Report of the Portfolio Committee on Education on Visit to North West, Gauteng, Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal Higher Education Institutions of Learning from 2 to 6 August 2004, dated 26 November 2004:

1. Background

Delegation
A Multi party delegation of the committee formed part of the oversight visits to Higher Education Institutions during the period of 1^st and 6^th August 2004. In order to cover the objectives of the visits, the delegation of the committee was constituted into two groups. The first group led by the Chairperson of the Committee, Prof S M Mayatula, was constituted of Ms P R Mashangoane (ANC), Mr. B Mthembu (ANC), Mr. G G Boinamo (DA) and Mr. A M Mpontshane (IFP) and Mr. S Morometsi, Committee Secretary. Departmental Merger Unit officials, Ms Kgabiso Pooe, Mr. Edward Mosuwe and Mr M R Khaphola accompanied the Committee to North West University, University of Pretoria, University of South Africa and Tshwane University of Technology.
The second group under the leadership of Mr. PRZ van den Heever was constituted of Ms. D G Nhlengethwa (ANC), Mr. B G Mosala (ANC) and Mr. R Bhoola (MF) and Mr. T Madima, the Control Committee Secretary of the cluster.
2. Objective
The primary objective of the visits in general is to exercise oversight and monitoring of the merger process and in particular to evaluate its impact on transformation and restructuring in Higher Education.
The salient features of the tour focused among other things, what are the key issues and challenges in the merger process; the cost of the mergers, progress with regards to the new funding formula and how to support weak institutions with greater need (lack of financial support and material resources; access and enrolment equity targets, e.g. demographics; governance, leadership, accountability and effecting credibility to the process, does historically advantaged institutions necessarily swallow historically disadvantaged institutions; is the curricula in line with the Human Resource and Development Strategy to produce quality graduates needed for social, economic and technological development and what considerations determined the new fee structures and who determines this?
In preparation for the oversight visits, the Department of Education briefed Members of the Committee on the 22 June 2004 on restructuring and transformation and the status of Higher Education institutions. Members of the committee were informed about the two phases of restructuring and transformation of Higher Education.
The entire report will cover the concurrent visits undertaken by the two multi-party delegations to Higher Education Institutions of Learning from the 2^nd to the 6^th August 2004.
The first delegation visited North West University, (which is a merger between Potchefstroom and Mafeking Campuses and the incorporation of the students and staff of the Sebokeng campus of Vista University) University of Pretoria (which incorporated the Mamelodi campus of Vista University), University of South Africa (which was merged with Technikon South Africa and the incorporation of Vista University Distance Education campus) and Tshwane University of Technology (which came into existence as a result of the mergers of Technikon Northern Gauteng, Technikon North West and Pretoria Technikon).
The second delegation visited University of Port Elizabeth (which incorporated Port Elizabeth campus of Vista University) the new name for the two institutions would be Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Border Technikon, University of Transkei, the new name for Border and Eastern Cape Technikons and University of Transkei would be Walter Sisulu University for Technology and Science, University of Kwazulu Natal, was created when University of Durban-Westville and University of Natal merged and Durban Institute of Technology was created when ML Sultan and Natal Technikon was merged.
Having conducted the oversight visits to Higher Education Institutions the Portfolio Committee on Education reports to Parliament as follows:
3. Visit to University of North West/ Potchefstroom Campus
On the 2^nd of August 2004, the delegation of the Committee under the leadership of Prof S M Mayatula visited the North West University, Potchefstroom campus. Prof C.F.C Van der Walt, the Interim Acting Registrar, welcomed the Committee.
The delegation had formal meetings with stakeholders such as Interim Management Council, Student Representative Councils (SRCs), of Vaal Triangle and Potchefstroom, African National Congress Youth League (Potchefstroom Branch) South African Student Congress (SASCO), South African Parastatal & Tertiary Institutions Union (SAPTU) National Union of Tertiary Employees Union (Nutesa), Meshawu, National Education, Health & Allied Workers Union (NEHAWU) and the Institutional Forum.
3.1. Meeting with the Interim Management Council
Prof van der Walt briefed the Committee on behalf of the Interim Management Council on the progress and challenges in respect of the merger with Mafeking Campus. As an Interim Management Council structure, they had accepted the inevitable and negotiated a best possible deal with the Mafeking campus. Once they had decided to merge they had to maintain stability and minimize uncertainty during the transition period
He said that during the process one of the challenges facing the two institutions was the geographical distance between the two campuses, and the transfer of academic programs from Mafeking to Potchefstroom, they had to balance between a faster or gradual process. To be able to achieve a smooth transition they opted for a gradual approach and achieved remarkable stability.
The gradual approach chosen by the Interim Management Council brought with it challenges. The first challenge the merged institutions faced were, to operate under one Interim Council, second challenge, agreeing on the values and practices, third challenge, to develop a unique institutional culture and ethos, fourth challenge, to have one institutional management and one set of institutional policies and fifth challenge to promote access, integration, and redress the language imbalances and develop a language policy and how to exchange study materials. Four task teams were established to develop the values and practices and various inputs were received from members of the task team. The proposed rules were debated at various meetings on both campuses in the Senate, with a Senate Committee and in the Council before it was adopted and the Minister suggested in order to co-ordinate managing both campuses, the Management seat of the new institution will be located at the Potchefstroom campus.
3.2. Interim Students Affairs Manager reporting
The Interim Students Affairs Manager, Prof MS Zibi, said that the student numbers of the three campuses, Potchefstroom, Mafeking and Vaal Triangle is estimated to be 37 776 for 2004. That the Student Representative Council managed to combine students and agreed to form an Institutional SRC that would serve as an umbrella body for both institutions. He stressed that the challenge facing students, was the reduction of the National Students Financial Aid Scheme with an amount of R20 million at Potchefstroom campus.
3.3. Vice-Rector: Finance & Budgeting Committee reporting
With regard to the finances of the institution, Prof A A Bootha, Vice-Rector, Finance and Budgeting Committee, said that both Potchefstroom and Mafeking campuses received an unqualified audit report. In terms of the assets, Potchefstroom campus had a long-term bond whereas; Mafeking campus had no bonds but was subsidized with R3 million by the Development Bank of South Africa. In Mafeking campus they discovered that the institutional assets were not well looked after, resulting into the Council taking a decision to write off the R78 million deficits.
The challenge facing the institutions is the finances. They need to seek a way to reach a break-even centralized budget. The other challenge facing the institution is what fees structure to put in place and how to breach the gap of the 40% in fees between the two campuses. The only solution to address those challenges is to get donor funding.
3.4. Challenges Faced by the Institution
The challenges facing the merged institutions were outlined as follows:
Management
Appropriate governance vis-à-vis management accountability
Ensuring that all campuses are and remain fully viable and sustainable in terms of student numbers, programs, quality and finances
Integration of systems, policies and procedures
Integrated, disciplined and participatory budget process taking into account the reduction of National Student Financial Aid Scheme subsidy by R20 million in the Potchefstroom campus.
Equity
Demographics: race, language and gender of staff and students
Access, including bursaries, loans and minimum payment
Fee structures and levels
Remuneration levels of staff
Entrance level requirements and
Exit level requirement of students
Quality Improvement
Better through put, resulting into better students enrolment
Better research outputs increasing from 0.4 per article to 1 and producing more PhDs and Masters students
Improve client orientation, be it students, staff, government, communities and industries
3.5. Achievements during 2004
Appointment of Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor
Accepted General Admission Policy and General Academic Rules
Timetable for 2005 was accepted by all formations
Submission of the Statute to the Minister
Student disciplinary rules and Institutional SRC was accepted by students
The process resulting from the recommendations by the Finance Committee on the viability study conducted around the future of Mankwe campus was accepted that technikon-type and short courses be designed and offered at Mankwe campus in 2004.
The process to appoint new external auditors was accepted
Experienced general stability after some unrest at Mafeking campus
The merger progressed well resulting into a stable and efficient institution.
3.6 Meeting with Student Representative Council (Potchefstroom Campus) The President of the Student Representative Council, Ms J Joubert of Potchefstroom campus, informed the Members that students resisted during the merger process due to the fact that they were uncertain and insecure about what the future holds for them. They managed to quell their fears and entered into negotiation with the Mafeking and Mankwe campuses around the Interim Student Representative Council Constitution. The view is to form an Interim Institutional Student Representative Council constituting of 8 members, with equal representation of 2 members from each campus after the Student Representative Council elections.
3.7 Meeting with the Student Representative Council (Vaal Triangle Campus)
Mr. K.B. Mokwena, President of the Student Representative Council of Vaal Triangle campus, said that student formations are positive about the merger. He said in terms of how the lectures were conducted, the medium of instruction is 50% Afrikaans and another 50% is English. Both campuses, Sebokeng and Vaal Triangle held a Constitutional Summit and the outcome of that summit, a General Draft Constitution was adopted as a framework for the upcoming SRC elections to be held at the end of August 2004.
3.8 Meeting with South African Student Congress
The issues they raised were; no commitment from management to transform the institution, white male and female students occupies hostels, increase in students fees annually, denying needy black student’s access into the campus, SRC elections process was not transparent, SASCO was not allowed to contest the elections and the National Student Financial Aid Scheme funds that were reduced resulted into most previously disadvantaged students not to gain access into the institution.
3.9 Meeting with African National Congress Youth League (Potchefstroom Branch)
The ANC Youth League Potchefstroom Branch said that they noticed that when students are recruited, the Marketing Department recruits mostly white male students and Coloured students from the Western Cape, as a result of that, they exclude needy black students from the nearby Ikageng community. Afrikaans is still the dominant medium of instruction when lessons are conducted.
3.10 Meeting with South African Parastatal & Tertiary Institutions Union (SAPTU)
The Chairperson of the South African Parastatal and Tertiary Institutions Union, Mr. Bennie Linde, focused on the geographical distance between Potchefstroom and Mafeking which has financial implications if traveling between the two campuses, lack of feedback from the Interim Management Council, Non-existence of Merger funds, lack of information on Conditions of Employment and non-existence of signed recognition agreement between the institution and the organized labour.

3.11 Meeting with National Education Health and Allied Workers Union (Nehawu)
The chairperson of the National Education, Health and Allied Workers Union, Enoch Moamogoa focused on the practice of Supervisors to victimize shop stewards, non-consultation and participation of Nehawu in merger process, Non-negotiation on recognition agreement processes and lack of managements’ commitment to transformation process and legislative requirement.
3.12 Meeting with Meshawu
The Chairperson of Meshawu, Ms J Montshonyane, focused on non-existence of transformation in the institution, lack of communication between Management and the Unions, lack of transparency on the policies and procedures of the institution, no consultation with regard to conditions of employment issues affecting employees, no representation on Interim structures and the existence of racism.
3.13. Meeting with National Tertiary Employees Staff Union (Ntesu)
The Chairperson of the National Tertiary Employees Staff Union, Mr.R Matube, raised the disparities in salaries, existence of racism, the existence of a culture of victimization, no access to 3 year rolling plan on equity, exclusion from selection and employment panel, no observer status, no access to benefits, high turnover of black academics and the unbearable working environment.
3.14 Meeting with Institutional Forum
The Chairperson of the Institutional forum, Mr. TP Venter, focused on the role his organization played, providing advice to the Interim Council, scrutinized the equity report, implemented diversity management, played a role in the nomination of the Vice-Chancellor, assisted in the merger process, dealt with student unrest, assisted in administrative and travel functions. Challenges facing the Institutional Forum are of having no representation on the Interim Council and the uncertainty of the role it should play now that the merger process is over.

3.15 Committee’s Observation
Having listened to the internal stakeholders of the institution, the Committee observed the following:
3.16 Committee’s observation with regard to Students
Are divided along racial background whites on the one hand and blacks on the other
Black students felt that they are being marginalized in terms of the medium of instruction used in lecture halls and accommodation is occupied mostly by white students
Felt that Afrikaans is a barrier to non-Afrikaans speaking students, they are unable to express themselves when communicating
Willingness exist amongst students to adapt to material conditions
Student Representative Council is mainly composed of white students
Adversarial attitude exist between black and white students
Vaal Triangle students are optimistic about the merger
3.17 Committee’s observation with regard to Unions
Not knowledgeable of the merger process
No representation on the selection and appointment of staff panel
Felt that there has to be merger funds to address merger related aspects such as the installation of an IT system
Want Union summit were all merger related matters are discussed (bosberaad)
Geographical distance between Mafeking and Potchefstroom campuses has financial implications when traveling to either one of those institutions
Adversarial attitude towards management

4. North West University, Mafeking Campus
On the 3^rd of August 2004 the Committee delegation visited University of North West, Mafeking campus. During the period of the visit, the delegation of the committee had formal briefings with internal stakeholders such as Management Board, Students formations of both Mafeking, and Mankwe campuses and Staff Associations.
4.1. Meeting with Staff Association
The Deputy President of Staff Association, Prof Mokgadi Molope, made a presentation and focused on three main issues; disunity in Mafeking Management, corruption in Human Resource and the issue of the statute of the new institution. In relation to disunity in management, he said that, when posts are advertised internally, the assumption is that the appointed candidate would come from Potchefstroom, non-existence of capacity building of academics, the merger is a federal system, management is centrally based and there are no strategic plan in place, no vision and mission of the institution, no merger implementation plan, no recapitalization and merger funding in place.
In relation to participation and information dissemination, no participatory democracy at the institution, staff are not adequately consulted, no multi-constituency participation as a result a new power structure was created at Potchefstroom. In relation to equity, no unified equity plan, no visible sharing of resources, staff retrenchment is increasing. With regard to access criteria, previously disadvantaged prospective students are marginalized, language policy a barrier and post-graduate students denied access to Potchefstroom campus. The Statute of the institution was returned by the Minister.
In terms of Human Resource, no transparency in appointments, management utilizes external consultants, biased staff development practice, unfair labour practice and no consideration for equity.


4.2. Meeting with Student Representative Council (Mafeking Campus)
The SRC President, Mafeking campus, Mr. I Leburu, briefed the delegation of the committee and said the barriers inhibiting the merger process are issues such as lack of qualified lecturers, and un-qualified lecturers are lecturing students, lack of capacity in terms of administration, inadequacy of NSFAS allocation, shortage of lecture halls, shortage of student accommodation, lack of security services within the campus, students fees inadequate, pending increment of student fees by 50%, lack of recreational facilities, lack of sports facilities, lack of incentives and opportunities for students, abandoning of objective of the merger to transform and rationalize institutional programs and lack of student development.
4.3. Meeting with Student Representative Council (Mankwe Campus)
Mankwe campus SRC President focused on the lack of Management structure, lack of consultation, non-recognition of Mankwe campus, incorporation of Mankwe campus into Mafeking campus, Acting Campus Director having no powers of authority, students transferred to Mafeking campus without consultation, academic programs transferred to Mafeking campus and at the end compromising the status and integrity of the campus. Following the presentation by students from Mafeking and Mankwe campuses, the Extended Management Board came before the Committee and briefed them.
4.4. Meeting with Extended Campus Management Board
The Acting Vice-Chancellor, Prof C Mashego, briefed the Committee and focused on the challenges facing the institution. The challenges outlined were; cultural differences in the two institutions, background of the two institutions, the different resources, the different systems in place, the different student systems, the different IT systems in place, non-computerized of the Human Resource system thus creating a perception of "Potchification" that the merger is a take-over and not a merger. The current IT System at the institution was not reactive to student affairs. The Department promised to assist financially to enable the institutions to move towards a unified system. In terms of the Guideline for Mergers, the Minister recognizes that there will be direct merger costs for which reimbursement would be required. Institutions would be assisted in the merging and aligning of information, communication and technology systems and processes. No traveling budget, any expense towards the merger should be applied for and awaits approval. The Management of former UNIBO was left very thin without middle management staff. The merger is a good thing but the Department needed to pilot it. The fee increases need to be addressed. The curriculum content is different, personnel salaries are different, the mode of payment of former University of Bophuthatswana is a total package, to address the salary gaps the Department needs to intervene. The problem existing with the Unions is a critical one around their Conditions of Service.
The Mankwe case, it was a former College of Education, which was incorporated into the former Unibo, and it was used as a satellite campus. They entered into agreement with Unibo to transfer some of the programmes. When the merger process unfolded, Mankwe was affected because it was not taken along the merger process as a structure. Breakdown in communication occurred, recruitment of students was halted due to a Council decision, as a result it lost students and it could not attract students. Due to the conditions at Mankwe campus, staff became demoralized and de-motivated. The Mankwe case is a serious one where consultation had been ongoing with members of the community as to how it could be turned into a niche institution or whether it should continue or be closed. External consultants were commissioned to conduct a viability study. The result of the study was that Mankwe campus was not viable, but not conclusive. They want to develop it into a niche area because of its suitability to Agriculture.
4.5 Committee’s Observation
Having listened to the presentations of stakeholders, the Committee observed as follows:
4.6 Committee’s observation with regard to Staff Association
The Committee observed that Staff Association felt that they were marginalized by Management at Potchefstroom campus. That they lacked the capacity to engage Management and most of the complaints leveled at Management were not related to the merger process.
4.7 Committee’s observation with regard to Mankwe campus
The report on the redundancy of the campus is exaggerated
Students are uncertain over the operational procedures of the campus.
4.8 Committee’s observation with regard to Mafeking campus
Students are affected by the shortage of facilities and students are divided on the campus
4.9 Response by Vice Chancellor, Prof Theuns Elloff of the North West University to the submissions made by Staff Association
The Vice Chancellor, Prof Theuns Elloff set up an appointment with the Chairperson of the Committee to respond to the submissions made by Staff Association with regard to the merger. The Vice-Chancellor first tabulated the concerns raised by Staff Association and focused his responses on structure and functioning of the North West University, Mafeking campus and Attitude and Style.
The concerns raised by Staff Association identified by the Vice Chancellor was as follows:
Concerns about the formal structure of the University of North West its Statute and the Mankwe campus issue
Concern about the historical issues present at the University of North West before the merger
Concern about the Management at Mafeking campus, many of which pre-date the merger, while some matters are alleged to also be present since the merger
Concerns relating to perceived lack of communication to and participation from the Mafeking campus
Concerns about the roles and relationships with respect to institutional and campus managements, amongst others including the matters changing the faculty structure at the Mafeking campus and the academic future of the Mafeking campus as one of the campuses
Concerns about the roles and relationship with respect to governance and management at the institutional level of the NWU, including reference to the matter of the Mankwe campus
Concerns about the way in which the preparatory and post-merger work with respect to the developing of institutional policies and rules have been done, including matters such as transparency, participation and decision-making
Concerns expressed by way of a variety of allegations, e.g. of disunity, inefficiency, ineffectiveness, unprofessional conduct, corruption, wastefulness, fraud, race and gender discrimination, insensitivity, neglect of duty etc.
4.10 Structure and Functioning of the North West University
Based on the above concerns raised by Staff Association, the Vice Chancellor responded that the overriding and recurring assumption in the Staff Association Document is that the merger is of a federal nature, allowing the Potchefstroom campus to continue as before, while leaving the Mafeking campus to flounder, and all of this while the Council is not performing its oversight function. These pervasive allegations are not supported with evidence or supporting material.
In order that the concerns raised in the Staff Association Document under this heading can be seen in context. The aims for and outcomes of the merger and incorporation processes that were agreed to and followed by the Councils of the previous two universities, the Interim Council and the Council of the North West University are provided. Those processes also demonstrate how the relationship between governance and management and between the institutional and campus management are dealt with. The handling of the matter of the future of the Mankwe campus is also covered. This should address most of the allegations made in the document as far as the nature of the merger, the transparent and participative processes followed and the outcomes achieved are arrived at and the use of joint task teams from the various campuses throughout in achieving the objectives.
To support his responses, the Vice Chancellor produced a letter which was written on the 24^th June 2002, by the former Minister of Education, Prof K Asmal giving notice in terms of the Higher Education Act, 1997 (Act 101 of 1997) of his proposal to establish a single Higher Education institution through the merger of the University of the North West, the Potchefstroom University for Christian Higher Education and the Sebokeng campus of Vista University.
Following this announcement, on the 9^th December 2002, the Minister having been advised by the Council on Higher Education gave notice to establish a single Higher Education institution through the merger of the Potchefstroom University of Christian Higher Education, the University of the North West and the incorporation of the Sebokeng Campus of Vista University.
The agreement entered into on the 20^th June 2002 between the Councils of the Potchefstroom University of Christian Higher Education and the University of North West on the nature and structure of the New Higher Education Institution. That the new name would be North West University and will have four campuses, namely, Potchefstroom campus, Mafeking campus, Vaal Triangle campus and Mankwe campus.
The Councils of the Potchefstroom University for Christian Higher Education and the University of North West reached a number of agreements on the 20 June 2003. The agreements reached around the preferred name of the new institution, the preferred official management seat of the new institution and the preferred date for the establishment of the new institution.
The nature of the new institution, the mechanisms used and time line. The outcome of the series of agreements entered resulted into the formation of one, new multi-campus university with one vision and mission, one Interim Council, one Senate, one Institutional Forum and one Institutional Student Representative Council.
4.11 Mafeking Campus
The viability studies and reports that were jointly undertaken by University of North West and University of Potchefstroom for the Council on Higher Education in the preparatory phase before the merger was done for the Mafeking campus by an external consultant. That report did not uncover the breadth and depth of the historical problems of the Mafeking campus. The format used for the viability study was to use focus groups and as many people as possible. The Interim Management Council approved that research into the internal institutional environment be undertaken on all campuses by two staff members from Mafeking campus in collaboration with a Senior academic from the Potchefstroom campus. Communication by Management to the campuses, particularly to the Mafeking campus, was a matter for concern even in the preparatory and pre-merger phase. It was decided that a printed merger newsletter would be developed and dispensed to all campuses. The entire Interim Management visited each campus (including Mankwe) of the NWU during February 2004, during the official opening of each campus, to be informed directly about the situation on each campus. The Vice Chancellor started a personal communication process after the merger date, by visiting each campus and meeting both formally and informally with groups of staff and students.
Problems concerning students and staff occurred at the Mafeking campus in 2003 and 2004. The Interim Institutional Management decided that an intervention entailing externally facilitated negotiations between the campus management, Staff Association, SRC and concerned students on the Mafeking campus should be instituted. This intervention resulted in calm being restored so that normal activities could proceed. The Interim Institutional Management required Mafeking campus Management to submit a turn-around strategy for the Mafeking campus. This turn-around strategy was developed and was approved by the Interim Institutional Council.
4.12 Attitudes and Style
The Staff Association document contains no evidence of any effort made by the Staff Association to establish or recognize the true factual situation about anything at all, nor to accept or address the fundamental challenges to effective governance and management of North West University and its various campuses, that are posed by the huge gaps and physical distances existing between the various campuses.
The campus and institutional management have already begun to engage constructively with possible attitudinal problems such as the viability study that was conducted around the internal environment looking at attitudes, beliefs, and values deriving from identifying facts, rituals, customs, campus atmosphere and related artifacts. The viability study did not render conclusive information in some areas.
5. University of Pretoria
On Wednesday, 4^th August 2004 the delegation visited University of Pretoria. The delegation was welcomed by Prof Pistorius, the Vice-Chancellor of the institution together with members of his management team.
The Committee had formal briefings with stakeholders such as, Management Board, Students formations of both Pretoria and Mamelodi campus of the former Vista University and staff and academic associations and organized labour.
5.1. Meeting with the Interim Management Board of University of Pretoria
Prof De Beer briefed the delegation of the committee around student demography, rationalization, due diligence study, academic programme, governance and administration, finances, human resource development, revising of administrative requirement, governance and management.
He gave a background that the incorporation of Mamelodi Campus of Vista University took place on the 2^nd January 2004 into the larger University of Pretoria. It took over the campus with its staff compliment of 173 staff corps, broken down into 121, academic and 52 support service staff and enrolled students amounting into 3 085, of which 2 825 are undergraduates for the programmes to be offered at the institution.
The Vice Principal stated that the students in the system still studying were to be considered as "pipeline students" and were to be afforded the chance to complete their degree programmes as planned under the old dispensation. According to the Higher Education Act, students who graduate would be issued with a University of Pretoria degree certificate with an inscription to the effect that the student followed the Mamelodi programme and curriculum. All new enrolments in the post-graduate programmes are on the main campus.
As part of the way forward, the University of Pretoria is considering further rationalization of non-viable programmes. As part of the programme alignment one of the greatest challenges in the incorporation process, is the finances, of chief concern is the student’s fees. The fee structure at Mamelodi campus and the one at the University of Pretoria are drastically different. The institution adopted a pragmatic approach particularly to the fees issue to pursue a smooth transition. The University is sensitive to the exclusionary role university fees can play in the life of the historically disadvantaged students who constitute the majority of the students at Mamelodi campus.
It was nearly impossible to conduct a due diligence study due to the lack of data and information with regard to both academic and staff on the Mamelodi campus, however the guidelines dictated that staff were to retain their previous conditions of employment and any changes would have to be negotiated. The institution recognized its responsibility with regard to the transfer of the existing personnel from Mamelodi campus to the UP staff corps and remains committed to deploying the staff in such a way as to optimize the delivery of educational instruction in all of the institution’s academic programmes and support services.
A committee of Senate, chaired by the Director: Quality Assurance, finalized an amendment to the academic offering at Mamelodi campus for 2005. The academic programme as agreed in the Memorandum of Agreement is currently being offered at the Mamelodi campus.
The rules for admission of students that applied at the Mamelodi campus in 2003-04 were aligned with the practices of the University of Pretoria and staff was trained accordingly. Mamelodi campus is managed as a fully integrated campus of University of Pretoria. A campus Director, Mr. Edwin Smith was seconded to co-ordinate and manage the campus and Dr BJ Ribeiro nominated to serve on the University’s Council. An interim SRC of nine members is functioning on the Mamelodi campus and that student’s unrest occurred following the merger was amicably resolved by accommodating legitimate student demands.
In terms of Vista, the outstanding student fees amount to R3.5 million in respect to pipeline students. Arrangements have been made with students for the repayment of those outstanding debts. NSFAS funds have been earmarked specifically for Mamelodi students and special arrangements had been made to ensure that the registration of students awaiting funds was not cancelled.
Prof Annel van Aswegen, Director Human Resources, said that all Mamelodi Campus staff members were transferred to the respective equivalent faculties and support service. Staff and parking cards were issued to all members of staff and were successfully incorporated on the UP payroll. After performing an exhaustive audit of the different sets of service conditions and benefits it was communicated to all staff members and the process of harmonization and alignment of benefits were negotiated. The retirement fund of the old Vista campus was transferred into UP Provident Fund. Management had met and negotiated a new threshold and honored the existing Vista Recognition Agreements with organized labour and staff associations. By maintaining conditions of service of former Vista could in certain cases have potentially unsustainable consequences?
The merger went relatively smoothly. The immediate challenge facing the institution is the alignment of the institutional culture of both campuses. In the process of alignment the culture of Mamelodi should enrich the UP culture.

5.2. Meeting with the Student Representative Council (Mamelodi Campus)
The SRC President of Mamelodi campus, Mr. Mlimandlela Ndamase said that it was agreed together with Pretoria campus that the SRC would be composed of a single structure divided into equal representation, the curricular integration would be phased in over six years, the medium of instruction is predominantly Afrikaans and no provision is made for non-Afrikaans speaking students to encourage multi-lingualism, the increase on fees was a major burden to poor students, NSFAS funds students are unable to register with the organization due to lack of registration fees, an independent auditor need to be commissioned for the review of the fund, transformation is non-existent and the pace to implement it is slow, there is a need for a transformation Forum Summit of all Student Representative Council’s.
5.3. Meeting with National Education Health and Allied Workers Union (Nehawu)
Ms Martha Molefe of Nehawu presented to the Committee and focused on the uncertainty that exists with regard to positions and promotions. She said that management has not responded on conditions of services and the diagonally different policies of the two institutions.
5.4 Meeting with National Union of Public Service and Allied Workers (NUPSAW)
Mr. MD Thokoane, the Chairperson of NUPSAW briefed the delegation and focused on, the autonomy of the institution insulating it from the social dynamics of the post-1994 South African society, lack of the existence of an environment to discuss strategies and expected outcomes of transformation in any detail, no equitable language policy in place, curtailing of contracts of all managers, institution protecting status quo, the incorporation with Vista is fundamentally flawed and in shambles, merger between Vista and TUKS explicitly excludes any merger between student bodies, Mamelodi campus is a dumping area for students.
5.5 Meeting with Solidarity Mine Workers Union
The Chairperson of Solidarity, Mr. J Biljon, indicated that the merger funding needs to be increased in order that the disparity in salary of the two different institutions could be put on par, the institutional bursary for staff at UP the dependants can only study at UP alone, whereas, the institutional bursary at Mamelodi, gives them an option to study at any institution of their choice.
5.6 Meeting with University of Pretoria Workers Union
The Chairperson of UPWO, Mr. J Jacobs briefed the delegation and stated that an employment equity plan is in place and that there is a need for an Employment Equity Summit of all organizations.
5.7 Meeting with Acting Campus Principal at Mamelodi Campus
Mr. J Venghani, the Acting Campus Principal, welcomed the delegation at Mamelodi campus. He said that the incorporation went relatively well and they are in the process of negotiating with the staff associations and academics around the conditions of employment. The campus is managed through an Interim structure that is dealing with outstanding issues such as the current pipeline students that are presently studying and what form of graduation is going to be instituted, what fees structure to be put in place for both institutions, the different fee and conditions of employment structures, causes uncertainty amongst students and staff of the institution. The SRC elections were held and are awaiting formal hand over to the incoming SRC. In the admission of students, they are still using the old criteria and are providing bridging courses.
In terms of the NSFAS funds, most students are not meeting the required criteria thus resulting into exclusions hence the recent students unrest at the campus. In relation to accommodation to students, there are no residences for students they are staying in the nearby townships. Staff compliment at the campus had been deployed to the main campus in Pretoria. They are still in discussions with the main office with regard to the installation of the IT System and the Conditions of Service. They have entered into negotiations with Nehawu, to discuss the realignment of Conditions of Service. In relation to sports facilities, all sport events take place at the main campus. The library at Mamelodi campus has been linked to the main campus in Pretoria.
5.8 Meeting with Student Representative Council (Mamelodi campus)
The Deputy President of the SRC raised five critical issues, academic exclusions of students, new intake of students vis-a-vis pipeline students, non-consultation with regard to Management decisions, procurement privatized, feeding scheme withdrawn, insurance for students with Sanlam discontinued, students debts of pipeline students, re-instatement of former Campus Principal, current Campus Director not qualified.
5.9 Meeting with Extended Management of UP and Mamelodi
The Extended Management Board responded to the issues raised by organized labour and students. Concerns raised such as appropriated monies, non-representation in Senate, insurance scheme with Sanlam. With regard to recapitalisation fund, those approved funds were earmarked for a specific purpose, which is to install an IT System. In relation to non-representation on the Council, the status quo currently is problematic, students serving on the Council are those based at the main campus whose term of office expires at the end of September 2004. With respect to the Sanlam Funeral Scheme, presently the amounts have changed from R40 to R80. Upon investigation they discovered that some students belonged to other schemes.
A trip was organized for the student governing body to Cape Town with the intention of exposing them to other environments. According to Management the student governing body was becoming a focal point thus the need for the development of students. When the Students Representative Council briefed the delegation, they made mention of the lack of food for them. Management took action and instituted a workable plan from the contingency funds to monitor the feeding scheme.
With regard to the Performance Management System, it is based on performance output between the employee and the employer, but has not yet reached an agreement with the organizations due to the fact that the system installed is new and it does not ensure compliance. No agreement has been reached with the Union with regard to performance output. The performance management tool is for capacity building of staff, harmonization of Conditions of Service. With regard to effective communication with staff, unions and students, there is room for improvement.
5.10 Committees Observation
Having listened to Management Board, students and the Union, the Committee made the following observations:
5.11 Committee’s observation with regard to Management
The Committee observed that the merger went smoothly and enhanced student advancement
The acceptance and incorporation of Mamelodi campus into UP is regarded as equal partner
Improvement of health facilities by establishing a Clinic shows commitment on the part of Management
Appreciated funding allocated by the Department
UP led by a strong leadership
Improvement advance in terms of the IT System
Committed to student development
5.12 Committee’s observation with regard to SRC
Agreed to have separate Student Representative Councils at Mamelodi and at the University of Pretoria
Language curriculum, marginalized non-Afrikaans speaking students
Subsidy decrease of NSFAS disadvantaged poor students from the nearby communities of Mamelodi and Garankuwa to gain access into the institution
5.13 Committee’s observation with regard to Unions
Generally concerned about their benefits
Uncertainties existing due to non-alignment of Conditions of Service
6. University of South Africa
On Thursday, 5^th August 2004, the delegation of the Committee visited the University of South Africa. Dr TND Sidzumo-Mazibuko, the Executive Director welcomed the delegation. During the period of the visit, the delegation of the Committee had formal briefing sessions with internal stakeholders such as South African Parastatal and Tertiary Institutions Union (SAPTU), National Education, Health and Allied Workers Union (Nehawu), National Unions of Tertiary Employees of South Africa (Nutesa), Vice Principal, Student Affairs, Student Representative Council (SRC), Academic and Professional Staff Association (APSA) and the Black Forum.
The delegation was unable to convene a meeting with the Executive Management due to misunderstanding of the objectives of the visit. The Vice Chancellor Prof B Pityana undertook to submit a response on the submissions made by internal stakeholders.
6.1 Meeting with South African Parastatal & Tertiary Institutions Union (SAPTU)
South African Parastatal and Tertiary Institutions Union briefed the Committee and said that they are uncertain about the concept of "comprehensive" institution, no clear guidelines with regard to the merger was communicated to them, as a result of the merger, academics are de-motivated and uncertain about the future, boundaries are unclear between higher and further education, the through put of students from schools are incapable of meeting the requirements set out by the institution, the new funding formula is problematic and the courses that are offered by the comprehensive institution are based on profit making.
6.2. Meeting with National Education Health and Allied Workers Union (Nehawu)
Nehawu focused their briefing on, the non-existence of consultation in relation to the merger particularly the former Vista staff, placing of moratorium on transfer of staff to Unisa, no proper consultation around the merger, no transparency with regard to the appointment of staff, merger process brought with it uncertainty and frustration amongst staff and uncertain about the new alignment of Conditions of service.
6.3. Meeting with National Union of Tertiary Employees of South Africa
Nutesa’s presentation raised the following issues that the merger in their view was not in its true sense a merger, instead the old Technikon South Africa was taken over by Unisa, that staff of TSA were excluded from the interim process even when the interim council were put in place, that the process of putting the new council in place was not inclusive and transparent, that there is an intention existing to sell the Florida campus, that the top management structure has relocated to Mucklenuk head office, relocated staff received vast amounts of money, that the Florida campus was excluded from the aerial map of the campus, Nutesa excluded from Senate and Interim Council, no formal consultation on new comprehensive institution and conditions of service, non-existence of change management structure, substantial exit of highly experienced staff and academics, and an increase on illnesses such as depression.
6.4. Meeting with Academic & Professional Staff Association (APSA)
APSA focused their presentation on, that the merger process is managed haphazardly and driven by power play at management level, that lack of consultation left staff with a feeling of disempowerment, uncertainty exist with regard to the vision of the comprehensive institution, that biases exists with regard to the appointment of old Unisa staff, that the Technikon type career focused qualifications replaced by University type qualifications, that the benefits of a huge merged institution is unclear and compromised academic offering, that the cultures of TSA and Unisa are different thus potentially leading to conflict among stakeholders, that the comprehensive nature of the institution is not reflected in the interim structures of College for Economic and Management Sciences, that the combination of old TSA and Unisa could lead to an impersonal, administratively driven superstructure which is bureaucratic, that the merger together with employment equity measures would compromise security of employment and career advancement, that middle age staff particularly white males feels threatened with the possibility of being forced to retire sooner than planned, that they are concerned of the possible declining academic standards, that Unisa would cater for unprepared students who will be issued with certificates, degrees and diplomas which the academic merit would have become questionable, that rationalization of courses may be accompanied by tensions between staff over what should be offered and what should be dropped, that academics are dissatisfied with regard to the conferment of their national, SAQA registered graduation at the same level as old Unisa B-degrees. In general members are apprehensive about various aspects associated with the merger, especially about job security, conditions of service and the academic comprehensive nature and administrative credibility of the merged institution.
6.5. Meeting with Student Representative Council (SRC)
The SRC briefed the delegation and said that UNISA, TSA and the incorporation of Vista to create a single comprehensive institution had been embraced by all, that an interim SRC will run parallel with the interim council, that there is no budget for convening of elections, that the alignment of fee structure should be handled by the Ministry so that plight of the poor, people with disabilities and rural women should not be compromised.


6.6. Meeting with Dean of Student Affairs
The Dean of Student Affairs, Prof O N Makhubela briefed the delegation and said that systems were put up to increase access, that the established systems ensures that a conducive environment for learning exists to ascertain students success, student profile extends to 250 000 which includes students at Unisa and Florida campus and external students, poor students were not taken into cognizance the emphasis were on technological advances, assessment systems were transformed to take into consideration disabled students, advocated for an equal system to encourage gender equality to ensure success.
6.7. Meeting with Vice-Principal of Student Affairs
The Vice Principal of the Student Affairs, Prof R C Bodibe said that open distance institution undercuts financial allocation, that they approached the Council to extend the financial Aid Scheme because the funds were inadequate, no funds exists to make provision for SRC elections, that they are faced with a challenge to fuse the two cultures with different practices and policies and the harmonization of conditions of service.
6.8 Meeting with Black Forum
Black Forum focused their briefing on, that their view is that the merger between TSA and Unisa is uncertain, TSA viewed the merger as being swallowed by Unisa and Unisa in turn feeling swallowed by the Vice-Chancellors coming from TSA, that the Interim Council having no authority to change the Statute, that management revising the gains made prior to the merger, that they are of the view that the Florida campus would be sold due to the fact that the resources of the campus were transferred to the main campus, suggested that Florida campus be developed into a hub of Science and Agriculture, that the merged institutions need to be funded, that they were concerned about the recent removal by management of previous employment policies which were there to effect redress in the imbalanced staff composition and replaced with vague measures and policies, that they witnessed an increasingly authoritarian and dismissive management style stemming from the old Unisa management, the exclusion of Black Forum from participating in the formulation of the "Unisa 2015: An Agenda for Transformation" was dis-empowering them . Black Forum aims to expose those whose actions are aimed actively, or passively to reverse the gains achieved thus far in the struggle for broad institutional transformation.
6.9 Committee’s observation
The delegation having listened to the inputs made by the internal stakeholders such SAPTU, APSA, Nehawu, SRC, Nutesa and the Black Forum, observed as follows:
That the Unions particularly those from the old Technikon South Africa, felt marginalized and excluded from the merger process.
They felt that they had been betrayed because the gains they have achieved prior to the merger process, in their view, transformation had been reversed and the status quo is maintained.
Meetings with management are turned into information sessions. No concrete resolutions are taken.
The delegation resolved to reserve their recommendations at the University of South Africa due to the fact that Management was unable to brief the Committee.
The Vice-Chancellor, Prof B Pityana undertook to provide the Committee with a Management perspective on the submissions made by the internal stakeholders.
7. Response from Interim Council of the University of South Africa
The response from the Interim Council of the University of South Africa was received on the 29^th October 2004, the Interim Council responded as follows:
In the run-up to the merger on 1 January 2004, the merger partners made three key commitments. The first was an undertaking on the part of management to communicate effectively with stakeholders, conveying the clear message that this is a new institution, not a case of business as usual. The second commitment was to ensure that the new institution would be a unitary one, based on full integration and harmonization and not a federal institution with parallel institutions run side by side. The third commitment was to ensure that the new comprehensive institution would provide unique programme offerings, meaning both university-type programmes and career-orientated offerings. Each of these three commitments was underpinned by the principle that the new institution should be a going concern. In other words, the new Unisa should continue delivering its services without disrupting operations or causing anxiety. If these are the four criteria by which the success of the merger can be assessed, how have we fared so far? Looking at the facts, it is clear that much has been achieved in a short space of time. I believe credit is due to the Interim Council, which has since made way for the substantive Council of the new Unisa, for so carefully laying the groundwork for a smooth transition.
7.1 Clear Cut Principles for Placement
Immediately after its appointment in mid-December 2004, the Interim Council set to work on appointing the Management of the new Unisa, a crucial first step in establishing stability and certainty. With top Management in place, work proceeded on the placement of all other staff, with the emphasis on fairness and transparency as the cornerstones. Aware that appointments are an area of great sensitivity, the Interim Council and Top Management took great care to define clear-cut principles for placement and to ensure that the processes set were strictly followed. The effectiveness of this approach was evident in the reasonably swift yet systematic way in which appointments have been handled. Firstly, it was the appointment of Vice-Principals, Executive Deans and Executive Directors followed by Directors and Heads of Departments. As the placement process rolls out further, staff should rest assured that the principles of fairness and transparency will continue to prevail. All appointments are scrutinized by a Human Resource Committee of Council. Where reasonable and applicable management is engaging with the unions on placements through a process of consultation. The next step in creating unity and certainty among staff is the harmonization of terms and conditions of employment which are now being finalized.
7.2 Governance Structures in Place
Equally good progress has been made in establishing the governance structures necessary for smooth, efficient operations. The pace and tone were set by the Interim Council which created various committees to oversee different governance issues, including human resources, finance, risk management and internal audit. Other highlights include the establishment of the new Senate, the institution’s highest academic body, which has been operational since the end of March and the constitution meeting of the Institutional Forum was held on 6^th August 2004.
7.3 The Challenges Ahead
We of the new Unisa are proud of the new institution we have helped to create. At the same time, we are aware that many challenges lie ahead. One is to continue the groundwork laid for Unisa to become the institution of choice for Africa. Another is to ensure the relevance, responsiveness and quality of our research and academic output. Yet a third is to improve our throughput rates, the quality of learner support and the use of technology. At its first meeting on 23^rd July 2004, the new Council of Unisa approved a new Statement on the Vision and Mission, Values and Strategic objectives titled "Unisa 2015: An agenda for transformation". The next task is to engage in an institution-wide planning process for 2005-2015. With this, will come a further development of the Change Management and Institutional Culture Change Programme. Critically, work must proceed on the harmonization of policies especially terms of conditions of employment, integration of Finances and the implementation of policies, systems and procedures. We are undertaking a personnel audit and investigation into our academic programmes with a view to rationalization. The bigger challenge, of course, will be the re-location of staff sometime in 2005 once various human resource initiatives have given us a clear picture of the resources available and how best these could be utilized. Another challenge is the question of the utilization of the physical facilities available to the new institution. We have resolved that both Florida and Pretoria campuses will continue to be used for learning and administrative purposes. A decision has already been taken about the location of the Colleges. A plan is being developed on our regional learning facilities and some rationalization is likely to be undertaken. The plan is that as many of our regions as possible will have a Unisa learning center. Management is also engaging in another drive to build a relationship to mobilize and organize the alumni of the former Unisa, Technikon Southern Africa and Vista into a new Unisa Convocation.
Addressing staff and student assemblies across the country recently, I had reason to put before the Unisa community some sobering thoughts. I said that I believe that the new Unisa was ready to fly. But that there were certain matters that made us too heavy to fly that were pulling us down. We need to be honest about these things, which have to be faced. Chiefly, we need to own this institution, to take responsibility for its future and its well-being. I said I urge you to treat this institution and its resources as carefully as if they were your own personal resources. Second we need to rethink our understanding of our role in the world and the mission of the university. The new Vision and Mission Statement is a valuable starting point. The final point I would like to make is that we must value the staff we have. Everybody has a role here. Relationships between staff and Management should never be adversarial but collaborative. Where this is not the case, let us sit down and talk. At the end of the day, the integrity of this institution depends on the level of responsibility each one of us is prepared for its success.
8. Tshwane University of Technology
On Friday, 6^th August 2004, the delegation visited Tshwane University of Technology. Prof R Ngobo, the Vice-Chancellor of the institution together with his Executive Management Committee welcomed the delegation.
During the period of the visit, the delegation of the Committee had formal briefing sessions with the internal stakeholders such as Student Representative Council from all three campuses, Garankuwa, Pretoria and Soshanguve, Nutesa from all three campuses and Nehawu.
8.1. Meeting with Executive Management Committee
Prof R Ngcobo, representing the Executive Management Committee briefed the delegation. The briefing focused on, the merger that composed of Technikon Pretoria, Technikon Northern Gauteng and Technikon North West resulting into the formation of Tshwane University of Technology. The process started on the 13^th February 2003, with the signing of a Declaration of Intent by the three institutions involved in the merger.
To understand where we are today, it is necessary to review what has transpired since the official launch of the merger. An Interim Transitional Committee, comprising the Council Chairpersons and Vice-Chancellors of the three institutions was established to manage the merger strategically. A joint merger team was constituted, chaired by a Deputy Vice-Chancellor from each of the three institutions on a rotational basis. The Joint Merger Unit included representatives from both organized labour and student community. In line with recommendations from the Ministry, Dr Danie Jacobs was appointed Merger Co-ordinator.
The Joint Merger Unit met formally on the 15^th April 2003, to formulate terms of reference and a code of conduct for all merger teams. 16 Joint Specialised Teams were established to attend to specific key areas of the merger. The cumulative efforts of all the merger structures were aimed at preparing the three institutions for the merger and the integration of functions and structures to follow. This resulted into the signing of the Memorandum of Agreement on 13^th June 2003 to govern the operations of the institutions until the merger on 1^st June 2004.
Significant milestone was the formulation of a vision and mission and values for the new institution. Following a consultative process, the proposed vision, mission and values were approved by the Interim Transitional Committee in June 2003 and it marked also the unanimous adoption of "Tshwane University of Technology" as the proposed name of the new institution. Throughout the merger process, the various structures worked closely with the Merger Unit of the Higher Education Section of the Department of Education, which was established to support the merging institutions countrywide, as well as the Reference Group that assisted the Minister of Education in monitoring the restructuring process.
On the 20^th October 2003, Prof Kader Asmal, then Minister of Education, ratified the proposed name of the new institution. The Minister proclaimed the Technikon of Pretoria as the future seat of Tshwane University of Technology.
Recognising the importance of involving staff, students and other stakeholders in the process, communication was of paramount importance in the run-up to the merger. In addition to publishing regular updates in established channels, several dedicated merger channels were established. They included a joint intranet site and a special merger publication, Merger Muse.
In December 2003, Prof R Ngcobo was appointed interim Vice-Chancellor and Principal of the Tshwane University of Technology and tasked with overseeing the establishment of the new institution until its Council had been constituted, after which a permanent Vice-Chancellor would be appointed. Since the beginning of the year two integration committees have been established to continue the work the various merger teams did last year. One committee focused on academic matters and the other on administrative and support services. One of the integration team’s key tasks is to develop the institutional Operating Plan that has to be submitted at the end of 2004.
Other key issues being addressed are; the finalization of the Programme and Qualification Mix and related matters, student enrolment planning, harmonization of conditions of service, financial planning and sustainability studies, linked to the new funding framework and facilities and infrastructure planning.
An organizational development process has been agreed upon to develop proposed permanent structures for all TUT units-both academic and non-academic. Team building workshops were held focusing on the early stages of team formation and putting teams on the path to on-going development. The change management competence development drive entails one-day workshop to equip managers to handle change and to maximize transformation to the benefit of the institution. Another initiative is a multi-level employment equity management structure to ensure maximum participation on all levels.
The new institution has a total student head count of more than 63 000, students of whom 48 000 are contact education students spread over eight learning sites. Of these, 85% are black students and 51% females. Staff component of 3 000 permanently appointed employees and the complexity of managing this massive organization assisted by an ably interim management team made up of the executive management of the three previous institutions.
8.2. Meeting with Student Representative Council of Soshanguve campus
The Soshanguve SRC raised issues such as, that they embarked on a mass action due to frustrations, that the merger process initially students were consulted, when the post merger process was reached, students were excluded from all structures, that reactionary policies were adopted by management which were not reactive to students grievances, that they support the merger, they noticed that Senior Management were recalled to TUT without consulting students.
8.3 Meeting with Student Representative Council of Garankuwa campus
The Garankuwa SRC said that they embarked on a strike action due to noticing that management had diverted from the transformation process, that the poor students were excluded who were unable to pay their fees, that no channels of communication existed, they were reduced into "Bantustan" institutions, they noticed that the departments were transferred to the head office without consultation, students are not provided with accommodation, the unrest was as a result of financial and academic exclusions, that the Vice-Chancellor is not sympathetic towards poor students, that management continues to appoint white staff, stripping of skillful people at the campus, reinforcing the main office and leaving the campus with scant staff, fees at TUT are too high, that the term of the Vice-Chancellor had been extended without consultation and that Pretoria Tech plays the role of "Big Brother".
8.4. Meeting with National Union of Tertiary Employees of South Africa
Nutesa briefed the delegation that staff are being retrenched with no apparent reason, the merger process exerted pressure and stress onto staff due to uncertainty, that there is a high academic staff turnover, pressure is exerted onto academics to put students through to secure subsidy, there is rampant union bashing, that Senior Management are relocated from Garankuwa and Soshanguve to render the institutions non-functional, that Garankuwa and Soshanguve have been relegated to satellite campuses, that essential services have been scaled down, staff have been exploited and being unfairly tasked to perform ad hoc duties, that lecturers are uncertain about their future, that they request the minutes of the G15.
8.5 Meeting with National Education Health and Allied Workers Union
Nehawu briefed the Committee and said that they support the merger. However, the development of the external campuses is non-existent. Instead, staff is deployed at the head office strengthening that structure and equipment at these campuses are removed without consultation. Such movement of staff and removal of equipment to the main office reflects that Pretoria campus is the best. Outsourcing of cleaning services sends out negative messages to staff and increases the uncertain syndrome. Relocation of staff and Senior Managers to head office and the physical removal of equipment have created a vacuum in leadership of the institutions. The merger has strengthened the former Pretoria campus and has weakened Garankuwa and Soshanguve campuses. Excellence is interpreted as being glossy and glassy. Nehawu has been excluded from the interim council and the institutional forum does not exist.
8.6 Management’s Response
On issues raised by the unions, students, and academics, such as low morale, students not consulted, deployment of Senior Managers, no feedback with regard to partners at work etc.
Management responded by saying that it is true that the morale is low due to the fact of the fluid merger process. The Interim Council instructed the top management of Garankuwa and Soshanguve in the spirit of the merger to be based at the main office because the Vice Chancellor’s of those institutions have been recalled to the head office. No staff was exploited instead what happened staff were deployed where duplication exists. The Institutional Operating plan was submitted to the Ministry for ratification. In terms of the policies, it makes perfect sense not to involve students because nothing new was brought to the table because the policies are going to be ratified by the Council. In terms of students, they will be allowed to review the policies. Out of 250 policies of the three institutions, they agreed that in the case where policies are not existing, new one’s would be developed. With regard to the relocation of the motor mechanic unit, it was decided to place it where most car manufacturers are based in Midrand where students would be able to meet with engineers identified by the institution. In terms of the employment equity plan, targets were set for 2005-2007 for benchmarking as an institution. When people were moved, all stakeholders were consulted.
Partners at work was a project designed by academics to develop programmes for staff to be abreast of modernization. For instance, posts are advertised electronically on the new IT System of the institution. The removal of the printing unit of the publishing section from Garankuwa to Soshanguve was that at Soshanguve the machines are new and of a high standard and bulk printing can be done. The development of policies was done by the Administrative Task team, which was tasked to look at these policies.
The delegation was unable to analyze the inputs made by all stakeholders as they were leaving for different destinations.
8.7. Conclusion
Some of the general challenges facing merged institutions were mainly around student fees and financial aid, harmonization of staff conditions of service and benefit structures, creation of new institutions in which all campuses are accorded the same status and the development of single new identities and institutional cultures that breaks with the past.
The delegation having managed to achieve its objective of monitoring the merger process in particular to evaluate its impact on Higher Education concluded its activities on the 6^th August 2004 at Tshwane University of Technology.
The delegation would want to extend its appreciation to the Vice-Chancellors of the different institutions, the Interim Management Councils, the Student Representative Councils of the different institutions, organized labour, Nehawu, SAPTU, Meshawu, Ntesu, APSA, Black Forum, SASCO, ANC Youth League, Staff Association, MWU Solidarity, UPWO, Nutesa and Institutional Forum for the submissions made and sharing your experiences and the challenges.
9. Visit to Eastern Cape & KwaZulu-Natal Merging Higher Education Institutions of Learning
9.1 Visit to Port Elizabeth University
9.2. The nature of the merging institution
The mergers taking place in Port Elizabeth would be between the University of Port Elizabeth (UPE), Port Elizabeth Technikon and the P.E. campus of Vista University. These institutions will merge and become Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University on the 1^st January 2005. An interim Council had already been established, a Memorandum of Agreement had been signed between the three institutions, the name of the new institution had been announced, and the appointment of the Interim Vice-Chancellor had been announced just a few days before the visit of the Portfolio Committee to the campus. The three institutions are also embarking on a consolidated budget for next year. On the face of it, therefore, it appeared as if a healthy situation existed with regard to the commitment of all three institutions to the merging process, and the relatively smooth progression of the merger. There were no serious objections in principle to the merger from anyone of the three merging institutions.
The delegation met with the Management Committee, Student Representative Council and Labour representatives of both University of Port Elizabeth and the Vista Campus in Port Elizabeth simultaneously. This appeared to be a good sign of reconciliation between at least two of the three merging institutions.
The delegation met with the Management Committee, Student Representative Council and Labour representatives from Port Elizabeth Technikon in the afternoon. They also committed themselves to the merging process.
It appeared there was rivalry or power struggle, as one of the students called it between UPE and P.E. Technikon. The Rector of P.E. Technikon had withdrawn from the race of Interim Vice-Chancellor of the new institution, citing retirement as his main reason. While his good intentions and bona fides were fully understood and appreciated, there was no doubt a sense of tension in the air. This is understandable in the light of the high stakes of the merger.
The Vista campus in P.E. appeared to be the disadvantaged institution swallowed by two larger established institutions. To their credit the various representatives from Vista were quite outspoken about this. However, they also acknowledged that historical legacies had contributed to the disparate situation between themselves and the other two institutions.
9.3 Meetings with Extended Management Board of University of Port Elizabeth and Vista Port Elizabeth
According to the interim vice chancellor, Prof. Stumpf, UPE had been significantly transformed since its Broederbond days, and was providing an uninterrupted provision of high quality education. There was an institutional reconciliation between the three merging institutions, and a respect for the multiplicity of cultures; a balance between University and Technikon programmes would be maintained; there was a smooth delivery of programmes contributing to a smooth transition; the restructuring of the academic programme was based on relevance to the needs of the Eastern Cape; organizational transformation issues such as gender, race and culture were important in the promotion of more transparency and consultative processes; the three institutions were merging as equal partners although Vista may be feeling that it is being swallowed by UPE and P.E. Technikon. There were many resource constraints though they have found the Department very co-operative and supportive in terms of requests made. Facilities at Vista campus were not always adequate, and this had to be attended to. The upgrading of the Chemistry Laboratory at Vista was a particular priority. The 3 institutions were embarking on a consolidated budget for the next year. The institution was struggling to retain Black staff, and plans are afoot to address this problem.
9.4 Meeting with Student Representative Councils of UPE and Vista campuses
The parliamentary delegation met with student leaders from the campuses of UPE and Vista. It was clear that the issues differed at the two campuses.
UPE students raised the issues of shortage of research journals in the library, lack of student representation on the various committees and the challenge of drafting a new student union constitution.
Vista students raised the shortcomings in NSFAS in terms of sufficiently financing students, rising fees, financial exclusions, and lack of adequate accommodation, shortage of books at the library.
Vista students were critical of what they regarded as a power struggle between UPE and PE Technikon for control of the newly merged institution. UPE students denied this, saying that from their side they were committed to democratic processes to form a student union fully representative of all three campuses.
UPE students in turn were concerned that they would have to face the brunt of the rising costs (fees) attached to an established institution merging with a historically disadvantaged institution and that UPE would have to carry the liabilities of the other institutions. They did, however, strongly commit themselves to the merging process.

Other issues that were raised:
High rate of failure at Vista; shortage of computers and printers at Vista; students feared that tuition fees would rise as a result of the merger; a student centered National Student Financial Aid Scheme which is viable was required; staff morale was low because the merger process was sapping their strength; Vista library closed at 19h00 while UPE library was closing at 22h00; students did not understand why applications from outside were not considered for the position of interim vice chancellor of the merged institution; student fees were increasing while government funds were decreasing. The institution wanted students to first settle their debt before they can register at the beginning of the year and Blacks are playing a secondary role in the merging processes.
The overall impression gained by the parliamentary delegation was that despite severe criticisms, students from UPE and Vista were operating together fairly harmoniously. It was clear that the Vista students still believe that they were being treated as a historically disadvantaged institution, and they faced the greatest problems of underdevelopment and under-funding. All student leaders were fully committed to the merging process.
The delegation was not convinced that all these matters were merger-related issues, and that indeed most challenges were the normal day-to-day challenges faced by students at any given institution.
9.5 Meeting with Labour Formations Nehawu & SAPTU
The main issues raised by the two unions were:
If transformation is not vigorously addressed the old order may simply continue; something new should come out of the merger and not a perpetuation of the old Blacks may be marginalized; cross pollination between technical and academic programmes should be susceptible to the needs of the market; unforeseen expenses of merger is impacting on salary details. There is a real possibility of retrenchments; basic fringe benefits were also coming under threat. Government must play an active role in order to ensure that equity and transformation be driven; Government must, for example, say what we do with people who do not fit the equity pattern. We are all in favour of transformation, but it will bring about high costs. Staff wants job security; unions are excluded from the Interim Council. The university had a bloated top structure which was very expensive; the huge salaries of top management is something the merging process cannot afford; the fact that top management were determining their own salaries was a huge problem. Government should act as watchdog over the funds of top management; there is a huge shortfall in the Pension fund; employees were concerned about post retirement medical aid and labour is not properly represented and wants to participate in all committees.
9.6 Meeting with Management at P.E. Technikon
The Vice Chancellor of the institution, Prof. Hennie Snyman, informed the parliamentary delegation that he had withdrawn from the race for the position of interim vice chancellor of the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University because he was nearing retirement. He was, however, quick to assure the delegation that he was fully committed to the merger and that he would give the initiative his unflinching support. He was happy that technikons had been renamed to "universities of technology" because it was something he had been passionate about since accepting the position as Rector at the technikon more than 15 years ago. Together with his Vice Rector, Prof. B.K. Wells, the Registrar, Mr. M.H. Grimbeek and other senior members of management, the following points were made:
That the P.E. Technikon was honoured to be part of the reconfiguration process and to make a meaningful input into the creation of a truly African, multicultural university with internationally recognized qualifications. Although merger-related matters took up a lot of capacity and energy from staff members, they still managed to remain true to the goals of the merger. P.E. Technikon was involved in the merger process as equal partners. Everything possible should be done to create equity. The Technikon had experience in dealing with different campuses; the merger process was unfolding very well. The management of the Technikon was just annoyed by interference by the Audit & Risk committee into the day-to- day affairs of the Technikon. A joint merger core group was meeting on a regular basis in order to involve all stakeholders in the process. A merger office has been set up. Joint Task Teams which were representative of all three institutions were taking the primary issues forward. Because there were serious problems of poverty, student funding was a huge issue. The Office of the Premier had assisted in the provision of additional funds for student financial support. The Technikon regretted that it’s funding for 2004 had decreased.
9.7 Meeting with Nutesa.
The following main points emerged from discussions with Prof N.D. Kemp and Mr. Quentin Booysen of Nutesa:
It was Nutesa’s hope that the merger would not bring about retrenchment. If it did, government would have to provide funds for golden handshakes. Student Representative Council sit in Council but unions only had an observer status at Council. The three institutions merging were totally disparate institutions and conditions of service of the various employees differed; the union is fully informed on the merger process. We don’t make a profit. Government would have to assist us financially when the merger process negatively impact on our job security and Medical Aid contributions differ for younger and older members and older people need medical aid more than young people.
9.8 Meeting with Student Representative Council of Port Elizabeth Technikon.
The meeting with the students was hastily set up because they had apparently been informed that the meeting with the parliamentary delegation would only take place on Thursday.
A number of student leaders, however, did meet with the delegation, and made the following points: There was not actually a power struggle between them and students at UPE, even though there may be such a perception; however they do voice their disagreement very vehemently on those occasions when they are taken for granted by UPE students; there were also disagreements on petty issues, but such disagreements extended to the management as well. There is definitely a common vision amongst all students, despite the occasional disagreements. There are strong views on how the vision of the merging institution should be implemented; there was concern that funds from NSFAS had not been increased; most students come from poverty stricken communities and need assistance. The composition of the student population in 2003 were as follows: African, 5 801, Whites, 2 678, Coloureds, 1 435 and Indians, 203. The average pass rate at the Technikon was in the region of 75%.
10. Visit to Border Technikon: East London
10.1 The nature of the merging institution
In December 2002 the Minister of Education announced his decision to establish a single Higher Education Institution through the merger of Border Technikon, Eastern Cape Technikon and the University of Transkei in terms of Section 23 of the Act.
In December 2003 it was gazetted that the new University would be known as the Walter Sisulu University for Technology and Science.
Various conferences, workshops and meetings were held between the three merging institutions, and a Memorandum of Understanding and a Joint Memorandum of Agreement were drawn up. The Joint Memorandum of agreement stated that the Councils of Border Technikon, Eastern Cape Technikon and the University of Transkei fully accepted the merger of the three institutions as desirable towards the creation of a strong, vibrant, stable, viable and excellent Comprehensive University by taking full advantage of combined Technikon and University programmes.
The vision of the new institution is set out as follows:
Walter Sisulu University for Technology and Science will be a leading African Comprehensive University focusing on innovative, educational research and community partnership programmes that are responsive to local, regional, national, continental and international development priorities. The time frames for the merger were set out in three clearly demarcated phases:
Pre-Merger Phase which will end on 31 December 2004. During this phase the name and address of the new institution is submitted and approved, as well as the appointment of the Chairperson and members of the interim Council. The pre-merger phase is also characterized by the completion of Audits of each institution’s operations.
Interim Phase will begin on 1 January 2005. During this phase the Interim Council and an interim Management structure have to ensure the effective functioning of the new institution within a transitional period. This will lead to the appointment of a permanent governance structure, which will be the new Council for Walter Sisulu University.
Post-Merger Phase which will most likely begin from 1 July 2005. This phase commences once the new permanent Council takes up its appointment. It is in this phase that the appointment of a permanent senior management, including a new Vice Chancellor takes place. This phase will also witness the full integration of academic programmes and institutional units, which could take up to 3 to 4 years.
10.2 Meeting with Border Technikon Management Council
During the meeting of the parliamentary delegation with the management of the institution, the following main points emerged:
The Walter Sisulu University would be a Comprehensive institution in line with the policy document; the student enrolment is 21 790; the funding formula has changed drastically; there was a need for a sustainable Walter Sisulu University; an Interim Elect Council is in place. The cost of the merger is causing rising expenditure; financial exclusions are being experienced particular students from disadvantaged communities; financial support goes hand in hand with the academic record of students. Government takes a very long time to respond to claims in respect of loans and finances. There was a shortage of quality research material and journals at Border Technikon. Department of Education has offered to pay for the campaign, design and branding in terms of developing a new corporate logo for the institution. There will be a big bang announcement of the merger in January with a flag lowering ceremony; the issue of staff security needs to be promoted. The institution appreciated the subsidies received from the government department, but backlogs were astronomical. The 18 month merger plan has also had a negative impact on staff in general. However, the institution has accepted the idea of the merger, and efforts are afoot to ensure sustainability.
10.3 Meeting with Nehawu and Nutesa.
The issues emerging out of this discussion were the following:
The government has not addressed the issue of people who were employed, lecturing and studying at the same time. Distance is an issue to be considered because the three institutions are far apart; students do not have proper accommodation. There are no decent stadiums due to funding restrictions; there are salary differences between the various institutions, and there is a need for salary realignment. Staff will become impatient if these processes take too long; grading and promotion should also be addressed; pass rate is not a problem. There was a need to educate the S.A. populace about the merger. The institution has managed to forge collaborative partnership in the pre merger phase. New staff has to be recruited and marketing programmes have to be launched in order to profile the institution. There was a need for a special process of harmonizing the employment conditions in the three merging institutions. However, the institution did not yet have the financial muscle to accomplish this. Relocation of staff will come about due to redeployment to different institutions within the Walter Sisulu University. The merger should avoid job losses and retrenchment; intervention is required to bring about better grading/credits system. The recruitment area of the institution is from poor schools. Assets such as computers and cars were sold at a very low price. The Interim Council meetings are not held regularly to deal with promotions and most employees do not have job descriptions. Presently, 10 laptops are reported missing and the assets of the institution are being abused. A former employee of the institution is allegedly going to receive more than a million for services rendered; cars are bought for people who do not qualify. The Principal manages the Memorandum of Agreement entered into with the Unions. The institution is being managed by external consultants. Conditions of Service are based on the last Ciskei Government Document. The principal is on leave finishing his Ph.D. There is preferential treatment for Whites. There is a concern about the geographical distance between the various components of the merging institution.
10.4 Meeting at Eastern Cape Technikon (Butterworth)
The meetings scheduled with Eastern Cape Technikon in Butterworth had to be cancelled because of the gates of the institution being barricaded by students on strike. In a telephonic conversation with the Vice-Chancellor it was agreed that a written submission could be forwarded to the Portfolio Committee on Education by the Rector of the institution.
11. Meeting at University of Transkei: Umtata
The University of Transkei (UNITRA) is the third institution which would merge with Border Technikon and Eastern Cape Technikon to form the Walter Sisulu University for Technology and Science.
Meetings were held with the Management Committee of University of Transkei, the Student Representative Council and organized labour.
11.1 Meeting with Management Committee of Unitra
The Vice Chancellor, Prof. Nicky Morgan, gave an executive overview of the process, followed by inputs from various members of the management team.
The following main points were made:
Unitra’s mission statement informing the direction which the institution has been taking in the new S.A. dispensation, was as follows:
"To be a leading university in Africa that focuses on innovative programmes which largely address Rural Development." Unitra’s present mission is defined as being committed to excellence by offering relevant and effective teaching, research and community partnership programs with specific emphasis on the promotion of Sustainable Rural Development while providing service to its clientele through optimal utilization of its resources."
The three pillars of a university are, teaching and learning; Research activities for academics and students and involvement in Community Development by academics and students. The quality of a university is, therefore, measured by its performance in the three pillars of the academic enterprise. University of Transkei is located in poor rural areas. The four challenges to advance its performance in the three pillars of a university are, attracting qualified academic staff members to teach at the University; retaining qualified academic staff members to teach at the University; attracting students with full Matriculation to come and learn at the University; attracting a nationally accepted number of academic staff commensurate with the increasing number of students. Currently the institution is unable to meet these requirements due to external factors. The University, however, is providing valuable developmental services to the lives of 4 million people from the Kei to Umzimkulu Rivers of the Eastern Cape Province through its mission of rural development, science and technology. The University of Transkei proposes that the Department of Education facilitate the creation of an enabling environment through redress funding to enable the University to carry out its mission of rural development, science and technology.
In 2002 an anomaly occurred at UNITRA when enrollment figures dropped; it is a matter of concern to UNITRA that 2002 has been regarded as a baseline year and that the funding of the institution has dropped as a result of that.
To provide access to the young people from poor socio-economic backgrounds and their needs for tertiary education, the University has embarked on the following strategies, Science Foundation Year Programme to prepare students who have performed poorly in science subjects in Matric to enter into the natural science programmes; Economic Science Bridging programme to upgrade students to obtain exemption into Economic Sciences; Senate Discretionary Exemption; application of Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL), student Recruitment Campaign Programme. This programme has discovered a pool of students with matriculation exemptions, but who have not applied to tertiary institutions because they do not know about the Department of Education Financial Aid Programme. A fee structure which is among the lowest in the region. The SRC, with management support, has created a student trust fund which has launched an intensive fund-raising campaign for bursaries. UNITRA remains the only university in South Africa, and one of two in Africa, which graduates doctors and nurses with a strong community-based orientation.
The rural development approach to scientific enquiry, knowledge transfer and application has been extended to the teaching and research activities of all faculties. Owing to the policy of deferred maintenance which has been followed over the last few years, the physical infrastructure at the university, especially the hostels, requires refurbishment. The total estimated cost is R 62 m. The proposed solution is that of looking into the possibility of advancing the re-capitalization funds due to merging institution so that the identified infrastructure problems can be attended to immediately before they deteriorate further.
Although a late starter in the merger process, UNITRA took the lead by initiating and hosting the first conference on Mergers in the Eastern Cape. UNITRA is fully committed to the merging process and is a co-signatory of the Memorandum of Understanding. UNITRA did not wish to conflate existing issues with merger issues; but the merger did provide the opportunity to improve conditions at the institution. UNITRA was concerned that it had been the original intention of the Minister to close the institution, and that despite assurances, they still get letters suggesting that only 20% of the institution would remain; This was still clouding the issue and UNITRA would like to get assurances in that regard. There has also been an exodus of staff as a result of the uncertainty. UNITRA was attracting students who cannot be accommodated at other institutions. There was a concern about the limitation of numbers in respect of student intake for the whole institution. New Fees will only be finalized next year;
11.2 Meeting with Organised Labour
The following issues emerged out of this meeting; harmonisation of staff and parity of conditions of service has to be addressed before the merger. Most academics were leaving the institution at an alarming proportion. The unions objected to be mere observers to the process; they wanted full participation. At UNITRA there has been no salary increment for the past number of years.
11.3 Meeting with Student Representatives Council, Unitra
The following matters were raised; students wanted full representation on interim structures; Transkei as a region was the poorest region in the country; Most parents of students were in Johannesburg, and the drop-out and failure rate was high; students were unhappy that NSFAS was not funding them sufficiently and academic excellence suffers due to inadequate funding.
12. Visit to University of KwaZulu Natal: Durban
12.1 Meeting with Interim Vice-Chancellor
The University of KwaZulu-Natal came as a result of the mergers between the University of Natal and the University of Durban-Westville on the 1^st January 2004. The parliamentary delegation was presented by a ‘One Hundred Days’ Report by the Interim Vice-Chancellor, Prof. Malegapuru William Makgoba.
The report outlined the following main points; pre-merger agreements had been honoured. There had been no disruptions to the merger process and registration on all campuses proceeded relatively smoothly. The Department of Education has been very supportive and has not reneged on any of the commitments made to the process. At the end of March 2004 the University of KwaZulu-Natal had a student enrollment of 40 617 across all five campuses. The new university was therefore well on track to claim its status as the largest contact University in South Africa. Of the total student enrolment, 45% are Africans, 3% are Coloured, 36% are Indian and 16% are white. Out of the entire student body, 55% are female. The total staff complement is 5 659. The above total is made up of 2 192 academic staff and 3 467 support staff. Among academic staff, 47% are white, 28% Indian, 23% African and 2% Coloured; 57% of academic staff members are male. Amongst support staff 36% are African, 34% Indian, 26% White and 4% Coloured. As these statistics indicate, the new university reflects very closely the demographics of the province with respect to the student population. Even though there is room for improvement as far as staff is concerned, the university has the best academic staff equity of any S.A. University; in addition a sophisticated equity acceleration programme has been put in place. The Memorandum of Agreement signed in 2003 between the Universities of Durban-Westville and Natal ensured that the appropriate management and organizational structures were in place and that an atmosphere of stability and unity prevailed on all campuses. Since the start of the academic year the Interim Council has dealt with a range of University matters, including the approval of the 2004 University budget, and the approval of the new corporate logo and existing staff appointments. The first governance structure to be finalized was the Interim Council. Chaired by Dr. Vincent Maphai, the nine-member Council was constituted late last year and has been meeting regularly since 11 December 2003 the inaugural meeting at which the Interim Council effected the appointment of Prof. Malegapuru William Makgoba as the Interim Vice-Chancellor. After wide consultation a 17-member Interim Executive Committee was approved by the Interim Council. Most Interim Executive members, including the Interim Vice-Chancellor are based on the Westville campus, which is the official "headquarters" of the new institution and the venue for weekly Executive meetings. In designing the new management structure, the University was required to take into account the needs of an extremely large multi-campus institution, the need to foreground the core academic, research and service functions of the University and the diverse experiences, cultures, worldviews and expertise of South Africans. It was also required to heed the Department of Education’s Merger Guidelines which advised that existing Executive managers with terms of office extending beyond the merger date should continue in their positions until the institutional structures had been finalized and substantive appointments made to these positions. Another crucial consideration was that issues such as access, equity and an enabling organizational culture, which underpin the mission and vision of the new University, be represented and driven at an executive level. Interim Executive directors were therefore appointed in each of these key areas. Instead of a single academic portfolio, the functions performed by the Academic Deputy Vice-Chancellor have been distributed among four Interim Executive Deans, each of whom is responsible for a cluster of faculties. Furthermore, to promote efficiency, it has been agreed to devolve administrative and management functions, such as Human Resources and Finance, to the Faculty clusters under the authority and control of the Executive Deans. The Executive Deans have, however, not subsumed any of the functions of the Faculty Deans whose authority remains intact at the Faculty Level.
Given the amount of work involved in the creation of new Schools and new common curricula, the Faculty cluster (or College) model is already bearing fruit with the Executive Deans being able to devote their full attention to the needs of the Faculties under their jurisdiction. The new University adopted the principle of single Faculties and single Schools across all campuses last year. A major challenge is to organize the University’s campuses in ways that will ensure full integration of the academic programme, and to create an infrastructure that is sustainable into the future. This will involve the relocation of some Faculties from one campus to another in the Durban area and their consolidation on these campuses. Since 1 January 2004 the Interim Vice Chancellor has visited all campuses on a monthly basis in an attempt to update staff on the progress of the new institution, to encourage participation and a positive sense of ownership over the merger process and to build unity between the various campuses.
Unitary conditions of service for existing members of staff of the new institution were approved by the Interim Council on 11 March 2004.
Notch increases have been extended to everyone, and every academic has been given a computer. A Collective Agreement is currently being prepared for the signature of all parties involved. The Interim Council accepted the principle that fees for first-time students should be equalized and that the uniform fee structure should be based on the higher of the two existing fee structures. However, the maximum fee increase for undergraduate entrant courses was capped at 20%, and not at 45% as proposed. Financial aid packages have been increased commensurate with the increase in fees. There is agreement with student organizations that an urgent need exist to address the shortage of residence spaces for undergraduates and postgraduates on the Pietermaritzburg, Westville and Howard College campuses.
12.2 Meeting with Organised Labour
The unions pronounced themselves in favour of the merger, but expressed their disappointment at the lack of funding received from the Department of education.
The unions believe the Human Resource costs have not been catered for in the merger. Such costs included the equalization of salaries and benefits, capitalization and operational costs. There was a concern that the contracts of management had been renewed without evaluation. The human factor in the merger has not been addressed. Decisions made have been driven by costs rather than by principled considerations. Change management has not been addressed gender and race need to be addressed.
12.3 Concerns from Individual Former UDW Staff Member
One individual former UDW Staff member informed the parliamentary delegation that he had submitted written queries to the Merger Unit of the Department of Education about incidents of non-compliance to the Memorandum of Agreement.
The delegation was also informed that correspondence in that regard had also been directed to the office of the Minister of Education.
12.4 Meeting with Student Representative Council
The following issues emerged out of discussions with the SRC; One Central SRC has been established with 5 local SRC’s. The SRC was not happy with the student funding situation. At Westville, a gap funding formula was being used which was not satisfactory; 400 students have been unable to get funding at the main campus Requests for the scrapping of debt has been turned down. While Natal students were getting full funding, Westville students only got half funding, and therefore felt left out. The access policy of the former UDW was dominating, and African students have a bigger problem in gaining access than Indian students. Even though students have representation in council, they still feel that the Deans and Council itself are making decisions on their behalf. Student Governance policies have not yet been finalized and are still being drafted.
12.5 Meeting with Senior Management
The parliamentary delegation met with the Senior Management without the Interim Vice Chancellor, who had felt that he did not want to impose on the discussions by his presence. The following main issues emerged; there is a strong feeling among some senior staff members that the changes in terms of merging have been imposed on them. In spite of this they were willing to support the merging process. There was still a question of "them" and "us" between former Natal and UDW colleagues which was hindering the development of a shared vision on campus. The swallowing up of a smaller institution by a larger institution was a real possibility, even though task teams were operating on an equal footing. The issues of gender and race were very complex matters. The merger guidelines arrived late and there were unreal timeframes. There was the accusation from some that Government had established the merger concept without looking at what it would entail. Leadership problems were rife at the various institutions. There were no plans regarding the interim management, hence it was not a merger of equals. The intentions of the merger proved that there were unfounded mandates for some staff members. The question of low morale, low trust and lack of security has to be addressed. In spite of all these concerns the senior staff was committed to supporting the merger and ensuring its success.

12.6 Meeting with the Convocations and African Forums
The positive issues of the merger were that the merged campus was running smoothly, irrespective of problems which occurred; the resoluteness, decisiveness and commitment of both institutions were noteworthy. The Interim Vice Chancellor was providing good leadership. There are no perceptions of inequalities as far as the merger is concerned. The Convocation was committed to playing a supportive and stabilizing role in the merging process.
The merger process at the University of KwaZulu-Natal is well under way, and proceeding smoothly without any major hiccups. There were some legacies of the past, particularly at the former UDW, which was still contributing to low morale and unhappiness in certain quarters. At the former University of Natal it was clearly a major transformation for an established institution to merge with a historically disadvantaged institution such as UDW.
In the One Hundred Days Report by the Interim Vice Chancellor, it was mentioned that a multitude of fears and assumptions about the effect of the merger have been raised by different sectors within the communities of both former universities. The concerns mentioned in the report – "falling standards", "Potential job losses", "invasion of our campus", "Increased student fees", "residential shortcomings", "lack of representation" - are consistent with the issues raised to the parliamentary delegation.
12.7 Committee’s Observation
The Parliamentary delegation is satisfied that a solid start has been made to the merger process, that the broader senior leadership remains thoroughly committed to the process, and that matters are generally proceeding smoothly.
13. Visit to Durban Institute of Technology
The Durban Institute of Technology came about as a voluntary merger between former Technikon Natal and M.L. Sultan College on 1 April 2002. The Mangosuthu Technikon were part of the original talks but later withdrew from the merger.
13.1 Meeting with Senior Management of Institution
The Parliamentary delegation met the Vice-Chancellor of the institution, Prof. Ncayiyana, along with other members of the senior management of the institution. Points made by the Senior Management were the following; even though the merger was a voluntary one, it has not necessarily been easy. A merger is not an event; it is a process. In spite of the withdrawal of Mangosuthu Technikon, the merger between Durban Institute of Technology and M.L. Sultan College was consolidated. From Day 1 programmes have been fully integrated: integrated campus; integrated curriculum; integrated staff. The staff at M.L. Sultan was mostly Black; while the staff at Natal Technikon was predominantly White. A large degree of integration has therefore taken place on the campus. M.L. Sultan was the financially stronger institution while there had been serious financial problems at Natal Technikon. Most mergers take a long time; even up to 10 years. Senior Management at Durban Institute of Technology was therefore under no illusion about the challenges of the merger. It will take time to create a settled, relaxed situation where people can work. A permanent Executive Manager has not yet been appointed and this was one of the major challenges facing the institution. If you do not have stability at management level, it affects the stability of the institution. The delay in the appointment of the Vice Chancellor also had a negative effect on the stability of the institution. Academic programmes were synchronized and harmonized. There was also the challenge of dealing with two institutional cultures meeting for the first time. Due to the different salary scales of the two new staff components, personnel became much more aware of the differences in remuneration. As far as student fees are concerned there are three sets of fees. M.L. Sultan fees for existing students; Natal Technikon fees for existing students and Durban Institute of Technology fees for new entrants to the merged institution. The institution has had no major problems as far as financial aid to students are concerned. There have been no financial exclusions. Students in need are interviewed and assisted where possible. A successful student is never excluded from financial assistance. However, the institution is tough on debt collection. There is only 2% - 5% bad debt. There were disparities between the salaries of employees from the different institutions at the time of the merger. A DIT Salary Schedule was created which was market related. Staff needed to migrate to the DIT Salary Schedule; 70% of the institution’s income goes to salaries; 30% goes to infrastructure. We offered Voluntary Severance Packages to 270 staff members and cut unviable programmes. A retrenchment proposal is currently under consideration.
13.2 Meeting with Student Representative Council
The students raised the following concerns; most students were struggling financially; overcrowding in lectures was not conducive to effective studying There are approximately 200 Marketing students in one lecture room. If students owe more than R1000 to the institution, all assistance is withdrawn from them. Some parents who came to complain have been chased away. There is no Financial Aid Committee, and decisions are autocratically arrived at. The student residence in Point Road has become unsafe for students and some have been mugged. The residence has been outsourced and the owner demands a R3 000 up front payment from students and there is no maintenance of the residence.
13.3 Meeting with Nehawu and Nutesa.
The Unions said that prior to the merger there was a court case dealing with three broad issues namely, leadership of the process, transformation and labour issues. These issues are still not resolved. Avenues to deal with these issues would have been identified, according to an out of court settlement. DIT is not a transforming institution. The Voluntary Severance Packages which were offered, were unstructured. Leading academics were lost by the institution. There is no Equity Plan; no Human Resource Development Plan. There is also a general lack of co-ordination of strategic planning. Labour is not represented in the Council. Lecture rooms are overloaded. There is no strategic plan at the institution. The management negotiating team has only been negotiating on section 189. Government need to put a hold on section 189. On the other hand new people are being employed despite section 189. Union is poised to declare a dispute on this whole matter. There is a corporatist approach to education rather than a co-governance approach. Management is not addressing the core issues of transformation. There is an absence of a business plan; no one knows what the vision, objectives or financial plan of the institution is; employment takes place without a plan and a budget, and occurs haphazardly; there is also mismanagement at DIT; an urgent audit is required and the Minister of Education needs to intervene at Council level.
13.4 Committee’s Observation
There are very serious contradictions in the reports received at Durban Institute of Technology (DIT). On the one hand senior management gives a glowing report about the state of the merger; on the other hand we receive a damning report from the unions and students about the state of the institution.
Of particular concern is the report by the unions that there is mismanagement and that there is a glaring absence of a fundamental business plan and budget. Also the contention that employment and financial practices occur haphazardly is a matter that has to be formally investigated by the Department.
Despite the contradictions, the institution has embraced the merger process and is prepared to address the inadequacies faced by the institution.
14. Conclusion
The Portfolio Committee on Education delegations wishes to acknowledge that during its recent study tours to Higher Education Institutions in the North and South of South Africa, that all institutions visited had indicated a strong commitment to the process of merging of Higher Education institutions as set out in the guidelines of the Department of Education. Despite a number of teething problems that were being encountered at some of these institutions, there was an overwhelming sense of goodwill and commitment at all these institutions towards the merger process.
The Committee believes that the positive response to the merging process is a vindication and an endorsement of the original decision taken by the Department of Education in this regard.

15. GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommends that the Department undertake more efficient steps in accelerating transformation to be able to bring about equity between the various sections of the merging higher education community.
The Committee recommends that the Department review the National Student Financial Aid Scheme in order to provide poor students with more satisfactory mechanisms of accessing the necessary funds.
The Committee recommends that the Department put mechanisms in place to examine the extent to which it provides adequate support to alleviate Institutions from the huge Human Resource costs inherent during the merging process.
The Committee recommends that the Department examine this tendency and intervene in order to establish a more equitable and transparent remuneration dispensation at Higher Education institutions.
The Committee recommends that the Department institute an investigation to assess whether the quality of research material meets the required standards at those institutions.
The Committee recommends that the Department liaise with Higher Institutions to assess whether the necessary structures have been put in place to accommodate student formations in decision-making levels.
The Committee recommends that the Department monitors whether Higher Education Institutions has put in place communication strategies to address the insecurities and uncertainties of staff, students and academics, and to improve communication with all internal stakeholders.
The Committee recommends that the Department and the respective Higher Education institutions put in place mechanisms or systems that would capture the institutional memories of merging institutions, as well as the indigenous knowledge of their surrounding communities be maintained and preserved.
The Committee recommends that the advisory role played by Institutional Forums during the merger process be reviewed.
The Committee notes the vast logistical distances between multi-campus institutions which may have an impact on the accessibility of these campuses.

16. Recommendations Dealing with Specific Institutions
16.1 Durban Institute of Technology
The Committee recommends that the Department undertake an in depth inquiry into allegations of mismanagement and to conduct a financial audit to address the shortcomings.
The Committee recommends that the institution develop a strategy to address the overcrowding in the Marketing lectures.
The Committee recommends that the institution approached the local municipality with the intention to improve the conditions of the road at Point Road and to improve the lighting of poles to avert criminal activities.
16.2 Walter Sisulu University for Technology and Science
The Committee recommends that the Department intervenes were necessary particularly where institutions find it difficult with the harmonization of conditions of service and were possible provides guidelines.
The Committee recommends that the Department institute an investigation at Border Technikon were university assets such as computers, laptops and cars are auctioned at very low prices.
The Committee recommends that the security system at all three institutions should be improved to guard against loss of resources.
The improvement of the infrastructure and refurbishment at the former Unitra campus need to be seriously addressed.
16.3 University of KwaZulu-Natal
Concerns raised by an individual member of staff of the University of KwaZulu-Natal with regard to incidents of non-compliance to the Memorandum of Agreement will be forwarded to the Department of Education for Investigation.
The issues concerned have already been raised by the individual staff member with the Ministerial Representatives of the Department of Education.
The shortage of residence spaces at Pietermaritzburg, Westville and Howard College campuses need to be addressed by the institution.
Access policies at the former UDW campus were apparently making it more difficult for African than Indian students to gain access to the institution.
Low morale, low trust and the lack of security amongst a number of staff members have to be addressed.
16.4 Vista PE Campus
The Department is urged to investigate this phenomenon and report back to the Committee as to what plans of actions has been instituted and what progress has been made.
High failure rate, shortage of computers & research materials, and perceived financial exclusions all contributed to the Vista PE campus still considering itself as a junior partner in the merging process with UPE and PE Technikon.
Students at Vista still believe that they were being treated as a historically disadvantaged institution and that they faced the greatest problems of under-development and under-funding.
16.5 North West University
The advisory role played by the Institutional Forum to the Interim Council during the merger process needs to be reviewed.
That Management needs to fast-track the Programme Qualification Mix to encourage better relations relating to the programmes.
Mankwe campus should be converted into a Further Education and Training College to eradicate duplication of programmes.

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
GUEST ATTENDANCE REGISTER
Prof C.F.C. van der Walt, Interim Registra, North West University, Potchefstroom campus.
Prof A.A. I Bootha, Vice Rector, Finance & Budgeting Committee North West University, Mafeking campus.
Prof MS Zibi Vice Rector, Staff and Student Affairs, North West University, Potchefstroom campus.
Prof F van Niekerk, Vice Rector, Institutional Management Board, University of North West, Potchefstroom campus.
Prof N P Maake, Sebokeng Vista University Campus.
Ms S Letsoalo, Interim Director of Administration
Mr Melvin Diedricks, Administration Unit
Ms J Joubert, SRC President, Potchefstroom campus.
Mr. T Robertson, SRC Vice President, Potchefstroom campus.
Mr. W Smit. SRC, Potchefstroom campus.
Ms C Pretorius, SRC, Potchefstroom campus.
Mr. K Nieuhof, SRC, Potchefstroom campus.
Mr. J Rossouw, SRC, Potchefstroom campus.
Mr. E Burger, SRC, Potchefstroom campus.
Ms E van der Westhuizen, SRC, Potchefstroom campus.
Mr. N Jordaan, Vice President, SRC, Vaal Triangle campus.
Mr E Mbipa, SRC, Vaal Triangle campus.
Ms L Mofokeng, SRC, Vaal Triangle campus.
Mr. KB Mokwena, SRC, Vaal Triangle campus.
Mr Bennie Linde, Chairperson, South African Parastatal and Tertiary Institutions Union, Potchefstroom campus.
Mr Krister J van Rensburg, Chief Executive Officer, South African Parastatal and Tertiary Institutions Union.
Ms Petro Sieberhagen, South African Parastatal and Tertiary Institutions Union.
Mr A Bobela, National Education, Health and Allied Workers Union, Potchefstroom campus.
Mr E Moamogwa, National Education, Health and Allied Workers Union, Potchefstroom campus.
Ms J Montshonyane, MESHAWU, Potchefstroom campus.
Mr R Matube, National Tertiary Employees Staff Union, Potchefstroom campus.
Mr TP Venter, Co-Chairperson, Institutional Forum, Potchefstroom campus.
Prof JWN Tempelhoff, Institutional Forum, Potchefstroom campus.
Dr C J Smit, Institutional Forum, Potchefstroom campus.
Mr J Tshabalala, Institutional Forum, Vaal Triangle campus.
Ms E Deacon, Institutional Forum, Vaal Triangle campus.
Ms P Sieberhagen, Institutional Forum, Potchefstroom campus.
Mr L J Zerwick, Institutional Forum, Academic Staff, Potchefstroom campus.
Mr Dewer Knoetzee, Student, Potchefstroom campus.
Adv. ZM Sicwebu, Co-Chairperson, Institutional Forum, Mafeking campus.
Ms M Modise, Institutional Forum, Mafeking campus.
Mr K L Molosankwe, Staff Association, Mafeking campus
Mr M M Pule, Institutional Forum, Mankwe campus.
Mr T Mashego, Institutional Forum, Mankwe campus.
Mr P T Mpete, Institutional Forum, Mafeking campus.
Mr F Leburu, Institutional Forum, Mafeking campus.
Mr N Thipe, , Institutional Forum, Mankwe campus.
Ms M A Mokoena, Institutional Forum, Mafeking campus
Mr J Monedi, Institutional Forum, Mafeking campus
Mr L Ngakane, Institutional Forum, Mankwe campus.
Mr P Sehlare, Institutional Forum, Mafeking campus
Prof CWI Pistorius, Vice Chancellor and Principal, University of Pretoria.
Prof CR de Beer, Vice Principal, University of Pretoria.
Prof A van Aswegen, Director, Human Resources
Ms A Smit, SRC President, UP
Ms M Molefe, National Education, Health and Allied Workers Union, UP
Mr TD Thokoane, National Union of Public Service & Allied Workers, UP
Mr J Biljon, Solidarity Union, UP
Mr J Jacobs, University of Pretoria Workers Union, UP
Prof L Maree, University of Pretoria Staff Association, UP
Mr J Vhengani, Acting Campus Principal, Mamelodi campus.
Ms Olga Meshoe, African Christian Democratic Party, UP
Mr Marni Scheepers, Vryheid Front, UP
Mr Lesego, Mokone, Independent Democrats, UP
Mr Segonye A Mohlamonyane, South African Students Congress, UP
Mr Lebohang Sodike, ANC Youth League, UP
Mr Dean Martin Baardman, DA, UP
Mr J Pentz, Deputy President, SRC, UP
Mr Janus Visagie, Vryheid Front, UP
Mr E Myburgh, Vryheid Front, UP
Mr CJ Janse van Rensburg, Vryheid Front, UP
Ms Marina Visagie, Vryheid Front, UP
Michell Vosloo, Suze Buurthut Katjes, UP
Mr Oscar Madlala, ANC Youth League,UP
Mr Mlinmandlela Ndamase, ANC Youth League/SASCO,UP
Mr David Maimela, ANC Youth League/SASCO,UP
Mr Francois Coetzee, Afrikaner Studentebond, UP
Mr Tumelo Phuthadira, ANC Youth League/SASCO,UP
Mr Bongani Mgwenya, PASMA, UP
Mr Aaron Mashele, ANC Youth League/SASCO,UP
Mr Sibusiso Zulu, ANC Youth League/SASCO
Mr Motlatso Raphasha, ANC Youth League/SASCO
Mr France Mjengu, ANC Youth League/SASCO
Mr GM Zondagh, SAPTU, Unisa
Mr M Jordan, SAPTU (VUDEC)
Mr SA Haale, SAPTU, Unisa
Ms WR Uys, SAPTU, Unisa
Mr SD Selematsela, SAPTU, Unisa
Mr A Hatzenberg, SAPTU, Unisa
Mr M A Kganaga, NEHAWU, Unisa
Mr E K Mashego, NEHAWU, Unisa
Mr NWT Makgwara, NEHAWU, Unisa
Mr TP Mashaba, NEHAWU, Unisa
Mr KD Mulaudzi, NEHAWU, Unisa
Ms PC Selumula, NEHAWU, Unisa
Mr Lazarus Nemungwi, NEHAWU, Unisa
Ms L H Ludick, NUTESA, Unisa
Ms Corlette Maharaj, NUTESA, Unisa
Mr Rabelani Dagada, NUTESA, Unisa
Mr Karel van Wyk, NUTESA, Unisa
Ms Thelma Louw, NUTESA, Unisa
Mr Johan Jonker, NUTESA, Unisa
Prof RC Bodibe, Vice Chancellor Student Affairs, Unisa
100 Prof O N Makhubela, Dean of Student Affairs, Unisa
101.Mr PSN Siwele, SRC, Unisa
102. Mr M Chuma, SRC, Unisa
103. Ms P Raseroke, SRC, Unisa
104. Mr S Mohaka, SRC, Unisa
105. Mr DJ Kruger, APSA, Unisa
106. Mr M Geldenhuys, APSA, Unisa
107. Mr L Kruger, APSA, Unisa
108. Mr NJ Coetzee, APSA, Unisa
109. Prof R L Ngcobo, Vice- Chancellor, Tshwane University of Technology.
110. Prof S K Lenyai, Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Academic, Tshwane University of Technology.
111. Prof S Johnny Molefe, Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Development, Tshwane University of Technology.
112. Prof Mbudzeni Sibara, Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Academic, Management Sciences, Tshwane University of Technology.
113. Prof Lourens R van Staden, Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Academic, Social & Information Sciences, Tshwane University of Technology
114. Prof Nico P du Preez, Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Academic, Distant Campus Education, Tshwane University of Technology
115. Mr Alf Mashego, Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Human Resources, Tshwane University of Technology
116. Mr Justice Mhlongo, SRC, Tshwane University of Technology
117. Dr Simon Sauer, Nutesa, Tshwane University of Technology
118. Mr Moss Motha, Nutesa, Garankuwa campus, Tshwane University of Technology
119. Mr Moses Peo, Nutesa, Soshanguve campus, Tshwane University of Technology
120. Mr Aslam Tawana, Nehawu, Pretoria Campus, Tshwane University of Technology
121. Mr Tshepo Makitla, Soshanguve campus, Tshwane University of Technology
122.Ms B R Maphai, Executive Director Student Affairs, Tshwane University of Technology
123. Mr MS Mukhola, Campus Director, Tshwane University of Technology
124. Dr D Tromp, Chief Financial Officer, Tshwane University of Technology
125. Prof Hugo Durrheim, Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Academic, SET, Tshwane University of Technology
126. Prof Peter van Eldik, Advisor to Vice-Chancellor, Tshwane University of Technology
127.Prof M Ralekhetho, Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Operations, Tshwane University of Technology
128. Mr Nico J van der M Stofberg, Registrar, Tshwane University of Technology
129.Prof R Uys, Oserver, Corporate Relations, Tshwane University of Technology
130. Mr R Kgaphola, DoE, Pretoria
131. Ms KI Pooe, DoE, Pretoria
132. Mr L Masuku, SRC Soshanguve Campus, Tshwane University of Technology
133. Mr F Moineo, SRC, Soshanguve campus, Tshwane University of Technology
134. Mr G Xaba, SRC, Administrator, Soshanguve campus, Tshwane University of Technology
135. Mr Philani Hlatshwayo, SRC, Garankuwa campus, Tshwane University of Technology
136. Mr Malope Morake, SRC, Pretoria, Tshwane University of Technology
137. Mr Tshepo Makitla, Nehawu, Soshanguve campus, Tshwane University of Technology
138. Mr Gardner Tefu, Nehawu, Pretoria, Tshwane University of Technology
139. Mr Nceba Botha, Nehawu, Soshanguve campus, Tshwane University of Technology
140. Ms Matete Madiba, Nehawu, Soshanguve campus, Tshwane University of Technology
141. Mr Manoko Seerane, Nehawu, Soshanguve campus, Tshwane University of Technology
142. Mr Thapelo Rametsi, Nehawu Soshanguve campus, Tshwane University of Technology
143. Mr Jabulani Mashiya, Nutesa, Pretoria campus, Tshwane University of Technology
144. Mr Jamwell Maswanganyi, Nutesa, Garankuwa campus, Tshwane University of Technology
145. Ms Dimakatso M Peo, Nutesa, Soshanguve campus, Tshwane University of Technology
146. Mr William van Wyk, Nutesa, Pretoria campus, Tshwane University of Technology
147. Mr J J C Sauer, Nutesa, Pretoria campus, Tshwane University of Technology
148. Mr Morse Motha, Nutesa, Garankuwa campus, Tshwane University of Technology.

Report to be considered.


2.