Festive Season Road Safety Plan; ACSA Non-Attendance; DoT Q2 2022/23 Performance; with Deputy Minister

Meeting report

ACSA Non-Attendance

The Chairperson said last week he received yet another request for postponement from the Airport Company South Africa (ACSA) which was supposed to appear before the Committee the previous week. This was the third time ACSA asked for a postponement, which according to him is a sign that they did not take the Committee seriously. ACSA said that it would be willing to join the meeting virtually at another time. The Chairperson told the Chair of ACSA that he did not take this lightly as the entity had no authority in determining how and when they meet with the Committee but rather it was the Committee that determined these rules. Over the weekend, the Committee attended public hearings, during which the Chairperson consulted some colleagues on this matter which resulted in the decision that ACSA would be subpoenaed to appear before the Committee. However, after careful consideration and seeing that the Committee would be attending more public hearings over the weekend; he suggested the Committee meet with ACSA then which would be on 5 December. This would be tiresome as the Committee had many obligations to attend to in a short space of time. The Committee would be working the entire weekend and on Monday go to ACSA premises to see them in their own suggested venue seeing that they have failed on numerous occasions to appear before the Committee. While at ACSA premises, the Committee would have a walk around to see all the things ACSA was supposed to present before the Committee which they have failed to do so.

The Chairperson added that the Committee would not be able to deal with agenda item number two and with the acceptance of the Committee members that item be moved to 5 December.

Mr C Hunsinger (DA) acknowledged the Chairperson’s effort to compromise but it was slightly more serious. This seriousness should relate to conveying a message of the parliamentary Committee on Transport in relation to these entities. There was a particular request to see ACSA on matters that were specified from the Committee’s side which was made clear on what would be discussed. This was done in expectancy of dealing with these matters in September. Again, it was postponed to October which the Committee accepted and yet again they postponed appearing before the Committee today. This was not the appropriate manner to deal with the Committee and he thought that this was a very important occasion where the Committee should send a message about the serious role and function of the portfolio Committee in relation to these entities. Should the Committee allow and accept ACSA’s request, this behaviour would be repetitive in dealing with the portfolio Committee and therefore requested the Committee reconsider and summon ACSA to appear before them.

Mr Hunsinger acknowledged that the Committee was at the end of the parliamentary year and that summoning ACSA to appear before the Committee may only take place the following year. The Committee should convey a clear message not only to ACSA but to all other entities. He thought the Committee should take this hash line that it did not work on when the entity was available but rather that when the Committee requested to engage, that should be taken seriously. The Committee had taken reasonable steps and been very fair, but they had a Constitutional responsibility in terms of the relationship, standing authority and position that the portfolio Committee had in relation to the entities. He asked that the Committee summon ACSA for them to know the seriousness of dealing with the Committee.

Ms M Ramadwa (ANC) understood what Mr Hunsinger said but thought that the Committee would have time for an oversight visit to ACSA premises while in Gauteng. She questioned what made ACSA not appear before the Committee. She was of the view that they are hiding something and that going to their premises while in Gauteng would allow the Committee members to do an oversight visit and then subpoena them in January after seeing all the issues that have been complained about. That was her submission.

The Chairperson asked that this matter be concluded at the end of the meeting to not delay all the other presentations, however, Mr Mabhena said he could not wait that long and was given the opportunity to make his submission.

Mr T Mabhena (DA) said he was glad that the Deputy Minister (DM) was in the meeting because thought that the line was very blurred. They could not have a State-owned entity (SOE) that behaved like it was optional to appear and account before the Committee. The first time ACSA was asked to appear before the Committee, they gave what he felt was a “lousy excuse” that the Group CEO is overseas. At the time, it was accepted as some of the issues were not within the programme of the Committee and they were able to accommodate them because maybe the overseas trip was planned before the incidents that led to them being asked to appear before the Committee. The second time they had to appear before the Committee, which was on 12 October; again they did not appear. Reasons were given to justify their absence, there was an issue with their board Chair. Again today they are not here. He said one thing that the Committee should not do, with so many entities within the Department of Transport that they oversee, is to be seen as being lenient to one entity; it would give them problems. Because the issue was in the interest of the public ACSA must account before the Committee which was a structure that represented the shareholder which was the people of South Africa that voted them in. ACSA continues to undermine the Committee. The previous Committee was described as a lame-duck Committee in a book. There was no way this Committee would be characterised in that manner. As colleagues, they agreed that ACSA would be subpoenaed to ensure they appeared before the Committee. There was no way an entity invited to appear before the Committee should be begged and chased around to do so. They have postponed three times. What does that say about the Committee? They are the ones following up on an entity that was supposed to voluntarily come when invited. His submission was that they subpoena them, and still attend the Gauteng oversight at ACSA over the weekend. That was not an issue. But it remained that ACSA had to be subpoenaed to send a strong message to all other entities across the board that they would not continue to undermine the Committee. ACSA was supposed to appear before the Committee when Mr Zwane (ANC) was still here. They had postponed those meetings and have done it twice to the Chairperson. He was not sure if the Chairperson wanted that to be part of his legacy, where an entity undermined him as the Chairperson of the Committee. He thought they had a unanimous decision that they subpoena ACSA to appear before the Committee because Ms Ramadwa, Mr Hunsinger and himself agreed to that submission. He flagged that having the meeting on ACSA premises takes away the transparency from the public; “PMG is here. Even some journalists are here and able to follow”. Going there would mean the Committee would be in some sort of in-Committee meeting.  “Here media is allowed to come”. Removing the meeting from the physical seating of Parliament would remove it from the public’s interest. He repeated that the Committee could continue with the planned oversight visit but still subpoena them. He believed that ACSA wanted to kick the issues out so that by the time they appeared before the Committee, they would have dealt with the mess they created in that corrupt tender, saying they had fixed everything. The Committee should subpoena them and failure to appear should result in legal steps to send a strong and stern message to all entities that the Committee would not be undermined thank you.

The Chairperson thanked the members for their views. All points had been registered very clearly. The matter was yet to be concluded but moved later in the meeting agenda so that a proper decision could be made.

The Chairperson said that one thing should be clear: the Committee would not be undermined but anybody. The Committee would do its job without fear or favour.

The Chairperson said he would allow the Deputy Minister and her team to give remarks on this matter before they moved on to the presentation by the department.

Before moving on she said the agenda the Department had was ordered differently from the one the Chairperson spoke on earlier in the meeting.

Mr Mabhena also said he had a different agenda.

The Chairperson asked Ms Carelse, the Committee Secretary, to clear that misunderstanding. She clarified the matter and gave the correct dates of when the updated programme was sent to Committee members and the Department.

The Chairperson apologised for this miscommunication. He handed over to the Deputy Minister.

Ms Sindisiwe Chikunga, Deputy Minister (DM), thanked the Chairperson for giving them this opportunity before starting their presentation. She apologised for the Minister’s absence as he was attending the Standing Committee on Public Accounts (SCOPA) meeting. The Deputy Minister said they were not aware that the Committee was finding it difficult getting ACSA to appear before it. Had they known, they would have offered to assist the Committee to ensure ACSA appeared to account. If the Committee wanted assistance in having ACSA appear before them whether in Gauteng or in Parliament, the Department was willing to ensure that happened. The Department was not aware of these difficulties and apologised because they were accountable for everything ACSA did.

Department of Transport (DoT) presentation on the Festive Season Road Safety Plan

Deputy Minister Chikunga said last time they attended the meeting they introduced the Deputy Director General (DDG) and their 365 days road safety programme for this festive season with this being the time people are travelling home from tertiary institutions, work, and schools etc. The Department noted a number of accidents that have happened where many people have been injured which meant it had to heighten its awareness campaigns and other road safety measures to prevent more accidents on the roads.

Mr Zakhele Gilbert Thwala, Deputy Director General: Civil Aviation, DoT, requested that the Department’s Executive Road Safety Manager from the agency led the presentation.

Mr Thabiso Ndebele, Executive Road Safety Manager, Stakeholder Relations, and Marketing, Road Traffic Management Corporation (RTMC) said the presentation contained several aspects that involved other stakeholders including provincial transport departments and is supported by Senior Superintended Boon and the Communications Officer.

Characteristics of festive season

Why the 2022/23 proposed road safety festive season plan was different? He said that slide 5 was an indication that festivities had begun. Firstly, the 2022 Qatar World Cup had begun, which cut into the normal 16 December festivities. This was because soccer by nature was a social sport, and the Department expected that night-time driving and alcohol consumption would increase during the months of November and December and football viewing was executed in groups. He said other factors included that the majority of employees had excess money due to 13th cheques; there were Christmas parties and celebrations for year-end closure and other general festivities. The season further experienced national school closures which increases travel on provincial and national routes; holidaymakers, migrants from other provinces/countries as well as travellers for economic reasons all travel in and out of various provinces in masses, at the same time thereby increasing the risk of fatalities. This period was exposed to high alcohol consumption rates because of the holiday and festive mood. This extended to increased road fatality incidents and crime. Over and above these crimes, drunken driving offences increased drastically due to the high rate of alcohol abuse. All major routes become extremely busy than normal during this period. With this being the first time in 3 years that the country would be having an open festive after Covid-19 regulations, this meant there was a need to have longer education, communication, and law enforcement interventions compared to the normal 42-day road safety campaigns.

Challenges that existed

Mr Thwala said another dynamic that existed was the fact that airline prices had increased. This meant more cars would be on the road. The inclement weather causing extreme rainfalls led to increased road crashes.

• Public transport safety came under scrutiny in recent times, and the number of head-on collisions that occurred recently
• Drivers and taxi operators not wearing seatbelts
• As of 31 August 2022 – the year was 1.5% worse compared to 2019 (pre-COVID19) and 3.5% worse vs 2021
• Heavy vehicles repeatedly involved in crashes leaving behind a trail of death

He said that RTMC was hosting a webinar on road safety to focus on truck crashes are well. In the current economic climate, many cars were not well maintained or serviced as regularly as they should. The Department would be focused on that matter as well. Another concern was that the average age of persons dying on the road in the last festive season was between the ages 35-39 years therefore the use of social media hashtags would be key. The focus would also be on drinking and driving as well as speeding and pedestrian safety.

• Pedestrians constitute the majority of road deaths in South Africa.
• They depend on walking as their primary mode of transport to access services and public transport.  This is impacted by the increasing population year on year and as a result, a lot of informal settlements are mushrooming. 
• Normally, these informal settlements are not developed and lack basic services and infrastructure forcing residents to cross different roads at places that are not safe to do so.
• A contribution of 32% for the period 2019/2020 was recorded for fatal crashes involving pedestrians and 30% for 2020/2021 which shows a slight decrease of 2%.

Reasons for high pedestrian fatalities

• Non-usage of pedestrian bridges due to criminal activities at such bridges
• Many roads are not designed for pedestrian usage, with features such as sidewalks and pedestrian crossings and/or fences are often non-existent.
• Unsafe crossing of roads – jaywalking
• Due to a lack of public transport in some areas, people walk for long distances to reach buses or taxis.
• Public Transport picked passengers up and drop them off at non-designated areas. This action caused jaywalking which is a very unsafe pedestrian habit.
• Passengers were picked up and dropped off when traffic posed a serious threat to their safety. They became pedestrians the moment they leave the vehicle.
• Distracted walking can be defined as anything from walking while texting, tweeting, playing games on the phone, talking, or using headphones.
• Texting and walking influence your pace of walking as well as your balance.

A brief overview of crashes & fatalities over the festive season period of 2019-2021

• The fatal crashes decreased by 11% from 1 362 during 2019/20 to 1 209 in 2020/21, whilst the number of fatalities decreased by 10% from 1 616 during the festive period 2019/21 to 1 451 during the festive period 2020/21.
• With the exception of Mpumalanga Province, all other Provinces recorded a decrease.
• The most affected road user group during the festive period 2020/21 were Pedestrians at 41%, Passengers at 32% and Drivers at 27%

Objectives of the festive season plan

• To reduce the number of road traffic crashes, injuries and fatalities which are prevalent during the Festive Season
• To achieve the 12% reduction in fatalities (to realise the Ministerial target of 25% by the year 2024)
• To enhance the overall quality of road traffic services provision and, in particular, ensure safety, security, order, discipline and mobility on the roads
• To enhance Cooperative governance within all spheres of government

The 2022/23 Festive Season approach will be different in the following manner

• Phased communication throughout from 20 November 2022 to 12 January 2023
• The focus is on specific challenges during the Festive Season namely:
• Head-on collisions – linked to impatience & moving violations
• Lack of seatbelt adherence – linked with a culture of adherence, and the inability of passengers to use seatbelts on public transport vehicles
• Single vehicles overturning – as a result of impaired driving and at times, too much speed for the conditions
• Pedestrian Safety - during the last weeks of December
• Taxi rank interventions, with specific attention to long-distance taxis
• Awareness interventions at malls (Education & Awareness Exhibitions), Filling Stations on National routes
• Fatigue management at roadblocks
• Weighbridge interventions directed at freight driver wellness
• Hazardous locations - roadside interventions
• Roadblocks (documents verification for public transport & impounding)
• Faith-based gatherings Educational Awareness Activations

In closing, Mr Thwala said that road safety was everyone’s responsibility, not only that of law enforcement. Road safety educators and campaigners such as the Phuza weekend campaign would be encouraging voluntary compliance in their Awareness Activations. Partnerships with entities such as SAB and Santaco would be vital in pushing the message of safe driving. Working together with everyone could stabilise and reduce road deaths not only during the festive season period but throughout the other months.

(See Presentation)

Discussion

Mr Hunsinger asked what the specific plans are to manage pedestrian fatality with the limited manpower. He appreciated the focus on taking care of vehicles because they were the first point of departure for many.

Mr Hunsinger asked what the Department was doing on an urgent and permanent basis to deal with truck drivers. He was encouraged that focus was also being geared towards younger drivers given the data of the average driver. The use of social media in driving this message was good. With many of the measures being new and Mr Thwala using the word “try”, what was done around getting pilot projects started so that after a period of 4-5 years the Department and Committee would know what works?

He asked what capacity shortages there were in terms of resources, and staff that are not available.

Mr Hunsinger wished the Department well and hoped that the report back in January would be positive.

Mr Mabhena said it was the first time he saw the Phuza weekend campaign and was not sure how effective it was. This was because in the past the Department had some effective campaigns with the most outstanding one being the Arrive Alive Campaign which has been a household safety campaign around transport. It was especially effective around the Easter holiday or anytime there would be increased volumes on the road. He asked where the Phuza weekend campaign was mostly driven. Was it in the media, social media? He mentioned a particular campaign the department ran where it scattered coffins along the road where car crashes had happened, which was attached to the Arrive Alive campaign. How effective was that campaign? Did the Department have any data that informed that type of campaign? The campaign seemed a bit aggressive and very graphic. How did they navigate families with young children driving past those intersections and had to explain to their children what was happening?

The presentation mentioned that part of the stakeholders included Santaco. What was the nature of this relationship in relation to that campaign? In the past, there was a Driver of the Year Award, what happened to that initiative? Taxi drivers hardly wear seatbelts, what programmes are there aimed specifically at Santaco especially with them accounting for 60% of the passengers on the road?

Mr Mabhena asked about the roadworthiness of the traffic department’s own fleet, how many of those were roadworthy?

On the 2023 traffic trainer intake, many young people applied, when will they get a response? It was said that they would be called by the end of November. What was the plan around communication?

There are many high-risk roads across the country. Some have limited traffic and police officers, with limited communication between them. For example, the R573, getting into KwaMhlanga, only when one had driven for some time do they see police or traffic officer but that too was limited. There was no visible law enforcement where it mattered. What was being done about this?

Ms Ramadwa said she had only three questions as the other issues had been covered by her colleagues. First, she asked about the issue of pedestrian fatalities that was raised in the informative presentation given by the Department. How was pedestrian fatality data gathered? She hoped that they had data for 2022 and where these fatalities happened. What was the Department’s plan in those areas? Were those areas prioritised according to the data that was collected where those fatalities happened; as the department spoke about awareness campaigns?

Second, she noted the Department spoke about role players but did not hear it mention SANRAL. This was because some of the national roads had potholes and it was known that some accidents happened because of those potholes. She gave an example of the road between Leeudoringstad and Musina where there were many potholes. That was a national road, people travel from Gauteng and everywhere going to Zimbabwe and other countries via that national road N1 between Leeudoringstad and Musina. What will be done to fix those?

Third, she raised the issue of border gates. Every year the Beitbridge border gate had extremely long queues. What were the Department’s plans to cut those long queues?

The Chairperson thanked the members and said he would allow responses from the team through the Deputy Minister. He added that many were comments, maybe the Department would take them as comments and if they felt the need to answer specific ones, they may without limiting their answers. He gave an example that the border gate matter would not be in the Department’s jurisdiction to respond to as that was a Home Affairs issue.

He opened the floor for the Department to respond and said if members had follow-up questions, he would allow that and that would be the end of the discussion.

Mr Ndebele explained that the road behaviour culture in the country was atrocious and sometimes a reflection of people’s frustration and gave an example of a person leaving a beer bottle at the traffic lights showing their disrespect for the road. The country’s rehabilitation would be a long road. The question of what initiatives the Department had done about pedestrians was that there have been multiple programmes created in multiple provinces. The examples he gave included activations that focused on road safety talks for pedestrians as they needed to comprehend the dangers of what they were doing. These activations had to be fun or people would not attend. The activations so far focused on conducting road safety talks and going into communities to talk to children as well. There were other stakeholders the Department worked with that started campaigns on drinking and walking. He gave an example of Thembisa, Ivory Park and Kliptown; areas that had people crossing roads when intoxicated had rangers who assisted people who were drunk or elderly to cross the road and were paid. Those were the programmes they were currently working on and would be back in January to report back on how effective they were. Campaigns had to be age-targeted. He assured the Committee members that at least 95% of young people have checked their WhatsApp and Tik Tok conversations and that this was a platform to use when campaigning for road safety during the festive season. To get that going they needed resources and such direct messaging would be essential to saving lives. The RTMC was working with donators and other stakeholders to push this direct message of safety which was outside of newsrooms such as eNCA. 30-second sharp and to-the-point trail clips would play an essential part in driving the conversation on road safety. These were some of the ideas they planned on implementing.

Mr Ndebele said he would leave the law enforcement questions to his colleague. He did not think they had done enough piloting campaigns building up to the festive season. It was something RTMC had to drive from mid-October but people were not inclined to invite family and friends in September as they did during the festive season. They needed to work on the psychological part of why this happened. This was also another reason festive season figures were different from during the year because the likelihood of someone being out at 11pm on 31 December was higher than on 2 October. Those were the nuances they were dealing with.  On resources, he commented that they had to be smart because advertising cost money. For instance, to do six one-minute clips that would be broadcasted the entire December cost 2 and a half million. He said bluntly the issue of financial constraints from a marketing and advertising perspective was a major issue. He touched on the technical issues of law enforcement vehicles and said they may have to come back to the Committee with a different presentation focusing on that. In essence, it was very expensive to advertise and push these campaigns. He handed over to his colleague to answer more questions.

An official said she would zone in on the question of aggressive awareness advertising. The placing of coffins, if members of the Committee recall, were at certain exits and certain roads and was aimed at making drivers more careful. It was realised that other passengers, more so younger passengers in family cars, would be left traumatised and a decision was made to discontinue the programme 6 or 7 years ago. The programme continued in Gauteng but the DoT engaged with the province highlighting that the programme would traumatise younger passengers. Anything that had to do with aggression was no longer part of the Department’s campaigning methods. Arrive Alive was a road safety campaign. Provinces had their local campaigns that were aligned to Arrive Alive. In the Western Cape, the tag slogan was “safely home”, in KZN it was “Alufakwa lubuya nesaphulamthetho”, those were campaigns aligned with Arrive Alive. These campaigns were limited by financial constraints which impacted their ability to reach a broader audience. If the Department had enough funds, those campaigns would be broadcasted on many national TV stations, radios etc. The Driver of the Year campaign was one of the best campaigns the Department had. It focused on heavy-duty driver vehicles such as trucks. The Department targeted companies such as Nestle and companies they knew that had trucks that were always on the road. Again the programme was halted due to financial constraints. The Department had an internal meeting where it was agreed that they needed to go back to basics. The Department needed to resuscitate some of those programmes and to move forward with times using the different social media platforms which were not available back in the day but also be mindful to not leave some of the concepts they had used in the past behind. She added that the Driver of the Year campaign was very effective and those drivers were better off than those who were not trained.

Deputy Minister Chikunga said that the abuse of alcohol was the mother of problems in the country. Speeding was another problem; this was particularly among young males who were dying at a higher rate than any other passengers on the roads and statistics confirmed this. They were dying more than any other age group which was the reason the Department was focusing on them. They knew that on 15 December, the roads would be busier than average as people would be travelling for holiday, companies are closing etc. When these people arrived at their destinations, they added to the number of pedestrians which needed the Department to change its focus to include pedestrians. On the weekend of the 15th, there were also a number of family events such as weddings scheduled which also added more pedestrians. The Department worked closely with media houses to push messages which assisted them to reach more people. In terms of resources, if the Department could, it would have traffic officers every 10kms but unfortunately could not do this to financial constraints that remained one of its fundamental challenges. Apart from people closing at work, others would be on holiday travelling towards the coast. There would be deployment of all the resources available on those roads. The Department expected cities to be busy with pedestrians which would see an increase in jaywalking. Dates such as the 15th, 24th, 25th and 26th of December as well as the 1st of January would also see all resources and law enforcement being deployed to high-risk roads. Along with media houses, social media would also be vital in pushing road safety campaigns for both motorists and pedestrians during the festive season. They have been pushing the message on billboards, radio stations etc. The Department was depending on parents and guardians to ensure children are not playing along busy roads but playing in safe spaces. The visibility of blue lights on the roads would also be vital during the festive season. All these campaigns were aimed at showing that the Department would enforce where needs be. SANRAL had an important role to play, “as a matter of fact all our road SOE’s have a responsibility to play with RTMC being the leader but SANRAL too had a role”. Mr Mabhena asked a question about the 2023 in-take, there was supposed to be an in-take in December but due to Covid-19 the previous in-take would only exit next year as they needed to complete their practicals. The in-take therefore would not be in January but in March or April. The Chairperson said he would allow follow-up questions or comments, but members should keep it short as they had to move on to the next item on the agenda.

The Chairperson said according to his understanding, the national traffic police had been able to enforce the law where AARTO had been piloted. Anywhere else where AARTO was not enforced they were unable to enforce the law in terms of the Criminal Procedure Act. He asked if that was correct. Linked to that, he asked what the status of the review of the AARTO Act in terms of the Constitutional Act was. What was the Department doing in areas where AARTO was not enforced and what were the legal instruments used in those areas? In the context of SANRAL, the Chairperson said it could go beyond them as any other entity that was responsible for road maintenance whether a municipality or province needed to fix roads because the roads were bad, bad being an understatement. He found what was missing in the presentation was the mention of engineering as though it did not contribute to road accidents. The focus was on pedestrians, drinking etc but nothing on engineering. The issue of SANRAL is linked more to matters of engineering. Another issue that he felt was not covered was the matter of trucks. It was not enough to say people had to maintain them, what about specific targets towards particular trucks?

Mr M Chabangu (EFF) apologised to the Committee for being late. His question was a follow-up to Mr Mabhena’s question on the Department’s relationship with Santaco. Did the Department finance the body in any way and if yes, why and for what reason? How much were they given?

Mr Chabangu noted that they were taught that no one was allowed to cross on the freeway. How was the Department teaching pedestrians not to cross on the freeway as and when they pleased? He asked about the issue of scholar patrol, as he had observed that it stopped. This resulted in many children dying. How did the Department plan to bring that back, especially traffic officers because in the past it was the Department’s responsibility to do so?

Ms Ramadwa asked about SANRAL and the potholes matter she raised earlier. She mentioned that a few weeks back she was stuck on a road in Polokwane, the place was dangerous and she had no way of communicating with roadside assistance. She was assisted by her colleagues who made calls on her behalf. That was when she learnt that roadside assistance was available in all areas but those numbers were not visible on some national roads. She suggested that the Department invest in making those numbers visible as much as possible. People were paying tollgates yet the number of potholes on the roads was ridiculous. The Department needed to take the issue of potholes seriously as they too contributed to causing accidents.

Mr Mabhena said the issue of traffic points was mostly focused in metropolitan areas such as the City of Johannesburg and the City of Tshwane; he was yet to see them in the City of Cape Town. He asked if there was any relationship as far as assisting with road safety campaigns and if there were any plans to bring them on board in the future to roll out more road safety campaigns. SAB was one of the biggest strategic beneficiaries during the festive season collecting billions in revenue. SAB went to the most remote places to deliver stock to taverns, road or not they would deliver and were more efficient than some government departments. SAB was delivering to taverns where there were pedestrians, where many drank and walked home. Had the Department not considered having a strategic partnership or collaboration with SAB rolling out a do not drink and walk campaign and partnering with taverns to maximise spreading the reach they had? He added that invitations to some road safety campaign launches were very limited and hoped that with the new DG, this would be an issue of the past.

Mr Hunsinger appreciated the Deputy Minister’s engagement on the topic and wanted to know from her if the Department considered taking reservist traffic officers similarly to police reservists to be on the ground. The reservists in the SAPS force made up between 16-20% of manpower and given they were a support structure, this allowed specialists to be out of the office and on the field to investigate and fight crime. Reservists did all the administration duties. He asked if the Department and leadership gave that some thought as a measure to increase capacity.

The RTMC official said that the Chairperson was correct in that the entity could only issue AARTO notices within the Johannesburg and Tshwane area and were limited in the Ekurhuleni area on issues of notices except on the cross border as they could issue section 56 notices for cross border related offences. They could now issue notices within KZN, Free State and Mpumalanga. They had yet to reach Nelspruit but were working on the matter. They could issue notices in the Limpopo province as well. He moved on to the section 56 notice. They had started with this process in Ekurhuleni and had the authority to issue notices in Springs, Nigel, Heidelberg and Vereeniging. He said other areas included Umhlanga, Ga-Rankuwa, Brits and Pretoria North. This showed how the law enforcement department had expanded its effectiveness in being able to issue notices which impacted road safety. They were in constant talks with SANRAL and other stakeholders. They had a WhatsApp group that he was part of where all the concessionaires, operators and even the breakdown drivers were part of. If they were any incidents or accidents, they would respond which would be followed by a debrief session. The report on potholes was also reported back to the different groups. It should be taken into consideration that not all roads belonged to SANRAL; some roads were still catered to by provincial and local municipalities. He said they could look at potholes where SANRAL, N3 PC or Bakwena were responsible for but not where they had no jurisdiction such as provincial or municipal roads. Most of the entities faced financial constraints which limited them from fixing all potholes at once. RTMC had a great partnership with SANRAL that focused on the Pongola area and Townial (spelling unconfirmed) area. SANRAL was supporting RTMC in these areas and it had deployed members in those areas. Since the entity had been in those two areas, there had been a significant impact for example in the Pongola area they made 14 arrests for negligent driving by truck drivers. They had also picked up on a number of fraudulent discs where an operator takes one truck for tests and then duplicates those results for other trucks. They would continue building on the work that had been done.

RTMC engaged with the taxi industry in different meetings on different issues. They had one the previous day where many concerns were raised concerning illegal cross-border operators. Meetings would be held with JMPD and other relevant entities to have effective measures put in place for illegal cross-border operators which would start in early December.

Concerning pedestrians on the freeway, law enforcement was doing its best to enforce the law on pedestrians. But they had other entities such as Human Settlements and Economic Development they were engaging on. He made example of the R21, since the expansion of the metropolitan area, with a number of developments taking place and them wanting to employ locals, there had been a huge incline of pedestrians on that freeway. To counter, Ekurhuleni metro was operating daily in that area.

Scholar patrols were a road safety matter and one of his other colleagues would respond to this. On the matter of roadside assistance communication, if boards were affected during accidents, they were taken out but he would communicate the issues with all concessionaires.

The Phuza weekend campaign was directed by the Minister, from a Thursday up to Sunday which was highlighted as critical times. RTMC did it on a weekly basis and it was effective. However, the success of the campaign would only be seen once the perpetrators had been to court and found guilty or not.

On the question of the RTMC fleet, their fleet was outdated and they were currently buying a new fleet. Internally, they were working on ensuring the fleets are functional and had weekly meetings on Thursdays.

The Chairperson said that other issues would be taken as inputs as they had exhausted their time on this item. Although RTMC answered some of the questions what the Committee did not want to know is who was responsible for fixing potholes but that potholes contributed to accidents on the roads. The Committee wished to see a presentation that incorporated all factors and parties that were responsible to play their part. The presentation needed to be included so that members felt confident in the department’s responses. On scholar patrol, members wanted the Department to look at getting it back. The Department needed to take that back as homework and look at how it could be rolled out again. They could look at collaborating with Outsurance to get it back on the roads. The suggested partnership with SAB was also an addition to what the Department had already been doing and could they package properly as how Mr Mabhena had explained it. Even the issue raised by Mr Hunsinger on the reservists could be responded to by the Deputy Minister. Those were important points that the Department needed to take away from that discussion.

The Chairperson opened the floor to the Deputy Minister for her final comments before moving on to the next item.

Deputy Minister Chikunga appreciated all the inputs from the Committee members and said the Chairperson was correct to mention engineering as a contributing factor to accidents. The Department discovered that the most hazardous roads in the country were national roads which included the N3, N2, and N1. They had identified the top 20 hazardous roads in the country with the majority being national roads. These were managed by SANRAL and in good condition. The Department would be deploying a number of law enforcement to those roads as they expected many people would die. It was imperative that the roads were well maintained in terms of potholes, signalling and engineering. The presentation covered environmental issues such as the weather would be rainy and misty. The Department would encourage people to drive during the day.

The relationship between the Department and Santaco was a long one. When the democratic government took over, many taxi associations were established and competed for space. Previous Ministers of Transport had decided to form one national taxi association which saw the formation of Santaco. Therefore, Santaco is a product created by the government. In terms of funding, the CFO would have to answer that. Santaco was a single-body taxi association that the Department would interact with and they would relay the message to members in their industry who were in provincial and smaller associations. DM said they were aware that this was not the case because different associations existed. The wish was to have a single taxi association to communicate with that would then relay the message down the ladder. She said they would look into the issue of scholar patrols.

Deputy Minister Chikunga agreed with Mr Mabhena that SAB was a strategic partner that benefitted the most and had no role in giving back to solve the challenges of alcohol abuse which they sold. The Department would consider bringing them on board to roll out different road safety campaigns. On the questions of invitations to launches, if the Committee wanted to join, on the 5th of December the Department would be launching the start of the festive season road safety campaigns. They would be happy to have Committee members attend. On the reservists, she was not aware if the Department considered this. It was something the Department could think about but it had a number of challenges even for SAPS.

The Chairperson said he looked forward to the Department coming back to report and hopefully, they would highlight some of the concerns raised by Committee members. He closed off the session and moved on to the DoT’s second quarter expenditure presentation.

DoT briefing on 2022/23 second quarter expenditure

Deputy Minister Chikunga thanked the Chairperson for giving the Department this opportunity to present its second-quarter expenditure report. She zoomed in on a few issues that were raised by the Committee on the Department’s performance. The Committee had raised issues about the filling out of vacancies. The Department also wanted to resolve this and was hard at work filling in vacant positions even though it was still at 22%. The aim was to reduce it to below 10% as per DPSA standards. Some of the vacancies that drove the high vacancy rate were not funded.

They had been having engagements as a sector on how they could integrate their plans and reports in line with what DoT was responsible for on a policy and implementation level which informed their strategic process. The underspending was being reviewed and there would be consequence management.

At the end of 2022, the Department had spent R34.2 billion, which was 48% of the total current budget.

A Department official went through the report highlights:

42 (79%) targets were achieved in the quarter.

DoT achieved an unqualified audit with findings for the 2021/22 financial year.

During the period under review, six (06) allegations relating to the manipulation of supply chain processes were reported. Two (02) investigations were finalised during the period under review.

Twenty-four (24) vacant positions were filled in the period under review:  Seven (07) internal promotions, Thirteen (13) new appointments, and Four (04) lateral transfers. The vacancy rate decreased by 1.42% (From 24.% in June 2022 to 22.58% in September 2022).

The CFO said the Department spent R34.254 billion to date of reporting or 48% of the total current budget of R71.394 billion, against the benchmark expenditure drawing target of R34.776 billion indicating an underspending of R522 million.

DoT underspent on the compensation of employees

DoT underspent on goods and services due to a number of projects across programmes, funds have been proposed to shifted to other projects and in house capacity was also utilised on other projects.

DoT underspent on transfers and subsidies as a result of funds withheld under the Public Transport Network Grant (PTNG) for the eThekwini municipality in terms of Section 17(6)(a) of Division of Revenue Act (DORA) No.5 of 2022 as a result of non-compliance with the PTNG framework conditions. Further contributing to the underspending is the delayed invoice for the Road Traffic Management Corporation (RTMC) which was paid in October 2022, outstanding payments to the Road Traffic Infringement Agency (RTIA) for operations and for the Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences (AARTO) rollout pending the outcome of the court judgement. As well as outstanding payments on membership fees to foreign governments and international organisations to the African Civil Aviation Commission.

(See presentation)

The Chairperson thanked the Deputy Minister and her team for the presentation before opening up the floor to Committee members.

Discussion

Mr Hunsinger asked about the Department’s fruitless and wasteful expenditure. What were the consequence management measures for past fruitless and wasteful expenditures? The Department could not just page over without addressing the past. What did they do to fix those issues?

The Committee had pointed out that there was a misalignment between the KPIs, KPAs and service delivery experienced by people. The Department would show the Committee achievements of 90%, and 100%, yet that was not what citizens were experiencing. That was an indication of misalignment. What was the Department doing to fix that?  He was yet to see improved KPIs, KPAs and alignment in what the Department had set as a target and what the actual service delivery was. How would service delivery standards be improved?

He spoke on the Department’s desired expression around the road-to-rail programme. The Department expressed the desire to achieve 10%; 10% of what? From 2008-2021, the container business activity in Durban harbour increased by 40%, with rail having a market share of less than 15%. He asked the Department to quantitatively explain where that 10% would come from, how it would measure that process in terms of progress and how the Committee would see if it was successful.

Mr Hunsinger said there was an increase in the chemical and gas trucks from Richards Bay to Johannesburg but that seemed to be ignored as such facilities were not available through rail. The Durban harbour had been around for more than 220 years in terms of harbour activity and had 2.8 million 6-meter containers. With a 3% growth added to that, they were looking at 23 million containers. He asked if the Department planned on increasing entry to 4 lanes. That was the type of planning expected from the Department. Trucks would not disappear because of the Department’s desire for road-to-rail. 

Mr K Sithole (IFP) said he was late to the meeting due to his schedule. He asked the Department about the road that was damaged in KZN. According to the report presented, an underspending happened due to the road being damaged by floods. He disagreed. The road from Free State (R74) to Okhahlamba was not damaged by floods but damaged due to not being maintained. What was the plan to fix that road? He asked about the issue of rural roads. There was a grant, PRMG (Provincial Roads Maintenance Grant) for transport to provinces. Was there any management for those roads? He said this was because in his area there was a road that had been under construction since 2015 and had not been completed to date. Doctors and nurses were moving due to commuting being a hassle. What management tools was the Department using to monitor such issues?

He asked about scholar transport, which the Committee had raised previously. In some provinces, this was run by schools, while others ran it through their transport departments. He asked if the Department planned on having a single management Department for that programme.

Mr Sithole asked about the Taxi Recapitalisation Programme. Every report from the Department spoke on the understanding of taxi recapitalisation. What is the Department doing because it could not just say it understood yet nothing was being done? What action is being taken?

Mr Chabangu noted the Deputy Minister’s remark that the Department had a 22% vacancy rate.  That was a high percentage taking into account the number of young unemployed graduates. Many have ended up abusing illegal substances because of being frustrated. The Department needed a timeframe to fill those posts.

Mr Chabangu agreed with the Deputy Minister on the Shova Kalula Bicycle Project being on track but it was not well maintained. Who was ensuring that those bicycles were in good condition? He suggested that a centre be opened to service the bicycles which would create employment. Schools would return the bicycles to the centre where they would be monitored and not misused.

He said the Department needed an urgent plan because in the presentation it was said that some vacancies were caused by people leaving the Department. He asked the Deputy Minister to elaborate on this point.

Mr Chabangu said he heard that the Naledi Rail in Gauteng started operating again which was appreciated by commuters. How many railroads were in operation and how many were left behind or not yet operational? He reiterated Mr Hunsinger’s point about consequence management. Would the implicated person receive their performance bonus at the end of the year as though nothing had happened or would the department deal with them accordingly?

Ms Ramadwa noted the Department had reported – in its second quarter presentation – that it had withheld the PTNG from EThekwini municipality due to non-compliance with the conditions of the grant. She asked the Department to elaborate on this. what those conditions were that led to this information being withheld. Additionally, in the view of assisting the municipality, what interventions did the Department assist the municipality with?

Ms Ramadwa asked if the Department had a strategy to work on addressing the vacancy rate and reducing staff turnover.

Mr Mabhena noted the Department mentioned that there were allegations of corruption only 2 had been finalised. What was the status of the remaining 4 matters and of those that were finalised what were the outcome and consequences? Hit appeared that consequence management had not always been effective. He asked about the status of the 4 allegations that were not finalised. Were those allegations raised by whistle-blowers, were they reported anonymously or were they raised by people within the Department? What measures had the Department put in place to prevent intimidation and victimisation or possible assassination if those allegations were raised by whistle-blowers? There had been many examples of this happening in the past. What measures were in place to ensure the protection of those people but also that cases were being formalised internally? He noted that some cases would be offloaded to law enforcement agencies which prolonged the turnaround time. What was the Department doing to ensure it tightened responsibility where it had oversight processes internally ensuring people would be prevented from engaging in any immoral activities?

Mr Mabhena said he was glad the Department mentioned that promotions had no positive impact on the vacancy rate of any organisation because people were moving internally. The Department mentioned that in its bursary scheme out of 172 bursaries, 0.58% went to persons living with disabilities. The national standard when employing persons living with a disability required a 2% threshold when looking at employment equity.

In terms of provincial road maintenance, Mr Mabhena said it was no secret that regional roads in some remote rural villages and provinces of South Africa were in a state of dilapidation. People were forced to make economic decisions that stretched their means. What mechanisms had the Department put in place to monitor, track and intervene within PRMG or did it solely rely on what provinces told it? He was not satisfied with the answer he got when this question was answered earlier. Was there a follow-up process to see what had been done in those areas? The quality of roads constructed from the pool of funds granted by the Department after 2/3 years washed away.

Mr Mabhena said since he became a Member of Parliament, there had never been a report from the Department coming to the Committee that suggested that their targets concerning the Taxi Recapitalisation Programme was met. Earlier, the Department mentioned that Santaco was formed as a result of its intervention which meant their relationship with Santaco was selective. Santaco was the Department’s biggest stakeholder in as far as affecting KPIs. The Department was yet to converse with the Committee on other issues concerning Santaco. Why was the Department unable to convince Santaco if they could? Whenever there was a financial issue; the taxi recapitalisation was at the top of the list. Why was that the case? In the presentation, the Department noted that several questions to the Committee were still outstanding with 6 pending. The difficulty with that was they got enquiries from the public about the Department. There was a parliamentary process that stipulated the number of days those queries should be responded to. When communicating with people to inform them that the Committee was still waiting for responses from the Department, the Committee was seen as being complacent and part of the problem in holding the Department accountable for its lack of response. The excuse that some questions could not be responded to earlier was unacceptable. He asked why the department had no firm control over some of its entities failing to respond. He also said that the quality of some responses was not up to par, which was concerning. The Department had failed in many instances to respond directly to what was being asked while other responses seemed as though they were following a tick box exercise. That resulted in the same questions being resubmitted because the quality of response given was not good. He asked that the Deputy Minister and new DG tighten up responses because that placed the Committee at odds with the people in its oversight and accountability roles.

The Department explained that the fruitless and wasteful expenditure transactions most related to no shows and travel bookings. In terms of the Department’s policy, all cases were to be submitted to the its loss and control office that determined which no shows were accidental and where an accident happened, if this was as a result of negligence. Should that be the case, consequence management would follow in that instance. Money would be deducted from officials to cover those damages. That was how the Department currently dealt with fruitless and wasteful expenditure.

Mr Christopher Hlabisa, Deputy Director-General: Road Transport, DoT, addressed the question on the PRMG raised by Mr Sithole and Mr Mabhena, which was an issue prioritised by provincial MECs and departments. For instance, Mr Sithole mentioned the R74 that was a provincial road. A form with the provinces’ business and operational plans was submitted to the National Department and National Treasury. In that plan provinces stated which roads would be updated during that financial year, which had to be within the allocated amount. 25% of that was for upgrades because the budget allocated was strictly for maintenance purposes. Back in 2011/12, the Department had a construction and maintenance indaba due to concerns about provincial roads in particular that had not been maintained adequately. The Department had to reinvent this fast and worked with National Treasury in establishing what the Committee knew to date as PRMG, dedicated funds for road maintenance, particularly provincial roads hence the name PRMG. The business and operational plans submitted by provinces were used by the Department to monitor them. It was unfortunate that provinces relied 100% on the grant for maintenance and any other road matter. Provinces did not use their equitable share to budget for road building and management and the grant was only meant to be a contribution. Beyond that, provinces had no other resources dedicated to building and maintaining roads. The Department had stressed time and again that provinces needed to manage and budget adequately from their allocated equitable share for road management and maintenance. The Department did oversight, and quality checks and management monitored the PRMG process. What the Department had done was to up its monitoring and quality assurance side of things. It was closing the gap. The Department had hired technical providers to augment the quality assurance process. He maintained that the Department followed up on the money given to provinces according to their submitted business plans. Mr Hlabisa told Mr Sithole that the R74 should have been placed by his province in their maintenance plan. The road was currently beyond the state of maintenance and needed major reconstruction. Once maintenance had been left to a particular stage, provinces were bound to find themselves doing major reconstruction. That was what many provincial roads were faced with.

The Chairperson asked members if they had any follow-ups and Mr Hunsinger asked to address Mr Hlabisa on his statement at the end of the departmental responses.

Mr Mathabatha Mokonyama, Deputy Director-General: Public Transport, DoT, spoke on the question of learner transport as a function in provinces. It was dealt with like any other provincial function and had become a section 132 prerogative of Premiers. In some provinces, learner transport was placed under education while in other provinces it was placed under transport. The Department wished that all provinces would place it under their transport departments as it was a transportation matter. However, section 132 of the Constitution, gave the Department little jurisdiction over some provincial decisions. To mitigate that, the Department developed a national learner transportation policy which regardless of provincial custodians the policy enables those who were responsible to be held accountable for the implementation of the programme. This was because they need to adhere to the policy’s standards. The Department had ongoing discussions that looked to ensure uniformity and standardisation. In the last 5/6 years, the Department had gone beyond the purchase and distribution of vehicles but had included after-service maintenance that was standard operating procedures (SOPs), that indicated what schools needed to do for minor repairs such as tyre punctures and other related issues. The Department had kiosks however; those were not managed well by schools. Through the same service provided that delivered bicycles, the Department provided after-service maintenance. The Department, particularly with PRMG and grant transferring officers, was stuck in a rock and a hard place. This was changed by the implementation of grant conditions through DORA (Division of Revenue Act). One of the major conditions was to develop an operational and business plan on how provinces would use the money. Should they divert at any point from those submitted plans, the Department could remind them to get back on track. If non-compliance persisted, funding was withheld pending realignment. The Department worked with provinces to get back on track and back into the system. In the EThekwini case, the city’s business and operational plans had been developed and submitted. Mid-term EThekwini changed its approach and came up with a tactical approach. That unfortunately touched on the very problems the Department had which pushed it to withhold funding. The good news is that EThekwini Municipality adjusted its tactical approach to the conditions stipulated in DORA. The Department would go back to release withheld funds after 2 months or so of discussions. This back-and-forth did not look good. The aim was not to punish non-compliant provinces; the aim was to correct their mistakes to follow the stipulated DORA regulations. Withholding of funds only happened twice in the last 3 years but the Department worked with the 2 provinces to have them back in the system.

On The taxi recap, he mentioned that it was a voluntary programme. The Department had worked closely with Santaco but unfortunately, there were a number of factors. The scrapping allowance had now come in at about R140 000 but the price of new vehicles was between R800 000 to R1 million. Another factor was the socio-economic conditions that made people reluctant to accept scrapping their vehicles. The Department did not wish to have unroadworthy and unsafe vehicles. To mitigate that, the Department got the Minister to issue a gazette for illegal panel vans as being unroadworthy. The cut-off date for those to be off the road would be 31 January 2023. They were targeting 636 vehicles. [Toyota Quantum panel vans that have been converted into taxis will be entirely outlawed, with those not voluntarily surrendered to the scrap yard facing being impounded]. The next step was to remove all Siyaya’s from the road and that too would have a cut-off date. The third part was to find a balance. The Department was still trying to navigate what would be done when people had no funds to purchase new roadworthy and safety-compliant vehicles. Those were the challenges and history of the TRP. Along with that, the Department was finalising its subsidy policy which included taxi operations. Those were some of the things the Department was trying to bring into its system to mitigate certain challenges. Thank you very much.

Mr Collins Letsoalo, CFO, DoT, indicated that in the quarter under review there were 6 cases, with 2 having been resolved, and 4 in progress. He noted that in terms of the irregular expenditure framework, when allegations of irregular expenditure were received, the framework required it be investigated and further assessed within the definition of irregular expenditure. Should further forensic investigation be required those matters were handed over to the Department’s internal auditing team. This forensic investigation unit was within the internal audit unit. When matters were finalised, they were handed over to accounting officers to approve whether any disciplinary steps would be needed. The labour relations unit would take over to enforce those disciplinary measures. With the 4 outstanding matters, when reports are issued, the same process would be followed and a disciplinary process would be taken if applicable. He said further investigations sometimes did not always result in irregular expenditure.

On potholes, the DDG explained that Operation Vala Zonke is part of a campaign, focusing on provincial and municipal roads. This was a national programme where SANRAL had been roped in to assist provinces where capacity was lacking. As mentioned earlier, roads had been left to a state of dilapidation. SANRAL was not taking over provincial or municipal roads but had MOUs to help with capacity in fixing some roads. For example, in KZN with the floods, SANRAL entered into an MOU with the province’s transport department to sort out corridors such as the M4, R102 and other troublesome roads.

The Chairperson asked if there were any other responses from the Department before he gave Mr Hunsinger the opportunity to respond. He urged members to be mindful of time and added that Mr Hunsinger made his request well in advance.

Mr Alec Moemi, DG, DoT, referred to Mr Hunsinger’s question on the misalignment of KPIs and service delivery. The Department was aligning its performance agreements with DGs internally together with the shareholder compact of entities. The Department was trying to not cross the grey line between intervening and interfering. A number of services were delivered through the department’s agents. The Department would return with its adjusted plan to the Committee to oversee once it had been finalised.

Mr Hunsinger reacted to the statements made by Mr Hlabisa about provinces and the PRMG.  The DDG had said that provinces should use their equitable share to mobilise capital that would fix and maintain their roads. He disagreed. In his view, the Department had been complicit in that scenario. The current dilemma was that provinces were incapable of fixing their roads and the Department was responsible for that. That was because since 2009, if a comparison was done between the combined budgets of all 9 provinces allocated budget to roads in relation to SANRAL, SANRAL received 25% of that budget. SANRAL currently received 75% of that combined budget and provinces got 25%. Given that SANRAL received 75% of that combined budget and only looked after 2100 km of roads whereas provinces had to look after 2273 km of roads. How could that work? He asked why the Department changed that budget relation taking money away from provinces and benefitting SANRAL. The Department was thus the cause of this dilemma and the state of the country’s roads to date.

Mr Hunsinger moved on to comment on the statement made by Mr Mokonyama that R141 000 from the TRP was offered to owners of illegal taxis with panel vans being converted into taxis with owners unknowingly bought coffins. Those vehicles were bought for hundreds of thousands of rands, approximately R375 000 to R425 000 at the time. Those vehicles were bought for business, yet the Department only compensated them with R141 000 through the scrap allowance. Those owners were losing business. Did the Department regard that as being fair because he thought it was not?

The Chairperson mentioned that they were in a tight spot for time considering the number of items that were still on the agenda. Again he pleaded with members to suspend some of the comments. What was clear was that they were not meeting with the Department often and only when it presented its quarterly report a number of issues were packed into a single meeting. That added no justice to the Committee for its oversight role and members were not satisfied with some of the responses. Similarly, the Department could not respond to all questions or statements that were made by members. The Department had a number of entities that were all critical. He reiterated that not enough time had been given to those entities or the Department.

The Chairperson said he would allow the Deputy Minister to respond but could the rest of the members reconsider? Mr Chabangu and Mr Mabhena rejected that suggested and asked they be allowed to raise their comments.

Mr Chabangu suggested that all the questions the Department had yet to answer should be responded to in writing. The Committee had been to provinces and knew the inter-relationship between provinces and local government and therefore, the Department should not present to the Committee any provincial functions as they knew what was happening. He expected them to answer questions and failing to do so the Department would have to accompany the Committee to engage the people on the ground. The Department could not compromise the integrity of the Committee.

Noting Mr Chabagu’s suggestion, Mr Mabhena mentioned he had yet to see responses from the Department in writing. He touched on some hindrances with Santaco. He pointed out that the Department mentioned that some of the TRP hindrances were due to…

The Chairperson interrupted and suggested Mr Mabhena point to specific questions which the Department needed to respond to in writing. In the Department’s defence, there had been written responses received and he offered to provide those emails from his side. However, Mr Mabhena was given the opportunity to finish off his follow-up.

Mr Mabhena continued and spoke of the tedious process in terms of applying for a renewed operator’s license which was cited as a major concern that operators wished the Department to take up. Another issue cited was taxis being bought yet people were unable to get membership into the taxi association following their tedious application process that was yet to be finalised. Could the Department act on the application process pending new permits for those new taxis.

Mr Mabhena gave an example of an executive member of one of the associations who had his taxi standing in his yard due to being unable to receive his permit from the Department. His following question was directed to Mr Mugatho. He noted that the TRP process was voluntary but the Department had a budget that was set. Of that set budget, he asked why the Department could not double the amount given to those operators. The Department may not have the capacity to accommodate all operators but the increase in funds could see a difference in the uptake.

Lastly, Mr Mabhena sought clarity on whether the Department had finalised the disciplinary cases it referred to.

The Chairperson thanked all members and requested that the Deputy Minister give her closing comments. He reminded the members that the Committee had to provide a report that would be handed over to the National Assembly. That report would be considered with observations and recommendations and adopted by the House. The Committee expected the Department to give those written responses within 7 days. If there were any problems, the Department should interact with the Committee Secretariat.

Deputy Minister Chikunga thanked members for all questions, comments and suggestions made. She noted that when the Department had prepared the presentation, it noted that the meeting would be 4 hours with 2 long items, which would have been 3 had ACSA been present. They anticipated that time would be a limiting factor. She suggested that in the future entities should be broken up to have the opportunity to present before the Committee which would mitigate the issue of packing all branches into a single presentation. Although the Department would be responding to some questions in writing, she said face-to-face engagements were very enlightening.

Deputy Minister Chikunga responded to Mr Hunsinger’s question about moving cargo from road to rail. Had time permitted a detailed and technical presentation would have been prepared. The Department wanted to see more cargo being moved from road to rail. The extension of lanes would not be enough if cargo was not moved from road to rail and if nothing was done about that a traffic jam would be inevitable. The issue was that the Department depended on another department’s assistance to move the cargo from road to rail particularly between Durban and Johannesburg, with Durban being the hub port of the country and Johannesburg being the economic hub of the country. The Department was looking into figures to ensure this would happen. The coal that was being transported should not be on the road but on rail which was happening in other countries.

She responded to Mr Chabangu’s question on the Department’s vacancy rate and said he was correct in saying that it was unacceptable to have a 22% vacancy rate in a country that had such a high unemployment rate. The Department had been working on it and held meetings with the CFO who explained those vacancy rates in figures. DDG’s had to account for vacancies in their branches. Some vacancies were a result of people resigning, retiring and dying. Promotions were used to mitigate that rate but could only account for 10% of that as the Department applied DPSA regulations. On the Department’s retention plan, while it rained and promoted people, they sometimes moved on to better opportunities which the department could not counter offer in either the private sector or internationally.

On the matter of outstanding parliamentary questions, the Department tried its level best to respond to as many as it could. Sometimes questions were too broad or required that the Department outsource responses from provinces or local municipalities. Other questions asked about information that was available in annual reports. The department would continue to respond to questions by Committee members as they regarded that as a constitutional requirement to hold the Department accountable.

The Chairperson thanked the Deputy Minister and the whole delegation. He noted the value of in-person interaction and being able to engage even if time was limited.

Consideration and adoption of Committee report on Public Protector Report – Handled by Subcommittee

The Chairperson wished to conclude this matter before its submission to the House highlighting any additions or amendments to report.

Mr Hunsinger moved to accept the report by the Committee. Apart from having to submit the report to the House, the Committee would also have an opportunity to look at all adjustments allowing members who were not part of the sub-Committee to make their observations, comments and recommendations. Only then would the report be submitted to the House.

Ms Ramadwa was not clear on this as she was under the impression that the sub-Committee report would be deliberated before it was adopted by the Committee. Even though the document had been circulated, she said not all members were part of the sub-Committee and asked that the report be presented before it was accepted.

The Chairperson asked Ms Valerie Carelse, Secretary to the Committee, to read the process in hopes that it would enlighten members who were not part of the sub-Committee.

Ms Carelse said members may or may not recall a report presented in August by Adv Nel. Additions had been made to that which was discussed by the sub-Committee. The Committee had to decide if they would accept all those suggestions or some before the final report was submitted to the House.

The Chairperson further explained that Ms Carelse was correct in that the report had been before the Committee. He explained that having the sub-Committee avoided the issue of repetition.

Mr Hunsinger clarified his stance in that he proposed that the Portfolio Committee of Transport accept the sub-Committee’s report and in addition to accepting that report create an opportunity where the entire report would be presented to the Committee. The Committee would then decide on which report to submit to the House. No bypassing would be allowed.

Ms Ramadwa asked for clarity on what Mr Hunsinger meant.

The Chairperson explained that the sub-Committee had been established, done the work and now needed to be dissolved. Secondly, the Committee needed to create a space and opportunity to engage the report submitted by the sub-Committee. In that engagement, all members would have the opportunity to voice their comments. The Committee would make changes to some of those observations and recommendations before the final report would be submitted to the House which would have been adopted by all members.

Ms Ramadwa thanked the Chairperson for the clarity. However, according to what she understood they could not close the adoption of the report before it was discussed.

Mr Sithole moved to support the adoption of the report.

The Chairperson noted that the report was adopted for consideration at the soonest possible time by the Committee. He noted Ms Ramadwa’s concerns and further clarified what Mr Hunsinger meant.

Ms Carelse sought clarity if the Committee wished to conclude the work done by the sub-Committee. To do that, she reminded members that there were additions that were highlighted in the report but needed to be finalised. Only then could the Committee look at an action plan.

The Chairperson noted that Mr Hunsinger mentioned that and was seconded by Mr Sithole. This was because the report was done by members of the Committee and not strangers. The sub-Committee was established to reduce the workload of the Committee.

Ms Ramadwa withdrew her submission and voted to adopt the report.

Mr Chabangu asked why Mr Zwane had constantly been absent. Could that be explained?

Mr Sithole asked that members not divert from what was being discussed which was the adoption and consideration of the sub-Committee report.

Report was adopted for consideration.

Back to ACSA matter

The Chairperson noted that earlier in the meeting members touched on the matter and the Deputy Minister appealed to have the Department assist the Committee to get ACSA to appear before it. He said members had strong views that the Committee should not go to ACSA premises for any meeting but that they are subpoenaed to appear before the Committee. He asked the Committee to resolve the matter before they concluded the meeting.

Mr Hunsinger acknowledged comments that were made by the Deputy Minister but felt that would be direct interference. The Deputy Minister was not a member of the Committee and had not been involved in the Committee process that tried to get ACSA to appear before them. The Deputy Minister offered to assist the Committee to avoid the embarrassment of not knowing that one of its entities had done that. The Chairperson and the Committee have the Constitutional right and power to summon such entities to appear before it. The Committee had been very tolerant and accommodating in accepting the second and third postponement from them to appear before the Committee. This had been a progression from September, October and November: 3 months. Although it was a hash line to take, summoning them was the only way. This would send a message of seriousness when dealing with the Committee.

The Chairperson asked if any member opposed Mr Hunsinger’s proposal.

Mr Chabangu supported Mr Hunsinger’s proposal. He said people needed to respect the Committee.

The Chairperson called for any objections to the proposal.

Ms Ramadwa said hers was not an objection because she proposed that the Committee conduct an unannounced oversight visit to ACSA premises after the public hearings. That would be followed by them being subpoenaed in January.

The Chairperson asked ifn Mr Mabhena objected to Mr Hunsinger’s proposal.

Mr Mabhena supported Mr Hunsinger and Ms Ramadwa’s suggestion. The Committee would continue with the subpoena buts also do oversight on their premises. He noted that it would be the third time ACSA failed to appear before the Committee. The Committee had attended public hearings for the past 3 weeks but still showed up to Committee meetings in Parliament. He expected ACSA to give the same common courtesy.

The Chairperson had sought clarity that ACSA was being subpoenaed for the 3 issues noted. He felt that the unannounced oversight visit would dilute those issues which were the actual reason for them being subpoenaed.

Mr Sithole was opposed to conducting the oversight at ACSA officers. He stated that the Committee had done that before and it was time ACSA be the one appearing before them. He felt that ACSA was undermining the Committee through its actions.

Ms Ramadwa mentioned that her unannounced oversight visit was a suggestion and did not include seeing the ACSA management but to look at the airport itself. That would enable the Committee to have information and when they had been subpoenaed the Committee would know if they were being honest or not.

The Chairperson noted the unannounced oversight visits at the airport would not be easy as some areas required authorisation. The emphasis rather should be on getting ACSA to appear before them to account of the 3 matters.

Ms Ramadwa withdrew her suggestion of an unannounced oversight visit.

The Chairperson asked if members agreed to remove the unannounced oversight visit but keep the proposal to subpoena ACSA.

This proposal was accepted.

Committee Minutes

The Chairperson asked if members accepted the minutes of 15 November 2022. They discussed the Marine Pollution Amendment Bill and deliberated on the Transport Appeal Tribunal Amendment Bill.

Ms Ramadwa moved to adopt those minutes

Mr Mabhena seconded the adoption of those minutes

The Chairperson asked if members accepted the minutes of 22 November 2022 where the Committee met with PRASA and deliberated on the Marine Pollution Amendment Bill

Mr Mabhena moved to adopt those minutes

Ms Ramadwa seconded the adoption of those minutes

Committee Programme

The Chairperson asked Ms Carelse to take members through the programme for the first term in 2023.

Ms Carelse went through the programme and noted that the programme could be adopted with adjustments.

Mr Chabangu proposed that the programme be adopted

Mr Mabhena seconded the adoption of the programme.

The meeting was adjourned.