(Subcommittee) Central Drug Authority Board interviews Day 2

Meeting report

Central Drug Authority Board interviews

The Committee interviewed the following candidates in person:

Dr Gurunathen Kistnasamy

Mr Devon De Koker

Mr Thabo Morabe

Ms Christina Molefe

Ms Meisie Ramakhula

Ms Nomcebo Alice Dlamini

Ms Zanamuhla Khanyile

Mr Samasivan Pillay

The Chairperson asked the candidate to briefly tell the Members about him or herself, why he or she wanted to commit time and energy to serve on the CDA Board and what he or she would like to accomplish if appointed.

Question One
Ms B Masango (DA) said the Central Drug Authority was established by an Act of Parliament. Which Act is that and what does it seek to achieve?

Question Two
Ms Masango asked in your assessment, do you think that the CDA performs its mandate effectively or efficiently; if yes, how so? If not, what are the shortcomings? In your response you can highlight both with regards to its mandate in ensuring compliance, accountability, monitoring and development as well as the implementation of the National Drug Master Plan by national departments and provincial forums. How are you proposing to address these shortcomings?

Question Three
Ms L Arries (EFF) said the National Drug Master Plan 2019-2024 represents a multi-sectoral approach to create South Africa free from harm associated with drug use, misuse and abuse. The Plan observed national and international policies, plans and conventions that ensure respect and dignity for all people in South Africa. If you are appointed as a Board Member, you will be expected to implement the Authority’s mandate – share with us your understanding of the objectives of the National Drug Master Plan 2019-2024 and how you think the CDA should achieve them?

Question Four
Ms Arries said that, prior to the review of the National Drug Master Plan 2013-2017, a need to conduct an evaluation was prioritised to assess how it was implemented. Subsequently, the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation commissioned the evaluation of the National Drug Master Plan 2013-2017 implementation, in partnership with the Department of Social Development. The evaluation took place in August 2015 - January 2016. What were the key findings and recommendations of the evaluation of the National Drug Master Plan 2013-2017 implementation?

Question Five
Mr L Stock (ANC) asked how the candidate would ensure good governance is practiced by the Board if appointed.

Question Six
Ms D Christians (DA) asked about the key issues affecting young people, their families and communities regarding substance abuse and how the candidate would advise government to deal with these.

Questions Seven
Ms A Maleka (ANC) wanted to know how the candidate felt about the state of public rehabilitation centres in the country. In addition, are there challenges with access to public rehabilitation centres in South Africa? If so, what are those challenges and how would you advise the country to address those?

Question Eight
Ms Arries said that one of the challenges facing the country is the lack of comprehensive statistics on the prevalence of substance abuse. How can the CDA play a role in this regard?

Question Nine
Ms M Gillion (ANC) asked about the candidate's views on the Constitutional Court ruling on the decriminalisation of marijuana.

Alternatively, if the candidate had already expressed a view, she asked: You spoke about the legalisation of marijuana. If appointed to the CDA Board, what will you do if the view of the board on the personal use of this drug is overruling your view?

Question Ten
Ms Gillion said during the Covid-19 lockdown regulations were introduced by government, which led to the ban of the sale of alcohol and tobacco. How would you advice government to deal with the sale of alcohol during a pandemic in the future?

The Chairperson thanked the candidate for participating in this process and showing interest.

Committee’s Observations

The Chairperson said he was not disappointed with the conversations Members had with the candidates. There are candidates who say something for four minutes which others could say in one minute, but those who are speaking for four minutes might have something better to say than the one saying it in one minute. The system needs to cater for all these variances.

Ms Arries was slightly concerned about candidates who referred to notes to respond to questions. She was not certain if the Committee should allow candidates to refer to notes when answering questions. One would assume that candidates would come to the interview well prepared rather than looking for answers during the interview session.

Ms Masango said that the Committee did not discuss in the preparatory session as it was not anticipated that candidates would refer to notes. It seemed like an open book exam session. The candidates were not told beforehand whether this was not allowed.  

The Chairperson asked the parliamentary officials to check if there is a rule on this. There are people who prepare for interviews and sometimes they can outsmart the panel. Once they know the advert, they can deduce what questions may be asked.  

From his teaching background, he was not opposed to open book exam questions. He took the view that science should not be crammed. What you want is people demonstrating their understanding of the subject. You do not want their memory of facts but rather their understanding and knowledge of the subject. When people do not have access to books, what you are testing is their memory not their understanding of the subject. Personally, he would not have a problem with people referring to notes because the Committee is trying to ascertain the candidate’s understanding and knowledge.

Ms Arries said that the process should continue. If other candidates come with notes they should be allowed to ensure consistency in the process.

The Chairperson noted the comments and thanked Members for their time.

The meeting was adjourned.