Department Public Service and Administration: Report back on 2013 Strategic Planning Workshop and budget review process

Meeting report

Department of Public Service and Administration: Report back on 2013 Strategic Planning Workshop and budget review process
The Chairperson noted an apology from the Minister of Public Service and Administration, but was concerned that the Deputy Minister was also absent without having forwarded an apology, and noted that the proper procedure showing due respect for Parliament should be followed. She also acknowledged having received a letter from the Public Service Commission (PSC) that noted it would be unable to attend this meeting.

She noted that the purpose of the meeting was to get a report-back on the matters that the Committee had raised during the budgetary review and recommendation report (BRRR) process, and the 2013 Strategic Planning Workshop and address such.

Mr Khumbula Ndaba, Acting Director General, Department of Public Service and Administration, expressed apology for the absence of some officials which he attributed to disruption in flights. He noted that he would report back on a number of issues relating to the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA or the Department), in particular information on human resources and financial expenditure, and on ICT in the public sector.

DPSA noted that it had made substantial progress on the Integrated Financial Management System (IFMS), as set out more fully in the attached document, noting the roles of the Department, the National Treasury, State Information Technology Agency (SITA) in the financing and implementation.

The expenditure of the Department was outlined and he took Members through it.

He also tabled slides, and explained them, on the human resources and employment schemes, management of disciplinary in the public sector, budgeting and tenders, the Batho Pele principles and how they were applied, projects embarked upon and their respective state of progress. The international financial commitments were also described.

In this year, in addition to what it had done in 2012/13, the DPSA would be working on full implementation of the Service Delivery Improvement Plan (SDIP) across government, with a view to institutionalising it and there would be evaluation along with implementation.

The community development workers (CDW) was another area of focus, and the public participation efforts and interventions were set out.

Finally, the DPSA tabled slides (see attached presentation) of its expenditure for the 2012/13 year.

Discussion
A number of questions were posed by the various Members of the Committee. Where answers were given, they are recorded. However, part-way through the meeting, the Chairperson had to draw the attention f the DPSA representatives to the shortage of time, and asked for a brief summary on some of the issues, stating also that a more detailed written response should be given.

The Acting Director General agreed that any questions not answered in the meeting would be answered in writing.

Community Development Workers
Ms J Maluleke (ANC) questioned the Department on the issue of Community Development Workers. She noted that this had been an ongoing matter since 2003, but as yet the Committee had not been given any precise details on where they would be based and how it would be implemented, and she also pointed out that the Committee needed to know the time frames.

Mr D du Toit (DA) also referred to the Community Development Workers, noting that the system of supervision had been a major problem. He asked if there was any clear policy or procedure to address it. On page 26, he took note of the initiative of public participation, which he felt must be guided by some document, and he requested to have a look at it.

Mr E Nyekemba (ANC) also asked about the relationship of the Department with the CDWs, as some were seen to be working at the provincial level. He enquired if the DPSA could throw any light on the problems and challenges they were facing, and how it would intend to assist.

Mr L Ramatlakane (COPE) also commented on the problems around implementation of the CDW programme, and asked about any policy directives and institutional arrangements.

The DPSA representatives responded that the master plan would be reviewed as the priorities had recently changed. This would be looked into during  2014. Also to be addressed were the issues around the location as well as functionality, and the DPSA would be looking closely into the contributions to poverty alleviation, HIV/AIDS, Early Childhood Development, food security and other matters.

In relation to the public participation draft document, he noted that although he did not have this available at the meeting, it would shortly be made available to the Committee.

Disability
Ms Maluleke noted that the President had again emphasised the importance on reaching the targets for employment of the disabled within the public service, as well as the DPSA itself, and said that she thought it was a major challenge. She was concerned that there did not appear to be sufficient plans to combat the problem.

Mr S Marais (DA) said that he did not find the percentage of disabled in employment acceptable, pointing out that there were far more suitably qualified and suitable disabled people who could well take up jobs.

The Departmental representative responded that the DPSA was working very hard to try to achieve the disability targets and quotas. It was looking proactively into what was the hindrance to reaching them, and it had entered into an alliance with Disabled People of South Africa, reaching out to that organisation to try to find mutual beneficial ways. Those who were disabled and employed within the DPSA were well-catered for. The intention was to attract and retain more disabled people. He reiterated that there were clear intentions to reach the quotas in this year.  
Mr D Du Toit (DA) pointed out the errors in numbering of the presentation.

He then asked a number of short questions, as follows:

- On page 6, he referred to SITA and noted the uncertainty as to cost and how the project would work. He sought clarity on this as well as the technical support and life cycle that would be involved.
- On page 11, there was mention of SITA getting an implementation partner and he raised concern about it.
- He asked about time frames in relation to the contract mentioned on page 8, and whether this ran for three, four or five years
- He noted that no time frame for the Learning Commission to commence was mentioned.
- In relation to page 10, he enquired if the slide was referring to software as well as hardware. He further pointed out that the cost had already been incurred, yet the presentation was talking of getting Cabinet’s approval. He said that this was clearly the wrong way around.
- In relation to page 18, he asked why the budget was not 100% instead of the 82.7%.

The Department’s representatives answered that the 82.7% was a reference to overall expenditure on all operations from the branch. Variances were due to vacancy rates and working rates.

-Mr du Toit commented, in relation to page 33, bullet point 4, that the Department appeared to be behind targets and had not effected its plans.
- He asked what would happen if the public did not buy into plans, for whatever reasons, and whether, in this event, what the Department had outlined would be abandoned. He cautioned that the Department should tread carefully.
- He raised concern on the consultancy report and asked who would take responsibility if anything went wrong, asking for a full explanation.

Mr Marais also spoke to the consultancy issue, asking whether the amount quoted was for the Department or for the whole civil service, and how this might differ from the previous year’s accounts. He asked in which area the Department was using consultancy services, as this was not stated.

The Department’s representative responded that the figure related to the DPSA. In the previous year, the amount spent was R21 million, and in this year, it was R17 million this year. The consultancy work included research on geographical accessibility in the metropolitan areas, done by Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) and another piece of work done by LLRM. There was also a consultancy contract on SMSes.

Mr du Toit, with reference to the statistic on page 41, asked if there was any reason why there were uneven vacancies.

Mr Marais acknowledged the efforts of the Acting DG, and said that he appreciated the depth of responsibility and difficulties that fell on him.

Mr Marais wanted details on the following:

- The various roles and responsibilities, as presented on page 6, and the relationship, between the DPSA, SITA. National Treasury, and other departments, in relation to signing of contracts and procurements. He wanted to know who bore the ultimate responsibility.  
- More details were requested on what was outlined in slide 9 and a report-back, including whether the project had been successful and whether more work was still needed.
- He also sought more detail on the effect of the programmes referred to in slides 19 and 20. He also enquired if there was a reward offered for participation, or any sanctions for failing to participate.
- The relationship between national departments was set out on page 23, but it was only 27.27% reached. He thought that not only was this very low compared to the provinces but was “appalling”. He felt that there was a dire need for better coordination with national departments, before extending this out also to provinces.
- In relation to employment, he wanted to know what the DPSA did to create it, and feedback and controls, all of which would help the DPSA to assess compliance.
- He enquired as to the objective of involvement and foreign financial commitment, and asked if there were any valuable returns from the involvement, and what the comparative figures were for financial input and returns.
- Mr Marais complimented the DPSA on having made progress on the unfunded vacancies, but sought clarity on what would be happening in the new financial year.
- He asked for a comparison of spending, particularly indicating any areas of under-spend and what the impact of this had been on the business plan. He wanted to know, overall, the value for money achieved by the expenditure. He suggested that, as far as possible, spending should be curtailed.

Mr Nyekemba appreciated the effort of the Department, and said it was useful to receive this report now, to avoid piling up too much work later.

He asked the following questions:
- How the DPSA was implementing employment equity
- What the results were of the public service negotiations in the previous year, noting that it was particularly important to isolate long-term issues, especially in relation to the housing scheme, and attach time frames to these.

Ms M Mohale (ANC) re-emphasised the need for public servants to be accorded decent housing, and said that it was appalling that so many were still living in poor conditions

Service Delivery
Mr Nyekemba had a reservation, in relation to the percentage attributed to the national Department in the Service Delivery Improvement Plan, because the various departments were not listed according to performance. Each department should be rated on its own, to show which was performing and which was not. These figures seemed to indicate that none of the departments were performing well.

Ms M Mohale (ANC) also spoke to the SDIP, bemoaning the lack of action to meet real delivery needs. She too pointed out that it was not just a case of meeting paper targets, but ensuring that real delivery took place.

Mr Marais also pointed out that, in relation to compliance with schemes, there was a need to clarify the “compliance rate” and the “delivery rate”. There was more to compliance than merely “ticking the boxes”. The purpose of the projects must be achieved.

The Acting Director General explained that the SIDP was generally put in place for three years. Feedbacks would be obtained, analysed and worked on. The Department was now in a new cycle, and was actually collating the reports now. It would make them known once finalised, along with a compliance and impact analysis. An ongoing past challenge had always been the non-accountability for impacts.

He reported that operation of the module was being done by Public Administration Leadership and Management Academy (PALAMA), but the policy was set by the Department.

Ms Mohale spoke to the issue of discipline, and wondered if DPSA had the capacity to implement what was set out, or if this was something that would be deployed out to another third party. She noted that there were a number of outstanding disciplinary issues.

Batho Pele
Ms Mohale noted that the DPSA intended to implement Batho Pele principles and asked how organised labour would assist the government, as she thought that the attitude of some public servants needed to be changed.

Mr Ramatlakane asked if any survey had been done yet to address attitudinal problem.

Mr Ramatlakane commented on the Integrated Financial Management System and doubts as to the cost. He referred to the uncertainties as set out for the module and wanted to know what exactly the challenges on this were.

Mr Ramatlakane took note of the improvement on expenditure, but still wanted to know, in the areas where there was under expenditure, what had not been achieved.

Mr Marais asked if the Chief Financial Officer could give some more details on the budget.

The Department’s representative  briefly responded to some issues. In relation to the interest, he explained that this was related to hiring photocopying machines in the Department. In relation to PALAMA, the use of reserve funds was being mooted to launch the school. The spending figures were not yet available, but would be passed on to the Committee when they were finalised.

Mr Ramatlakane noted the President’s directives on the filling of posts within set timeframes and asked if this issue was being resolved. When the Committee last spoke with the Public Service Commission, the set timeframes were still far from being achieved.

Mr J Williams (ANC) wanted to know more about the abolition of unfunded vacancies. With reference to Limpopo, he sought to how people were being affected.

The Chairperson sought clarification on the idea of the Anti-corruption bureau, as well as the PALAMA School and how the Department was working to accommodate it in the allocation budget.

A Departmental representative spoke about the establishment of the Public Administration Leadership and Management Academy (PALAMA) and said that the blueprint had already been discussed with the Committee. The necessary plans for the school had already been adhered to, and presented to the committee. The Minister had appointed a Committee to work with PALAMA to ensure better delivery. However, the lack of a draft report from the Committee had not allowed for the PALAMA adequately respond to some questions, but these should have been covered by the presentation. She noted that a further update would be given to Cabinet in June.

The Acting Director General noted that, in regard to the anti-corruption Bureau, a team was already on board and the scheme was part of the budget and vote of the Department. A revised structure was already in place.

The Chairperson clarified the issue on the draft report, saying that it was scanty at the moment and there was a need to work on some of the issues still, before it went out, but it was hoped that this would be attended to shortly.

The Chairperson implored the Department to work on the issues and keep open lines of communication. There were several issues that would need to be ironed out at other meetings.

The meeting was adjourned.