Police Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report 2010/11, Civilian Secretariat for Police Annual Report 2010/11

Meeting Summary

The Committee discussed, made some amendments to and then adopted the Committee’s Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report for 2010/11 on the Department of Police. Some further recommendations were added, and there were also some grammatical amendments.

The Civilian Secretariat of Police then presented its Annual Report for 2010/11. It noted that its mandate was derived from Section 208 of the Constitution. The Secretariat would be a designated Department from the 2013/14 financial year. The Secretariat had embarked on a job evaluation exercise, with the Department of Public Service and Administration. The Secretary of Police was officially appointed in June 2010, and the Office of the Secretariat was then staffed. The Secretariat had underspent on its operational budget in the last financial year, but overspent on personnel, because it had filled eleven new posts. The staff complement had grown from 52 to 101 staff members. The Secretariat had drawn up new procedures and was monitoring performance agreements, and had developed a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) tool on which eight provinces were engaging. Various other indicators were discussed. Heads of Departments in the provinces were briefed on the Civilian Secretariat for Police and Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) legislation, to make sure that all provinces acted in alignment. Provincial Secretariat Management Forums would be established in due course. A task team was established between the Secretariat and Independent Complaints Directorate, to address the implications of the new legislation, to ensure cooperation and engagement, and to monitor and report on ICD recommendations. The Minister had directed three research reports, which were described. However, the State of the Police Report had been postponed to accommodate the White Paper Review. Various other research and surveys were conducted. A Resource Centre was established. There were partnerships with South African Police Service (SAPS), including one on the Reservist Policy. The draft policy for the Hawks had been developed but had, since the Constitutional Court judgment in the Glenister matter, since been revised. A report was given on the Chief Directorate, and it was explained that due to problems in this division, much of the work had only been achieved in the last quarter of the financial year. A National Monitoring Tool had been developed and piloted at 19 police stations, and was being implemented in nine provinces, though not without problems. The National Database was supposed to have been developed in the last quarter of 2010/11, but the process was not developed in house, as had been agreed, and details of the State Information Technology Agency work was being sought. It was noted that Regulations would be made around the database. The Secretariat had developed community outreach programmes to try to involve communities also in crime prevention, and was discussing assistance also with the South African National Defence Force. Although the Secretariat had adopted a short-term strategy for xenophobia attacks, it would not be effective long-term. Training approaches had been taken. It was submitted that most of the targets were met.

The Committee felt that the Secretariat had managed to achieve some aims, but questioned the lack of targets in some instances, and the time taken for implementation of the new legislation. The filling of posts was also questioned, and the Secretariat was asked to give more detail on the resignation of the Chief Director, the reasons why two senior posts were now vacant, as well as the process for provincial appointments. 

The status of the finger-printing legislation, and the youth engagements were questioned, and the Secretariat was asked why it was confident that SAPS would not, as it had done in the past, ignore the recommendations of the new IPID. Further clarity was sought on some of the staffing in the units. Members asked when the Metro Police process would start. Members asked about the process with State Information Technology Agency, and asked what the Secretariat would do if it was not satisfied with the outcome of discussions with this Agency. The problems around cooperation in North West Province were further explored. Members asked whether the Secretariat managed its own budget, and urged that it give attention to strengthening the oversight function. Members questioned the amount of R9.8 million, which SAPS had stated was paid to the Secretariat, although it was not reflected in the Annual Report, and indicated that they wished to investigate this matter further. They believed that the reservist issues had not been resolved, as SAPS had indicated, and asked about the details of the policy. They commented that a proper Annual Report was needed. The Committee asked for written responses to questions that could not be answered in the meeting.