Education Grants: Fourth term 2011 expenditure, in presence of Deputy Minister

Meeting report

Chairperson’s Opening remarks
The Chairperson said the Committee had requested that a senior official should be sent to the Committee to represent the Ministry. He also noted that engagements with the Eastern Cape and Mpumalanga provincial departments of education, during a previous meeting, had highlighted a number of inconsistencies and gaps in the fourth quarter of 2011 spending information, and it was noted that the figures that these two provinces provided did not correspond with those provided by National Treasury (NT). The Committee had therefore allowed more time for work on a comprehensive report on Dinaledi, School Infrastructure, and Technical Schools Grants.

He noted that it was useful that the political heads be invited to these meetings, as this would cut out the necessity to brief the Ministers on the outcome of meetings, and many of the issues could be dealt with during the meeting.

The Chairperson also requested that the Parliamentary Liaison Officer for the departments should attend meetings of the Committee, especially when dealing with spending on the conditional grants. The information was shared among all Parliamentary committees on basic education.

Finally, he welcomed the Deputy Minister of Basic Education (DBE), Mr Enver Surty, to the meeting.

Deputy Minister's briefing
Mr Surty tendered apologies for the Minister of Basic Education, Ms Angelina Motshekga, who was participating in another event, and the Director General of the Department of Basic Education (DBE), Mr Bobby Soobrayan, who was ill. 

Mr Surty described the work of this Committee as critical, saying that it dealt with issues that were central to the strategic choices the Department of Basic Education (DBE or the Department) had made. He cited the strategic objective to promote mathematics and science in 2012. The Committee’s involvement was crucial to the Department achieving the outcomes set out in the delivery agreements with the President. Mr Surty said that oversight had to apply nationally to all school infrastructure nationally. It was the Committee’s responsibility, as part of its oversight mandate, to ensure that these projects happened.

Another important area was that of technical schools. Following the Committee's request for a meeting, there had been engagement with senior officials who were asked to spell out progress on all the grants. It was important to inform Parliament on the challenges on each of the areas, so that it could provide guidance. He said that the information he would now provide would give a frank assessment and sufficient detail of each area.

Mr Surty said 49 schools would be built in the Eastern Cape (EC), and the Development Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA) had been engaged. There were challenges in the management of the project, especially the appointment of contractors who lacked capacity. There had been a tendency to neglect pertinent aspects like the terrain and geographic nature, which posed major challenges for the earthworks, and had resulted in delays on projects. The Department had learnt an important lesson, and would be paying more attention to this in the future planning. It had also appointed an in-house engineer to take a closer look at such instances, as they occurred. In the next quarter, it was hoped that no less than 50% progress would have been achieved on each of the 49 schools, and photographic evidence would be provided.

Mr Surty said that it was not possible to have Accelerated School Infrastructure Delivery Initiative (ASIDI) programmes focussed on one province, and in the current financial year, 100 unsafe schools would be eradicated across all provinces, although the bulk of those were in the Eastern Cape. Particular attention would be paid to those provinces with the greatest need.

He noted that the Dinaledi initiative was critical to the development of the country, especially development of maths and science skills. Five years ago, there were 27 000 learners doing mathematics, but that had now doubled. Every learner was now expected to study either mathematics or maths literacy. This of course required that competent teachers be provided, and there was still a need to intensify and accelerate content and teacher development in both maths and science. Grades 10 and 11 students were now using a single and standardised textbook, with a uniform process and new normative standards.

Mr Surty expanded that the concept of Dinaledi (special skills) was not specifically focused on Grade 12, but on all other grades. Every learner, from Foundation Phase to Grade 9, received two books in literacy and numeracy, each year. 56 million books were delivered to learners at each school. This was an achievement, in itself, but questions still must be asked whether the resources were adequately utilised, and if teachers had the skills to augment what was offered in the textbooks.

Lack of delivery of study materials to schools had been substantially corrected, and DBE had done extremely well in providing textbooks, a calculator and a teacher to all pupils, as a result of the Dinaledi initiatives. The primary recipients were African children. The Department had ensured also that every province had a well-resourced warehouse, where textbooks should be available.

The Dinaledi project was achieving great results, but still there were almost 10 000 pupils who achieved less than satisfactory results. That was not acceptable. A meeting had been arranged with the Director General and senior staff of all nine provincial departments to find out how the Dinaledi grant was being dealt with, and how education was being improved. The DBE had to intervene in those schools to prevent mediocrity.

Mr Surty moved on to debate Technical Schools, noting that these were necessary for skills acquisition, and they formed part of the educational landscape. Not much had been done in the past towards recapitalisation, nor replacing old and obsolete equipment at schools. The DBE had seen the huge advantages of recapitalising Further Education and Training (FET) Colleges, and, following the new curriculum, R2 billion was allocated for that purpose. This programme was driven by the national DBE in collaboration with the provinces.

The Council of Education Ministers had resolved that the National Department should now drive technical schools. This would make it easy to identify challenges in certain schools, and failing this, there would always be underspending. A formal decision had been taken on administering technical schools, and a dedicated unit had been established to oversee that process.

Mr Surty said the Committee needed to look seriously at the issue of learners who did not want to pursue tertiary education, and consider the mathematics studies that were needed for university and the number of subjects. It must be recognised that not every learner would want to go to university.

Finally, Mr Surty said that he had been disappointed with the expenditure patterns in the past years.

Dinaledi Schools Programme performance
Mr Allan Subban, Director: Dinaledi Schools, DBE, said this programme started in 2001 with the aim of improving performance in mathematics and science. The strategy was to focus on improving teaching and learning of the two subjects, and increasing the number of learner passes. The programme also sought to give support to black learners, and girl learners on these subjects at the selected Dinaledi schools. However, on the broader basis, the objectives of the programme were to set performance targets in all schools and ensure qualified and competent teachers, by improving the language of teaching and learning and identify and nurture those learners with particular potential. It was also hoped to cooperate with the Department of Science and Technology and various other stakeholders.

There were 500 maths and science schools in the country, which were intended to raise the participation and performance, by historically disadvantaged learners, in mathematics and physical science. They would also provide a cost-effective way of channelling scarce resources in the context of competing priorities.

One of the major concerns had been the increased numbers of students attaining below 40% for the two subjects. The national picture showed that the programme was not keeping with its intended objectives, but that would be addressed. In the previous financial year all provinces were awarded R70 million towards enhancement of maths and science, and all transfers had taken place, except in Limpopo, which had been placed under a Constitutional section 100(b) order. Provincial reports indicated that other provinces were keeping up with the objectives of the grant.

In the current financial year the grant allocations were R99 million. There were some challenges around implementation. Firstly, the mathematics and physical science learner enrolment had not improved substantially and there had been movement by learners to opt for mathematics literacy, instead of mathematics. The lack of capacity in provinces and the National Department contributed to slow procurement processes. The practice among provinces was to wait for the accumulation of the funds so they could procure for the entire academic year.

Mr Subban said it was advisable that the Dinaledi Conditional Grant should assist feeder schools to increase the number of learners taking mathematics. The programme was intended to expand to other secondary schools in proximity to the identified Dinaledi schools, and to allow them also to use the resources of the  Dinaledi schools.

Provinces needed to ensure that 60% of Dinaledi schools' learners took mathematics; and 40% took mathematics literacy. DBE was developing a national unit at national office to monitor both Dinaledi schools and the technical schools programmes. He said DBE hoped to see the desired results in the second year of the programme. The Department had taken note of the numbers of learners enrolled to do mathematics, and would continue its efforts to increase that. The Department hoped to provide support to Grades 8 and 9 as well.

The Department wanted to see Dinaledi Schools eventually enrolling only mathematics and science learners. It was also hoped that connectivity of these schools was increased. Currently, 268 schools were connected, and a further 132 would be added in 2012, through the Telkom Network. This would facilitate support to both teachers and learners. These schools would be provided with digitised content that allowed for interactive learning. This was already in place in the Western Cape.

School Infrastructure Backlog Grant
Mr Paddy Padayachee, Deputy Director General, DBE, noted that the School Infrastructure Backlog Grant was meant to be used to fix schools with inappropriate structures, such as mud schools, but also to provide sanitation, electricity and water to schools. The grant was sometimes referred to as ASIDI. The programme was allocated R8.2 billion over the three-year Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) period.

Allocations totalling R700 million for 2011 were split between providing for eradication of 50 mud schools and providing basic services. An implementing agent was appointed for the 50 inappropriate schools in the Eastern Cape, and another one was built by the provincial Department. Other implementing agencies included Mvula Trust, Eskom, and the provincial Departments of Public Works in Free State, Gauteng, KwaZulu Natal (KZN), and the Western Cape.

Some of the challenges pertaining to the 49 schools in the EC included procurement by the implementing agent. The process involved negotiating with the agent, DBSA, finalisation of the memorandum of agreement, approval of the Finance Minister, and signature by DBSA on the agreement. The implementation plan was only received in August 2011, which indicated that DBSA planned to use professional service providers (PSPs) to undertake scoping. This resulted in other delays as there appeared to be conflict of interest in companies that applied for the work. Sites were handed over to the contractor on 12 January 2012.

The Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (COGTA), the Independent Development Trust (IDT) and Eastern Cape provincial Department of Public Works were appointed for the implementation of work in the 49 schools. A scoping process for inappropriate schools, water and sanitation was complete, and estimations had been made.

Mr Padayachee said companies that were awarded the contracts had to be graded and he listed them (see attached presentation). All projects were behind schedule by between 16 and 77 days. Notices had been issued to contractors and they had been asked to submit recovery plans. The companies relied much on local labour, and one of the major risks was identified as material suppliers.

In Limpopo, 32 of the 38 water projects had been completed. Most of the provinces showing good progress had basic services provision. Delays were mainly due to work stoppage due to non-payments as a result of the scope change process. However, payments had now been processed and completion was anticipated by the end of May. Delays in the Eastern Cape were mainly due to materials that to be ordered from outside the province.

Technical High Schools programme
Mr Enoch Mchiza, Projects Manager, DBE, indicated that written replies to questions raised at a previous meeting had been provided in the back pages of his presentation. The Technical High Schools Grant was now in its third year. The purpose of the grant was to increase technical skills required by the country. The grant would be measured on delivery of new workshops, refurbishment of existing workshops, the purchase and installation of new equipment and the training of teachers involved in the technology field.


The national school system needed to prepare learners for either the workplace, or further education, or self-employment. The grant was critical in driving the Department to achieving any of these three options. There were 960 public high schools that offered a technological subject, in electrical, mechanical or engineering technologies. The Department was currently recapitalising 200 of those schools.

Mr Mchiza said the Department was looking at building 118 new workshops and 266 would be refurbished. All teachers involved in the field subjects that had been identified would have received training by the end of the programme. Funding was available to provide equipment to 663 workshops. The budget for the programme was revised downwards in 2011. Expenditure declined in 2011 by 3% in comparison to the previous year. There were retention amounts on infrastructure payments, and the amounts were determined on the pace at which the work was finished.

Gauteng, Limpopo, North West and the Eastern Cape were underperforming on this grant, but the Eastern Cape was improving. Performance was satisfactory in those provinces where transfers were made directly to the schools, rather than to a centralised provincial fund, showing about 90% or more performance. In Gauteng, the performance had gone down drastically. In Limpopo, the use of a separate directorate to effect payments for infrastructure projects had had an impact on expenditure, since, at the end of the year, virements would not have been done and the records would indicate underspending, although the projects did exist. This was now the second year in which this had happened, and DBW was trying to work with the province to find a solution.

DBE was succeeding in making improvements, and noted that although spending had decreased, the targets and outputs seemed to be met. It was noticeable that the learners taking technical subjects were also required to take mathematics and physical science, which often posed a challenge, but the contribution of the Dinaledi grant was commendable. The performance on technical subjects was around 90%.

Mr Mchiza said that learner numbers had declined by around 10% over three years, but said that most of the learners were not lost to the system, as they moved to other subjects in the field. There had been measures to improve retention, increase learner numbers, and maintain pass rate at around 90%. There were pending reviews of the technical subjects, and the Department looked to introduce specialisation and two new technical subjects.

Challenges included lack of capacity to implement the projects, and the fact that some provinces started to implement very late. Eastern Cape did not have capacity to deliver on the project, yet gave greater projections, but now that COGTA had taken over this should address challenges. Provinces had matured in terms of the operational systems and understood the processes.

The budget allocation had increased from R80 million to R200 million for the current financial year. That had assisted the Department to increase its outputs. The decline in expenditure had been noted. DBE was looking at how to assist provinces in spending at a required level.

Discussion
The Chairperson requested that the two provinces scheduled to present at this meeting should address only expenditure. The reports presented here were consolidated reports, but provinces could touch on issues they felt may not have been adequately addressed by the National Department.

Mr M Makhubela (COPE, Limpopo) appreciated the remarks by the Deputy Minister, and asked what could be done to correct interference by administrators in the progress of projects.

Mr Surty replied that he, as a political head of the Department, did not interfere with administrative issues, and that included the handling of contracts. Heads of the Department met every Monday to receive a report on progress in infrastructure projects. The Department had looked at the matter seriously and was considering ways to accelerate progress. In the past two months there had been a dramatic change, and the Eastern Cape would definitely report performance of over 50% in the next two months. The preliminary work had been done, and DBE and DBSA were exerting pressure.

In addition to these interventions, Mr Surty noted that in the Eastern Cape and Limpopo he headed a team of five Deputy Ministers (the others were Justice and Constitutional Development, Finance, Higher Education and Training, and Public Service and Administration) who were conducting oversight, and the Eastern Cape had agreed with reports and recommendations that this team prepared after visiting the province in December 2011.  He was confident that there would be significant improvements in progress.

Mr Makhubela wanted to know if the Department had thought of using generators for electricity generation, in case Eskom failed.

Mr Surty replied that generators were one of the options considered, but the issue was to ensure connectivity. The 264 Dinaledi schools had received computers and the remaining schools were included in the list of schools in respect of which Eskom, DBE, Department of Communications, and Telkom had agreed to provide Information Communication Technology (ICT) connections.

Mr Makhubela said he did not believe that it was only Mpumalanga that had challenges with Maths teachers, and wondered how many provinces were truly satisfied with the quality of their maths and science teachers.

Mr Surty replied that DBE had, especially in the Dinaledi schools, embarked on teacher development in Grades 10, 11 and 12. More than 2 500 teachers had been trained on content knowledge, and a further 2 000 would be trained in this year.

Mr Makhubela wanted to know if the maths teacher retention strategies were working, and how many teaches had been retained and lured back to the system.

Mr C De Beer (ANC, Northern Cape) asked if the Department had any action plan to recruit Grade 12 learners to go and study as maths and science teachers. The teacher population was ageing, and the country had to look into sustaining the system.

Mr Surty replied that the DBE sat with universities when identifying student-teachers for the Fundza Lushaka Bursary scheme. Emphasis was given to Foundation Phase teachers, as well as those who would teach maths and science, languages, and accounting. Successful bursary applicants were selected on the basis of need. In rural schools and schools with particular teaching challenges, teachers of maths, science and languages were entitled to an incentive. A conscious decision had been taken, in respect of Fundza Lushaka, to focus on learners from rural areas, in the hope that they would be more willing to return to teach in those areas. However, the reality was that people were keen to migrate from rural areas, so more people had to be trained.

Mr Makhubela sought clarity on whether the Department had visited Mbilwi School in Limpopo, to establish the reasons for its success rate in maths and science.

Mr Surty said the DBE had been to the school, which had managed to produce distinctions in mathematics and sciences. The school's recipe for success was good leadership and a complete buy-in from the community, as well as community ownership. Both government and the private sector gave support to the school.

Mr De Beer said the textbook distribution system did not work in the Northern Cape, where many schools awaited textbooks until the middle of February, well into the school  year.  He asked if it would be reviewed.

Mr Surty admitted that textbook distribution was a challenge. There was a need to provide officials with contact numbers for the dedicated unit for textbook distribution at the National Department. DBE had already started sourcing information on learners from across the country, and this had to be signed off by principal and districts, accompanied by a requisition signed by the head of department. The challenge was that pupils would migrate between the provinces, which skewed distribution. However, where there were textbook distribution challenges, the Department could resolve those in 24 hours. He would check what had happened with the Northern Cape.

Mr A Lees (DA, KZN) said variances in figures between National Treasury and the Department were still apparent, as raised in the previous meeting.

Ms Ntsetsa Molalekoa, Chief Financial Officer, DBE, responded that she was not sure why figures did not correspond, but perhaps the figures might relate to different periods. DBE had received confirmation letters of expenditure from NT.

Mr Edgar Sishi, Director, National Treasury, responded that there had originally been a technical error, but the issue had since been sorted out. The numbers corresponded now, for the most part. He could not explain the variance on the allocation on technical schools, and was not made aware of the problem, but would follow up on this with the DBE.

The Chairperson requested that the information regarding the corrected figures be forwarded to the Committee Secretariat. He failed to understand the difference.

Mr Sishi explained that the main allocation, in line with the Division of Revenue allocation, would be shown, but it was important to indicate whether the amount included or excluded any rollover figures. This would be quite simple to sort out.

Mr Lees was concerned that one of the columns in the presentation was headed “Passing” yet this included learners who had only got 20%, and the low marks were sending out the wrong message.

Mr S Montshitsi (ANC, Gauteng) asked if there was a specific reason to regard 30% as a pass mark.

Mr Surty replied that the “20%” was a typing error, and not the reflection of the pass rate. He said no student could pass with 30%, except where this figure related to two subjects only, and the student had performed satisfactorily in the other five subjects.  No university would accept a student with below 50%, and the cognitive demands of the current education system were much higher.

Mr Lees sought clarity on the recommendation that feeder schools should be assisted, asking for more details.

Mr Surty replied that it would be futile to aim for excellence in matric without addressing challenges at the lower grades. Dinaledi schools could not be the only focus, at the expense of trying for quality at other schools. There was a need to adequately support all those feeder schools to the high schools, starting right from primary levels. Another important intervention was the annual literacy and numeracy examinations that would be conducted in grades 3, 6, and 9. These would become compulsory in this year, following a successful piloting last year. These tests would make the process of identifying mathematics students much easier. So far, there had been compilation of a database of 11 million learners so far, which detailed information on learners and their progress.

Mr Lees wanted to know the targets for 2013 for the ASIDI programme, especially noting that fifty schools were scheduled to be built in the Eastern Cape in 2011, and another fifty in 2012.

Mr Surty replied that the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research was attached to the Department of Science and Technology. Part of its task was to look at the footprint left on the environment by the large-scale projects, as well as to look at better ways of rain harvesting. The implementing agent was the DBSA. The DBSA was now working with the Presidential Infrastructure Coordinating Committee (PICC). That would increase the pace of the delivery of the projects, would ensure delivery in line with the targets, and would lessen bureaucratic processes were removed. DBE would in future account to Parliament and the President. The pressure was greater, and the intention was far more focused. The specific projections were set out in the presentation.

Mr Montshitsi wanted to know the definition of “inappropriate” structures, and asked how many mud schools there were, and how many schools had no buildings, as well as the actual performance of DBE in addressing that.

Mr Surty replied that “inappropriate” meant “unsatisfactory from a safety perspective”, and included all mud schools and other unsafe structures. By the end of 2014, the Department should have eradicated all mud schools. There had, in the past, been a tendency among communities to decide to open schools without planning, and without regard to the rules that 200 learners had to be identified, and the growth of informal settlements also meant that schools were not adequate. The reality was that there would always be a backlog in education, health and housing.

Mr Montshitsi wanted to know why Gauteng was the worst performing province on the Technical Schools Recapitalisation programme. There were a number of irregularities in this province on development and approval of tenders, monitoring and collection of data, and failure to consult with other departments.

Mr Surty said Gauteng was generally good in terms of delivery, and he was not aware of the reasons behind this specific poor performance.

Mr Montshitsi wanted to know if there had been a comparative analysis of boys’ and girls’ performance at the technical schools, and what challenges there were. He asked about the quintiles in the Dinaledi schools.

Mr Surty replied that there would be a mathematics summit on 8 and 9 June 2012. This would afford the Department the opportunity to engage stakeholders in the mathematics and science fields. In 2014, South Africa would host the International Maths Olympiads. Previously, the participation of black people in the Olympiad was low, but had since improved. All the Dinaledi schools participated in the Olympiad. The impact was not immediately clear, but participating learners’ progress was remarkable. The decline in numbers had to be addressed.

Mr Surty said DBE was looking at quintiles 4 and 5. The Department was focusing on issues of inequality to try to find a sensible way of funding and providing. He added that 6 million schoolchildren were also being fed each day, and this was an incredible achievement.

Ms T Memela (ANC, KZN) asked if there were strategies in place to ensure that no fatalities would be reported as a result of slow progress in building schools in the Eastern Cape, where children were becoming restive at the delays.

Mr Surty said infrastructure was a huge problem, and urgent attention had to be paid to it. DBE should have acted in a more organised and faster way. The results could never be totally satisfactory, so he advised the Committee to demand frequent progress reports on infrastructural projects. Despite the challenges, however, there were positive signs.

The Chairperson was concerned that expenditure was not picking up on the Dinaledi schools programme. Although the enrolment and the pass rate of Dinaledi schools started well in 2009, it had dropped in 2010, and he enquired why this was so.

Mr Surty said the Dinaledi programme was more organised, and it was important that senior people were appointed to administer the grant. The Chairperson’s concerns were valid, but he assured him that improvements would be seen in the next quarters.

The Chairperson wanted to know what the Department was doing to ensure that KZN and Mpumalanga delivered on the provision of equipment. He said the expenditure level on the School Infrastructure Backlog Grant was a concern. He wanted to know if there would be improvement on expenditure, especially given rollover funds for the 2013 financial year.

The Chairperson sought clarity on expenditure of KZN, Limpopo and North West on the Technical Secondary Schools Recapitalisation Grant, asking if there were plans to correct the decline in expenditure patterns.

Mr Surty replied that the Department shared the concerns of the Chairperson, and this could do better. Provincial expenditure on the Technical Schools would improve, and there was a formal resolution at the Council of Education Ministers that the DBE could go to all schools to check on progress.

KZN presentation
Mr Nkosinathi Sishi, Head of Provincial Department of Education, KZN, said her province had the largest education system. The province had spent 100% of the Dinaledi grant and had, in respect of other grants, performed satisfactorily. The province needed more funds to improve and promote mathematics programmes. This province abided by the norms set by the National Department in relation to expenditure.

She outlined some of the challenges, saying that the first lay in spending the school infrastructure grant. The province had spent 95% of the grant, and had requested rollover funding of almost R2 million, for ordering equipment that was not available in the country. There were also challenges in relation to infrastructure, with backlogs estimated at about R75 billion. Even an advance payment for the next ten years would not even dent the infrastructure backlogs. She recognised the need not only to rely on government funding to address infrastructure, and said that provinces should experiment with various models, otherwise they would always report 100% expenditure, yet not meet the growing demands.

Discussion
Mr De Beer said KZN needed to look at the issue of disadvantaged schools that could not engage with the Department. For instance, something needed to be done to address water and sanitation issues of Granskop school in the northern parts of KZN. The school registered about 136 learners, and had a river running a few metres away.

Mr Sishi replied there was a challenge with rural areas that were sparsely populated. Wherever a school was placed, there would always be some learners who would have to walk long distances, and find themselves without services. The tendency with rural communities was to set up illegal satellite schools if the parents felt that the existing schools were too far away. He repeated that the norm for establishing a formal school was one that took 200 learners. Schools registering less than 200 learners were regarded as satellites. Whilst National Treasury had every sympathy for learners who were too young to walk long distances to get an education, this was the reality on the ground, and the DBE would have to be creative in rolling out infrastructure, and try to find a solution conducive to learning.

The Chairperson sought clarity on the number of satellite schools in KZN, and asked if the DBE recognised those teaching at such schools.

Mr Sishi replied there were 35 such schools. There had been engagement between the DBE and communities, especially in Umzinyathi, Zululand and Uthungulu, where this phenomenon manifested itself. The schools were generally initiated by local chiefs and councillors, and were mostly combined schools. In some cases the DBE tried to assist by providing mobile classrooms, but it was generally not in favour of doing this. The teachers would be recognised. Often, the schools might be housed in a deserted house, putting at risk the safety of children. The MEC had considered this issue and DBE was even prepared to renege on the 200-norm, if there was motivation for such a school.

Mr Makhubela wanted to know what kind of equipment KZN province had ordered from outside South Africa, and what would happen if it broke down.

Mr Sishi replied that local suppliers were sometimes unable to provide heavy machinery for workshops, but it was not a policy of the Department to source equipment from outside.

Mr Lees said community involvement and strong leadership were all that were needed to run an effective school management. He was concerned at the assertion that education backlogs would “never” be addressed and said that the emphasis should be on the education, rather than the infrastructure. Another challenge that was real was that certain political parties wanted to create dominant factions within the school environment.

Mr Sishi agreed with Mr Lees that the emphasis should be on education, and said that this meant having  dedicated and high-quality teachers. There were 89 000 teachers in the province, who accounted for about 75% of the entire budget. Unless there was an increase in the budget, and reconsideration of the percentage to be spent on education, South Africa would reach a point where provinces were unable to fund education. KZN lost about 5 000 teachers a year and universities could only provide 1 600 teachers annually. This ratio made it easy for unqualified teachers to enter the system, and that undermined quality.

Limpopo Provincial Department presentation
Mr Morebudi Thamaga, Head of Provincial Department of Education, Limpopo, said that much of the background information had been provided by DBE. There was a variance of R16.8 million on the overall under expenditure. R9.4 million of that money was due to invoices that, whilst presented, had not been paid by year-end. The delay in transfers arose as a result of the province being put under administration. The supply chain management processes were slowed as a result of poor administration, and then were stopped. Orders could not be processed because service providers were being investigated.

Discussion
Mr Makhubela wanted to know if the Department was not moved by the performance of the Dinaledi schools. He asked if the number of the maths schools was sufficient for Limpopo. He asked for clarification on the criteria used to decide on Dinaledi schools.

Mr Thamaga replied that selection criterion for Dinaledi schools was preceded by an audit conducted by DBE, in 2008. There was then a focus on schools in quintiles 1, 2, and 3. The decision also took account of the geographical spread, to improve access. The schools had to be offering maths and science; and had to have teachers for the two subjects. Of course, there could never be enough of these schools.

Mr De Beer raised a concern on the information presented. He said this presentation appeared different to a presentation made to the Committee during its oversight visit to the province in March.

Mr Thamaga replied that there was a strong correlation between the information contained in this presentation and what was said in March. He said the difference was that the presentation in March included historical matters from as far back as 2008.

The Chairperson noted that remaining issues would be dealt with at another meeting and noted that the Committee would be paying visits to the provinces.

The meeting was adjourned.