Committee Report on Department’s 2005/06 Annual Report: adoption

CORRECTIONAL SERVICES PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
7 November 2006
COMMITTEE REPORT ON DEPARTMENT’S 2005/06 ANNUAL REPORT: ADOPTION

Chairperson: Mr D V Bloem (ANC)

Documents handed out:
Draft report of the Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services on the Annual Report and Financial Statements of Department of Correctional Services for 2005/06

SUMMARY
The committee adopted its report on the Annual Report of the Department of Correctional Services for 2005/06. In the only major change to the draft, the committee agreed to delete references to the performance bonuses awarded to the accounting officer of the department as it was not their duty to pronounce on it. The Minister dealt with this issue. The report was adopted with the DA voting against.

MINUTES 

Consideration of Committee Report

The chair proposed that the committee should go through each page of the report and if there are any concerns it will be discussed afterwards.

Mr S Mahote (ANC) was concerned about the reference to the performance bonuses of the accounting officer of the Department of Correctional Services (DCS). A suggestion was made that the whole paragraph should be deleted.

The chair asked Mr Mahote what was problematic with this paragraph.

Mr Mahote said the paragraph indicates that senior managers of DCS will not receive performance bonuses because of poor service delivery. This should also apply to the accounting officer and not to the senior managers alone. Concerns were raised about who determined the performance bonus of the accounting officer.

The chair said that Mr Mahote is supposed to know the answer when it comes to this matter.

Mr Mahote mentioned that that it is not the portfolio committee’s duty to deal with the matter. Therefore this paragraph should be deleted from the draft report of the portfolio committee.

Ms W Ngwenya (ANC) supported Mr Mahote’s proposal on deleting the paragraph. It was also mentioned that DCS failed to provide an answer on the issue during the meeting when their annual report was presented. The committee wanted to know why they gave the accounting officer a performance bonus, but DCS failed to answer this question.

The chair asked whether Ms Ngwenya is saying that the department had failed with regard to this matter.

Ms Ngwenya said that management are getting performance bonus and the annual report indicates that there were poor management. Concerns were raised as to why managers get performance bonuses if their service delivery was poor. The DCS failed to answer this question and did not outline it clearly. Therefore this paragraph should be deleted because DCS did not provide a thorough explanation with regard to the performance bonus matter.

Mr Mahote said the paragraph should be deleted based on the fact that the portfolio committee is not the right structure to deal with this matter. The people who are supposed to deal with this matter should deal with it. The portfolio committee should not do their job for them.

Mr E T Xolo (ANC) supported Mr Mahote’s viewpoint on deleting the paragraph. There are structures such as the Public Service Commission that will deal with this issue.

Mr J Selfe (DA) said that if the portfolio committee were to remove the recommendation it will have serious implications for other parts of the report. If this recommendation were removed, others too would have to be removed. The Auditor-General had listed key reasons for the fifth qualified audit in a row. The committee would fail in its responsibilities if it did not express an opinion with regard to awarding a performance bonus to the accounting officer. It was true that the committee is not supposed to decide on performance bonuses but the committee has to take an important decision based on the performance of the accounting officer over the last financial year. He suggested that it is highly appropriate for this committee to echo the views of the Auditor-General and the National Treasury about the award of performance bonuses.

Mr Mahote said that the draft report focused only on the negative aspects of DCS while the positive aspects are being neglected. There must be a balance between the two.

Mr N B Fihla (ANC) said that DCS is a complicated department. If one takes a look at the qualified audit issues for the past 5 years, the issues are not the same issues that were dealt with in 2001. Different issues came up, meaning after one problem has been solved another problem comes up.

Mr M A Cele (ANC) said that the history of the department should be taken into account. The question that remains to be asked is how one measures the performance of DCS. In this regard, the report dealt only with negative aspects.

Mr Selfe responded to some of the arguments that have been raised. The first argument was that DCS is dealing with these issues problem by problem and has solved some of them. MEDOR was used as an example that remains unresolved year after year. The second argument is what the Auditor General has referred to as matters of interest that have turned into qualifications. This means they raised issues of concern the previous year that has deteriorated in such a way that they have become matters of qualification for the audit report. The issue of asset management was an example. DCS have not met their own goals. Emphasis must be placed on the fact that DCS is in serious trouble. DCS has received the most audit qualifications for this financial year. The fact that nothing is stated in the report about the accounting officer receiving performance bonus is problematic.

Mr Xolo wanted to know if the offending paragraphs would be deleted.

The chair answered this by reminding Mr Xolo that after going through the whole document it will be decided whether of not it will be deleted.

Mr Fihla raised concerns about the fact that the report only deals with the problems or weaknesses of DCS. The report is not dealing with the positive aspects and whether anything new has happened since 2001. A document that outlined the positive aspects was referred to. This document should be added to the draft report to bring balance.

The chair proposed that Mr Fihla should deal with the document paragraph by paragraph.

Mr Selfe agreed with the chair. A suggestion was also made that Mr Fihla where possible refer to relevant sections in the annual report of DCS which deals with the additional aspects that he has raised.

Mr Fihla mentioned that all the issues mentioned in the document are issues that the portfolio committee has dealt with.

The chair said that if a person proposes something he or she must be able to motivate that proposal.

Mr Fihla emphasised that the document should be an addition to the committee report as a balancing factor. Finding the sections of this document in the annual report would be time consuming.

Mr Mahote proposed that all members should get copies of the document Mr Fihla was referring to.

The chair emphasised that they are dealing with the annual report. It became problematic if the committee report dealt with something not reflected in the annual report. He was not rejecting Mr Fihla’s opinion but was trying to assist him.

Mr Fihla suggested that copies should be made for everyone.

Ms Ngwenya said it would difficult to include things that are not in the annual report.

Mr Fihla continued and referred to the following issues in the annual report: composition of offender population, security, corrections, development, facilities, employment and vacancies, employment changes, HIV and Aids, labour relations and skills development. These issues fit into those aspects mentioned in the document.

The chair offered to help Mr Fihla and said the centres of excellence, curriculum programme and 100% pass rate at Durban Westville were in the annual report

After a short break, Mr Fihla proposed that the document should be withdrawn. The reason for this was because it was a last-minute proposal. The committee agreed.

The chair put the full committee report forward. Mr Mahote reiterated his original proposal to delete sections dealing with the accounting officer’s bonuses.

Mr Selfe opposed this.

The ANC members voted in favour of the report, while the DA voted against. The report was adopted.
 
The meeting was adjourned.