Home Affairs Committee's Mandate and Five-Year Programme

Meeting report

The Chairperson said that the purpose of the meeting was to look at the strategic plan of the Department of Home Affairs and how the Portfolio Committee would relate to these plans. The short, medium and long-term objectives of the next five years, which the Committee would try to achieve, would be discussed, identifying key areas in which the Portfolio Committee could have an impact, while bearing in mind the budget constraints. He mentioned that ideally he would have liked all the Committee members to visit all the provinces, but because of budget constraints it would instead be likely that one or two members might be asked to target specific provinces, visiting them and reporting back to the Committee. At international level the Committee would discuss interacting with best practice, and possible places to visit for study, as well as what lessons might be learned. Any other concerns should also be highlighted by Members. The Committee must play a role in turning around the Department.

Planning Session: costing reported in media
Dr C Mulder (Freedom Front Plus) raised the issue of statements made concerning the planning session of the previous week, specifically DA statements that were published in the media to the effect that the Home Affairs Portfolio Committee outing was wasteful, and was the most expensive outing, costing R41 800. He was concerned to protect the integrity of the Committee. These statements created the impression that Members of this Committee were simply spending and enjoying themselves. He asked if it was possible to ascertain the exact cost of the work session, and passionately argued that if the DA had given an incorrect higher amount than the Committee had required, then a DA representative should apologise to the Committee.

The Chairperson noted that a journalist had phoned him to query why Committee meetings were being held outside of Parliament. His response was that over forty Committees were meeting and that it was not possible to accommodate all of them in Parliament. He had liaised with the Committee Clerk to find a venue for this Committee’s meetings, and had requested that if none were available in Parliament for a particular date then the Clerk should book an outside venue, strictly within the cost bracket of meeting costs by Parliament. He said that it was untenable that Committees should not be attending to their work simply because of a lack of venues in Parliament.

Mr Eddie Mathonsi (Committee Secretary) said that the cost bracket was R70 000 for the Strategic Plan meeting, but that the amount expended was only R24 300.

Mr M Mnqasela (DA) said that the DA should not be criticized for trying to find out the truth of the matter. He conceded, however, that there was a problem in the way that attempts were made to ascertain the facts. He pointed out that there were in fact Committee rooms vacant at the time, and that if the Committee organisers were misled then it was a pity. He said that the Committee should not make undue fuss over the statement, as the opposition had a role to play to protect public finances and the dignity of Parliament. He appealed to the Committee to not debate the DA's statement but rather to question the incorrect impression given to the organizers of the meeting that they must go elsewhere, despite vacant rooms being available.

The Chairperson stressed that it was not a question of debating the DA's statement but a question around the facts. He explained that Parliamentary meetings required the booking of a venue in advance. If those who let out the venues said that there were none available, then the Committee had to accept this.

A Member said that Committee members had a right to defend the Committee and that they must, in the case where the statement conflicted with the facts, put out a statement to correct the impression.

Dr Mulder said that he understood that the DA has a role to play because it was the opposition, but that he was not prepared to be involved in a propaganda exercise. The meeting had been held as a positive effort to turn the Department around, but instead the DA issued a statement creating the impression that the Committee was a gravy train. He was adamant that the Committee should make a fuss about this issue, and pointed out that the opposition must stick to facts and not be irresponsible.

The Chairperson said that it was a pity that this point was being raised for discussion when not all the Members were available, such as Ms Terblanche. He made it clear that he took his responsibility as Chairperson seriously, and that he would not like to close the ranks. All Members of this Committee were bound by their duty as public representatives to all the voters of the country, not only individual constituencies, with a commitment to all citizens, whilst also ensuring that the minority voice was heard. He promoted critical and constructive statements and engagement, but asked that Members should not publish propaganda that was not factually-based. He said that the ANC, even before the Budget Debate, acknowledged that the Department was facing serious challenges, that it had a tarnished image, and was in a mess. He made it clear during the budget vote that the Department had to be turned around, in the best interests of the people. He said that there was a role for party political issues, but that the national interests should be predominant.

He concluded that the Committee would release a joint-statement that would correct the facts, with input from the Clerk regarding the costs, and the reason the venue was chosen.

Mr Mnqasela said that it was unfortunate that the Committee had to discuss this matter. He also suggested that the Portfolio Committee’s management team who attended to the booking of venues, should ascertain why the booking agent had said that there were no rooms available. He agreed that this Committee should work together as a progressive and robust Committee, without becoming involved in party political debates.
 
Discussion paper: Template of Committee Business Plan
Mr Adam Salmon, Parliamentary Research Unit, informed the Committee that the strategic planning process was dealt with by the Project Management Office of Parliament, and that they were fully booked that day. He however told the Committee that he would present the template for the Committee Business Plan document. He stressed that this was not final, and was not for publication, but was tabled for discussion purposes.

Mr Salmon noted that the Business plan was divided into five main topics: namely, the process of legislation, the conducting of oversight, the facilitation of public participation and involvement, the facilitation of co-operative governance and facilitation of international participation.

In respect of the process of legislation, he said that the main tasks of the Committee, as outlined in the strategic planning meeting, were to investigate amendments to the Electoral Commission Act, specifically in relation to their additional functions that this Commission was doing across the continent. A second task was to investigate the amendments to the Film and Publication Act.

Discussion
A Member asked if the document was in “skeleton form” only, noting that there were no time frames or targets attached to the document. He requested that the legislation that needed to be scrutinised be explained for the Members. He wanted clarity on what investigation meant, such as the procedure and who would investigate, and the role of the Committee.

Mr Salmon responded that this was a broad structure and that there were particular time frames for certain goals, but that in regard to certain other issues it would be difficult to put time frames with any certainty now because they depended on extraneous factors, such as the work of the Department, the Presidency and the National Council of Provinces (NCOP). He however said that the Project Management Office would brief the Committee.

Mr Mnqasela said that the programme of action was a holistic picture of the role of the Portfolio Committee, which needed some refinement. He suggested multi-party visits to provinces, and possibly a half-half split of the Committee. He also queried the budgetary constraints for the travel, enquiring whether the funding would be from the Committee budget or Members’ travel allowances.

The Chairperson clarified that the travel budget would come from the Committee section.

Mr Mnqasela said he wanted to discuss the practicalities, such as targets and time frames for the goals.

The Chairperson said that the most important aspect for this meeting was to raise all the ideas and issues, rather than finding the resolution immediately.

Dr Mulder said Parliament’s primary duty was legislative, so even though the pattern in the past had been for the Executive to draw up and present legislative ideas, and for Parliament to adopt these, there was nothing to prevent the Committee from suggesting legislation, which the Executive could accept. He also suggested that this Committee should go through the relevant Acts to see if there were matters that could be improved, to ensure better service. He suggested the second aim of the Committee should be to ensure that the Department succeeded in its own turnaround goals.

Mr Salmon said that in practice, the Department would indicate what amendments it would need, but that Members could also initiate amendments if there were any changes that they felt should be made.

The Chairperson added that it was important to remember that the responsibility was not only to pass legislation, but also to analyse its implementation and impact in the real world. Members had to determine both the successes and unintended consequences of any legislation, and to be able to address these consequences.

Mr Salmon responded that first two points, process legislation and oversight, fed into each other.

The Chairperson suggested obtaining the budget of the Ministry to determine what were the challenges.

Continuation of presentation
Mr Salmon then moved on to discuss conducting oversight. He explained that three main issues taken from the strategic planning meeting was ensuring accountability of the three entities, Government Printing Works (GPW), the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) and the Film and Publications Board (FPB), reviewing their policy effectiveness and departmental programmes, and ensuring accountability by the Department of Home Affairs (DHA). He highlighted that the second column of the draft document contained the specific actions that the Committee would like to take. He suggested that a good way of ensuring accountability was to make sure that reports, such as budget planning and annual reports, were given in on time, and that the Department should provide additional reports if requested. He advised that the number of unannounced site visits should be increased, so that the Committee could see the truer picture. He suggested closed meetings to set the timelines to plan the interventions, particularly in problem areas.

With regard to facilitating public participation, Mr Salmon explained that this was a more general task whereby the Committee could initiate or facilitate various research projects or impact studies. He cited the example of the xenophobia task group that was established that included Department of Home Affairs. He noted that this was very task or event orientated, and would respond to specific needs of information or requests by the public. He also mentioned public participation meetings and public hearings as avenues to facilitate public participation. These should be seen separate from other public functions, such as public hearings for legislation and interacting with clients while carrying out oversight functions. However he suggested, beyond this, that it would be useful also to ensure that there was more interaction, to make people aware of issues in their community, and to publicise the role of Parliament

Discussion
The Chairperson suggested having formal relations with stakeholders such as the UCT Refugee Clinic and Lawyers for Human Rights. He advised a pro-active approach, so that there was not only a reactionary relationship when there was a problem, but rather a pro-active approach that developed productive relationships in order to preempt problems.

Mr Salmon said that this should not just be limited to the Committee, but that the Committee should also ensure that the Department itself took proactive measures, such as more interaction with Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and the community.

The Chairperson requested reports on previous “hot spots” and interactions by the previous Committee.

Mr Mnqasela agreed that the Committee should be visible before the trouble started, not after an eruption.

Mr Salmon responded that the best way to get there before the trouble was to keep informed on a daily basis. He said that he would put all the Members on the Parliamentary library e-mail list so they could be sent daily briefings.

Continuation of presentation
Mr Salmon suggested that a particular action that could be taken was managing effective relations between the DHA and its three entities. A further suggestion was for the Committee to plan, direct and review its processes, in line with government imperatives, constantly checking that whatever was done related to the big picture of government. Lastly, monitoring the progress of the Facilitation of Movement Protocol was also suggested as something the members could investigate.

Discussion
A Member asked to what extent the Presidential speech implications for the Committee were contained in the document.

Mr Salmon presented the State of the Nation Address aims, and highlighted the Home Affairs section. He mentioned certain areas that related to Home Affairs, and that had corresponding Committee duties, such as problematic issues around the ID Smart Card and secure travelling documents that would need to be investigated by the Committee. Monitoring the roll out of online verification equipment and the vetting of officials were also mentioned.

A Member requested tangible goals that the Committee could tick off.

The Chairperson agreed that the Committee would need to know which areas from the State of the Nation Address were specific to the Committee, so that they could have tangibles to address.

Mr Salmon responded that he would meet with the Project Management Office and include all those issues in the plan.

He added that there was a need to interact on a higher level to encourage the political will for progress on the Facilitation of Movement Protocol. This currently did pose some technical issues, because other member countries’ lack of systems was mentioned as a challenge.
Mr Mnqasela said the Committee must be careful that not to infringe on other Department’s areas, for instance in the field of international cooperation.

Ms M Maunye (ANC) responded that she did not understand what the problem was, because there was encouragement to interact with neighboring country's parliamentary members, specifically to look at the issue of movement of people, and she noted that there were bilateral agreements with some of the countries.

The Chairperson responded that the two points were not mutually exclusive, that there would be overlap between some Portfolio Committees and that it was still possible to interact with parliamentarians of other countries.

Mr Salmon said that there was an overlap between functions four and five and that use could be made of the various forums to attempt to address these issues. The Committee could have independent meetings or feed into these other processes.

Mr Salmon noted that the facilitation of international participation related more to the broader functions of Parliament and that there were various international parliamentary forums that addressed cross-cutting issues. He noted some of the dates. He told the Committee that the Project Management Office would brief the Committee and provide the exact guidelines and deadlines.

The Chairperson reminded the Committee that it was most important to brainstorm and flag issues. He asked for the working document to be made available to the Members, and for them to come up with ideas that would assist in finalising and submitting the working programme.

The meeting was adjourned