ATC130524: Report of the Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services on Budget Vote 21: Correctional Services, dated 22 May 2013
Correctional Services
REPORT OF THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON CORRECTIONAL SERVICES ON BUDGET
VOTE 21: CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, DATED 22 MAY 2013
The Portfolio Committee on
Correctional Services, having considered the Department of Correctional
Services 2013/14 budget (Vote 21), and strategic and annual performance plans,
reports as follows
:
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
In
its consideration of the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) 2013/14 budget,
strategic and annual performance plans, the Portfolio Committee on Correctional
Services (the Committee) received input from stakeholders during hearings held
on 16 April 2013, as well as a briefing by the DCS on 17 April 2013. The
Committees observations and recommendation were deliberated on 22 May 2013.
1.2
The
Committee invited comment from the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional
Services (JICS), labour unions, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and
research institutions. The National Institute for Crime Prevention and the
Reintegration of Offenders (NICRO), the Civil Society Prison Reform Initiative
(CSPRI), Just Detention International (JDI), Sonke Gender Justice Network
(SGJN), Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union (POPCRU), and the Public Servants
Association of South Africa (PSA) presented their submissions to the Committee.
The Association on the Prevention of Torture (APT), and the University of the
1.3
The
DCS officials who appeared before the Committee included: Mr T Moyane (National
Commissioner), Ms N Jolingana (Chief Operations Officer), Ms N Mareka (acting Chief
Financial Officer), Mr T Raseroka (acting Chief Deputy Commissioner: Strategic
Management), Mr J Smalberger (Chief Deputy Commissioner: Corrections and
Incarceration), and Ms P Mathibela (Chief Deputy Commissioner: Community
Corrections)
1.4
This
report comprises a programme-by-programme summary of key aspects of the DCS
budget and strategic objectives, a brief summary of some of the main concerns
raised by stakeholders and, finally, the Committees observations and
recommendation. Given the recurrent nature of the DCS challenges, this report
should be read along with previous reports, including the Committees 2012
Budgetary Review and Recommendation (BRR) report.
1.5
The Money Bills
Amendment Procedure and Related Matters Act (Act No 9 of 2009) provides for,
amongst others, a parliamentary procedure to amend Money Bills, thus granting
parliamentary committees greater opportunity to influence the allocation of
funds to the departments they oversee. Section 5 compels the National Assembly,
through its committees, to annually submit BRR reports on the financial
performance of departments accountable to them. The BRR report must be informed
by a committees interrogation of, amongst others, each national departments
medium-term estimates of national expenditure, strategic priorities and
measurable objectives, National-Treasury-published expenditure reports, annual
performance plans (APPs), annual reports and financial statements, as well as
observations made during oversight activities. Essentially, the BRR report is a
committees assessment of a departments service delivery performance in
relation to its available resources, as well as the effectiveness and
efficiency with which its programmes are implemented. Although BRR reports must
be published at a specific time in the budgetary cycle, it is clear that the
work that informs the report must be ongoing. The Committee regrets to report
that, despite the significance of this process, the DCS has again failed to
respond to the recommendations contained in the 2012 BRR report.
2.
OVERVIEW
OF THE DCS KEY STRATEGIC FOCUS AREAS FOR THE PERIOD 2013/14 TO 2015/16
2.1
The
DCS strategic planning has, since 2005, been informed by the White Paper on
Corrections (White Paper). According to its strategic plan the DCS mission is
to contribute to maintaining and protecting a just, peaceful and safe society
by enforcing court decisions and sentences in line with relevant legislation,
detaining all inmates in safe custody while ensuring their human dignity, and
promoting the rehabilitation, sense of social responsibility and human
development of all offenders.
2.2
The
DCS identified three strategic goals to pursue over the medium term, and which are
to enable it to contribute to ensuring that all South Africans are and feel
safe. Firstly, the DCS endeavours to ensure that offenders are held in safe,
secure and humane custody, that they are provided with correctional sentence
plans, and that they have their literacy, education and training needs met.
Secondly, the DCS intends to ensure that remand detainees are held in safe,
secure and humane detention, have access to court processes, and that they have
their family and social needs supported. Finally, the DCS will ensure that
parolees, probationers and those under community supervision, are
rehabilitated, monitored and reintegrated.
3.
OVERVIEW OF
THE 2013/14 BUDGET
3.1
In 2013/14 the Justice, Crime Prevention
and Security (JCPS) cluster receives approximately R 141,26 billion i.e. 24% of
the national budget. The DCS receives 13% of the clusters and 3% of the
national budget i.e. approximately R18,7 billion. The budget shows a 5,92%
increase in relation to the allocation received in 2012/13.
3.2
According to the Estimates of National
Expenditure (ENE) the DCS budget will increase to R20 795 billion by 2015/16.
The bulk of the increased allocations will be spent on improved conditions of
service, the upgrading of information technology (IT) infrastructure, and
higher municipal charges.
3.3
The DCS budget is allocated across five
budget programmes i.e. administration, incarceration, rehabilitation, care, and
social reintegration. Receiving 28% and 53% respectively, the Administration
and Incarceration programmes will, because they are labour-intensive, receive
the largest share of the 2013/14 budget.. As in previous years, the
Rehabilitation and Social Reintegration programmes will receive the smallest
allocations - jointly only 10%. The Care programme will receive 8% of the total
budget.
3.4
Although
it reflects a 2,6%
decrease, at 66,4%, most of the DCS budget will be spent on the compensation of
employees.
3.5
The allocation to the category Goods and
Services shows a fractional increase, and while the decreases in allocations
for computers, contractors and agency and support/outsourced services are
welcomed, increases in allocations to external audit costs (R25.3 million
increase), fleet services (R35 million increase) and to travel and subsistence
(R95,7 million increase) are noted with concern.
3.6
Under the category capital assets, the
allocation to buildings and fixed structures decreases by R12,1 million, while
the allocation towards machinery and equipment more than doubles to R286
million. The reduction in spending on infrastructure is due to Cabinet-imposed budget
reductions on buildings and other fixed structures owing to the DCS consistent
under-spending on capital works projects. These reductions notwithstanding, the
DCS intends to upgrade 13 correctional centres over the medium term, thereby
creating 3 464 additional bed spaces.
4.
OVERVIEW
OF ALLOCATIONS ACROSS PROGRAMMES
4.1
Administration
4.1.1
The
Administration
programme provides the administrative, management, financial, information,
communication and technology, research, policy co-ordination and good
governance support functions. These functions are necessary for service
delivery, good governance and accountability to oversight institutions. The
programme receives the second largest allocation i.e. R5,3 billion, most of
which will be spent on compensation of employees. Over the medium term the
programmes spending focus will be on building capacity to improve service
delivery, professionalising the DCS and providing Information Communication
Technology (ICT) services.
4.1.2
The lower than anticipated spending on
vacancies, and the service level agreement between the DCS and the State
Information Technology Agency (SITA) resulted in decreased spending over the
previous two financial years.
4.1.3
According to the Annual Performance Plan
(APP) the DCS intends to amongst others, fill 97% of its vacancies, train 15
000 officials in line with Workplace Skills priorities, reduce audit
qualification to nil, reduce matters of emphasis, and limit its under-spending to
0,25% of its allocated budget.
4.2
Incarceration
4.2.1
The
Incarceration
programme provides for services and well-maintained
physical infrastructure that support safe and secure conditions of detention
consistent with human dignity. It also provides for the profiling and compilation
of correctional sentence plans, administration and interventions. In addition
to the Remand Detention and Offender Management sub-programmes, it comprises
the Security Operations and Facilities sub-programmes. The programme receives
the largest allocation, reflecting a 5.91% increase on the 2012/13 allocation. Over
the medium term the spending focus will be on providing suitable and humane
facilities by reducing overcrowding, escapes, assaults, unnatural deaths and
the time spent in remand.
4.2.2
According to the APP the
DCS intends to, amongst others, reduce the number of gang-related incidents by
10%, unnatural deaths to 42, escapes to 0.032%, and assaults to 2% of the
population. In addition, the DCS intends to reduce overcrowding to 30% and the
average length of time spent in remand to 165 days. It further commits itself
to ensuring that 98% of those serving sentences longer than 24 months will have
correctional sentence plans (CSPs).
4.3
Rehabilitation
4.3.1
The
Rehabilitation
programme provides needs-based programmes and
interventions to facilitate rehabilitation and enable social-reintegration. The
programme comprises the Offender Development, Psychological, Social and
Spiritual Services and the Corrections sub-programmes. Just over 60% of the programmes
allocation will be spent on the Offender Development sub-programme. Although the
programmes allocation has increased by 13%, it again receives the second
lowest percentage of the budget.
4.3.2
Spending on this programme is projected to
increase to R1,2 billion between 2013/14 and 2015/16. This increase will make
it possible to increase the number of offenders eligible for further education
and training programmes to 14,9 percent, to provide more workshops, and to
ensure increased educator-development.
4.3.3
According to the APP the DCS will ensure
that 60% of those with CSPs will complete correctional programmes, that the
number of offenders attending Adult Basic Education and Training (ABET)
programmes will be increased to 67,2%, that those attending formal education
programmes will be increased to 1,4%, and that the number of those
participating in skills training will grow to 28,7%.
4.4
Care
4.4.1
The
Care
programme provides for needs-based programmes and services
aimed at maintaining the personal well-being of incarcerated offenders by
facilitating physical fitness, social functioning, health care, thereby
ensuring their spiritual, moral and psychological wellbeing. The programme
comprises the following three sub-programmes: Nutrition, Health and Hygienic Services.
The Nutrition Services sub-programme receives the largest allocation i.e. R776
million.
4.4.2
According to the APP, the
DCS intends to, amongst others, increase the percentage of inmates tested for
HIV to 50%, the percentage of those on antiretroviral treatment to 94%, and the
percentage of inmates who are on the tuberculosis cure to 75%.
4.5
Social
Reintegration
4.5.1
The
Social Reintegration
programme, which is divided into four
sub-programmes (Parole Administration, Supervision, Community Reintegration and
Office Accommodation), focuses on the provision of programmes preparing inmates
for release, on the effective supervision of those on parole, and on ensuring
reintegration. The programme receives R801 million, only 4,2% of the overall
DCS allocation. More than 80% of this allocation will be spent on the
compensation of employees.
4.5.2
According to the APP the
DCS will, amongst others, increase victim participation in parole proceedings
to 4,43%, increase the percentage of parole cases submitted by case management
committees (CMCs), and considered by correctional supervision and parole boards
(CSPBs) to 94%, and rollout service level agreements to six halfway houses.
5.
OVERVIEW OF
STAKEHOLDER INPUT
The Committee received several written submissions on the
DCS 2013/14 budget and planning documents. Although the detail of the
submissions
will not be captured below, the submissions will serve as a
useful resource during our quarterly interrogation of the DCS performance. This
summary of some of the key aspects of the
i
nput, does not necessarily
reflect the Committees views.
5.1
Administration
5.1.1
Stakeholders identified a number of challenges related to the
alignment between the planning documents, applicable government and DCS
priorities and the budget. In many instances the DCS provided no detail on how
the targets set out in the strategic plan would be achieved, making it
difficult to assess exactly how the budget will be utilised.
5.1.2
The labour organisations
especially, emphasised that the DCS inappropriate distribution of human
resources resulted in centre-level officials being over-extended and that too
many office-based administrative positions have been created.
5.2
Incarceration
5.2.1
Concern was raised about the DCS use of high-tech solutions to
improve security, which contradicted the White Papers emphasis on dynamic
security or direct supervision within a unit management system to improve
security.
5.2.2
Stakeholders reiterated the concern that the DCS continue
d
to make no mention of sexual assault in their strategic and annual performance
plans. Specific targets for the reduction of sexual abuse should be set, and
statistics related to reported rapes and sexual assaults should be made
available. It is believed that the DCS will only be able to meaningfully
address sexual abuse in correctional centres once the
Framework to Address Sexual Abuse of Inmates in DCS Facilities
has
been approved.
5.2.3
Stakeholders shared the JICS concerns about inhumane conditions
of incarceration and treatment, and abuse of inmates, which amounted to
ill-treatment of torture. Major concern was raised about the lack of emphasis on
ensuring the security of inmates in correctional centres, and of ensuring their
well-being, thereby reducing their vulnerability to torture and ill-treatment.
5.3
Rehabilitation
5.3.1
It was noted that the DCS did not indicate that additional
capacity would be created at female centres. This was a cause for concern as
73% of women offenders were incarcerated across six centres that, on average,
were overcrowded by 75% overcrowded. This pointed to poor distribution of women
offenders and/or poor infrastructure in which to accommodate women offenders.
5.4
Social
Reintegration
5.4.1
Re-entry research was identified as an emerging field focusing
on four dimensions i.e. personal issues facing those being reintegrated into
society, impact of reintegration on offenders families, impact of
reintegration on communities, and social challenges to reintegration. It was
emphasised that unless the relevant government departments cooperated to
provide post-release support services, and unless greater use was made of
services rendered by NGOs, reintegration was virtually impossible.
6.
COMMITTEE
OBSERVATIONS
6.1
Administration
6.1.1
The Committee remains concerned about the integrity of the
information contained in the DCS planning documents. We agree with the Auditor
General of South Africa (AGSA) that the lack of proper risk assessment
processes resulted in poor internal controls, which in turn compromises the
integrity of performance information. These shortcomings should be addressed as
a matter of extreme urgency.
6.1.2
The AGSA pointed out that certain technical indicator
descriptions had not been prepared as per National Treasury-requirements. That
the DCS has to date been unable to implement a uniform reporting process across
all its centres presented a major challenge. Had the DCS internal audit unit
been effectively utilised, these weaknesses could have been identified and
addressed. That the DCS trained only senior managers in performance reporting,
and not all those officials with a reporting responsibility, contributed to the
challenge.
6.1.3
The
Committee has for many years been concerned about the quality of the DCS legal
support services. In 2013/14 the DCS intends to defend 80% of all cases brought
against it. The Committee agrees that this target seems ill-informed as it
implies that all challenges will be defended regardless of whether the DCS
would be able to successfully defend itself. Of greater concern however, is
that no indication was provided that the DCS will reduce its risk of exposure to
litigation.
6.1.4
Given
the DCS major challenges as far as recruitment, targets should be in relation
to reducing new vacancies, rather than in relation to filling the existing ones.
The National Commissioners comments that the DCS was ageing and that
therefore attrition accounted for many of the new vacancies, were noted. The
audit of employees still to be conducted, and the strategies to manage
attrition still to be put in place, should be prioritised. Given the DCS
struggle to recruit and retain staff, these strategies ought to have been
implemented much earlier.
6.1.5
Given
the nature of the DCS work it was impractical for it to operate on a five-day
work week, relying on skeleton staff at weekends and on public holidays. The implementation
of the Seven Day Establishment (7DE) was intended to ensure that the DCS would
be able to guarentee delivery of services to inmates at all times. The DCS
severe challenges as far as determining suitable shift systems that would
address centres specific needs, proved a major stumbling block. The challenges
have resulted in failures of both security and service delivery. Questioned about
why the 7DE could not be more effectively implemented, the DCS was unable to
provide convincing responses. The fear that the DCS senior management is
unable to develop strategies to ensure the effective implementation of the 7DE,
therefore remains.
6.1.6
Concern
was raised that as the development and implementation of an Integrated Justice
System (IJS) relied on cooperation between many departments, and not only on
the DCS, having included targets associated with it in the planning documents,
was ill-informed. The performance indicators and targets related to the
establishment of an integrated ICT system, through the phased implementation of
the CJS business information system, and integrated, holistic business and
operational systems, should therefore ideally not have been included. Although
the DCS agreed that it could not commit itself to targets that depended on the
performance of several JCPS cluster departments, it could not clarify what had
motivated the inclusion of the targets in their planning documents. They
predicted however that clear roadmaps should be available by December 2013.
6.1.7
The
DCS identified the following eight values as core to its strategic intent:
development, integrity, effectiveness, security, justice, accountability,
equity and ubuntu. Apart from promoting productivity, commitment, and service
with kindness and humanity, the DCS implores its officials to be honest, and
to disassociate from forms of corruption and unethical conduct. The Committee
agrees that these values should be lived by all DCS employees, and by those
employed by the public service. The Committee has on several occasions referred
to a moral breakdown among all levels of the DCS. That the DCS has opted to
actively advocate for its officials to embody the above-mentioned values,
appears to be an acknowledgement of such a breakdown. In addition, the eight
core values are not linked to specific targets, and therefore it will prove
difficult to measure the DCS performance as far as its moral upliftment. This compounds
already-existing doubts about the DCS commitment to developing plans and
strategies that are measurable, and for which they can be held accountable.
6.1.8
The
Committee welcomes that
over the medium term much focus will be on
providing ICT services. A fully-functional IT environment is key to the
efficient functioning of any organisation, particularly one as vast as the DCS.
It is believed that the weaknesses associated with offender management, as well
as with performance reporting and monitoring will be addressed should the DCS
long-standing IT-related challenges be resolved. Given its long history of
procurement irregularities, the DCS is cautioned against flouting the relevant
processes when procuring the services and equipment necessary to improve its IT
environment.
6.1.9
The Committees concern about the DCS administrative well-being remains.
The DCS attempts to deliver rehabilitation and reintegration services are
undermined by its continued administrative crises. Poor discipline, lack of
commitment and corruption owing, in the main, to inadequate management
seriously impede delivery and must be addressed as a matter of urgency.
6.1.10
According
to the 2012/13 Strategic Plan the DCS had 41 911 funded posts at the end of
April 2011, 40 017 of which were filled. The DCS distribution of its limited
human resources remains a concern: many correctional centres are grossly
understaffed, and there appears to be too many regional and national
administrative posts, the value of which is unclear. It is hoped that the
Ministerial Consultative Forum established to resolve a number of long standing
human-resource related challenges will have the desired outcome, and that it
would lead to better distribution of resources, better working conditions, and
ultimately improved service delivery.
6.2
Incarceration
6.2.1
In
2013/14 the DCS intends to reduce the number of inmates assaulted in its
centres to 2%. Despite previous recommendations that assaults should be disaggregated
to differentiate between general cases of assault, and sexual assault, the DCS
has again opted to cover all forms under the one generalised target. According
to the DCS inmates often failed to report sexual assault as such, and opted to
report such incidents as assault only. Often the true nature of the assault is
only determined after a medical examination. This has resulted in the reporting
challenge. Their observation notwithstanding, the DCS gave no indication of
what would be done to ensure that awareness is raised about sexual assault, thereby
addressing the stigma associated with it and hopefully resulting in improved
reporting of such assaults.
6.2.2
Upon
interrogation, the DCS reported that in partnership with stakeholders, it had
developed a policy framework that was in the final stages of approval. Although
the Committee is concerned that this policy is not referred to in any of the
planning documents, it hopes that the strategy, to be implemented with the
assistance of stakeholders, will result in victims increased reporting of sexual
assaults, the DCS improved monitoring and reporting on the prevalence of
sexual assaults, and ultimately, in a reduction in sexual assaults.
6.2.3
The
targeted reductions in the number of assaults, deaths and gang-related
incidents were noted. The Committee is concerned however that in the absence of
an effective admissions process during which vulnerable
inmates
could be
identified and then accommodated appropriately, these
targets cannot be reached. The risk of assault, death and gang activity is
further increased by the DCS acute staff shortage, and the levels of
overcrowding in correctional centres. Given that the 2012/13 target in relation
to reducing gang activity had for instance not been met at all, and that such
activity had actually increased considerably during that period, it is felt
that in this instance too targets are not achievable at this stage.
6.2.4
For
the DCS to comply with the Presidents call to ensure a safe South Africa, the
Correctional Services environment must be highly secure, not only to protect it
from inmates efforts to breach security, but also to ensure that officials do
not pose a threat. The vetting of officials must therefore be prioritised, and
the necessary interventions must be made to ensure that all access and security
systems are fully operational.
6.3
Rehabilitation
6.3.1
Given
that the DCS is charged with ensuring that offending behaving is addressed, so as
to prevent a return to crime upon release, the DCS failure to measure the rate
of recidivism, and failed to set targets in relation to it, is noted with
concern. Questioned about it, the DCS was unable to provide convincing reasons
for why it has to date not developed strategies whereby it could measure its performance
against the number of offenders who returned to crime and imprisonment. The DCS
referred to socio-economic conditions, and the stigma associated with
imprisonment as some of the major reasons for failed reintegration and a return
to crime, but gave no indication that these well-known realities were taken, or
would be taken, into account when developing and implementing rehabilitation
strategies.
6.3.2
While
the Committee welcomes the DCS intention to enrol all offenders who have not
completed Grade 9 in education programmes, concerns remain about whether the
DCS will be able to reach this target. The DCS has for many years been
struggling to attract and retain the educators needed to run education
programmes. The Committee remains of the opinion that all education services
should be rendered by the Department of Basic Education (DBE). The Committee
notes that the DBE and DCS have cooperated to some degree, and hopes that a
formal agreement surrendering the responsibility of providing education
services to the DBE, will be reached soon.
6.4
Care
6.4.1
In
its 2011/12 annual report the JICS reported that it received 34 202 health-care
related complaints. As in the case of basic education-services, the Committee
feels that inmates health care needs should be met by the Department of Health
(DOH). We agree with stakeholders that result in consistency as far as the
implementation of the national health care policy and in consistent training of
health care staff in correctional centres. In addition, DOH-employed health
care workers would also be able to independently monitor and report on conditions
of incarceration and human rights violations. The Committee therefore welcomes
the discussions between the ministers of Health and Correctional Services,
which are aimed at formalising the provision of health care services in
correctional centres by the DOH.
6.5
Social
Reintegration
6.5.1
The DCS
success at rehabilitation and reintegration of ex-offenders can only be
measured by determining the rate and circumstances of criminal reoffence. As alluded
to above, the DCS failure to measure their performance in this regard, makes
it virtually impossible to measure its true effectiveness.
6.5.2
The services rendered
under the incarceration, rehabilitation and reintegration programmes are key to
the DCS success yet they remain under-funded.
All expressed frustration
at the DCS continued failure to align its strategies and programmes with the
imperatives contained in the 2005 White Paper, the Correctional Services Act, and
the Constitution. The Committee has consistently raised concerns about the
apparent disjuncture between the rehabilitation and reintegration ideals
contained in the White Paper and the DCS planning. We therefore welcome the
DCS implementation of our recommendation that the White Paper be reviewed to
assess its impact since implementation, as well as to re-evaluate its
appropriateness.
6.5.3
Useful support service should be provided to parolees and
probationers, so that their reintegration can be better facilitated. One of the
major challenges experienced
is
that community corrections offices are
severely understaffed, and that, in the majority of instances, community
corrections officers are more inclined to police probationers, than to assist
them so that their reintegration is less traumatic. Without such services, it
is unlikely that the DCS will be able to reduce the rate of recidivism.
6.6
Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional
Services
6.6.1
The JICS, which does not
receive its own budget from the National Treasury, but is funded by the DCS,
had brought its severe budgetary constraints and the fact that its allocation
would not increase in 2013/14 to our attention. The Committee regrets that the
entity had not made use of the budget hearings and briefings to further
illustrate and clarify exactly how these budgetary constraints impacted on its
operation, and effectiveness.
7.
RECOMMENDATION
7.1
The above-mentioned
concerns notwithstanding, the Committee recommends that the DCS 2013/14 budget
be approved.
7.2
In most previous reports
the Committee voiced its extreme concern that, despite the rehabilitation and
social reintegration objectives contained in the White Paper and echoed in the
DCS core mandate, programmes aimed at addressing offending behaviour and
promoting reintegration remain under-funded. Although we had previously urged
the DCS to work towards steady progress in the direction of such alignment,
such progress is not evident. We again urge the DCS to commit itself to the
alignment of its budget with its strategic and policy objectives.
7.3
As
in previous reports the Committee would like to reiterate the importance of
measuring recidivism. Because it does not measure its success as far as
addressing offending behaviour, and facilitating reintegration, the DCS does
not have a true understanding of its effectiveness, or its true contribution to
making South Africa safer.
7.4
.Given the serious
concerns raised ,the Committee will intensify its interrogation of quarterly
financial and operational reports, with special focus on efficient
administrative practices, and the combating of corruption, the recruitment of sufficient
and appropriately trained and skilled officials, and the overall safer
incarceration of those sentenced to the DCS care.
8.
APPRECIATION
The Committee thanks all those who contributed
during its interactions on the latest DCS budget, and looks forward to fruitful
interactions with all stakeholders as it performs its oversight of the DCS.
Report
to be considered.
Documents
No related documents