Transcript of Deputy President Kgalama Motlanthe's replies to questions in the NCOP, June 2 2010

Question 9

Mr M H Mokgobi (ANC-Limpopo) to ask the Deputy President:

(1) Whether the Government has undertaken any systematic review of the structure and operations of the public service since the 2009 elections; if not, why not; if so,

(2) whether the Government had any engagements with senior government officials at all spheres of government regarding concerns raised by communities on the (a) pace of service delivery in some areas and (b) ways of ensuring that the public service remains development oriented, credible and an efficient mechanism of implementing political objective of addressing the needs of the people; if not, (i) why not and (ii) to what extent will the National Planning Commission assist in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? CO206E

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Chairperson, hon members, there has been several strands of work to review the workings of the civil service and the public sector in general both before and after the 2009 elections.

Since the inauguration of this administration, the Minister in The Presidency responsible for performance monitoring and evaluation was mandated by Cabinet to lead a process called the macro-organisation of the state. This built on previous reviews which necessitated the creation of new departments aimed at improving effectiveness and streamlining government programmes.

Given the importance that government has placed on the transformation of the public service, we have included this project in the 12 outcomes designed to improve the performance of the state. The aim is to build an efficient, effective and development oriented public service.

Government, led by the President, has had a number of engagements with public servants including school principals, municipal managers, police station commanders and Directors-General. These engagements have focused precisely on the issues raised by hon Mokgobi, that of improving the capacity and performance of the state in relation to meeting the electoral mandate.

In addition, these engagements have emphasised the need to strengthen inter-governmental relations since in many instances, service delivery is slowed down due to poor coordination among the spheres of government.

Hon members, the National Planning Commission has an important role to play in shaping the manner in which we do things in government. As Minister Manuel has said on countless occasions, his portfolio will help us develop a long-term plan, which will impact on the organisation and capacity of the state as we seek to improve our ability to tackle the challenges of modest growth, employment, service delivery and human capital development. Thank you.

Mr Tim HARRIS: Chairperson, through you to the Deputy President, is the government considering, (a) implementing a single public service for all the three spheres of government; or (b) considering engaging with other political parties to end the deployment of party cadres into the public service?

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Chairperson, hon members, yes indeed the government is ceased with the matter of processing the establishment of a single public service and that work is in progress. On part (b) of the question; in all countries parties go to elections and the party that leads government has a right to deploy in strategic senior managerial positions those who are committed and understand the manifesto of that particular party.

In countries, such as the USA there is a book the size of a telephone directory, which identifies the posts that changed with the change of the governing party. And everyone understands that at that level, particularly at senior strategic level, that if the party which would have appointed into those posts loses elections they move out. It is understood and it's established. 

In the UK, the public service bureaucrats prepare two booklets, if there are three parties as was the case recently, they would have prepared three booklets based on the manifestos of the parties contesting elections. They lock them up. Whichever party comes in they would pull that out and say that that is the programme to be implemented.

So, this is not unique, what we should be, perhaps taking into account is the level. Because our senior management positions are at the level of directors-general, which are known as permanent secretaries in other countries. They are called permanent secretaries and we call them directors-general. Our directors-general come in on contracts for a period not less than five years. Some are able to stay on for ten years, and so on. This is a very critical question. I think, particularly with regards to the stability of the public service that there is a level at which we should always ensure that there is some stability and a sense of permanency. But there is an upper senior level which is really where the political appointees are located. At that level, there should be no debates about the right of any government party to appoint at that level.

The assumption that people who are associated or related with one party or the other are inherently inefficient, inexperienced and of low skills is a wrong assumption. Because if we are, for instance like we are in South Africa, a nation of activists, there would be no level at which you would not find people who have one preference or the other, in terms of their political affiliation.

However, the point is that if they are public servants they should act professionally. That is the point that we should all agree to as an important element in the consideration of appointments of public servants. Thank you. 

Mr A LEES: Chairperson, through you to Deputy President, you have set it right about the senior appointments and I don't think one can argue about that. It is an internationally accepted norm; but, does the Deputy President then implies that the appointment of cadres to positions below those levels, whichever they determine is indeed a practice so should be looked at, is the government looking at that?

Chairperson, the question is whether the government is investigating the validity or the bad practice, perhaps of the state doing business with employees of the state or their families?

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: The question of deployment has been satisfactorily replied by the Deputy President. I don't think we should begin to open a debate on that, and if you want a debate you can call for a debate. Perhaps, the Deputy President may want to respond to the last part of the question.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: When I was responding to the question, I was well aware that there are administrative requirements. Any public post is advertised and the requirements are stipulated in the adverts. There are panels that, for instance even in the level of the DG, Cabinet follows certain set of protocols. The interviewing panel would consist of no less than three Ministers, including a DG from another department. Just to ensure that the successful candidate would have gone through a rigorous process. So, those are administrative processes that cannot be overridden by simply political appointments.

However, there are posts where it is just a political appointment, as I said, it's given that the governing party would deal with them in that fashion. By the way - what was the second question?

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: What was the last part of your question, Mr Lees?

Mr A LEES: Chairperson, the question was whether the government is looking at public servants and their role in doing business with the state or members of their family doing business with the state as is the practice that should, perhaps be outlawed?

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, that practise is wrong and steps are being taken to ensure that it does not happen. The report of the Auditor-General has revealed that indeed there are public officials who have and interest in companies that do business with departments that is impermissible. It is something that must never be allowed and there are processes to deal with such challenges.

That also goes for relatives, as you know the Public Finance Management Act also specifically debars relatives of public servants from doing business or even public officials from doing business with municipalities. So, that is something that is being attended to. Thank you.     

Mr K A SINCLAIR: Chairperson, hon Deputy President, thank you for the opportunity. In terms of one of the narratives of the Public Service Act, the President, the Deputy President, Ministers and Premiers are provided for to appoint special advisors in various capacities. In terms of an answer to a question that I posed to the Minister of Public Service and Administration, a list was provided, which indicated that 72 special advisors have been appointed to various Ministers, the President, the Deputy President and naturally the Premiers.

Now, I am happy to see that the Deputy President only thought it wise to appoint only one special advisor, contrary to the President and some of the Ministers that has got four. The question that I want to pose to the Deputy President is, in terms of the question posed, what is the role of special advisors in this new dispensation?

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Chairperson, well special advisors give special advice on special issues. [Laughter.] That is what they are there for.

These would be men and women who add value and enhance the capacity of the principal to perform. Because the responsibility that lies on the shoulders of a head of state are quite onerous. Therefore, it is important that there should be a team of people that can ensure that the country is given good and effective leadership. That is why there is no fixed number as the President can appoint as many special advisors as is required. Thank you.

Source: Unrevised Hansard, June 2 2010

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter