach the Chairperson.

Mr Mpanza moved for the BRRR to be adopted with amendments

Mr X Nqola (ANC) seconded.

Ms Msane asked for the EFF’s rejection of the BRRR to be noted.

Mr Bergman asked that the DA’s reservation be noted.

Rev Meshoe asked that the ACDP’s reservation be noted

Meeting adjourned.