Report of the Portfolio Committee on Science and Technology
on Budget Vote 33: Science and Technology, and Corporate Strategy 2010-2013, dated
14 April 2010:
The Portfolio
Committee on Science and Technology, having considered and concluded its deliberations
on Budget Vote 33: Science and Technology, and the Corporate Strategy 2010 –
2013, reports as follows:
Introduction
On 10 March 2010,
the Committee was briefed on the strategic plan and budget by the Department of
Science and Technology’s Acting Director –General at the time, Dr Thomas Auf
der Heyde and assisted by Deputy Minister, Mr Derek Hanekom.
The presentation by
the Department of Science and Technology (DST) included a focus on their
strategic context, overview and key policy developments, principal goals,
outputs, achievements and challenges, medium-term priorities and initiatives,
selected medium-term output targets, monitoring and evaluation, gross
expenditure on research and development and the financial resources of the
Department.
Strategic context
The Corporate
Strategy was informed by Government’s Medium-Term Strategic Framework, the
Ten-Year Innovation Plan and the National Research and Development Strategy.
Principal goals
DST’s principal
goals are to enhance SA’s knowledge-generation capacity, develop innovation
capacity and the necessary science and technology innovation (STI) human
capital to meet the needs of society. The idea is to build a world-class STI
infrastructure to extend the frontiers of knowledge, train the next generation
of researchers and enable technology development and transfer. Thereby positioning SA as a strategic
international research development and innovation (RDI) partner and making the
exchange of knowledge, capacity and resources between SA and its regional and
international partners possible.
Outputs, past achievements and challenges
Some of the achievements
highlighted to the Committee were:
·
the launch of the SumbandilaSat (a micro earth observation
satellite);
·
the completion of the construction of 7 dishes of the KAT-7
(MEERKAT precursor);
·
the launch of the SA HIV and AIDS research and innovation
platforms;
·
82 research chairs that were awarded;
·
an increased number of people participating in the National Science
Week Programme;
·
the launch of a R100 million Platinum Development Fund to
promote commercialization of platinum group metal technologies in
·
SA’s election as Vice-President of the Non-Aligned Movement
Science and Technology Bureau for the next four years;
·
R178 million leveraged by DST through official donor
assistance;
·
the finalization of the 10-year Global Change research plan;
·
the roll-out of rural broadband connectivity using a
wireless mesh network, that reached 150 schools in Nkangala District Municipality
in Mpumalanga and part of the Sekhukhune District in Limpopo; and
·
the establishment of a Titanium Centre of Competence was at an
advanced stage.
The challenges in
implementing some key performance areas included the economic recession, which
resulted in substantial reprioritization, lack of intergovernmental
co-ordination; the disparity of the financial and academic year calendars,
which impacted on the disbursement of funds; and the strain on resources with
the establishment of new entities.
The Committee was
presented with an overview of medium-term priorities, deliverables and
medium-term initiatives. The Committee was further briefed referring to a table
which listed the major objectives, measurement indicators and output targets of
the Department.
Monitoring and evaluation
One of the specific
requests to the Department had been to to elaborate on the existing monitoring
and evaluation mechanisms to assess their programmes and projects. The
Department summarized their monitoring and evaluation mechanisms as follows:
·
monitoring and evaluation would be informed by the
Presidency’s Outcomes framework, published in January 2010;
·
strong focus on outcomes and indicators in the corporate
strategy;
·
a dedicated monitoring and evaluation unit within the
Department;
·
business plan very closely aligned with corporate strategy;
·
quarterly reports with indicators;
·
development of an internal Performance Information
Management System;
·
shareholder compact a key instrument used to link public
entities’ targets to DST targets; and
·
project funding to entities will be informed by programme
objectives to assess the potential long-term impact of the interventions.
Gross Expenditure on Research and Development (GERD)
Under Gross
Expenditure on Research and Development it was reported that the 2007/8 Research
and Development (R&D) survey showed spending on R&D amounted to R18.6
billion, that is 0.93 per cent of GDP. Spending decreased from 0.95% (2006/7) to
0.93% (2007/8). Private sector spending on R&D amounted to 57.7%.
Medium-term expenditure estimates
The estimated
expenditure for the 2010/11 financial year amounted to R4.6 billion, increasing
to R4.9 billion in 2011/12 and decreasing to R4.5 billion in 2012/13. 92.1% of
the funds allocated go to public entities with the remainder to goods and
services, compensation and payments for capital assets. Programmes such as Research, Development and
Innovation are allocated 28%, Human Capital and Knowledge Systems is allocated
38%, Socio-Economic Partnerships receives 27%, International Co-operation and
Resources amounts to 3%. The historical spending trends (2005-2009) of the
Department reflect that over the years the Department spent the allocated to it.
Summary of Committee deliberations
1.
Members wanted to know how effective expenditure on R&D was
and whether it was measurable. The Department’s response was that they were
only in a position to measure their outputs and that it was difficult to
control the outcomes and socio-economic impact of projects after
implementation.
2.
Members enquired about the decrease in the amount allocated
by Treasury in 2013 and what informed the cut? The response was that with less
funding, National Treasury requested all government departments to review their
budgets. The Department had to reprioritize programmes in such a manner that it
did not necessarily stop programmes.
3.
Reference was made to energy as one of the Grand Challenges
identified by DST, but information was limited regarding DST’s role in
alternative energy solutions and the amount spent on that. In response, the
Committee was assured that though much of DST’s involvement in the field of
energy was at a research level, a considerable amount of work was being done on
the energy front, especially in the field of hydro-energy and that a number of
projects were under way. The
Department’s entity for energy research is the South African National Energy Research
Institute (SANERI).
4.
With regard to the Anglo Platinum Development Fund
partnership and the initiatives in fuel cells and battery development, Members
enquired to what extent there will be international collaboration given the
amount of work done on battery development internationally or will the focus be
on local manufacturing only. The
Department indicated that it was in the process of reviewing the investment
potential against the benefits.
5.
The extent to which innovations in biotechnology,
nanotechnology and advanced manufacturing, etc. linked with other or existing
beneficiation programmes, was questioned. The Department indicated that there
were a number of areas where the sole focus is on value-add. Four platforms were developed for the
different types of metals such as precious metals, ferrous metals and light
metals. The by-products of the metal industries allowed for advanced manufacturing
in, for example, the area of chemicals. Other initiatives were in the
agricultural sector. The Department
undertook to do a full briefing with the Committee at a later stage on some of
the socio-economic development projects.
6.
A question was raised around the strategy for retaining
scarce skills. An example was made of engineers finding themselves in other
jobs outside engineering. The Department explained that this was a global phenomena
and that retention strategies needed to be developed at institutional level
instead of governmental level.
7.
Reference was made to the DST’s target of 2% of GDP spend on
R&D within a period of ten years and whether such a target was possible. In
response, the Department clarified that the 2% target was merely a DST aspiration
and that it was not a formal target.
8.
Members enquired about the small-scale trout farming and
abalone projects and whether it was limited to the
9.
Clarity was required around the four new health initiatives
mentioned in the presentation, its location and whether the initiatives were in
response to a challenge identified. The Committee
was informed that the choice of area for a project was informed by the needs of
the region and community as well as the suitability of available
technology. In some cases, proposals for
pilot projects are referred to DST by other government departments.
10.
Further examples of the rural quality of life improvement
initiatives were required. The Department referred to pilot programmes launched
in communities in the
11.
Members wanted to know how the Department plans to address
the challenges they have in implementing some of its targets. The impact of the
economic recession on certain programmes were noted and captured. The DST
reported that the challenges of intergovernmental co-ordination on integrated
projects were being addressed through fostering closer working relationships.
Cabinet is also in the process of reviewing the cluster system in order to
improve it.
12.
One of the outputs
identified was awarding 4900 students with bursaries during the period
2010-2013, members enquired to what extent was race, gender, disability and
rural entrants were being considered when awarding those bursaries. The DST
assured the Committee of their commitment in ensuring that bursaries are
awarded in accordance with the equitable distribution of the general population
and that the Department and its entities were mindful of the need to address
the issues concerning gender, race, impoverished backgrounds and persons with
disability.
13.
Members enquired:
·
why the target for the Technological Innovation Agency (TIA)
to be fully operational has shifted from 2010 to 2013.
·
what the potential problems were of amalgamating entities
under TIA,
·
the reasons why the CEO of TIA was in an acting position,
·
the reason for the change of the target date for the
appointment of a CEO from 30 March 2010 to 30 November 2010; and
·
the reason for the lengthy
delay in the appointment of the CEO.
The Department
explained that at the time the TIA Board was appointed, the Agency could not
yet be considered as fully operational. The establishment of the Agency took
more time than anticipated. The
different entities being merged into TIA had their own employment policies and
contracts and it was necessary to consult with all personnel involved. The
Department was involved in managing the process of aligning policies and
introducing new processes such as access to funding. The Department undertook
to revert back to the Committee around the appointment of the CEO.
Conclusion
1.
The Committee noted that some of the targets set for
strategic priorities have changed and would therefore require more details from
the Department regarding factors necessitating these changes.
2.
The Committee would engage the Department on the question of
the awarding of Research Chairs, which they felt was not well-co-ordinated. The
Committee encouraged a co-operative relationship between the Department of
Science and Technology and the Department of Higher Education to discuss issues
in this regard and that the Committee should be kept abreast around
developments of these discussions.
3.
The Committee undertook to closely monitor the amalgamation of
several entities into TIA amid insecurities raised by some of the entities’
management regarding their positioning within TIA.
4.
The Committee noted that the target for the SA National
Space Agency (SANSA) to come into operation seemed to have shifted to March
2013, the Committee required clarity on this as they were under the impression
that SANSA was already in operation.
5.
The Committee noted the important role that agencies such as
the Technology Innovation Agency, National Space Agency and the National
Intellectual Property Management Office have played in facilitating the
development of cutting-edge science and technology capabilities in the country.
For this reason, the Committee was disappointed to learn that these agencies
were not yet fully operational or that the initial target dates for
operationalisation have been shifted to later dates.
6.
Members noted that very little was reported about progress
being made since the Sumbandila satellite was launched and will be requiring an
update from the Department on the matter.
7.
The Department will be required to provide detailed
presentations on the role of science and technology in energy security, the
development of alternative energy-generation technology and energy as one of
the Department’s grand challenges.
8.
The Committee would require the Department’s participation
and input when they receive a presentation from the University of the
9.
The Committee was satisfied with the Department’s track
–record of unqualified reports by the Auditor-General.
10. The Committee was
satisfied with the Department’s historical spending trend of actual expenditure
in relation to the amount voted for.
Recommendation:
The Portfolio
Committee on Science and Technology, having considered and concluded its
deliberations on Budget Vote 33: Science and Technology, and the Corporate
Strategy 2010 – 2013, recommend that Budget Vote
33, be approved by the House.
Report to be
considered